Case Study – Protection Beyond Fences for Electrical Utility Substations with Compact Surveillance Radar

by Rod Cross
SpotterRF

Summary

Physical protection of electrical substations is much more critical than simply guarding against copper theft. Recent terrorist attacks on substations and the potential for simultaneous attacks across the U.S. puts the entire country at serious risk for major power interruption! Detection devices such as fence sensors, thermal cameras, microwave and passive infrared (PIR) motion sensors all provide some warning against such attacks but are all limited in their ability to detect threats outside the fence line.

For power utility substations, SpotterRF Compact Surveillance Radar (CSR), integrated with PTZ cameras, provides early warning detection and identification of threats both inside and outside the fence line. This is achieved at a price point comparable to fence only solutions and is feasible for electrical utilities.

The Threat

On April 16th, 2013, terrorists attacked a substation near San Jose California. A Wall Street Journal article covering the event explained:

“Snipers opened fire on the substation for 10 minutes before a plant operator heard the sound and called 911. The attack continued for another 10 minutes before the attackers slipped into the night, just before police arrived but not before 17 giant transformers were knocked out.”

A recent report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission captures the gravity of this and potentially future events like this:

Figure 1. Map of Attack on Substation

Figure 1. Map of Attack on Substation

Destroy nine interconnection substations and a transformer manufacturer and the entire United States grid would be down for at least 18 months, probably longer.

See the article discussing the report here.

Until this attack occurred, physical substation  security was focused almost exclusively on fence line detection and security of the control house. This attack revealed a critical weakness in this approach as the attackers never entered the substation, but simply shot at transformers from outside the fence as seen in Figure 1. Thus, the attackers were never detected by any of the existing security equipment. Only the sparks caused by the fence being repeatedly hit triggered the alarm 10 minutes into the shooting. It is evident that outside-the-fence detection and event recording is required to reliably detect and record an attack on a substation.

The Shield System Advantage

The SpotterRF Shield System provides reliable outside-the-fence detection and recording of such events. It is a robotic perimeter security system that features Compact Surveillance Radar (CSR) integrated with a PTZ Camera (either EO/IR or Thermal). The two are integrated through NetworkedIO, a powerful integration platform that applies behavioral filters and automatically slews cameras to the target being tracked by the CSRs. NetworkedIO also allows the user to set parameters to alert operators only when there is activity they are concerned about.

Turnkey Shield systems easily integrate into existing security systems as well as operate as stand alone systems. Shield systems detect moving people and vehicles over wide areas, cue cameras directly to the intruder, notify an operator of the intrusion in real time, record it and then respond automatically to a threat.  In this fashion, Shield provides Robotic perimeter surveillance and deterrence.

There are four levels of Shield packages designed for short, medium, long range and mobile applications.

Figure 2. Shield System Options

Figure 2. Shield System Options

Key Capabilities of the Shield include:

  1. Automatic, outside-the-fence threat detection with slew-to-cue integration
  2. Effective operation in rain, snow, sleet, fog, dust and at extreme temperatures
  3. Low false alarm rates
  4. Easily deployed in remote areas without trenching
  5. User defined zones or geofences to alert only on activity within areas of concern
  6. User defined behavioral filters to alert only on behaviors of concern
  7. Pre-integrated and pre-configured system rapid installation and reliable performance (1 day install for a 4 radar, 4 camera system if poles, power, and communications are in place)
  8. Modular design able to compensate for varying terrains and environmental conditions
  9. Web browser based user interface for use on PCs, tablets, and smart phones

The Shield system adds particular value around large remote substations where detection of an intruder prior to entering the perimeter is critical. In the attack outlined earlier, fence line detectors or cameras looking down the fence line did not detect the event  because the attackers never entered the substation or touched the fence. Outside-the-fence detection is required to defend against this type of attack.

Figure 3. Example Sub Station

Figure 3. Example Sub Station

Figure 3 above gives an example layout for a substation using four Shield systems, one in each corner, and two cameras mounted high up in the middle of the substation. Alert zones are configured to alert on any movers that are not on the roads, thus eliminating alerts on normal road traffic. The cameras are positioned to provide complete coverage of the entire perimeter cueing off any of the four radars. Each red ellipse shows the coverage area of one CSR. This configuration provides complete outside-the-fence coverage of the perimeter out to a minimum of 100 meters around the entire perimeter plus significant coverage inside the fence line.

Figure 4 shows the system diagram for a NetworkedIO device. It is able to network multiple shield systems and cameras together via any type of TCP/IP network back to an operation center or control room.

Figure 4. NetworkedIO Layout

Figure 4. NetworkedIO Layout

The cost of a complete system including all four Shield stations is comparable to the cost of purchase and installation of a fiber based fence detection system for a 3000’ perimeter.

Figure 5. CSR at a Utility Site

Figure 5. CSR at a Utility Site

The Shield system would provide complete detection, tracking, recording and alerting of intruders in and around the substation. Recording would only be triggered by events of interest, significantly reducing the amount of space needed to record and time required to review events.

Shield stations are modular in design allowing for site specific layouts and configurations, some of the common devices tied to the Shield are:

  • One or more Compact Surveillance Radars
  • PTZ cameras with Thermal or IR illumination
  • NetworkedIO Integration Platforms
  • Security lights triggered on when intruders are detected
  • Loud Speakers triggered on when intruders are detected
  • Ethernet radios
  • Solar Panels

Example Installation

7

Figure 6. CSR at Utility Site

One electrical utility company that used the Shield System in a yard surrounded by a chain link fence. The yard, shown in Figure 7, housed valuable assets and was surrounded by a fence with fiber based vibration detection installed on it. The fiber alarm was frequently set off by trains passing by on the nearby tracks resulting in dozens of daily nuisance alarms.

To resolve the issue a SpotterRF C40 was mounted inside the plant fence line pointed out over the yard and a SpotterRF NetworkedIO CC8A was installed on the same network in a different location. Two alert zones were drawn, one covering the yard with the other covering the interior of the plant itself and filters were applied to minimize nuisance alarms.

The result was that no more alerts were caused by the trains and the utility was able to track intruder movements throughout the yard with cameras cued directly to their locations. Additionally, they had interior coverage to their plant which they did not have with the fiber on the fence.

Figure 7. Screenshot of NetworkedIO Interface at Utility Site

Figure 7. Screenshot of NetworkedIO Interface at Utility Site

The advantage of the Shield System for this customer was a perimeter security solution that was deployed in a few hours, required no trenching, eliminated nuisance alarms caused by trains passing by, and coverage provided inside and outside the fence line from all-weather threat detection with automatic camera cueing.

In the following section Compact Surveillance Radar is compared against different sensor technologies.

SpotterRF Compact Surveillance Radar vs. Other Common Solutions

CSR vs Shot Detection

Shot Detection is a technology that uses an array of microphones which are used to detect the firing of a weapon. Some can determine the direction and spot of origin of the shot.  While this type of technology is effective in detecting shots it is unable to detect any potential threats prior to actual shots being fired.  In the case of the Metcalf incident mentioned above, there were signs that the attackers had been to the site prior to the actual attack, planning what they would do.  Shot detection has no possibility of detecting or deterring this type of behavior.  There are other threats to a substation, including theft that is not detected by shot detection.  The best way to detect a threat outside the perimeter prior to shots being fired is to use a wide area surveillance technology that is not affected by lighting, temperature, fog, rain or snow.  The only type of technology that meets that requirement is radar.

SpotterRF CSR vs. Video Analytics

Using CSR in and around wide areas can reduce system and installation costs as well as operational costs by as much as 88% over purely camera based detection systems. For smaller, well lit areas CCTV camera systems with video analytics have proven to be effective. However, using cameras to detect threats in wide open outdoor areas has proven to be problematic, because cameras (including thermal) are severely affected by environmental conditions and the field of view is limited when increased range is needed. A Technical Note on Thermal imaging from FLIR describes the effective range of thermal cameras: “Although thermal imaging cameras can see through total darkness, light fog, light rain and snow, the distance they can see is affected by these atmospheric conditions… Rain and fog can severely limit the range of thermal imaging systems due to scattering of light off of droplets of water”. .

For automated detection using video analytic systems, 15 pixels or greater is needed for better than 80% detection rates, instead of 1.5 pixels on target that is typically required for the human eye to detect a target. 15 pixels on target can be difficult to achieve at ranges further than 100 meters due to the reduction of the field of view (FOV) of the camera when zooming. This has been described as the soda straw effect. As you zoom in your FOV narrows leaving the operator unaware of what is happening outside that small narrow area. Because of this and other limitations of thermal imaging through changing environmental conditions, even FLIR, the leading manufacturer of thermal cameras, states on their website, “A more effective and strategic solution combines ground-based radars, pan and tilt imagers (visible CCD and thermal) and software technology to automate many of the critical challenges that the security guard faces.”

In addition there the following other limitations that must be considered before choosing analytics:

  1. Fine tuning: Video Analytics works best in well regulated environments where lighting conditions are consistent and predictable. In indoor environments video analytics does not require a lot of fine tuning because the lighting is consistently regulated, but for outdoor environments it is difficult to adapt for constantly changing lighting environments. In order to achieve low false alarms with daylight cameras in an outdoor environment a significant amount of time must be attributed to fine tuning the detection settings over the period of a year or more to accurately filter the lighting based alerts.
  2. Detection Range: The effective detection range of most cameras zoomed out is 50 meters or less. As the camera zooms in the detection range increases but the field of view shrinks and blind spots increase. This makes cameras ineffective detectors for areas larger than a few hundred square meters.
  3. Data Storage: Cameras that continually record can result in significant video storage and analysis costs. See Cost of Video Surveillance White Paper.

SpotterRF Compact Radar vs. Fence Sensors and Break Beam Sensors

Both fence sensors and break beam sensors provide the same basic functionality of point detection upon touching or “breaking” the line. These systems work well for point detection in and around perimeters but have a couple of drawbacks compared to radar based security:

  1. Fence and break beam sensors often require complex and extensive installations costing as much or more as the purchase price of the equipment. Buried Fiber especially is labor intensive and requires trenching everywhere the fiber is to be laid.
  2. Fence and break beam sensors do not give any advanced warning, they alert when someone is on the fence and not before. In contrast the Shield can provide several minutes of advanced warning prior to the intruder reaching the fence, giving operators crucial extra minutes to notify and engage the response team. Figure 8 below shows an intrusion scenario and the time it would take to interdict the intrusion with no perimeter protection, using fence sensors or using Spotters.
    Figure 8. Comparison between the Shield and Fence Sensors

    Figure 8. Comparison between the Shield and Fence Sensors

  3. Fence and break beam sensors give you only one opportunity to detect the intruder. Once the intruder has passed there are no more detections. In contrast the Shield tracks the intruder throughout the field of view of the CSR, giving constant updates to the operator of the intruder position both inside and outside the fence line.
  4. Fence and break beam sensors do not provide exact locations, only sectors. This makes cueing a PTZ camera directly to the target difficult and if cueing is implemented it is only to presets. The Shield provides GPS coordinates of the intruder updated every second, allowing cameras to be cued to follow the intruder as they move.
  5. Fence and break beam sensors only provide one point detection which does not allow for behavioral filters such as track duration, and distance traveled to be used to mitigate nuisance alarms. In contrast the Shield is able to filter detections based on behavior such as distance traveled, speed, direction and track duration.

 

Table 1. Feature Comparison Table

Table 1. Feature Comparison Table

Conclusion

Electrical Substation Security is critical to the security of any nation. As we have learned from recent terrorist attacks on substations, to effectively secure a substation requires more than just detection of unauthorized entry. It requires detection and protection beyond fences. Proven in military and critical infrastructure environments by companies such as Exxon, Honeywell, and SAIC the SpotterRF Shield System provides the most cost-effective means of providing early warning in remote medium to large scale substations.

For more information about the SpotterRF Shield System please contact a SpotterRF Field Application Engineer by phone at: (801) 742-5849 or by email at: sales@spotterrf.com

Rodrick Cross is the Director of Engineering Sales and Marketing at SpotterRF.   As a top performing international, technical sales, marketing, and business development executive for high-tech industries, he has defined, developed, launched and managed successful B2B high-tech product lines, sales/marketing organizations, contracts and business ventures for Hewlett Packard, Agilent, Sony, Blue Coat Systems, Yokogawa Electric and several startup companies.  His business and technical expertise has supported business development in several industries, including microwave & RF, power/energy utilities, electronics, test instrumentation, internet security, solar energy, software, semiconductor, telecommunications, and aerospace/defense.

Recent Posts

Leave a Comment

Contact Us

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, ASAP.

15