Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:06:52.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Aircraft-sized anechoic chambers for electronic warfare, radar and other electromagnetic engineering evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2017

M. Pywell*
Affiliation:
Electromagnetic Engineering Department, BAE Systems – Military Air and Information, Warton, UK
M. Midgley-Davies
Affiliation:
Typhoon Avionics Joint Team, BAE Systems – Military Air and Information, Warton, UK

Abstract

This paper considers capabilities and benefits of aircraft-sized radio/radar frequency anechoic chambers for Test and Evaluation (T&E) of Electronic Warfare (EW), radar and other electromagnetics aspects of air and ground platforms. There are few such chambers worldwide. Initially developed to reduce costs, timescales and risks associated with open-air range flight testing of EW systems, their utility has expanded to most areas of platforms’ electromagnetics’ T&E. A key feature is the ability to conduct T&E of nationally sensitive equipment and systems, fully installed on platforms, in absolute privacy. Chambers’ capabilities and uses are described, with emphasis on key infrastructure and instrumentation. Non-EW uses are identified and selected topics elaborated. Operation and maintenance are discussed, based on experiential knowledge from international use and the authors’ 30 years’ involvement with BAE Systems’ EW Test Facility. A view is provided of trends and challenges whose resolution could further increase chamber utility. National affordability challenges also suggest utility expansion to support continuing moves, from expensive and difficult to repeat flight test and operational evaluation trials, towards an affordability-driven optimal balance between modelling and simulation, and real-world testing of platforms.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Welch, M.J. and Pywell, M. Electronic Warfare Test and Evaluation, 2012, NATO RTO-AG-300, 28, (1). Available from: http://www.sto.nato.int/publications/STO%20Technical%20Reports/RTO-AG-300-V28/$$AG-300-V28-ALL.pdf. Accessed: November 2016. doi: 10.14339/RTO-AG-300-V28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Integrated test, evaluation and acceptance (ITEA) principles. UK MoD Defence Gateway, Acquisition System Guidance, Requirements and Acceptance. Available from: http://www.aof.mod.uk/aofcontent/tactical/randa/content/itea.htm. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
3. UK Defence Industrial Strategy. Defence White Paper, CM 6697, 15 December 2005.Google Scholar
4. EW Test and Evaluation Process – Direction and Methodology for EW Testing. Air Force Manual 99–112. 27 March. 1995. Available from: http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/virtual_disk.../afman99-112/afman99-112.pdf. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
5. United States. Department of Defense, Office of the Inspector General. Electronic Combat Integrated Test Facilities. Audit Report 93-006. 16 October. 1992. Available from: http://www.dodig.mil/audit/audit2/93-006.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
6. Pywell, M. and Midgley-Davies, M. Improved test capabilities for cost-effective performance evaluation of airborne EW systems. Aeronautical J, September 2010, 114, (1158), pp 527547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Hemming, L.H. Electromagnetic Anechoic Chambers: A Fundamental Design and Specification Guide. 2001, John Wiley & Sons. Inc., New York, New York, US.Google Scholar
8. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Disposal and Reuse of Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant , February 1997, Calverton, New York, US, pp 4.8-1. Available from: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a334054.pdf. Accessed: August 2016.Google Scholar
9. Olver, K.M. et al. Cost comparison of the Navy's Air Combat Environment Test and Evaluation Facility (ACETEF) and the Air Force's electronic combat integrated test (ECIT). Paper IDA-P-2727, 1992, Institute for Defense Analyses, Alexandria, Virginia, US. Available from: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA253986. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
10. Thirtle, M.R. et al. Cost-benefit analysis of the 2006 Air Force materiel command test and evaluation proposal. Available from: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG619.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
11. Final report of the comprehensive review of test and evaluation infrastructure. United States Department of Defense, 2012. p 20.Google Scholar
12. US Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), Integrated Battlespace Simulation and Test, Advanced Systems Integration Laboratory and Aircraft Anechoic Test Facility. Available from: http://www.navair.navy.mil/ibst/08_InsideTheBox/insideBox.html. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
13. Sabat, E.E. An integrated and collaborative RF test infrastructure. 2012. AFFTC-PA-12494. Available from: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a562976.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
14. USAF 772 Test Squadron, Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF), Anechoic Chamber. BAF Handbook and Fact Sheets. Available from: http://www.edwards.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/828279/772nd-test-squadron-benefield-anechoic-facility-baf-anechoic-chamber. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
15. USAF 772nd Test Squadron web page. Available from: http://www.edwards.af.mil/Units/772nd-Test-Squadron. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
16. Stecklein, J.M. Error cost escalation through the project life cycle. 14th Annual Int. Symp., 19–24 June. 2004, Toulouse, France. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20100036670.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
17. Dawson, M. et al. Integrating software assurance into the software development life cycle (SDLC). J. Information Systems Technology & Planning, 2010, 3, (6), pp 4953. Figure 3. Available from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/255965523_Integrating_Software_Assurance_into_the_Software_Development_Life_Cycle_SDLC. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
18. Jiemin, Z. Study on TEMPEST standards attributes and architecture. Int J u- and e- Service, Science and Technology, 2015, 8, (11), pp 8594. ISSN: 2005–4246 IJUNESST. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/ijunesst.2015.8.11.09. Accessed: April 2017.Google Scholar
19. Anechoic Chamber / RF-Shielded Rooms. Frankonia Brochure, English Version 4.0. pp 14-15. Available from: http://www.frankoniagroup.com/cms/fileadmin/shared/downloads/rooms%26chambers/Anechoic_Chambers.pdf. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
20. Rodriguez, V. An introduction to RF anechoic chamber technology. IEEE/EMC Society, Dallas Chapter Meeting, 17 February 2004. Available from: http://www.dallasemc.org/Feb04mtg.html. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
21. Saville, P. Review of Radar Absorbing Materials. Technical Memorandum TM 2005-003, January 2005. Defence R&D Canada. Available from: http://dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a436262.pdf. Accessed: September 2016.Google Scholar
22. Fabara, J. Benefield Anechoic Facility acquires new upgrade, patriotic look. Edwards Air Force Base News, 29 January. 2014. 412th Test Wing Public Affairs. Available from: http://www.edwards.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/829306/benefield-anehoic-facility-acquires-new-upgrade-patriotic-look. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
23. Sirles, C.W., Mantovani, , , J.C., Howland, A.R. and Hart, B.J. Anechoic chamber performance characterization using Spherical Near-Field Imaging techniques. 3rd European Conference on Antennas and Propagation, 2009, Berlin, Germany, pp 1734-1738. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5067951&isnumber=5067558. Accessed: April 2017.Google Scholar
24. Pywell, M. Developments in RF simulator technology – approaching the affordable fidelity limit. Aeronautical J, September 2007, 111, (1123), pp 545560, doi: 10.1017/S0001924000001822.Google Scholar
25. Pywell, M. Development and management of high-fidelity test technology for comprehensive performance evaluation of electronic warfare systems in multi-threat environments. PhD thesis. Available from: http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/9299/. Accessed: August 2016.Google Scholar
26. Combat Electromagnetic Environment Simulator (CEESIM). Northrop Grumman web page. Available from: http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/ceesim/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed: October 2016.Google Scholar
27. EW Simulation Technology Ltd. web page. Available from: http://www.ewst.co.uk/. Accessed October 2016.Google Scholar
28. Andrews, R. Test and evaluation of 4th and 5th generation platforms. Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on EW, Indian Institute of Science, February 2016, Bangalore, India.Google Scholar
29. Jones, W.J. Electronic warfare directorate: Transition into the 21st century. US Air Force T&E Days, 6–8 December 2005, Nashville, Tennessee, US. AIAA 2005–7664. Available from: http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2005-7664. Accessed: October 2016.Google Scholar
30. SCS: Synchronization & Control System. Northrop grumman capabilities web page. Available from: http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/SCS/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed: October 2016.Google Scholar
31. RFSS Announces New Advanced Radar Target Generator System. EIN PRESSWIRE. Available from: https://www.einpresswire.com/article/253833877/rfss-announces-new-advanced-radar-target-generator-system. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
32. Central T&E Investment Program (CTEIP) Brief. US DoD, Test Resource Management Center. 24 June 2013. p 16. Available from: https://acc.dau.mil/adl/en-US/661211/file/73253/20130624_CTEIP%20101%20Brief_v2.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
33. Solt, R. and Monserrate, J. NAVAIR and industry partner to create Multi-Jammer Characterization system. Electronic Military and Defense Annual Resource, 3rd ed., pp 1213. Available from: http://electronicsmilitarydefense.epubxp.com/i/146848-3rd-edition/11. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
34. SAE ARP 5583. A Guide to Certification of Aircraft in a High-Intensity Radiated Field (HIRF) Environment - Revision A, SAE Standard, June 2010, Section 6.3.4.Google Scholar
35. Macnamara, T.M. Introduction to Antenna Placement and Installation. 2010, John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, US.Google Scholar
36. EUROCAE ED 84/SAE ARP5412B. Aircraft Lightning Environment and Related Test Waveforms, January 2013, SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania, US.Google Scholar
37. Pearson, K.A. Circadian rhythms, fatigue and manpower scheduling. MSc thesis, 2004, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, US,. Appendices A-C. Available from: http://www.Calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/1241/04Dec_Pearson.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
38. Gilmore, J.M. Key issues with Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) test and evaluation. Association of Old Crows, AEA Symposium, 14–15 March 2011, Las Vegas, Nevada, US. Available from: www.dote.osd.mil/pub/presentations/AOC%20AEA%20Symposium.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
39. Hein, M. Antenna engineering. Summer Semester 2017. RF & Microwave Lab., ILMENAU University of Technology. Available from: https://www.tu-ilmenau.de/fileadmin/media/it.../antenna_engineering/ant_eng.pdf. Accessed: April 2017.Google Scholar
40. Radio Frequency Threat Simulator Upgrade (Phase 3C). FA930215F7003 Award notice, 2015. Federal Business Opportunities. Available from: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=179099a7be4a1185f80d7b8d21c9ab94. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
41. Gilmore, J.M. Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, FY 2015 Annual Report. January. 2016. Table 1, 2015, p 399. Available from: http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2015/pdf/other/2015DOTEAnnualReport.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
42. Advanced Dynamic Transmit Array (ADTRA). FA9302-14-R-X001 request for information. Federal Business Opportunities. Available from: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=f4a13ce089556030bc975e6921fb2c3&tab=core&_cview=1. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
43. CEESIM Spares; CEESIM-ADTRA Study. FA930216F7001 Award notice, 2016. Federal Business Opportunities. Available from: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=abdeade1657c128a314b1be6c2379724. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
44. DOT&E FY2012 Annual report, test and evaluation resources. p 314. US Director, Operational T&E, December 2012. Available from: http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2012/pdf/other/2012teresources.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
45. Haystead, J. NEWEG – threat simulation for the next generation of EW. J Electronic Defense, April 2013, pp 3841. Available from: http://www.nxtbook.com/naylor/JEDM/JEDM0413/index.php?startid=38#/40. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
46. NEWEG industry day briefing: Next-gen Electronic Warfare Environment Generator. ID_BriefFINAL.pptx, November. 2011. Available from: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=3e2c8ccf5fdbfdc0588129eef8a77585&tab=core&_cview=1. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
47. Next-generation Electronic Warfare Environment Generator (NEWEG), 2016. Available from: http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawctsd/Programs/Files/2016-NEWEG.pdf. Accessed: January 2017.Google Scholar
48. NEWEG Integration Support Study. Award notice, 2016. USAF Federal Business Opportunities. Available from: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d9d4db0855668ce3812a47d8e3c0d6bf&tab=core&_cview=0. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
49. Northrop Grumman unveils Advanced Pulse Generation technology with direct digital synthesis for next generation advanced threats. News Release, 13 January. 2014. Available from: http://globenewswire.com/newsarchive/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=10064000. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
50. Textron systems web page for A2PATS. Available from: http://www.textronsystems.com/what-we-do/electronic-systems/a2pats. Accessed: April 2017.Google Scholar
51. Anderson, R. et al. Threat correlation to ground test stimulators at the Benefield Anechoic Facility (BAF). US Air Force T&E Days, 6–8 December 2005, Nashville, Tennessee, US. AIAA 2005–7659. Available from: http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2005-7659. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
52. Manzardo, M.A. et al. Infrared scene projector system design description for installed infrared sensor testing in an anechoic chamber environment. Proc. SPIE 3697, Technologies for Synthetic Environments: Hardware-in-the-Loop Testing IV, 19 July 1999. Available from: http://www.dtic.mail/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a368732.pdf. Accessed: November 2016. doi: 10.1117/12.352895.Google Scholar
53. Simmons, O.D. et al. Infrared sensor stimulator (IRSS) installation in the ACETEF, NAWC-AD, Patuxtent River, MD. Proc. SPIE 4366. Technologies for Synthetic Environments: Hardware-in-the-Loop Testing VI. 31 August, 2001. Available from: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA393428. Accessed: November 2016. doi: 10.1117/12.438081.Google Scholar
54. Infrared/ultraviolet simulators and related systems. Technology Service Corporation. Available from: http://www.tsc.com/Fact%20sheets/Infrared%20Ultraviolet%20Simulators%20and%20Related%20Systems%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
55. IR/EO simulation systems: Real-time IR/EO scene simulator. Northrop Grumman web page. Available from: http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/RISS/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar
56. New chip ease operations in electromagnetic environs. US Defense Research Projects Agency, News and Events, 11 January. 2016. Available from: http://darpa.mil/news-events/2016-01-11. Accessed: November 2016.Google Scholar