IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joudef/v17y2020i1p83-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Response surface modeling of precision-guided fragmentation munitions

Author

Listed:
  • Darryl Ahner
  • Andrew McCarthy

Abstract

The use of precision-guided artillery rounds has increased in recent years, but analytical models within simulations that enable effect analysis and tradeoff analysis between precision and conventional munitions are lacking. This paper develops an analytical model of precision-guided fragmentation munitions effects for low-resolution simulations. A modification of the commonly used Carlton Damage Function, called the Klopcic Hybrid approach, is implemented within a baseline simulation that addresses the Carlton Damage Function’s shortcomings and implementation issues. A designed experiment using a range of parameters accounting for many weapon types is then performed using a space filling design whose results are used in constructing an empirical model. The baseline simulation for the magnitude of target location error, a trait not normally modeled in simulations but critical in the determination of precision munition use, is addressed. A response surface is developed that analytically models the nonlinear behavior of the dependent variable. Defendable and traceable response functions are developed for varying precision munition types and target location error ranges that are flexible to a broad range of munition capabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Darryl Ahner & Andrew McCarthy, 2020. "Response surface modeling of precision-guided fragmentation munitions," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 17(1), pages 83-97, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:joudef:v:17:y:2020:i:1:p:83-97
    DOI: 10.1177/1548512918811138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1548512918811138
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1548512918811138?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kleijnen, Jack P. C. & Sargent, Robert G., 2000. "A methodology for fitting and validating metamodels in simulation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 14-29, January.
    2. Ross Gore & Saikou Diallo & Christopher Lynch & Jose Padilla, 2017. "Augmenting Bottom-up Metamodels with Predicates," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(1), pages 1-4.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark G Stewart, 2022. "Simplified reliability-based load design factors for explosive blast loading, weapons effects, and its application to collateral damage estimation," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 19(3), pages 385-401, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katarzyna Growiec & Jakub Growiec & Bogumil Kaminski, 2017. "Social Network Structure and The Trade-Off Between Social Utility and Economic Performance," KAE Working Papers 2017-026, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis.
    2. Kleijnen, Jack P. C., 2005. "An overview of the design and analysis of simulation experiments for sensitivity analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(2), pages 287-300, July.
    3. Acharki, Naoufal & Bertoncello, Antoine & Garnier, Josselin, 2023. "Robust prediction interval estimation for Gaussian processes by cross-validation method," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    4. Giorgio Fagiolo & Mattia Guerini & Francesco Lamperti & Alessio Moneta & Andrea Roventini, 2017. "Validation of Agent-Based Models in Economics and Finance," LEM Papers Series 2017/23, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    5. H. Christopher Frey & Sumeet R. Patil, 2002. "Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 553-578, June.
    6. Xuefei Lu & Alessandro Rudi & Emanuele Borgonovo & Lorenzo Rosasco, 2020. "Faster Kriging: Facing High-Dimensional Simulators," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 233-249, January.
    7. Tunali, S. & Batmaz, I., 2003. "A metamodeling methodology involving both qualitative and quantitative input factors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(2), pages 437-450, October.
    8. Panknin, Lea & Boy, Karl-Friedrich & Henning, Christian H.C.A., 2024. "Can the European Green Deal be a game changer for sustainable food system transformation? A computational political economy approach," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343740, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Jack P. C. Kleijnen & Susan M. Sanchez & Thomas W. Lucas & Thomas M. Cioppa, 2005. "State-of-the-Art Review: A User’s Guide to the Brave New World of Designing Simulation Experiments," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 263-289, August.
    10. Jin, Ding & Thube, Sneha Dattatraya & Hedtrich, Johannes & Henning, Christian & Delzeit, Ruth, 2019. "A Baseline Calibration Procedure for CGE models: An Application for DART," Conference papers 333057, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Robertson, Joseph J. & Polly, Ben J. & Collis, Jon M., 2015. "Reduced-order modeling and simulated annealing optimization for efficient residential building utility bill calibration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 169-177.
    12. Richard E. Nance & Robert G. Sargent, 2002. "Perspectives on the Evolution of Simulation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(1), pages 161-172, February.
    13. Dehua Gao & Flaminio Squazzoni & Xiuquan Deng, 2018. "The role of cognitive artifacts in organizational routine dynamics: an agent-based model," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 473-499, December.
    14. Durieux, Severine & Pierreval, Henri, 2004. "Regression metamodeling for the design of automated manufacturing system composed of parallel machines sharing a material handling resource," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 21-30, May.
    15. Kleijnen, Jack P.C., 2009. "Kriging metamodeling in simulation: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 707-716, February.
    16. Ziesmer, Johannes & Jin, Ding & Mukashov, Askar & Henning, Christian, 2023. "Integrating fundamental model uncertainty in policy analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    17. Kleijnen, J.P.C. & Sanchez, S.M. & Lucas, T.W. & Cioppa, T.M., 2003. "A User's Guide to the Brave New World of Designing Simulation Experiments," Discussion Paper 2003-1, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Kamiński, Bogumił, 2015. "A method for the updating of stochastic kriging metamodels," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(3), pages 859-866.
    19. Strang, Kenneth David, 2012. "Importance of verifying queue model assumptions before planning with simulation software," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 493-504.
    20. Johannes Ziesmer & Ding Jin & Sneha D Thube & Christian Henning, 2023. "A Dynamic Baseline Calibration Procedure for CGE models," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 1331-1368, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:joudef:v:17:y:2020:i:1:p:83-97. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.