Department of the navy (don) 17. 1 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions introduction

Efficiently implementing 3D visualization technologies requires developing a new graphics language/API to take advantage of the full range of capabilities associated with 3D visualization. A number of high-tech companies and research institutes are developing novel display technologies for perspective correct 3D visualization. Many of these technologies require significant computation resources to compute the 3D visuals and as such require clusters of Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) to render content. OpenGL is typically used as the graphics language for rendering 3D content for novel Field-of-Light Display (FoLD) architectures whether holographic, volumetric, or light-field; however, there is no definitive agreement or standard among 3D display developers on the appropriate application interface. As such, 3D computation clusters and FoLD-enabled applications are generally limited to single display architecture. Furthermore, OpenGL interceptors are often augmented with additional APIs to interpret the scene and render the 3D visual correctly for each novel display technology. The need for additional APIs to augment OpenGL inherently binds an application to a particular display implementation making portability of the application to additional display technologies problematic. Lacking a common language/API also inhibits the interchangeability of Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) and the ability to augment a visualization environment with a perspective correct light-field display. The application software is bound to a visualization system. This problem increases the lifetime cost of each visualization system and application requiring the sailors to have the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities to properly operate each visualization system. In addition, each new visualization system would require custom software development to integrate the 3D display technology into a common application.

The ideal solution should employ a common optimized 3D graphics standard/API that can be understood and adopted by novel 3D display developers encompassing as many 3D visualization technologies as possible. The solution must provide for an AEGIS display environment that allows the operator the flexibility to choose the best display device for the visualization task without an expensive and time-consuming integration or development effort. The API must support accelerated 3D rendering for novel multi-view display architectures. It must be capable of insulating software application development from novel 3D display implementation. The solution should consist of an API structured to support HMDs (for example Microsoft HoloLens, Oculus Rift and HTC Vive) and FoLD capable hardware (such as Zebra Imaging ZScape Motion Display, Holografika HoloVizio and Leia3D) from multiple vendors with minimal (or preferably no) software reconfiguration of the host application.

By creating a common 3D standard FoLD interface definition, the Navy will be able to integrate multiple novel 3D display technologies such as Volumetric, Light-field, and HMDs. A single API, which drives multiple display technologies for first-person or God-eye viewing, creates a truly heterogeneous display environment. In addition, these first-person and God-eye views based on 3D display technologies will improve overall watch stander team performance by reducing the information needed for transmitting, tracking and monitoring information among the watch team.

PHASE I: The company shall devise and define a concept for a common FoLD application interface for accelerated 3D rendering for novel multi-view display architectures. The concept shall show it can be feasibly implemented for a variety of emerging 3D display technologies. Feasibility shall be established through proposed methods and solutions that insulate software application development from novel 3D display implementation. In the Phase I Option, if awarded, the company will develop a Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) to further develop, test, and integrate the proposed API into the AEGIS Advanced Display environment.

PHASE II: Based on the results of Phase I and the Phase II Statement of Work, the company will develop the common FoLD interface/API and deliver a prototype API. Demonstrations of FoLD application integration through the API should be provided for multiple actual, simulated, and hypothetical FoLD (HMD, holographic, volumetric or light-field) systems. The FoLD rendering demonstrations through the API should clearly validate rendering for a heterogeneous visualization environment where multiple display technologies may visualize the same scene.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: During Phase III, the company will work with PEO IWS 1.0 to further refine the API and integrate it with one or more existing FoLD systems and applications that are transitioning to the AEGIS Display System (ADS). PEO IWS 1 will provide the facilities and make the system available for testing the API within a heterogeneous FoLD environment. Private Sector Commercial Potential: The display environment of the future should be heterogeneous where the most appropriate 3D display technology is employed for given visualization task. For this to occur, the nuances of the display architectures should be hidden from the host application behind a 3D display standard.

Novel display technologies are currently being developed and demonstrated for medical, engineering design and entertainment applications. Developing a common 3D standard ensures the portability and longevity of applications within complex visualization environments. For example, a doctor can perform a pre-operative procedure with an immersive HMD visualization or collaborate with the surgical team with a light-field display using a single application.

REFERENCES:

1. Hans Bjelkhagen, David Brotherton-Ratcliffe, Ultra-Realistic Imaging: Advanced Techniques in Analogue and Digital Colour Holography, Boca Raton, CRC Press, 2013.

2. Michael Klug, Thomas Burnett, A Scalable, Collaboraative, Interactive Light-field Display System. Austin, SID Symposium Digets of Technical Papers, 2013.

3. Michael W. Halle, A. B., Fast Computer Graphics Rendering for Full Parallax Spatial Displays, Boston, International Society for Optics and Photonics, 1997.

4. Young Ju Jeong, H. S., Efficient Direct Light-Field Rendering for Autosteroscoptic 3D Displays, 2015.-

KEYWORDS: OpenGL; 3D rendering; holographic display; application interface for FoLD; heterogeneous display environment; AEGIS display System

Questions may also be submitted through DoD SBIR/STTR SITIS website.

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Ground/Sea Vehicles

ACQUISITION PROGRAM: PMS 377-6 Division, Landing Craft Technical

OBJECTIVE: Develop an Improved Skirt System to increase the skirt material life, decrease maintenance time and decrease total ownership costs, while maintaining performance of the current LCAC Deep Skirt System and the SSC Advanced Skirt System.

DESCRIPTION: The Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) and follow-on craft, the Ship-to-Shore Connector (SSC), are Air Cushion Vehicles (ACV). ACV or “hovercraft” provides amphibious transportation of equipment and personnel from ship to shore and shore to shore. An inflated skirt system provides the hovercraft with a cushion of air captured within a “bag” and “finger” system. The bag distributes pressurized air around the hull perimeter while the skirt fingers conform to the supporting surface and retain the air cushion over waves and solid obstacles. The skirt system is required to be both flexible to accommodate obstacles described in MCRP 3-31.1A Employment of Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) (REF 1) and durable to decrease associated maintenance time by 30% and total ownership costs by 20%.

The LCAC operates using a “Deep Skirt” System whereas the SSC will operate using an “Advanced Skirt” System, while both systems are fundamentally the same and share many similarities, small differences do exist in their configuration. Both Deep and Advanced Skirt System materials are manufactured from a chemical-coated, nylon base fabric and an elastomer rubber coating made from polychloroprene (neoprene). The rubber coating is vulcanized over the nylon base fabrics to provide increased strength in a process very similar to the manufacturing of automotive tires. The current Skirt Systems incur significant procurement costs and the Navy is seeking manufacturing innovations to extend the life of a skirt thus reducing procurement and life cycle costs.

Both the Deep Skirt and Advanced Skirt Systems material experience significant wear during normal operations, requiring expensive and time-consuming maintenance repairs. The Navy seeks an innovative new skirt system that provide the following characteristics; 20% reduction in manufacturing costs of the bag and fingers, 25% improvement in durability and extension of bag and finger material life, and 30% reduction in man-hours needed to install replacement skirt system components (specifically the fingers and attachment hardware). These improvements in the ability to perform patch/repair maintenance of the skirt system and reduction of the number of skirt system components should reduce total ownership costs (TOC) of 25% over currently fielded Skirt Systems. The innovative new skirt will improve the current Skirt Systems and not degrade any of the current skirt system characteristics. The Bag segments of the Improved Skirt System must attach to the craft hull using existing attachment points and maintain the geometry of the Deep/Advanced Skirts as defined in the references.

PHASE I: The company will define and develop a concept for an Improved Skirt System that meets the characteristics and the requirements as stated in the Description section. The company will prove that their concept can successfully operate in all environments that Air Cushion Vehicles (ACV) can operate and demonstrate that the Improved Skirt System will account for no loss in capability or ACV performance over currently fielded Skirt Systems. The company will also demonstrate via material testing and analytical modeling that the concept for the Improved Skirt System can be readily and cost effectively manufactured. The company will also demonstrate a concept that improves the mean time between repair and mean time to repair over the current Skirt Systems. The Phase I Option, if awarded, will include the initial design specifications and capabilities description to build a prototype in Phase II.

PHASE II: Based on the results of Phase I effort and the Phase II Statement of Work (SOW), the company will develop and deliver a (at least one) prototype section of the Skirt System for evaluation on either LCAC or SSC. This will include both the bag and finger components. The prototype will be evaluated to determine its capability in meeting the performance goals defined in Phase II SOW. System performance will be demonstrated through installation on a Craft and by modeling or analytical methods over the required range of parameters including numerous deployment cycles. The prototype will also need to be evaluated to ensure the Skirt System can be repaired if damaged. Evaluation results will be used to refine the prototype into an initial full Skirt System design. The company will prepare a Phase III development plan to transition the technology to Navy and potential commercial use.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Upon successful completion of Phase II, the company will support the Navy in transitioning the technology to Navy use. The company will further refine a complete First Article Improved Skirt System for use on either the LCAC and/or the SSC and support the Navy in transitioning the Improved Skirt System for Navy use on the associated ACV program. The company will refine the design of the Improved Skirt System, according to the Phase III SOW for evaluation to determine its effectiveness in an operationally relevant environment. The company will support the Navy for test and validation in accordance with ACV Craft Specifications to certify and qualify the system for Navy use and for transition into operational usage. Following testing and validation the end design is expected to produce results outperforming the current Skirt System Design with regards to required maintenance and repair (both man-hours and associated cost), and mean-time-between failure of components (i.e. system durability), in addition to the requirements listed in this report. Private Sector Commercial Potential: The current Skirt System’s material manufacturing process is very similar to that of automotive tires. Improvements in the manufacturing process (specifically with patches and repairs) may have transferable applications to the commercial and private sector tire/rubber manufacturing industries. Furthermore, the improved Skirt System described in this SBIR topic could have private sector commercial potential for any hovercraft operating in a similar environment.

REFERENCES:

1. MCRP 3-31.1A Employment of Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC), 1997; http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/usmc/mcrp/3-31-1a/mcrp3-31-1a.pdf.

2. Ship-to-Shore Connector(SSC) Analysis Of Alternatives Overview, October 2015; http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/673554.pdf.

3. Geaney, Sean CAPT USN, Surface Connector Outlook, September 2012; http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2012expwar/Geaney.pdf.-

KEYWORDS: Air cushion vehicles; skirt system for air cushion vehicles; landing craft air cushion (LCAC); ship-to-shore connector (SSC); bag and finger system for air cushion vehicles; deep skirt for air cushion vehicles; advanced skirt materials for air cushion vehicles

Questions may also be submitted through DoD SBIR/STTR SITIS website.

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Battlespace, Electronics, Sensors

ACQUISITION PROGRAM: NAVSEA Program Executive Office, Submarines (PEOSUB) PMS435 AN/BLQ-10B(V) and the Scalable Integrated Radio Frequency RF Systems for Undersea Platforms (SIRFSUP) FNC

The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with section 5.4.c.(8) of the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws.

OBJECTIVE: Develop Solid State Radar Emitter Identification algorithms to detect, classify, and uniquely identify solid-state radar emitters in real time. This topic, if successful, will allow modern Electronic Warfare (EW) systems that utilize richer digital data products to accurately detect, classify, and localize these changing and complex emitters.

DESCRIPTION: Maritime situational awareness is a critical Navy operational need. Recent advances in and commercialization of solid-state based radar systems have resulted in the widespread proliferation of low cost and high performance maritime navigation radars. Since a large component of maritime situational awareness comes from the ability to detect, classify, uniquely identify, and track vessels based on their radar emissions, it is imperative that identification capabilities keep pace with emerging emitter technology. At the forefront of emitter technology, Solid State Radar (SSR) systems combine direct digital synthesis, low power/high duty cycle RF waveforms, near-arbitrary waveform, and timing agility to produce emissions that challenge legacy identification systems.

Because of their digital nature, SSR emitters produce highly consistent behavior from model to model. Waveform and other conventionally measured parameters - such as pulse width, pulse repetition interval, center frequency, and frequency extent as measured between like-model SSR emitters (with identical firmware loads) - are nearly indistinguishable. Thus, conventional parametric-based approaches to unique identification are not well suited to SSR emitters.

Waveform-based approaches to identification are also problematic for SSR emitters. The ability to detect, classify, and track vessels based on their SSR emissions is further complicated by the fact that SSR behavior is highly software/firmware configurable. All waveform properties, including timing (start, duration, repetition interval) and modulation (amplitude, frequency, and/or phase), are able to be changed on an emission-to-emission basis. For pulsed emitters, hopping in time and frequency in near arbitrary fashion is supported by and used in commercially available SSR emitters.

Overcoming the challenges of SSR identification will require the incorporation of waveform and timing independent representations of an emitter. Such representations will likely require additional measurement capabilities of the collection system. For example, one specific approach might focus attention on measurements of emitter polarization behavior. Doing so effectively incorporates the emitting antenna characteristics into the identification process.

For the Phase II effort, the government will furnish data formats used by the AN/BLQ-10B (V). Due to this, the Phase II effort will be conducted at the SECRET level.

NAVSEA will process the DD254 to support the contractor for personnel and facility certification for secure access. The Phase I effort will not require access to classified information. If need be, data of the same level of complexity as secured data will be provided to support Phase I work.

PHASE I: The company will demonstrate the feasibility in meeting Navy needs for an innovative concept for the development of a conceptual approach and software algorithms for the detection and identification of Solid State Radar (SSR) emitters. Algorithms will be demonstrated in software using both sponsors-provided SSR data and contractor-designed simulated emissions.

The company should identify technical risks of their concept. The Phase I Option, if awarded, will include the initial design specifications and selection of hardware components to comprise a functioning real-time prototype SSR detection, classification, and unique identification system, which will be developed to build a prototype in Phase II.

PHASE II: Based on the Phase I results and the Phase II Statement of Work (SOW), the small business will develop and deliver a Solid State Radar Emitter Identification prototype for evaluation. The prototype will be evaluated to determine its capability in meeting the performance goals defined in Phase II SOW and the Navy need to comply with current Submarine Safety requirements. The company will design and assemble prototype detection, classification, and unique identification algorithms for SSR radars. These prototype algorithms will be run on a digital architecture similar to the AN/BLQ-10B (V). Either the performer can provide a digital system or a government furnished development system can be provided for the Phase II development. Near real-time operation of the prototype system will be demonstrated in both laboratory and field environments using multiple like model SSR emitters (test range and emitters will be provided by sponsor). Phase II will be a SECRET effort.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Upon successful completion of Phase II, the performer will be expected to adapt and transition the technology to a Navy Program of Record such as the AN/BLQ-10B. Contractor will adapt and implement developed SSR identification algorithms to operate on available hardware processors within the target platform architecture. The firm will support the Navy in integrating the SSR identification technology into selected legacy system(s) in collaboration with the sponsoring agency. Private Sector Commercial Potential: Solid-state radar emitter identification technology would find widespread application in commercial systems meant for physical layer RF security and/or device spoof detection. For example, emitter identification could form a physically secure layer for cell phone device authentication. Similarly, the same technology could be applied to anti-spoofing for both automated ship traffic reporting systems (AIS) and automatic aircraft reporting systems (ADS-B).

REFERENCES:

1. Jaeckel, S., Borner, K., Thiele, L., and Jungnickel, V., "A geometric polarization rotation model for the 3-d spatial channel model," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 5966-5977, Dec. 2012.

2. Wei, DFeng, C., Guo, C., and Fangfang, L., "A power amplifier energy efficient polarization modulation scheme based on the optimal precompensation," IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 513-516, Mar. 2013.

3. Kwon, S.C. and Stuber, G. L., "Geometrical theory of channel depolarization," IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 3542-3556, Oct. 2011.

4. Pederson, J. C., SCANTER 5000 and 6000 Solid State Radar: Utilisation of the SCANTER 5000 and 6000 series next generation solid state, coherent, frequency diversity and time diversity radar with software defined functionality for security applications, Waterside Security Conference (WSS), 2010 International, pp. 1-8, 2010.

5. Galati, G., Pavan, G., and De Palo, F. "Interference problems expected when solid-state marine radars will come into widespread use," in EUROCON 2015 - International Conference on Computer as a Tool (EUROCON), IEEE, vol., no., pp.1-6, 8-11 Sept. 2015.

KEYWORDS: Solid State Radar; Maritime Surveillance; Solid State Radar Detection; Solid State Radar Classification; Unique Radar Identification; Dual Polarization

Questions may also be submitted through DoD SBIR/STTR SITIS website.

N171-044

TITLE: Cognitive Software Algorithms Techniques for Electronic Warfare

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Battlespace, Electronics, Sensors

ACQUISITION PROGRAM: Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 2 and Block 3.

The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with section 5.4.c.(8) of the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws.

OBJECTIVE: Develop innovative cognitive software algorithms and techniques for electronic warfare in order to counter highly agile radar emitters.

DESCRIPTION: Traditionally, electronic warfare (EW) techniques have relied on some priori knowledge of threat emitters. In the most basic form, this can be a catalogue of threat emitter characteristics against which received signals are compared – that is, a database of signal characteristics that are used to quickly classify emitters and where ambiguities in signal characteristics remain due to incomplete data. The effectiveness of the technique depends on three things: (1) the quality and extent of the detected threat signal data and the completeness of the information contained in the threat library; (2) the speed of classifying the threat emitter which, in turn, depends on the amount of data that must be sorted and systematically compared to threat library files (including the ranking of ambiguities); and (3) the assumption that threat modes and characteristics have not changed. Even with hierarchal structures, searching through threat libraries can be a challenging task, made difficult by the need for accuracy and speed, and complicated by similarities in signal characteristics. Even so, evolving threat emitter complexity has typically been matched by advances in computer processor power and the technique has proven itself highly effective over the years. However, the technique consumes considerable system processing power and memory. Furthermore, creation and maintenance of threat libraries is costly and time consuming and the continued emergence of agile radar will only exacerbate the problem. Cognitive techniques will reduce the dependence on threat libraries or may, through the use of learning algorithms, eliminate the need for manually created and maintained threat libraries altogether.