Home' RTCA Documents for Review : DO-230H FRAC Contents 194
© 2017, RTCA, Inc.
Establishing the “need” for video analytics.
Assuring that the analytic techniques will produce the expected benefits with tolerable false alarm
Determining how to evaluate what is achieved and compare the results to contracted specifications.
The false alarm issue is fundamental. Any camera which gives false alarms several times a day may be
tolerated, but even a small false alarm percentage for an airport having hundreds of cameras equipped with
video analytics is likely to overwhelm operators in the SOC and cause the system to be shut down.
Exterior and interior opportunities for using video analytics present different challenges, and should be
treated differently. All applications, however, require clear and sharp video images, and these images must
be of sufficient size (percent of screen height) to enable the analytic functions. Image quality and image
size requirements differ according to the analytical function and also differ among vendors.
Applying video analytics to exterior surveillance requires careful attention to scene conditions, especially
at night when target contrast is usually reduced, camera detectors are forced to operate a less than optimum
levels because of low scene illumination, and bright point light sources may be present in the scene which
can exceed camera dynamic range. The system design process should include testing of candidate sensors
and analytic functions over the full range of conditions for which they are to be used before the airport
makes a commitment.
Applying video analytics indoors should present fewer problems. Scene illumination should be under the
airport’s control, wind and fog will not be issues, distances will be relatively short, etc. That does not,
however, avoid the need for careful planning and testing, both of which are prerequisites to realizing
Each analytic function will present its own unique requirements. This process starts with defining the
minimum functionality needed at each camera site - an operational requirement to be decided by the airport;
the environment in which the function must perform (camera motion being a critical problem, since video
analytics are designed to work with fixed cameras, along with scene illumination); camera placement and
aspect needed to achieve the performance objectives; minimum and maximum field coverage and resolution
requirements, especially important if megapixel cameras are to be used; and the maximum false alarm rate
that can be tolerated.
In this context, being able to do one function very well may be more useful for security purposes than doing
several functions less well. The following list is representative of the video analytic functions that an airport
might consider adopting selectively based on the specific requirements of each situational condition:
Video Motion Detection - Detect and track multiple moving objects in a Region of Interest (ROI)
defined in the camera field-of-view. VMD is mature for target detection, but provides limited target
Tripwire - Detect when an object crosses a defined threshold or multiple thresholds. This is a
variation of the VMD analytic.
Counter Flow - Detect an object moving counter to normal flow direction, e.g., on a boarding bridge
or along a fenced perimeter. Effective in uncluttered environments, especially indoors, less useful
when dynamic clutter is present, e.g., passenger traffic moving through a terminal.
Congestion - Alert the SOC when the number of objects in a Region of Interest (ROI) exceeds a
threshold. Evolved from VMD, this function is sensitive to camera position and requires more
precise and complicated rules than VMD.
Abandoned Object - Detect an object left unattended for a defined period of time. A complicated
video analytic functions to implement because of the many possible target scenarios which include
multiple objects at variable times, objects being occluded for variable lengths of time by passenger
Links Archive Navigation Previous Page Next Page