A Heterogeneous Shoot-Look-Shoot Attrition Process

Anderson, Lowell Bruce

doi:10.1177/1046878193243001

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…this article gives the precise form of the corresponding attrition equation. (Formulas concerning shoot-look-shoot fire are discussed in [7].) This article does not.…”

Section: A Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

“…None of these structures will be discussed in detail in this article-shoot-look-shoot fire is included in this taxonomy for completeness only. For more information concerning shoot-lookshoot fire, see [7] and [lo].…”

Section: A Taxonomy For Attrition Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Formulas for shoot-look-shoot attrition will not be given in this article; [7] discusses the computation of shoot-look-shoot attrition. Formulas for all of the other entries on Table 1 are given below.…”

Section: A Taxonomy For Attrition Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This type of fire is computationally more tractable than other types of shootlook-shoot fire, and it can consider multiple types of munitions in a straightforward manner. Detailed specification of this process is given in [7].…”

Section: F Shoot-look-shoot Firementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Attrition formulas for deterministic models of large-scale combat

Anderson

1995

Naval Research Logistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes attrition formulas that (a) consider area fire and point fire, (b) consider various levels of coordination of fire, (c) allow the explicit consideration of the use of various types of munitions, (d) allow a maximum density of targets for area fire, and (e) allow meaningful allocations of fire for point fire. For each type of fire (area or point) and for each relevant level of coordination except one (shoot‐look‐shoot fire), the precise form of the corresponding attrition formula is given. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

show abstract

“…this article gives the precise form of the corresponding attrition equation. (Formulas concerning shoot-look-shoot fire are discussed in [7].) This article does not.…”

Section: A Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Taxonomy For Attrition Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Taxonomy For Attrition Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: F Shoot-look-shoot Firementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Attrition formulas for deterministic models of large-scale combat

Anderson

1995

Naval Research Logistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This approach is based on the so-called Lanchester and/or Dinner equations of particular probabilities and their distribution laws, as presented in detail in [7], as well as in [8]. Their equations use variable attrition rates as the frequencies in operations probabilities, similar to [9], in which surface point effects are taken with variable probabilities. The modelling of cycles' efficiencies in these references is performed with coupled equations, in which two subjects simultaneously affect each other.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deterministic Mathematical Modelling of Platform Performance Degradation in Cyclic Operation Regimes

Kapor¹,

Milinović²,

Jeremić³

et al. 2015

SV-JME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Machines operating in cycles and their properties have not been studied in depth in literature and, as such, are not well described by integral mathematical models. If the effects of their operation are actions on the given working surfaces under given constraints, then the quality of the affected surfaces can be described by reliability functions. In this manner, the operating capabilities of the platform can be determined. A majority of the published papers use a standard approach to the measured performances that depend on the machine's designed purposes. Such processes are described in [1] to [3] for the abrasive flow machines (AFM) with which material is hardened by randomly treating the working surface with abrasive particles with polymeric fillers, and dispersed within the flow media. The authors of [1] classified the work piece parameters into three groups based, among others, on the number of cycles (operations) and the machining time. Some of these parameters were determined experimentally in [2], in which the authors recognized that the parameters denoted as the creeping time and the cycles frequency have impact on the quality of the machining process. In [3], the authors experimentally prove that the aforementioned parameters influence the process. Common for all three papers is that they do not include hidden random effects caused by particles affecting the surfaces in cyclic operations, although such effects significantly influence the quality of the surface treatment. In all three papers, there is no mathematical modelling of the process.Another similar type of machine with cyclic operation affecting working surfaces is described in [4] as shot-peening (SP) platforms. They bombard a surface with spherical beads to increase the material fatigue strength. The physical modelling of the influence of the bead shapes on the performance of the surface hardening process is presented in [5]. Random surface effects due to bombing cycles are a result of the quality of the machine's performance. However, the connection between the effects and the particular operations is missing in • Proposed methodology for performances degradation caused by operations composed in cycles.• Using Gaussian probability distribution law to predict degradation measures.• Predicting the changes of probability dispersion based on modelling and experimental data.• Determination of an analytical model based on a hypothesis that the degrading effects are a function of the platform capacity, frequency of operations and the number of available cycles.

show abstract

On weapons scores and force strengths

Anderson¹,

Miercort²

1995

Naval Research Logistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantitative comparisons of the combat forces on two opposing sides are virtually always formed as follows. First, all of the resources on each of the two sides are grouped into a set of categories. Each of the resources in each category is assigned a (nonnegative) value or score, where these scores are constant within categories, can vary across categories, and can be functions of the numbers and effectiveness parameters of the resources on both sides. These categories need not be the same for the two sides. Force strengths are then formed for each side by summing, over all of its categories, the product of the number of resources in each category times the score given to the resources in that category. Quantitative comparisons of the two forces are then calculated using (real‐valued) functions of these strengths and, perhaps, of exogenous input parameters. Thus, such force comparisons depend on the number and effectiveness of the weapons in the forces only through these force strengths. Accordingly, if this type of quantitative comparison of the forces on two opposing sides is desired, then it is reasonable to consider the questions of how to calculate scores for the resources of each type, and of how to combine the resulting scores to form force strengths that can be used to calculate measures of the relative effectiveness of the forces involved. This article addresses these questions. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

show abstract

A Heterogeneous Shoot-Look-Shoot Attrition Process

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Attrition formulas for deterministic models of large-scale combat

Attrition formulas for deterministic models of large-scale combat

Deterministic Mathematical Modelling of Platform Performance Degradation in Cyclic Operation Regimes

On weapons scores and force strengths

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About