Determining the location of a signal using only 2 receivers

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DDH
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Signal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the problem of locating the source of a signal using only two non-directional receivers, focusing on the theoretical and practical implications of using time difference measurements to determine the signal's origin. Participants explore various models and approaches, including the geometric interpretation of measurements in two and three dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that with a very accurate timebase, it is possible to calculate the location of the signal by measuring time differences and moving the receivers to different locations to create intersecting planes.
  • Another participant argues that signals travel radially, implying that the measurements should be interpreted as intersections of spherical shells rather than planes, and mentions that prior knowledge about the signal's location could reduce possible source locations.
  • A third participant raises concerns about the definition of "primitive" receivers and discusses the limitations of timing accuracy, suggesting that the distance between receivers affects directional resolution and introduces ambiguity in locating the signal source.
  • The same participant also questions the feasibility of the setup, proposing that a larger distance between receivers could improve accuracy and suggesting alternative configurations for better directional detection.
  • The original poster acknowledges a misunderstanding of the dimensionality of the problem and admits to using imprecise language in describing the scenario.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility and methodology of locating the signal with the given constraints. There is no consensus on the best approach or the implications of the measurements, indicating that multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the assumptions about the signal's properties, the dimensionality of the problem, and the accuracy of timing measurements. These factors contribute to the complexity of the discussion without resolving the underlying questions.

DDH
Messages
12
Reaction score
2
I'm currently writing a book. In the book the main characters need to find the source of a signal but they can only use two primitive, non-directional receivers.
I think it is possible to calculate the location providing they have access to a very accurate timebase which will tell them the time difference it takes the signal to reach the receivers. Each measurement would give them a plane in which the source should lie. After each measurement they move to a different location (at a considerable distance of the previous location). After two measurements they would have an line on which the source should be, the intersection between the two planes. Three measurements would give them the location of the source, the intersection between the line and the third plane. (assuming none of the planes are the same or parallel)
Am i correct? And if so, how should the calculations be done.
If not, is there an other way to do it with just time difference as data, f.e. using more receivers.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Since signals travel radially, you should be looking a circles. If you have perfect time difference data and clear line of sight, your 'planes' are spherical shells, and instead of lines, you should have the intersections of spherical shells.
If you now something a priori about the signal, like it is stationary and on the ground, you will have the possible source locations reduced to 2 points with two measurements.
A third measurement, as long as it is not collinear with the first two should be the tiebreaker.
 
Um... What is your definition of "primitive" in "primitive non-directional receiver?"

Suppose your two receivers are 1 km apart. And suppose the source is on a line fairly close to the line between the two receivers. The signal arrives at the two detectors just 3 microseconds apart. If your timing is good to only +/-1 microsecond, then you have a directional resolution of round about 30 degrees.

Also, as RUber referred to, you have a left-right issue. If the delay is (2 +/- 1) microseconds, you can't distinguish anything from 45 degrees to the left to 45 degrees to the right.

If your detectors were 10 km apart with the same electronics, then you could distinguish a smaller angle. Does your story allow for the antenna to be that far apart and have wires leading to a central receiver?

It seems kind of far-fetched though. You can make a simple di-pole antenna that will be directional to better than that kind of accuracy out of a hoop. Supposing the signal is only pulses that don't give you time to rotate a hoop to find the max and min. Then you want three or four hoops arranged at different angles.
 
Thank you for the reply, RUber and DEvens.
First of all, nothing is known about the signal a priori, except that it propagates with the speed of light and it's not blocked by matter what so ever.
Secondly, i realize I've been looking at it in a two dimensional way applied on a three dimensional reality.
Third, I've used some wrong words to describe the problem. I tried to write down an analogy so i didn't have to disclose too much about the story. My apologies.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K