White Papers
Evaluation Of Two Common Analysis Environments
Thomas W. Held
William R. Braisted
University Of Dayton Research Institute
Abstract
This report summarizes an assessment of two commercially available common analysis environment tools being considered for technology assessment within the Air Vehicles Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL/VA). This assessment was a portion of the Common Analysis Environment Task under the Simulation-Based Research and Development (SBRD) Program for the Wright Brothers Institute (WBI) and AFRL/VA. The Air Force Project Engineers for this effort were Mr. Dennis Carter and Mr. Daniel Tejtel, both of the AFRL/VA Aerodynamic Configuration Branch (AFRL/VAAA). WBI technical and programmatic support was provided by Mr. Stephen Zemanek. The prime contract number for this effort was FA8652-03-3-0005, and the subcontract number for the SBRD effort was WBSC 9002.
The work was performed from July 2003 through December 2004 within the Aerospace Mechanics Division (Michael P. Bouchard, Division Head) of the University of Dayton Research Institute (UDRI). Overall UDRI program management for the Simulation-Based Research and Development Effort was provided by Mr. Allen Revels. UDRI’s technical efforts on the Common Analysis Environment Task were led by Mr. Thomas Held.
Introduction
The products described in this report were evaluated during the period September 2003 through May 2004. The evaluation location was primarily at the offices of AFRL/VA at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Evaluation personnel were staff from the AFRL/VA Aerodynamic Configuration Branch (AFRL/VAAA) and the University of Dayton Research Institute (UDRI); this report documents the experiences derived from their use of the products. The primary computing environment used for the evaluation was at the AFRL/VA network system at WPAFB; some additional evaluations were performed at UDRI’s campus facilities.
This document describes software applications, product versions, and system policies that were in place at AFRL/VA and AFRL/VAAA during early 2004. Comments below are meant to apply to this environment and timeframe unless otherwise noted. Evaluation information related to UDRI-specific implementations is so noted, and comments related to earlier or later product versions than those in use at this time are also noted.
The computing environment used by AFRL/VAAA is a subset of the network supported by AFRL/VA. Comments below that refer to the AFRL/VA network can be inferred to apply to the AFRL/VAAA network as well; comments that refer to the AFRL/VAAA computing environment may not necessarily be applicable to all of the AFRL/VA networking environment. For example, the Linux operating system was not widely used within AFRL/VAAA during the evaluation period; however, there are organizations within AFRL/VA that used Linux extensively then.
Download The Complete Paper
(A one-time registration will be requested)
