A 24-GHz phase-comparison Monopulse radar estimated the angular location of a single normally breathing subject with approximately 84% accuracy, and 78% for two subjects.
A 24-GHz phase-comparison Monopulse radar can successfully detect respiratory patterns and estimate the direction of arrival for single and multiple subjects, offering a scalable non-contact approach for healthcare monitoring.
A scalable non-contact respiratory monitoring approach is introduced for the practical separation and recognition of multiple simultaneous human respiratory patterns, using a 24-GHz phase-comparison Monopulse radar. The proposed system demonstrates a computationally efficient phase-comparison Monopulse technique to estimate the direction of arrival (DOA) of respiratory motion signals from single and multiple subjects to determine their angular positions. Experimental results demonstrated that Monopulse radar can sense and detect three different breathing patterns (normal, fast and slow) and can estimate the angular location of a single normally breathing subject within the main beamwidth of the transceiver with an estimation accuracy of approximately 84% whereas, and almost 78% for two subjects. Based on analysis of experimental results, the estimation accuracy of phase-comparison Monopulse technique degrades with the breathing pattern deviations from nominal breathing cycle and rate (fast/slow breathing) due to reduced phase measurement accuracy for the irregular signals resulting from lower signal to noise ratios (SNR). The proposed scalable 24-GHz radar transceiver system can successfully find the direction of the human target based on recognition of respiration signals which can have potential applications in healthcare and security surveillance systems.
Islam et al. (Tue,) conducted a other in Respiratory monitoring. 24-GHz phase-comparison Monopulse radar was evaluated on Estimation accuracy of angular location. A 24-GHz phase-comparison Monopulse radar estimated the angular location of a single normally breathing subject with approximately 84% accuracy, and 78% for two subjects.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: