Skip to main content

Active Denial Technology Computational Human Effects End-To-End Hypermodel (ADT CHEETEH)

Human Factors and Mechanical Engineering for Defense and Safety volume 3, Article number: 13 (2019) Cite this article

Abstract

We developed the Active Denial Technology Computational Human Effects End-To-End Hypermodel (ADT CHEETEH), a computational model to simulate the response of a human target to Active Denial Technology (ADT), including estimates of ADT’s physical, physiological, cognitive, and behavioral effects. The ADT system is a counter-personnel non-lethal weapon for crowd control, convoy protection, and perimeter security. The target is subjected to pulses of focused 95 GHz electromagnetic energy. The energy diffuses approximately 400 μm into the target’s skin, producing no skin damage. However, the target may still perceive a burning sensation strong enough to repel (i.e., compel the target to immediately move away). We use one model component to estimate the physical output of the ADT system, coupled with three additional components to estimate the ADT’s effect on the target’s physiology, cognition, and behavior. All components passed verification tests. Validation data was available for only the physical component, which passed its validation test. Each run of ADT CHEETEH completes in only a few minutes on a standard laptop computer, beginning with a simulation of the ADT beam formation and concluding with the estimated time at which the target is repelled. This end-to-end approach quantifies the ADT system’s main measure of effectiveness (the probability of repel) as well as its intermediate measures of performance (dose on target, temperature and damage in skin, perceived pain level, etc.) Once fully validated, ADT CHEETEH’s comprehensive results may be able to feed into force-on-force simulations to provide educated estimates of ADT effectiveness in military scenarios.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

References

  1. Carter A (2013) DoD executive agent for non-lethal weapons (NLW), and NLW policy, DoDD 3000.03E, Change 2, August 31, 2018. USD(A&S). https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/300003p.pdf?ver=2018-10-24-112944-467. Accessed 1 Feb 2019

  2. Huff A (2017) Image gallery. JNLWD. https://jnlwp.defense.gov/Press-Room/Multimedia/Images/igphoto/2001730433/. Accessed 1 Feb 2019

  3. No Author (2016) Active denial technology fact sheet. JNLWD. https://jnlwp.defense.gov/Portals/50/Documents/Press_Room/Fact_Sheets/ADT_Fact_Sheet_May_2016.pdf. Accessed 1 Feb 2019

  4. Hardy JD, Wolff HG, Goodell H (1947) Studies on pain: discrimination of differences in intensity of a pain stimulus as a basis of a scale of pain intensity. J Clin Invest 26(6):1152–1158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hardy JD, Wolff HG, Goodell H (1948) Studies on pain: an investigation of some quantitative aspects of the Dol scale of pain intensity. J Clin Invest 27(3 Pt 1):380–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stutzman WL, Thiel GA (2012) Antenna theory and design, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  7. Biddle J, Cazares S (2018) Beam propagation model selection for millimeter-wave directed energy weapons. 13th Directed Energy Systems Symposium, Portsmouth VA, pp. 24–28 May

  8. Liebe HJ, Hufford GA, Cotton MG (1993) Propagation modeling of moist air and suspended water/ice particles at frequencies below 1000 GHz. In: AGARD (ed) Atmospheric propagation effects through natural and man-made obscurants for visible to MM-wave radiation. NATO, Neuilly Sur seine France

  9. No Author (No Date) Active denial system FAQs. JNLWD. https://jnlwp.defense.gov/About/Frequently-Asked-Questions/Active-Denial-System-FAQs/. Accessed 1 Feb 2019

  10. Robinson E (2012) Solid state active denial technology demonstrator program. 2012 Joint Armaments Conference, Seattle WA, 14–17 May

  11. Brown K, Brown A, Feenstra T, Gritters D, O’Connor S, Sotelo M, Kolias N, Hwang KC, Kotce J, Robinson E (2016) 7kW GaN W-band transmitter. 2016 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium (IMS), San Francisco CA, 22–27 May

  12. Welch AJ, van Gemert MJC, Star WM (1995) Definitions and overview of tissue optics. In: Welch AJ, van Gemert MJC (eds) Optical-thermal response of laser irradiated tissue, 2nd edn. Springer, Dordrecht

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Fourier J (1822) Théorie Analytique de la Chaleur. Firmin Didot Père et Fils, Paris

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Cannon JR (1984) The one-dimensional heat equation. In: Rota G-C (ed) Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications, 23, 1st edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  15. Haberman R (1983) Elementary applied partial differential equations, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Tillman D-B, Treede R-D, Meyer RA, Campbell JN (1995) Response of C fibre nociceptors in the anaesthetized monkey to heat stimuli: estimate of receptor depth and threshold. J Physiol 485(3):753–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Henriques FC, Moritz AR (1947) Studies of thermal injury, 1. The conduction of heat to and through skin and the temperature attained therein. A theoretical and an experimental investigation. Am J Pathol 23:531–549

    Google Scholar 

  18. McArthur JCE, Stocks A, Hauer P (1998) Epidermal nerve fiber density. Arch Neurol 55(12):1513–1520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ochoa J, Mair WGP (1969) The normal sural nerve in man: 1. Ultrastructure and numbers of fibers and cells. Acta Neuropathol 13(3):197–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schmidt R, Schmelz M, Forster C, Ringkamp M, Torebjork E, Handwerker H (1995) Novel classes of responsive and unresponsive C nociceptors in human skin. J Neurosci 15(1):333–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sandby-Moller J, Poulsen T, Wulf HC (2003) Epidermal thickness at different body sites: relationship to age, gender, pigmentation, blood content, skin type and smoking habits. Acta Derm-Ven 83(6):410–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hodgkin AL, Huxley AF (1952) Currents carried by sodium and potassium ions through the membrane of the giant axon of Loligo. J Physiol 116:449–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mouraux A, Rage M, Bragard D, Plaghki L (2012) Estimation of intraepidermal fiber density by the detection rate of nociceptor laser stimuli in normal and pathological conditions. Clin Neurophysiol 42:281–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Xu F, Wen T, Lu TJ, Seffen A (2008) Modeling of nociceptor transduction in skin thermal pain sensation. J Biomech Eng 130(4):041013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Plaghki L, Decruynaere C, van Dooren P, Le Bars D (2010) The fine tuning of pain thresholds: a sophisticated double alarm system. PLoS One 5(4):e10269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Short KR, Reid G, Cooke G, Minor TR (2010) Can repeated painful blunt impact deter approach toward a goal? 27th Army Science Conference, Orlando FL, 29 Nov - 2 Dec

  27. Moreno A, Rage M, Bragard D, Plaghki L (2012) Estimation of intraepidermal fiber density by the detection rate of nociceptive laser stimuli in normal and pathological conditions. Clin Neurophysiol 42:281–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Walters TJ, Blick DW, Johnson LR, Adair ER, Foster KR (2000) Heating and pain sensation produced in human skin by millimeter waves: comparison to a simple thermal model. Health Phys 78(3):259–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Torebjork EH, LaMotte RH, Robinson CJ (1984) Peripheral neural correlates of magnitude of cutaneous pain and hyperalgesia: simultaneous recordings in humans of sensory judgments of pain and evoked responses in nociceptors with C-fibers. J Neurophys 51(2):325–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yarnitsky D, Simone DA, Dotson RM, Cline MA, Ochoa JL (1992) Single C nociceptor responses and psychophysical parameters of evoked pain: effect of rate of rise of heat stimuli in humans. J Physiol 450:581–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Weidner C, Schmelz M, Schmidt R, Hansson B, Handwerker HO, Torebjork EH (1999) Functional attributes discriminating mechano-insensitive and mechano-responsive C nociceptors in human skin. Neurosci 19(22):10184–10190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Umapathi T, Tan WL, Tan NCK, Chan YH (2006) Determinates of epidermal nerve fiber density in normal individuals. Muscle Nerve 33:742–746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vlckova-Moravcova E, Bednarik J, Dusek L, Toyka KV, Sommer C (2008) Diagnostic validity of epidermal nerve fiber densities in painful sensory neuropathies. Muscle Nerve 37:50–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lauria G, Hsieh ST, Johannsson O, Kennedy WR, Leger JM, Mellgren SI, Nolano M, Merkies ISJ, Polydefkis M, Smith AG, Sommer C, Valls-Sole J (2010) European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society guideline on the use of skin biopsy in the diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy. Eur J Neurol 17:903–912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Karlsson P, Moller A, Jenson TS, Nyengaard JR (2013) Epidermal nerve fiber density estimation using global spatial sampling in healthy subjects and neuropathy patients. J Neuropath Exp Neurol 72(3):186–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Beason CW, Payne JA (2017) Dynamic thermal model (DTM) Version 1.0. Air Force Research Laboratory, Fort Sam Houston

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) in the United States Department of Defense.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science and Technology Division, Institute for Defense Analyses, 4850 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA, 22311, USA

    Shelley Cazares, Jeffrey A. Snyder, James Belanich, John Biddle, Allyson Buytendyk, Stacy H. Teng & Kelly O’Connor

Authors
  1. Shelley Cazares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey A. Snyder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James Belanich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Biddle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Allyson Buytendyk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stacy H. Teng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kelly O’Connor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shelley Cazares.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cazares, S., Snyder, J.A., Belanich, J. et al. Active Denial Technology Computational Human Effects End-To-End Hypermodel (ADT CHEETEH). Hum Factors Mech Eng Def Saf 3, 13 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41314-019-0023-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41314-019-0023-7

Keywords

  • Modeling and simulation (M&S)
  • Active denial technology (ADT)
  • 95 GHz
  • Millimeter-wave
  • Repel