Conflict Simulation Pioneers Defense Strategies · PDF fileJanuary/ February 2000 U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Conflict Simulation Pioneers

January/February 2000

U.S. Department of Energy’s

Lawrence LivermoreNational Laboratory

ConflictSimulationPioneersDefenseStrategies

ConflictSimulationPioneersDefenseStrategies

Also in this issue: • Hydrodynamics of Supernovas• Agile Manufacturing• Hypersonic Flight

Also in this issue: • Hydrodynamics of Supernovas• Agile Manufacturing• Hypersonic Flight

About the Cover

About the Review

• •

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is operated by the University of California for theDepartment of Energy. At Livermore, we focus science and technology on assuring our nation’s security.We also apply that expertise to solve other important national problems in energy, bioscience, and theenvironment. Science & Technology Review is published 10 times a year to communicate, to a broadaudience, the Laboratory’s scientific and technological accomplishments in fulfilling its primary missions.The publication’s goal is to help readers understand these accomplishments and appreciate their value tothe individual citizen, the nation, and the world.

Please address any correspondence (including name and address changes) to S&TR, Mail Stop L-664,Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P.O. Box 808, Livermore, California 94551, or telephone (925) 422-8961. Our e-mail address is [email protected]. S&TR is available on the World Wide Web atwww.llnl.gov/str/.

Prepared by LLNL under contractNo. W-7405-Eng-48

© 2000. The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. This document has been authored by theRegents of the University of California under Contract No. W-7405-Eng-48 with the U.S. Government. To requestpermission to use any material contained in this document, please submit your request in writing to the TechnicalInformation Department, Document Approval and Report Services, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P.O. Box 808, Livermore, California 94551, or to our e-mail address [email protected].

This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neitherthe United States Government nor the University of California nor any of their employees makes any warranty,expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness ofany information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately ownedrights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring bythe United States Government or the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein donot necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or the University of California and shall not beused for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

Pho

tos:

PH

3 E

ric L

ogsd

on a

nd P

H2

Mic

helle

Ham

mon

d,

FLE

ET

CO

MC

AM

GR

UP

AC

Lawrence Livermore has long been a leaderin developing conflict simulation models fordefense and emergency response training andplanning. This issue’s lead article reports on thecapabilities of Livermore’s JCATS (JointConflict and Tactical Simulation), an extremelypowerful and detailed conflict simulationprogram. The article also describes how JCATSwas used successfully in March 1999 duringOperation Urban Warrior, a U.S. Navy–MarineCorps exercise in the San Francisco Bay Areadesigned to test new combat concepts, tactics,and technologies in an urban setting. Imagesfrom that exercise comprise this issue’s cover.The JCATS story begins on p. 4.

SCIENTIFIC EDITORS

David Eimerl and Jean H. de Pruneda

MANAGING EDITOR

Sam Hunter

PUBLICATION EDITOR

Dean Wheatcraft

WRITERS

Arnie Heller, Ann Parker, Katie Walter, and Dean Wheatcraft

ART DIRECTOR AND DESIGNER

Ray Marazzi

INTERNET DESIGNER

Kitty Tinsley

COMPOSITOR

Louisa Cardoza

PROOFREADER

Carolin Middleton

S&TR, a Director’s Office publication, is produced by the Technical InformationDepartment under the direction of the Office of Policy, Planning, and Special Studies.

S&TR is available on the Web atwww.llnl.gov/str/.

2 The Laboratory in the News

3 Commentary by Wayne ShottsTapping the Full Power of Conflict Simulation

Features4 Simulating Warfare Is No Video Game

A new Laboratory conflict simulation program was put to a major test in a San Francisco Bay Area exercise.

12 Supernova Hydrodynamics Up CloseDespite vast differences in scale, supernovas and high-energy-density laser experiments have more in common than might be imagined.

Research Highlights17 Agile Manufacturing: Gearing Up to Meet Demand

20 Bringing Hypersonic Flight Down to Earth

23 Patents and Awards

Abstracts

S&TR Staff January/February 2000

LawrenceLivermoreNationalLaboratory

Printed in the United States of America

Available fromNational Technical Information ServiceU.S. Department of Commerce5285 Port Royal RoadSpringfield, Virginia 22161

UCRL-52000-00-1/2Distribution Category UC-0January/February 2000

Page 4 Page 20

Page 12

Pho

to: P

H1

Chr

is D

esm

ond,

FLE

ET

CO

MC

AM

GR

UP

AC

2 The Laboratory in the News

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Lab’s ASCI supercomputer comes of ageOn October 28, 1999, Lawrence Livermore and IBM

celebrated the “coming of age” of their Blue Pacificsupercomputer with a special ceremony at the Laboratory. This machine, part of the Department of Energy’s AcceleratedStrategic Computing Initiative (ASCI) has been developed anddelivered in several stages over the past three years. It hasbecome a mature and powerful tool for maintaining the safety,reliability, and performance of the nation’s nuclear stockpile.

Created by IBM, Blue Pacific performs at nearly 4 trillionoperations per second, applying all of its 5,856 processors inparallel to a single computational problem. The massivesupercomputer is connected by nearly 8 kilometers (5 miles)of cable and occupies an area covering some 750 squaremeters (8,000 square feet).

With all of the critical elements—software and codedevelopment, a functional problem-solving environment,interconnect and communication capabilities, data storagefacilities—now in place, ASCI’s Blue Pacific has emerged as a fully functional supercomputer to help fulfill therequirements of DOE’s Stockpile Stewardship Program.

The October ceremony included presentations by LaboratoryDirector Bruce Tarter, DOE Deputy Assistant Secretary forResearch, Development, and Simulation Gilbert G. Weigand,and IBM Senior Vice President for Technology andManufacturing Nicholas M. Donofrio. A sampling ofbreakthrough research calculations performed on the newcomputer was highlighted.

The ceremony also included a preview of Option White,currently being built by IBM as an extension of Blue Pacific.Able to perform 10 trillion operations per second, Option Whitehas three times the capacity and capabilities of Blue Pacific. It isscheduled for demonstration in March 2000, with delivery toLawrence Livermore planned for the summer of 2000.Contact: Susan Houghton (925) 422-9919 ([email protected]).

Lab studies smoking effects on newbornsA team led by James Tucker from Livermore’s Biology

and Biotechnology Research Program Directorate has beenawarded a $1.8-million grant from the California TobaccoRelated Disease Research Program to study the effects ofsmoking on newborns. In particular, the team wants to knowif babies born to mothers who smoked during pregnancy havemore chromosome damage than babies born to nonsmokers.

Tucker and team members Marilyn Ramsey and DaveNelson will study blood samples taken from 300 mothers andfrom the fetal side of the placentas of their newborn babies.

This research grows out of the team’s earlier investigationof the theory that as people age, the amount of chromosome

damage increases. For part of its work, the team analyzedumbilical cord blood from newborns delivered at a localhospital, and according to Tucker, it saw a significantly highamount of genetic damage in babies of smokers.

Tucker explained further, “We know that tobacco causes cancer. This is a special case of second-hand tobaccoexposure. Unborn babies are at a very vulnerable stage of development. They have no choice about being exposed to tobacco carcinogens. [Now] we also want to look atsusceptibility. Are some mothers or newborns moresusceptible to chromosome damage? The answer to thisquestion may tell us whether some people are at greater-than-average risk of getting cancer as a result of tobaccoexposure.”Contact: James Tucker (925) 423-8154 ([email protected]).

Potential for improving gene therapy reportedIn the October 1999 issue of Science, a Laboratory team

reported that it has developed a possible method to makegene therapy more effective. The team also announced thediscovery of a key step in fertility.

The researchers analyzed the interactions of a singlemolecule of DNA and a protamine, a small protein withpositive charges that allow it to bind to DNA.

One problem of gene therapy—the introduction of newgenes into the body to replace defective genes that may causea disease—is incorporating the genes into cells withoutdamaging the genes. Typically, enzymes in the body destroyforeign genes or DNA.

“We believe we’ve learned how to design a protamine-like molecule to optimize the success of incorporating genesinto the cells in gene therapy,” says team member RodBalhorn. “Protamines bind too tightly to genes to be effectivein protecting against enzymes that might destroy the genes.But we have learned that we can . . . possibly improve genetherapy . . . by designing a protamine that has fewer positivecharges.”

The Livermore team has also made a new discovery abouta key step in the fertility process. Balhorn explains that forembryo development to be initiated, a protein in the egg mustremove all the protamine bound to the sperm DNA within 5 to 10 minutes after the sperm fertilizes the egg.

Using a two-sided miniature flow cell designed by a teammember, the Livermore scientists mimicked the embryodevelopment initiation process and studied the interactionsbetween DNA and the protamine. Viewing the processthrough a video camera, they saw the speed at which theprotein bound to and released from the DNA.Contact: Rod Balhorn (925) 422-6284 ([email protected]).

S&TR January/February 2000

ITH the closure of many overseas military bases and themove away from large standing armies and navies, the

U.S. military is placing a premium on the use of advancedtechnology for precision operations that allow U.S. troops todeploy rapidly and win decisively. Lawrence Livermore has along-standing relationship with the Department of Defense forresearch and development for advanced defense technologies,and conflict simulation is one area in which we are recognizedas among the best in the world. The article beginning on p. 4describes JCATS (Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation), thelatest advance in decades of effort to create accurate andrealistic conflict simulation models.

JCATS is unique in the breadth and depth of the informationit integrates and the variety of conflict situations it can simulate.It offers an unprecedented level of detail, operationalcomplexity, and accuracy of simulation. In describing JCATS,it is easy to be swept into the technical details of the model—entity level, aggregation/deaggregation, 660- by 660-kilometer“playbox,” and so forth—and lose sight of its wide range ofapplications and its potential for truly understanding moderncombat operations.

The U.S. military uses JCATS primarily for trainingindividual commanders in battlefield operations and tactics.Training, other than “on the job” in actual combat, is difficultto make realistic. Live exercises, which are themselvessimulations, are limited by logistics to a relatively smallnumber of participants, and the need for safety limits the use of real weapons. With JCATS, war games can be set up tosimulate combat situations, with teams of officers playing thevarious forces. As the article describes, these war games areextremely accurate and thus provide directly applicable andcredible training.

But the program is also useful for mission planning,assessment of military strategy, evaluation of new or proposedtechnologies, after-action analysis, and even site securityassessment.

For example, military doctrine and strategy developed inthe large-scale conflicts of the first half of the century are ofquestionable applicability to current operations, which focus

W

3


Commentary by Wayne Shotts

increasingly on limited-scope engagements andpeacekeeping. JCATS can be used by military planners totest new doctrines and strategies. It can also be used toevaluate the utility of new technologies, such as alternativesto antipersonnel land mines, or different applications ofexisting technologies. Once the program’s databases areloaded with the desired information (for example, terrainmaps, troops, weaponry), simulations can be run over andover again, changing one set of variables at a time. BecauseJCATS tracks the action at the level of individual items,after-action analyses are extremely detailed, and statisticscan be assembled to provide an accurate systems-level viewof the pros and cons of different approaches to militaryoperations.

JCATS is also extremely useful for evaluating andimproving physical security. Site security at the nationallaboratories is receiving considerable attention these days.Just as with military training, live exercises to testphysical security are expensive and limited in scope.However, JCATS, with its ability to accurately modelindividual buildings, obstructed lines of sight, the timerequired to cut through walls or penetrate barriers, and soforth, is ideally suited to this application. Site security hasused the program to evaluate the effectiveness of existingphysical defenses and response actions against differentthreats. After-action analyses and statistics, assembledfrom a large number of runs, provide a credible basis fordecisions to alter response tactics or modify physicalsecurity features.

Even as the JCATS developers continue to upgrade themodel’s capabilities, with improvements seemingly limitedsolely by imagination and technical creativity, the U.S.military and other users are striving to exploit the program’sfull potential. As new conflict simulation needs arise in boththe defense and civil sectors, users will find that the idealtool is already sitting on their shelves.

Tapping the Full Powerof Conflict Simulation

n Wayne Shotts is Associate Director, Nonproliferation, ArmsControl, and International Security.

Photo: PH2 Jon Gesch, FLEETCOMCAMGRUPAC


ITH whirling helicopters,grinding tanks, and screaming

soldiers, computer war games havebecome some of the most popularsoftware programs for video arcadesand personal computers in recent years.Long before computers became ahousehold item, however, the nation’sarmed forces were taking advantage ofcomputer-driven combat simulations totrain officers, rehearse missions, andexplore tactics.

Since the mid-1970s, LawrenceLivermore computer scientists, working atthe Conflict Simulation Laboratory, havepioneered increasingly realistic softwarefor the Department of Defense. TheLaboratory’s landmark Janus program,developed in the late 1970s, was the firstconflict simulation to use a graphical userinterface. Since then, Livermore expertshave remained at the forefront of combatsimulation development by takingadvantage of steady advances in hardwareand software and by working closely withmilitary officers to understand their needs.

By all accounts, the Livermoresimulations have proved highlyvaluable to the military. They have beenemployed in Operation Just Cause inPanama and Operation Desert Storm inthe Mideast, as well as for combatplanning in Somalia, Bosnia, and otherinternational trouble spots.

4


W

Simulating Warfare Is No Video Game

Simulating Warfare Is No Video GameLivermore’s JCATS combat simulation program provesinvaluable for training officers and rehearsing missions.


resources, analyzing the effectiveness ofweapons and different force structures,and planning and rehearsing missions.Besides warfighting scenarios, JCATScan also simulate exercises for druginterdiction, disaster relief,peacekeeping, counterterrorism, hostagerescue, and site security. Current usersinclude the Army, Air Force SecurityForces, Special Operations Command,Marine Corps, Naval Post GraduateSchool, U.S. Southern Command, U.S.Army Europe, Department of Energy,and Secret Service.

Program Controls 60,000 ElementsAn enhanced version of JCATS

released in October 1999 can simulateup to 60,000 individual elements, fromsoldiers to planes to mob participants.What’s more, the new version can runon a workstation as well as on a laptopcomputer, making it feasible for use inthe field.

The new program typicallysimulates a battle between twoopposing sides (often called red andblue forces), but it can accommodateup to 10 sides with friendly, enemy,and neutral relationships. Depending onthe rules of engagement established forthe conflict, a soldier can beprogrammed to shoot at the first sign ofan opposing force, hide, dig a foxhole,

5


Conflict Simulation

computer games may look impressivewith flashy three-dimensional effects,she says, but they don’t always observethe laws of physics.

A typical PC game soldier can jumpoff a 15-meter cliff without a scratch, but a soldier in JCATS doing the samething will be badly injured. Neither docommercial games take into accountsuch seemingly mundane but crucialfactors as fatigue, inclement weather,low food supplies, or poor visibility.“JCATS realistically simulates thecapabilities and limitations ofarmaments, people, and theenvironment,” she says.

Tom McGrann, deputy leader of thetactical systems section in theLaboratory’s Conflict SimulationLaboratory, notes that JCATS is a directdescendant of Janus, building on morethan two decades of computer-drivenmission analysis and rehearsalexperience. “We want to help DoD withsoftware that gives commanders arealistic, cost-effective, and operator-friendly training tool,” he says. “Ourprograms give officers a detailed feelfor how combat operations will go,from the deployment of an aircraftcarrier to an individual soldier.”

The program is currently used fortraining both individuals and commandstaffs in tactics and deployment of

In 1997, a team of computerscientists from the Laboratory'sNonproliferation, Arms Control, andInternational Security (NAI) Directorateunveiled Livermore’s most powerfulcombat program. JCATS (Joint Conflictand Tactical Simulation) merged andupgraded the capabilities of two earlierprograms, the Joint Conflict Model, anadvanced version of Janus, and the JointTactical Simulation, an urban conflictmodel. (See S&TR, November 1996,pp. 4–11). Significantly, the programalso incorporated important newfeatures requested by its DoD sponsor,the Joint Warfighting Center in FortMonroe, Virginia, that conferred greaterfidelity to the simulations.

JCATS was used to rehearse possiblecombat options in support of the 1999Kosovo conflict. It was also used by theMarine Corps and the Navy to plan forand participate in an exercise in the SanFrancisco Bay Area. During theexercise, JCATS tracked the liveparticipants and tested in real time theeffects of virtual air and artillery attackson the participants.

Taking Physics into AccountLivermore computer scientist Faith

Shimamoto, JCATS project leader,notes that every aspect of the programtakes physics into account. Typical

Photo: PH1 Chris Desmond, FLEETCOMCAMGRUPAC

http://www.llnl.gov/str/Sackett.html


fire only upon positive identification,or take other action. The rules ofengagement may change during thesimulation as political alliances shift orwhen civilians become involved.

Players see only their respectiveforces and whatever intelligence theyacquire about opposing forces by visualor auditory means, including forwardscouts, spotter planes, radar, andsensors. A large hill, for example, canprevent a soldier from visually spottingenemy forces massing on the other side.Tanks generate noise that can be“heard” by nearby opposing forces.

Typically, a controller at a masterworkstation has a bird’s-eye view andcan observe the movement of forces onall sides. To test players’ responses tothe unexpected, the controller canresurrect fallen troops, change theweather, provide more fuel, speed upthe clock, release a biological weapon,and the like.

6


Conflict Simulation

Players can also import blueprints of specific buildings (below right) for urban warfare and site securityexercises. Or users can create their owntown or building, as is often done fordrug interdiction training. In thesecases, JCATS offers a palette of menusto create everything from windows anddoors to streets and parks.

Shimamoto points out that terrainsignificantly affects movement oftroops, aircraft, tanks, and maritimeoperations. A rescue helicopter cannotsafely land in a forest, amphibiouslanding craft must negotiate rockyshores, vehicles move slowly throughswamps, and soldiers slow considerablywhen marching uphill. Environmentalfactors such as adverse weather,nightfall, and smoke from combat alsoaffect mobility.

JCATS is unusually flexible in thesheer scale of battle, from the defenseof a nation involving thousands of

Before a JCATS simulation begins, terrain features are laid out (in thiscase of the greater Sarajevo area) from standard Department ofDefense maps.

Games Can Last WeeksThe duration of games varies from

20 minutes for a brief site securityexercise involving a few people to twoweeks for a complex drug interdictionrehearsal involving different agencies.Sometimes a short game is run dozens oftimes so that statistical sampling can beused to evaluate a particular tactic orweapon system.

Setting up a JCATS exercise takesone to two weeks depending on thenumber and kinds of combat forces and,especially, the kinds of topography to bemodeled. Terrain is modeled withextraordinary fidelity. Rivers, forexample, can be characterized by theircurrent, depth, and underwaterobstacles. Players can enter terrain data,including correct elevation andgeographical features, from standardDoD maps of the world (such as the onebelow at the left) and from DoDdigitized terrain data.

Buildings and other urban features are added onto terrain maps. Inthis example (again of Sarajevo but at a smaller scale), individualbuildings can be seen.

soldiers, planes, ships, and vehicles, to the rescue of a hostage in anunderground compound by a handful ofspecial operations personnel. Typically,the maximum simulation area, orplaybox, is 660 by 660 kilometers, but it can be expanded under specialconditions. Even at this enormous scale,a player can zoom in on a city to view

details such as roads, rivers, andbuildings, and then select an individualbuilding and examine its floor plans.

Depending on the exercise, playershave at their disposal a vast range ofweapons, including tracked andwheeled vehicles, aircraft andhelicopters, ships and submarines, andeven systems that are in the

development or conceptual stage.Infantry soldiers may have machineguns, rifles, antitank weapons, mortars,and other munitions. Nonlethalweapons, increasingly important as themilitary assumes peacekeeping dutiesaround the world, include rubberbullets, clubs, tear gas, pepper spray,stinger grenades, rocks, foam, and fists.

7


Conflict SimulationS&TR January/February 2000

The realism of JCATS simulations in urban settings makes itextremely valuable for assessing and strengthening site security ata range of government facilities, including the very institution thatcreated the program. For the past several months, securitymanagers at Lawrence Livermore have been using JCATS to testestablished interdiction measures against a variety of adversaryscenarios. The work has helped to sharpen security strategies,identify vulnerabilities, and train officers for different kinds ofthreats, even those deemed highly improbable.

Livermore security managers have conducted more than 200 exercises with JCATS, with each exercise repeated about 10 times. According to Stuart Jossey, security administrator withLivermore’s Safeguards and Security Department, most of thescenarios involve attempts to gain entry to the Laboratory’sheavily guarded Superblock area that houses special nuclearmaterial. Jossey says that JCATS is invaluable for simulating the close-combat, interior fighting conditions a real incursionmight involve.

Currently, a small corps of people including Special Response Team members, Protective Force supervisors, andsecurity administrators participate in JCATS exercises atLivermore. The department’s long-range goal is to integrateJCATS into the development of site security tactics and training.Operator proficiency requires between two and three weeks oftraining. “The scenarios involve a lot of mouse clicks underpressure,” Jossey notes.

The exercises are performed at adjoining computer stations byoperators controlling a designated number of virtual securitypersonnel driving in patrol cars or patrolling on foot. Theoperators wear headphones to communicate with each other aboutwhat their forces see and hear. Their computer screens displaybuildings comprising the Superblock area and adjoining facilitiesas well as the location and health of people under their command.

In a nearby room, another operator controls a number of “badguys” intent, for example, on breaking into a facility containingspecial nuclear material. This monitor shows only the intrudersand any Lawrence Livermore security members they detect.Jossey, meanwhile, operates a station that depicts the locations of

all the participants. He can change the makeup of each opposingforce, as well as their weapons, on the fly.

Jossey says the simulations are a powerful supplement to realdrills involving players with laser-tag-like weapons that are stagedregularly in and around the Superblock area. “It’s expensive doingactual exercises,” he says. “We also run a safety risk becausemany of our exercises are done at night with people running onroofs, climbing fences, and responding tactically in patrol cars.”JCATS allows the department to test security strategies to helpdecide what scenarios the actual exercises should focus on.

The completed simulations are saved on disk and thenreplayed for the participants on a large-screen monitor. Josseyinvites comments from participants about the exercise, especiallyhow things might have gone better. He also uses the program’sAnalyst Workstation feature to obtain statistical data such ascasualties and ammunition used.

“We get a lot of good statistical information,” he says. “Thewhole point is to make sure we have designed a strategy thatdenies unauthorized entry to our critical facilities.”

Simulations Strengthen Livermore Site Security

Livermore site security exercises use JCATS to strengthen securityand help train security personnel for what-if scenarios. Here, JasonDufour (left) and Raymond Harvey train using JCATS.

Model’s Power Is in the DetailsMilitary operations include clearing

barriers; aircraft takeoff and landing;bombing runs; naval gunfire; buildingfoxholes, vehicle holes, and fortifications;sandbagging; looking around, standing,and crouching; recovering weapons andammunitions; resupplying food, fuel, andammunition; and mounting onto ordismounting from vehicles, ships,airplanes, and helicopters.

With a feature unique to JCATS, aplayer may aggregate entities (soldiers,tanks, or other individual units) into agroup such as a formation, convoy,squad, or battalion that is then viewedand controlled as one icon. In this way,large formations are more easily viewedand controlled while the program tracksand records activity at the individualentity level. At any moment, a playercan zoom in on a squad and examineevents involving just a few soldiers,each uniquely outfitted and trained.

The effectiveness of every weapon,from a laser-guided missile to a singlebullet, is determined by probability-of-hit and probability-of-kill statisticscompiled by DoD. Using these data,JCATS calculates, for example, theblast area and resulting casualties fromtripping a land mine. Just as easily, theprogram calculates if a launchedantitank weapon misses the tank,destroys it, incapacitates the tank’smovement but leaves its gun free to fire,or destroys the gun but leaves the tank’smobility intact.

Virtual soldiers face hazards fromfatigue, enemy and friendly fire, poorhealth, and inadequate training. Everysoldier begins with a certain amount ofenergy, which is expended morequickly during running or walking

uphill. Players can bring in medicalassets to attend to the sick or wounded.

In recognition of possible modernenemy capabilities, JCATS can simulatethe release of chemical or biologicalwarfare agents as well as othersubstances that might by employed aspoisons during acts of terrorism orwarfare. For example, the program candisplay how exposure to an atmosphericrelease of a nerve agent can affectpersonnel. Such capabilities make ituseful for developing both military andcivilian preparedness and responses.

Many Options to Review a GamePlayers can choose from several

options to review a completed game.The entire exercise can be replayed atdifferent speeds. The AnalystWorkstation, a feature that conductsrapid analyses of exercise data, can alsobe employed. This capability isespecially useful, says Shimamoto,because in combat simulation, only asmall fraction of the data is important toany specific factor under scrutiny.

One of JCATS’s most significantenhancements is modeling the urbanenvironment for such missions as hostagerescue, disaster relief, mob control, orprotecting heads of state along a motorroute. In urban settings, players can view

8


Conflict Simulation S&TR January/February 2000

A modular building onthe pier housed Marineofficers using JCATS totrack the action in theOakland Hills betweenopposing blue and redforces. The Marineswere tied to thecommand andcommunication systemsheadquartered on thenearby USS Coronado.

The command ship USS Coronado docked ata San Francisco pier and served as thecommand center for both the Navy’s andMarine Corps’s exercises.

groups of buildings as well as individualbuilding floors and their features—including glass and solid walls, windows,doors, and stairwells—roofs, andunderground features, such as tunnels,sewers, and garages. Virtual forcesfighting inside buildings are hampered bylimited lines of sight, poor lighting, andthe risk of injury to civilians.

The program’s superb urbansimulation capabilities led the U.S.Navy and Marine Corps to give JCATSan important role in exercises conductedlast March in the San Francisco BayArea. The Marine Corps exercise wasdubbed Urban Warrior AdvancedWarfighting Experiment. Its objectivewas to develop and test new concepts,tactics, and technologies to prepareMarines for combat in the next century,especially activities in urban areas. TheNavy’s companion exercise, FleetBattle Experiment–Echo, also tookadvantage of JCATS. (See S&TR, June1999, pp. 4–11.)

The exercises were run from theNavy command ship USS Coronado,which was docked at a pier in SanFrancisco. A small building inside thepier housed Marines running JCATSterminals and other command andcommunications systems. All data werefed to the command ship. Livermorecomputer scientist Mike Uzelac, directorof operations for JCATS, monitored theexercise from the building.

According to McGrann, the Marinesfocused on an urban exercise becauseits studies show that by 2020, about 70 percent of the world’s populationwill live in cities and at least 80 percentof those cities will be located within300 miles of the coastline. Fighting inurban areas, says McGrann, isparticularly treacherous because of thedanger to the civilian population andbecause of the numerous hiding placesfor opponents.

Enemies Eye Urban WarfareA recent statement by Col. Mark

Thiffault, Director, Joint Information

Bureau, Urban Warrior, underscores theMarines’ commitment to winning urbanbattles: “Our enemies, having watchedDesert Storm on CNN, know they cannotengage the United States withconventional methods. These potentialfoes view cities as a way to limit thetechnological advantages of our military.They know that cities, with their narrowstreets, confusing layout and large numberof civilian noncombatants, place limits onour technological superiority andespecially our use of firepower. We haveto develop technologies that allow us towin while minimizing collateral damage.”

McGrann says that the Marines areconcerned about the performance

degradation that occurs in standardcommand, control, communications,computer, and intelligence systemsbecause of cities’ concrete buildings,phone lines, and other electronicdevices. As a result, Urban WarriorMarines experimented with wirelesscommunications devices, satellite links,remotely piloted reconnaissance aircraft,and global positioning system links.

The focus of the exercise was anintense battle between some 700 battle-dressed Marines, divided into red andblue forces, at the former Oak KnollNaval Hospital in the Oakland Hills.Both sides wore Multiple IntegratedLaser Engagement System gear similar

9


Conflict SimulationS&TR January/February 2000

(a) The former Oak KnollNaval Hospital andadjacent buildings in theOakland Hills formed thesetting for the UrbanWarrior AdvancedWarfighting Experiment.(b) One Marinedemonstrates to anothera handheld computerused in the Urban Warriorexercise.

(a)

(b)P

hoto

: PH

3 E

ric L

ogsd

on, F

LEE

TC

OM

CA

MG

RU

PA

C

Photo: PH2 Michelle Hammond,FLEETCOMCAMGRUPAC

http://www.llnl.gov/str/Baskett.html

to that used in laser-tag games. Redforces, holed up in the hospital,barricaded stairwells with anything they could find as they tried to fight off blue forces intent on taking over the building.

The fierce battle was set against abackdrop of civil unrest taking place inmore than 30 small, adjoining buildings.In this outlying area, additional blueforces kept order among noisy reporters,milling civilians, and rock-throwingagitators, all played by paid actors.(Actual video footage of the exercisecan be viewed on the Marine Corps’s

Urban Warrior Web page at www.defenselink.mil/special/urbanwarrior/.)

Prior to the exercise, Marine Corpspersonnel, who had previously trainedon JCATS, modeled the interiors of the buildings (including the hospital’s 9 stories and 500 rooms) by digitizingconstruction blueprints and entering thedata into the program’s “terrain editor.”The Marines’ Integrated GlobalPositioning System Radio Systemprovided updates every 30 seconds onthe position of vehicles and soldiers

outside buildings. Because the radiosystem is ineffective inside buildings,every hospital room was wired with theInside Building Instrumentation Systemto keep track of each Marine’s locationand health status (healthy, wounded, orkilled) when they were inside.

The ever-changing data on theMarines’ locations were broadcast fromthe Oakland Hills on securecommunication links and fed into JCATSfor viewing on screen. In this way,command personnel on the pier andaboard the USS Coronado were providedunprecedented, real-time details about thelocation of their Oakland forces,including the whereabouts of combatantson every floor of the hospital.

Virtual Strikes Complete ExerciseJCATS also simulated the effects of

artillery and tactical air strikes thatobviously could not be used in theOakland area. Computer-generatedweapons even included systems thatcurrently exist only in concept. Thevirtual strikes were executed by a Marine JCATS operator in

San Francisco, acting on request by an officer at the battle and approved by an operation commander.

The program calculated the time of flight and the effects based on theimpact of the virtual strike and thereported location of the liveparticipants. In this way, commanderslearned within seconds the effects ofusing these weapons. Back in Oakland,both red and blue participants werequickly informed through their laser tag and radio gear if they had beenwounded or killed by the virtual strikes.

While the battle for control of the hospital raged, JCATS simulatedcombat on Treasure Island in San Francisco Bay and on the SanFrancisco–Oakland Bay Bridge. Redforces driving toward Oakland wereattacked by blue virtual aircraft.Simulated Navy ships just off the coastwere also included in the overallconflict.

Following the exercise, the programprovided a thorough review for thecommand officers. The review showedwho was killed and how and when theybecame casualties, thereby removingmuch of the uncertainty that oftensurrounds the lessons-learned processfollowing an exercise.

Uzelac says that the Marines werepleased with the usefulness of JCATS.In particular, “They recognize thatcombining simulated firepower withlive participants allows the Marines tosignificantly broaden their trainingmissions,” especially whenenvironmental or safety restrictionsprevent the actual use of weapons.Uzelac adds that the Marines plan to usethe program in their next urbanexercise, which will incorporate morebuildings than were used in Oakland.

The Livermore team is alreadyworking on enhancements to JCATSthat have been requested by the JointWarfighting Center. Theseenhancements will include an

10


Conflict Simulation S&TR January/February 2000

This JCATS imagedepicts the location ofblue forces outside theOak Knoll Hospital aswell as inside one of itsnine floors. (K standsfor kill or destroyedtarget.)

http://www.defenselink.mil/special/urbanwarrior/

S&TR January/February 2000 11


Conflict Simulation

information warfare capability, aterrain-generation capability usingcomputer-aided design building filesand satellite imagery, and betterintegration with militarycommunication systems.

Shimamoto notes that one ofJCATS’s most important advantages isits applicability to all the militaryservices. Although each military servicehas its own weapons, its own methods ofcombat operations, and even its ownspecialized simulation programs, JCATSis a powerful resource for all of them.Because it models all of the services’forces, as well as those of other securityorganizations, it also encourages bettercoordination among agencies, both inplanning missions and in training

FAITH SHIMAMOTO joined Lawrence Livermore in 1975 whileworking on her master’s thesis in electronics engineering at theUniversity of California at Davis, where she also earned a B.S. inelectronics engineering. She has provided computationalcapabilities development and management support to numerousdepartments in the Engineering and Computation directorates,recently managing teams in the development of miniature sensor

technology for low-Earth and suborbital satellite experiments.Currently, she is the project leader of the Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation

(JCATS) Conflict Simulation Laboratory in the Nonproliferation, Arms Control, andInternational Security Directorate. She is responsible for leading the development ofJCATS, a real-time simulation program used by the departments of Energy, Defense,and Transportation for training, analysis, and mission planning, particularly in anurban environment. Her responsibilities have included software development andtesting and coordination of deliverables with JCATS’s primary proponent, the JointWarfighting Center. She has also developed JCATS for and demonstrated it to otherpotential users and sponsors.

About the Scientist

JCATS also simulated combat on TreasureIsland in San Francisco Bay and on the SanFrancisco–Oakland Bay Bridge. (a) Redforces heading toward Oakland wereattacked by blue virtual aircraft and Navyships. (b) Detail of Treasure Island combat.The yellow sunbursts and star shapes depictthe effects from naval gunfire and air strikes,respectively. (K stands for kill or destroyedtarget; S stands for suppressed.)

officers. “We’ve made JCATS aspowerful and flexible as we know howto help the nation prepare for conflictsin the new century,” she says.

—Arnie Heller

Key Words: combat simulation, ConflictSimulation Laboratory, Fleet BattleExperiment–Echo, Janus, JCATS (JointConflict and Tactical Simulation), JointConflict Model, Joint Tactical Simulation,Joint Warfighting Center, U.S. MarineCorps, Special Response Team, U.S. Navy,Urban Warrior Advanced WarfightingExperiment.

For further information contact Faith Shimamoto (925) 422-8083([email protected]).

(b)

(a)


IVERMORE’S Bruce Remington isno stranger to hydrodynamics. As

leader of experimental hydrodynamicwork on Nova and other lasers, he hasparticipated in years of experimentsrelated to inertial confinement fusion andhigh-energy-density physics. One day in1995, he noticed the similarity betweentwo images (shown on p. 13) in differentscientific journals. One showedsimulations of the turbulent splashingand mixing of plasma as a fusion capsulewas hit by the powerful beams of anintense laser. The other depicted acomputer model of gases mixing duringa supernova explosion. Although the firstpicture was of an event less than a tenthof a millimeter across and the secondinvolved millions of kilometers, the fluidbehavior of the materials appeared to bevirtually identical.

Remington reasoned that laserexperiments might be able to mimic thebehavior of the phenomenal blast of asupernova. The timing of his ruminationsproved to be perfect because a way ofdoing supernova experiments toquantitatively test observations andmodels was vitally needed.

Astrophysical research hastraditionally been divided intoobservations and theoretical modelingor a combination of both. But scientistshad discovered that existing models didnot explain their observations of thegreat supernova of 1987. That event,known as Supernova 1987A, gaveastronomers their first close-up viewsince 1604 of a star’s cataclysmic death.Although supernovas take place fairlyfrequently all over the universe, they areusually too far away and too dim to be

12


Scientists thought they understood supernovabehavior until they saw one up close in 1987.Today, ingenious laser experiments and advancedmodeling are coming closer to mimicking thecomplex hydrodynamics of a star’s death.

L

SupernovaHydrodynamicsUp Close

SupernovaHydrodynamicsUp Close


Supernova models in place at thetime of the spectacular 1987A eventpredicted that the onion structure wouldbe preserved in the explosion and thatthe material in the various layers wouldgradually dissipate. But, in fact, some ofthe debris moved much faster thanexpected, as if fingers of fast-movinggas were poking through the rest of thematerial. Gamma rays from cobalt-56,generated deep in the star during theexplosion, became visible six monthsearlier than expected. The tidy onionmodel had to be discarded for a messierone that incorporated more turbulenceand mixing (see p. 15, lower left).

Turbulence Up CloseIt was this turbulence—in a Nova

inertial confinement fusion experimentand in models of 1987A—that

13


Supernova Hydrodynamics

silicon took just a week. Iron and itscohorts (nickel, chromium, titanium,vanadium, cobalt, and manganese) lieat the bottom of the curve of bindingenergy because energy must be addedto fuse them into heavier elements or tosplit them into lighter ones. Fusioncould go no further.

As ignition of successively heavierfuels took place in the center of the star,previous fuels continued to burn in theoverlying regions, so that in its finalmoments, the star resembled anenormous layered onion. Ultimately,however, gravity won. In a few tenthsof a second, the core collapsed, andalmost immediately, its centerrebounded, smashing into the still-collapsing outer core and giving birth toa shock wave that burst through thematter at the outer edges of the “onion.”

viewed with much clarity from Earth.This one was a mere 165,000 light yearsaway in the Large Magellanic Cloud, asatellite galaxy of our own.

Supernova 1987A is a type IIsupernova, which heralds the demise ofa particularly massive star. Toward theend of its life, the star’s supply ofhydrogen for fusion began to wane. Itscentral regions began to contract,bringing higher core densities andtemperatures. As core temperaturesincreased, successively heavier nuclearfuels began to ignite—first helium, thencarbon and oxygen, and on up throughneon, magnesium, sodium, and so on.Each consecutive stage of burninghappened more quickly. Helium burnedfor nearly a million years, carbon tookabout 12,000 years, and neon burned forperhaps 12 years. Toward the end,

Dis

tanc

e, m

icro

met

ers

Distance, micrometers

80

60

40

20

00 20 40 60 80 3 million kilometers

(a) (b)

Striking similarities exist between hydrodynamic instabilities in (a) inertial confinement fusion capsule implosions and (b) core-collapse supernovaexplosions. [Image (a) is from Sakagami and Nishihara, Physics of Fluids B 2, 2715 (1990); image (b) is from Hachisu et al., Astrophysical Journal368, L27 (1991).]


Remington saw in 1995. When fluids orfluidlike matter of different densities isoriented such that the heavier fluid sitson top of the lighter fluid, the system isunstable and tends to mix. At theinterface between the two surfaces, theheavier fluid always sinks downwardinto the lighter one in fingers. This basicfluid dynamic process is known as theRayleigh–Taylor instability. A relatedtype of hydrodynamic instability,known as the Richtmyer–Meshkovinstability, also occurs when there is ashock wave, as in a supernova.

Dozens of laser experiments withNova tried to simulate the behavior ofSupernova 1987A. Early one-dimensional simulations used a tiny, flatstacked target of metal, plastic, andfoam to represent the composition anddensities of various parts of thesupernova. As Nova’s laser light hit thehohlraum surrounding the target, a floodof x rays ensued that bathed the target in

radiation. The x rays rapidly heated themetal and sent a powerful shockthrough it, mimicking a supernova blastwave passing through a layer of the star.One-dimensional modeling and lasersimulations are useful for determiningwhen the shock wave hit the variousshells of the supernova. But one-dimensional work cannot examine themixing that was obviously taking place.

To examine mixing between thehelium and hydrogen layers ofSupernova 1987A, the mosthydrodynamically unstable region of theexploding star, scientists haveperformed modeling studies usingPROMETHEUS, a multidimensionalhydrodynamics code, and the two-dimensional code CALE. Theycompared these simulation results withdata from laser experiments that useplanar foils with a tin-roof-likesinusoidal ripple to examine in twodimensions a localized region of

14



activity. As shown in the figure on p. 15(bottom right), the two codes givesimilar results, both of which agree wellwith experimental results.

But two-dimensional models predictmaximum velocities of only about2,000 kilometers per second forradioactive materials moving outwardfrom the core, whereas observedvelocities for these materials wereactually more than 3,000 kilometers persecond in Supernova 1987A. Three-dimensional hydrodynamic effects mustbe considered to explain these and otherdiscrepancies between models andobservations.

Laser targets for examininghydrodynamic behavior in threedimensions incorporate a minisculedimple, invisible to the naked eye, thatfollows the same laws of hydrodynamicsas 1987A. The figure on p. 16 compares aNova radiograph of a dimpled experimentwith a two-dimensional model. (Three-

February 23, 1987 7:36 a.m. universal time Neutrino blast

10:00 a.m. Hard ultraviolet burst

May 20

July 4

March 1

October 31

0 50 100 150Time, days

Tota

l lum

inos

ity, m

illio

ns o

f sol

ar lu

min

ositi

es

200 250 3000

50

100

150

200

250

104

3 × 1013

Iron Silicon

Carbon, Oxygen Helium

Hydrogen

In its death throes, Supernova 1987Aresembled an enormous, many-layeredonion as successively heavier layers of fuelignited and burned.

Supernova 1987A, like other type II supernovas, occurred when the star’s iron core collapsed.

S&TR January/February 2000 15



dimensional supernova hydrodynamicsare unfortunately prohibitively expensiveto calculate, but three-dimensional laserexperiments are no more expensive torun than two-dimensional ones.)

Laser experimentation forsupernovas is becoming more complexall the time in an effort to incorporate asmany features of supernovas aspossible. Remington’s team has begunto use multilayer targets in supernovaexperiments on the Omega laser at theUniversity of Rochester (currently theworld’s largest operating laser), becausean actual supernova does not have justtwo layers but many. The team is alsoconsidering creating density gradients in

laser targets because the density withineach layer of a supernova is notconstant but rather drops smoothly withdistance from the core. This densitygradient would allow the shock wave tospeed up with distance. An actualsupernova is also spherical, not planar.Spherical geometry would cause theshock wave to expand, weaken, andslow, which is precisely the opposite ofthe effect due to the density gradients.

Initial spherical experiments havealso been done on Omega.Consideration of the many factorsinvolved will, over time, bringLivermore’s laser experiments more inline with actual supernova behavior.

The Issue of ScaleThe Euler equations, which

describe the conservation of mass,momentum, and energy for fluids, donot know the difference between a tinylaser experiment and a hugesupernova. At first, though, not allscientists were convinced that a lasersimulation could be considered anaccurate representation of the muchlarger event. Supernova 1987A isabout 100 trillion times larger than alaser experiment. Its initial radiusequals 20 million kilometers versus 0.2 millimeters for the laserexperiment.

Remington notes that he and othersspent a year and a half studying thescaling issue, performing laserexperiments and innumerablecalculations. Ultimately, they

Supernova 1987A provided strong evidence of turbulence emanating from the core of theexploded star because core materials were observed well before they were predicted. Theturbulence caused mixing among the layers and greatly complicated the tidy “onion” model ofdying stars. [Image reproduced from Muller, Fryxell, and Arnett, Astronomy & Astrophysics251, 505 (1991).]

The hydrodynamic mixing of the most unstableregion (the hydrogen and helium layers) ofSupernova 1987A has been modeled using (a) the multidimensional PROMETHEUS codeand (b) the two-dimensional CALE code.

(a)

(b)

concluded that for the “intermediate”time frame of a supernova explosion, thehydrodynamics can be transformed fromthe microscopic to the astronomicalscale. The intermediate time frame forthe laser experiment is in the range of 20 nanoseconds after the initial shock,which, as it happens, is when bubble andspike growth typically occurs. Theequivalent time for the supernova isroughly 2,000 seconds, that is, 11 ordersof magnitude longer.

The Challenge ContinuesThe decommissioning of the Nova

laser last year ended a four-year programof groundbreaking supernovahydrodynamics experiments atLivermore. With the Nova experiments,Remington and his team demonstrated thevalue of laser experiments to validateastrophysics codes and studyhydrodynamics issues that are difficult tosimulate. Nova also helped put to rest theissue of scale. Increasingly complexexperiments continue on the Omega laser.

The spectacle of 1987A may not be over yet. Even before the starexploded in 1987, it had what appear to be gaseous rings around it. Thoserings are still there, at an estimateddistance of about a half light year (5 trillion kilometers) from thesupernova’s core. Late last year, theshock wave launched by the expandingdebris from the supernova began tocollide with the rings. Scientists predictthat over the next decade, the collisionshould heat the rings, brightening thesupernova again to produce anotherspectacular light show. Livermore’smodels and laser experiments will againbe put to the test.

—Katie Walter

Key Words: hydrodynamics, modeling,Nova laser, Omega laser, Supernova 1987A,supernovas, turbulence.

For further information contact Bruce Remington (925) 423-2712([email protected]).

16


Supernova Hydrodynamics S&TR January/February 2000

Using (a) “dimpled” targets, Novaexperiments yielded (b) three-dimensionalradiograph data of a laser implosion’shydrodynamics that show strong similaritiesto (c) a two-dimensional model of supernovahydrodynamics.

BRUCE REMINGTON received a B.S. in mathematics fromNorthern Michigan University in 1975 and a Ph.D. in physics fromMichigan State University in 1986. He joined the Laboratory as apostdoctoral associate in 1986 doing nuclear physics research andbecame a permanent staff physicist in the Laser ProgramsDirectorate in 1988. As leader of the hydrodynamics group of theInertial Confinement Fusion Program, he initiated and managed

direct- and indirect-drive hydrodynamics experiments on the Nova laser related tohigh-energy-density regimes, compressed solid-state regimes, fluid dynamics, andastrophysics, work that continues on the Omega laser at the University of Rochestersince Nova laser operations were discontinued. He is currently chair of the AmericanPhysical Society’s Topical Group on Plasma Astrophysics.

About the Scientist

(a)

(b)

(c)

17Agile Manufacturing


Research Highlights

ar has broken out somewhere in the world, and the U.S.becomes involved. Suddenly, all branches of our armed

forces need more conventional munitions—and they needthem immediately. How can suppliers meet this kind ofunpredictable, high-volume demand?

A project under way at Lawrence Livermore aims to helpmanufacturing companies do just that. Known as TotallyIntegrated Munitions Enterprise (TIME), it is being funded bythe U.S. Army to handle several munitions manufacturingissues. Not only does the Army need to obtain munitionsquickly in national emergencies, but munitions productionsfacilities are being downsized at the same time that a varietyof highly complex, “smart” munitions are becoming available.Supplying these munitions on a timely basis while keepingthem affordable has become a challenge.

Livermore is one of eight participants in the TIME project.Most other participants, including Raytheon, General MotorsPowertrain, Aerojet, and Primex, are in the private sector.Together, project participants are developing and demonstrating

a distributed, flexible manufacturing capability that is cost-effective and can be rapidly reconfigured as needs change.

Implementing an integrated manufacturing base meanschanging a basic practice that is pervasive in manufacturingtoday. Contractors use subcontractors, who in turn use othersubcontractors, and minimal information is shared among them.A contractor typically shares with subcontractors only enoughinformation for the subs to get their job done. But if knowledge,experience, and risk are commonly shared among all partners,so that the manufacturing process can be more widely viewed asa total, integrated process from concept to delivery, then moneyand time can be saved as quality increases.

Changing the Entire ProcessTo support this fundamental change, TIME addresses the

entire process—from concept to finished product—as a system,integrating design, engineering, manufacturing, administration,and logistics. In the manufacturing industry, this process iscalled product realization. To facilitate the flow of information

Agile Manufacturing: Gearing Up to Meet Demand

W

Using Web-basedintegration manager toolsdeveloped by TEAM(Technologies EnablingAgile Manufacturing), anonspecialist cantransparently modify aproduct design, run costand product simulations,and produce a tradeoffstudy.

18 S&TR January/February 2000


among various functions, TIME is using a host of Internet-based software tools. Many of these tools were developedduring an earlier Department of Energy project known asTechnologies Enabling Agile Manufacturing (TEAM).Livermore engineer Bob Burleson was technical manager for TEAM, which started in 1994 and wrapped up work in late 1998. Burleson is technical manager for the TIME projectas well.

TEAM’s 40 participants were remarkably diverse.Participants from the private sector represented manyindustries, including aerospace and defense, automotive,machine tools, robotics, consumer electronics, and software.Federal facilities and agencies included Lawrence Livermore,Los Alamos, and Sandia national laboratories, the Oak RidgeCenters for Manufacturing Technology, and the AlliedSignalKansas City Plant.

The Internet-based software tools developed by TEAMsupport not only an open flow of information but alsomodeling of all phases of the work, communication amongcomputing systems for geographically distributed facilities,concurrent engineering and production for teams that may beusing different standards, and state-of-the-art methods forcontrolling manufacturing processes. An integration manageron the World Wide Web pulls together all product realizationfunctions, including product design, process planning, processsimulation, and fabrication controls.

Other activities, equal in importance to these softwaretools, support a generic infrastructure and overall planning andmanagement. These integrative elementsare what make the TIME projectpossible today.

Manufacturing facilities of TEAM partners served as theproving ground for these models and software tools. TheInternet-based tools allowed a large number of facilities to worktogether quickly and easily. In one instance, projectrequirements were analyzed at GM in Pontiac, Michigan;design was done collaboratively between a DOE site in KansasCity, Missouri, and Raytheon in Tucson, Arizona; the productanalysis was performed at Livermore and ISX Corp in Atlanta,Georgia; DOE sites in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Kansas Citycompleted process design; and process simulation wasperformed by the University of Illinois and a DOE site in LosAlamos, New Mexico. Tradeoff studies between product,process, and resources were performed wherever the productmanager happened to be. Then parts were manufactured at GMin Pontiac and inspected at Ford in Dearborn, Michigan.

The real payoff for bringing together these Internet-basedtools was in the way they enabled real change. In one instance,a critical machine was down, and the other available machinewasn’t as accurate—and even if it were, the entire processdesign, process simulation, and tradeoff studies would have tobe redone. The TEAM project worked across 10 differentfacilities, making the changeover in less than an hour instead ofdays or even weeks. That is truly integrated product realization.

Livermore was the leader for development of an intelligentcontroller for machining products such as the part shown at theleft. Machine tools and robots that cut and shape parts foreverything from safety pins to computers receive theirinstructions from a device known as a controller. The controlleris programmed to know where to cut, drill, and turn on aparticular part and typically serves the machine tool for itsentire life. But if a part comes down the conveyor belt slightlycrooked, then holes will be drilled at the wrong angle, forcingan inspector to throw that part away. In contrast, an intelligentcontroller can sense the angle of the part and correct the angleof drilling, reducing waste and saving time and money. Anintelligent controller can also be reprogrammed quickly forproduction of different parts, making it a key player in an agilemanufacturing setting. (See also S&TR, April 1996, pp. 22–23.)

Meeting Surge Rates and Retrofitting WeaponsThe Army was so impressed with the results of the TEAM

project and the controller effort that it wanted this collectionof tools put to work at its munitions manufacturing facilities.Currently, after having produced a stockpile of m2munitionsfor potential conflicts, all of these facilities producemunitions at a sustaining rate that just keeps up with theArmy’s ordinary needs. But the Army also needs facilities tobe able to produce at a surge rate, without the necessity ofcreating a larger stockpile. With agile manufacturing, privatecompanies that manufacture other products could be put to

Agile Manufacturing

This automobile cylinder head is anexample of the products machined bythe intelligent controller developedunder Lawrence Livermore’s leadership.

http://www.llnl.gov/str/Burleson.html

work to produce munitions on short notice. And with agilemanufacturing, existing plants could quickly produceentirely new munitions or retrofit “dumb” weapons withnew, “smart” features.

Integrated production had already been demonstratedgenerically, but a demonstration at a munitionsmanufacturing site was in order. Last fall, the TIME teamwent to the Scranton Army Munitions Plant in Pennsylvaniato show how quickly and easily a manufacturing facilitycould begin to make something entirely new. There, in just afew days, they were able to produce the part shown on p. 18.

In 2000, another type of demonstration will take place inwhich production data from a munitions production plantwill be used to almost immediately begin production at anonweapons manufacturing company. The plan is for GM tomanufacture components for small grenades using data fromPrimex, which routinely manufactures these and otherconventional weapons. Burleson notes, “This is an almostunheard-of event in the manufacturing world, whereproprietary data are zealously protected.”

Work on agile manufacturing to date has focused onmaterial removal processes—milling, drilling, turning, and so on—but agile manufacturing can easily be extended toassembly and other repetitive manufacturing activities.

Tom McWilliams, program leader for the TIME project for the U.S. Army in Picatinny, New Jersey, is enthusiasticabout successes to date. “These new control systems couldallow existing facilities to change production modes quickly.They could, for example, switch back and forth between‘dumb’ bullets and ‘smart’ ones, even on a day-to-day basis.Agile manufacturing will give us a flexibility we have not had before.”

—Katie Walter

Key Words: agile manufacturing, machine controller, munitionsmanufacturing, product realization process, U.S. Army.

For further information contact Robert Burleson (925) 423-1967([email protected]).

19Agile ManufacturingS&TR January/February 2000


Using Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise’s agilemanufacturing capabilities, private companies thatproduce nonmunitions products could be used to producemunitions on short notice to meet surge production ratesor to retrofit weapons with advanced features.

20 Research Highlights S&TR January/February 2000


rom the doodlings of daVinci and the penned fantasies ofJules Verne to the tangible accomplishments of the

Wright brothers and other aviation pioneers, mechanizedflight has captured the imagination of humanity through thecenturies. Even today, with atmospheric and space flight areality, there are still aviatory realms to dream about andconquer. Hypersonic flight at speeds 5 to 12 times the speedof sound (Mach 5 to Mach 12) is one such area of interest tothe commercial and defense communities.

At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, aerospaceengineer Preston Carter has invented a concept for a next-generation hypersonic aircraft, dubbed HyperSoar, that couldfly efficiently, economically, and cleanly.

Flying at Mach 10 (3 kilometers per second), HyperSoarcould reach any point on the globe within two hours. (Thefastest military plane, the SR-71, flies between Mach 3 and Mach 4, while the commercial Concorde only reachesMach 2.) HyperSoar would also have twice the fuel efficiencyof commercial airliners, be three to five times more efficient

in putting satellites in space than today’s launch systems, anduse liquid hydrogen fuel, which produces simple water vaporwhen burned.

HyperSoar—a concept-development project funded throughLivermore’s Physics Directorate and the Laboratory DirectedResearch and Development Program—could transport peopleor cargo, strike enemy targets, or help put satellites into space.“The fact that HyperSoar has many potential uses is key,” saysCarter. “Developing an entirely new aircraft is expensive.However, if there is a large market for such an aircraft, thecost per plane goes down. It’s like the difference between a747 and the Stealth bomber. There are hundreds of Boeing747s being used by commercial airline companies, airfreightcompanies, and so on. But the only market for the Stealth isthe military, which only needs a few. That’s why you’ll neversee a Stealth being built for much less than they cost today.”

Skipping on the AtmosphereA 25-meter-long HyperSoar aircraft (about as long as the

wingspan of a large business jet) could make a conventionaltakeoff from a standard runway. Using special air-breathing,rocket-based, combined-cycle engines, it would ascend to 40 kilometers—at the outer limit of Earth’s atmosphere. Oncethere, its engines would be turned off, and (as shown in the

Bringing HypersonicFlight Down to Earth

F

In appearance, HyperSoar resembles afolded paper airplane. Sharp leadingedges give the vehicle lift from the high-pressure air behind the shock wavecreated by breaking the sound barrier.

figure below) it would coast up to a high point of 60 kilometersbefore beginning to fall back down to about 35 kilometers—well inside the atmosphere’s upper level. As it descends intodenser air, the aircraft would be pushed up by the increasedaerodynamic lift. The engines would fire briefly, propelling theplane back into space. Outside the atmosphere, the engines shutoff and the process repeats. In this way, HyperSoar would skipoff the top layer of the atmosphere every two or so minutes,like a flat rock skittering in slow motion across the surface of a pond.

Inclusive of the time taken and distances covered by theascent and descent portions of a flight, a trip from Chicagoto Tokyo (10,123 kilometers) would involve about 18 skipsand 72 minutes, and to travel from Los Angeles to NewYork (3,978 kilometers) would involve about 5 skips andtake 35 minutes. (Both flights require a total of about 2,450 kilometers and 27 minutes for take off and landing.)

By popping regularly out of the atmosphere and using theengines intermittently, HyperSoar would use less fuel andsolve a critical problem that plagues other hypersonic aircraftdesigns—heat.

Beating the HeatAny object—airplane, spacecraft, asteroid—speeding

through the atmosphere will compress and heat the air in frontof it. This heat is inevitably absorbed by the surface of theobject. “Heat buildup just kills most designs for hypersonicaircraft,” Carter said. “The hotter the craft gets, the morematerial engineers add to the airframe to strengthen and shieldit. Also, most other hypersonic concepts have trajectories thatare strictly atmospheric, and the only way to get rid of the heatis to dump it into the fuel and then burn the fuel in the engines.The problem is, the faster you fly, the more fuel you mustcarry as a heat sink. Eventually, you end up carrying a

significant amount of fuel just as a heat sink, and the enginesend up running fuel-rich, that is, burning up more fuel thanthey really need. That’s wasteful in and of itself. Also, morematerial and more fuel translate to more weight. After a while,the aircraft can no longer carry a decent cargo.”

Because HyperSoar spends nearly two-thirds of its time outof the atmosphere, it can radiate the heat into space. Carter andcolleagues at the University of Maryland have analyzedHyperSoar, compared it to other concepts, and found that—thanks to its trajectory and shape—HyperSoar has less heatload on its airframe and consumes less fuel.

From Express Mail to Satellites“The way HyperSoar blends flight and space access is

revolutionary, opening up a world of potential applications,”says Carter. Possibilities include using HyperSoar as afreighter, military aircraft, low-cost launcher, and, eventually,a passenger aircraft. According to Carter, HyperSoar would becapable of carrying more weight over longer distances thanplanes of similar size and mass.

As a freighter, it could make four round-trips to Tokyodaily versus one or less for today’s aircraft. This speedwould be a boon to the $4-billion-per-year commercialintercontinental package delivery market. “The speed oftoday’s aircraft has limited the growth of this market,” saysCarter. “The express delivery industry requires centralintracontinental hubs that are about two hours’ flying timeapart. Current technology allows express mail, for instance,to move between these hubs in close to that time. Now,imagine the possibilities if you could fly between Memphisand Singapore in close to two hours.” Carter estimates that aHyperSoar aircraft flying express mail between Los Angelesand Tokyo could generate ten times the daily revenue of asimilar-size subsonic cargo plane.

21HyperSoarS&TR January/February 2000


Takeoff Mount Everest Landing

Commercialaircraft

One “skip“450 kilometers

(280 miles)

Points ofweightlessness

10.7 kilometers(35,000 feet)

32 kilometers(105,000 feet)

64 kilometers(210,000 feet)

HyperSoar’s trajectoryfollows a skipping pattern.Passengers would feel 1.5 times the force ofgravity at the bottom ofeach skip, andweightlessness out inspace. The experiencewould be comparable tobeing on a swing,although HyperSoar’smotion would be 100 times slower.



Flying the Paper PlaneEven though HyperSoar is still in the “paper airplane”

stage, it has garnered interest from organizations as diverse asFederal Express and STRATCOM (the U.S. Air ForceStrategic Air Command). HyperSoar has appeared in Jane’sDefence Weekly, Aviation Week and Space Technology,Scholastic’s Weekly Reader, and daily papers from the LosAngeles Times to the Washington Times to local newspaperssuch as the Valley Times.

Passenger flight would be one of the last applications tobecome reality, but it is the one that the media and the publicare most interested in. “The public gets very excited aboutspace and air travel,” said Carter. “To the general public,HyperSoar looks doable. The technology is nearly there, theconcept is proven on paper. The thing now is to make iteconomically feasible to the defense and commercialcommunities so HyperSoar can get the funding it needs to takethe next step in development.”

Carter estimates that about $500 million would be neededto develop the technologies needed and build and test a 16-meter-long flyable unmanned prototype. Lawrence Livermoreis positioned to help bring HyperSoar into reality because ofits expertise in thermal protection materials, large-scalecomputational fluid dynamics, ultrahigh pressure testingdesign, and modeling the environmental effects of high-speedsupersonic aircraft.

The question of funding aside, the day when passengers canhop a HyperSoar to London is still a ways off.

“When most people hear about HyperSoar,” Carter added,“they immediately think big—building big airplanes to carrylots of passengers or cargo. But that’s not economicallyfeasible. I propose building small airplanes to justify themarket and then building up from there, according to the need.That’s how all the different flight technologies—airplanes,jets, helicopters—got started. It’s the way that fledglingtechnologies like HyperSoar take wing.”

—Ann Parker

Key Words: HyperSoar, hypersonic aircraft.

For further information contact Preston Carter (925) 423-8293([email protected]).

As a military aircraft, a HyperSoar bomber the size of an F-22 could take off from the U.S. and deliver its payload froman altitude and at a speed that would defy all current defensivemeasures. It could then return directly to the continental U.S.without refueling and without the need to land at forwardbases on foreign soil.

HyperSoar could also be employed as the first stage of atwo-stage-to-orbit space launch system. This approach wouldallow approximately twice the payload-to-orbit as today’sexpendable launch systems for a given gross takeoff weight.At the high point of its skip, HyperSoar could eject an upper-stage vehicle and its payload into low-Earth orbit. A largerHyperSoar vehicle, the size of a Boeing 777 for example,could handle a 13,700-kilogram payload in addition to theweight of a typical second-stage launcher. At a 255,000-kilogram gross vehicle weight, the HyperSoar would weighabout half as much as the largest Ariane 4 expendable launchvehicle but could carry about 40 percent more payload. Ofcourse, these lower weight-to-payload requirements mean thatHyperSoar vehicles will not need to be built as large vehiclesbut rather as smaller, less expensive ones.

HyperSoar

According to its designers, HyperSoar would be capable of carrying moreweight over a greater distance than planes of similar size and mass.

68,040

56,700

45,360

34,020

22,680

11,340

0

Pay

load

, kilo

gram

s

0 12,874 25,749 38,623Distance, kilometers

HyperSoar

Boeing 777

B-15bomber

B-2 bomber

23Each month in this space we report on the patents issued to and/orthe awards received by Laboratory employees. Our goal is toshowcase the distinguished scientific and technical achievements ofour employees as well as to indicate the scale and scope of thework done at the Laboratory.

Patents and Awards

Patent issued to

William BennettPeter CelliersLuiz Da SilvaMichael GlinskyRichard LondonDuncan MaitlandDennis MatthewsPeter KrulevichAbraham Lee

Frank J. WeberEberhard A. Spiller

John W. KuryBrian L. Anderson

Paul R. Coronado

Claude MontcalmDaniel G. StearnsStephen P. Vernon

Patent title, number, and date of issue

Opto-Acoustic Transducer for MedicalApplications

U.S. Patent 5,944,687August 31, 1999

Cleaning Process for EUV OpticalSubstrates

U.S. Patent 5,958,143September 28, 1999

Explosive Simulants for TestingExplosive Detection Systems


Method for Making Monolithic MetalOxide Aerogels


Passivating Overcoat Bilayer forMultilayer Reflective Coatings forExtreme Ultraviolet Lithography


Summary of disclosure

An optically activated transducer for generating acoustic vibrations in abiological medium. The transducer is located at the end of an opticalfiber, which may be located within a catheter. Energy for operating thetransducer is provided optically by laser light transmitted through theoptical fiber to the transducer. Pulsed laser light is absorbed in theworking fluid of the transducer to generate a thermal pressure andconsequent adiabatic expansion of the transducer head such that it doeswork against the ambient medium. The transducer returns to its originalstate by a process of thermal cooling. The motion of the transducerwithin the ambient medium couples acoustic energy into the medium. By pulsing the laser at a high repetition rate (continuous wave to 100 kilohertz), an ultrasonic radiation field can be established locally inthe medium. This method of producing ultrasonic vibrations can be usedin vivo for the treatment of stroke-related conditions in humans,particularly for dissolving thrombi. The catheter may also incorporateantithrombolytic drug treatments as an adjunct therapy, and it may beoperated in conjunction with ultrasonic detection equipment for imagingand feedback control.

A cleaning process for surfaces with demanding cleanlinessrequirements, such as extreme ultraviolet (EUV) optical substrates.Proper cleaning of optical substrates prior to applying reflective coatingsthereon is critical in the fabrication of the reflective optics used in EUVlithographic systems. The cleaning process involves ultrasonic cleaningin acetone, methanol, and a pH-neutral soap, such as FL-70, followed byrinsing in deionized water and drying with dry filtered nitrogen inconjunction with a spin rinse.

Explosives simulants that include nonexplosive components thatfacilitate testing of equipment designed to remotely detect explosives.The simulants are nonexplosive, nonhazardous materials that can besafely handled without any significant precautions. The simulants imitatereal explosives in terms of mass density, effective atomic number, x-raytransmission properties, and physical form, including moldable plasticsand emulsions/gels.

A method for producing transparent, monolithic metal oxide aerogels ofvarying densities by preparing separately and then reacting a metalalkoxide solution with a catalyst solution. The resulting hydrolyzed-condensed colloidal solution is gelled, and the wet gel is containedwithin a sealed but gas-permeable containment vessel duringsupercritical extraction of the solvent. The containment vessel isenclosed within an aqueous atmosphere that is above the supercriticaltemperature and pressure of the solvent of the metal alkoxide solution.

A passivating overcoat bilayer for multilayer reflective coatings forextreme ultraviolet (EUV) or soft x-ray applications to prevent oxidationand corrosion of the multilayer coating, thereby improving the EUVoptical performance. The overcoat bilayer is composed of a layer ofsilicon or beryllium underneath at least one top layer of an elemental or acompound material that resists oxidation and corrosion. Materials for thetop layer include carbon, palladium, carbides, borides, nitrides, andoxides. The thicknesses of the two layers that make up the overcoatbilayer are optimized to produce the highest reflectance at thewavelength range of operation. Protective overcoat systems composed ofthree or more layers are also possible.

Patents




Patent issued to

Michael D. PerryPaul S. BanksBrent C. StuartScott N. Fochs

Patent title, number, and date of issue

Aberration-Free, All-Reflective LaserPulse Stretcher


Summary of disclosure

An all-reflective pulse stretcher for laser systems employing chirped-pulse amplification enables on-axis use of the focusing mirror, thusallowing ease of use, significantly decreased sensitivity to alignment,and near aberration-free performance. By using a new type of diffractiongrating that contains a mirror incorporated into the grating, the stretchercontains only three elements: (1) the grating, (2) a spherical andparabolic focusing mirror, and (3) a flat mirror. Addition of a fourthcomponent, a retroreflector, enables multiple passes of the samestretcher, resulting in stretching ratios beyond the current state of the artin a simple compact design. The pulse stretcher has been used to stretchpulses from 20 femtoseconds to over 600 picoseconds (a stretching ratioin excess of 30,000).

A poster presentation created by a team of Livermorebiomedical scientists recently garnered top honors at theCalifornia Breast Cancer Research Symposium in LosAngeles. The scientists are Kristen Kulp (lead author),Mark Knize, Mike Malfatti, Cyndy Salmon, and Jim Felton.

The poster, which focused on diet and how individualsdiffer in their susceptibility to breast cancer, won theCornelius L. Hopper Scientific Achievement Award.Presented for the poster with the “Highest Impact on BreastCancer,” the Hopper award recognizes the University ofCalifornia’s recently retired Vice President for Health Affairs.

The Livermore scientists’ poster analyzed the linkbetween the presence of certain metabolites—the excretionproducts of carcinogens—and an individual’s susceptibilityto breast cancer. Specifically, the Livermore team examinedwhether the speed at which people excrete the metabolitesand the relative amounts are related to the risk of developingbreast cancer.

During their study, the Livermore researchers became thefirst scientists to develop a technique using massspectrometry to detect phenylimidazo pyridine (PhIP)metabolites in human urine.

Awards

Patents and Awards

Simulating Warfare Is No Video GameFor more than two decades, Lawrence Livermore conflict

simulations have proved highly valuable to the military services fortraining officers, rehearsing missions, and evaluating new tactics. Ateam of computer scientists has developed Livermore’s mostpowerful conflict model, JCATS (Joint Conflict and TacticalSimulation). The program realistically simulates the capabilities andlimitations of combatants, weapon systems, and the environment.The model was used to rehearse possible combat options in supportof the 1999 Kosovo conflict. It was also used by the Marine Corpsand the Navy to plan for and participate in an exercise in the SanFrancisco Bay Area. During the exercise, JCATS tracked the liveparticipants and tested the real-time effects of virtual air and artilleryattacks. An enhanced version of JCATS released in October 1999that can simulate up to 60,000 individual elements and can run on aworkstation computer as well as a laptop, making it feasible for usein the field.Contact:Faith Shimamoto (925) 422-8083 ([email protected]).

Supernova Hydrodynamics Up CloseA group of Livermore scientists has conducted a series of laser

experiments to deepen and refine understanding of thehydrodynamics of dying stars. Using Livermore’s Nova laser (andmore recently, the Omega laser at the University of Rochester), thegroup has simulated on a near-microscopic scale the hydrodynamicturbulence and mixing of Supernova 1987A, the great supernova of1987 that marked the demise of a particularly massive star. TheLivermore scientists are using the results of multidimensional laserexperiments to refine existing one- and two-dimensional models ofsupernovas, to stand in for prohibitively expensive three-dimensional supernova hydrodynamics modeling, and to bring thesupernova models into closer agreement with astrophysicalobservations. Their work has also helped resolve the issue of thedifference in scale between a supernova event and a laserexperiment, thereby allowing the cosmically huge supernova to besuccessfully studied using the vastly smaller laser medium.Contact:Bruce Remington (925) 423-2712 ([email protected]).

Abstracts

U.S. Government Printing Office: 2000/583-046-80027

Coming Next

Month

Coming Next

Month

Livermore’s latest record-breaking laser, the Petawatt, firedits last shot in May 1999, leavinga legacy of information and newways to delve into high-energy-

density physics, astrophysics, andmedical diagnostics.

Also in March• Simulations predict nuclear

repository safety eons into thefuture.

• The design of the Next LinearCollider pushes the frontiers ofparticle physics and cosmology.

• Underwater explosions inIsrael serve the nuclear test ban,improve earthquake safety, andfoster political cooperation.

The Amazing Power ofthe Petawatt

University of C

aliforniaS

cience & Technology R

eviewLaw

rence Livermore N

ational LaboratoryP.O

. Box 808, L-664

Livermore, C

alifornia 94551

Printed on recycled paper.N

onprofit Org.

U. S

. Postage

PAID

Albuquerque, N

MP

ermit N

o. 853

Documents

Conflict Simulation Pioneers Defense Strategies · PDF fileJanuary/ February 2000 U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Conflict Simulation Pioneers