DID YOU KNOW? DTIC has over 3.5 million final reports on DoD funded research, development, test, and evaluation activities available to our registered users. Click
HERE to register or log in.
Accession Number:
AD1096145
Title:
Local-Rapid Evaluation of Atmospheric Conditions (L-REAC) System: Design and Development-Volume 6 (Original vs LR-x System Comparison)
Descriptive Note:
Technical Report,15 Jul 2019,11 Aug 2019
Corporate Author:
CCDC Army Research Laboratory White Sands Missile Range United States
Report Date:
2019-09-01
Pagination or Media Count:
38.0
Abstract:
Protecting civilian and military personnel caught in airborne hazard scenarios is the underlying purpose of the two systems examined in this report the Local-Rapid Evaluation of Atmospheric Conditions L-REAC System, invented by the US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Army Research Laboratory, and the LR-x, the evolving Diamond B Technology Solutions DBTS equivalent. The systems provision of timely and relevant wind and plume fields was key to this L-REAC vs LR-x Systems Comparison Study. Calibrating the DBTS product against the original technology was the objective of this study. Two neutral reviewers were introduced to the systems and asked to glean qualitative and quantitative comparison data. System subject matter experts were available for guidance and clarification. The final qualitative comparison showed that the evaluated present-day systems have a slightly higher percentage of features that are the same or equivalent than different. The quantitative comparison focused on the meteorological data used as wind and plume model input, which in turn produces end user displays for first responders. The presumption was that a model is only as good as the data ingested. The quantitative comparison found good agreement between all but two variables. The LR-x pressure variable consistently reported a sea-level magnitude. An analysis suggested that the mismatch may be a function of the test sites security-required location-identification function blockage. The second irregularity was the diametrically different wind directions acquired by the systems during locally severe weather conditions. After review, it was determined that were the LR-x incident-specific measured weather capabilities included in the test vs model only, this latter anomaly would not have been observed.
Distribution Statement:
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
