Army 18. 1 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions

DESCRIPTION: The future of Army collective simulation/scenario-based training will be a cloud-based integrated environment, which will support the breadth of a unit’s training needs. The environment will provide an exercise design capability and an exercise repository. The design capability will enable a user to design a new scenario, use an existing scenario, modify an existing scenario, and store new/modified scenarios. To support this, exercises in the repository must be discoverable based on the unit’s current training needs. The purpose of this topic is to support the development of a web-service to support discoverability and recommendation. The results should (1) provide an editable underlying structure for organizing exercises according to multiple dimensions (e.g., learning objectives, terrain, unit size and type, ratings, etc.), (2) provide a dashboard of recommended tasks (e.g., CATS—Combined Arms Training Strategies), and (3) provide a user-friendly method for associating new/modified exercises with the underlying structure. The work should include methods for establishing the organizational scheme (underlying structure) with users, and that is ultimately successful and appropriate for users/training content. The dashboard will support unit personnel in (1) creating an adaptive training roadmap, (2) recommending content that will allow the unit to progress along that roadmap, and (3) adapting exercise recommendations dynamically, based on both unit readiness and user input. The dashboard must be user friendly and support an understanding of the reasons for system recommendations. Users should be able to accept or reject recommendations, and the system should use these choices to adapt future recommendations. The web-service or services developed should be agnostic as to simulation or virtual environment and training objectives. They should also provide open APIs allowing exchange of data from other systems (e.g., the Army Training Management System). The work should also demonstrate usability by the intended user audiences, and methods by which recommendations are adapted over time.

PHASE I: Phase I is a feasibility study (6-month effort) to develop an initial concept design and key elements required for the capabilities described in the Topic Description. This includes, but is not limited to (1) a concept for the underlying structure and the interface for user editing, (2) approaches for involving users in developing the content dimensions needed in the underlying structure, (3) a conceptual design/storyboards for the user dashboard, (4) conceptual methods of recommendation and recommendation adaptation, and (5) user interfaces for associating new/modified scenarios with the underlying structural taxonomy/dimensions. During Phase I, any demonstration content should be based on CATS HHC, INF BN (IBCT) 07416R000.

PHASE II: Phase II is a 2-year R&D effort that will culminate in a working prototype based on Infantry CATS. While actual scenario-based training exercises do not need to be created in a repository, dummy files with descriptions of scenarios should be created to support the demonstration. In addition to demonstrating the capabilities described in the Topic Description and designed in Phase I, human-interfaces must conform to common usability heuristics (https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/), and a usability study be conducted with participants from the potential user audience (or similar). Ideally user input will be collected iteratively. A final demonstration should show the prototype’s technical ability to meet the specifics of the topic description, by demonstrating its capability to generate and adapt training roadmaps for 5 different types of Infantry units, using simulated user interaction data based on hypothetical training results and varying user acceptance of system recommendations. At least some of the training results should be read in “automatically” from one or more simulated training systems, thus demonstrating API data exchange. In addition, a user study should be conducted demonstrating that with no more than an hour’s training, users (at least 5) can interact with the system to generate the same or similar results as the technical demonstration, based on a conceptual description of the simulated input data used for the technical demonstration.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Phase III derives from and extends efforts performed during the previous phases, and covers technology transition and commercialization. During Phase III the prototype will be transitioned to a fielding-ready system. The specific Phase III military applications will be to apply the developments to various virtual/simulation training environments which involve scenario repositories. Candidate Army environments include Close Combat Tactical Trainer, Games for Training, and the Synthetic Training Environment (STE). It is STE that this topic was particularly aimed at. The vision for the STE is to be a single multi-echelon collective training environment as described in the Topic Description. The STE will require the type of training management capability to be developed under this topic. Phase III should integrate the designed prototype with ongoing efforts to develop the STE, design the appropriate hand-shakes with other STE web-services or other Amy systems, and comply with information security requirements. With respect to commercial application, the developed services should be applicable to any learning repository for which users need to make a training plan, and update that plan as time progresses. While the military application is about training for teams, the developed services can also be applied to individual learning, and may be of benefit for university, vocational and ElHi teachers and/or training managers.

REFERENCES:

1. TRADOC Force Operating Capability (FOC): Soldier and Team Performance Overmatch

2. Warfighter Outcomes: Enhance Realistic Training, Improve Solder, Leader, and Team Performance.

3. Human Dimension Strategy Lines of Effort: Cognitive Dominance, Realistic Training

4. PEO STRI: PM ITE

5. ARL-HRED-ATO: Training Effectiveness
6. Additional Q&A from TPOC, 5 pages (uploaded in SITIS on 1/9/18).

KEYWORDS: Simulation, content management, Human Dimension

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Electronics

OBJECTIVE: Reusable alternatives to blank cartridges for use with dismounted MILES systems.

DESCRIPTION: The Army’s goal has always been to train as they fight in a realistic environment. Live training intends to provide the most realistic environment to prepare the warfighter for actual combat.

The Multiple Integrated LASER Engagement System (MILES) allows soldiers, commanders and instructors to simulate real-time, direct-fire, force-on-force (FoF) combat between opposing forces. MILES equipment is responsive to MILES coded LASER fire from MILES equipment. Functionally, the equipment conforms to the same hit, kill, and near miss definitions of firing event outcomes. Different versions of MILES systems are available. The Instrumentable – Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (I-MILES) is designed to simulate both the direct-firing capabilities and the vulnerability of dismounted troops, tactical vehicles and combat vehicles and to objectively assess weapon effects during training. This provides unit commanders an integrated training system to use at the home station local training area and instrumented training areas.

Gun-mounted MILES Small Arms Transmitters (SATs) are designed to emit lasers when they detect indicators that their gun is being fired – they wait for an explosive sound (report) and simultaneous shock from recoil. To produce a small arms signature effect without endangering trainees, the military uses blank cartridges, a type of cartridge that contains powder but no bullet. Blanks provide an acceptable level of realism, forcing the trainee to deal with real-life tasks such as gun jams and ammo management.

The standard infantryman is issued 210 rounds (7 30-round magazines) for an operation. Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCTs) contain 3 Infantry companies, each of which can consist of as many as 250 soldiers. Using those numbers, we can assume that a SBCT training exercise at the National Training Center (NTC) in Barstow, California will include as many as 750 trainees. If each soldier expends all of the rounds issued to him, a single Army Force on Force exercise can go through 157,500 blanks. At a price of $0.25 per blank, the Army could potentially pay $39,375 for blanks alone every exercise. This figure does not account for additional logistics costs such as storage and transportation or for blanks for OPFOR forces.

Purchasing blank cartridges is a major cost driver for live training. This commodity is expendable, and some must be replaced each time a new exercise is initiated. Removing the need to replace blanks for each exercise could lead to major cost savings, reduced environmental impacts, and lessening the Army’s logistics burden.

The idea of reusable alternatives to blank cartridges is not new. Previous offerings included a recoil actuating bolt paired with a battery-powered magazine & muzzle-mounted “flash” device. While a novel concept, the problem with this approach is that it requires modification of the firearm, leaving it unable to perform in an operational environment. An ideal solution would not require firearm modification, allowing trainees to switch from operations-ready to training-ready (and back again) with as few intermediary steps as possible.
The Army continues to transition toward a “training on demand” paradigm, where the amount of time and money required to initiate training is reduced through the use of persistent & on-demand training products. A low-impact, reusable, easy-to-use alternative for blank cartridges would give the Army the flexibility to offer live-fire training with low overhead and little impact on operational capability. Having this capability would propel live Force on Force training forward toward full “training on demand” compliance.

PHASE I: 1. Analyze/conduct a feasibility study and identify alternatives to blank cartridges for small arms weapons chambered in 5.56mm and 7.62mm that are inexpensive, easy to use, and require no firearm modification

PHASE II: After the scientific & technical merit of such a device is measured and approved, efforts during Phase II would entail the development of prototypes of the devices designed in Phase I.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The commercialization potential of the product developed in Phase II is significant given the widespread use of MILES SATs.

REFERENCES:

1. MILES, SAT, TESS

A18-094

TITLE: Compact High Efficiency High Energy Laser

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Weapons

The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their country of origin, and what tasks each would accomplish in the statement of work in accordance with section 5.4.c.(8) of the Announcement.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a high efficiency high-energy laser (HEL) with a reduced Size Weight and Power (SWaP) footprint for integration into smaller, more tactical platforms.

DESCRIPTION: Current high energy lasers have a large SWaP footprint due in large part to their low electrical to optical efficiency of around 40%. The low efficiency of these systems requires substantial cooling systems to remove the waste heat from the system and requires large power banks to supply the electrical power. The large size of these systems limit our ability to integrate lasers into smaller, more tactical systems.

PHASE I: The phase I effort will result in a design concept and analysis of both the efficiency and scalability. The phase I effort shall include a final report with modeling and simulation, and/or proof of concept experimental results supporting performance claims.

PHASE II: The phase II effort will build upon the phase I and will include lasing demonstration and scalability experiments. It is acknowledged that a full power demonstration may not be possible at this stage, but its feasibility should be well documented and validated.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: DoD laser weapons offer benefits of graduated lethality, rapid deployment to counter time-sensitive targets, and the ability to deliver significant force either at great distance or to nearby threats with high accuracy for minimal collateral damage. Future laser weapon applications will range from very high power devices used for air defense (to detect, track, and destroy incoming rockets, artillery, and mortars) to modest power devices used for counter-ISR. The phase III effort would be to design and build high efficiency HELs for integration into a variety of military platforms. The US Army Space and Missile Defense Technical Center as part of its Directed Energy research would execute military funding for this Phase III effort.

REFERENCES:

1. D. J. Richardson, J. Nilsson, and W. A. Clarkson, "High power fiber lasers: current status and future perspectives [Invited]," J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 27, B63 (2010).

2. N. W. Carlson, Monolithic Diode-Laser Arrays (1994).

3. M. N. Zervas and C. A. Codemard, "High Power Fiber Lasers: A Review," IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 20, 219–241 (2014).

4. W. F. Krupke, “Diode pumped alkali lasers (DPALs) – A review,” Prog Quant Electron. 36, 4-28 (2012)

KEYWORDS: High energy laser, tactical, directed energy, laser weapons, high efficiency, high power laser

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Sensors

OBJECTIVE: To develop an algorithm capable of reliable target classification for a wide range of targets, including, but not limited to, Rockets, Artillery and Mortars (RAM); Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs); and cruise missiles.

DESCRIPTION: For defensive High Energy Laser (HEL) missions, the engagement timeline can be very short. Thus, it is highly desirable to have a robust target classification system that, at the very least, can provide additional information to the operator. It has been established that reliable classification cannot be accomplished using only state information such as target velocity and acceleration. However, modern HEL systems have multiple imaging sensors, and a laser range finder in addition to radar queueing information. This suite of sensors provides a wealth of information about the target that when combined together, can help with identification and classification of targets.

PHASE I: The phase I effort will result in analysis and design of the proposed algorithm. The phase I effort should include the development of tools to test and evaluate the efficacy of the algorithm. The phase I effort shall include a final report.

PHASE II: The phase II effort shall include development and testing of a breadboard system. The designs will then be modified as necessary to produce a final prototype. A complete demonstration system (camera, lens, etc.) will need to be provided by the offeror and larger items such as radars can be utilized for testing as GFE if they are required and available. The final prototype will be demonstrated in a field test against targets of interest to validate performance claims.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: High energy DoD laser weapons offer benefits of graduated lethality, rapid deployment to counter time-sensitive targets, and the ability to deliver significant force either at great distance or to nearby threats with high accuracy for minimal collateral damage. Future laser weapon applications will range from very high power devices used for air defense (to detect, track, and destroy incoming rockets, artillery, and mortars) to modest power devices used for counter-ISR. The Phase III effort would be to design and build a target identification/classification processor that could be integrated into the Army’s High Energy Laser Mobile Tactical Truck (HELMTT) vehicle. Military funding for this Phase III effort would be executed by the US Army Space and Missile Defense Technical Center as part of its Directed Energy research.

REFERENCES:

1. B. Khaleghi, A. Khamis, F.O. Karray, and S.N. Razavi, “Multisensor data fusion: A review of the state-of-the-art,” in Information Fusion, Vol. 14, Issue 4, pp. 28-44, 2013

2. E. Blasch and B. Kahler, “Multiresolution EO/IR Target Tracking and Identification,” in 7th International Conference on Information Fusion, pp. 275-282, 2005

3. J.F. Khan, M.S. Alam, and S.M.A. Bhuiyan, “Automatic target detection in forward-looking infrared imagery via probabilistic neural networks,” in Applied Optics, Vol. 48, Issue 3, pp. 464-476, 2009

4. S.P. Yoon, T.L. Song, and T.H. Kim, “Automatic Target Recognition and Tracking in Forward-Looking Infrared Image Sequences with a Complex Background,” in International Journal of Control, Automation, and Systems, Vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 21-32, 2013

5. H. Zhang, N.M. Nasrabadi, Y. Zhang, and T.S. Huang, “Multi-View Automatic Target Recognition using Joint Sparse Representation,” in IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 2481-2497, 2012

6. L.M. Novak, M.B. Sechtin, and M.J. Cardullo, “Studies of target detection algorithms that use polarimetric radar data,” in IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 25, Issue 2, pp. 150-165, 1989

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Ground/Sea Vehicles

OBJECTIVE: Dual-voltage Lithium-ion 6T packs (24V/48V) capable of supporting low-voltage and high-voltage ground vehicle and robotic applications.

DESCRIPTION: The military requires low-voltage 24V batteries to provide energy and power for starting, lighting, & ignition (SLI) and Silent Watch on legacy ground vehicle platforms. There are however current and future military ground vehicle platforms that use or will be using higher voltages ranging from 48V to as high as 600V. Common 48V examples include medium-size military ground robotic platforms, such as the TALON, and 48-V hybrid-electric all-terrain vehicles (ATVs). While the 6T format is widely used in 95% of Army ground vehicles, Lead-Acid and Lithium-ion 6T batteries currently only support 12V and 24V vehicle buses respectively. Therefore, there is a need for a Lithium-ion 6T battery which can support at a minimum 48V operations. To avoid the need for multiple fielded batteries to meet both needs, having a Lithium-ion 6T battery which can support multiple voltages is preferred. Accordingly, innovative solutions must be developed and demonstrated which will allow for a Lithium-ion 6T to operate at both 24V and 48V without greatly increasing cost of the 6T product or affecting its fit and function in legacy 6T applications. Additionally, the higher characteristic voltage of 48V should allow the Lithium-ion 6T to serve as a building block for higher voltage systems up to at least 300V. The Dual-Voltage version of the Lithium-ion 6T in the 24V mode should meet all existing requirements of MIL-PRF-32565. The existing 6T form factor should be maintained to the greatest extent possible, however additional provisions for the higher voltage output are allowable as long as the added components do not increase 6T height beyond post height and do not impede battery tie downs. Technology developed to allow 24V/48V dual-voltage operation should be fully integral to the Lithium-ion 6T battery, with the exception of power output provisions. Technology developed for allowing the Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T to build larger voltage packs (ex: 300V mobility packs) may use external components housed in some type of battery box/enclosure. Technologies developed should additionally allow for achieving 48-V operations using two Dual-Voltage Lithium-Ion 6Ts in 24-V mode in series and using two Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6Ts in 48-V mode in parallel. Concepts should also take into account all new required battery electrical and thermal interfaces, battery safety, and battery-to-battery communication requirements to allow for higher voltage operations.

PHASE I: Identify and determine the engineering, technology, and embedded hardware and software needed to develop this concept. Drawings showing realistic designs based on engineering studies are expected deliverables. Additionally, modeling and simulation to show projected performance and Ah capacity of a single Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T (<5% reduction in overall Li-ion 6T pack capacity to achieve 48-V dual-voltage operation) developed in this phase is expected. Cost analysis projections should also be performed to determine the cost premium between a Standard and Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T (<20% increase in overall Lithium-ion 6T product cost). A bill of materials and volume part costs for the Phase I design should also be developed. This phase also needs to address the challenges identified in the above description, including scaling to larger voltage mobility packs.

PHASE II: Develop and integrate prototype embedded hardware and software into 24V Lithium-ion 6T's to create Dual-Voltage Li-ion 6Ts capable of both 24V and 48V operations. Additionally, hardware and software should be developed to allow Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6Ts in 48V mode to be combined into and demonstrated as a 300V hybrid mobility pack. Analysis should also be performed to show potential for operation up to a 600V pack. Testing should be performed on single Dual-Voltage Li-ion 6T batteries in both the 24V and 48V mode to demonstrate operation, performance, and Ah-capacity (<5% reduction in overall Li-ion 6T pack capacity to achieve 48-V dual-voltage operation). Additionally, 48-V operation should be tested on a 2-series set of two Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T batteries set to 24V mode and on a 2-parallel set of two Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T batteries set to 48V mode. Series operation up to 300V using Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T's in the 48V mode should also be demonstrated. Cost analysis should also be performed on the finalized product to determine the cost premium between a Standard and Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T (<20% increase in overall Lithium-ion 6T product cost). A bill of materials and volume part costs for the Phase II design should also be developed. Deliverables include electrical drawings and technical specifications, software, M&S and test results, and at least six Dual-Voltage Li-ion 6T batteries with the integrated embedded hardware and software improvements as well as software and hardware required to operate the batteries in a 300V hybrid mobility pack configuration.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: This phase will begin installation of Dual-Voltage Lithium-ion 6T packs using the solutions developed in Phase II on selected vehicle platforms (military, commercial EV/HEV, etc.) and will also focus on integration of Phase II embedded hardware and software technologies into the production processes of current Li-ion 6T batteries.