<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Aircraft Survivability Journal on Test Science Research Document Library</title>
    <link>https://research.testscience.org/venues/aircraft-survivability-journal/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Aircraft Survivability Journal on Test Science Research Document Library</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.129.0</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Institute for Defense Analyses</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://research.testscience.org/venues/aircraft-survivability-journal/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>CDV Method for Validating AJEM using FUSL Test Data</title>
      <link>https://research.testscience.org/post/2023-cdv-method-for-validating-ajem-using-fusl-test-data/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://research.testscience.org/post/2023-cdv-method-for-validating-ajem-using-fusl-test-data/</guid>
      <description>M&amp;amp;S validation is critical for ensuring credible weapon system evaluations. System-level evaluations of Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFV) rely on the Advanced Joint Effectiveness Model (AJEM) and Full-Up System Level (FUSL) testing to assess AFV vulnerability. This report reviews and improves upon one of the primary methods that analysts use to validate AJEM, called the Component Damage Vector (CDV) Method. The CDV Method compares vehicle components that were damaged in FUSL testing to simulated representations of that damage from AJEM.</description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>M&amp;S validation is critical for ensuring credible weapon system evaluations. System-level evaluations of Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFV) rely on the Advanced Joint Effectiveness Model (AJEM) and Full-Up System Level (FUSL) testing to assess AFV vulnerability. This report reviews and improves upon one of the primary methods that analysts use to validate AJEM, called the Component Damage Vector (CDV) Method. The CDV Method compares vehicle components that were damaged in FUSL testing to simulated representations of that damage from AJEM. In the past, the CDV Method has employed a variety of different analysis techniques and results presentations. Many focused on low-level validation results, detailing each component that was damaged in each FUSL event. The unique contribution of this report, which complements past CDV efforts, is that it focuses on high-level results. This has three purposes  (1) to provide a pithy, yet detailed, validation assessment for a given FUSL test series, (2) to discover high-level trends that cut across an entire FUSL test series, such as whether AJEM performed better for one type of threat versus another, and (3) to compare validation results between multiple FUSL test series.</p>
<h4 id="suggested-citation">Suggested Citation</h4>
<blockquote>
<p>Grimm, David K, Thomas H Johnson, Lindsey D Butler, Craig Andres, Julia Ivancik, and Russ Dibelka. Component Data Vector Methodology in Support of FUSL-AJEM Validation. IDA Product ID - 3002075. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Defense Analyses, 2024.</p>
</blockquote>
<h4 id="slides">Slides:</h4>
<embed src= "slides.pdf" width= "100%" height= "700px" type="application/pdf" >

<h4 id="paper">Paper:</h4>
<embed src= "paper.pdf" width= "100%" height= "700px" type="application/pdf" >

]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Use of Design of Experiments in Survivability Testing</title>
      <link>https://research.testscience.org/post/2019-use-of-design-of-experiments-in-survivability-testing/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://research.testscience.org/post/2019-use-of-design-of-experiments-in-survivability-testing/</guid>
      <description>The purpose of survivability testing is to provide decision makers with relevant, credible evidence about the survivability of an aircraft that is conveyed with some degree of certainty or inferential weight. In developing an experiment to accomplish this goal, a test planner faces numerous questions What critical issue or issues are being address? What data are needed to answer the critical issues? What test conditions should be varied? What is the most economical way of varying those conditions?</description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The purpose of survivability testing is to provide decision makers with relevant, credible evidence about the survivability of an aircraft that is conveyed with some degree of certainty or inferential weight. In developing an experiment to accomplish this goal, a test planner faces numerous questions  What critical issue or issues are being address? What data are needed to answer the critical issues? What test conditions should be varied? What is the most economical way of varying those conditions? How many test articles are needed? Design of Experiments provides an analytical basis for test planning tradeoffs when answering these questions.</p>
<h4 id="suggested-citation">Suggested Citation</h4>
<blockquote>
<p>Couch, Mark, John Haman, Thomas Johnson, and Heather Wojton. “Designs of Experiments (DOE) in Survivability Testing.” Joint Aircraft Survivability Program - JASP Online (blog), March 2019. <a href="https://www.jasp-online.org/asjournal/summer-2019/designs-of-experiments-doe-in-survivability-testing/">https://www.jasp-online.org/asjournal/summer-2019/designs-of-experiments-doe-in-survivability-testing/</a>.</p>
</blockquote>
<h4 id="paper">Paper:</h4>
<embed src= "paper.pdf" width= "100%" height= "700px" type="application/pdf" >

]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
