Technology Today Research Issue 2

Transcription

Technology
Today
H ighlighting R aytheon ’ s T echnology
2010 ISSUE 2
Raytheon Research
Maintaining our technology edge
A Message From
Mark E. Russell
Vice President of Engineering, Technology and Mission Assurance
Fifty years ago, the world changed forever with a research breakthrough leading to the
first operating laser — a moment in Raytheon’s rich research heritage that transformed
modern life with countless applications from DVDs to supercomputing.
Today, research is as vital as ever to delivering new technologies and capabilities to
our customers. At Raytheon, research begins with a customer focus. What current and
emerging capabilities do our customers need? Where do technology gaps lie? Then we
focus our research and technology road maps to address these capabilities needs.
Raytheon funds and supports research at many different levels. We leverage the domain
knowledge of Raytheon’s world-class people with investments through program funding, contracted research and development, independent research and development, and
enterprise campaigns. In addition, we tap new external ideas and approaches through
partnerships, alliances, mergers and acquisitions.
Do you have an idea for an article?
We are always looking for ways to connect
with you — our Engineering, Technology and
Mission Assurance professionals. If you have an
article or an idea for an article regarding
technical achievements, customer solutions,
relationships, Mission Assurance, etc., send it
along. If your topic aligns with a future issue of
Technology Today or is appropriate for an online
article, we will be happy to consider it and will
contact you for more information.
Send your article ideas to techtodayeditor@
raytheon.com.
On the cover: Raytheon BBN Boomerang
shooter detection system. Photo courtesy
of Air Force Master Sgt. Andy Dunaway.
This Research issue of Technology Today shows how Raytheon is investing at all levels
of research to provide customers with mission critical capabilities. Articles discuss the
development of the once theoretical wide bandgap semiconductor gallium nitride, and
the Morphable Networked Micro-Architecture as the most adaptable processor ever
built for the U.S. Department of Defense. You will also learn about a new radiation
detection system for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and how we are using
virtual-reality technology for battlefield simulation training.
In this issue’s Leaders Corner, Bill Kiczuk, vice president and chief technology officer,
focuses on technology and innovation, two cornerstones for Raytheon’s success. Bill
works with leaders across the businesses to ensure our technology efforts are coordinated and integrated for both near term needs as well as for long term capabilities.
In the Events section we highlight our 2009 Excellence in Engineering and Technology
Award recipients, our Raytheon Six Sigma™ President’s Award winners and of those,
the winners of the CEO Award, plus Raytheon’s 38 newest certified architects. Our
Raytheon Certified Architect Program has garnered accreditation by the Open Group,
an international vendor- and technology-neutral consortium. Raytheon is the first in
the aerospace and defense industry to receive this recognition.
Best regards,
Mark E. Russell
2
2010 ISSUE 2 RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGY TODAY
View Technology Today online at:
www.raytheon.com/technology_today/current
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
Feature: Raytheon Research
Technology Today is published
by the Office of Engineering, Technology and Mission Assurance.
Vice President Mark E. Russell
Edition Editor
John Zolper
Managing Editor
Lee Ann Sousa
Senior Editors Donna Acott
Tom Georgon
Eve Hofert
Art Director Debra Graham
Photography Rob Carlson
Dan Plumpton
Overview: Maintaining Our Technology Edge
4
COSMOS: Next Generation, High-Performance, Mixed Signal Circuits
7
Raytheon's Trimode Imager for Nuclear Detection
10
Advances in Passive Short Wave Infrared Imaging
13
Adaptive Flight Control Systems
16
Computational Materials Engineering
18
GaN Microwave Amplifiers Come of Age
21
Monarch Meets Demanding, High-Stress Processing Requirements
24
YAG Solid State Laser Ceramics Breakthroughs
26
Partnering With Universities for Knowledge Technologies
29
Small Business Innovation Research
32
Virtual and Warfighter Training Counter IEDs
35
Raytheon BBN Technologies
37
Raytheon Joins DARPA's Focus Center Research Program
39
Leaders Corner:
Q&A With Bill Kiczuk
40
EYE on Technology
Knowledge Exploitation: Enabling IO
42
Next Generation RF Systems
43
Events
Excellence in Engineering and Technology Awards
46
2010 Mission Assurance Forum
48
Raytheon Six Sigma Awards
49
Publication Distribution Dolores Priest
Excellence in Operations and Quality Awards
50
Contributors
John Cacciatore
Kate Emerson
Raytheon’s Newest Certified Architects
Website Design
Joe Walch IV
People
51
Special Interest
Ultrathin Environmental and Electroactive Polymer Coatings
Patents
52
53
RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGY TODAY 2010 ISSUE 2
3
Feature
Raytheon Research Overview
Maintaining Our Technology Edge
T
echnology continues to be a key discriminator for Raytheon in delivering
value to our customers. Our technology research is done in a highly collaborative environment, with ideas coming internally and from partners in
academia, small businesses, large contractors and national laboratories. In today’s
global economy, research is no longer solely an internally focused activity, but a
highly dynamic, collaborative process where good ideas and novel solutions come
from many sources. The research enables upgrades to existing products as well as
the demonstration of completely new capabilities.
Raytheon combines engineering and scientific research — systematic studies to generate new knowledge or insights — with an emphasis on innovation.
Innovation can occur by applying existing knowledge in new ways to deliver novel
products, methods or services that add value to our customers. Innovation is part
of Raytheon’s culture of bringing forward new solutions that add value to all
parts of our business, with research innovation primarily focusing on technology
development.
This issue of Technology Today highlights some of Raytheon’s ongoing research
activities and demonstrates the breadth of our partnerships and research areas. The
figure on the following page illustrates the sources of new technology ideas and
technology funding that Raytheon brings to bear to solve customer problems and
maintain our technology edge.
Program-Funded Technology Development
One path for technology funding comes within the context of ongoing acquisition
programs, whereby our customer reaches out to Raytheon to help develop a key
technology, often in partnership with subcontractors, to address a program need.
An example is the work done under our radar, electronic warfare, communications
and missile programs. We have successfully developed and delivered technologies
such as advanced signal processing algorithms, new computing architectures, advanced monolithic microwave integrate circuits (MMICS), and new waveforms to
meet the system specifications for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Army, Navy,
Air Force and Intelligence community.
Contracted Research and Development
Technology research is also done under Contracted Research and Development
(CRAD) programs, which align with our core and growth markets. In response to
customer solicitations, Raytheon forms teams that maximize the value and impact
of the proposed solution. Depending on the nature of the research, Raytheon may
be the overall team leader or integrator, a primary subcontractor, or a mission transition partner. Often, over the course of a technology research program, the role
Raytheon takes on evolves to ensure that the developed capability becomes available for the end user. Several examples of ongoing CRAD programs are discussed
in this issue, including Standoff Radiation Detection System (SORDS), Compound
Semiconductors on Silicon (COSMOS), and Photon Counting Arrays (PCAR).
Photo courtesy of
Air Force Master Sgt. Andy Dunaway.
4
The SORDS program is developing a new concept based on a Trimode Imager (TMI)
for nuclear material detection with a team that brings together a small-company
expert in nuclear detection (Bubble Technologies, Inc.) with nuclear physicists from
Los Alamos National Lab; academic experts in imaging and detection from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Michigan; and the
Feature
Internal Research and Development
Sources of Technology
High
Degree of Customer Funding
Program
Funding
Contracted Research &
Development (CRAD)
Internal Research &
Development (IRAD)
Partnerships &
Alliances
Mergers &
Acquisitions
Low
systems engineering, design and testing expertise of Raytheon. The team is pioneering
the trimodal imager approach that exploits two imaging technologies, along with spatial information, to achieve unsurpassed
effectiveness in detecting nuclear and radiological threats while driving down false
alarm rates. This program is funded by the
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office of the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The COSMOS program, funded by the
Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency’s (DARPA) Microsystems Technology
Office, is changing the paradigm of how
mixed signal circuits (combined analog and
digital circuits such as analog-to-digital converts) are designed and built. The COSMOS
program is enabling close integration of
different semiconductor materials within
the same circuit to allow the designer to
pick the “best junction for the function,”
thereby improving circuit dynamic range,
bandwidth and power performance.
Raytheon is leading a multidisciplinary team to demonstrate manufacturable highperformance, mixed-signal circuits.
The DARPA-funded PCAR program extends
the capability of infrared (IR) imagers for
the warfighter by developing detectors
able to measure single photons in the short
wave IR (SWIR) band. The SWIR wavelength
band, nominally from 1 to 3 microns, has
gone largely unused because of inadequate
detectors and a lack of understanding of
the imaging phenomenology in this band.
The Raytheon PCAR research team has developed high speed, high sensitivity SWIR
sensors, along with low noise readout electronics and novel scene integration algorithms, to dramatically improve the
image dynamic range, allowing low-light
images to be resolved in the same scene as
a bright object.
Raytheon maintains an Internal Research
and Development (IRAD) program that includes projects executed within individual
businesses, as well as cross-company enterprise campaigns that are collaborations
between several Raytheon businesses.
The portfolio of IRAD projects addresses
improvement of existing products, as well
as disruptive new solutions, for our core
and growth markets. These projects bring
to bear the full capability of Raytheon’s
technologies to address the most pressing
customer needs. Raytheon’s IRAD investment is defined by developing technology
road maps and quantifying the technology
gaps that need to be addressed to deliver
capabilities that meet customers’ needs.
There are two articles in this issue covering
research primarily funded by IRAD. The first,
about computational materials, discusses leveraging advances in computational
power and understanding of quantum
physics to analyze potential replacement
materials for lead (Pb) in lead/tin solder
without compromising the electronic integrity of the solder. Taking this computational
approach has allowed a more rapid analysis
of material combinations than could be
done experimentally.
The second featured IRAD program describes how Raytheon is pulling from university research in adaptive control algorithms to develop robust, adaptive flight control algorithms that will enable
higher performance missiles or UAVs.
IRAD and CRAD Synergies for LongerTerm Initiatives
While the above discussion suggests research is done solely under either CRAD
or IRAD projects, many longer-term, highpayoff research efforts span many years and
benefit from the contributions of multiple
investments addressing specific aspects of a
technology. A noteworthy example of this is
presented in the article on the status of gallium nitride (GaN) microwave amplifiers.
Continued on page 6
5
Research Overview
Feature
Continued from page 5
For more than 30 years, the wide bandgap
semiconductor GaN has been theoretically
identified as ideal for producing high-powered, high-frequency transistors. However,
until the late 1990s, research on GaN was
largely limited to a few university research
groups and small companies, because the
quality of the material was insufficient to
support high-performance devices. The
article presents an overview of the history
of GaN electronics along with current work
that is preparing to insert GaN MMICs into
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) systems.
This research effort began at Raytheon in
2000 and has benefited from funding from
multiple agencies — including the Office of
Naval Research, the Missile Defense Agency
(formerly the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization) and DARPA — as well as significant IRAD investments from Raytheon to
address various aspects of the development.
Another example of a research effort that
spanned more than 10 years and required
several investments is presented in the article about the Monarch processor. This effort
— initially funded under a DoD study for a
high performance processing system, then
continued under IRAD investment before
winning support from DARPA under the
Polymorphic Computing program — demonstrates new records for microprocessor
performance and computational efficiency.
As discussed in the article, the Monarch chip
is now being leveraged for real-time data
analysis in DARPA’s Seismic and Acoustic
Vibration Imaging (SAVi) program.
investment in liquid crystal modulators to
demonstrate an optical phased array to realize an electronically steered, high-power laser
with adaptive optics for atmospheric correction. In the area of multifunction RF systems,
Raytheon is leveraging long-term investments
in beamsteering, laser-based frequency
sources and high-speed sampling to develop
ultra broadband systems that enable multifunction capabilities. This area is discussed
in more detail in the Eye on Technology article “Next-Generation RF Systems.”
Another example of partnering with a
small business is shown in the article
“The Convergence of Virtual Reality and
Warfighter Training to Counter Improvised
Explosive Devices.” This article discusses
research Raytheon has done with Motion
Reality, Inc., and BreakAway, Ltd., to
combine motion capture technology, simulation-based realism and battlefield domain
expertise that puts warfighters into a fully
immersive environment for training before
they deploy into a war zone.
Partnerships and Alliances with
Universities and Small Businesses
Mergers and Acquisitions
In all of its research, Raytheon actively partners with leading technologists to bring the
best minds to bear on problems. Raytheon
has active university research partnerships,
both through directed research projects and
through membership in university centers.
An example of our university partnerships
is presented in the article about Raytheon’s
collaborative work in the area of knowledge
technology, with the University of Texas
at Dallas and Penn State. The field of data
analysis has moved from searching data for
key terms to focusing on approaches that
extract knowledge — as opposed to data —
from large, often unrelated databases. In this context, knowledge refers to the association of multiple elements of a data
set to develop additional insights into meaning that could not be determined when the
individual data is considered alone.
A third example of the payoff of long-term
investment is presented in the article about
recent work on nanoparticle ceramics to
produce low-loss optical ceramic gain media
for slab lasers. The current work leverages
a long history of leading optical materials
research by this group and will enable more
efficient, high-power slab lasers.
Raytheon has also joined the DARPAsponsored Focused Research Center
Program (FCRP), a consortium of six
research centers and more than 40 universities formed to address critical challenges
in microelectronic technology and applications. As a member of the FCRP, Raytheon
receives royalty-free rights to intellectual
property generated under the program, gets
access to top engineering students, and
gains early insights into emerging research
areas that impact Raytheon systems.
Beyond the topics covered in feature articles
in this issue, Raytheon is also pursuing
several other longer-term research investments in high-power laser technology and
multifunction radio frequency (RF) systems. Under the DARPA-funded Adaptive
Photonic Phase-Locked Elements (APPLE)
program, Raytheon is leveraging a long-term
Similar to universities, small businesses
offer a wealth of novel technologies, and
Raytheon proactively engages with the
government’s Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR) program to find technologies that address our customers’ needs. The
article on the DoD SBIR program highlights
multiple SBIR success stories for Raytheon.
6
The final method of establishing technology capability is to acquire companies that
are pioneering new fields important to
Raytheon’s markets. Raytheon uses targeted
acquisitions to expand our technology capabilities in our core and growth markets.
Examples include acquisitions of several
cyber technology companies and the recent
acquisition of BBN Technologies. BBN’s
diverse portfolio encompasses a range of
technologies, including advanced networking, speech and language technologies,
information technologies, sensor systems
and cybersecurity. The history of innovation at BBN — from its start as a leader in
acoustics to seminal work on the Internet
and language translation — is discussed in
the article “Raytheon BBN Technologies:
Persistent Innovation.” A BBN accomplishment currently supporting warfighters in
the field is the sniper detection system,
Boomerang, shown mounted on the top of
a vehicle on the cover of this issue. The ultrasensitive directional microphones detect the
shock wave of a flying bullet, even when the
vehicle is moving, and are used to identify and
report the position of the shooter.
Summary
Raytheon continues to strengthen our
technology portfolio through leading-edge
research. The research leverages internal
expertise and external partnerships with
the best and brightest through multiple
mechanisms to bring the finest technology
forward for our customers. Using this broad
research approach, Raytheon is maintaining
its competitive edge as an innovative technology provider. •
John Zolper
Feature
COSMOS: A Path to Next-Generation,
High-Performance, Mixed Signal Circuits
R
aytheon’s research in Compound
Semiconductor Materials on Silicon
(COSMOS) will enable a new class of
high-performance mixed-signal integrated
circuits (ICs) that enhance the capabilities of
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) systems
through direct monolithic integration of
compound semiconductors — such as gallium arsenide (GaAs) and indium phosphide
(InP) — and silicon (Si) CMOS on a common, low-cost silicon substrate. Using COSMOS technology, Raytheon is designing
and fabricating high-speed, high dynamic
range, low-power dissipation converter circuits (analog to digital converters, or ADCs,
and digital to analog converters, or DACs)
with performance that cannot be achieved
with today’s technology.
The future of integrated circuits will include
the integration of high-performance III-V
electronic and/or opto-electronic devices
with standard Si CMOS. While traditional
hybrid approaches — such as wire bonded
or flip-chip multi-chip assemblies (see Figure 1) — may provide short-term solutions, the variability, losses and size of the
interconnects and the limitation in the
placement of III-V devices relative to CMOS
transistors limit the performance, utility,
size and cost benefits of these approaches.
A more attractive approach is the direct
integration of Si CMOS and III-V devices
on a common silicon substrate (Figure 1,
right). In this way, circuit performance can
be optimized by the strategic placement of
high-performance III-V devices adjacent to Si
CMOS transistors and cells, and the devices
and subcircuits can be interconnected using
standard semiconductor on-wafer interconnect processes.
Integrating III-V devices on silicon wafers
is not new. For example, in the 1980s and
1990s, there was considerable, although
unsuccessful, effort to “grow” GaAs devices
on silicon wafers. So what is new this time?
TFN Si CMOS TFN III-V
Multilayer Substrate
Today’s Hybrid Technology
“chip and wire” or flip chip
with thin film networks (TFNs)
TFN
Overcoming Technical Challenges
To address the many technical challenges
associated with the direct integration of
silicon CMOS and III-V devices on the same
wafer, Raytheon assembled a team of internationally recognized experts in the fields of materials/substrate engineering and advanced semiconductor devices.
The first challenge was the creation of
a substrate that is compatible with both
silicon and III-V device materials and fabrication processes. To address this challenge,
Raytheon worked with Eugene Fitzgerald
of the Materials Science Department of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
Continued on page 8
Revolutionary
developments
enable system
on a chip
Si Multilayer Interconnect
Si CMOS III-V Si CMOS
Si Substrate
III-V CMOS Integration
III-V devices embedded in a Si wafer
using III-V templates and standard
Si multilayer interconnects and processing
Figure 1. Traditional hybrid assembly (left) and direct monolithic integration of III-V devices
and silicon CMOS (right)
7
Feature
COSMOS
and Paradigm Research LLC, a world-renowned expert in semiconductor substrate
engineering. To facilitate integration of III-V
devices with silicon CMOS, Fitzgerald developed SOLES — silicon on lattice engineered
substrates. SOLES wafers, a variation of silicon on insulator (SOI) substrates commonly
used for the fabrication of silicon ICs, allow
for the fabrication of silicon devices on the
silicon surfaces and the direct growth and
fabrication of compound semiconductor
material (GaAs, InP) devices (high electron
mobility transistors, or HEMTs, and heterojunction bipolar transistors, or HBTs) on a
buried template layer (Figure 2). To a silicon
wafer fab, SOLES look like a standard silicon
or SOI wafer. The SOLES wafer technology
was transitioned from MIT to production at
Soitec in France, the world’s leading supplier of SOI wafers.
Si pmos
III-V Device
Compound Semiconductor Template Layer
Silicon
SOLES wafer
Si nmos
Figure 2. Schematic cross section of
COSMOS technology showing silicon CMOS
and III-V transistors on a silicon template
wafers (SOLES)
The second challenge was demonstrating
that the silicon CMOS fabricated on SOLES
performed the same as silicon CMOS on
native silicon substrates. For this task, the
team selected Raytheon’s 100mm silicon
fab at Raytheon Systems Limited (RSL)
in Glenrothes, Scotland. RSL successfully
modified its 1.2mm production silicon CMOS
process for compatibility with SOLES with
no discernable change in transistor properties. To further drive cost and performance
the process is being transitioned to 200mm
diameter wafers and 180nm CMOS at SVTC
in San Jose, Calif.
8
InP HBT
BT
InP HBT
Silicon CMOS
Silicon CMOS
5µm
Figure 3. SEM image of a completed InP HBT in close proximity to a Si CMOS transistor prior
to heterogeneous interconnect formation.
The third challenge was the selective growth
of III-V devices on SOLES. Raytheon’s
Advanced Semiconductor Material group,
leaders in advanced III-V epitaxial growth,
teamed with IQE in Bethlehem, Pa., the
world’s leading supplier of III-V epitaxial
material, to successfully demonstrate the
growth of both InP HBT and GaAs pHEMT
epitaxial material on SOLES. Key to this
success was Raytheon’s and IQE’s pioneering work in metamorphic buffer layer
technology, which enables the growth of
high-quality semiconductor materials on dissimilar substrates.
The final challenge was the fabrication
of high-performance compound semiconductor devices on SOLES and the
interconnection of these devices with the
silicon CMOS transistors. Here the team
has focused on two complementary device
technologies — InP HBTs for mixed signal
applications and GaAs pHEMTs for RF applications.
For the integration of InP HBTs, the team
leveraged Teledyne Scientific’s (Thousand
Oaks, Calif.) expertise in InP HBT transistors and circuits developed under DARPA’s
TFAST program to fabricate InP directly adjacent to Si CMOS transistors (Figure
3). The InP HBTs on SOLES exhibited performance that was comparable to InP
HBTs fabricated on native InP substrates.
Teledyne’s multilayer interconnect process,
developed for InP mixed-signal circuits, was
adapted for the creation of heterogeneous
interconnects between InP HBTs and silicon
CMOS with nearly 100 percent yield for
InP HBT — silicon CMOS spacing as small
as 2.5mm. The resulting device structure
and fabrication process are analogous to
a SiGe BiCMOS process where SiGe HBTs
are replaced with an InP HBTs, but with a
VDD
Silicon
PMOS
M1
M3
HBT
VBP
OUTN
INP
VBN
OUTP
InP
HBT
INN
PMOS
Silicon
PMOS
Silicon
NMOS
Silicon
PMOS
NMOS PMOS
InP HBT
InP HBT
Silicon
NMOS
VSS
Figure 4. Schematic (left), layout (center) and optical image (right) of differential amplifier
with output buffer and bias circuit. The differential amplifier met all of the DARPA COSMOS
Phase 1 Go/No-Go Metrics with first pass design success.
Feature
MODULATOR
RZCK
DAC
CALIBRATION DAC
DIGITAL CLOCK
1MHz
Digital
DECODE BUFFER
DECODE FF/CLK
DECODE MUX
INPUT BUFFER
Figure 5. Layout of a compact, low power dissipation (1.6W) high resolution (13 bit, > 78 dB
spur free dynamic range digital-to-analog converter designed using COSMOS technology.
The DAC contains on chip calibration circuitry and consists of > 1000 InP HBTs and >5,000
silicon NMOS and PMOS transistors. Total chip areas is < 12mm2. The DAC is the DARPA
COSMOS Phase 2 demonstration circuit and is currently being fabricated.
significant performance advantage due to
the superior speed, gain and high-frequency
performance, and higher operating voltage
of InP HBTs.
Companion efforts underway at Raytheon’s
MMIC foundry in Andover, Mass., have
demonstrated GaAs pHEMTs on SOLES, with
performance comparable to GaAs pHEMTs
fabricated on native GaAs substrates.
To demonstrate the viability of the COSMOS
technology, the team successfully designed
and fabricated a high-speed differential
amplifier, which consisted of silicon CMOS
current sources and an InP HBT differential
pair (Figure 4). The complete circuit (differential amplifier with bias circuit and output
buffer) contained over 100 heterogeneously
integrated InP HBTs and silicon CMOS transistors. The circuit met all of the DARPA
COSMOS Phase 1 Go/No-Go Milestones
with first pass design success. This circuit
is a building block for a low power dissipation (1.6W), high resolution (13 bit, greater
than 78 dB spur free dynamic range digitalto-analog converter (DAC) currently being
fabricated (Figure 5). The DAC, with its onchip calibration circuitry contains over 6,000
heterogeneously integrated InP HBT and
silicon CMOS transistors.
Addressing Next Steps
to integrate these mixed-signal converter
circuits with radio frequency transistors
(HEMTs and HBTs) to enable single chip
digital transceivers and dynamically reconfigurable circuits as well as compact circuit
elements for low-cost panel arrays.
The new class of high-performance mixedsignal circuits enabled by the COSMOS
technology will provide unprecedented
performance, and size advantage to current
and future RF systems, including: compact,
high dynamic range radars; broadband
communication systems; multi-beam communications for comm-on-the-move;
high-resolution synthetic aperture radars
(SAR) and inverse SAR; data links; active
missile seekers; active self-protect systems;
and multifunction unmanned air vehicle
sensors.
While the circuit results presented here are
for InP HBTs directly integrated onto the silicon substrate, the approach is equally applicable to other III-V electronic (e.g.,
GaAs pHEMTs or MHEMTs, GaN HEMTs)
and opto-electronic (e.g., photodiodes,
lasers - VSCLS) devices and opens the door
to a new class of highly integrated, highperformance, mixed-signal circuits. These
circuits will enhance the capabilities of
existing DoD systems, enable new system
architectures, and facilitate proliferation of
low-cost sensors and active electronically
scanned arrays for a wide range of DoD and U.S. Department of Homeland Security applications. •
Thomas E Kazior
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work is supported in part by the DARPA
COSMOS Program (Contract Number N0001407-C-0629). The author would like to thank Mark
Rosker (DARPA) and Harry Dietrich (ONR).
The COSMOS Phase 2 DAC is a building
block for other types of high-speed, high
dynamic range, low power dissipation converter circuits, including ADCs and direct
digital synthesizers (DDS). The next step is
9
Feature
Raytheon’s Trimode Imager for Nuclear Detection:
Merging Technologies to Defeat Radiological Threats
N
uclear or radiological terrorism is a
growing concern for U.S. national
security, driving a need for high
performance (high probability of detection
and low false alarm rate) standoff detectors
for nuclear material. Under the Standoff
Radiation Detection System (SORDS) program, Raytheon has developed a Trimode
Imager (TMI) that employs three simultaneous modalities — Compton imaging (CI),
code aperture (CA) imaging, and spatial
information from a non-imaging shadow
technology — in a wide field of view system to improve system performance, with
an emphasis on driving down the false
alarm rate. The research team included
Raytheon, national labs, small businesses
and universities. The system was designed
to detect nuclear or radiological threats by
enabling the rapid search of urban or suburban environments using a mobile threat
imaging system with unique discrimination
capabilities.
Detecting gamma rays from strategic
nuclear materials or radiological materials
is very difficult in a complex urban environment because of the natural background
and environmental sources of gamma
rays. To detect a threat (a point source of
radiation) in the presence of background
(a distributed source of radiation) in a large
field of view requires that the field of view
10 2010 ISSUE 2 RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGY TODAY
be pixilated to achieve a detectable signal
to noise. To identify a threat and eliminate
natural sources of radiation requires very
effective imaging for low and high energy
gamma rays. The CA imaging capability of
the TMI is very effective for lower energy
gamma rays, and the CI capability is very effective for higher energy gamma rays.
Two Technologies Merge for the First Time
The Raytheon TMI for the first time merges
these two imaging technologies to achieve
an unsurpassed effectiveness in defeating
nuclear and radiological threats. The nonimaging shadow technology utilizes the
shielding of the detectors by the superstructure of the truck and mounting hardware to
give the operator a rough idea of where in
the search area an increase in radioactivity
may be located.
The development of the Raytheon TMI
is the result of a collaboration composed of Raytheon, Los Alamos National
Laboratory (LANL), Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, University of Michigan, and
Bubble Technologies Inc. (BTI). The major
components of the TMI are shown with
their responsible organizations in Figure 1.
Technical and Program Management
RTN
Navigation/Orientation System
RTN
Coded Aperture
Imager
LANL/BTI
Compton Imager
LANL/BTI
Technical Advisory Committee
MIT-UMICH
Data
Acquisition
System
BTI
Data
Analysis
System
BTI/LANL/RTN
Digital Camera System
RTN
Data Visualization
Software
RTN
Shadow Imager
BTI
Modeling & Sim.
LANL
System Arch.
RTN
System Software
RTN
System Utilities
RTN
Figure 1. Trimode imager system and responsible organizations
System Transp.
RTN
Feature
The CA and CI designs are being headed
by LANL and BTI, respectively; the Shadow
imager is the responsibility of BTI. BTI is
also leading the development of the data
acquisition and data analysis systems. Data
visualization design and development is
headed by Raytheon. The digital camera system design and development is also headed
by Raytheon. Modeling and simulation of
the system is headed by LANL, which is also
in charge of the development of all imaging and analysis algorithms and how they
interact to yield a fused nuclear and visual
image with alarm protocols suitable for
display by the data visualization system. BTI
contributes to this analysis system with the
isotope identification algorithm. Raytheon
is responsible for overall system integration,
with company directorates leading design,
integration and test efforts associated with
system architecture, system software, system utilities (power, HVAC, lighting, etc.),
and vehicle transportation.
How the TMI Works
Figure 2 shows a rendition of an exploded
view of the TMI, with the TMI instrument
package mounted in a panel truck. The cutaway shows the two arrays that provide for
the TMI’s imaging capability. The front array
of square sodium iodide (NaI) detectors
serves as the mask for CA imaging and as
the first scattering center for the Compton
imaging. The back array of rectangular NaI
detectors is the location-sensitive plane
for both the coded and Compton imaging
modes. The location measurement is accomplished using the difference between
the amplitudes of the signals in the photomultiplier tubes on each end of the NaI
detectors. The energy measurement is accomplished from the sum.
The signals from the photomultiplier tubes
are collected by a data acquisition system in
the truck and then time-stamped, digitized
and labeled with additional orientation and
position information. These preprocessed
signals are fed into the data analysis system,
where the algorithms for constructing the
cabinet assembly and CI images operate,
seeking a point source of radiation in the
moving field of view (FOV) on an eventby-event basis. The isotope identification
detector (ID) algorithms operate in conjunction with the imaging algorithms to
determine if a point source in the FOV is a
threat and is presented on a display in the
cab of the truck.
An example of the data visualization system is shown in Figure 3 (next page). A
Cobalt-60 (Co-60) source inside the building
near the window is detected at 25 meters
with the TMI traveling at 30 mph. The nuclear images from the CA and the CI, shown
in the upper left of the figure, are fused
using an algorithm developed specially by
the Raytheon team to form a combined
nuclear image shown to the right.
Simultaneously, range data is used to determine that the point source is 25 meters
from the TMI, which in this example is
traveling at 30 mph. The combined nuclear
image is used in the isotope ID algorithm,
which in this case determines that the point
source is Co-60. The isotope ID spectrum is
shown in the figure, along with the color
code options for display. Co-60 is considered a threat. The color-coded crosshair
labeling this as a threat is overlaid on the
appropriate digital camera image determined from the geolocation and orientation
data and presented to the TMI operator.
The TMI user interface adds confidence
level, geolocation data, and alarm status
along with system health data.
Continued on page 12
Figure 2. Artist rendition of TMI system. CA and CI are housed in the back of a panel truck, along with the data acquisition system (not shown).
The detection image is color-coded to the nature of the threat, overlaid on a visual image, and presented on a display in the cab.
RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGY TODAY 2010 ISSUE 2 11
Feature
Trimode Imager
Development of a Unique Algorithm
COMPTON IMAGE
The TMI team has developed a unique algorithm for fusing the two nuclear
images. This fusion algorithm enables unexpected improvement in the performance
of the TMI instrument for both lower and
higher energy gammas.
Analysis has revealed a far richer role of
these two imaging modes, particularly when
their images are fused to form a common
nuclear image.
Equipped with validated simulations of imaging in the presence of background, and a
TMI system and an algorithm for fusing the
two nuclear images, the receiver operation
characteristics (ROC) for the active aperture
system can be evaluated. To calculate the
ROC, one takes a figure of merit (FOM)
that reveals the performance of the system
— the presence of a point source radiation
peak in the field of view. The operational
system will have further FOMs such as the
shape of the peak. This peak finding FOM
is a starting point. The ROC curves for three
radiation sources at 100 meters, with the TMI
moving at 30 mph, are shown in Figure 4.
The left plot is for Cesium-137 (Cs-137), the
center plot is for Co-60 and the right plot
for the H(n,γ) line at 2.23 MeV. All sources
are 1mCi in strength. For each ROC curve,
many hundreds of test cases were run with
backgrounds randomly varied. For each CA
and CI image, a simple peak finding routine
searched the FOV, resulting in true positives and false positives. The percentage
COMBINED NUCLEAR IMAGE
Isotope Identity of Combined Image
Isotope is Cobalt 60 with an assigned threat color of RED
Time Stamp [Gamma]
Conventional wisdom holds that CA imaging works well for low-energy gammas,
whereas Compton imaging works well for
high-energy gammas. In a conventional
CA system, the mask elements eventually
become transparent to higher and higher
energy gammas, thus defeating the utility
of the mask. In the TMI active mask system,
the elements of the mask detect the gammas that strike them. If the gammas are of
low energy, they are stopped in the mask
element and their energy measured. If the
gammas are of higher energy they will
Compton scatter in the first array and be
stopped in the back array. This enables the
Compton scattering imager to operate.
Color Codes:
Threat – Red
Suspect – Yellow
Medical – Blue
Industrial – Purple
NORM – Green
CODED APERATURE IMAGE
500
intrinsic
background noise
400
algorithmic
extraction
process
(fingerprint)
300
RANGE DATA = 25m
200
Co-60
100
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
OVERLAY TARGET IDENTIFIED
Energy [keV]
Figure 3. Sample data images from the CA and CA for a Co-60 source located within a building. The spectra shows the isotope ID spectrum used to determine the source as Co-60. The
color legend describes the represented radiation source overlaid on the image scene, as explained in Figure 2.
of true positives is plotted vertically and
the percentage of false positives is plotted
horizontally.
Results for the CI images are plotted in red,
CA results are plotted in blue, and results
for the fused image are plotted in green.
A random peak finding result would be
plotted as a diagonal line from the origin
to the upper right-hand corner; an ideal
result would be a step function rising from
the origin to the upper left-hand corner. In
the plot for Cs-137, the CI results shown in
red almost mimic this random result. This
behavior is not so surprising, given that CI
is not expected to do very well at lower
energies. The CA results shown in blue are
clearly better. However, the surprising thing
in the research is that even at these lower
energies, the hybrid image results shown in
green are better than either imaging mode
taken alone.
For higher energy gammas (Co-60), the CI
and CA have traded roles as the preferred
approach, as expected, and the hybrid
image results are almost the ideal step function. Moving higher in energy, the results
for H(n,γ) show the CA performance is
falling still further behind the CI, while the
hybrid image results are nearly ideal. These
results demonstrate analytically, for the first
time, the superiority of the TMI aperture system over CA or CI imaging systems alone.
This instrument is being developed for
the Standoff Radiation Detection System
(SORDS) program being conducted by
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO)
of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under contract HSHQDC08-C-00001. •
Michael Hynes
Figure 4. Receiver operating curves showing improved system performance when combining
the two signals
Feature
ENGINEERING PROFILE
Hector Reyes
Network Centric
Systems
NCS Texas
Chief Technologist
Hector Reyes currently serves as the
technical director
of Engineering and
chief technologist for Network
Centric Systems
(NCS) in Texas.
His primary responsibility is to provide technical insight and guidance to the programs in the
region. As chief technologist, Reyes manages the
regional technology portfolio and works with
product line teams to develop integrated technology solutions.
Specifically, Reyes works with NCS product
lines to develop innovative concepts for sensor
technologies (including active/passive electrooptical, infrared and laser); networked sensors;
and border and warfighter sighting systems. He
leads the engineering organization in developing a technical vision, product road maps, and
a plan to transition to an integrated networked
sensors systems provider for the military and
civil customers.
Reyes began his career in a co-op scholarship
program at Southern Methodist University.
His first job was weighing parts for the forward looking infrared (FLIR) targeting system
for the F-18 Hornet. “I’ve been working on
electro-optic systems in roles of increasing
responsibility ever since,” he said.
Today, Reyes is convinced he has found his
ideal position. “Over my career, I’ve been in the
cockpit of fighters and gunships and in the turret of armored vehicles and tanks,” said Reyes.
“I’ve fired the gun on the Abrams Tank and
flown anti-tank missiles down range. Today, I
ensure our warfighter’s needs are being met by
working to advance our technology. I have my
dream job.”
Counting Photons: Advances in Passive Short Wave Infrared Imaging
S
hort Wave Infrared (SWIR) — the
spectrum from nominally 1 to 3
microns in wavelength — has gone
largely unexploited due to a lack of suitable detectors and limited understanding
of the image phenomenology in this band.
Due to its shorter wavelength, SWIR offers
the advantage of higher resolution and
smaller optical systems than mid-wave and
long-wave (LW) infrared systems, making
it attractive for tactical applications. To enable the exploitation of the SWIR band,
Raytheon has been leading in the development of new detectors and cameras, as well
as studying the imaging phenomenology.
Raytheon has made exciting advances in
single-photon short-wave infrared detectors and imagers that open the door to new
applications and operational advantages to
the United States. New systems will leverage the key strengths that SWIR sensors
provide, including:
• True low-light imaging capability — turns
night into day
• Penetration of haze better than visible
cameras
• Sharper images than conventional LW
thermal imagers
• Observation of covert lasers and beacons
• Uncooled technology for size, weight and
power advantages over cryo-cooled systems
• Spectral phenomenologies that enable
camouflage exposure, human-flesh detection, and the ability to see through
glass
• High resolution iris and 3D facial image
capture for standoff biometrics
Raytheon continues to be the industry
leader in delivering technologies to operate in new optical wavelength ranges such
as SWIR; achieving even higher sensitivities
(down to single photon detection); and
improving the size, weight and power of
infrared imagers. Raytheon’s collaboration with the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) and U.S. Army
Night Vision and Electronic Sensors (NVESD)
researchers has advanced the state of the
art of SWIR imaging. Research has focused
on developing SWIR imagers that exploit
both urban light sources and natural
When he’s not working as a leader and mentor
within Raytheon and the academic community,
Reyes keeps busy at home where he enjoys
photography and spending time with his family.
ENGINEERING PROFILE
Jeff Hoffner
Feature
SWIR
Space and Airborne
Systems
Principal
Engineering Fellow
During 37 years with
Raytheon and its
legacy companies, Jeff
Hoffner developed
extensive experience
in airborne radar system design, analysis,
and engineering and
program management. He currently works on the Space and
Airborne Systems Engineering Technical Staff in
El Segundo, Calif.
He is responsible for overseeing development of
advanced air-to-ground radar technology with
a focus on radar automatic target recognition
(ATR) discrimination and electronic protection
and fusion. From 2007 through 2009, he was
co-lead of the Corporate Enterprise Campaign
for ATR, which advanced fusion, feature-aided
track, move-stop-move track, synthetic aperture
radar ATR, and ground moving target ATR
technologies. He is also program manager for a
classified technology program, technical director
for the Raytheon–Air Force Research Laboratory
Radar Vision Target Identification program,
and a Raytheon representative to the Military
Sensing Symposia Tri-Service Radar Symposium
steering committee.
After many years in a leadership role for the
continued development of air-to-ground radar
system capability, Hoffner became involved
in research and development around ATR. In
1999 he became manager of the AGRI program,
a radar-based stationary ground target ATR.
“ATR became one of my key technical interests,” he said. “It was natural to join with my
Raytheon colleague Al Coit in proposing and
then co-leading the Raytheon ATR Enterprise
Campaign which has focused on making
Raytheon’s radar ATR the best in the industry.”
He said he remains excited about his work
because, “I am working with the best and the
brightest from across Raytheon on technologies
such as ATR and electronic protection —
very challenging problems that are
becoming increasingly more critical to our
customer community.”
Figure 1. SWIR tactical integrated vacuum packaged assembly, electronics core and field camera
nightglow. Significant advances have been
made with higher sensitivities, smaller pixels, larger imaging array sizes, and higher
dynamic range. These advances will deliver
new capabilities to the warfighter and are
attracting interest for application to iris
and 3D facial image capture for standoff
biometrics.
SWIR Passive Imagers With Near Single
Photon Sensitivity
Working with DARPA and NVESD researchers during the last decade, Raytheon has
played a key role in developing imaging
technology in the SWIR with near singlephoton uncooled imaging capability (see Figure 1). This challenges near-infrared image
intensifiers in night-vision applications.
Sky nightglow comes from natural chemical
reactions with oxygen–hydrogen molecules
in the Earth’s mesosphere (50 to 80 km altitudes) resulting in the release of energy in
the form of photons in the SWIR band. This
always-present light source is invisible to the
Figure 2.
High
SWIR sensor with standard dynamic range
and high-sensitivity
human eye, yet provides 13 times the light
available from visible light on a moonless
night and comes from nearly the entire sky.
Exploiting nightglow with advanced sensors
can provide superior range for target identification compared to conventional sensors.
SWIR cameras can also see all common
laser wavelengths (e.g., laser designators)
in use today. Adoption of SWIR cameras
and sensors into fielded systems will enable more systems to transition to eye-safe
lasers. Active and range-gated SWIR sensors
that take advantage of materials reflectivity
and contrast provide additional application
opportunities. Under DARPA’s sponsorship
of the Multi-spectral Adaptive Networked
Tactical Imaging System (MANTIS) and
Photon Counting Arrays (PCAR) programs,
Raytheon has developed multiple generations of SWIR cameras with dramatic
improvements in sensitivity, resolution, and
dynamic range — making Raytheon the
current market leader in large-format and
high-sensitivity uncooled SWIR focal planes.
Medium
and medium-sensitivity
Feature
Technology Leadership
Combining ultra-low dark-current indium
gallium arsenide detectors and ultrasensitive readout integrated indium gallium
arsenide (InGaAs) circuits, Raytheon has
maintained its uncooled (no cryogenic
cooler) -SWIR technology leadership since
2004, when the company demonstrated the
first megapixel (1280x1024) SWIR camera.
In tests by NVESD and others, Raytheon
SWIR outperforms third-generation image
intensifiers and other competition with respect to sensitivity and resolution, providing
superior night vision capability.
More recently under DARPA’s PCAR program, Raytheon invented and demonstrated
an advanced SWIR sensor design. A remarkable feature of this sensor is the inclusion of
novel high dynamic range circuitry in small
15×15 µm pixel. The result is a large-format,
high-density 1280×1024 SWIR focal plane
array. Dynamic range exceeding 16 bits
(80,000:1) with less than five electrons read
noise has been demonstrated with detector
operation at or near ambient temperatures.
High dynamic range performance is shown
in Figure 2 in three representations obtained
within one frame time and showing the
resulting instanteous dynamic range image.
With post processing, these 16-bit total
dynamic ranges can be directly fed into an
automated target recognition system, or
individually contrast-adjusted and mapped
into a typical 8-bit display. Low
and low-sensitivity
These sensors’ extremely low noise and high
dynamic range allow recognition of lowcontrast targets, without saturation from
bright sources within the same frame of
information. This enables operation in both
urban and rural environments with imaging
under low levels of ambient illumination,
while simultaneously seeing around bright
sources that would otherwise saturate conventional high-sensitivity sensors.
Raytheon’s family of uncooled tactical SWIR
focal planes and SWIR sensor technologies
that were developed and matured through
five years of DARPA programs is now ready
for transition to production and integration
into a wide range of applications, including: rifle sights, handheld targeting units,
marine/ship-board surveillance cameras,
port security systems, unmanned aerial
vehicles, manned air vehicles, and longrange observation and targeting platforms.
Raytheon’s innovative technology developed
with support from DARPA has resulted in
performance superior to conventional night
vision systems. This has resulted in a compact, small-pixel, large-format SWIR camera
which, within one scene, can operate over
six orders of magnitude illumination, covering conditions ranging from extremely low
light to full daylight. •
David Acton
Combined
ENGINEERING PROFILE
Al Coit
Missile Systems
Lead, ATR Enterprise
Campaign
Director, Mission
Systems Solutions
Al Coit has more than
20 years experience
in weapon system
development, scientific
research and program
management. His
technical background
includes automatic target recognition (ATR) and tracking algorithms,
infrared systems and laser systems. He led the
ATR Enterprise Campaign (EC), and is the director of Mission System Solutions. Previously, Coit
served as director of the Signal Processing Center
in the Engineering functional organization.
ATR consists of complex signal processing on
sensors, ground stations and weapons, coupled
with advanced algorithms to find and track
objects of interest, and determine if friend,
neutral or combatant. According to Coit, current in-theater experience shows that significant
challenges remain in this area. “It’s still difficult
to strike targets that are hiding or using evasive
tactics. The problem is compounded by adverse
weather, complex terrain and urban battlefields,
and asymmetric threats.
“Developing and demonstrating the next
generation intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, targeting and weapon delivery
algorithms is critical to growing Raytheon’s market share in sensing and effects, and continued
recognition as a Mission Systems Integrator,”
Coit noted. “Raytheon has much of the enabling
technology and domain knowledge to address
this critical issue for the warfighter. The ATR
EC leverages expertise from across Raytheon
to develop near-term technology enablers and
mid-term disruptive innovations to address the
difficult challenges of assured identification and
persistent tracking.”
In addition to developing next-generation algorithms, the ATR EC eliminated duplicate efforts,
catalogued best practices, conducted progressive capability demonstrations, and developed
cross-domain dominance technologies. The team
supported a wide range of pursuits and played a
key role in several critical program wins.
PCAR SWIR sensor simultaneously imaging
at high instantaneous dynamic range with
low noise
Raytheon employees can find additional information on the ATR EC on Raytheon’s internal
wiki pages.
Feature
Adaptive Flight
Control Systems
Delivering more robust performance
T
he ability of a missile or an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to
complete its mission depends heavily
on the quality of its flight control system.
The quality of a traditional flight control
system is rooted in the validity of the
mathematical models used in its design,
the fidelity of the information it receives in
flight, and the health of its actuation devices. When the models are a good match
to reality and the sensors and actuators are
functioning as expected, uncertainty in the
system is low and the vehicle behaves as designed and predicted. However, air vehicles
do not always perform as their models
would predict — due to battle damage,
system faults, or aerodynamic uncertainties
in the design models themselves — and as
a result system performance degrades and
mission effectiveness is reduced. However,
by employing adaptive control algorithms
that dynamically adjust to the changing
conditions, performance can be maintained
in the face of uncertainty. Raytheon has
integrated adaptive algorithms into our
missile and UAV flight control systems to
deliver more robust performance.
While adaptive flight control has been an
area of high interest in the controls community, it had not previously been applied to
high performance missile systems or UAVs.
Raytheon’s Adaptive Air Vehicle Technology
(AAVT) strategic internal research and
development effort has, for the first time,
developed methods to utilize adaptive control techniques in Raytheon missile and UAV
autopilots. By partnering with academic
researchers to investigate and refine various
adaptive control methods, the AAVT research has been able to develop promising
algorithms for real-world applications.
Consistent Performance for Uncertain
or Degraded Systems
An adaptive flight control system uses one
of two methods to maintain a consistent
level of system performance in the presence
of uncertainty and faults with minimal degradation. In the first, called indirect adaptive
control, the adaptive controller monitors the
difference between the measured system
behavior and the expected system behavior
in real time, estimates why those differences
exist, and adjusts key control design parameters based on those estimates to regain
system performance.
The second method is direct adaptive
control where the controller uses the perceived differences to compute an input
control signal that directly drives those
errors to zero without concern of
why the differences exist. Whichever
method is employed, the ability of an
adaptive autopilot to provide consistent
performance for uncertain or degraded
systems reduces the need for high fidelity
models and subsystem performance that
is normally required for high-performance,
robust autopilot design. By reducing the
initial modeling effort and essentially doing
more with less, adaptive control technology allows Raytheon to rapidly develop and
deploy reliable flight control systems for advanced missiles or UAVs at reduced cost.
Where a traditional flight control system
would show degraded performance, the
adaptive flight control systems developed
maintain an expected level of system performance, as measured against a reference
(nominal behavior) model. Many adaptive systems either do not use a reference
model, or use a simple reference model that
is not consistent with the system dynamics.
By adapting to the error between the desired
response and the measured response of the
vehicle in real time, the Raytheon adaptive
Feature
controller creates an additional
control signal that is used to
augment that of a traditional
robust autopilot. If the system
dynamics match the representative reference model, the
contribution from the adaptive controller will be zero. If,
however, they do not match,
the adaptive control signal will
correct any differences and the
combined control signal retains the desired performance.
Desired
Response
but most missiles and proposed
very small UAVs cannot supTracking
port an air data system due
Error
to weight and size restrictions.
Σ
Guidance
The Raytheon adaptive controlRobust
Command
Baseline
Σ
ler eliminates the wrong-way
Actual
Autopilot
response problem by adapting
Response
to a careful combination of the
Adaptive
Flight
Nonlinear
measured acceleration and the
Control
Adaptive
measured angular rate, which
System
Augmentation
are both available system outputs. Overcoming these and
Adaptive flight control system showing baseline controller augmentation other challenges to applying
adaptive control to real-world
which are difficult for actuation systems to
Taking Algorithms from
systems have been among the achievements
achieve. This is avoided in the L1 adaptive
Academia to Missiles and UAVs
of the AAVT research.
control algorithm through the use of a low
Throughout the lifespan of Raytheon’s
pass filter on the adaptive control signal and
AAVT research, various adaptive control
Testing on Raytheon’s Delta Wing Flight
a flexible companion model instead of a
techniques have been investigated. These
Control Test Bed
rigid reference model.
include the neural network-based adaptive
Because adaptive autopilots must operate
control developed at the Georgia Institute of
in real-world systems, the AAVT research
Another challenge is adaptively controlling
Technology, L1 adaptive control developed
team developed a process for evaluation
the acceleration of a tail-controlled vehicle,
at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
of algorithms that includes simulation
where the actuation system is aft of the University, the Retrospective Correction
and flight test. The algorithms are flown
system’s center of gravity. To rotate the
Filter (RCF) adaptive controller developed
on Raytheon’s own Delta Wing advanced
nose of the vehicle upward to produce a
at the University of Michigan, and othcontrol system test bed. The Delta Wing
desired
upward
lift
force,
the
control
acers. L1 and RCF are direct adaptive control
is a low-cost UAV, developed in-house,
tion must produce a downward force on
algorithms that show many desirable charcomplete with an internally developed
the tail of the vehicle. This causes an initial
acteristics and are the current algorithms
avionics suite and processor. This vehicle
downward motion to the vehicle center of
of choice. Raytheon has partnered with the
demonstrated Raytheon’s first adaptive
gravity.
A
standard
adaptive
controller
sees
University of Michigan to assist with the
autopilot flight in 2007, and the team won
this
initial
‘wrong-way’
effect
and
attempts
application and evaluation of the RCF algothe Raytheon Excellence in Engineering
to correct for it, resulting in an unstable
rithm on flight vehicles.
Technology award for this accomplishment
response. One method to eliminate this
in 2008.
problem
is
to
instead
control
the
angle
of
While the academic research laid a founContinued on page 18
attack
as
measured
by
an
air
data
system,
dation for the Raytheon development, a
primary accomplishment of the AAVT research has been to develop the necessary
modifications to these algorithms to successfully use them on missiles and UAVs. For
example, one of the challenges in designing
adaptive controllers for agile missiles and
UAVs is the rapid response requirement,
which dictates a high rate
of adaptation in the controller. For missiles, system
dynamics can change very
quickly, so any adaptive
action must react very
rapidly. This typically is
achieved by using a
high adaptive gain value,
2007 Raytheon Excellence in Engineering and Technology Award winners: Adaptive Air Vehicle
but this can lead to high
Technology IRAD Adaptive Control Development Team holding a Delta Wing UAV. From left:
frequency control signals
Todd Fanciullo, Rob Fuentes, Josh Matthews, Richard Hindman, Yung Lee.
Closed Loop
Reference
Model
Feature
Adaptive Flight Control
-4
Command
Plant with Adaptive
Model Response
Plant w/o Adaptive
-5
Simulink Adaptive A/P model
Autopilot
Guidance
Commands
Adaptive
Autopilot
Actuators Nonlinear
Missile
Dynamics
Sensors
Automatic Code Generation
RTW
Embedded Coder
C Code
6-DOF Simulation Tool
Common Avionics
Delta Wing Flight Test
The adaptive control design process
including flight testing
A comparison of the pitch channel response of the Delta Wing 6DOF simulation
to a step in the acceleration command
is shown in the following figure. For this
simulation, the pitch control authority was
reduced 70 percent. The green line on the
-6
Computational
Materials
Engineering:
-7
AP Z Accel (m/sec2)
Much is involved in the implementation
and evaluation of adaptive autopilot algorithms for flight vehicles. After the adaptive
flight control algorithms are developed
and verified on simple examples, they are
applied to a 6 degree-of-freedom (6DOF)
simulation of the Delta Wing, where they
are analyzed using Monte Carlo analysis. If
the algorithm performs well in the 6DOF,
algorithm performance is then verified
during flight test of the Delta Wing flight
control test bed.
-8
-9
-10
-11
-12
-13
-14
-15
225
225.5
226
226.5 227 227.5
Time (sec)
228
228.5
229
6DOF simulation showing performance recovery when 70% of control authority is lost
plot shows the response of the Delta Wing
flying with a classical autopilot. The red line
shows the response of the Delta Wing with
an adaptive autopilot tracking the desired
response from a reference model, shown in
blue. Not only have these algorithms been
applied to the Delta Wing UAV, they are
being designed for and will soon be tested
on the Cobra UAV, Raytheon’s own UAV
test bed. Application to several advanced
missiles is currently being pursued.
Throughout industry and academia, adaptive control has been successfully applied
to slowly varying industrial processes. It has
also been applied to several aircraft and
low-performance bombs. Through AAVT,
Raytheon has pushed the state of the
art in adaptive control by applying adaptive algorithms to advanced air vehicles.
Our systems are very challenging as they
require extremely high performance and
reliability, data sensing is often limited, and
they may have either stable or unstable
airframes. Furthermore, future systems are
being developed that require the airframe
to drastically morph its shape during flight.
This poses very costly, if not insurmountable, challenges to developing wind tunnel
models for use in classical flight controller
design. Additionally, future agile UAVs will
require a high level of fault tolerance to
meet airworthiness requirements. This will
require on-board health monitoring and
system identification, as well as a flight
control system that can adapt rapidly to
the detected changes. Finding solutions to
these challenges is the future of adaptive
control technology at Raytheon. •
D. Brett Ridgely, Rick Hindman
A tool whose
time has come
Isaac Newton (1643−1727) and
Robert Hooke (1635–1703) were
contemporaries, and their work
forms the basis of modern engineering. Newton’s calculus found
fertile ground and grew into the
core computational techniques that
are the foundation of mechanical
design. Finite element analysis, for
example, is a numerical integration
technique that permits analysis of
systems that are too difficult to
solve by other means. Hooke’s law
of elasticity laid the foundation for
computing the internal distortions
of physical objects subjected to
external stresses and for predicting
strain induced failures.
Feature
S
ince the time of Newton and Hooke,
accurate property determination was
limited to those materials readily
available for characterization in the laboratory. All material properties arise from the
interaction of electrons with atomic nuclei;
consequently, the ability to compute engineering properties for a given material
was not possible until the advent of quantum physics.
Atomic interactions are described by quantum physics. While writing the equations
describing atomic interactions is easy,
solving these equations is not. Systems
composed of more than two or three atoms
frequently involve more than 30 electrons.
This type of problem requires the numerical integration techniques spawned by
Newton’s work.
A Fistful of Atoms
Raytheon often uses novel materials in order
to expand the performance envelope of its
products, and is currently using computational materials engineering (CME) as an aid
to characterize these novel materials. CME is
simply the application of advanced computing techniques to the solution of quantum
physics problems involving the mechanical,
thermal, electrical and optical properties of
engineering materials.
Recent advances in computing power have
increased computer speed and reduced
computing costs. Now computations are a
viable alternative to experimentation for engineering problems.
As input, CME needs only the identity and
geometric arrangement of a small group of
atoms (less than 100) to predict the total
energy of that arrangement. Figure 1 is an
example of the required input. All other
required parameters are known physical
constants.
Comparing the energy of several different
arrangements leads to amazing insight into
material properties and material stability.
Mechanical properties (modulus, strength);
thermal properties (heat capacity, coefficient
of thermal expansion); Optical properties
(index of refraction, spectral absorption);
and electrical properties (band gap) can all
be computed by systematically distorting
the input geometry.
Because the basic physics and fundamental
constants are known and the geometry
is defined, all the input parameters are
known, making this truly an ab initio, or
first principles, technique. The results do
not depend on empirical relationships or
assumed relationships between input parameters. Interpretation of results, however,
does require a detailed understanding of statistical thermodynamics and quantum theory.
Just as finite element analysis (FEA) revolutionized mechanical engineering, the
ability to compute a material’s mechanical
properties (modulus and strength); optical
properties (absorption, THz phonon spectra,
dielectric constant, etc.); and electrical properties (band gap, ionization potential, etc.)
will revolutionize materials engineering. Its
ability to map out spatial energy fields is
creating new opportunities to predict kinetic
phenomena such as diffusion and structural
relaxation, as well.
CME is maturing at a rapid rate. It will not
replace laboratory testing, but can substantially reduce the cost of testing by focusing
testing on critical parameters and providing
insight to eliminate or suggest new materials suitable for a particular application. CME can also suggest alternate test
methods, which may not have been previously considered.
A Fresh Perspective on
Persistent Problems
The ability to tailor properties of a given material to optimize it for a specific application expresses the essence of engineering.
This technique will quickly be adopted by
the engineering community as a standard
tool. This is especially attractive for the
aerospace industry, where performance
envelopes can be limited by materials
problems that evade solution for decades.
Figure 1. Zinc atom (green) in a tin (grey)
grain boundary. This geometry is used to
compute the activation energy for diffusion
of atoms through a low angle grain boundary. The grain boundary is a horizontal
plane containing the zinc atom.
Getting an alternate perspective on these
persistent problems is invaluable.
As an example of the power of CME, we
apply it to the current industry problem of
tin whiskers. If lead (Pb) is not added to tin
(Sn) solder in sufficient quantities, solder
lines will slowly grow tin whiskers of sufficient length to eventually cause shorting
and component failure. Recent environmental restrictions on the use of lead require
the formulation of new solders and whisker inhibitors.
Figure 1 shows a particular arrangement
of atoms that represents a zinc atom (Zn)
moving along a tin grain boundary. A fixed
atom arrangement is input to the quantum
computation engine, which uses iteration to
find the lowest energy arrangement of
Feature
Computational Materials
mechanical and thermal properties of the
50
tin–lead alloy. Any viable solder replacement
40
Pb
should have mechanical thermal properties
very similar to tin–lead alloys. The computed 30
properties of candidate alloys can be verified later by testing.
Energy / KJ / mol
20
Sn
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
Raytheon is performing these calculations
10
using the MedeA software package, written and distributed by Materials Design, Inc. 0
-0.5
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Design since 2005, initially to understand
-10
Zn
Raytheon has been working with Materials
the capabilities and limits of the tool. More
recently we have been applying it to a
-20
diverse range of engineering problems.
-30
Displacement
Figure 2. Diffusion activation energies of lead (Pb,) tin (Sn) and zinc (Zn) atoms moving along
a Sn grain boundary.
Raytheon and Materials Design are designing a virtual chemical vapor deposition (CVD)
chamber, based on the MedeA software, to
complement the zinc sulfide CVD system recently installed at Raytheon in Tucson.
electron density around the nuclei. The lowest energy state is determined by convergence. The result is an approximation of the energy of that configuration at
absolute zero.
Repeating this same procedure for slight
variations in geometry shows us the lowest energy configuration of atoms. Figure 2
shows the energy of the entire group of
atoms as the zinc atom is moved along the
grain boundary. The height of the curve is
the activation energy for diffusion of zinc
through a tin grain boundary.
Zinc is known to move quickly through tin
grain boundaries and may promote the
growth of tin whiskers. Lead is known to
inhibit the growth of tin whiskers. The
bulk tin that forms the whiskers is known
to travel to the whisker root along grain
boundaries. If we restrict the movement of
tin through the grain boundary, then we
should be able to slow or inhibit whisker
growth. The diffusion activation energy is
a measure of how difficult it is to move an
atom from one location to another. A large
activation energy implies slower transport.
Figure 2 clearly shows that the activation
energy for transport of lead and zinc are
A Few Atoms More
different from each other. The activation
Dramatic growth in computing power, and
energy for transport is greater for lead than
insights enabled by quantum theory, now
for tin. The activation energy for zinc is
makes it possible to apply quantum mechan-
substantially lower than that of either lead
ics to industrial materials problems. Quantum
or tin.
mechanics is as important to materials engineering as Newtonian statics and dynamics.
We surveyed binary alloys comprised of tin.
Each alloy combines tin with each element
in the entire periodic table. Most elements
have activation energies lower than of tin.
A few have activation energies greater than
tin and fewer still have activation energies
greater than or equal to lead.
We can now use this knowledge to focus
experiments on alloys with elements that
we think will behave, like lead, as whisker
inhibitors. This effort should reduce the time
to find a suitable replacement for lead solders for electronics, which are the heart of
many of Raytheon's products.
Unfortunately, the reliability of tin-lead in
electronics is not limited to whisker inhibition by lead, but relies on the unique
Characterizing the mechanical properties of materials is no longer restricted to
the laboratory. We can now investigate
new materials, and variations of existing
materials, outside of the laboratory using
computational methods. In addition, the
computational analysis can be used to tailor
materials to specific needs — engineering of
materials is no longer science fiction.
Computational materials engineering has
shown us what we can obtain from a fist
full of atoms, can you imagine what we can
achieve for a few atoms more? •
D. Brooke Hatfield, Brian J. Zelinski
Feature
GaN
Microwave
Amplifiers
Come of Age
T
he revolutionary power, efficiency
and bandwidth performance improvements demonstrated by
Raytheon’s gallium nitride (GaN) technology
are now being realized in state-of-the-art
microwave power amplifiers, enabling
the next generation of radar systems.
Raytheon’s large development effort leveraged extensive gallium arsenide (GaAs)
development experience, strategic partnerships with universities and the government,
and long-term investment commitments.
High-power semiconductors play an important role in radar performance. In a
phased array radar, the RF energy is distributed to each element, phase shifted
and then amplified before being radiated.
The final amplification of the RF signal at
each element is performed by the power
amplifier. Traditionally, GaAs has been
the semiconductor of choice for efficiently
amplifying this signal, creating the desired
output power.
Throughout the 1990s, Raytheon was a
pioneer in inserting GaAs-based monolithic
microwave integrated circuits (MMICs) into
phased array radars. As the performance
requirements of these military systems have
increased to meet ever-growing threats, so
too have the power and efficiency requirements on the power amplifiers. Over that
time, GaAs performance was stretched from
the unit power density of 0.5 watt per millimeter of transistor periphery to 1.5 W/mm
by increasing the drain voltage from 5V to
24V. GaN, however, continued to make dramatic performance improvements, quickly
surpassing GaAs capability (see table).
Today, with Raytheon’s development phase
nearing completion, the power, efficiency
and bandwidth performance of GaN-based
MMICs is unsurpassed — revolutionizing
the design of radars by creating not only
higher performance but also lower system
cost. With over 5 W/mm of power density,
GaN RF amplifiers can provide more than 5X
the power per element of GaAs in the same
footprint. Fewer high-power GaN MMICs
could be used to replace many low-power
GaAs MMICs, or alternatively, equal-power
GaN chips can be made dramatically
smaller. Both approaches reduce overall system costs while enabling size-constrained
Parameter
Output
power
density
Operating
voltage
Breakdown
voltage
Maximum
current
Thermal
conductivity
(W/m-K)
GaAs
GaN
0.5–1.5 W/mm
5–7 W/mm
5–24 V
28–48 V
15–48V
>100V
~ 0.5 A/mm
~1.2 A/mm
47
~390 (SiC)*
* GaN on silicon carbide substrate
Demonstrated GaAs and GaN microwave
performance and thermal conductivity
showing superior GaN results.
Feature
GaN
systems. The higher drain current that GaN
offers makes the broadband matching of
high-power MMICs simpler and more efficient than GaAs, while the seven to eight
times improvement in the thermal conductivity enables amplifier cooling. Finally, the
wide band gap intrinsic to GaN material
provides large critical breakdown fields and
voltages, making a more robust amplifier
and easing system implementation.
Development History of GaN
GaN semiconductors were first studied
more than 30 years ago, and even then
they were considered ideal for high-power
microwave devices based on their high
theoretical breakdown field and high saturated electron velocity. But at that time, the
gallium nitride material quality was
1st GaN
µwave
Power
Transistor
Demo
1st GaN
LEDs
1993
1995
1997
1st GaN
µwave
Amplifier
Demo
Raytheon
GaN
Fabricates Materials
its1st GaN Improvement
Transistor
WBGS
Phase 1
1999
2001
2005
2007
Raytheon
GaN in
Production
WBGS
Phase 3
2009
Figure 1. Timeline of GaN Microwave Technology Development
insufficient to produce microwave transistors. This all began to change in the early
1990s when researchers used gallium
nitride to fabricate the world’s first green,
blue, violet and white light-emitting diodes
(LEDs). This breakthrough drove forward a
rapid improvement in GaN material quality.
Now, these LEDs can be found all around
us: on traffic lights, scoreboards, billboards
and flashlights.
Another obstacle to the development of
GaN transistors was the lack of an inexpensive substrate material. Traditionally the
substrate material of the transistor is the
same material as the transistor itself, but,
to date, researchers have been unable to
grow large area GaN substrates. Instead,
researchers originally turned to growing
GaN transistors on sapphire substrates, and
in 1996 demonstrated the first microwave
GaN power transistors. The sapphire substrates are low cost and widely available.
However, their poor thermal conductivity
and non-ideal lattice match to GaN limited the performance of the transistors.
Researchers then turned to growing the
GaN devices on semi-insulating silicon carbide (SiC) substrates. Silicon carbide has a
good lattice match to GaN and is an excellent thermal conductor. The only drawback
was that silicon carbide substrates were only
available in small sizes (50 mm diameter)
and were very expensive (100 times the
price of GaAs) in the late 1990s. The last 10
years have seen a rapid improvement in the
size, quality and cost of the silicon carbide
substrates. Today, Raytheon’s production
GaN process uses 100 mm (4-inch) diameter
SiC substrates.
2003
GaN
Transistor
Improvement
WBGS
Phase 2
Raytheon has been researching GaN since
1999, fabricating its first gallium nitride
transistors in 2000. MMIC demonstrations
quickly followed. While the demonstrated
performance of the GaN transistors was
excellent, it took a number of years to
improve the reliability and yield of the
transistors to the present state, where the
technology is ready to meet the stringent
needs of defense systems. This development
was funded through both Raytheon internal
research and development investments and
external government contracts from Ballistic
Missile Defense Office, Office of Naval
Research and Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA).
As shown in Figure 1, Raytheon’s long-term
commitment to the development of GaN
technology began nearly 10 years ago, and
the company has leveraged its long history of GaAs semiconductor work, as well
as partnerships with industry, university
and government. Raytheon’s development
history with GaAs provided the needed infrastructure and lessons-learned experience
to accelerate GaN’s development. This included the growth of starting material, the
modeling of transistors’ RF performance,
the semiconductor fabrication facility, the
microwave and module design, and the RF
testing capabilities. Through early strategic partnering with Cree, the University of
California Santa Barbara and U.S. government labs, the team shortened the cycles
of learning and shared findings to more
quickly advance the state of GaN transistors. Focused Raytheon-funded university
research at Cornell, Georgia Tech and MIT
continues to push the performance envelope of GaN to higher frequencies.
Feature
Raytheon’s focus on early reliability demonstrations and transition to 4-inch wafers, to
leverage the existing manufacturing facility,
has resulted in industry-leading maturity.
Raytheon’s 4-inch microwave GaN process
was moved into a production environment
two years ago and today is completing final
production validation. Many hundreds of
wafers have been processed, resulting in
increased process maturity and lower system insertion costs. The capabilities of this
process provide not only the performance
benefits of GaN, but also the assurance of
supply and the capture of early system insertion opportunities.
The high maturity of Raytheon’s GaN
technology, signaled with its transition to
production, has provided Raytheon the
ability to quickly scale the technology to millimeter-wave frequencies (> 30 GHz). With a
nominal voltage of 20V and similar currents
levels, millimeter-wave GaN gives the same
five times performance improvement over
existing high frequency GaAs technology as
microwave GaN technology does.
GaN Amplifiers
The ability of GaN transistors to operate
at very high voltage and current enables
them to produce very high output power,
high-efficiency amplifiers. To realize these
high-performance designs requires accurate modeling of the transistor’s harmonic performance. The
maturity of Raytheon’s GaN
technology has enabled us to
obtain consistent, repeatable performance
and the models needed to obtain the highefficiency amplifiers. We have demonstrated
amplifiers with record combinations of
power and efficiency amplifiers at L-band,
S-band and X-band. The higher voltage
and load impedance of GaN also makes
it especially well suited for the broadband
amplifiers required for future multifunction
systems. Raytheon has demonstrated high
power broadband amplifiers with bandwidths greater than 4:1.
Raytheon is also leading the way for
extending the performance of GaN to
millimeter-wave frequencies and higher.
Raytheon has recently demonstrated
state-of-the-art power performance for
MMICs operating at 35 GHz and at 95
GHz. Raytheon’s 95 GHz MMIC work has
been funded in part by the Joint Non Lethal
Weapons Directorate to produce a solidstate version of the company’s Active Denial System.
Fixtured GaN MMIC
Raytheon’s Active Denial System is designed
to use millimeter wave technology to repel
individuals without causing injury
The high power handling capability of GaN
transistors also makes it an ideal choice
for other types of circuits. For example,
Raytheon has demonstrated GaN low-noise
amplifiers with record survivability and GaN
microwave switches with record power
handling.
As customer requirements increase beyond
GaAs capabilities, there has been a strong
pull to mature GaN for system insertion. In
collaboration with the government, universities and small businesses, Raytheon has
matured GaN from 2-inch wafers with transistors measured with hours of lifetime, to
4-inch wafers and transistors with the millions of hours of reliability today needed to
transition into U.S. Department of Defense
system. Ultimately, GaN will become the
power amplification standard for all new radars, communication and weapon systems, where cost-effective, high RF power is needed. •
Colin Whelan, Nick Kolias
Feature
Monarch Meets Demanding,
High-Stress Processing Requirements
Mobile SAVi system features a laser vibrometer and processing system.
R
aytheon is bringing two DARPAsponsored technologies together to
meet challenging warfighter needs:
Monarch, an exceptional processor architecture that provides an order of magnitude
more processing per watt than other computing solutions, and SAVi (seismic and
acoustic vibration imaging), an advanced
sensor that uses laser vibrometry and a
number of compute-intensive algorithms
to detect buried objects such as mines
and tunnels.
A chip is typically designed either for frontend signal processing or back-end control
and data processing. The Monarch architecture and chip can efficiently do either, or
both concurrently. It can perform as a single
system on a chip, supporting single or multiple diverse processing functions, resulting
in a significant reduction in the number of
processor types required for computing systems, or it can perform as an array of chips
to provide teraflop throughput.
The direction in U.S. Department of Defense
(DoD) systems is toward large data volume sensors with demanding signal and
data processing throughput requirements.
Processors for these systems also need
outstanding energy efficiency. Even as
commercial processors have increased in
processing performance, the amount of
data provided by the sensor to the front-end
processor has placed an even greater stress
on the back-end processor for more performance within a stricter power budget. The
morphable networked micro-architecture
(Monarch) is a high-performance processing
chip developed with the goal of providing
exceptional compute capacity and high data
bandwidth coupled with state-of-the-art
power efficiency and full programmability.
Monarch got its start as the Raytheondeveloped High-Performance Processing
System (HPPS) architecture. HPPS was
part of a challenge problem from a DoD
agency to develop a 1-teraflop, 10-watt
architecture for 2010. In 1999, Raytheon
received a seedling contract and assembled
a small team to study this. Out of that
work and follow-on internal research and
development investment came the core of
Monarch, the dataflow-based field programmable computing array (FPCA). This
approach was further developed in Phase I of a new Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) Information
Processing Technology Office program:
Polymorphic Computing Architecture (PCA).
Development History
The goal of the PCA program was to
develop adaptive, high-performance
processing architectures that can be optimized to mission requirements across DoD
applications — whether in response to
changes from mission to mission or to the
dynamic evolution of in-mission processing
requirements. A team from the Information
Sciences Institute of the University of
Southern California (USC/ISI), led by
John Granacki, was developing the Data
IntensiVe Architecture (DIVA). Raytheon
became part of the USC/ISI team and the
two elements — DIVA and HPPS — were
combined to create Monarch.
By Phase III of PCA, Raytheon became the prime contractor and the team grew to include Exogi, Mercury Computers, IBM
and Georgia Tech. The chip was fabricated
by IBM using their Cu08 (90nm) CMOS
ASIC process.
The
Raytheon-led
team enjoyed
first-spin
success in
developing
this complex
Monarch
chip.
Feature
Architecture
The Monarch chip includes six reduced
instruction set computer (RISC) processors,
12 megabytes of on-chip dynamic random
access memory (DRAM), two DDR2 ports,
two serial RapidIO ports, 16 2.6-gigabyte
per second streaming I/O ports, and the
FPCA, a reconfigurable computing array.
The Monarch chips can boot from a single
commercial flash memory part, providing a
highly embeddable system-on-a-chip processing solution. Monarch can also be used
as a tiled array of processing chips to build
a multi-teraflop computer, again with no
glue parts required, thus achieving excellent
size, weight, energy, performance and time
values and enabling embedded systems that
demand high performance computing for
complex algorithms.
The FPCA is key to the Monarch chip’s
high performance and efficiency. The FPCA
contains 96 multiplier-ALUs, 124 dual-port
memories, 248 address generators, and 20
direct memory access (DMA) engines all connected through a rich, dynamically switched
interconnect. The architecture of the FPCA
has been optimized for signal processing
algorithms, for example, fast Fourier transforms and finite impulse response filters,
using 16- and 32-bit integer and 32-bit
IEEE floating point data. The FPCA uses a
dataflow processing paradigm that supports
streaming data with hardware support for
dataflow synchronization, and uses a novel
distributed programming paradigm. Monarch
also supports threaded style execution
through six independent RISC processors.
The processors may also be configured to
operate on 256-bit wide word or or on single
instruction, multiple data operations. Many
of the on-chip data paths and memories are
256 bits wide for high bandwidth; others are
32 bits wide to match common data needs.
Total on-chip memory bandwidth is 390 gigabytes per second, enabling the sustained
throughput of 64 gigaflops.
For power efficiency, Monarch substantially differs from nearly all conventional
digital signal processors or RISC processors.
Conventional architectures use DMA to place
data into memory, pull it out for computing, put it back into memory and then
DRAM
I/F
DRAM
I/F
FLASH
EDRAM
RISC
EDRAM
RISC
EDRAM
RISC
EDRAM
RISC
EDRAM
RISC
EDRAM
RISC
FPCA
RIO
RIO
An overview of the Monarch architecture. Monarch incorporates 6 RISC processors,
12 megabytes on-chip DRAM, 12 arithmetic clusters, and 31 memory clusters
use DMA to send it to the output devices.
Monarch data paths support direct execution
of dataflow graphs — streaming data through
the processor from input devices through
computing elements, to output devices
with no need to store the data in memory.
Streaming execution without using memories
saves all the energy consumed storing and
retrieving data multiple times into memory.
Memory is used only when the algorithm requires time alignment or for saving state.
The Monarch programming environment
is a combination of industry standard
languages (C/C++) and machine-specific
dataflow language. The RISC compiler
provides auto vectorization when developing code for the wide word processor and
scalar code. The dataflow assembler is the
primary path for programming the FPCA.
Math libraries can be used for both the
threaded and dataflow streaming portions
of the machine to reduce programmer work
load. There are simulators, debuggers, and
a real-time executive for the machine. The
maturities of the tools vary but are sufficient
for developing application code.
Monarch Advantages
Monarch provides high signal processing
throughput in a power-efficient balanced
architecture. Monarch can perform as a
single system on a chip or as an array of
chips to provide teraflop throughput. Tests
have shown that Monarch can sustain 64
gigaflops of throughput via the FPCA while
consuming less than 20 watts of power. The
achievement of 3 gigaflops of throughput
per watt in the current generation results
in one of the most efficient processors
available.
Dataflow processing is the key to Monarch’s
power efficiency. Dataflow is rooted in an
early 1900s technology process: the assembly line.
Standard general purpose processors can be
viewed as a single-worker with a long “todo” list to complete a job. A lot of time and
energy is wasted checking what needs to be
done next (instruction fetching).
The FPCA processor is an entire shop full of
specialized workers. Each worker is provided
only a short list of operations to do. Upon
completion, the incremental product is sent
down the line, and the worker receives the
next piece to perform the same operations
on the line. The operations are nearly always
Feature
the same, with only limited flexibility (i.e., a
painter can be told to paint it green instead of
blue, but never to weld). FCPA processors have
extremely high throughput at the cost of lower
overall flexibility. Dataflow architecture also
eases programming workload.
Programming Monarch’s FPCA requires the
mindset of an industrial engineer as much as a
software engineer to:
• Decompose a task into individually workable units
• Effectively utilize workers
• Balance the workload
• Optimally route between workers
System Impact
DARPA’s SAVi program is an example of the
trend toward large data volume sensors with
demanding requirements, with a sensor capable of producing 1 to 2 gigasamples per
second of data and needing hundreds of gigaflops of compute power.
SAVi uses laser Doppler vibrometry to detect
mines and tunnels in real time, from a mobile
platform. SAVi induces ground-surface vibrations by applying an acoustic stimulus for land
mines and improvised explosive devices and
a seismic stimulus for tunnels. Laser Doppler
vibrometry allows for non-contact vibration
measurements of a surface by detecting the
Doppler shift of a laser beam frequency to derive the vibration velocity over time for a target.
The Monarch implementation will replace the
original SAVi processing approach that was
estimated to take 96 conventional commercial
processors with 16 Monarch chips. The SAVi
program will utilize quad-chip boards developed by Mercury Federal Systems for Raytheon
in a four-board chassis configuration to fulfill
SAVi system processing requirements.
Raytheon is proud of this innovative processor.
We plan to continue providing similar creative
solutions to stay at the forefront of information systems and computing technologies to
meet the future needs of our customer’s radar,
electro-optical, missile, communications, and
signal intelligence systems. •
Kenneth Prager
YAG Solid State
Laser Ceramics
Breakthroughs at Raytheon
R
aytheon has long been a leader in
optical materials research and development, with multiple patents
involving multi-spectral zinc sulfide (ZnS),
Raytran zinc selenide, and aluminum
oxynitride (ALON), just to name a few.
More recently, the focus has shifted to
next-generation optical materials that
will enable further system capabilities
and higher performance. For example, as
missile domes and windows and as laser
gain media. Yttrium aluminum garnet
(Y3Al5O12, or YAG) is a laser gain host
material widely used for solid state lasers.
When doped with rare earth elements
such as neodymium (Nd), ytterbium
(Yb) or erbium (Er), and pumped with
light from an external source, energy
is transferred to these atoms and then
released to emit laser light at a different
wavelength. While single crystals have
traditionally been used, polycrystalline or
ceramic YAG is gaining momentum as
preferred for high-power solid state lasers
because of several advantages and capabilities afforded by ceramics.
Why Ceramics?
As the size and design complexity requirements become more stringent
for high-power solid state laser systems,
optically transparent ceramic laser gain
materials are replacing single crystals.
Most single crystal YAG is grown according to the Czochralski method, in which
a seed crystal is slowly pulled and rotated
inside an Iridium crucible with molten
YAG to form a crystal boule. Large crystals are difficult to fabricate because the
growing process introduces significant
stress and other index distortions. Due to
the mass, the maximum size of the boule
without fracture is also limited.
Ceramics offer competitive advantages in
overcoming these shortcomings. Ceramic
material can be fabricated faster and in
larger sizes with more uniform optical
properties and doping. Ceramic parts can
be made as large as the size of the furnace hot zone, eliminating the need for
optical diffusion bonding as commonly
practiced with single crystal material.
Ceramic YAG can also be doped at higher
concentrations than single crystal in many
cases. The complex, net shape capability
also contributes to the cost competitiveness of ceramic materials. Ceramic
material can be produced in several days
with the appropriate furnace, while growing a crystal boule requires several weeks
and expensive iridium crucibles at very
high temperatures. Ceramic sintering
temperatures are well below the melting
temperatures required for single crystals.
Ceramic processing is also amenable for
producing complex monolithic structures
in which graded doping profiles and dopant type can be tailored. Ceramic laser
gain material has already demonstrated
equivalent or superior performance to
single crystal. In fact, all of the properties
critical to the laser performance — such
as propagation loss, thermal birefringence, dopant absorption and emission
characteristics, and refractive index —
have been proven identical to those of
single crystal laser media.
Feature
Next-generation
optical
materials enabling
higher performance
Fabrication of Laser Ceramics
Optical ceramic YAG materials are fabricated from a starting nanopowder material
which is consolidated into a desired shape
and then heat-treated at temperatures well
below the melting point for pore removal
and densification. The fabrication process
flowchart is shown in Figure 1.
Powder
Characterization
Deagglomeration
Sinter
Powder
Compaction
Hot Isostatic Pressing
Optical Finishing and
Characterization
Figure 1. Optical laser ceramic YAG fabrication process flow
The extensive powder characterization step
is critical in understanding and predicting how the powder will behave during
consolidation and densification. It is also
a screening method to evaluate chemical
and crystalline phase purity information of
the powder to see if it will produce optically superior ceramic. The average particle
size of the YAG powder is in the nanometer range, which makes them prone to
agglomeration due to their large surface
area (see Figure 2). A deagglomeration step
is therefore necessary to break up the powder aggregates before consolidating it into
a green body. This step allows for uniform
pore distribution and optimal green density, both of which aid in uniform sintering.
The green ceramic body is fabricated using
the uniaxial and isostatic pressing apparatus on the die filled powder. As seen in Figure 3, the green body has approximately
50 percent porosity contained within,
which renders the sample opaque.
Sintering followed by hot isostatic pressing
(HIP) is the method of densification for optical ceramic YAG fabrication at Raytheon.
Following sintering, the ceramic still has
some residual porosity left in the part. The
HIP takes these remaining pores out of the
ceramic by using both temperature and
pressure. The resulting ceramic is optically
transparent if the starting powder was
of high chemical and phase purity. The
sample then needs to be polished on major
faces before it can be further analyzed for
optical transmission, absorption, lasing
characterization, and other microstructural
examination. State-of-the-art ceramic
Figure 2. Nanopowder (left) to green ceramic (middle) to optical ceramic YAG (right)
ENGINEERING PROFILE
Jean Huie
Imholt
Integrated
Defense
Systems
Principal
MultiDisciplined
Engineer
Since joining
Raytheon six
years ago,
Principal
MultiDisciplined
Engineer Jean Imholt has been working on the
development of optical ceramic YAG (yttrium
aluminum garnet) material for application in
high-power solid state lasers and infrared transparent windows.
Imholt has also led numerous internal research
and development projects around nanomaterials,
including nanocomposites for thermal and EMI
applications and the alternate environmental
barrier coating for panel arrays. She recently
supported the AN/TPY-2 Radar Sub-Systems
integrated product team to mitigate obsolescence
and refresh/redesign a high-speed
recorder system.
As a graduate student in chemical engineering,
Imholt worked on synthesis, processing, and
characterization of various nanomaterials spanning from carbon nanotubes, quantum dots and
nanoparticles. Before Raytheon, she worked at
a small nanotech company developing nanocomposite coatings. “With this background, my
transition into the Materials Engineering group
at Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems seemed
almost natural,” Imholt said. “IDS’ Advanced
Materials group is a world-class technology
leader in advanced materials development. When
working in the lab, it felt like I was back in graduate school, only all of the equipment actually
worked as it should!”
Imholt had never worked with ceramic materials before joining Raytheon, but she believes her
background helped her meet this new challenge.
“My family moved to the U.S. from South Korea
when I was 15, and I did not speak the language
or understand the culture.” She credits strong
personal discipline and work ethic for helping
her meet the challenge, graduating at the top of
her high school class and summa cum laude from
the University of Pittsburgh. “My philosophy is
that hard work always pays off.”
Feature
YAG Ceramics
Green body
Porosity ~ 50%
Sintered ceramic
HIPed ceramic
Porosity 5%
Porosity ~ 0%
Figure 3. Depiction of ceramic microstructure as it undergoes densification process
processing ensures refractive index and dopant uniformity of the final ceramic as well as
complete elimination of porosity and controlled grain growth.
It is critical that the starting nanopowder is
the highest quality possible in terms of its
chemical purity, sinterability, and stoichiometry. If the powder contains chemical
impurities, especially those that absorb
around the wavelengths of interest for the
application, not only will they degrade the
laser power output, they also will contribute to significant heating of the laser gain
medium. Another source of loss in laser
ceramic YAG comes from scattering. Scatter
centers can originate from poor sinterability
and off-stoichiometry of the starting powder. Sinterability attributes to the affinity of
the powder to coalesce and form ceramic
and effectively diffuse and eliminate pores
along the grain boundaries, while undergoing heat treatment. Pores that remain in
the final ceramic, whose refractive index
is hugely different from that of YAG, act
as scatter centers. Stoichiometry refers to
the molar or atomic ratio of the YAG compound, Y3Al5O12, or more specifically, 3 to
5 molar ratio of yttrium to aluminum. When
the YAG powder composition deviates from
this stoichiometric ratio by more than 1 part
in 1,000, the ceramics will contain second
phase inclusions that have different indices
of refraction than YAG and also cause optical scatter. Because the high-quality starting
nanopowder is exceptionally critical to the
overall optical properties of the final ceramic (the other factor being the optimum
ceramic processing technique), Raytheon
has established strategic relationships with
several nanopowder suppliers.
Raytheon Ceramic YAG
The most basic differences between single
crystal and ceramic material are the presence of grain boundaries and the random
orientation of individual grains in ceramics.
Figure 4 shows the scanning electron micrograph of Raytheon laser ceramic YAG.
Cyrstallographically, YAG is a cubic material
and therefore optically isotropic. The average grain size of Raytheon ceramic YAG is
less than 1.5 microns — particles coalesce
and the grains grow during densification.
Fracture strength of polycrystalline ceramic
materials tends to be greater than the corresponding single crystal, primarily because
the residual flaw size scales with grain size.
The ring-on-ring biaxial flexure fracture
strength test was carried out on 25 mm
diameter disk samples of Raytheon ceramic
YAG and the result was compared against
that of single crystal YAG samples. Fracture
toughness was also measured by Vickers
indentation method. As can be seen from
Table 1, Raytheon ceramic materials are as
much as 50 percent stronger than the single
crystal samples and the fracture toughness
proved to be exceptionally higher — 100
percent increase over single crystal.
This research has established Raytheon as
the leading domestic source of optically
transparent laser ceramic YAG with quality that matches the lasing performance
of the leading international supplier. The
material quality has been verified through
optical transmission and direct laser efficiency comparisons of Raytheon’s ceramic
Nd:YAG and that from the other leading
supplier. Specifically, the slope efficiency,
which is the key measure of lasing performance, was measured as 54 percent for
Raytheon’s material and 52 percent for the
other supplier.
Single
Raytheon
Crystal YAG Ceramic YAG
Fracture
Strength (MPa)
252
336
Fracture
Toughness
MPa/m1/2)
1.0
2.0
Table 1. Comparison of fracture strength and
fracture toughness of single crystal YAG and
Raytheon ceramic YAG.
This accomplishment was made possible
through 30-plus years of experience in the
development of optical ceramic materials
at Raytheon. In addition to this significant
milestone, Raytheon has also demonstrated
appreciable lasing in Yb- and Er-doped
ceramic YAG materials. Scale up was demonstrated with Nd:YAG and Yb:YAG in
dimensions of 90 mm diameter by 5 mm
thickness and 125 x 35 x 2.5 mm, respectively. Ceramic laser gain materials are a key enabler in advancing the next generation of high-power solid state lasers.
Raytheon’s goal is to become the domestic
supplier of high-quality laser ceramics to all bona fide high-power solid state laser
system developers. •
Jean Huie Imholt; Richard Gentilman
Figure 4. Scanning electron micrograph
showing Raytheon ceramic YAG
microstruture
Feature
Raytheon Partners With Universities
for Knowledge Technologies
The intelligence community has cried out, and Raytheon has listened.
According to Lt. Gen. David A.
Geographic Semantic Schema Matching
Deptula, Air Force deputy chief of
Integrating information has proven to
be a difficult problem over the last few
decades. Researchers at the University of
Texas at Dallas, led by Dr. Latifur Khan and
Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham, have developed a method for integrating different
geospatial resources that is applicable to
combining information from, for example,
Google Maps™ and MapQuest™ tools. The
method, called GSim, is a two-part process,
and it is intended to ultimately work with
little or no human intervention.
staff for intelligence, surveillance
and reconnaissance, “We’re going
to find ourselves in the not too
distant future swimming in sensors
and drowning in data.”1
To address this issue, Raytheon has conducted significant research and matured
techniques to work at higher orders of cognitive function in the progression from data
to information to knowledge, as depicted in
Figure 1. Part of that investment has focused
at the knowledge level, where algorithms
are developed to extract actionable information, or knowledge, from large seas of data
and tie together pieces of knowledge from
different sources to increase its value.
Raytheon’s investigation of the marketplace
has found a lack of existing tools and techniques for manipulating knowledge, so the
company has focused its research and
development on that level and higher.
This article highlights three collaborative
partnerships that Raytheon has with universities to address sharing knowledge, using
knowledge tools alongside existing information tools, and merging knowledge from
different sources.
The first part of GSim compares data between systems using details about their
geographic information. To give an example
of how many geographic locations share the
same name, the instance value “Victoria”
(depicted in Figure 2) may be a city, a
county, a lake or various other features.
After comparing enough details between
the two geographic sources, the approach
develops statistics indicating which feature
types (e.g., city, county, road, etc.) most
closely match among the data sources.
At this point, the set of possible matches
is too great and still confused. The second
part of the algorithm reduces the potential
matches by confirming which feature types
have similar meanings by looking at how
well the two features align on the planet or
estimating how alike the feature names are
Customer Environment
Definitions
Examples
p
Domain
Applications
Intelligence
Concepts/
Ontology
Knowledge
Facts/Entities
Information
Bits/Bytes/
Files/Streams
Data
Electrical
Impulses
Signal
City
1/3
1/3
Victoria
1/3
Anacortes
1
1/2
Clinton
State
Feature
County
1/2
1
Edmonds
...101101001110...
Physical Environment
Figure 1. Actionable intelligence
reference model
1
Magnuson, Stew. “Military ‘Swimming In Sensors and Drowning in Data.’” National Defense: January 2010. http://
www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2010/January/Pages/Military‘SwimmingInSensorsandDrowninginData’.aspx
Figure 2. Even within a single geographic
source, an identifier like Victoria or Clinton
may appear many times, causing great difficulty in matching across multiple sources.
Feature
Universities
by using the Google Maps distance calculator, which finds frequent occurrences of
the feature names using standard Google
search and determines how often the
potentially matching terms from the two
sources appear on the same pages.
As shown in Figure 3, the graph-oriented
(i.e., links and nodes) structures of RDF are
presented in relational database form to the
existing tools. This is accomplished without
converting any data to relational table form.
Rather, all queries in relational table form
(e.g., SQL) are converted on the fly into an
RDF form (e.g., SPARQL), and then results
are converted on the fly into the necessary
relational table presentation.
The GSim algorithm was compared with
a method for semantic similarity measurements that uses substrings of Length 2
known as 2-grams. The results over two distinct sets of geographic databases showed
that GSim performed 25 to 50 percent better in both precision and recall.
The performance impact of R2D was measured to be a negligible addition to query
time of the knowledge store while enabling
the user to leverage the data table for further analysis.
Bridging Knowledge and Information
Technologies
Random Forest Disambiguation
As knowledge technologies grow in popularity, there is still a need to work with
pre-existing tools and environments. RDF-todatabase (R2D) allows knowledge engineers
to use new storage approaches, specifically
resource description framework (RDF), with
existing relational database visualization
and analytic tools like Crystal Reports® and
Business Objects®.
Determining which names in multiple datasets actually refer to the same person is very challenging and is of high importance to the intelligence community. For
example, when “John Smith” appears
multiple times in a data set, how do we
determine if this always refers to the same
person? Solving this problem includes using
all the information available in each data
source like address, job title, list of friends,
and correspondences. Dr. C. Lee Giles at the Pennsylvania State University has developed a method for this problem and
deployed it as part of managing the scientific literature library CiteSeer, hosted by
R2D was devised at the University of Texas
at Dallas under the guidance of Dr. Latifur
Khan and Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham. It addresses the problem by providing a bridge
between the two approaches to storage.
Fields
File
rdfs:class
Person
rdf type
<Description>
Name
<First>
URI/Emp A
Description
Phone Projects
First
<Middle>
Middle
Last
<Last>
Department
Salary
<DeptId>
<Salary>
Address
<Address>
Cell
<Cell>
Cell
Work
Project
<Proj 3>
<Proj 1>
<Cell>
<Work>
R2D
Project
Project
<Proj 2>
All Database Fields
Department
Department_Description
Department_Location
Department_Name
Department_PK
Employee
Employee_Address
Employee_Department
Employee Description
Employee_PK
Employee_Salary
Name_First
Name_Last
Name_Middle
Phone
Employee_PK
Phone_Type
Phone_Value
Project
Project_Duration
Project_Name
Project_PK
Project_StartDate
Projects
Employee_PK
Project_PK
Figure 3. R2D converts semantic representations into relational database table hierarchies
The approach, named Random Forest, requires enough known truth samples to train
it before being used, like other machine
learning algorithms. The Random Forest approach uses decision-tree learning as part of
the algorithm. The decision-tree approach
takes a set of data and subdivides the data
using features such as how closely related
two names are, based on additional attributes, so that leaves of the tree represent
whether or not two names are considered
to represent the same person. The Random
Forest algorithm first modifies this approach
by using a random selection of a subset
of features for the splitting criteria at each
node in the tree, instead of optimally select-
Figure 4. Depiction of a Random Forest of
Training Sets
X
Edit Field
Special Fields
rdf type
Penn State’s College of Information Sciences
and Technology.
ing from the full feature set. Once the forest
is built, as depicted in Figure 4, it simply
counts the majority votes (i.e., match/nomatch) of the trees in the forest.
The Random Forest approach was compared
to the popular support vector machine classifier using the Medline literature database
maintained by the U.S. National Library of
Medicine, which has more than 18 million
articles. The results show Random Forest to
be two to three percentage points better
than support vector machines in accuracy,
and always much faster to train. This represents significant improvement, especially
when dealing with extremely large data sets.
Some of Raytheon’s 100+ University Partnerships and Projects
Summary
Thus far, our contributions to technologies for application and integration of
knowledge technologies include:
• Automated matching of geographic
schema
• Bridging of knowledge stores to existing database exploitation tools
• Disambiguation of human identities
across multiple sources
Raytheon will continue to mature these
technologies to address the intelligence
needs of our nation. •
Authors: Steven Seida; BJ Simpson
Contributors: Jeffrey Partyka,
Sunitha Sririam,
Dr. Latifur Khan,
Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham,
Dr. C. Lee Giles
Full-Motion Video-Based Control Research
Texas A&M
Formal Verification Methods for Security Verification
University of Texas, Austin
Semantic-Based Knowledge Extraction
UMass - Amherst
Folding MEMS IMU
UC Irvine
Advanced RF Image Formation and ATR
Ohio State University
Modeling and Prediction of Battery Lifetime in Wireless Sensor Nodes
University of Arizona
Energy Security Microgrid Configuration Study
New Mexico State University
Synthetic Aperture Radar Automatic Target Recognition (SAR ATR)
Cal Poly SLO
Distributed Radar for Weather Detection - Waveforms
University of Melbourne
Distributed Radar for Weather Detection - Testbed
University of Adelaide
Rapid Grinding and Polishing of SiC and Glass Ceramic Substrates
University of Arizona
Novel Passive and Active Mid-IR Fibers for IRCM Applications
Clemson University
Low Loss, High Strength Fibers from Improved Chalcogenide Glasses
Clemson University
AlGaN/GaN Nanowire Transistors for Low Noise and W-band Applications
MIT
Radar Signal Processing
Cal Poly Pomona
Silicon Compatible Processing of III-V Devices
University of Glasgow
3-D Modeling of Semi-Guiding Fiber
University of Rochester
Enhancing Modeling and Simulation Reuse
Old Dominion University
Low Defect Density Substrate Technology for Heterogeneopus Integration
of III-V Devices and Si CMOS
MIT
Increasing the Self-Focusing Threshold in High-Peak-Power Fiber Lasers
Cornell University
Development of Titanium Foil Reinforced High Temperature Composite GS Fuselage
UCLA
Meta and Nano Materials Research
UMass-Lowell
Partnership for Cyber Policy Research
Georgetown University
High Mechanical Performance and Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)
Shielded Multifunctional Composites
Florida State University
MBE-Grown, IV-VI Nano-Based, Ultra Thermoelectric Coolers
University of Oklahoma
Electrowetting Display Research
University of Cincinnati
ENGINEERING PROFILE
BJ Simpson
Intelligence
and
Information
Systems
Senior
Principal
Software
Engineer
BJ Simpson
has spent more
than 30 years
as a technology leader
and innovator
at Raytheon
Intelligence and Information Systems and its
legacy companies. Currently a senior principal
software engineer at IIS, he is the principal
investigator for the newly formed Informatics
and Knowledge Analytics Technology Center,
which allows him to direct application of knowledge discovery and management technologies
toward our customers’ ever-changing problems.
“I have always had an interest in following new
technology, and do a lot of reading and research
on my own time,” Simpson said. “What excites
me most in my job is the ability to continually
work with cutting-edge technology, and to collaborate with technical experts across Raytheon,
academia and commercial companies.”
Simpson was first drawn into these current areas
of interest in the early days of the World Wide
Web, when he was part of a proposal demonstration. Following that effort and working for
programs that allowed him to apply these new
techniques, he was assigned to develop advanced
concepts and identify emerging technologies for
insertion into programs. This path now allows
him to continually investigate and apply new
technology in Raytheon and customer-funded
research, proposals and ongoing programs.
There are several challenges to working with
emerging technologies, according to Simpson.
One involves balancing near-term business
demands with longer term technology development to prepare for the future. “With the
current pace of change in technology, new
concepts and technologies emerge seemingly
daily,” Simpson said. “We need to balance that
with maintaining ongoing communications with
commercial vendors and universities as well as
our internal business development and program
customers.”
Simpson received a bachelor’s degree in computer science from The Pennsylvania State
University.
Feature
Small Business Innovation Research
T
he U.S. federal government’s Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
program represents a significant opportunity for Raytheon to work with
small businesses to develop technologies
for the customer, fill technology needs and
gaps, and create competitive discriminators
for Raytheon.
Congress established the SBIR program in
1982 to more effectively meet the nation’s
research and development needs by investing in small businesses to develop innovative
technologies. The U.S. high-tech small business base, composed of more than 450,000
engineers and scientists, represents a major
technology and business growth engine
for the U.S. and a resource that Raytheon
continues to effectively utilize. In so doing,
we can provide more cost-effective weapon
systems to the warfighter.
In fiscal year 2008 the government invested
$2.5 billion in the SBIR program. Figure 1
shows the breakdown of the SBIR budget
for FY08. This article discusses the latest
advances in the SBIR program and how
Raytheon is proactively engaging with small
businesses and government customers to
help increase the overall success of the SBIR program.
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) SBIR and
Small-business Technology Transfer (STTR)
programs. Raytheon program managers
work closely with their government counterparts to recommend ways of effectively
using the SBIR Program to satisfy our shared
program needs.
The formal SBIR program consists of three
phases, as depicted in Figure 2. Phases I and II are formally funded from the congressionally mandated SBIR program.
Federal agencies allocate 2.5 percent of
their research, development, test and evaluation budget to the SBIR program and an
additional 0.3 percent to the STTR
Figure 2 shows a number of entry points
where Raytheon becomes actively involved
with a small business during SBIR development. While we have typically become
involved in Phases I or II, we are increasingly
focusing on being more proactive by working with our customers and small businesses
in defining solicitation topics to satisfy our
program and technology roadmap needs.
This earlier involvement is referred to as
“Phase 0.”
DHS
DOE $19M
$115M
0.8%
5%
NASA
NSF Other
$115M
$97M $46M
5%
4.2% 2%
NIH
$651M
28.1%
DoD
$1.272B
54.9%
$2.315 Billion
U.S. Total Federal SBIR/STTR FY2008
For most of the past 10 years, Raytheon has
been actively involved in leveraging technology developed by small businesses via the
DARPA
$72M
5.7%
MDA
$137M
10.8%
OSD
$64M
5% Other
$32M
2.5%
Air Force
$370M
29.1%
Army
$303M
23.8%
Navy
$294M
23.1%
$1.272 Billion
DoD SBIR/STTR FY2008
Figure 1. SBIR funding
program. Phase III, referred to as both
“commercialization” and “transition to production,” is funded utilizing non-SBIR money.
Feature
A collaborative
path for developing
needed technologies
Since the year 2000, a number of government initiatives have been instituted to
increase the effectiveness of the program,
especially within DoD.
• Development of integrated program and
technology road maps/plans between the
prime contractors, their customers and
small business partners.
• The Navy Transition Assistance Program
helps small businesses transition their
technology to engineering and manufacturing development and production.
• The Commercialization Pilot Program
(CPP) more rapidly transitions SBIR Phase II technologies into production
• “Program Manager/PEO Pull” emphasizes
the importance of having government
program managers involved early in the
process to establish a need and verify
commitment.
Leveraging SBIR technologies is one important way that Raytheon fills technology
gaps identified in the technology planning
process. The company’s successes in transitioning technology from small businesses
into programs of record came through persistence and strong partnerships with both
the end customer and the small business.
• “Primes’ Initiative” proactively involves
the prime contractor community.
• Presidential Executive Order 13329, “Encouraging Innovation in Manufacturing,” defines duties of the
agencies and departments that participate in the SBIR and STTR programs.
PROACTIVE
REACTIVE
SIBR Dollars
Non-SIBR Dollars
PHASE I
PHASE II
~6 mo.,$75-100K
~18-24 mo.,$750K-$1M
PEOs and SBs to:
– Align strategies
– Develop road maps
– Shape technology
Entry point
Entry point
Entry point
Figure 2. SBIR Phase 0 through III
Vanguard Composites: During development and qualification of Exoatmospheric
Kill Vehicle (EKV), Raytheon needed a
metal flange to meet design requirements.
Vanguard Composites developed an Raytheon has numerous success stories of
transitioning benefits derived from SBIRdeveloped technologies into our products
Upfront engagement
Shift from reactive to proactive
PHASE 0 1 Solicitation
2 Proposal
Develop solicitation
3 Announcement
ideas and work with
4 Award
where our entry into the SBIR process varied
from proactively entering into Phase 0 collaboration to partnering well into Phase III.
The following sampling of success stories
shows the diversity of approaches for participating in the SBIR/STTR programs.
Entry point
Entry point
PHASE III
Program Dependent
Transition to SDD
or production via prime
Entry point
advanced composite material replacement
part with U.S. Missile Defense Agency
(MDA) SBIR funding. The part met the
demanding design requirements, and
Raytheon and Vanguard entered into a
Phase III contract, which enabled qualification and transition to production of the
metal flange to meet EKV’s deployment
schedule. The SBIR-developed hardware is
on all delivered production units.
Versatron: A control actuator system was
developed by Raytheon partner Versatron
(now a part of General Dynamics) for gunContinued on page 34
Feature
SBIR
KaZaK Composites: Raytheon was involved
in the Phase II development and test of
armor protection for ship applications
with KaZaK Composites. This new highperformance material provides Phase III
cost savings to the U.S. Navy and is now
part of a significant contract award for the
Zumwalt DDG-1000 Destroyer program.
Beacon: Raytheon has actively worked with
Beacon Interactive Systems on various Phase II SBIR projects, culminating in a Phase III transition of Beacon’s IMAPS
maintenance software to the Zumwalt
DDG-1000 Destroyer Program. Leveraging
this successful SBIR-developed capability,
U.S. Fleet Forces Command is currently in
the process of transitioning IMAPS to every
ship in the fleet.
launched projectiles under Navy Phase I
and II SBIR awards beginning in the late
Iris Technology Corporation: In a collabora-
1990s. Versatron’s design provided enabling
tion that began in Phase I, Iris Technology
technology for precision-guided projectiles.
Corporation designed and built a next-
This technology has been used on nearly all
generation cryo-cooler motor drive. Their
guided projectiles developed over the past
concept improved system efficiency, electro-
ten years, and contributes to the precision
magnetic interference performance, power
guidance capability for the U.S. Army’s
capacity, vibration and temperature control,
Excalibur guided projectile.
and radiation hardness. This SBIR-developed
technology helped Raytheon secure a new
San Diego Composites: San Diego
program win; the technology will be further
Composites worked with Raytheon to matured as a part of this program.
develop an innovative replacement design
for an expensive mechanical structure
BSEI: BSEI was developing target acquisi-
using a low-cost material approach, initially
tion algorithms for foliage penetration.
funded under internal research and devel-
Raytheon supported BSEI’s effort by de-
opment funding, followed by MDA and
veloping a small airborne radar system for
Navy SBIR funding. The result: Component
this application. Raytheon received Phase
cost was reduced by more than one-third.
III funding through an indefinite-delivery,
indefinite-quantity contract to build the
radar system and test BSEI’s target recognition algorithms, with BSEI participating as
a subcontractor. We are currently pursuing
funding via the CPP initiative to transition
the complete system into production for
drug enforcement missions, and evaluating expansion of this capability for DoD
applications.
DSI: Raytheon’s AMRAAM Program defined
a Phase 0 information technology topic for
supply chain management risk-mitigation
planning and implementation. Phase I and II SBIR awards were made to DSI by the
Air Force. Early in the process, Raytheon
awarded a Phase III contract to DSI to begin
integration of the software into our management information and control systems.
We are currently working with multiple
programs across the business unit to pursue
implementation funding to transition this
unique capability into broader use.
These examples of Raytheon SBIR success stories represent only a sampling of
how we have successfully partnered with
small businesses and government through
the SBIR program to close technology
gaps. Raytheon continues to welcome opportunities to establish new partnerships
with additional small businesses, including veteran-owned, disadvantaged and
Mentor–Protégé participating businesses. •
John P. Waszczak
Feature
The Convergence of Virtual Reality and Warfighter
Training to Counter Improvised Explosive Devices
E
xpect the unexpected. Thanks to
Raytheon’s IED Reality Training (IRT)
technology, U.S. warfighters assigned
with countering IEDs will be prepared to
do just that. IRT is a result of Raytheon’s
research to combine motion capture
technology, simulation-based realism and
battlefield domain expertise that puts warfighters into a fully immersive environment before they deploy into a war zone.
be quickly modified to replicate a new threat,
a new environment, or a new enemy.”
Able to function around the clock, this technology is cost-effective and provides a much
greater training capacity than what is currently available to warfighters, Baggott said.
Virtual Realistic Battlefield
By merging the technologies found in motion picture animation with immersive
simulations, the Raytheon IRT Team can
create virtual experiences that replicate
the sights, sounds and stresses of the
battlefield. And they can do it just about
anywhere. IRT can be installed in any large
interior space, such as dining facilities,
warehouses, aircraft hangers, and even expandable truck-hauled trailers.
Conceptually, the IRT is a safe, effective training solution for countering IEDs,
one of the military’s deadliest problems.
Structurally, it consists of a large frame
with a bank of mounted cameras. These
cameras provide the visualization that goes
into the head-mounted displays worn by the
warfighters. For added realism, the training
exercises also allow the warfighters to use
their very own communications equipment
and weapons, once they’re connected with lasers.
“It is a great rehearsal for pre-deployment
and home-station training,” said John
Baggott, a former soldier and trainer who
is now with Raytheon Technical Services
Company LLC. Baggott set the program
in motion in April 2008. “It gets warfighters familiar with the specific environment
they’re going in to, and it provides them
with the visual cues they’ll need to react to
in that environment. Most importantly, as
the IED threat changes, this technology can
With the head set on and the gaming
animation activated, the trainees feel like
they’re in a war zone, with all of its unpredictable stimuli — even though they may
physically be standing in a warehouse in
Florida. Depending on the configuration,
individuals or entire platoons can be simultaneously trained in this realistic virtual
battlefield. As such, it is an ideal environment to teach the skills required to interact
as part of a team.
This highly portable and fully immersive
platform uses commercial-off-the-shelf
(COTS) technology that can be integrated
and fielded in less than seven months.
Evolving Threat, Evolving Technology
To be effective, IED defeat training must not
only integrate the actual fielded equipment
the warfighters use in combat, it must also
update current threat employment tactics,
techniques and procedures. In other words,
as the real-world IED environment changes,
so too must the gaming technology activated in the IRT.
For example, the IRT might incorporate
either a command-detonated IED or
pressure-detonated IED into the simulation, depending on the trend in the region.
If it is command-detonated, the training
focuses on the electronic pulses between
the command detonation and the IED. If it
is pressure-activated, then it focuses on the
pressure of the movement on the ground.
By simply changing the cue of the training,
it forces the warfighters to change how
they would perform in a given environment
based on the threat.
Feature
Continnued from page 35
Award-Winning Animation and
Simulation Partners
The technology can also be ratcheted up based on the training level of the
warfighter. If it’s the first time a trainee is
going through the IRT, for instance, the
environment might be open and friendly
with non-combatants. As their training
progresses, hostile combatants and other
artificial intelligence (AI) characters can be
integrated into the gaming environment. In all cases, the characters will react positively or negatively — in real time — based
on the trainee’s actions.
Raytheon’s IRT solution combines patented
technologies from a pair of award-winning
partners: Motion Reality, Inc. (MRI) and
BreakAway, Ltd.
MRI has been a pioneer in the area of 3D
real-time engineering analysis and computer graphics animation of human motion
since 1984. During this time, MRI has been
recognized with numerous international accolades for its ability to accurately capture a
subject’s 3D motion and display any biomechanical data associated with that motion.
Raytheon’s IRT solution uses the MRIdeveloped Virtual Tactical Training
Simulation System (VIRTSIM™), which provides real-time soldier simulation animation,
and gives the individual combatant mobility
and full-body interaction with the simulation. With VIRTSIM, the warfighter visualizes
himself within his surroundings through
a wireless stereo head-mounted display.
VIRTSIM scenarios are reconfigurable and
create strikingly accurate battlespace environments, making them far more effective
than canned video displays projected on a
wall or CD-ROM-based training on a PC.
VIRTSIM trainees move, shoot, and interact
inside a 3D virtual battlespace, during which
they are stressed both physically and cognitively. Stress is achieved by employing audio
and visually accurate stimuli commonly associated with a war zone. For example, AI
characters (non-combatants and combatants)
are mixed into scenarios and react appropriately to all trainee real-time actions and
activities based on movements stocked in a
motion library. The motions of all characters
are created using Academy Award®-winning
motion capture technology to deliver unmatched realism. In fact, AI characters are
capable of speaking in any language, and
are capable of facial expressions.
BreakAway is a leading developer of entertainment games and game-based technology for modeling, simulation, training and visualization. By applying the tools
and technology of the gaming industry to
the creation of military training, BreakAway
makes it possible to achieve the promise of
deployable, immersive, interactive training.
The BreakAway technology integrated into
Raytheon’s IRT is mōsbē™, a custom simulation development platform built from PC
game technology. The mōsbē platform can
represent large virtual worlds in 2D and 3D.
mōsbē employs statistical, effects-based
models of civilian and military vehicles,
weapon systems and sensors to simulate actions and the resulting effects of symmetric and asymmetric combat.
Derived from strategy game technology for mission planning, mōsbē is optimized
to replicate IED combat scenarios of up
to 2,500 entities, and allows the training
audience to focus on decision making, leadership, and the command and control of
tactical operations.
Within IRT, VIRTSIM and mōsbē are
connected in a federation to allow a coordinated training experience. Federating
the systems provides each end user with a
tailored training experience: Individuals and
squads receive the immersive hands-on IED
training they need, and company staffs have
a command-centric interaction with the tactical operations.
On the Forefront
Simulation and virtual training have proven
to be a safe and effective way to train military personnel — warfighters and staff — in
a wide range of activities.
“IRT is cost effective, easily transportable,
quickly configured, and, most importantly,
can be tailored to the needs of its training audience,” Baggott said. “If a unit has
been alerted for movement to Kabul this
technology can be adapted to replicate the
environment and the combat conditions our
warfighters must succeed in.”
For these reasons, the military simulation and
virtual training market has seen dramatic
growth in the last decade and is expected
to grow steadily in the years ahead. And
Raytheon, with its IRT technology, stands on
the forefront of this emerging market. •
Contributor: John Baggott
Feature
Raytheon BBN Technologies: Persistent Innovation
M
ore than 60 years ago, two
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT) acoustics professors set up a small, architectural acoustics
consulting firm in Cambridge, Mass. The
modest firm’s first commission was an auspicious one: design the acoustics for the
United Nations facilities being built in New
York City. Requests for consulting work on
lesser auditoriums followed and the firm
— called Bolt Beranek and Newman — developed a reputation for excellent acoustics.
Soon the National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics (forerunner of NASA) called
on the firm for urgent help. The noise and
vibration from a newly deployed jet engine
were a major nuisance, and calls were
lighting up switchboards in police and fire
stations and local government offices. It had
to be fixed. Seven months later, neighbors
could not tell when the engine was running,
and Bolt Beranek and Newman’s reputation
for acoustic excellence spread.
Leo Beranek believed that every new
hire should enhance the firm’s capabilities. Because it was so close to Harvard
University and The Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, BBN was able to recruit
employees from the brightest, best-trained
scientists and engineers, and BBN became
known as “Cambridge’s third university.”
The caliber of BBN’s staff, combined with
its reputation for tackling tough, interesting
problems, made it the place where smart
people chose to work. One of the bright
new employees, J.C.R. Licklider, recommended that BBN buy a computer — an
unusual acquisition in 1958 — but Beranek
agreed. It was a momentous decision, paving the way for BBN’s technology diversity
and networking expertise.
idea could also be applied to high-speed
networks transmitting messages across
varied routes to dispersed destinations. This
is the breakthrough idea that enabled the
Internet as we know it.
Enabling the Internet
When the Advanced Research Projects
Agency sent out the request for proposals
for the ARPANET in the early 1960s, notable
players in the communications industry
were skeptical that such a network could
work. They were even more surprised that
the significant contract went to a small
firm in Cambridge rather than to one of
the communications giants. The notion of
breaking messages into small packets and
reassembling them at their destination was
revolutionary, but with the implementation
of the first four nodes of the ARPANET, BBN
proved that not only could it be done, the
BBN founder Leo Beranek
Feature
BBN Technologies
Other networking breakthroughs followed
in rapid succession. During the next decade,
one of BBN’s scientists, Ray Tomlinson,
invented network e-mail and established
the @ sign protocol, creating the digital
icon for our age. At the same time, BBN
was already anticipating the security requirements of the network technology on
the horizon and demonstrated the first
secure traffic sent over a packet-switched
network and deployed the first IP-based
network encryption. Other BBN networking
scientists developed the first routers, and
demonstrated packet broadcast satellite
communications over the Atlantic Ocean.
Now BBN is known for deploying the first
quantum-encrypted network, advanced
software in support of the widebandnetwork waveform, directional-antenna
networking technologies and security for
critical networks, as well as for world-class
expertise in very large ad hoc wireless
networks.
The BBN Broadcast Monitoring System creates a continuous, searchable archive of international
television and radio broadcasts. The audio stream is automatically transcribed by BBN’s Audio
Monitoring Component and translated into English with technology from Language Weaver in
real time.
Pioneering Speech and
Language Processing
At the same time as the networking pioneers were making early advances, other
BBN scientists were tackling tough language-processing problems and performing
pioneering research in automatic speech
recognition. By the mid-1980s, BBN had
developed Byblos™, a high-performance,
continuous speech recognition system.
Since then, BBN has had many firsts in
speech and language processing, including the first demonstration of real-time,
large-vocabulary, speaker-independent continuous speech recognition on commercial
off-the-shelf hardware. Current research
programs continue to advance the state of
speech recognition technology and deliver
significant improvements in recognition
accuracy for speech in different environments and in multiple languages, including
English, Arabic, Mandarin and Spanish.
Because BBN’s natural language processing
technologies can locate, identify, and organize information from a variety of sources
and in multiple languages, they have enabled successful products such as
the BBN multimedia monitoring system that
transcribes and translates foreign Web and
broadcast news in real time, giving U.S. analysts an immediate awareness of the
events and attitudes influencing our world.
Continuing Acoustics Leadership
Even as the staff explored new technology
areas, BBN maintained a leadership position in acoustics, frequently combining that
knowledge with networking expertise
Feature
to develop sophisticated sensor systems.
BBN’s acoustic expertise contributed to our
nation’s undetectable submarines; now it is
saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan though
the Boomerang shooter detection system
(see cover photo).
In addition to continued work in networking and speech, BBN is applying its data
mining expertise to healthcare to predict
outcomes and spot early warnings of
disease outbreaks. BBN physicists are developing next generation communication,
sensing, transaction, and computation systems using quantum and optical
techniques.
As part of Raytheon, BBN looks forward to transitioning advanced research in all
these areas more quickly to the field to give our government customers every technological advantage. •
Raytheon Joins DARPA’s
Focus Center Research Program
As discussed in several of the articles in this issue, Raytheon is a leader in advanced photonic and electronic component technologies that enable new system capabilities. To
ensure we continue to maintain this technological edge, Raytheon recently joined the
Focus Center Research Program (FCRP), a major pre-competitive research consortium
jointly sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the
Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA).
As depicted in the figure below, the FCRP consists of six university research centers that
address all aspects of modern semiconductor materials, devices, circuits, systems and
applications. The six centers encompass 43 universities and more than 230 faculty members. Raytheon joined the FCRP in 2009 as the first representative from the aerospace
and defense industry. As a member of the FCRP, Raytheon receives royalty-free rights
to intellectual property generated under the program, gets access to top engineering
students, and gains early insights into emerging research areas that impact Raytheon
systems. Raytheon expects to leverage this program to maintain its technology and
innovation leadership in the aerospace and defense industry. •
Joyce Kuzmin
Multi-scale
Systems
Boomerang
wearable
detection
system
Gigascale Systems
Research Center
• Heterogeneous design
• Soft systems
• 15 Universities - Princeton (Lead),
Carnegie Mellon, Columbia,
Georgia Tech, Harvard. MIT, Stanford,
UCB, UCLA, UCSB, UCSD, UIUC,
U. Mass, U. Michigan, U. Penn
Center for Circuit &
Systems Solutions
• Analog/mixed signal
• Heterogeneous circuits
• Post-CMOS circuits
• 13 Universities -
Carnegie Mellon (Lead), Caltech,
Columbia, Cornell, MIT, Stanford,
Texas A&M, UCB, UCLA, UCSD, UIUC,
U. Michigan, UT Dallas
Functional Engineered
Nano-Architectonics
• Post-CMOS research in nano
materials/devices
• 14 Universities - UCLA (Lead),
Caltech, Columbia, MIT, NC State,
Northwestern, Purdue, Stanford,UCB,
UCSB, U. Mass, UC Riverside, UCS, Yale
Microsystems
Design
Hardware/
Software
Platform/
Achitecture
Circuits
Devices/
Interconnect
Structures
Materials
Physics
Multiscale Systems Center
• Distr. Sense and Control
• Large & small scale sytems
• 10 Universities - UC Berkeley (Lead),
Caltech, NC State, Rice, Stanford, UCSD
UIUC, U. Maryland, U. Michigan, USC
Interconnect Focus Center
• Nano wires
• Expanded optoelectronics
• Power
• Thermal
• Networking
• 13 Universities - Georgia Tech (Lead),
Arizona State, Caltech, Columbia,
Dartmouth, MIT, RPI, Stanford,
SUNY Albany, UCB, UCSC,
U. Florida, UC Riverside,
Materials, Structures & Devices
• Ultimate-scale CMOS structures
• Post-CMOS materials
• 15 Universities - MIT (Lead),
Columbia, Cornell, Harvard, Penn State,
Purdue, Stanford, SUNY Albany,
UCB, UCSD, UIUC, U. Mass, U. Penn,
UT Austin, UT Dallas
Focus Center Research Program’s six centers and their university partners
LEADERS CORNER
Bill Kiczuk
Vice President, Chief Technology Officer
Bill Kiczuk is vice president and chief technology officer for Raytheon
Company. He oversees the development and execution of the integrated
technology and research vision and strategy for the entire company.
Kiczuk chairs the company’s technology leadership team, which
oversees Raytheon’s collective research collaboration and technology
opportunities. He also represents the company on outside councils
regarding technology and the defense industry. From 2003–2010,
he was technical director and director of Strategic Architectures for
Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems. A 29-year Raytheon veteran,
Kiczuk has held a variety of engineering, management and technical
leadership positions.
T
echnology Today recently spoke
with Kiczuk about his background,
his responsibilities as CTO, how
Raytheon’s technology strategy is developed, and the roles of research and
innovation in technology strategy.
TT: What are your duties as CTO?
BK: I focus on technology and innovation
— two cornerstones to Raytheon’s success that I am passionate about. I ensure
Raytheon has an integrated technology
portfolio that will help us win programs
near term while positioning the company
for longer term success. I work with the
technical directors across the company to
coordinate technology for our broad range
of development efforts and we work to
maintain a long-term strategic technical
vision for the company.
I lead Raytheon’s technology leadership
team, which is responsible for developing
and executing an integrated technology
and research strategy.
TT: What are your initial goals for
this position?
TT: How is the company’s technology
strategy set?
BK: We need to strengthen collaboration across the company and ensure we
are integrating our capabilities to provide
solutions for our customers. We’re doing
well in this area, but it requires continuous
focus to ensure we don’t miss opportunities. Ultimately, we want to reach a level
of proactive technology management and
optimization, where we have a comprehensive integrated technology strategy
that aligns with our business plans and
ensures our goals are met.
BK: We analyze inputs from many perspectives and integrate them to form the
technology strategy. From our customers,
we seek to understand their needs today
and in the future. Business development
and program management leadership help
us apply a business filter to determine market priorities, which technologies in those
markets will be differentiators and how
the technologies might evolve to impact
our business plans.
Key to our integrated technology strategy
is having an external focus. This not only
strengthens our technology fabric but also
incorporates a partnership component
with our customers, universities and other
technology sources.
In the end, it’s about ensuring that we
think strategically and execute tactically.
We also look for true game-changing technologies that could revolutionize the way
we view a market and impact our business
plans. We develop an understanding of
our internal capabilities along with what
is externally available, identify key milestones for each technology and potential
sources of technology and create a plan
that addresses how we will mature the key
technologies. We monitor our progress
and make appropriate adjustments.
TT: What role does research play in
Raytheon’s technology strategy?
BK: Research plays a significant role in
thinking and planning strategically. We
need to begin identifying and working on
technologies, now, that may not find their
way into systems for the next five or 10 years. Many of the technologies we start today may not ever mature or prove
viable in the long run. So it’s important that we cast a wide net, looking at many
alternatives, but do it in a low-risk, affordable manner.
This is where we rely more on partnerships
and consortiums. Partnerships — whether
with universities, government or industry —
enable Raytheon to access a much broader
range of ideas and technologies. In many
cases, we can add value through complementary capabilities or technologies. In all
cases, we gain valuable insight that helps us to understand the state of the art and
plan for integration of new technologies
into our products.
TT: Innovation … How do we knit together
our people and processes to effectively
capture it? And/or how do we nurture it?
BK: It’s critical for Raytheon to maintain its
innovative culture. This is key to our identity, and it’s an enabler for where we want
to go. From an enterprise perspective, we
sponsor numerous initiatives ranging from
the Raytheon Innovation Challenge to the
IDEA program. We also encourage businessspecific initiatives like the Bike Shop in
Missile Systems and the Office of Innovation in Space and Airborne Systems.
Each initiative encourages innovation in its
own way, and they have been successful.
From a corporate perspective, it’s important
that we encourage these approaches while not trying to homogenize to a onesize-fits-all approach. These business-specific
approaches result in diversity of thought
and unique ideas that we need to cultivate.
TT: You’ve worked in many parts of the
company with varying cultures. What have
you taken away from each place?
BK: I started with Texas Instruments
Defense Systems and Electronics Group
in Dallas, and worked the last six years in
Integrated Defense Systems, after moving to
New England. In between, I’ve worked with
other parts of Raytheon through the years
on missile systems, avionics, and ground
systems. This has given me the opportunity
to see firsthand what makes Raytheon a
great technology-driven company. Across
the company, we have a culture of innovation and continuous improvement that
constantly generates new ideas and challenges the status quo. We complement this
with a strong engineering discipline that
pays attention to details and delivers results
for our customers.
Recently I had the opportunity to escort a
reporter who has done a series of articles
on aerospace and defense companies,
including many of our peers. His insight was
interesting. He conveyed that what stood
out about Raytheon was the pervasiveness
of our innovative engineering culture. We
don’t need to set up special standalone
organizations to be innovative or to engineer high tech products. We do these things
every day, everywhere. Most importantly,
we work together to get things done.
TT: Having a master’s degree in systems
engineering and having led IDS’ Strategic
Architecture Directorate, what are your
thoughts on these two disciplines?
BK: I view systems engineering and
systems architecting as tightly coupled
disciplines. Systems engineering decomposes specific mission needs into a set of
systems requirements that we then design
and test to. It provides traceability from
key performance parameters to design
features and tests. Systems architecting
provides for a standard set of solutions
to a broad range of problems. It also
provides the ability to explicitly deal with
ambiguities and unknowns within a well
defined standard framework.
Integrating these practices enables
interoperability and affordability through
re-use and planned evolution.
TT: You’ve won some of Raytheon’s
highest awards during your career. What’s
your formula for success?
BK: I’ve been fortunate enough to work
with a lot of good people on challenging projects that I really enjoyed. If you
are surrounded by good people, and you
are willing to listen, learn, and contribute
wherever needed, things generally work
out for the better. Most important, I
think, is that in whatever position I held, I
wanted to make a difference, so I worked
with the people around me to make
things successful. •
That being said, our company is multinational and distributed around the U.S. and
the world. We do have local cultures, local
strengths, and unique capabilities across
the company. This is a good thing; it puts
a local face on Raytheon and enables us to
make a difference in communities and work
more effectively with universities. This gives
us the diversity in thought and practice we
need to be strong.
on
Technology
Information Systems and Computing
Knowledge Exploitation:
Connecting the Dots to Enable Information Operations
Information Operations (IO).
IO is the integrated use of electronic warfare, computer network operations, psychological operations, military deception
and operations security.1
IO creates huge amounts of disparate data,
each piece of which, by itself, may not be
particularly meaningful. These data must
be parsed, understood, fused and analyzed
before a picture that can be acted upon
can emerge from the disconnected dots.
Currently, the military can process only 20
percent of the available sensor data.2 To realize the potential of emerging IO technologies,
significant improvements in data processing
and analysis are needed. Knowledge exploitation (Kx) is an emerging Raytheon capability
that addresses these issues.
Knowledge Exploitation
Kx integrates elements of four complementary technologies: knowledge management
(KM), information fusion (IF), knowledge
discovery (KD) and semantic processing.
Knowledge management addresses the effective organization and retrieval of source
material and data streams. Information
fusion melds related data to eliminate
redundancy, reduce uncertainty, provide
situation awareness, and enable effective
decision-making and resource allocation.
Knowledge discovery techniques find nonobvious relationships, patterns and trends
Exfiltration Malware
Controlled
by
Is a
Controlling
Device
Malware
Has
Location
Exploits
Exfiltrates
buried within the mounds of data; and
semantic processing establishes the meaning of data.3 This article shows how these
knowledge exploitation technologies can
be integrated to help “connect the dots” to
enable IO, with a specific emphasis on semantic processing and knowledge discovery.
instances of the defined concepts and relationships in the knowledge model. These
facts are called assertions. Knowledge extractors can operate on sensor data, RDBs,
Web pages or unstructured text, and they
allow us to capture a rich set of assertions
about the IO domain.
Semantic Processing and
Knowledge Discovery
Each assertion specifies a relationship between two entities — the subject entity
and the object entity — which are specific
instances of the concepts in the knowledge
model. An assertion can be thought of
as the node – edge – node construct of a
graph corresponding to the subject – relationship – object data pattern. For example,
the graph of Figure 2 would be constructed
from independent observations and would
consist of specific instances of the concepts
defined in Figure 1.
IO involves diverse entities such as people,
computers, networks, software, infrastructure and organizations as well as more
abstract concepts such as effects, vulnerabilities and cultural biases. Unlike relational
databases (RDBs), which are very good for
storing many instances of similar, wellstructured data, semantic processing easily
captures and manipulates many diverse
concepts and how they relate to each other.
Semantic processing is thus well suited to
represent and manipulate the concepts in
the IO domain.
The starting point for capturing knowledge
in a semantic system is to describe the
framework of the problem domain; in our
case, IO. The framework is captured in a
knowledge model4 that consists of three
parts: concepts, relationships and rules. The
concepts and relationships5 can be represented together as a concept map such as
that in Figure 1, which depicts a part of the
IO domain. Here concepts are represented
as nodes of a graph and their relationships
as annotated edges. Knowledge extractors are used to convert
information from data sources to specific
Deployed
on
Has
OS
OS
Used
By
User
Rules can also be used to infer additional
facts and patterns in the graph and can
identify situations that need to be acted
upon. For example, appropriate rules applied to the above graph would reasonably
generate an alert that country ZZZ could be
exfiltrating sensitive defense information.
BScope.Trojan.Palevo.1
Exploits
Target Device
Country
Constructing this graph from individual assertions requires us to recognize when two
instances of an entity, possibly reported by
different sources, represent the same entity.
This process, which links individual assertions
together, is a specific form of information
fusion6 called object refinement. Object refinement can be implemented by the third
element of the knowledge model, rules.
Figure 1. A partial concept map of the IO
domain showing terms and relationships
Exfiltrates
192.168.1.178
Has
OS
Has
User
Data
User Data
Deployed On
MS Windows 2000
Version 2.0
Used
By
293.219.245.212
Has
User Data
Defense
Contractor
Controlled by
Has
Location
Document
1
Figure 2. Concept map of asserted facts for the IO Domain
Country
ZZZ
on
Because we are representing knowledge in
the form of a graph, we can employ graph
algorithms, in addition to rules, to discover
patterns and relationships of interest.
Many important non-obvious relationships
often appear as multi-hop links chained
through several nodes in the graph. Graph
algorithms can be used to discover these
graph paths and assert the non-obvious
relationships between nodes. Our Raytheon
IIS partners are developing special-purpose
high-speed graph processes that will enable
us to efficiently implement knowledgediscovery algorithms on huge graphs.
In addition to the graph representation of knowledge, it is also common
to capture assertions as triples in the
form subject – relationship – object. The
Resource Description Framework (RDF),7
Web Ontology Language (OWL),8 and the
Semantic Protocol and RDF Query Language
(SPARQL) are semantic Web standards that
can be used to express a knowledge model
as triples, enable reasoning to be performed by commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
reasoning engines, and provide a query/rule
language for the model. These standards
enable inferences and rule-based reasoning
to be done, complementing graph exploitation algorithms to discover and infer new
knowledge. RDF triples and knowledge graphs are
different approaches to knowledge representation. Knowledge discovery can
be done using the representation most
likely to perform best for a particular
problem. Current COTS RDF triple stores
have limited storage capacity and reasoning performance. Dedicated, high-speed
graph processors, such as those under
development by Raytheon, will provide
the high-speed reasoning, on huge data
stores, required to address the IO and similar problems. •
Author: Jean Greenawalt
Contributors: Don Kretz, Jim Jacobs, John
Montgomery, John Moon, Tom Chung
Joint Publication 3-13, Information Operations, 13 February 2006.
Al Shaffer, principal deputy director, Defense Research and Engineering.
Semantic processing also establishes common shared meaning, which enables interoperability.
4
One common form of a knowledge model, called an ontology, uses formal description logic to
express the semantics of a term.
5
In general, concepts can have attributes. For example, if the concept is a person, it is useful
to capture attributes such a name, address, and date of birth. In many applications, it is also
important to assign attributes to edges, such as the time an observation is valid.
6
Object refinement recognizes when two or more nodes represent the same entity and combines them, eliminating duplicates and reducing uncertainty. Object refinement is also called
Level 1 fusion in the Joint Directors of Laboratories (JDL) fusion framework. This is the most
widely accepted model of information fusion. See Revisiting the JDL Data Fusion Model II,
James Llinas, Christopher Bowman, Galina Rogova, Alan Steinberg, Ed Waltz and Frank White,
2004, for a discussion of the JDL model and refinements.
7
See http://www.w3.org/RDF for an overview of RDF.
8
See http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features for an overview of OWL.
Technology
Multifunction RF
Next Generation RF Systems:
Multifunction Designs to Meet
Future Warfighter Needs
T
o control the evolving battlespace, our
customers increasingly require systems that
sense more phenomena; transfer the results
of the sensing to the decision maker more
quickly; provide electronic protection; and
do all this without adding cost, weight or
power. These factors are driving future system designs that must incorporate multiple functions. set of missions. To meet this requirement,
platforms must have a broader range of
sensors and greater communications connectivity. Because weight, power, cooling
and cost constraints prohibit carrying a full
suite of optimized, federated systems, an
urgent need has emerged for a new generation of radio frequency (RF) systems that
can support multiple functions.
Raytheon has a long tradition of providing
the absolute best in sensor and communication systems. These systems, however, were
optimized for one or two functions, and
their host platforms were optimized for a
limited set of missions. The changing nature
of defense acquisition in the 21st century is
placing different demands on weapons systems, requiring that they support a broad
Raytheon is already meeting customers’
needs for multi-functionality with systems like the AN/APG-79 airborne Active
Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar
for the Navy’s F/A-18 aircraft, and the SPY-3
shipboard AESA for the Navy's Zumwaltclass destroyer. We are therefore well
positioned to meet this challenge.
AN/APG-79
SPY-3
1
2
3
Multifunction RF (continued)
17.1
17.2
17.3
17.7
17.8
BCST SAT.
FIXED SATELLITE (E-S)
FX SAT (E-S)
FIXED
Radioloc.
Radiolocation
RADIOLOC.
Space Res.
Earth Expl Sat
Radiolocation
Radiolocation
15.63
15.7
16.6
Radiolocation
RADIOLOCATION
RADIOLOCATION Space Res.(act.)
RADIOLOCATION
AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION
15.4
15.43
FIXED SAT (E-S)
AERO RADIONAV
RADIO ASTRONOMY
AERONAUTICAL RADIONAVIGATION
Space Research
EARTH EXPL. SAT.
(Passive)
Mobile
SPACE RESEARCH
(Passive)
FIXED
15.35
15.1365
14.47
14.5
14.7145
Space Research
Space Research
Mobile
Fixed
Mobile
FX SAT.(E-S) L M Sat(E-S)
FIXED
Land Mobile
SAT. (E-S) Satellite (E-S)
14.4
14.2
Land Mobile
Satellite (E-S)
FIXED
SATELLITE (E-S)
Mobile
Fixed
Fixed
FIXED
MOBILE
Space
Research
Mobile**
13.75
14.0
13.25
13.4
Space Research (E-S)
AERONAUTICAL RADIONAV.
RADIOStandard
RadioLOCATION
Freq. and
location
Time Signal
FIXED
RADIORadioSatellite (E-S)
SAT.(E-S ) location
LOCATION
RADIO
Land Mobile
FIXED
Space
NAVIGATION
SAT. (E-S) Satellite (E-S)
Research
12.75
FIXED
FIXED
SATELLITE MOBILE
(E-S)
SPACE
RESEARCH (S-E)
(Deep Space)
12.7
FIXED
MOBILE
Mobile **
FIXED
SATELLITE (E-S)
FIXED
BROADCASTING
SATELLITE
FIXED
SATELLITE
(S-E)
FIXED
12.2
11.7
10.7
10.68
FIXED
EARTH EXPL.
SATELLITE (Passive)
RADIO
ASTRONOMY
FIXED
SATELLITE
(S-E)
SPACE
RESEARCH (Passive)
RADIO
ASTRONOMY
FIXED
EARTH EXPL.
SAT. (Passive)
SPACE RESEARCH
(Passive)
10.45
10.0
10.5
10.55
10.6
Amateur
Radiolocation
RADIOLOCATION
Amateur
Satellite
Amateur
Radiolocation
RADIOLOCATION
RADIOLOCATION
Radiolocation
9.5
9.2
9.0
8.5
9.3
Radiolocation
RADIONAVIGATION
Meteorological
Aids
Radiolocation
Radiolocation
AERONAUTICAL
RADIONAVIGATION
MARITIME
RADIONAVIGATION
Radiolocation
RADIOLOCATION
8.4
8.45
FIXED
SPACE RESEARCH (S-E)
(deep space only)
FIXED
FIXED
SPACE RESEARCH (S-E)
8.215
8.175
8.025
MET.
SATELLITE
(E-S)
FIXED
EARTH EXPL. SATELLITE
FIXED
SAT. (S-E)
(E-S)
FIXED
EARTH EXPL.
SATELLITE
SATELLITE (S-E)
(E-S)
FIXED
MOBILE
SATELLITE (E-S)
SATELLITE (E-S)
FIXED
EARTH EXPL.
FIXED
SATELLITE (E-S) SATELLITE(S-E)
FIXED
Mobile Satellite
(E-S)(no airborne)
Mobile
Satellite (E-S)
(no airborne)
7.90
Fixed
Mobile
Satellite (E-S)
7.75
7.55
7.30
7.45
Mobile
Satellite (S-E)
Mobile
Satellite (S-E)
Fixed
Mobile Satellite (S-E)
FIXED
FIXED SATELLITE (S-E)
FIXED SATELLITE (S-E)
FIXED
MET.
FIXED
SATELLITE (S-E) SATELLITE (S-E)
FIXED
FIXED
SATELLITE (S-E)
7.19
7.235
7.25
SPACE RESEARCH (E-S)
FIXED
MOBILE
SATELLITE (S-E)
FIXED
7.125
FIXED
MOBILE
6.875
FIXED
FIXED
SATELLITE (E-S)
FIXED SAT (E-S)
MOBILE
MOBILE
FIXED
FIXED
7.025
7.075
Figure 1. Communications, surveillance and radar functions are present within the tunable range of a Strawman 7-17 GHz multifunction radio
frequency system.
One needs to look no further than the FCC
frequency allocation chart, Figure 1 (next
page), to appreciate the diversity of RF functions that exist within a limited frequency
range. These functions can be classified into
groups as passive sensing, active sensing
and communications. Each group places
similar but different requirements on RF
performance. Key performance characteristics common to all three groups include
tunable frequency range, instantaneous
bandwidth, dynamic range, effective radiated power, modulation diversity and linear
transmit operation. Raytheon’s next generation of systems must provide a balanced
combination of these capabilities to enable
multifunction operation.
Passive sensing functions include radar
warning, electronic support measures and
signals intelligence, plus others. These systems require sensitivity over a wide tunable
frequency range to detect signals of interest;
wide instantaneous bandwidth to capture
wide-band signals; and large dynamic range to detect weak and strong signals.
Active sensing functions include radar and
jamming, plus others. Radar systems require
a wide tunable frequency range to operate
without interference (and comply with international frequency allocation standards),
wide instantaneous bandwidth to provide
high-resolution target identification, large
dynamic range to detect targets in the
presence of clutter (and interference), effective radiated power to meet the range
requirement, and programmable waveform modulations tailored to the target
characteristics being sensed to maximize
target detection. Jamming systems are also
designed for a wide tunable frequency
range, but to interfere with targeted systems. Jamming also requires adjustable
instantaneous bandwidth and waveform
modulations to optimize the effect on threat
systems, and sufficient effective radiated
power to neutralize the threat system.
Communications systems include a variety
of one- and two-way links for networking
and sharing information. These systems require frequency agility for spread-spectrum
waveforms to operate in authorized communications bands, instantaneous bandwidth
and programmable modulations to satisfy
waveform requirements, sufficient dynamic
range to receive signals in the presence of
strong interference, and sufficient power to
complete the link and achieve the required
availability. In addition, communications
systems have two unique requirements that
are more stringent than those of other radio
frequency capabilities. The first mandates
isolation between transmit and receive
during simultaneous transmit-receive (full
duplex) operation. This is facilitated by having orthogonally polarized transmit and
receive antennas or having separate transmit
and receive frequency band allocations. The
second requirement is for high-efficiency,
linear transmit operation, which is used
to support the communications waveform
modulations.
Raytheon is already delivering many multifunction RF systems. Limitations of today’s
technologies often require compromises
in the functionality and performance of
secondary RF functions. Raytheon is working on technologies to eliminate those
compromises. Two breakthrough technologies include Ultra-Wideband (UWB)
Samplers and Ultra-Short Pulse Laser-Based
Frequency Sources. The UWB sampler
enables the instantaneous bandwidth and
dynamic range to be tuned to the function
via software. The Laser-Based frequency
source provides an ultra-pure, ultra-stable
reference for waveform synthesis and coordination. Raytheon’s future systems are
being designed with the architecture and
technologies to give the best in multifunction capability.
Our customers need the next generation of radio frequency systems to support
passive sensing, active sensing and communications; with the minimum number of
apertures and back-end electronics units;
and at an affordable price. By considering
the customer’s needs up front, Raytheon
will provide RF systems that meet all of the
performance needs of the warfighter, and
do so affordably. •
Eric Boe
Supporting Math and Science Education
When can long division lead to lunar
exploration? When MathMovesU .
®
Raytheon believes when students are engaged and inspired by math and science,
anything is possible. That’s why we created the MathMovesU national initiative.
It takes math and science to fun, exciting and innovative places: like having kids
engineer their own thrills through a new Raytheon experience at INNOVENTIONS at Epcot at the Walt
Disney World Resort; compete with peers in the Raytheon MATHCOUNTS National Competition; use math
to talk football with the New England Patriots; or explore a range of interactive activities on www.mathmovesu.com. It’s all
part of our mission to inspire today’s students to be tomorrow’s leaders.
®
®
®
www.MathMovesU.com
© 2010 Raytheon Company. All rights reserved.
“Customer Success Is Our Mission” is a registered trademark of Raytheon Company.
MathMovesU is a registered trademark of Raytheon Company.
MATHCOUNTS is a registered trademark of the MATHCOUNTS Foundation.
®
Events
2009 Excellence in
Engineering and Technology Awards
T
he Raytheon Excellence in Engineering and Technology (EiET) Awards took place at The Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum in
Washington, D.C., in March. The awards are Raytheon’s highest technical honor. They recognize individuals and teams whose innovations,
processes or products have or will have a substantial impact on the company’s success, and the success of Raytheon customers.
The award recipients comprised 17 team and five individual examples of excellence, hailing from every business — including four “One
Company” awards and an Information Technology award. In all, 97 people were honored.
Retired Gen. John R. Dailey, director of the National Air and Space Museum, kicked off the program by welcoming the nearly 200 attendees
to the museum. He also commented on the shared goals of Raytheon and the museum to inspire a new generation toward careers in science, technology, engineering and math.
In his opening remarks, Mark E. Russell, Raytheon vice president of corporate Engineering, Technology and Mission Assurance, thanked and
congratulated the evening’s award recipients. “You are our modern-day innovators; you add to our company’s history of innovation; and
you make me proud to be a Raytheon engineer.”
After dinner, Raytheon Chairman and CEO William H. Swanson congratulated the honorees for their tremendous efforts on behalf of
Raytheon and its customers. Swanson was joined on stage by Russell and business leadership as master of ceremonies Mike Doble, Raytheon
director of Strategic Communications, read the award citations and called each honoree up to be personally congratulated.
Raytheon congratulates all recipients of the 2009 Excellence in Engineering and Technology Awards.
2009 Raytheon Excellence in Engineering and Technology Award Winners
ONE COMPANY AWARDS
Advanced Technology Program Team
John Abraham (RMS), G. C. Fisher (SAS), Kenneth Gautreau (RMS),
James Jennings (SAS), Leonard (Lee) Leonard (SAS), Cesar Melendez (RMS),
Daniel Urbanski (RMS),
For working across business and geographical boundaries to develop
next-generation hardware and execute comprehensive integration and
test plans.
Mini-RF Design Team
David Baker (RMS), Mark Brackenbury (SAS), David Canich (RMS), Larry Lai
(SAS), Kwan Ying Muramoto (SAS), Richard Taylor (RMS), Allen Wang (SAS)
For leading the effort to design, build, test and deliver two space
payloads within 30 months of the contract award.
Radar and Sensing Enterprise Campaign Team
Harry Birrell (NCS), Matthew Lambert (IDS), Thomas Miller (SAS),
Alan Moore (NCS), John Olsen (NCS), Angelo Puzella (IDS),
James Roche (IDS), Michael Sarcione (IDS)
For developing and demonstrating a set of common sensing
technologies to grow Raytheon’s competitive position in core radio
frequency sensing markets.
RayShield™ Team
Jeff Brown (Corp.), Randy Jennings (IIS), Jesse Lee (IIS), Monty McDougal (IIS),
Matthew Richard (Corp.), Michael Simms (IIS), William Sterns (IIS)
For developing an industry-leading solution that will be enormously
important to Raytheon and its customers in the area of information
security.
Events
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Raytheon Computer Emergency Response Team (RayCERT)
Joseph Bell, Joshua Douglas, Christina Fowler, Joshua Ray, Peter Tran
For developing an innovative, industry-leading approach to minimize
the risk and impact of cyberattackers on providers of national critical
infrastructure.
INTEGRATED DEFENSE SYSTEMS
Individual Award
Michael Borkowski
For developing revolutionary architectures leading to a family of GaN
MMIC module solutions that maximize the radiated energy while
minimizing the size and cost of the system.
Battlespace Command and Control Center Range Operations
(BC3-RO) Integration Team
Robert Harris, Brian Keeton, Steven Lee, Boris Rasputnis, Scott Summers
For developing a solution that solidifies Raytheon Solipsys as the
leading provider of range command and control (C2) solutions.
Nanocomposite Optical Ceramic (NCOC) Team
Richard Gentilman, Todd Gattuso, Christopher Nordahl, Stephanie Silberstein,
Brian Zelinski (RMS)
For demonstrating the first major breakthrough in mid-wave infrared
(MWIR) missile dome and window materials in more than 30 years.
INTELLIGENCE AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Individual Award
Clayton Davis
For developing and executing a means to accurately geo-locate and
navigate in underground environments for long time periods using
magnetic signals.
Crew Communications Team
Leonard DiBacco, Ronald Harvey, Raymond (Al) Magon, John Masiyowski,
Michael McCann
For developing a multiple security level, net-centric real-time voice
communication system designed to support Intelligence, Surveillance
and Reconnaissance missions.
NETWORK CENTRIC SYSTEMS
Individual Award
Thomas Young
For being the key technical innovator for Network Centric Systems’ new
software-defined radio mobile communications capability.
Close Combat Tactical Radar Product Line Design Team
John Carpenter, Thomas Leise, Patric McGuire, John Reed, David Steinbauer
For designing a product hardware, firmware and software architecture
that exhibits architectural robustness in terms of scalability, testability
and reusability.
RAYTHEON MISSILE SYSTEMS
Individual Award
Don E. Wilson
For being one of Raytheon’s leaders in the areas of software engineering
and processing technologies.
EKV Guidance, Navigation and Control Team
Michael Barker, David Cohen, Daniel Heacock, James Lewis, Alexander Murphy
For developing an approach that fuses Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle
(EKV) sensors to improve the hit-to-kill capability of Missile Defense
ground-based interceptors.
SM-3 Encryption Design Team
Andrew Fullerton, William Geller, Kari Lynn Hanson, Datasha Holland, Erik Larson
For completing an NSA certification within two years, allowing the
Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IB to meet a tight testing schedule.
RAYTHEON SYSTEMS LIMITED
ASTOR Design Authority Transition Team
John Christopher Coady, Barry Martin Lowe, Colin Tebb
For achieving U.K.-approved Design Authority status for RSL for the
Airborne Stand-Off Radar system, including the Sentinel aircraft.
RAYTHEON TECHNICAL SERVICES COMPANY
K3 Surveillance Effort Team
Ronald Brown, Lisa Eagleson-Roever, Douglas Jankovich, Robert Perisho, Dan Surber
For providing a comprehensive surveillance solution within six months
to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA).
SPACE AND AIRBORNE SYSTEMS
Individual Award
Howard Nussbaum
For developing an architecture for the AN/APG-79 radar receiver/exciter (REX) subsystem and the receiver/exciter integrated development
environment (RIDE).
AAS Development Team
David Fittz, Lori Hecker, Charles Livingston, Peter Mahre, William Weaver
For leading the technical concept design for a low-risk, innovative
solution to the U.S. Navy’s next-generation advanced airborne sensor.
ARTEMIS Responsive Space Team
Christopher Chovit, Dave Makowski, Michael Menendez, Robert Patterson, John Silny
For quickly and cost-effectively building an advanced hyperspectral
imaging space payload.
Secure Scalable Processor Team
Drew Davidoff, Lisa Go, Steven Kirsch, Esther Lee, Spencer White
For developing an advanced capability in airborne processing by
implementing an open, yet secure architecture while achieving high
performance in a constrained volume.
DragonFire MXF-4039 Radio Team
Mark Gloudemans, Alan Ly, David Mizicko, David Mussmann, Tyler Ulinskas
For developing and implementing RAYMANET®, the technology
solution that led directly to the DragonFire contract to supply radios
to key customers.
Events
2010 Mission Assurance Forum
The Sum of Our Commitment
T
he fifth Raytheon Mission Assurance
Forum was held April 26–28 in Lake Buena
Vista, Fla., at Disney’s Contemporary Resort.
Organized around the theme “The Sum of Our
Commitment,” the forum brought together
more than 500 Raytheon employees, leaders,
customers and industry partners to reinforce our
definition of Mission Assurance.
The forum integrated the Raytheon Six
Sigma™ Awards and Excellence in
Operations and Quality (EiOQ) Awards into
the program. These evening events recognized
achievement in productivity, process excellence
and Mission Assurance.
Forum attendees also developed an understanding of Raytheon’s relationship with Disney
and the attraction — Sum of all Thrills™ at
INNOVENTIONS at Epcot® at the Walt Disney
World® Resort. As part of the program, attendees had the opportunity to visit the ride and
experience the thrills first-hand.
Mark Russell, vice president of Engineering,
Technology and Mission Assurance, kicked off
the general session with a video highlighting
what Mission Assurance means to our people.
“We deliver customer success every day with
Mission Assurance and by practicing its five core
principles ... These are crucial to ensuring that
Raytheon products, solutions and systems work
as intended — the first time, every time,” said
Russell. “But as you know, it is our people and
the total commitment of all 75,000 of them that
makes us so powerful.”
Keynotes from the Customer Community
and Raytheon Leadership
Attendees heard about the importance of
Mission Assurance during keynote addresses
from:
• Bryan O’Connor, chief, Safety and Mission
Assurance, NASA
• Rick Yuse, president, Space and Airborne Systems (SAS)
• Dave Wajsgras, chief financial officer
• Scott Milligan, SPHR facilitator, Disney Institute
• General Charles R. Holland, USAF (Ret.)
Breakout Presentations, Panel Discussions
and Exhibits
Participants were able to choose from 10
informative breakout presentations where
they learned about best practices from dayto-day practitioners of Mission Assurance. An
Engineering vice presidents’ panel, moderated
by Bill Luhrs, allowed attendees to gain a better
understanding of Mission Assurance and what it
means to the work we do every day. The panel
discussed some of the biggest challenges we
face with achieving Mission Assurance, as well
as key commitments needed as a team. Exhibits
with a wealth of information related to Mission
Assurance lined the outside of the general and
breakout session rooms. Displays featuring project team achievements provided the opportunity for attendees to ask questions and hear
project highlights. •
Events
Raytheon Six Sigma Awards:
Best in Business and Best in Class
T
he achievements of Raytheon Six Sigma™ teams across the company were recognized April 26 at
an awards dinner during the 2010 Mission Assurance Forum. Raytheon leaders, Raytheon Six Sigma
Experts, honorees, customers and guests gathered for the event at Disney’s Contemporary Resort.
Two types of awards were bestowed during the dinner: the Raytheon Six Sigma President’s Award
and the Raytheon Six Sigma CEO Award. Both, among the company’s highest honors, recognize
projects that have delivered substantial and measurable results and impact for Raytheon’s businesses,
customers and suppliers.
Fourteen teams were selected as recipients of the President’s Award, receiving the designation of
“Best in Business.” Among these teams, six were recognized at the end of the night with the prestigious Raytheon Six Sigma CEO Award — for projects that Chairman and CEO William H. Swanson
selected as “Best in Class” in a specific focus area. The awards-selection criteria included being proactive and predictive; supporting the front end of business; thinking out of the box to be innovative;
working closely with Supply Chain; and being a catalyst for productivity and growth. •
2009 Raytheon Six Sigma Award Winning Teams
IDS UAE Patriot Rolling Wave Improvement Team
Jacqueline Bourgeois, Charles Spengler, Alex Umansky, James Webster, Daniel Zwillinger
IDS Patriot Pure Fleet Eliminate Single Point of Failure Team CEO Award Winner: CEO‘s Choice
Jo-Ann Basso, Cheryl Drake, James Hackendorf, Daniel Lafratta, David Sauer
IIS Goldfinch Improvement Project Team CEO Award Winner: CEO‘s Choice
Scott Derflinger, Guy Dubois, Elaine Nantz, Dick Perron, Royal White
IIS Mission Analysis and MSI SE Capability Team
Karen Casey, Rita Hurst, Craig Korth, David Rhodes, Phil Sementilli
NCS P274 Workstation Host Streamlining Team
Capt. Sofiane Abadlia, James Anderson, Larry Hoffsetz, Maj. Amine Lassoued
NCS Engineering Maturing Apple Technology Team
Michael Benoit, Steven Collins, Amanda Kirchner, Robert O’Shea, Megan Tremer
NCS Common Crypto Team CEO Award Winner: CEO‘s Choice
Dick Arend, Larry Finger, John Legowski, Jeff Miller, Rob Norwalk
RMS EKV Organizational Effectiveness Team
Bryan Lovitt, Kevin McCombs, Roya Montakhab, David Mueller, Robert Nussmeier
RMS SM-2 Yield Improvement Team CEO Award Winner: CEO‘s Choice
Matthew Axford, Michael Beylor, Lew Blum, Kent Bortz, Patricia Moshe
RTSC Southwest Asia Market Growth Team CEO Award Winner: CEO‘s Choice
Angela Anthony, Eugene Beauvais, Kip Matthias, Chase Mohler, Lyle Richardson
RTSC Fuel Drum Caching in the Antarctic Team
Lisa Gacioch, Julie Grundberg, Alex Morris, David Pettengill, William Turnbull
SAS ALR-67 Extended Value Stream Capacity Improvement Team CEO Award Winner: CEO‘s Choice
Suzanne Brayton, Ian David Brough, Arthur John Fowler, Denise Meredith, John Stephens
SAS B-2 RMP SDD Right Eyes On Target Supplier Improvement Team
Julie Ahamad, Jason Bays, Charnette Humphrey, Denise Meredith, Ben Mitchell
Corporate ACES Team
Manny Barros, Jeffrey Downs, Walter Geary, Joseph Morris, Michael Sirois
Events
2009 Excellence in Operations and Quality Awards
Disney’s Contemporary Resort in Lake
Buena Vista, Fla., was the setting for the
2009 Excellence in Operations and Quality
(EiOQ) Awards dinner.
One of Raytheon’s highest honors, the EiOQ
award recognizes those who demonstrate
a constant pursuit of excellence, dedicated
leadership and a commitment to customers
by providing the best solutions. In all, 19
teams and one individual were honored.
Mark Russell, vice president of Raytheon
Engineering, Technology and Mission
Assurance, acknowledged a total of 96
award recipients for their achievements.
Each recipient contributed to Raytheon’s
growth by helping ensure our customers’
mission success.
“Tonight’s honorees have demonstrated
leadership, improved performance and provided Mission Assurance,” said Russell. “It
takes all of us working together, applying
and expanding our domain knowledge, and
being accountable to deliver the solutions
our customers need to complete their missions.”
2009 Raytheon EiOQ Award Winners
Integrated Defense Systems
Core Energy Team Energy Conservation Award
Michael Baginski, David Chamberlain, Tracy Fialli, Kevin Sheehan, Elizabeth Welch
Antenna Element Pull System Team
Carl Carucci, Gary Knox, Cynthia Kyslowsky, Eileen Leung, Yuliya Rovner
Visual Controls Initiative Team
Arun Bhatia, Janet Groebe, Gary Marinelli, Purvesh Thakker, Collin Ward
Intelligence and Information Systems
Mission Experience Library Team AKT Award
Esther Harvey, Craig Korth, Richard Smerker, Robyn Schaub, Frederick Sutton
GPS-OCX Compass Eyes Demonstration Team
Adam Fisher, Michael Highfill, Kent Jones, Sarah Law, Jared Stallings
State College Building Consolidation Team
Tracy Getz, Jason Killam, Jason Moore, Mark Scott, Julie Voorhees
Missile Systems
CMMI® Level 5+ IPPD High-Maturity Implementation Team AKT Award
Debra Herrera, Thomas Lienhard, Stephen Ross, Christopher Sisemore,
Christopher Toal
Predictive Supplier Performance Improvement Process and Tools AKT Award
Carrie Mauck, Kevin McDonald, William Messina, Ted Naone, Edmundo Samaniego
Falcon Dashboard and Scorecard Team
Jesse Crowley, James Irish, Trindy Leforge, Kristyn Stewart, Mark Westergaard
3R Team
Bridget Bonner, Lemond Dixon, Sarah Galbraith, Stephanie Kendrick, Nathan Tenney
Tomahawk Production Acceleration Team
Steven Carstens, Carol Conrad, Jim Healy, Albert Liguori, Paula Wilson
Network Centric Systems
ITAS Program Production Challenge Team
Kenneth Cunningham, Douglas Davis, Edmundo Rodriguez, Igor Silver,
Pamela Tignor
RMI Product Improvement Meets Spec Team
Randolph Holtgrefe, Michael Mikasa, Larry Mollett,Gary Sackett, David Stephens
Raytheon Systems Limited
Interrogator Radar Systems Process Improvement
Matthew Jupp
Raytheon Technical Services
Ideas Are Free Team AKT Award
Normand Dunlap, Michele Orman, Keith Taylor, Michael Terry, Curtis White
Kirkuk ATII Design Team
James Athey, Joseph Champlain, Philip Corrow, Aleksandr Danilenko,
Ed Schlossberg
Space and Airborne Systems
CalTex PRISM Knowledge Sharing Team AKT Award
Cedric Cleveland, Sarah Federick, Barry Jones, Randall Weston, Adrienne Willis
HTM4 Mk 3 Transition to Production Team
Dan Booth, Wayne Bowen, Joshua Lamb, Peter McDowell, Vincent Turner
Ops/SCM Waste Reduction Team
Ruben Carrasco, Sandra Holliday, Kenneth Lannin, Uy Ngu, Doug Toby
Remove and Replace Business Process Improvement Team
Daniel Chavez, Sheryl Kilgore, Christopher Mitchell, Rene Smith, Jesus Subia
People
Raytheon Recognizes Its Newest
Certified Architects
Raytheon honored 38 newly certified architects at a special recognition dinner in held in
April at the Boston Harbor Hotel. The employees were recognized as Raytheon Certified
Architects after completing the multiyear Raytheon Certified Architect Program (RCAP).
The RCAP program requirements include: training on architecture standards within the
Raytheon Enterprise Architecture Process; external architecture certifications, leadership and
communication skills; architecting practitioner experience; system life-cycle experience; and
contributions to the architecture discipline. Certified architects must also pass an examination before the Raytheon Architecture Review Board.
The recipients represented all six businesses
as well as Raytheon Systems Limited. Five
Accelerating Knowledge Transfer (AKT)
awards were given for projects that extended improvements across multiple
Raytheon businesses, as well as an award
for energy reduction efforts.
The winning teams were joined by their
guests, customers, members of the
Raytheon leadership team, members of the ET&MA leadership team, and
Operations and Performance Excellence
Council members.
Message of Commitment Highlighted
Excellence in Operations and Quality is
crucial to enabling Mission Assurance. The
theme of the forum, “The Sum of Our
Commitment,” reminds us that it is part
of Raytheon’s personal and collective commitment to ensure no doubt in all of our
products and services.
“Walt Disney had a lot to say about
teamwork and persistence,” said Russell.
“Whatever we accomplish is due to combined effort. The organization must be with you, or you don’t get it done.”
The program was established in 2004 to ensure Raytheon develops architectures that support customer mission success, facilitate interoperability between highly complex systems
and foster the expertise required for Raytheon to excel as a Mission Systems Integrator. As
of April 2010, Raytheon had certified 149 architects across the company — well exceeding
the program’s initial goal of 100.
In February 2009, RCAP achieved accreditation from The Open Group, an international
vendor- and technology-neutral consortium focused on open standards and global interoperability within and between enterprises. Raytheon is the fourth company in the world and
first in the aerospace and defense industry to receive this recognition. •
Raytheon 2009 Certified Architect Graduates
Ken Block
Stephen Gaul
Steven Labitt Donald Larson
Randy Smith
Edward Taylor
Bruce Bohannan
Gorman Findley
Mike Forsman
John Garnett Daniel Gleason Dale Hargrave Wayne O’Brien
Bob Peterson Gary Route
Cary Sutton David Younkin
Jim Booher
Mario D’Amico
IDS
IDS
IDS
IDS
IDS
IDS
IIS IIS
IIS
IIS
IIS
IIS
IIS
IT-IIS
IIS
IIS
IIS
NCS
NCS
Sudbury, Mass.
Portsmouth, R.I.
Sudbury, Mass.
Portsmouth, R.I.
Huntsville, Ala.
Tewksbury, Mass.
Aurora, Colo.
State College, Pa.
Garland, Texas
State College, Pa.
Aurora, Colo.
Aurora, Colo.
Falls Church, Va.
Garland, Texas
Aurora, Colo.
Omaha, Neb.
Aurora, Colo.
Fullerton, Calif.
Marlborough, Mass.
Paula Moss
NCS
John Schlundt NCS
David Bossert
RMS
Steven Greene
RMS
Louisa Guise
RMS
Dennis Hart
RMS
Andrew Hinsdale RMS
Jay Stern
RMS
Stephen Thelin
RMS Thomas Bergman RTSC
Timothy Bretz
RTSC Todd Patel
RTSC
Glen Davis
SAS Gary Lindgren
SAS Jeanette Lurier SAS
Bruce Munro
SAS Kevin Sullivan
SAS
Michelle White-Heon SAS Brian Wells
Corp
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Tucson, Ariz.
Tucson, Ariz.
Tucson, Ariz.
Tucson, Ariz.
Tucson, Ariz.
Tucson, Ariz.
Tucson, Ariz.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Goleta, Calif.
El Segundo, Calif.
El Segundo, Calif.
Plano, Texas
Goleta, Calif.
McKinney, Texas
Waltham, Mass.
The evening concluded with award recipients coming on stage to receive recognition and congratulations from
Russell and the business leaders. •
Special Interest
To Preserve and Protect:
Ultrathin Environmental and Electroactive Polymer Coatings
M
any Raytheon electronic components and systems must survive
harsh environmental conditions
for long periods. Environmental conditions such as humidity, bias, temperature
cycling, and ionic contamination can cause
de-lamination and migration of the metallic interconnects. In an effort to reduce or
eliminate this type of damage, Raytheon is
investigating the use of GVD Corporation’s
polytetrafluoroethylene coating (PTFE, also
known as Teflon®) as an alternative candidate for the board-level environmental
protection of active electronically scanned
arrays (AESA).
Conventional Wet Coatings—Challenges
Applications ranging from aerospace structures to radio frequency (RF) electronics to
microelectromechanical systems (MEMs) require ultrathin polymer coatings tailored to
meet customer needs. Commonly used wetcoating methods are often complicated by
the need to blend in and then remove solvents to ensure proper coating uniformity.
Solvent purchase, processing, extraction,
and disposal add to manufacturing costs
and/or production time. Coatings with uniform thickness may be difficult to achieve with many wet processes,
especially when very thin coatings are
needed. Further, solvent-substrate incompatibility may damage the part being coated
or prevent adequate wetting; the latter also
contributes to poor coating uniformity. Coating of nano- or micron-scale surface
roughness is required in many emerging
applications (e.g., some flat-screen televisions have tiny moving mirrors that require
a lubricating coating). But wet processes are
often not adequate to achieve the required
coating coverage, consistency, smoothness
and thickness. Non-uniformity is exacerbated when the part being coated has a
complex topology. In many cases, small
features (microns or below) are obscured
or overcoated when the solvent is driven
off. Further, on drying, the strong liquid surface tension forces of wet coatings tend to
cause small particles (e.g., carbon nanotubes,
ceramic fillers) to aggregate, producing incomplete or uneven coverage. Hence, there is a
great need for an all-dry, low-cost approach to
depositing functional polymer coatings.
GVD Corporation’s Novel, VaporDeposited Coatings
To address this need, GVD Corporation
provides the Exilis™ line of ultrathin, solvent-free polymer coatings. Exilis coatings
are based on novel chemical vapor deposition (CVD) technologies developed at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology by
Prof. Karen Gleason.
These technologies accommodate a wide
range of off-the-shelf monomers and precursors, and parts being coated need not
have any special surface chemistry. Exilis
coatings can be used in applications requiring environmental protection (circuit
boards), RF transparency (radomes), optical
transparency (lenses, displays), lubrication
or release (composite molding tools), antistiction (MEMs), or electrical conductivity
(electromagnetic interference [EMI] shielding, resistive heating, energy storage).
Raytheon has applications in almost all of
these areas.
GVD currently produces coatings based
on intrinsically conductive polymers (e.g.,
PEDOT [Polyethylenedioxythiophene], a
polythiophene), silicones, and PTFE. PTFE is
a widely used polymer with unique properties, including a tendency to repel water,
a non-stick surface that minimizes friction,
and unsurpassed chemical resistance. Ultrathin, Conformal Coatings
Exilis coating thicknesses in the 25 nanometer to 10 micron range are typical.
Deposition rates of up to 1 micron/minute
or more are achievable for coatings based
on PTFE, GVD’s most mature product offering. Exilis PTFE coatings are ready to use
right after deposition; no post-processing
(drying, curing) is required. GVD’s coatings
are highly conformal to simple substrates
and those with complex topologies, including molds, nanoparticles, foams,
membranes and nanofibers (see figure).
GVD Corporation deposits conformal,
“shrink-wrap” coatings of ultrathin polymers onto substrates that have complex
topologies. For example, open-cell foam
coated with GVD’s Exilis electrically conductive polymer is shown here. GVD’s vapor
deposition coating process preserves the
foam’s open-cell structure.
For example, when an Exilis polymer coating
is to be deposited on a porous substrate,
the reactive monomer vapors infiltrate the
substrate’s pores, forming a thin polymer
coating on contact and “shrink-wrapping”
the porous structure. The open porosity
of the substrate is thus preserved. Indeed,
uniform “shrink-wrapping” of geometries
as small as individual carbon nanotubes has
been demonstrated. Raytheon’s Potential Use of GVD Coatings
When fully populated, Raytheon’s AESA
panel array boards have 128 TR channels.
GVD’s coating process facilitates lower-cost,
near-room-temperature, conformal coating
of the entire panel array board with proper
masking. GVD’s process is so gentle that
even facial tissue can be coated. Exilis coatings show significant promise in
protecting Raytheon components, such as
those in AESAs, that are subjected to harsh
environments. For example, Exilis coatings may effectively shield circuit boards
from corrosive salt water. These coatings
(1012 – 1013 Ω resistance range) have
survived under physiological saline soak
and DC electrical bias for greater than four
years. No coating cracks, pinholes or other
failure manifestations have developed over
this time period. For AESAs, the GVD coating can be tailored to provide exceptional
dielectric performance as well as superior
moisture barrier properties. Raytheon IDS
is currently verifying the performance GVD
coatings against required metrics. •
Erik S. Handy, Ph.D.,
GVD Corporation, Cambridge, Mass.
U.S. Patents
Issued to Raytheon
At Raytheon, we encourage people to work on
technological challenges that keep America
strong and develop innovative commercial
products. Part of that process is identifying and
protecting our intellectual property. Once again,
the U.S. Patent Office has recognized our
engineers and technologists for their contributions in their fields of interest. We compliment
our inventors who were awarded patents
from January through June 2010.
PURNACHANDRA R. GOGINENI
MARTIN A. KEBSCHULL
JEFFREY H. KOESSLER
JUAN A. PEREZ
JOHN PARINE
7642492 Single-axis fin deployment system
EMERALD J. ADAIR
GRAY FOWLER
MICHAEL LIGGETT
7642336 Improved phthalonitrile composites
ALEXANDER A. BETIN
KALIN SPARIOSU
7646796 Solid-state suspension laser
ROBERT ADAMS
WILLIAM J. SCHWIND
7645970 Flight control system and method of using
piezoelectric modal sensors to mitigate flexible body dynamics
CHUL J. LEE
SEAN T. PRICE
7646332 Method and apparatus interleaved gridding in
distributed multiple computing for real-time rcs prediction
LACY G. COOK
ANDREW LEWANSKI
SUSAN B. SPENCER
7648249 Beam-steering apparatus having five degrees of
freedom of line-of-sight steering
BRIAN J. HARKINS
CHUL J. LEE
7652620 RCS sinature generation for closely spaced multiple
objects using n-point models
DANIEL T. MCGRATH
7652631 Ultra-wideband antenna array with additional
low-frequency resonance
BRIEN ROSS
KEVIN WAGNER
7652818 Optical sight having an unpowered reticle
illumination source
CONRAD STENTON
7651237 Improved reticle illumination
MORRIS ROBITAILLE
7650711 Rifle scope with textured profile
ROBERT E. LEONI
7657189 Optical link
TROY ROCKWOOD
TAMER ELBATT
JIJUN YIN
7656801 Jamming of network traffic in connection-based
networks
PATRICK T. HANZLICK
JOSHUA J. LANGE
7665691 Aerial vehicle launching system and method
JAMES CLINGENPEEL
7661036 Cache for collecting events on a monitored computer
QUENTEN E. DUDEN
7661628 Catalyzed decomposing structural payload foam
MARK A. GLOUDEMANS; WILLIAM COLEMAN JR.;
JAYANTI PATEL; BROR PETERSON; WILLIAM MOSLEY JR.
7664472 Reducing the peak-to-average power ratio of a signal
KAMAL TABATABAIE
7662698 Transistor having field plate
ROBERT W. BYREN
7663090 Automatic avalanche photodiode bias setting system
based on unity-gain noise measurement
MICHAEL G. ADLERSTEIN
7664196 Frequency agile phased locked loop
RICHARD J. LETT
GREGORY L. RENNO
THOMAS N. TERWIEL
7669081 System and methods for scheduling, processing, and
monitoring tasks
EMMET ANDERSON
DAVID G. ANTHONY
DANIEL W. BRUNTON
DAVID G. GARRETT
DANIEL C. HARRISON
JIM R. HICKS
DAVID J. KNAPP
JAMES P. MILLS
FRANK E. SMITH III
WAYNE L. SUNNE
7667190 Optical fiber assembly wrapped across gimbal axes
ROBERT J. DELACK
KEVIN J. KRESSNER
7665998 Radio frequency connector
DEVON G. CROWE
7667850 Imaging system with low coherence light source
JOHN P. BETTENCOURT
ALAN J. BIELUNIS
KATHERINE J. HERRICK
7670045 Microstrip power sensor
JOSEPH M. CROWDER
PATRICIA S. DUPUIS
MICHAEL C. FALLICA
JOHN B. FRANCIS
JOSEPH LICCIARDELLO
ANGELO M. PUZELLA
7671696 Radio frequency interconnect circuits and techniques
JOHN CARCONE
7671783 Radar reflector
JAMES A. PRUETT
FRANK L. SHACKLEE
7671801 Armor for an electronically scanned array
ALEXANDER A. BETIN
RICHARD GENTILMAN
PATRICK HOGAN
MICHAEL USHINSKY
7675952 Articulated glaze cladding for laser crystal components
and method of encapsulation
THOMAS K. DOUGHERTY
JOHN J. DRAB
STEPHEN A. GABELICH
GREGORY D. TRACY
TRICIA VEEDER
7675066 Erase-on-demand memory cell
BILLIE G. HENDRY
STEVEN MATTHEWS
ROBERT D. STULTZ
7675958 Intra-cavity non-degenerate laguerre mode generator
OLIVER HUBBARD
JIAN WANG
7675458 Dual beam radar system
RANDY W. HILL
PAUL A. MEREMS
7677491 Methods and apparatus for airborne systems
MICHAEL A. GRITZ
RAFAEL HERNANDEZ
WILLIAM H. WELLMAN
7679057 Antenna-coupled-into-rectifier infrared sensor elements
and infrared sensors
STEPHEN JACOBSEN
DAVID MARCEAU
DAVID MARKUS
SHAYNE ZURN
7680377 Ultra-high density connector
THOMAS K. DOUGHERTY
JOHN J. DRAB
SOLOMON O. ROBINSON
DANIEL SIEVENPIPER
7683854 Tunable impedance surface and method for fabricating a
tunable impedance surface
ROBERT J. CODA
CHRISTOPHER A. LEDDY
JOHNNY Y. LEE
STEPHEN R. NASH
7683945 Responsivity correction for electro-optical images
ANDREW B. FACCIANO
ROBERT T. MOORE
GREGG J. HLAVACEK
CRAIG SEASLY
7681834 Composite missile nose cone
JOHN A. COGLIANDRO
HENRY FITZSIMMONS
7681776 Methods and apparatus for efficiently generating profiles
for circuit board work/rework
PATRICK M. KILGORE
7684634 System and method for adaptive non-uniformity compensation for a focal plane array
ROBERT C. HON
MICHAEL H. KIEFFER
CARL KIRKCONNELL
THOMAS H. POLLACK
7684955 Noncontinuous resonant position feedback system
MIRON CATOIU
7683734 Rf re-entrant combiner
KEVIN W. CHEN
GRAY FOWLER
ERIC KRUMIN
MICHAEL M. LIGGETT
RICHARD M. WEBER
7686248 System and method for internal passive cooling
of composite structures
HANSFORD CUTLIP
NELSON WALLACE
7688438 Scanning solar diffuser relative reflectance monitor
JAMES M. IRION II
ROBERT S. ISOM
7688265 Dual polarized low profile antenna
MARK A. HARRIS
7686255 Space vehicle having a payload-centric configuration
ROBERT CAVALLERI
THOMAS A. OLDEN
7685940 Pellet propellant and composite propellant rocket motor
GERALD L. EHLERS
CHARLES LEPPLE
AARON WATTS
7693313 Personal authentication device
VICTOR JARINOV
MICHAEL THORPE
7692858 Method and apparatus for internally zeroing a sight
SHAHROKH HASHEMI-YEGANEH
RICHARD A. MONTGOMERY
CLIFTON QUAN
DAVID E. ROBERTS
7692508 Spring loaded microwave interconnector
ROBERT B. HALLOCK
KAMAL TABATABAIE
7692222 Atomic layer deposition in the formation of gate
structures for III-V semiconductor
SCOTT R. CHEYNE
JEFFREY PAQUETTE
7690924 An electrical connector to connect circuit cards
SCOTT R. CHEYNE
JEFFREY PAQUETTE
JOHN D. WALKER
DIMITRY ZARKH
7704083 Busbar connector
MATTHEW H. BOSSE
NICCOLO A. GARBARINO
RANAPRATAP LAVU
JOHN MICHEL
MICHAEL P. PEYTON
JOSE J. SOTO
7698148 Web-based risk management tool and method
ERIC P. LAM
CHRISTOPHER A. LEDDY
STEPHEN R. NASH
7697073 Image processing system with horizontal line registration
for improved imaging with scene motion
DAVID B. HATFIELD
RENEE M. RODGERS
TERRY M. SANDERSON
7694578 Method of evaluating materials using curvature
DANIEL J. MOSIER
7697646 Discrete state-space filter and method for processing
asynchronously sampled data
PAUL CRETE
7696460 Frequency adjusting arrangement
RANDY C. BARNHART
CRAIG S. KLOOSTERMAN
MELINDA C. MILANI
DONALD V. SCHNAIDT
STEVEN TALCOTT
7701891 Data handling in a distributed communication network
DELMAR L. BARKER
HARRY SCHMITT
NITESH N. SHAH
DONALD E. WAAGEN
7701381 System and method of orbital angular momentum (OAM)
diverse signal processing using classical beams
ISTVAN RODRIGUEZ
ROBERT A. LINDQUIST JR.
7701308 Radio frequency modulator
LACY G. COOK
7703932 All-reflective, wide-field-of-view, inverse-telephoto
optical system with external posterior aperture stop and long
back focal length
DEVON G. CROWE
7705971 System and method for determining crosswinds
JAMES BALLEW
SHANNON DAVIDSON
7711977 System and method for detecting and managing HPC
node failure
KUO-LIANG CHIOU
CARROLL CHIOU
KEVIN E. RUDOLPH
7711476 Aided ins/gps/sar navigation with other platforms
PETER LUKENS
7707871 Leak detection system with controlled
differential pressure
DAVID BURKS
THOMAS E. FETSKO
RICHARD GENTILMAN
MARLENE PLATERO
DERRICK J. ROCKOSI
CHRISTOPHER K. SOLECKI
7710347 Methods and apparatus for high performance
structures
RALPH HUDSON
JOHN P. KILKELLY
JON H. SHERMAN
HELEN L. SUN
7714768 Non-statistical method for compressing
and decompressing complex SAR data
KENNETH W. BROWN
7715091 Spatially-fed high-power amplifier with shaped reflectors
THOMAS G. LAVEDAS
7714791 Antenna with improved illumination efficiency
RICHARD M. LLOYD
7717042 Munition
PATRICK M. BROGAN
FRANK COSTANZO
WILLIAM J. MARSHALL
DINO ROBERTI
7719926 Slotted cylinder acoustic transducer
ROBERT H. BUCKLEY
WILLIE NG
DAVID PERSECHINI
7725043 System and method for reducing interferometric
distortion and relative intensity noise in directly modulated
fiber optic links
LAWRENCE SCHWARTZ
7725259 Trajectory estimation system for an orbiting satellite
JEFFREY M. PETERSON
ERIC SCHULTE
7723815 Wafer bonded composite structure for thermally
matching a readout circuit and an infrared detector
chip both during and after hybridization
DELMAR L. BARKER
WILLIAM R. OWENS
ABRAM YOUNG
7724420 Frequency modulation structure and method utilizing
frozen shockwave
WON CHON
GHARIB GHARIBJANIANS
NICK J. ROSIK
DEAN W. SCHOETTLER
GREGORY SURBECK
7724061 Active clamp circuit for electronic components
TIMOTHY E. ADAMS
JERRY M. GRIMM
CHRISTOPHER MOSHENROSE
JAMES A. PRUETT
7724176 Articulated synthetic aperture radar antenna
RICHARD M. LLOYD
7726244 Mine counter measure system
MARLIN SMITH JR.
7729667 System and method for intermodulation distortion
cancellation
ERWIN M. DE SA
JUSTIN DYSTER
MARVIN D. EBBERT
RODNEY H. KREBS
7728264 Precision targeting
KAICHIANG CHANG
YUCHOI F. LOK
7728764 Sidelobe blanking characterizer
RUDY A. EISENTRAUT
EDGAR R. MELKERS
7728266 Exhaust assembly for mass ejection drive system
JAMIE CLARK
TERRY M. SANDERSON
7728267 Methods and apparatus for adjustable surfaces
MICHAEL GUBALA
KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIAN
ROBERT A. ROSEN
7728756 Wide area high resolution sar from a moving
and hovering helicopter
KAICHIANG CHANG
WILIAM KENNEDY
7728769 Adaptive processing method of clutter rejection in a
phased array beam pattern
CONRAD STENTON
7728988 Method and apparatus for testing conic optical surfaces
KENNETH W. BROWN
REID F. LOWELL
ALAN RATTRAY
A-LAN V. REYNOLDS
7730819 Weapon having lethal and non-lethal
directed-energy portions
EMERALD J. ADAIR
JUDITH K. CLARK
GRAY FOWLER
MICHAEL LIGGETT
7732030 Method and apparatus for preform consistency
JAYSON KAHLE BOPP
JOSEPH C. DENO
PAUL JONES
JAMES LEECH
7732772 System and method for detecting explosive materials
RAYMOND C. LANING
STEVEN J. MANSON
7733339 Automated translation of high order complex geometry
from a CAD model into a surface based combinatorial geometry
format
JAMES H. DUPONT
RICHARD D. LOEHR
WILLIAM N. PATTERSON
7730838 Buoyancy dissipator and method to deter an errant
vessel
ARNOLD W. NOVICK
7738319 Determining angles of arrival using multipaths
ALEXANDER A. BETIN
KALIN SPARIOSU
7742512 Scalable laser with robust phase locking
ELI BROOKNER
JIAN WANG
7741992 A moving target detector for radar systems
JOSEPH R. ELLSWORTH
MICHAEL P. MARTINEZ
TEPHEN J. PEREIRA
7742307 High performance power device
GABRIEL D. COMI
KELLY L. PETERMAN
7747569 Systems, methods, and language for selection
and retrieval of information from databases
JAYSON KAHLE BOPP
MARTIN G. FIX
7746639 F-16 avionics processor packaging
International Patents Issued to Raytheon
Titles are those on the U.S.-filed patents; actual titles on
foreign counterparts are sometimes modified and not
recorded. While we strive to list current international
patents, many foreign patents issue much later than
corresponding U.S. patents and may not yet be reflected.
AUSTRALIA
ELI BROOKNER
2004282851 Efficient technique for estimating elevation angle
when using a broad beam for search in a radar
RICHARD LAPALME
2003238262 Method and apparatus for intelligent information
retrieval
ELI BROOKNER
DAVID MANOOGIAN
FRITZ STEUDEL
2004282856 Multiple radar combining for increased range, radar
sensitivity and angle accuracy
RICHARD T. KARON
MICHAEL E. LEVESQUE
2005326810 Event alert system and method (robust system architecture for sensors on dedicated and on-dedicated platforms)"
BORIS S. JACOBSON
2006232963 Integrated smart power switch
CLIFTON QUAN
STEPHEN SCHILLER
YANMIN ZHANG
2006255759 Attenuator circuit comprising a plurality of quarter
wave transformers and lump element resistors
JOHN CANGEME
GERALD M. PITSTICK
DAVID MANOOGIAN
2006270435 A method of generating accurate estimates of azimuth and elevation angles of a target for a phased-phased array
rotating radar
ROBERT ALLISON
RON K. NAKAHIRA
JOON PARK
BRIAN H. TRAN
2006205200 Micro-electrical-mechanical device and method of
making same
KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIAN
ROBERT A. ROSEN
2006249603 Variable inclination array antenna
WENDY CONNOR
2006255733 Top loaded disk monopole antenna
KWANG CHO
LEO H. HUI
2006330076 Efficient autofocus method for swath SAR
REZA TAYRANI
2006269627 Two stage microwave Class E power amplifier
MICHAEL BRENNAN
BENJAMIN DOLGIN
LUIS GIRALDO
JOHN HILL III
DAVID KOCH
JORAM SHENHAR
2004267467 Drilling apparatus, method, and system
AUSTRALIA, CHINA
QUENTEN E. DUDEN
2005332059 Catalyzed decomposing structural payload foam
AUSTRALIA, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, UK
QUENTEN E. DUDEN
ALLAN T. MENSE
2005333599 Catalyzed decomposing foam for encapsulating
space-based kinetic objects
AUSTRALIA, FRANCE, SPAIN, UK
JAMES HOLDERLE
JAMES A. KEEBAUGH
JEFFREY W. LEWELLEN
2005327114 Determining a predicted performance of a
navigation system
AUSTRALIA, JAPAN
TAMRAT AKALE
EDUARDO D. BARRIENTOS JR.
MICHAEL T. CRNKOVICH
LAWRENCE DALCONZO
DAVID J. DRAPEAU
CHRISTOPHER A. MOYE
2006292765 Compact multilayer circuit
AUSTRIA, CZECH REPUBLIC, FRANCE, GERMANY,
ITALY, UK
RUDY A. EISENTRAUT
MARTIN A. KEBSCHULL
JOHN PARINE
1485668 Missile having deployment mechanism for stowable fins
CANADA
STEVEN R. GONCALO
YUCHOI F. LOK
2452635 Precision approach radar system having computer
generated pilot instructions
PAUL M. INGRAM JR.
ARCHIE MUSE
2416266 Sensitivity of iterative spectrally smooth temperature/
emissivity separation to instrument noise
RICHARD M. LLOYD
2597527 Warhead with aligned projectiles
VINH ADAMS
WESLEY DWELLY
2561391 Versatile attenuator
WILLIAM AUTERY
JAMES HUDGENS
JOHN M. TROMBETTA
GREGORY TYBER
2419987 Method of making chalcogenide glass
CHINA
STEPHEN HERSHEY
WILLIAM SU
zl200480017652.0 Distributed dynamic channel selection in a
communication network
DELMAR L. BARKER
WILLIAM R. OWENS
ROSS D. ROSENWALD
NITESH SHAH
HAO XIN
zl200680001822.5 Dynamic control of planck radiation in
photonic crystals
DENMARK, FRANCE, GERMANY, NETHERLANDS,
SINGAPORE, SPAIN, SWEDEN, UK
ROBERT ALLISON
JAR J. LEE
ROBERT LOO
BRIAN PIERCE
CLIFTON QUAN
JAMES SCHAFFNER
1597797 Low cost 2-D electronically scanned array with compact
CTS feed and MEMs phase shifters
FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, UK
ROBERT ADAMS
VINH ADAMS
WESLEY DWELLY
1896869 Radar system and method for reducing clutter in
a high-clutter environment
JOHN P. BETTENCOURT
ALAN J. BIELUNIS
KATHERINE J. HERRICK
1756593 Microstrip power sensor
SHARON A. ELSWORTH
MARVIN I. FREDBERG
WILLIAM H. FOSSEY JR.
1595023 High strength, long durability strutural fabric/seam
system
NORMAN A. LUQUE
782496 Apparatus and methods for split-feed coupled-ring
resonator-pair elliptic-function filters
JOSEPH M. CROWDER
PATRICIA S. DUPUIS
MICHAEL C. FALLICA
ANGELO M. PUZELLA
1520455 Multilayer stripline radio frequency circuits
and interconnection methods
FRANCE, GERMANY, UK
ROBERT W. BYREN
1517158 Synthetic aperture ladar system and method
using real-time holography
TIMOTHY D. SMITH
NINA L. STEWART
1911226 Dynamic system and method of establishing
communication with objects
STAN W. LIVINGSTON
470609 Solid state transmitter circuit
DAVID D. CROUCH
WILLIAM E. DOLASH
436856 Reflecting surfaces having geometries independent of
geometries of wavefronts reflected therefrom
FRITZ STEUDEL
159635 Radar system having spoofer, blanker and canceller
JAMES HENDERSON
MICHAEL M. LIGGETT
JOSEPH TEPERA
1196735 Ramming brake for gun-launched projectiles
LACY G. COOK
ROGER WITHRINGTON
1488272 Method and laser beam directing system with rotatable
diffraction gratings
FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, SPAIN, SWEDEN, UK
BORIS S. JACOBSON
JOHN MCGINTY
PAUL C. THOMAS
1774635 Method and apparatus for a power system
phased array radar
FRANCE, GERMANY, SWEDEN
GERALD COX
MARK S. HAUHE
STAN W. LIVINGSTON
CLIFTON QUAN
ANITA L. REINEHR
COLLEEN TALLMAN
YANMIN ZHANG
1749330 Radiator structures
FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, SINGAPORE, SPAIN, UK
DAVID D. HESTON
JOHN G. HESTON
THOMAS L. MIDDLEBROOK
1886406 Power absorber system and method
FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, NETHERLANDS, UK
FERNANDO BELTRAN
JOHN J. HANLIN
RICHARD H. HOLDEN
1354370 Radio frequency antenna feed structures having a coaxial
waveguide and asymmetric septum
FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, JAPAN, UK
GARY ALLEY
1287611 Amplifier circuit
FRANCE, GERMANY, SWITZERLAND
JOHN ARCHER
UKROY P. MCMAHON
203432 Arc-fault detecting circuit breaker system
GERMANY, SWEDEN, UK
REGINA ESTKOWSKI
PETER TINKER
602005019034.1-08 System and method for adaptive
path planning
HUNGARY
WILLIAM T. STIFFLER
E007461 Programmable cockpit upgrade system
ISRAEL
RICHARD HODGES
JAMES M. IRION II
NICHOLAS SCHUNEMAN
160680 Balun and groundplanes for decade band tapered slot
antenna and method of making same
ALAN L. KOVACS
MATTHEW PETER
KURT S. KETOLA
JACQUES LINDER
156227 Multilayer thin film hydrogen getter
STEVE E. HUETTNER
STEVEN C. REIN
DOUG BAKER
165380 Accurate range calibration architecture
PETER V. MESSINA
164199 Figure eight hysteresis control method and
follow-up system
ISRAEL, SOUTH KOREA
DIPANKAR CHANDRA
ATHANASIOS SYLLAIOS
161696 Sensor for detecting small concentrations of a target matter
JAPAN
RODERICK BERGSTEDT
LEE A. MCMILLAN
ROBERT STREETER
4512304 Microelectromechanical micro-relay with liquid
metal contacts
ANTHONY S. CARRARA
PAUL A. DANELLO
JOSEPH MIRABILE
4477040 Wedgelock system
FERNANDO BELTRAN
JOSEPH P. BIONDI
RONNI J. CAVENER
ROBERT CUMMINGS
JAMES MCGUINNIS
THOMAS V. SIKINA
KEITH D. TROTT
ERDEN YURTERI
4440266 Wideband phased array radiator
KURT S. KETOLA
ALAN L. KOVACS
JACQUES LINDER
MATTHEW PETER
4436249 Dielectric interconnect frame incorporating EMI shield
and hydrogen absorber for tile T/R modules
MARY ONEILL
4481812 Method for protecting an aircraft against a threat that
utilizes an infrared sensor
KENNETH A. ESSENWANGER
4445010 Compact balun for rejecting common mode
electromagnetic fields
YONAS NEBIYELOUL-KIFL
WALTER G. WOODINGTON
4447455 Automotive side object detection sensor blockage
detection system and related techniques
WILLIAM H. FOSSEY JR.
SHARON A. ELSWORTH
4510820 High strength fabric structure and seam therfor with
uniform thickness and a method of making same
PHILLIP ROSENGARD
4473733 Method and system for encapsulating variable-size packets
JONATHAN LYNCH
4499728 Monolithic array amplifier with periodic bias-line
bypassing structure and method
PHILLIP ROSENGARD
4523596 Encapsulating packets into a frame for a network
JON N. LEONARD
JAMES SMALL
4490433 Mass spectrometer for entrained particles, and method
for measuring masses of the particles
ANDREW B. FACCIANO
ROBERT T. MOORE
JAMES E. PARRY
JOHN T. WHITE
4444964 Missile with multiple nosecones
SHANNON DAVIDSON
4451806 On-demand instantiation in a high performance computer (HPC) system
KELLY MCHENRY
4497780 Projectile for the destruction of large explosive targets
GERALD COX
DOUGLAS A. HUBBARD
TIMOTHY D. KEESEY
CLIFTON QUAN
DAVID E. ROBERTS
CHRIS E. SCHUTZENBERGER
RAYMOND TUGWELL
4435459 Vertical interconnect between coaxial or GCPW circuits
and airline via compressible center conductors
RICHARD O’SHEA
4463860 Flexible optical RF receiver
TOM BROEKAERT
4422914 Method and system for quantizing an analog signal
utilizing a clocked resonant tunneling diode pair
LLOYD LINDER
4468358 Mixed technology MEMs/BICMOS LC bandpass sigmadelta for direct RF sampling
SINGAPORE
STEVEN G. BUCZEK
STUART COPPEDGE
ALEC EKMEKJI
SHAHROKH HASHEMI-YEGANEH
WILLIAM MILROY
132849 True-time-delay feed network for CTS array
JONATHAN D. GORDON
REZA TAYRANI
132485 Broadband microwave amplifier
SOUTH KOREA
PHILLIP ROSENGARD
10-0946446 Compressing cell headers for data communication
YUEH-CHI CHANG
MARIO DAMICO
BRIAN D. LAMONT
ANGELO M. PUZELLA
THOMAS SMITH
NORVAL WARDLE
10-0953233 Extendable spar buoy for sea-based
communication system
UK
STAN SZAPIEL
BRIEN ROSS
2440013 Multi-magnification viewing and aiming scope
Raytheon’s Intellectual Property is valuable. If you become
aware of any entity that may be using any of Raytheon’s
proprietary inventions, patents, trademarks, software, data or
designs, or would like to license any of the foregoing, please
contact your Raytheon IP counsel: David Rikkers (IDS),
John J. Snyder (IIS), John Horn (MS), Robin R. Loporchio (NCS
and Corporate), Charles Thomasian (SAS), Horace St. Julian
(RTSC and NCS).
Copyright © 2010 Raytheon Company. All rights reserved.
Approved for public release. Printed in the USA.
“Customer Success Is Our Mission” is a registered trademark of Raytheon Company.
Sum of all Thrills and Raytheon Six Sigma are trademarks of Raytheon Company. Byblos is
a trademark of Raytheon BBN Technologies. Epcot and Walt Disney World are registered
trademarks of The Walt Disney Company. Crystal Reports and Business Objects are registered
trademarks of Business Objects SA. VIRTSIM is a trademark of Motion Reality, Inc., Academy
Award is a registered trademark of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. mōsbē
is a trademark of BreakAway, Ltd. Exilis is a trademark of GVD Corporation. Teflon is a registered trademark of E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company Corporation.

Technology Today Research Issue 2

Transcription

Similar documents

Innovation Infographic_8.5 x 14_R4

ELCAN Specter® DR 1-4x

February 11 Board Meeting Highlights

aviation technology

Watchtower investments in armament companies

Shooters Review the ELCAN SpecterDR™

Advanced Technologies

UKnews - Raytheon UK