ARMY17.3 Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)

Proposal Submission Instructions

INTRODUCTION

The US Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command (RDECOM) is responsible for execution of the Army SBIR Program. Information on the Army SBIR Program can be found at the following Website: https://www.armysbir.army.mil / .

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), topic, and general questions regarding the SBIR Program should be addressed according to the DoD Program BAA. For technical questions about the topic during the pre-release period, contact the Topic Authors listed for each topic in the BAA. To obtain answers to technical questions during the formal BAA period, visit https://sbir.defensebusiness.org/. Specific questions pertaining to the Army SBIR Program should be submitted to:

John SmithProgram Manager, Army SBIR usarmy.apg.rdecom.mbx.sbir-program-managers-helpdesk@mail.mil US Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM)6200 Guardian Gateway, Suite 145Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-1322TEL: (866) 570-7247FAX: (443) 360-4082

The Army participates in three DoD SBIR BAAs each year. Proposals not conforming to the terms of this BAA will not be considered. Only Government personnel will evaluate proposals with the exception of technical personnel from The Geneva Foundation who will provide Advisory and Assistance Services to the Army and technical analysis in the evaluation of proposals submitted against Army topic number:

A17-139 “Unmanned Systems Teaming for Semi-Autonomous Casualty Extraction”

The individuals from The Geneva Foundation will be authorized access to only those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary to enable them to perform their respective duties. This institution is expressly prohibited from competing for SBIR awards and from scoring or ranking of proposals or recommending the selection of a source. In accomplishing their duties related to the selection processes, the aforementioned institution may require access to proprietary information contained in the offerors’ proposals. Therefore, pursuant to FAR 9.505-4, the institution must execute an agreement that states that they will (1) protect the offerors’ information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. These agreements will remain on file with the Army SBIR program management office at the address above.

PHASE I PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

SBIR Phase I proposals have four Volumes: Proposal Cover Sheet, Technical Volume, Cost Volume and Company Commercialization Report. The Technical Volume .pdf document has a 20-page limit including: table of contents, pages intentionally left blank, references, letters of support, appendices, technical portions of subcontract documents (e.g., statements of work and resumes) and any other attachments. Small businesses submitting a Phase I Proposal must use the DoD SBIR electronic proposal submission system (https://sbir.defensebusiness.org/). This site contains step-by-step

ARMY - 1

instructions for the preparation and submission of the Proposal Cover Sheet, the Company Commercialization Report, the Cost Volume, and how to upload the Technical Volume. For general inquiries or problems with proposal electronic submission, contact the DoD SBIR Help Desk at 1-800-348-0787.

The small business will also need to register at the Army SBIR Small Business website: https://portal.armysbir.army.mil/Portal/SmallBusinessPortal/Default.aspx in order to receive information regarding proposal status/debriefings, summary reports, impact/transition stories, and Phase III plans. PLEASE NOTE: If this is your first time submitting an Army SBIR proposal, you will not be able to register your firm at the Army SBIR Small Business website until after all of the proposals have been downloaded and we have transferred your company information to the Army Small Business website. This can take up to one week after the end of the submission period.

Do not include blank pages, duplicate the electronically generated cover pages or put information normally associated with the Technical Volume such as descriptions of capability or intent in other sections of the proposal as these will count toward the 20-page limit.

Only the electronically generated Cover Sheets, Cost Volume and Company Commercialization Report (CCR) are excluded from the 20-page limit. The CCR is generated by the proposal submission website, based on information provided by you through the Company Commercialization Report tool. Army Phase I proposals submitted containing a Technical Volume .pdf document containing over 20 pages will be deemed NON-COMPLIANT and will not be evaluated. It is the responsibility of the Small Business to ensure that once the proposal is submitted and uploaded into the system that the technical volume .pdf document complies with the 20 page limit.

Phase I proposals must describe the "vision" or "end-state" of the research and the most likely strategy or path for transition of the SBIR project from research to an operational capability that satisfies one or more Army operational or technical requirements in a new or existing system, larger research program, or as a stand-alone product or service.

Phase I proposals will be reviewed for overall merit based upon the criteria in Section 6.0 of the DoD Program BAA.

17.3 Phase I Key DatesBAA closes, proposals due 25 Oct 2017, 8:00 pm ET Phase I Evaluations 27 Oct – 22 Jan 2018Phase I Selections 23 Jan 2018Phase I Award Goal 23 Apr 2018*Subject to the Congressional Budget process

PHASE I OPTION MUST BE INCLUDED AS PART OF PHASE I PROPOSAL

The Army implements the use of a Phase I Option that may be exercised to fund interim Phase I activities while a Phase II contract is being negotiated. Only Phase I efforts selected for Phase II awards through the Army’s competitive process will be eligible to have the Phase I Option exercised. The Phase I Option, which must be included as part of the Phase I proposal, should cover activities over a period of up to four months and describe appropriate initial Phase II activities that may lead to the successful demonstration of a product or technology. The Phase I Option must be included within the 20-page limit for the Phase I proposal. Do not include blank pages, duplicate the electronically generated cover pages or put information normally associated with the Technical Volume such as descriptions of capability or intent, in other sections of the proposal as these will count toward the 20-page limit.

ARMY - 2

PHASE I COST VOLUME

A firm fixed price or cost plus fixed fee Phase I Cost Volume ($150,000 maximum) must be submitted in detail online. Proposers that participate in this BAA must complete a Phase I Cost Volume not to exceed a maximum dollar amount of $100,000 and six months and a Phase I Option Cost Volume not to exceed a maximum dollar amount of $50,000 and four months. The Phase I and Phase I Option costs must be shown separately but may be presented side-by-side in a single Cost Volume. The Cost Volume DOES NOT count toward the 20-page Phase I proposal limitation. When submitting the Cost Volume, complete the Cost Volume form on the DoD Submission site, versus submitting it within the body of the uploaded proposal.

PHASE II PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Commencing with Phase II’s resulting from a 13.1 Phase I, invitations are no longer required. Small businesses submitting a Phase II Proposal must use the DoD SBIR electronic proposal submission system (https://sbir.defensebusiness.org/). This site contains step-by-step instructions for the preparation and submission of the Proposal Cover Sheet, the Company Commercialization Report, the Cost Volume, and how to upload the Technical Volume. For general inquiries or problems with proposal electronic submission, contact the DoD Help Desk at 1-800-348-0787.

Army SBIR has four cycles in each FY for Phase II submission. A single Phase II proposal can be submitted by a Phase I awardee within one, and only one, of four submission cycles and must be submitted between 4 to 17 months after the Phase I contract award date. Any proposals that are not submitted within these four submission cycles and before 4 months or after 17 months from the contract award date will not be evaluated. The submission window opens at 0001hrs (12:01 AM) eastern time on the first day and closes at 2359 hrs (11:59 PM) eastern time on the last day. Any subsequent Phase II proposal (i.e., a second Phase II subsequent to the initial Phase II effort) shall be initiated by the Government Technical Point of Contact for the initial Phase II effort and must be approved by Army SBIR PM in advance.

The four Phase II submission cycles following the announcement of selections for the 17.3 BAA are:

2018(a) 17 October to 16 November 20172018(b) 1 March to 2 April 20182018(c) 15 June to 16 July 20182018(d) 1 August to 31 August 2018

For other submission cycle see the schedule below, and always check with the Army SBIR Program Managers office helpdesk for the exact dates.

SUBMISSION CYCLES TIMEFRAMECycle One 30 calendar days starting on or about 15 October*Cycle Two 30 calendar days starting on or about 1 March*Cycle Three 30 calendar days starting on or about 15 June*Cycle Four 30 calendar days starting on or about 1 August*

*Submission cycles will open on the date listed unless it falls on a weekend or a Federal Holiday. In those cases, it will open on the next available business day.

Army SBIR Phase II Proposals have four Volumes: Proposal Cover Sheet, Technical Volume, Cost Volume and Company Commercialization Report. The Technical Volume .pdf document has a 38-page limit including: table of contents, pages intentionally left blank, references, letters of support,

ARMY - 3

appendices, technical portions of subcontract documents (e.g., statements of work and resumes), data assertions and any attachments. Do not include blank pages, duplicate the electronically generated cover pages or put information normally associated with the Technical Volume in other sections of the proposal as these will count toward the 38-page limit. As with Phase I proposals, it is the proposing firm’s responsibility to verify that the Technical Volume .pdf document does not exceed the page limit after upload to the DoD SBIR/STTR Submission site by clicking on the “Verify Technical Volume” icon.

Only the electronically generated Cover Sheet, Cost Volume and Company Commercialization Report (CCR) are excluded from the 38-page Technical Volume. The CCR is generated by the proposal submission website, based on information provided by you through the Company Commercialization Report tool.

Army Phase II Proposals submitted containing a Technical Volume .pdf document over 38 pages will be deemed NON-COMPLIANT and will not be evaluated.

Army Phase II Cost Volumes must contain a budget for the entire 24-month Phase II period not to exceed the maximum dollar amount of $1,000,000. During contract negotiation, the contracting officer may require a Cost Volume for a base year and an option year. These costs must be submitted using the Cost Volume format (accessible electronically on the DoD submission site), and may be presented side-by-side on a single Cost Volume Sheet. The total proposed amount should be indicated on the Proposal Cover Sheet as the Proposed Cost. Phase II projects will be evaluated after the base year prior to extending funding for the option year.

Small businesses submitting a proposal are required to develop and submit a technology transition and commercialization plan describing feasible approaches for transitioning and/or commercializing the developed technology in their Phase II proposal.

DoD is not obligated to make any awards under Phase I, II, or III.  For specifics regarding the evaluation and award of Phase I or II contracts, please read the DoD Program BAA very carefully. Phase II proposals will be reviewed for overall merit based upon the criteria in Section 8.0 of the BAA.

BIO HAZARD MATERIAL AND RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMAL OR HUMAN SUBJECTS

Any proposal involving the use of Bio Hazard Materials must identify in the Technical Volume whether the contractor has been certified by the Government to perform Bio Level - I, II or III work.

Companies should plan carefully for research involving animal or human subjects, or requiring access to government resources of any kind. Animal or human research must be based on formal protocols that are reviewed and approved both locally and through the Army's committee process. Resources such as equipment, reagents, samples, data, facilities, troops or recruits, and so forth, must all be arranged carefully. The few months available for a Phase I effort may preclude plans including these elements, unless coordinated before a contract is awarded.

FOREIGN NATIONALS

If the offeror proposes to use a foreign national(s) [any person who is NOT a citizen or national of the United States, a lawful permanent resident, or a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b (a) (3) – refer to Section 3.5 of this BAA for definitions of “lawful permanent resident” and “protected individual”] as key personnel, they must be clearly identified. For foreign nationals, you must provide country of origin, the type of visa or work permit under which they are performing and an explanation of their anticipated level of involvement on this project. Please ensure no Privacy Act information is included in this submittal.

ARMY - 4

OZONE CHEMICALS

Class 1 Ozone Depleting Chemicals/Ozone Depleting Substances are prohibited and will not be allowed for use in this procurement without prior Government approval.

CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING APPLICATION (CMRA)

The Contractor Manpower Reporting Application (CMRA) is a Department of Defense Business Initiative Council (BIC) sponsored program to obtain better visibility of the contractor service workforce. This reporting requirement applies to all Army SBIR contracts.

Offerors are instructed to include an estimate for the cost of complying with CMRA as part of the Cost Volume for Phase I ($100,000 maximum), Phase I Option ($50,000 maximum), and Phase II ($1,000,000 maximum), under “CMRA Compliance” in Other Direct Costs. This is an estimated total cost (if any) that would be incurred to comply with the CMRA requirement. Only proposals that receive an award will be required to deliver CMRA reporting, i.e. if the proposal is selected and an award is made, the contract will include a deliverable for CMRA.

To date, there has been a wide range of estimated costs for CMRA. While most final negotiated costs have been minimal, there appears to be some higher cost estimates that can often be attributed to misunderstanding the requirement. The SBIR Program desires for the Government to pay a fair and reasonable price. This technical analysis is intended to help determine this fair and reasonable price for CMRA as it applies to SBIR contracts.

The Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) operates and maintains the secure CMRA System. The CMRA Web site is located here: https://cmra.army.mil/.

The CMRA requirement consists of the following items, which are located within the contract document, the contractor's existing cost accounting system (i.e. estimated direct labor hours, estimated direct labor dollars), or obtained from the contracting officer representative:

(1) Contract number, including task and delivery order number;(2) Contractor name, address, phone number, e-mail address, identity of contractor employee entering data;(3) Estimated direct labor hours (including sub-contractors);(4) Estimated direct labor dollars paid this reporting period (including sub-contractors);(5) Predominant Federal Service Code (FSC) reflecting services provided by contractor (and separate predominant FSC for each sub-contractor if different);(6) Organizational title associated with the Unit Identification Code (UIC) for the Army Requiring Activity (The Army Requiring Activity is responsible for providing the contractor with its UIC for the purposes of reporting this information);(7) Locations where contractor and sub-contractors perform the work (specified by zip code in the United States and nearest city, country, when in an overseas location, using standardized nomenclature provided on Web site);

The reporting period will be the period of performance not to exceed 12 months ending September 30 of each government fiscal year and must be reported by 31 October of each calendar year.

According to the required CMRA contract language, the contractor may use a direct XML data transfer to the Contractor Manpower Reporting System database server or fill in the fields on the Government Web site. The CMRA Web site also has a no-cost CMRA XML Converter Tool.

ARMY - 5

Given the small size of our SBIR contracts and companies, it is our opinion that the modification of contractor payroll systems for automatic XML data transfer is not in the best interest of the Government. CMRA is an annual reporting requirement that can be achieved through multiple means to include manual entry, MS Excel spreadsheet development, or use of the free Government XML converter tool. The annual reporting should take less than a few hours annually by an administrative level employee.

Depending on labor rates, we would expect the total annual cost for SBIR companies to not exceed $500.00 annually, or to be included in overhead rates.

DISCRETIONARY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

In accordance with section 9(q) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(q)), the Army will provide technical assistance services to small businesses engaged in SBIR projects through a network of scientists and engineers engaged in a wide range of technologies. The objective of this effort is to increase Army SBIR technology transition and commercialization success thereby accelerating the fielding of capabilities to Soldiers and to benefit the nation through stimulated technological innovation, improved manufacturing capability, and increased competition, productivity, and economic growth.

The Army has stationed nine Technical Assistance Advocates (TAAs) across the Army to provide technical assistance to small businesses that have Phase I and Phase II projects with the participating organizations within their regions.

For more information go to: https://www.armysbir.army.mil, then click the “SBIR” tab, and thenclick on Transition Assistance/Technical Assistance.

As noted in Section 4.22 of this BAA, firms may request technical assistance from sources other than those provided by the Army. All such requests must be made in accordance with the instructions in Section 4.22. It should also be noted that if approved for discretionary technical assistance from an outside source, the firm will not be eligible for the Army’s Technical Assistance Advocate support. All details of the DTA agency and what services they will provide must be listed in the technical proposal under “consultants”. The request for DTA must include details on what qualifies the DTA firm to provide the services that you are requesting, the firm name, a point of contact for the firm, and a web site for the firm. List all services that the firm will provide and why they are uniquely qualified to provide these services. The award of DTA funds is not automatic and must be approved by the Army SBIR Program Manager.

COMMERCIALIZATION READINESS PROGRAM (CRP)

The objective of the CRP effort is to increase Army SBIR technology transition and commercialization success and accelerate the fielding of capabilities to Soldiers. The CRP: 1) assesses and identifies SBIR projects and companies with high transition potential that meet high priority requirements; 2) matches SBIR companies to customers and facilitates collaboration; 3) facilitates detailed technology transition plans and agreements; 4) makes recommendations for additional funding for select SBIR projects that meet the criteria identified above; and 5) tracks metrics and measures results for the SBIR projects within the CRP.

Based on its assessment of the SBIR project’s potential for transition as described above, the Army utilizes a CRP investment fund of SBIR dollars targeted to enhance ongoing Phase II activities with expanded research, development, test and evaluation to accelerate transition and commercialization. The

ARMY - 6

CRP investment fund must be expended according to all applicable SBIR policy on existing Phase II availability of matching funds, proposed transition strategies, and individual contracting arrangements.

NON-PROPRIETARY SUMMARY REPORTS

All award winners must submit a non-proprietary summary report at the end of their Phase I project and any subsequent Phase II project. The summary report is unclassified, non-sensitive and non-proprietary and should include:

A summation of Phase I results A description of the technology being developed The anticipated DoD and/or non-DoD customer The plan to transition the SBIR developed technology to the customer The anticipated applications/benefits for government and/or private sector use An image depicting the developed technology

The non-proprietary summary report should not exceed 700 words, and is intended for public viewing on the Army SBIR/STTR Small Business area. This summary report is in addition to the required final technical report and should require minimal work because most of this information is required in the final technical report. The summary report shall be submitted in accordance with the format and instructions posted within the Army SBIR Small Business Portal at:https://portal.armysbir.army.mil/Portal/SmallBusinessPortal/Default.aspx and is due within 30 days of the contract end date.

ARMY - 7

ARMY SBIR PROGRAM COORDINATORS (PC) and Army SBIR 17.3 Topic Index

Participating Organizations PC Phone

Aviation and Missile RD&E Center(AMRDEC-A)

Dawn Gratz 256-842-8769

Armaments RD&E Center (ARDEC) Marzell LeeSheila Speroni

973-724-2585973-724-6935

JPEO Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO-CBD)

Lawrence Pollack 703-767-3307

Medical Research and Materiel Command (MRMC)

James MyersAmanda Cecil

301-619-7377301-619-7296

PEO Ground Combat Systems (PEO GCS)

Lynne Krogsrud 586-215-9072

PEO Intelligence, Electronic Warfare & Sensors (PEO-IEW&S)

Caitlyn Byrne 410-991-0189

PEO Soldier Mary Harwood 703-704-0211PEO Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI)

Robert Forbis 407-384-3884

Tank Automotive RD&E Center (TARDEC)

George PappageorgeTodd SankbeilAmanda Osborne

586-282-4915586-282-4669586-282-7541

ARMY SUBMISSION OF FINAL TECHNICAL REPORTS

A final technical report is required for each project. Per DFARS clause 252.235-7011(http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfars/html/current/252235.htm#252.235-7011), each contractor shall (a) Submit two copies of the approved scientific or technical report delivered under the contract to the Defense Technical Information Center, Attn: DTIC-O, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218; (b) Include a completed Standard Form 298, Report Documentation Page, with each copy of the report; and (c) For submission of reports in other than paper copy, contact the Defense Technical Information Center or follow the instructions at http://www.dtic.mil.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

This is a Checklist of Army Requirements for your proposal. Please review the checklist to ensure that your proposal meets the Army SBIR requirements. You must also meet the general DoD requirements specified in the BAA. Failure to meet these requirements will result in your proposal not being evaluated or considered for award. Do not include this checklist with your proposal.

1. The proposal addresses a Phase I effort (up to $100,000 with up to a six-month duration) AND an optional effort (up to $50,000 for an up to four-month period to provide interim Phase II funding).

2. The proposal is limited to only ONE Army BAA topic.

3. The technical content of the proposal, including the Option, includes the items identified in Section 5.4 of the BAA.

4. SBIR Phase I Proposals have four (4) sections: Proposal Cover Sheet, Technical Volume, Cost Volume and Company Commercialization Report. The Technical Volume .pdf document has a 20-page

ARMY - 8

limit including, but not limited to: table of contents, pages intentionally left blank, references, letters of support, appendices, technical portions of subcontract documents [e.g., statements of work and resumes] and all attachments). However, offerors are instructed to NOT leave blank pages, duplicate the electronically generated cover pages or put information normally associated with the Technical Volume in other sections of the proposal submission as THESE WILL COUNT AGAINST THE 20-PAGE LIMIT. Any information that details work involved that should be in the technical volume but is inserted into other sections of the proposal will count against the page count. ONLY the electronically generated Cover Sheet, Cost Volume and Company Commercialization Report (CCR) are excluded from the Technical Volume .pdf 20-page limit. As instructed in Section 5.4.e of the DoD Program BAA, the CCR is generated by the submission website, based on information provided by you through the “Company Commercialization Report” tool. Army Phase I proposals submitted with a Technical Volume .pdf document of over 20-pages will be deemed NON-COMPLIANT and will not be evaluated.

5. The Cost Volume has been completed and submitted for both the Phase I and Phase I Option and the costs are shown separately. The Army prefers that small businesses complete the Cost Volume form on the DoD Submission site, versus submitting within the body of the uploaded proposal. The total cost should match the amount on the cover pages.

6. Requirement for Army Accounting for Contract Services, otherwise known as CMRA reporting is included in the Cost Volume (offerors are instructed to include an estimate for the cost of complying with CMRA).

7. If applicable, the Bio Hazard Material level has been identified in the Technical Volume.

8. If applicable, plan for research involving animal or human subjects, or requiring access to government resources of any kind.

9. The Phase I Proposal describes the "vision" or "end-state" of the research and the most likely strategy or path for transition of the SBIR project from research to an operational capability that satisfies one or more Army operational or technical requirements in a new or existing system, larger research program, or as a stand-alone product or service.

10. If applicable, Foreign Nationals are identified in the proposal. An employee must have an H-1B Visa to work on a DoD contract.

ARMY - 9

ARMY SBIR 17.3 Topic Index

A17-135 360 degree field of view information in a 120 degree immersive virtual reality (VR) displayA17-136 Improved Coupling Efficiency Optical Pump Combiners for Fiber Laser SystemsA17-137 Robotics and Armaments controllerA17-138 Advanced Materials for Gamma SpectrometryA17-139 Unmanned Systems Teaming for Semi-Autonomous Casualty ExtractionA17-140 Improved biomonitoring of toxicant exposures and health in the deployed environment using

preserved blood.A17-141 Gunner Primary Sight (GPS) Shock IsolatorA17-142 Optical Character Recognition (OCR) Automated Document Pre-processing SoftwareA17-143 Near Real-time LIDAR Processing and Exploitation AlgorithmsA17-144 Next Generation Encrypted Wireless Intercom WaveformA17-145 Advanced Human Type TargetA17-146 In Vehicle Adjustable Torsion Bar Technologies

ARMY - 10

ARMY SBIR 17.3 Topic Descriptions

A17-135 TITLE: 360 degree field of view information in a 120 degree immersive virtual reality (VR) display

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Air Platform, Human Systems

OBJECTIVE: To support Warfighter (soldier, airman, commander, etc.) situational awareness and decisive actions through the development of presentation techniques capable of providing 360 degree field of view with enhanced symbology in a 120 degree field of view immersive virtual reality display.

DESCRIPTION: BackgroundAdvancements in computer processing power and memory, 3D and virtual reality displays, and sensor technology have reached a point that allows for substantial augmentation of the human warfighter. The warfighter of tomorrow will have extra-human capabilities that will allow him or her to perceive, evaluate, plan, and respond in manners far beyond those of either humans or machines acting in isolation. Current limitations of the human body (e.g., limited sensory range and capability, limited retrospective, prospective, and declarative memory, and limited computation) can be overcome using augmentation.

Humans currently use a stereo-optical visual system that is limited to roughly a 120 degree field of view, but they must operate in a 360 degree world. Thus, two thirds of the environment is unavailable to the human at any one time. The human must turn his or her head or body to see anything in the other 240 degrees. Numerous studies in altered or inverted visual fields strongly suggests that the human visual system is limited primarily by the sensors (eyes) rather than the computational mechanism (brain). Indeed, while theories vary, it appears that the brain is quite capable of acclimating to non-standard visual fields and that humans can perform at the same proficiency using these altered visual fields. There is usually a period of retraining/acclimation that is required to transition to the new field and there is usually a period of acclimation required to return to the normal field of view (negative after effects). Some research has evidently demonstrated it is possible for the human to rapidly switch between the different fields of view.

SolutionThis task seeks to develop visual compression techniques that will display a live, real-time 360 degree sensory visual image in a 120 degree field of view using a virtual reality headset. Rather than a linear compression, an algorithm should be developed such that there will be no resolution or distance distortion for images in the fovea (~ +/- 5 degrees off of the center line of sight), and that the remaining peripheral view is compressed to present the remaining 350 degrees. The exact method of compression (e.g., linear, logarithmic) should be explored to determine the ‘best fit’ for human performance. Best fit is defined by factors such as task performance, situation awareness of objects and the movement of objects in the environment, length of acclimation and after effects periods, ability to switch between normal field of view and 360 field of view, and subject comfort and endurance.

Current LimitationsMany gaming development software and 3D computer modeling and animation software packages offer ways to increase the field of view. However, these packages do not allow for variations in the compression pattern (e.g., keeping the resolution and distance of objects in the foveal view at those of normal field of view). There has been no rigorous experimentation and research into the effectiveness of 360 degree field of view presentations similar to those that have been conducted in distorted fields of view such as inverted or prism displays.

PHASE I: Develop a functional proof-of-concept system capable of providing 360 degree field of view with enhanced symbology in a 120 degree field of view immersive virtual reality display to the user. The user’s foveal vision (+/- 5 degrees) should have a resolution and apparent distance that is 1-to-1 with normal field of view. At least two variations of compression fall off from the foveal vision (linear, logarithmic) should be produced. The user should be able to move around within a virtual 3D environment and react to (e.g., identify, turn to, target) artificial objects in the environment. A protocol for acclimation to the 360 view and re-acclimation to the normal field of view should be proposed and demonstrated on at least one individual.

ARMY - 11

PHASE II: Evaluate variations proof of concept system (including acclimation and re-acclimation protocols) to establish best concept. Enhance best concept to demonstrate more realistic warfighter scenarios for ground and air. Examine candidate sensor solutions and make recommendations for best uses of the concept.

Evaluation criteria include (but are not limited to) the following: time to detect threats (single and multiple) – faster = better; Accuracy of classification of threat – greater = better; negative physiological effects (e.g., spatial disorientation, headache, fatigue, vertigo, dizziness, difficulty assessing distances) – fewer = better; Ability to navigate, move, and avoid obstacles through complex environments – easier + faster = better; and Ease of transition between 360-mode and normal mode (i.e., acclimation) – easier + faster = better.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Develop combined VR display and sensor system prototypes and demonstrate the combined system in a real world setting (e.g., outdoors, navigating indoor office hallways and spaces; operating vehicles such as aircraft or ground vehicles) where the system presents real time data with the user carrying out a number of activities. The system will also be well-suited for transition to a variety of commercial applications, including: monitoring systems for police, border patrol, and private security; and the entertainment industry, specifically motion capture for the production of video games and movies.

Evaluation criteria are the same as for Phase II, but also include (but are not limited to) the following: system weight – less = better; wearer comfort - more = better; Visual Resolution – greater = better; system robustness – greater = better; all weather capabilities – greater = better.

REFERENCES:1. Welch, Robert B. Perceptual modification: Adapting to altered sensory environments. Elsevier, 2013

2. Martin, T. A., et al. "Throwing while looking through prisms. II. Specificity and storage of multiple gaze-throw calibrations." Brain 119.4 (1996): 1199-1212.

3. Fernández-Ruiz, Juan, and Rosalinda Díaz. "Prism adaptation and aftereffect: specifying the properties of a procedural memory system." Learning & Memory 6.1 (1999): 47-53.

4. Kennedy, Robert S., and Kay M. Stanney. "Postural instability induced by virtual reality exposure: Development of a certification protocol." International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 8.1 (1996): 25-47.

5. Clower, Dottie M., and Driss Boussaoud. "Selective use of perceptual recalibration versus visuomotor skill acquisition." Journal of Neurophysiology 84.5 (2000): 2703-2708.

6. Lin, JJ-W., et al. "Effects of field of view on presence, enjoyment, memory, and simulator sickness in a virtual environment." Virtual Reality, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE. IEEE, 2002.

KEYWORDS: image processing, three-dimensional imagery, photogrammetry, human systems, virtual reality, field of view, augmented reality, situation awareness, sensor, computer vision

A17-136 TITLE: Improved Coupling Efficiency Optical Pump Combiners for Fiber Laser Systems

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Materials/Processes

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

ARMY - 12

OBJECTIVE: Design and develop novel materials, processes and/or geometries of optical pump combiner to increase coupling efficiency.

DESCRIPTION: Lasers and optical amplifiers are pumped with shorter wavelength light to excite electrons required for the amplification of optical signals. The pump light needs to get into the center of the laser fiber in order for it to be absorbed and excited by the laser ions. If the pump light does not get into the core, it is converted to waste heat. Any waste heat must be removed. With the rapid improvement in laser and amplifier power seen in the past two decades, kilowatts of power are routinely achieved. With this high power, heating due to coupling inefficiencies presents real problems. If the coupling efficiency were improved from 90% to 95%, there would be fifty fewer Watts of heat to remove from the coating of a 1 kW pump fiber. This two-fold reduction could be the difference between water- and air-cooling of the contact area. The simplicity of the air-cooled system might be the tipping point needed in a candidate laser system to show the value of laser solutions to military problems. This SBIR announcement calls for novel methods and geometries that could increase coupling efficiency. If greater coupling efficiency designs could be created that have similar, or even improved reliability, these new pump combiners could be used in future weapons systems. Pump light is produced at expense, and any gain in coupling efficiency would also reduce the burden on the pump lasers.

PHASE I: Design and develop novel materials, processes and/or geometries of optical pump combiner. Provide theoretical justification for the method(s) selected and utilize mathematical modeling to predict coupling efficiencies. Prepare a preliminary manufacturability and validation/testing plan in preparation for Phase II.

PHASE II: Optimize design(s) based on the output of Phase I. Construct prototype device(s) based on the most promising methods. Conduct experimentation and evaluation testing. Compare data to modeling predictions and make recommendations for further design iteration if warranted. Provide prototype hardware and final report.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Collaborate with ARDEC engineers for possible prototype integration for TRL7 demonstration and/or transition to military program.

Industrial lasers must also remove waste heat, industry would benefit from more efficient energy conversion. Other uses include applications in which energy is at a premium, such as satellites or undersea applications, such as amplifying optical signals in transatlantic communications cables.

In industrial lasers, uncoupled pump light can exit the fiber and add to unwanted heating of a larger material surface as light exits the fiber, so increased efficiency would improve the precision of the laser machining process.

REFERENCES:1. https://www.osapublishing.org/oe/abstract.cfm?uri=oe-20-27-28125

2. http://www.google.com/patents/US8818151 3.

3. https://www.google.com/patents/US6956876?dq=Presby+Fischer+pump&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjr9eDwyr7MAhVDkh4KHeBFA4IQ6AEIHTAA

4. http://www.lightcomm.com/product/lists/typeid/125.html https://www.rp-photonics.com/passive_fiber_optics8.html

5. http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/print/volume-48/issue-04/features/the-state-of-the-art.html

6. http://www.nlight.net/nlight-files/file/technical_papers/PW10/Jan%2030%20High%20Brightness%20Fiber%20Coupled%20Pump%20Lasers.pdf

KEYWORDS: laser, fiber, pump, coupling, efficiency

ARMY - 13

A17-137 TITLE: Robotics and Armaments controller

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Information Systems

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

OBJECTIVE: Design and develop a handheld robotics and armament controller that can receive information from combined group of manned and unmanned platforms treated as a single operator control unit.

DESCRIPTION: Mounted/dismounted computing platform architectures will rely on multiple unmanned systems to perform focused mission; i.e. mapping, reconnaissance, fire mission execution, etc. Recent advances in agent software technologies, and high bandwidth wireless communication, allow for multi-sensory based perception, collaborative planning, 3D visualization technology and intelligent control to enable a new generation of multi-platform controller capable of mixed initiative planning, task execution and control within a manned-unmanned teaming environment. This represents a revolution advance in current controller technology in which any mission involving multiple unmanned platforms, requires an operator to manually break the group mission into individual unmanned platform tasks/subtasks before he/she can use the vehicle’s mission planner. The operator has to manually address deconfliction issues like planning the vehicle’s reconnaissance route to avoid friendly fire, avoid overlap and plan individual ingress/egress paths for each unit. The key technical challenge will be to provide an integrated architecture and solution that addressed fundamental problems of mobility, flexible task level control and automation, multi-sensor integration, multi-platform coordination associated with network centric, manned-unmanned teaming operation in complex environments. Technical issues of interest include brain-computer interface, task handoff and visualization, multi-platform control strategies, knowledge based task level control including path planning, navigation, permission based control, and real-time dynamic planning/re-planning. The Handheld robotics and armament controller will be a portable, wireless, networked device that can compute and display map data, maneuver graphics representations, and tactical information on a handheld lightweight device to improve situational awareness of the dismounted soldier in GPS and GPS denied areas. Control approaches should address issues related to multi-platform autonomous control, handoff, hierarchical planning, and deconfliction. The mission planner portion should factor in input from user to develop optimized plans for the use of the systems.

PHASE I: Conduct research to develop the design methodology, computation approaches and architecture concepts to support the design and implementation of a prototype multi-platform manned/unmanned system mission controller. Define system concept and hardware/software architecture and functional specification.

PHASE II: Based on Phase I research results develop a proof of concept robotic armament controller prototype and demonstrate its operation with platforms in a networked, manned/unmanned teaming scenario. Optimize algorithms and design approach based on experimental results and provide complete documentation of algorithms, architecture and component software.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: There are many dual use applications of the underlying multi-platform mission planning and control architecture and information processing infrastructure which be readily adaptable to support homeland security application, law enforcement, border patrol and search and rescue applications. The technology will provide leaders on the ground with the ability to plan, manage, control and coordinate actions of both manned and unmanned assets in real time and optimize achievement of team goals in distributed, network environment.

REFERENCES:1. B. Larochelle, G. M. Kruijff, N. Smets, T. Mioch, and P. Groenewegen, “Establishing Human Situation Awareness Using a Multi-Modal Operator Control Unit In An Urban Search & Rescue Human-Robot Team”, IEEE Intern. Symp. On Robot and Human Interactive Comm., July 31 – August 3, Atlanta, GA (2011).

ARMY - 14

2. N. Checka, S. Schaffert, D. Demirdjian, J. Falkowski, and D. H Grollman, “Handheld Operator Control Unit”, 7th ACM/IEEE Intern. Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 137138, March 5-8, Boston, MA (2012).

3. J. Crossman, R. Marinier and E. B. Olson, “A Hands-Off, Multi-Robot Display for Communicating Situation Awareness to Operators”, Intern. Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), pp. 109-116, May 21-25 (2012).

4. B. Larochelle, G. M. Kruijff, N. Smets, T. Mioch P. Groenewegen, “Establishing Human Situation Awareness Using a Multi-Modal Operator Control Unit In An Urban Search & Rescue Human-Robot Team”, IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, September 9-13, Paris, France. (2012).

KEYWORDS: artificial intelligence, software agents, robotics, decentralized control, autonomy, sensor-shooter links, mission planner, autonomous control, distributed robotics, intelligent control

A17-138 TITLE: Advanced Materials for Gamma Spectrometry

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Materials/Processes

OBJECTIVE: Develop innovative approaches to, and demonstrate the production of, an alternative gamma spectrometry material that simultaneously improves technical performance and lowers procurement costs.

DESCRIPTION: Research, development, innovation, and demonstration of methods and processes are sought to reduce the costs of radioisotope identification detectors (RIIDs) materials while enhancing, or at a minimum, maintaining current commercial detection and identification performance. RIIDs need to be expeditious, reliable, and affordable while minimally impacting the Warfighter’s performance in concurrent missions. Other agencies such as DOE/NNSA and DTRA/J9 (R&D) develop new materials or new combinations of materials using methods such as co-doping or alternate dopants to get resolution down to 0.5%. While identification performance is enhanced, the associated increased costs are prohibitive in Acquisition.

The type of instrument most commonly used for this mission is a hand-held gamma spectrometer referred to as a radiological isotope identification device (RIID) [1]. Their performance is determined by parameters such as the material system it uses for radiation detection, the electronics and software packages it uses for analysis, and its form factor.

The material systems found in commercially-available RIIDs are either scintillators or semiconductors. The most prevalent material in DoD RIIDs is sodium iodide (NaI), a scintillator. It is prevalent because it is technologically mature – which enables the reliable production of high-quality crystals at reasonable cost and performance. The drawback of NaI is its energy resolution (~7%) which presents challenges when making identifications in complex environments. Cerium-doped lanthanum bromide (LaBr3:Ce) is a scintillator with better energy resolution (~4%) than NaI, but it costs twice as much[2]. The 'gold standard' for gamma spectrometry is high-purity germanium (HPGe), a semiconductor, due to its excellent energy resolution (<0.05%). But the benefit of improved technical performance is offset by much higher lifecycle costs for a system – the material is inherently expensive to produce at high quality and the small band gap of HPGe requires it to be kept at cryogenic temperatures (-180° C) during operation[3].

To provide the best combination of capability and cost, the Defense community has developed materials which fall somewhere in the middle – with technical performance approaching semiconductors (HPGe) at a price closer to scintillators (NaI, LaBr, CsI). The paragon of these efforts cadmium zinc telluride (CZT) – a semiconductor with energy resolution better than 3% (some results are approaching 1%) which is operable at room temperature. Continuous efforts to improve the quality of CZT have succeeded, but the cost to produce the material has remained sufficiently high that it has not been broadly incorporated into high-performing RIIDs at a cost comparable to scintillators.

ARMY - 15

At the same time, the body of knowledge surrounding several other materials, for example [4, 5], is sufficient to acknowledge that they offer advantages to the Warfighter over current commercially-available materials. The maturity of the methods necessary to produce spectroscopic-grade specimens of these other materials and incorporate them into gamma spectroscopy systems at costs and scales advantageous to the Defense community remains low. Demonstrations of new and/or improved methods for producing these advanced non-CZT materials in large volumes, at consistently high quality, and acceptable growth rates are sought.

If producibility hurdles can be overcome for new or emerging materials, they should yield radioisotope identification detectors (RIIDs) that affordably improve the performance of the warfighter.

PHASE I: Identify and examine innovative approaches for producing a single specimen of a material suitable for gamma spectrometry in a hand-held sensor format. The approach/process should be able to produce material in sufficient volume and quality to yield a detector crystal whose utilization presents no inherent environmental, health, or safety hazard to the operator, a physical envelope comparable to commercially-available radiation detection materials, relative efficiency[6] that is at least 33%, energy resolution is below 3%, and production cost is comparable to commercially-available NaI.

Responsive proposals should clearly describe the proposed approach to producing RIIDs material(s), describe and compare the advantages of the proposed approach and resultant material(s) including cost/benefit, address how the proposed material is superior to those currently used in commercially-available gamma spectrometers, include discussion of prior efforts producing the material(s), problems encountered in producing and integrating material into a gamma spectrometry system, and how the proposed approach could reliably overcome the difficulties, and a path to commercialization.

Develop and demonstrate a process flow concept, produce a sample of the material that can be tested, produce supporting documentation with preliminary test data that establishes cost and performance baselines that will mitigate risk for a potential Phase II effort.

PHASE II: Develop and validate the production process from Phase I to demonstrate yield of sufficient detector material at costs and sizes relevant to the Defense community such that the material could be incorporated into systems which are deployed in the field. Integrate the produced material into four (4) prototype RIID detectors for delivery to the Government.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: If Phase II were successful, the technology developed under this topic would be ready to enable the Warfighter to better accomplish their relevant missions. It would simultaneously allow the radiation detection needs for other groups beyond DoD, both public and private, to be met more affordably without requiring a decrease in performance.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Dual-use markets are anticipated from Department of Homeland Defense, First Responders, Civil Support Teams, Customs and Border Patrol, and Industrial HAZMAT teams.

REFERENCES:1. (Ref. 1 was removed by TPOC on 9/22/17.)

2. Brian D Milbrath, Bethany J Choate, Jim E Fast, Walter K Hensley, Richard T Kouzes, and John E Schweppe. 2007. “Comparison of LaBr3:Ce and NaI(Tl) Scintillators for Radio-Isotope Identification Devices.” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research. Section A, Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, 572(2):774-784 572 (2). United States. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2006.12.003. http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-15831.pdf

3. Sean Stave, Germanium Detectors in Homeland Security at PNNL. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 606 (2015) http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/606/1/012018/pdf

4. Henry Chen; Joo-Soo Kim; Proyanthi Amarasinghe; Withold Palosz; Feng Jin, et al. "Novel semiconductor radiation detector based on mercurous halides," Proc. SPIE 9593, Hard X-Ray, Gamma-Ray, and Neutron Detector

ARMY - 16

Physics XVII, 95930G (August 26, 2015); doi:10.1117/12.2188448; http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2188448.

5. Utpal N. Roy, Aleksey E. Bolotnikov, Giuseppe S. Camarda, Yonggang Cui, Rubi Gul, Anwar Hossain, Ryan Tappero, Ge Yang, Ralph B. James, “Nuclear Weapons and Material Security (WMS) Team Program Review WMS2013 CdTeSe Crystals for Gamma-Ray Detectors.”

6. Hastings A. Smith Jr. and Marcia Lucas, “Chapter 3 - Gamma-Ray Detectors”, NUREG/CR-5550 Passive Nondestructive Assay of Nuclear Materials, 1991.

KEYWORDS: Gamma, Spectrometry, Spectroscopy, Gamma Spec, Radiation Detection, Radiological Isotope Identification Device (RIID), Identification, Manufacturing materials

A17-139 TITLE: Unmanned Systems Teaming for Semi-Autonomous Casualty Extraction

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Biomedical

OBJECTIVE: Develop a capability to enable emerging mobile robotic platforms to function as a team to locate, assess, and extract a casualty back to a safe location for medical treatment and further evacuation from difficult terrain and hazardous environments.

DESCRIPTION: The Army and Marine Corps are developing concepts and strategies for future ground combat operations in the 2025-2040 timeframe that require highly capable and dispersed units to leverage Manned-Unmanned Teaming capabilities to penetrate high risk-areas while conducting Distributed Operations missions [1]. The “Joint Concept for Robotics and Autonomous Systems” further speaks to the increased role of Robotics and Autonomous Systems (RAS) in the future battlefield, predicting that greater levels of autonomy will allow RAS to “evolve from tools for basic tasks into team members capable of coordinating and collaborating across domains and Services” [2]. Future RAS are likely to provide multi-mission functionality, and could be leveraged for medical missions including casualty extraction in man-denied environments, reducing the risk of injury to medics and other personnel during casualty extraction attempts in high-threat areas. RAS systems capable of casualty extraction would also provide standoff protection for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives (CBRNE) threats and to aid in mortuary affairs operations (i.e. extraction of deceased personnel) in hazardous environments.

An individual common-use mobile robotic platform is unlikely to be able to perform all the required tasks for a semi-autonomous casualty extraction mission. However, a team of small mobile robots could team up to collaboratively perform the required tasks of locating, assessing, and extracting a casualty, with a human in the loop for supervision and high-level commands. DARPA has been working on developing robot swarming capabilities for both ground and air unmanned systems (UMS) where a large number of UMS come together upon command, or as result of semi-autonomous or autonomous mission analysis, to achieve a common objective. The goal of this topic is to develop the capability for a swarm of future common-use mobile unmanned platforms (ground and/or air), perhaps equipped with common-use end-effector manipulators or grippers, and/or so-called soft robotics technologies, to team-up and synchronize their movements to perform a casualty extraction mission. This may involve self-assembly by a swarm of small robots into a larger UMS capable of executing a casualty extraction mission. Methods for real-time communication and processing need to be developed to enable synchronization between RAS elements. The development a unique robotic platform or unique end effector(s) for casualty extraction is not the intent of this effort, but rather, the intent is to develop the software to enable a secondary use for existing or emerging small multi-purpose Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs), and/or Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) to self-assemble to perform the cognitive and physical tasks required to extract a wounded casualty to a safe location where a combat medic can perform stabilizing care and initiate further evacuation. The Advanced Explosive Ordinance Disposal Robotics System (AEODRS) [3], the Man-Transportable Robotics System (MTRS), Inc. 2 [4], and the Common Robotic System – Individual (CRS-I) [5], are examples of future mobile robotic platforms that could be leveraged for this capability. Innovative solutions which utilize other types of common mobile robotic platforms not mentioned above are also encouraged.

The desired outcome of this research effort is to demonstrate the capability of two or more mobile robotic platforms

ARMY - 17

to effectively communicate and coordinate to collaboratively conduct a casualty extraction mission under the control of a single human operator; this will require significant autonomy of the RAS to be able to perform these tasks in timely manner. The ability to easily integrate with future mobile robotics platforms is an important element of this capability, therefore, use of open architectures and compliance with existing interoperability standards is required. To further promote cross-platform interoperability, at least one robotic platform that was not developed in-house must be used as part of the proposed system. Proposers should use the Army UGV Interoperability Profiles (UGV IOP) for guidance to facilitate integration with future Army RAS platforms.

PHASE I: Design a concept for a swarm of multiple mobile robotic platforms to collaboratively conduct a casualty extraction mission. The scope of the casualty extraction mission should include 1) identifying/locating the casualty, 2) navigating to the casualty location, 3) self-assembling as required in order to execute casualty extraction, 4) securing the casualty for transport (e.g. using a standard litter) and 5) collaboratively transporting to a safe location defined by the human operator. Identify concepts and methods that will allow for synchronization of movements and information sharing between and among the RAS elements. The proposer shall identify concepts and methods that will allow the robotic elements to operate semi-autonomously such that a single human operator can provide high-level tasking of the RAS team to allow the mission to be executed in a timely manner. Develop an initial concept design and model key elements to conceptually demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed approach. Based on Phase I research, develop a Phase II proposal and refine the commercialization plan contained in the Phase I proposal.

RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMAL OR HUMAN SUBJECTS: The SBIR Program discourages offerors from proposing to conduct Human or Animal Subject Research during Phase 1 due to the significant lead time required to prepare the documentation and obtain approval, which will delay the Phase 1 award.

All research involving human subjects (to include use of human biological specimens and human data) and animals, shall comply with the applicable federal and state laws and agency policy/guidelines for human subject and animal protection.

Research involving the use of human subjects may not begin until the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command's Office of Research Protections, Human Research Protections Office (HRPO) approves the protocol. Written approval to begin research or subcontract for the use of human subjects under the applicable protocol proposed for an award will be issued from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, HRPO, under separate letter to the Contractor.

Non-compliance with any provision may result in withholding of funds and or the termination of the award.

PHASE II: Conceptually demonstrate the capability of a single human operator to orchestrate a casualty extraction mission using a swarm of ground and/or air RAS platforms by developing a prototype system based on the Phase I initial concept design. Test, evaluate, and demonstrate the Phase II prototype in an operationally-relevant environment. The RAS system should be prototyped, in both hardware and software, as a modular system consisting of several (but at least two) mobile robots. The prototype should demonstrate the capability of the RAS elements to synchronize movements in real-time through short-range communications, demonstrating the ability of the RAS team to move together without long-range communications to a remote operator. The proposer will identify concepts and methods that will allow the robotic elements to operate semi-autonomously such that a single human operator can provide high-level tasking of the RAS team in order to execute the mission in a timely manner. Based on Phase II research, refine the commercialization plan contained in the Phase II proposal.

The use of existing mobile robotic platforms, manipulators, and sensor payloads is encouraged for the prototype system to the degree that is possible. The proposer will be responsible for acquiring and/or developing the components of the prototype system; no GFE will be provided. The RAS extraction system should demonstrate robustness to different types of terrain, varying casualty poses, and variation in Soldier height and body-type. Interoperability of the systems shall be addressed by detailed documentation of the required software and hardware interfaces and by developing a future integration plan with emerging multi-use mobile robotic systems.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Incorporate system improvements informed by the Phase II evaluation results and further develop the RAS swarm/teaming capabilities to mature the Technical Readiness Level (TRL) of the system, with a target of TRL 6. Demonstrate the application of this RAS teaming capability to provide standoff casualty extraction in varying terrain and operational environments. Execute system evaluation in a suitable

ARMY - 18

operational environment (e.g. Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD), Joint Capability Technology Demonstration (JCTD), Marine Corps Limited Objective Experiment (LOE), Army Network Integration Exercise (NIE), etc.). Present the prototype project, as a candidate for fielding, to applicable Army, Navy/Marine Corps, Air Force, Cost Guard, Department of Defense, Program Managers. Examples of emerging Army robotic ground mobility platforms that could leverage this technology include the Advanced Explosive Ordinance Disposal Robotics System (AEODRS), the Man-Transportable Robotics System (MTRS), and the Common Robotic System – Individual (CRS-I), however cross-domain and Joint applications should also be considered. Once validated conceptually and technically, the dual use applications of this technology are likely to be significant in both civilian emergency services and other military operations, and thus enable commercialization according to the plan outlined in the Phase II proposal. The technology is especially suited for applications in which standoff interaction with soldiers or civilians is of paramount importance, e.g. environments with CBRNE exposure threats. While the primary intended use for this system is for stand-off casualty extraction on the battlefield, an alternate use could be for humanitarian disaster relief missions involving robot-assisted search and rescue in hazardous environments, for example, during disease outbreaks or nuclear disasters. The technology and methods developed to allow small mobile robots to effectively coordinate as teammates extends the capability of existing RAS platforms allowing them to accomplish tasks through teaming that they would otherwise not be capable of individually. This has general applicability to other mission areas, e.g. explosive ordinance disposal, logistics, etc., in which RAS platforms are likely to be increasingly utilized to protect and extend the reach of the Warfighter.

REFERENCES:1. “United States Army-Marine Corps White Paper, Multi-Domain Battle: Combined Arms for the 21st Century”, 18 January 2017.

2. “Joint Concept for Robotic and Autonomous Systems”, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 24 October 2016

3. “Navy Presses On With Long-Delayed Bomb Disposal Robot Program” http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2016/March/Pages/NavyPressesOnWithLongDelayedBombDisposalRobotProgram.aspx. Accessed 6 Feb. 2017.

4. "Man Transportable Robot System (MTRS) Increment 2". USAASC. http://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/cs-css-man-transportable-robot-system-mtrs-increment-2/ Accessed 6 Feb. 2017.

5. "Common Robotic System – Individual (CRS(I))". USAASC. http://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/cs-css-common-robotic-system-individual-crsi/.Accessed 6 Feb. 2017.

KEYWORDS: Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Autonomy, Medical Robotics, Manned-Unmanned Teaming, Swarming, Casualty Extraction, Casualty Evacuation, Unmanned Systems, UAS, UGV, CASEVAC

A17-140 TITLE: Improved biomonitoring of toxicant exposures and health in the deployed environment using preserved blood.

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Biomedical

OBJECTIVE: Develop improved fieldable capabilities for the collection and preservation of blood samples for biomonitoring occupational and/or environmental exposures.

DESCRIPTION: At least since the Viet Nam conflict, it has been recognized that exposures to environmental and industrial chemicals during military operations can result in long term adverse health effects for Service members. Exposures to high levels of natural dust, smoke, and industrial pollution during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have re-emphasized the need for a comprehensive effort to capture exposure data for individuals. Capturing exposure data and understanding the impact of exposures on the individual is integral to the practice of personalized medicine and essential for improving public health risk assessments by eliminating exposure misclassification. A longitudinal set of blood samples collected on a regular basis and as needed on an incident-driven basis extending over a Service member’s career, could function as a biological medical record, documenting exposures and health

ARMY - 19

effects through the Service life cycle and into the veteran’s post-separation life.

The most direct method for assessing exposure and health is by using a biosample to analyze biomarkers of exposure and/or effect. Where the health effect of exposure is delayed and/or where the biological half-life of the exposure marker is short, timely collection is imperative. However, collecting and transporting biosamples under operational conditions can be challenging, and analysis in the field may be impossible.

Blood is a rich and well-understood source of xenobiotic and biological molecules that can serve as biomarkers of exposure and effect, and the sensitivity of methods for measuring a broad range of such molecules in blood has dramatically increased. Blood spots collected and dried on filter paper cards have been used for many years in drug development, newborn screening, therapeutic drug monitoring, and research. Analytes ranging from metal ions to complex biomolecules (proteins, RNA, DNA) are stable during storage and have been successfully recovered from dried blood spots (DBS). The cards are durable and have a low logistical footprint. However, sample collection using blood spot cards, particularly under field conditions, requires care to avoid sample contamination and possible infection. The spot must be well dried to stabilize the sample, which can be difficult in wet or humid environments. DBS use requires several components, the card itself, media for cleaning the collection site, a needle or lancet for puncturing the skin, and some means of protecting the card for transport and storage.

Proposals will address the following aspects: 1) improved materials or methods or platforms for collecting, preserving, and transporting blood specimens and 2) enhanced recovery of analytes. The specific collection platform, material, or approach should aim to simplify collection, reduce logistical burden, and improve analyte recovery in comparison with existing blood spot cards. Note that this topic, especially the Phase I investigations, does not require the use of patient-identified or disease-specific samples. Research may be performed using existing/exempt/synthetic samples, as appropriate for the proposed research and the performing institution. If an offeror plans for the platform or method to be used medical diagnostics, the offeror shall initiate contact with the FDA representatives and provide a clear plan on how FDA clearance will be obtained.

PHASE I: Provide an initial characterization of key aspects of the platform, method or material. Demonstrate potential for enhanced sample preservation, collection simplification, and recovery of critical analytes from preserved blood samples. Demonstrate quantitative results using conventional laboratory technology.

The approach must provide advantages in convenience and logistics over collecting samples on conventional blood spot media. The method must provide more rapid drying than conventional blood cards or not require air-drying for analyte stabilization. The method must show reduced potential for contamination and cross-contamination of blood specimens during and after collection. The method must be amenable to simplified collection procedures in comparison with conventional blood spot media.

Proposers are encouraged to demonstrate analyte recovery sufficient for analysis using partial preserved specimen samples. The approach should demonstrate enhanced analyte stability/recovery, and/or more facile processing of the dried or preserved sample. Initial analysis may be performed using existing/exempt/synthetic samples. Spike-in analyses are acceptable for Phase I demonstrations using xenobiotics (e.g., pesticides and dioxins), high quality RNA, and moderate abundance serum proteins.

RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMAL OR HUMAN SUBJECTS: The SBIR Program discourages offerors from proposing to conduct Human or Animal Subject Research during Phase I due to the significant lead time required to prepare the documentation and obtain approval, which will delay the Phase I award.

All research involving human subjects (to include use of human biological specimens and human data) and animals, shall comply with the applicable federal and state laws and agency policy/guidelines for human subject and animal protection.

Research involving the use of human subjects may not begin until the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command's Office of Research Protections, Human Research Protections Office (HRPO) approves the protocol. Written approval to begin research or subcontract for the use of human subjects under the applicable protocol proposed for an award will be issued from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, HRPO, under separate letter to the Contractor.

ARMY - 20

Non-compliance with any provision may result in withholding of funds and or the termination of the award.

PHASE II: 1) Demonstrate incorporation of the new approach/material into dried or preserved sample absorptive platforms. Demonstrate significant improvement in platform performance in comparison with conventional blood spot cards, including drying time/stabilization time, ease of use, stability, and resistance to contamination and cross-contamination. Evaluate shelf-life. Six month stability testing of preserved blood specimen samples on the new materials and blank preservation material itself should be initiated within the two-year performance period, and testing plans must be developed.

2) Validate feasibility of the sample recovery method developed in Phase I with a practical protocol. Provide a detailed plan for integrating the proposed method for processing and sample analysis post-collection. Demonstrate quantitative recovery of analytes that are currently challenging to assay due to low concentration in the blood (e.g., aM-pM) or high degradation rates in comparison with conventional blood spot cards. Spike in analysis is acceptable for demonstrating limits of detection. Analyses should employ human blood, but it need not be linked to patient identifiers.

Show quantitative analyte recovery using standard detection methods for a range of analytes including but not limited to toxic metals, small molecule metabolites, xenobiotic toxicants, and biological macromolecules. The platform should provide reliable measures of high quality low to moderate abundance serum proteins, and mRNAs. Demonstration xenobiotics should be selected from the CDC National Report on Human Environmental Chemicals or from the Biomonitoring California database (http://www.biomonitoring.ca.gov/). To ensure maximum usefulness of the product, proposers are encouraged to consider but are not restricted to methods and technologies compatible with Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA)-waived analysis, good laboratory practices (GLP), and good manufacturing practice (GMP) procedures

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: During military operations, Service members operate under conditions where it may be impossible to foresee the type or extent of inadvertent or deliberate hazardous exposures. At present, it is generally not feasible to collect and archive specimens for exposure biomonitoring on an incident-driven basis during operations. Ready commercial availability of materiel for collecting and preserving blood samples would permit improved long-term health risk assessment based on both incident-driven and scheduled sample collection when linked to the Service member’s electronic health and exposure record. Such biosamples would also enhance epidemiological exposure reconstruction and permit the compensation of Service members and veterans based on validated exposure data rather than on presumption.

An additional potential market is first responders (fire fighters, hazmat, police, and emergency medical personnel) who can face similar mission-driven challenges. Firefighters in particular are known to be at risk for pulmonary and systemic disorders resulting from toxic exposures. Moreover, it is now recognized that an individual’s life-time health risks are based, in significant measure, on the aggregate exposures he/she has experienced (the individual “exposome”). Actionable responses to the realized and potential effects of exposure require an inexpensive, stable, simple method for capturing and archiving key exposure and health data throughout life. Hence there is an increasing interest in capturing overall exposure data for both individual medical purposes and for evaluating health risk for the general population, currently for research purposes (e.g., CDC’s NHANES program), but also for medical and public health practice in the future. Improved biomonitoring has the potential to provide increased understanding of the consequences of exposure and the opportunity to prevent or control the adverse health consequences of exposure for both military personnel and civilians.

REFERENCES:1. Christophe P. Stove, Ann-Sofie M.E. Ingels, Pieter M.M. De Kesel and Willy E. Lambert, Dried blood spots in toxicology: From the cradle to the grave? 2012 Critical Reviews in Toxicology 42:230-243 (available in manuscript from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221845739_Dried_blood_spots_in_toxicology_From_the_cradle_to_the_grave)

2. The Use of Dried Blood Spot Sampling in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project 2009 Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 64B (Suppl 1) i131-i136.

ARMY - 21

3. Stuart A. Batterman, Sergey Chernyak andFeng-ChiaoSu, Measurement And Comparison Of Organic Compound Concentrations In Plasma, Whole Blood, And Dried Blood Spot Samples 2016 Frontiers in Genetics, 7:64.

4. Kristine K. Dennis, Elizabeth Marder, David M. Balshaw, Yuxia Cui, Michael A. Lynes, Gary J. Patti, Stephen M. Rappaport, Daniel T. Shaughnessy, Martine Vrijheid, and Dana Boyd Barr, Biomonitoring in the Era of the Exposome 2016 Environmental Health Perspectives, epublished ahead of print July 6, 2016.

5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, https://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/index.html

KEYWORDS: Biomonitoring, exposure, dried blood spots, biomeasures, diagnostics, plasma

A17-141 TITLE: Gunner Primary Sight (GPS) Shock Isolator

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Materials/Processes

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

OBJECTIVE: Develop a material and structural solution designed to be integrated onto the M1A2 Abrams tank and isolate the Abrams Gunner Primary Sight (GPS) system from the turret. The isolator shall reduce MIL-STD-810G ballistic shock inputs in all 3 axes, to levels which allow various optical vision systems to continue functioning. This problem can be solved by leveraging structural and material solutions to dampen the shock input to the sights system by the turret. It’s critical that the proposed isolator shall take into account secondary effects on that of boresight alignment/retention, and stabilization both prior to and after a ballistic shock. The successful isolator design concept shall not introduce resonances that would amplify input shock and vibration levels. It should be noted that while the isolator may grow the GPS in the vertical direction, there should be no structural modifications to the current turret, with the present GPS mounting bolt pattern being utilized.

DESCRIPTION: As currently designed the Abrams GPS is hard mounted to the turret so as to minimize spatial movement and maintain the GPS’ angular relationship with the turret and other hardware mounted within the turret. This mounting strategy is intended to provide improved capability as it relates to locating and hitting targets. However, this strategy also allows shock impulses to be transmitted to hardware within the GPS with little attenuation. As a result of advancements in technology and materials it’s the intent of the Abrams office to determine an alternative means of mounting the GPS so as to maintain current capabilities while improving the survivability of the sight system (GPS) when subjected to a ballistic shock event. In order to reduce the number of modifications to other turret systems/hardware as a result of integrating the isolator, there is a maximum height constraint of 4 inches (T), with a design objective for the isolator to add 0 inches of height (O) to the Abrams turret. The described Threshold and Objective height constraints are measured from the current mounting location for the GPS on the turret roof. The Threshold defined maximum height of 4 inches allocated to the shock isolator will not have an effect on transportability given the height of other components mounted to the Abrams turret. Currently the secondary sight on the tank, CITV, has an isolator which provides this ballistic protection capability to the Commanders sight. While technology challenging, this integrated design has proven that fielded solutions exist. The challenge moving forward is the two sights are structurally different and therefore a common solution is not possible.

PHASE I: Demonstrate feasibility of an isolator concept by means of modeling and simulation tools. For this analysis, the Government will provide a GPS model with appropriate mass and material properties. In addition to a reduction in ballistic shock, any analysis should also include the effect the isolator would have on the operation of the GPS due to vibration in the tanks operational environment. Success in Phase I would be to show a reduction in shock loading to the GPS as a result of the Abrams turret (to include shock isolator) being subjected to the Government defined MIL-STD-810G ballistic shock (an SRS plot can be provided if needed). Shock reduction to

ARMY - 22

the GPS as a result of the isolator should be less than or equal to the shock profile defined as 200G 0.5ms half sine (an SRS plot can be provided if needed). An assessment for how easily the proposed isolator can be manufactured shall be delivered in this phase.

PHASE II: Design and build the prototype isolator for integration onto an Abrams M1A2 SEPv2 or M1A2 SEP V3. This should include a Bill of Materials that identifies if the parts are “off the shelf “custom made and so on. The delivered prototype must be suitable for testing at an Army facility by technical personnel. As noted in Phase I, success is achieved when the Abrams turret (with isolator and GPS installed) is subjected to a live fire test event and the isolator is able to reduce the shock input on the GPS to a value less than or equal to 200G 0.5ms sine wave. If required, clear installation and operational manuals shall be submitted but no specific military format. During this phase, the Army expects to work closely to clarify mission integration requirements appropriate for the initial prototype maturity.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Final solution is an isolator designed for the Abrams GPS which maintains current capabilities of the sight system while also improving survivability of the sight systems after a ballistic shock. The Army can integrate the technology solution developed under this SBIR into the family of Abrams vehicles, Army and Marines, given the commonality of the GPS structure to all variants.

REFERENCES:1. MIL-STD-810G, Department of Defense Test Method Standard for Environmental Engineering Considerations and Laboratory Tests" (PDF). United States Department of Defense. 31 Oct 2008.

2. Walton, W. Scott, “Ballistic Shock Simulation Techniques for Testing Armored Vehicle Components,” Proceedings of the 64th, Shock and Vibration Symposium, Volume I, October 1993, pp. 237-246. Shock & Vibration Information Analysis Center (SAVIAC), Three Chopt Rd. (Suite 110), Richmond, VA 23229.

3. Walton, W. Scott and Joseph Bucci, “The Rationale for Shock Specification and Shock Testing of Armored Ground Combat Vehicles,” Proceedings of the 65th Shock and Vibration Symposium, Volume I, October 1994, pp. 285-293. Shock & Vibration Information Analysis Center (SAVIAC), Three Chopt Rd. (Suite 110), Richmond, VA 23229.

4. Egbert, Herbert W. “The History and Rationale of MIL-STD-810,” February 2005; Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology, Arlington Place One, 2340 S. Arlington Heights Road, Suite 100, Arlington Heights, IL 60005-4516.

5. The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their country of origin, and what tasks each would accomplish in the statement of work in accordance with section 3.5.b(7) of the solicitation.

KEYWORDS: Abrams, Gunner Primary Sight, GPS, Shock, Ballistic, Isolation, Isolator, Sights, Boresight, Survivability

A17-142 TITLE: Optical Character Recognition (OCR) Automated Document Pre-processing Software

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Electronics, Sensors

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

ARMY - 23

OBJECTIVE: Develop Optical Character Recognition (OCR) automated document pre-processing software that can be integrated into the US Army Machine Foreign Language Translation System (MFLTS) Software Architecture. Pre-processing software should provide automated document cleaning and correction for seamless OCR processing and machine translation (MT).

DESCRIPTION: Optical Character Recognition (OCR) is an identified key system attribute (KSA) for the Army Machine Foreign Language Translation System (MFLTS) Program. As stated in the MFLTS Requirements Definition Package (APR 2015): "The first step in text language translation of hard copy documents is to have an accurate rendition of the original text for translation. Degraded or noisy documents of the type encountered in the operational environment where MFLTS will be used make character recognition difficult for OCR software. Degraded or noisy documents slow down the OCR process. Therefore, MFLTS must remove noise and improve the appearance of documents for high OCR accuracy, which will speed up the document translation process and provide more precise translations." OCR supports the following primary Army Phase 3 task: Exploitation of hard copy documents as collected at checkpoints, entry control points, base security operations, detainee and internment operations, and site exploitation.

PD MFLTS partnered with CERDEC-I2WD to commission a performance study of commercial and GOTS OCR for Arabic script. This study was performed by Progeny Systems, and determined that none of the available products performed at the accuracy level required by PD MFLTS. This was particularly true for operationally-encountered documents that were not considered to be "clean," even though the products all incorporate limited image pre-processing. We anticipate that an advanced image pre-processing tool can sufficiently "clean-up" such documents to a degree that will allow the OCR products to transcribe the images at a higher level of accuracy. Also, an image pre-processing tool will apply to scripts other than Arabic, which will benefit PD MFLTS as it adds additional languages to its portfolio.

Therefore, OCR automated document pre-processing must remove noise and improve the appearance of documents for high OCR and MT accuracy. OCR automated document pre-processing software must provide the removal of flaws such as speckle, watermarks, paper creases, stains, small holes, rough edges, lines on the paper, and copier noise and streaks. OCR automated document pre-processing software must not change or degrade document formatting (e.g., font sizes and font formatting elements such as underline, italic, and bold).

PHASE I: Develop prototype software for an initial two writing systems. Initial writing systems are English and Arabic. Demonstrate prototype software on a variety of degraded writing samples.Note: If document noise removal is tied to specific languages, proposers must clearly identify these ties.

All Phase I awards are required to identify a path forward for achieving compatibility / interoperability with MFLTS software architecture.

Phase I development will provide prototype software that could be used to externally pre-process document images sent to MFLTS to yield improved OCR accuracy.

PHASE II: Phase II development would result in a component that would be integrated into the MFLTS architecture to automatically or on-demand pre-process any document images ingested into MFLTS, improving the effectiveness of analysts using MFLTS to exploit captured foreign language documents.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Software becomes a fully licensed, supported, fielded component of the MFLTS program. Potential to expand language sets beyond initial set.

Phase III applications would include all commercial or military settings where there is a need to apply OCR to documents in less than pristine condition. (E.g., scans of documents post fire / flood, historical documents / scrolls)

REFERENCES:1. Parker, Jon, Ophir Frieder, and Gideon Frieder. "Automatic Enhancement and Binarization of Degraded Document Images." In Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR), 2013 International Conference on, IEEE, (2013).

ARMY - 24

2. Parker, Jon, Ophir Frieder, and Gideon Frieder. " Robust Binarization of Degraded Document Images Using Heuristics." In Proceedings of Document Recognition and Retrieval XXI, (2014).

3. Yasser Alginahi (2010). Preprocessing Techniques in Character Recognition, Character Recognition, Minoru Mori (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-307-105-3, InTech, Available from: Caution-http://www.intechopen.com/books/characterrecognition/preprocessing-techniques-in-character-recognition

KEYWORDS: optical character recognition, automated pre-processing, image recognition

A17-143 TITLE: Near Real-time LIDAR Processing and Exploitation Algorithms

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Electronics, Sensors

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

OBJECTIVE: Design and develop the algorithms needed to perform onboard Automated Feature Extraction (AFE) and/or aided target recognition (AiTR) on Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) data.

DESCRIPTION: The U.S. Army has an interest in automated exploitation algorithms for airborne LIDAR systems. These algorithms would take as input, airborne LIDAR data of a specified geographic area. The input data would contain a high-density point cloud created from numerous passes over the specified area. The area may be partially or completely concealed by foliage typical of northern deciduous summer forest environments. As output, the algorithms would produce compressed data products capable of being transmitted via a 2 Mbps data link. The products can take many forms, examples of such products are: Line-of-Communication delineation, void detection, evidence of man-made features, target detection, or 3D scene generation. Ideally, these algorithms would be equally applicable to data generated by any class of LIDAR system (e.g., linear-mode or Geiger-mode).

PHASE I: The Phase I goal is to demonstrate techniques and concepts that could be used to perform AFE or AiTR on LIDAR data. To support development of these algorithms the contractor must provide, or simulate, their own data. The Phase I proposal must describe the data to be used during this phase and give justification as to why this data is valid. The concepts and techniques to be leveraged in Phase II will be demonstrated to government Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). The demonstration of fully autonomous algorithms and real-time hardware is not required during this phase. However, the concepts to be developed in Phase II must be proven.

PHASE II: The Phase II goal is to develop autonomous algorithms for feature extraction and AiTR. Autonomous algorithms refer to the autonomous nature in which the sensor data is ingested and a data product created with no intervention and aiding by a user. The results of these algorithms can/will still require a user to validate the detected target or feature. The algorithms developed in this phase will be based off the approaches demonstrated in Phase I; however, they will be matured to the point of not needing manual interaction. During this phase, the algorithms shall be compared against data sets from a number of scenes and backgrounds to demonstrate performance and robustness to varying scenes and environments. Phase II will conclude with a report describing a detailed description of the algorithms developed, algorithm performance and robustness as well as recommendations for future improvements to the algorithm(s).

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The Phase III goal is to take the algorithms from a TRL 5 to a mature state such that they can be transitioned. This includes the system and algorithm improvements described in the Phase II report. These algorithms could then be transitioned to a number of ISR programs. The potential for commercial applications is considerable with such mission areas as search/rescue, mapping, and first responders for situational awareness.

REFERENCES:

ARMY - 25

1. Peter Cho et al., "Real-Time 3D Ladar Imaging," Lincoln Laboratory Journal, vol. 16, no. 1, 2006, pp. 147–164.

2. Alexandru N. Vasile et al., " Pose-Independent Automatic Target Detection and Recognition Using 3D Laser Radar Imagery," Lincoln Laboratory Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, 2005, pp. 61-78.

KEYWORDS: LIDAR, LADAR, automated feature extraction (AFE), Aided Target Recognition (AiTR), algorithm development, pattern recognition, ATR, ISR, event detection, onboard processing

A17-144 TITLE: Next Generation Encrypted Wireless Intercom Waveform

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Air Platform, Sensors

OBJECTIVE: Propose and develop next generation hardware and waveform for the Encrypted Aircraft Wireless Intercom System (EAWIS) capable of supporting both voice and data while meeting a new mission time requirement of eleven hours.

DESCRIPTION: The Medevac community has expressed interest in a wireless data bridge through the Blue Force Tracking (BFT) satellite network capable of sending live video of a patient to a doctor from an HH-60M Blackhawk helicopter. The existing EAWIS in the field can be linked to the BFT system but does not currently support a waveform capable of handling wireless data fast enough to support video. There are two existing manufacturers of encrypted wireless intercom systems certified for Type I communication. Neither company’s existing product can support data at a rate needed to broadcast live video. The new waveform must be resistant to Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) requirements per MIL-STD-461E, Radiated Susceptibility test RS-103, and Table 1A of MIL-STD-464 for deck operation on ships for rotary wing aircraft. The proposed system must support an operational time of 11 hours continuous audio transmittal assuming data packets of 1 TX, 7 RX, and 16 idle (~ 33%). The proposed system must perform one hour of continuous video (output only from user to BFT network) at a video resolution of 720p, 30 frames per second, with an output screen resolution of 1280x720 pixels within the eleven hours of continuous operation. The proposed system must support a USB input capable of providing the video resolution being broadcast by the medic. The system must allow a plug in module or a software upgrade to enable Type I encryption.

PHASE I: This effort shall generate a feasibility study which defines whether an existing or new waveform can be built to the data and voice requirement in the 2.4 Ghz bandwidth of supporting duplex voice and data transmittal in the EMI environment defined above. The deliverable for Phase I shall be a report of the findings, a prototype waveform in a simulation environment demonstrating waveform capability, projected size, weight and power consumption, and a recommendation for a path forward. Size and weight projection must demonstrate a successor system for the handheld and aircraft mounted components that are equal or less than current component size and weight with battery life supporting eleven hours of operation. A new performance specification shall be delivered which identifies all of the new capabilities of the EAWIS.

PHASE II: This effort shall build and produce a quantity of not more than four prototype hardware systems consisting of two handhelds and one base station per system capable of sending unencrypted voice and data through a proposed waveform compliant with the EMI environment requirements and prove out this capability in a lab. The hardware shall demonstrate the capability of inserting a Type I encryption capability. The hardware shall demonstrate simultaneous video and audio transmittal with a simulated encryption software to replicate processor load for one hour and continuous audio for ten hours for a total of eleven hours of operation. A new item specification for the EAWIS shall be delivered. A study shall be delivered outlining a program cost and schedule to introduce a Type I encryption module, certify the system for NSA Type I application, and bench test of the system for all performance requirements in the new item specification. All hardware developed under Phase II shall become the property of the US Government as a deliverable. Without the encryption module inserted, the system could easily be offered as a commercial product offering data and ICS capability to airline maintenance, fueling, or flight attendant duties.

ARMY - 26

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: A Type I encryption module which enables Over The Air key fill of the handheld radio will be introduced as a plug in capability to the design created and tested in the Phase II program. The new system will enter the certification process for Type I encryption at the National Security Agency (NSA), test to the requirements of the item specification, and be integrated on the H-47 and H-60 series helicopters for development and operational testing.

REFERENCES:1. Performance Specification for the Encryption Capable Aircraft Wireless Intercom System, document 780-LE68-PS02, revision G. (Uploaded in SITIS on 8/28/17)

KEYWORDS: wireless intercom, waveform, encryption, audio, video, over the air key

A17-145 TITLE: Advanced Human Type Target

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Human Systems

OBJECTIVE: Develop a Human Type Target (HTT) that increases realism (realistic portrayal of threat, threat escalation, and threat reduction), durability, and usability in the Urban Operations (UO) and Live Fire Training environment. An HTT is a stationary, physical, three dimensional, full body target designed to realistically portray a human being in the training domain.

DESCRIPTION: The primary use case of the HTT would be used in an urban training environment (Shoot Houses, Combined Arms Tactical Training Facilities (CACTFs), etc.). The HTTs however could be deployed in any of the live fire training ranges as defined within Training Circular 25-8. The current human type target system needs to be reset (manually by a person) into the standing position between each engagement. This is a labor and time intensive process given the number of targets utilized in the training environments. The current Stationary Infantry Targets (SITs) require too much area space in the training area to use effectively and safely. Finally, most 3 dimension human-type targets are one piece construction and fall straight down, in an unrealistically manner, when they are engaged.

The objectives of the research and development for the HTT are to:• Provide the means to reset to an initial condition from the engaged/dead position when commanded from the control system• Provide accurate hit detection in the lethal, non-lethal, and incapacitating zones• Provide the means to add or redefine the hit detection zones• Provide a system that can withstand the engagement of up to 5000 live fire rounds before needing major component replacement• Provide the means to define and begin from either a standing or sitting/crouching position, to change positions, and the provide a realistic body collapse from the position when engaged• Provide a means to replicate (provide visual cues of) an engagement in a non-lethal area

The target must incorporate programmable hits to kill, hit detection capabilities, and hit zone definition. The HTT must be capable of integrating into a control systems. The HTT will be used in a live fire environment and must detect and be durable enough to sustain hits from 5.56mm Ball, Special Effects Small Arms Marking System (SESAM), and Short Range Training Ammunition (SRTA). The HTT must be capable of surviving live fire environments and be constructed from non-ricocheting, non-fragmenting and repairable materials. The HTT should be designed to support a product line ideology, where multiple configurations would be available, depending on the use-case.

In addition, the HTT should be capable of the following:• Ability to be scenario driven• Provide two-way audio communication• Ability to add and implement Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System (MILES) hit sensing (not subject to live fire events)• Ability to add and implement aim-able MILES shoot back (not subject to live fire events)• Execute actions/reactions based on scenario controls (O)

ARMY - 27

• Incorporate the Non-Contact Hit Sensor (NCHS) technology (O)• Support evacuation of mannequin from area (O)• Support basic Combat Life Saver (CLS) actions (O)

Requirements with an (O) indicate reach objectives and capabilities desired to be integrated into the system research and development. These additional objective capabilities should help steer the design and technology to support future evolution and future research initiatives.

PHASE I: Study, research, and develop an architectural framework solution. Synchronization of work being completed by RDECOM, PM ITTS, PEO STRI and academia will be required. Determine feasibility of and conduct trade-off study (realism versus durability versus survivability) for material of target mannequin as well as falling and stand-up solutions.

PHASE II: Perform initial capability for hit detection capability by dividing mannequin into lethal and non-lethal zones. Integrate audio communication, MILES hit sensing and shoot back, data connection capabilities, threat awareness, reaction, and scenario capabilities. Continue hit detection capability by making shot detection accurate within one centimeter and enabling the ability to specify number of hits to kill.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Military application: Transition technology to the Army Program called Future Army System of Integrated Targets (FASIT).

Commercial applications include game play applications and law enforcement applications.

REFERENCES:1. CEHNC 1110-1-23 - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Design Guide for the Sustainable Range Program

2. Field Manual (FM) 3-06, Urban Operations

3. PRF-PT-00468 Performance Specification for the Future Army System of Integrated Targets (FASIT

4. Training Circular (TC) 25-8, Training Ranges

KEYWORDS: Human Type Target; Live Fire Training, Non-contact hit sensor; FASIT

A17-146 TITLE: In Vehicle Adjustable Torsion Bar Technologies

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Ground/Sea Vehicles

OBJECTIVE: Develop a novel new combat vehicle torsion bar system that can vary vehicle pitch, attitude, provide ride height management and wheel lockout capability for ground combat vehicles. This will allow combat vehicles to improve and/or regain lost mobility, provide additional tractive effort, increase ride quality and augment towing and recovery.

DESCRIPTION: Current U.S. tracked combat vehicles use a torsion bar based suspension system. These systems are proven and provide the needed vehicle spring force at a reasonable cost to the platform. However, torsion bar technology offers very little adjustment to compensate for increased vehicle weights and does not offer newer features such as height management found on more complex suspension systems such as External Suspension Units (ESU’s). There have been limited advances in torsion bar technology over the years. This SBIR will develop new possibilities to increase the capabilities of torsion bars such as (but not limited to) adjustable anchors and dual rate torsion bars, for use in combat vehicle applications. The ability of these new torsion bar technologies would increase off-road mobility over a larger range in platform weights. For example, adjustable torsion bar anchor points can control vehicle ride height and pitch to increase transportability options or adjust for terrain conditions during operational maneuvers. Likewise, either this adjustable anchor or dual rate torsion bar could also provide a partial or

ARMY - 28

full wheel lockout. Such technologies have previously existed only on ESU suspensions which offer these capabilities at increased cost and complexity. This SBIR will evaluate if novel, new torsion bar systems can be designed for ground combat vehicles which encapsulate the advantages of ESU’s characteristics, wheel lockout capability, as well as increased capability for ride height control. These new technologies would be specific only to the torsion bar system and would be independent of struts and damper modifications (i.e. out of scope) or damper type (traditional shock or rotary dampers). The addition of these features could be applied to the existing hull structures without major modifications as usually required by ESU technology.

PHASE I: Develop a preliminary design of an on the move in vehicle adjustable torsion bar. The range of adjustment should be enough to allow ride height adjustment utilizing the full range of suspension travel. The feasibility, methodology, package size, power requirement, and amount of adjustability would be developed under this first phase. When Phase I is complete, a low risk preliminary design using packaging constraints, vehicle characteristics/weight from a current heavy combat platform (i.e. Abrams, or M88) will be complete. A cost and performance benefit report with comparisons to the stock vehicle suspension and an ESU style suspension will also be completed, along with an assessment of the capability increase this system potentially offers.

PHASE II: Refine, fabricate and integrate the Phase I design onto a heavy combat platform. Perform a test and evaluation to determine the performance benefits these systems offer over the current torsion bar system.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Make any required modifications that was discovered in phase II and prepare for commercialization. This design will be vehicle specific and have a design and integration approach that has been approved by the specific vehicle PM.

REFERENCES:1. http://www.google.com/patents/US6779806

2. Value stream 1 of the 30 year strategy (references ESU's but are usually to expensive)https://www.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/451990.pdf

3. http://www.freeasestudyguides.com/torsion-bar-adjustment.html

4. http://www.sleeoffroad.com/installation/torsionbar_adjustment.pdf

KEYWORDS: Keywords: Torsion bar, anchor, Ride height control, improved towing, lift and carry, M88, Abrams, Bradley

ARMY - 29