DE Effects Committee Brief HPM M&S Subcommittee 02 November 2009 Dr. Timothy J. Clarke AFRL/RDH Directed Energy Directorate Air Force Research Laboratory Dr. J. Mark DelGrande SAIC

Summary Role of M&S Sample of Codes Present Activities Shortfalls NOTE DETEC MSWG held this last week at AFRL. Pulled some shortfalls from this observation. 2

The HPM M&S Pyramid DOD Modeling Pyramid Results, not models, are aggregated and passed up the pyramid ICEPIC TMax, Antenna codes Physics (Components & Subsystem Effects) Engagement (One-on-One/Few) Mission (Few-on-Few) Campaign (Force-on-Force) THUNDER CFAM EADSIM SUPPRESSOR RF-PROTEC DREAM DOD Modeling Pyramid Simulates HPM system against one or more target systems (devices or networks of devices) Bridges Physics & Mission Levels Physics: study detailed problems (e.g., sources & antenna physics) Mission: flight packages (e.g., effectiveness and survivability against targets with air defenses) Supports the following R&D functions Predicting HPM system lethality against electronic devices and systems of devices Performing tradeoffs to optimize HPM effects Sensitivity studies to determine key parts of problem, and areas where experiments can provide the most insight 3

HPM Physics Level Codes

Higher Level HPM Codes

Institute for High Power Microwave (HPM) Employment, Integration, Optimization, and Effects Building and populating a framework to propagate accurate and traceable information from engineering level models to mission and campaign level models to allow for faster acquisition of HPM systems that solve mission needs MISSION- & CAMPAIGN-LEVEL ANALYSIS Mission (EADSIM, SUPPRESSOR) Campaign (THUNDER, CFAM) (Whole Target) Abstracted Models Pk MODELS (Target Components) Highly integrated end-to-end HPM system model Pe MODELS Fault Trees Advanced network models Engineering Level Models PROPAGATION MODELS Empirical Pe models Predictive models As an example of efforts to integrate tip-to-tail Platform EMI/EMC State of the art optimization, design of experiments, and uncertainty quantification will be available at all levels to allow for rapid analysis of alternatives HPM SOURCE T Max – Finite Difference Time Domain RF-PROTEC - Exterior & Interior ray-tracing CREATE-RF-high fidelity propagation models “In-situ” performance prediction CREATE-RF-high fidelity propagation models Detail plasma and material modeling

M&S Shortfalls Propagation Models Capability to quickly calculate fields inside of complex structures, such as anechoic chambers, where multiple bounces occur. Engagement Models Data to support engagement scenarios/validation Time-Out-of-Action: particularly data to support models Improved methods to assess/develop TTPs via M&S NOTE DETEC MSWG held this last week at AFRL. Pulled some shortfalls from this observation. 7

M&S Shortfalls Effects Models “Physics-based” HPM effects prediction capability e.g., Elemental Modeling Data to support effects models that account for % degradation e.g., Network traffic reduction Other M&S Tools Predictive tools to assist testers in scoping HPM effects parameter space, pre-test. A maintained database to collect and share the HPM data supporting M&S NOTE DETEC MSWG held this last week at AFRL. Pulled some shortfalls from this observation.

Summary We view our scope as effects-related M&S, specifically for counter-electronics applications, and not including ADS (human effects) We identified several near term and far term issues: Near term Time Out of Action: data to support models Predictive effects modeling Methodology for V&V of effects models (probably falls within V&V subcommittee, but important enough to call out here) Ensuring that effects testing produces appropriate data to feed engagement M&S Far term M&S support for BDA Wideband and low-frequency propagation models for engagement M&S