i^pecial Publication 980

Partnership for Advajvced

Measurement Standards:

The Calibration Coordination Group (CCG)

of the Department of Defense and

The National Institute of Standards and

Technology (NIST)

teof

Technology

inistration of Commerce

Special Publication 980

A Partnership for Advanced

Measurement Standards:

The Calibration

Coordination Group (CCG)

of the Department of Defense

and

The ]>fational Institute of

Standards and Technology

(]\IST)

Gerome Reeve and Dr. Raju Datia, Editors

December 2002

U. S. Department of Commerce

Donald L Evans, Secretary

Technology Administration

Phillip J. Bond, Under Secretary of

Commerce for Technology

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Arden L Bement, Jr., Director
C€G Participating Military Organizations
VII The Importance of Metrology to Defense 1 The Military Need 1

First Person. ..Singular 1 How the Partnership Began 5

What We Accomplished Together 9

Part 1. Highlights 11

Will my Gas Mask Leak? 11

Where in the World Am I? 1

Selecting the Right Target; or. You Can't Hit it if You Can't See it 14

To See the Unseen—from Desert Storm to Saving Energy 16

From Star Wars to Pocket Pointers 17

No More Messy Wet Cells for DC Measurements 20

Conclusions 21

Brief Histories: the Services' Metrology Programs and NCSL International .... 23

Acknowledgements 28

References 29

Part 2. Digest of Selected Projects by Technical Area 31

Electrical/Electronic 31

Physical/Mechanical 36

RF/Microwave 37

Electro-Optics 47

Chemicai/Bioiogical/Radiological (CBR) 60

Appendix A. A List of ail CCG Projects as of FY 2002 61

Appendix B. The Charter Documents and Present CCG Organization 71

Political humor is no stranger to tales of rivalries among Government agencies, including even

the military services; stories of voluntary cooperation are rare. But occasionally there are accounts of successful cooperative efforts that have yielded results far greater than expected.

This report is about one such effort, which has existed for over three decades. It involves a little-known element within the Department of Defense (DoD),the Calibration Coordination

Group (CCG), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the

Department of Commerce.

For over 33 years the CCG and NIST have had a working relationship to provide the military

services with required measurement standards and expertise, and to schedule the calibration of military laboratory standards at NIST in the most efficient and cost-effective way. They

have also had to anticipate totally new technologies and the measurements that they would

require, so that the necessary research and standards development could take place in a timely manner. This benefited not only the military services but also American industry. Yesterday's

military technological innovations often become today's industrial products. With the meas- urement infrastructure already developed, U.S. industry is in a unique position to capitalize on new products and gain a competitive edge in the new world economy.

On the occasion of the one-hundredth anniversary of NIST (and the 33rd of the CCG) it seemed an appropriate time to tell the story of how this partnership came to exist and to pro- vide some highlights of what has been accomplished over these years. Besides coordinating

routine calibrations of military standards for the three services at the NIST laboratories the

CCG has sponsored close to 500 technical research projects to develop new standards and

measurement methods in anticipation of technological advances. Since NIST also serves as the nation's primary civilian standards agency, the results of these projects quickly found their way into the country's commerce. The results, not always easy to document, have in many

cases provided the source for new product development and entrepreneurial startups.

In the following pages we have documented some of these engineering projects and their

results, not only for archival purposes but also to honor the efforts of the people who had the

foresight to recognize the initial problems and generate solutions with far-reaching results.

This NIST Centennial Special Publication is dedicated to the staff of the

National Institute of Standards and Technology and to the members of the

metrology organizations of the military services, past and present.

Gerome Reeve, Radio-Frequency Technology Division, NIST retired, and

Dr. Raju Datia, Optical Technology Division, NIST, Editors

I

1

Certain commercial firms, trade names, equipment, and materials may be identified in this document but only to describe program efforts adequately. Such identification implies nei- ther recommendation nor endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and

Technology or the Department of Defense; nor does it imply that these are necessarily the

best or only sources or items available.

In regard to the many CCG/NIST projects referenced in the following sections, it has been NIST

policy that these metrology projects deal only with unclassified material and aspects of mili- tary technology. While specific project reports to the sponsoring military agencies are released to the public only with agency permission, the discoveries and advances in metrological science are broadly published in archival scientific journals and quickly made available in the public domain.

When the projects described in parts 1 and 2 are referred to as CCG sponsored, it should be

understood that the CCG itself has no direct funding or contracting authority. All projects are supported by R&D funds contracted out by each service's metrology organization. The CCG is the operational venue for formulating specific requirements, prioritizing, initiating, monitoring,

and disseminating the results of the projects within the services.

In the following technical descriptions of the projects, the terms "accuracy" and "uncertainty"

are both used interchangeably, and "error" assumes the common meaning of deviation from

perfection no matter what the source. The editors are well aware of the correct metrological

usages but have chosen to use terms, appropriate to the context, that would be more understandable to those outside the metrology community.

Lastly, for those who dig deeply, a technical note; the symbol K, which appears in some of the

project description, particularly in part 2, stands for thermodynamic temperature in units

called kelvins. To convert to the more familiar scale of degrees Celsius (° C) subtract 273 from

the temperature in kelvins.

The Military Need

First one might ask, why are measurement

standards and calibrations so important to the military services? For an answer let's turn to a real-life incident as recounted by an

Air Force crewman.

The following is from a series ofarticles entitled

"First Person . . . Singular" from JED, The Journal

of Electronic Defense [ I ]. Although these stories cover the period from WWII to the present

they echo many of the same themes. This one was selected for the number of instances in which the accuracy of information presented

by instruments was critical to the mission and

the lives ofservice men. It describes a mission

aboard an AC-130E, a rather slow transport air- craft that had been converted to a very effective close-in ground support gunship. When

faced with enemy fighters, however, the only

choice was to run and/or hide. Take particular note of the italicized portions.

First Person ... Singular

Jerry Stiles

I will never forget the look on our IR (infrared

camera) operator's face when I said that we

might have seconds to live. This night our

AC-1 30E was assigned to an armed recon- naissance mission. Our job was to find and

destroy military targets. We were on a night

mission a few days before Christmas, 1971,

but it was far from dark. The moon was full and reflected brightly off the solid cloud

undercast obscuring the terrain below us. The glare almost blinded my night-penetrating, low-light television targeting camera. The

radio code name of our land-based controller was "Cricket." Our code name was

"Spectre."

After about two-and-a-half hours we

received a radio call. On the universal emer- gency (or "guard") frequency came a heart- stopping message. "This is Redcrown on

Guard. Bandits, Bandits, Blue Bandits." This

meant that a friendly radar (Redcrown) had

detected North Vietnamese l\/liG-21 fighters

(Blue Bandits). They were undoubtedly look- ing for a target to engage—perhaps us

and their radar, coupled with the brightness

outside, gave them a good chance of success.

Our navigator had also been keeping tabs on

the MiGs. Within a heartbeat of the last warning, he called out over the interphone,

"Pilot, Nav.Turn south now! Descend!

Minimum safe altitude 9,600 ft. Those MiGs

are coming directly at us!" Our pilot wasted no time. He stood our northbound AC-1 30 on a wing and pulled hard into the turn; we

were running south in a few seconds. Our

pilot was motivated, and justifiably so; the

MiGs could make mincemeat of our lumbering aircraft. The rapid turn caused my TV

camera to swivel and jam inside the aircraft. This, in turn, rendered us three sensor operators (the IR camera operator, the EWO

[Electronic Warfare Operator] and myself—

•TV") in the "booth" blind.

Our situational awareness was limited to observing our flight instruments, and these

weren't telling a happy story. The airspeed

indicator had spooled up to 280 knots. The

problem was that this was 100 knots above our maximum 180-knot, cargo-door-open airspeed

limit. Our AC-1 30's tail could be torn off because of the loads imposed on our structurally diminished airframe. Equally perilous,

my altimeter had unwound to 4,600 ft.-5,000

ft. below the declared 9,600 ft. minimum safe

altitude. Our busy pilot had no time to explain that he was visually skimming along

just above the cloud deck, the bright moonlight enabling him to see and avoid the

karsts (sharp mountain peaks) looming near and above our gunship. Perhaps four or five minutes crawled by. As more time elapsed,

relief began to build with the feeling that,

perhaps—just perhaps—we would make it. At our lower altitude, the MiGs may have

missed us, and we had avoided the karsts.
But then: "Pilot, this is the 10 (the Illuminator

Operator: the gutsy, enlisted aviator who

physically hung out the open rear door, and

who directed our pirouette through flak as it came at us). I can see something! Sir, you

won't believe it, but I think I see light reflect- ing off another airplane. He's higher than we

AC 130 Aircraft

are, but almost directly behind. I think we're being followed!" In all likelihood, the MiGs

had slowed and were trying to find us. The

interphone buzzed. "Can't we go faster?" Another minute or two passed, after which

the 10 announced that the reflection was no

longer immediately behind us. Apparently,

the MiG pilot couldn't find us even in the

bright moonlight.

We were just starting to breathe a bit easier when our radar warning receiver (RWR) began

to sing: radar had begun sweeping us. The

MiG pilot behind us had begun to search

with his radar. If and when the radar locked

onto us, we were dead. Our AC-1 30's jammers

didn't cover the MiG's radar frequency; it would have been futile to try to jam it. We

were sitting ducks.

Time dragged on over the jungle. We now

felt that our lives had been extended a few

minutes because of our pilot's shrewd action

in hugging the cloud tops. This, in turn, required that the MiG pilot look down into the terrain clutter to try to find us—not an

easy task with radars of that vintage, but possible. Given our large radar cross section, it seemed but a matter of time.

"Call Cricket and tell them to scramble the

Papas. Tell him we have a Blue Bandit on our

tail and need them to scramble the Papas!"

[The "Papas" were several Air Force jet fight- ers that were kept ready for immediate takeoff from a nearby friendly air base for just

such an emergency.]

"Roger, affirmative. Papa. Gate Climb." This

meant that Papas One and Two had taken off and were directed to climb to 28,000 ft. on a heading of 1 0°, with their target on that axis at 50 mi. The instruction to "Gate Climb" was

an order to climb in full afterburner, an otherwise less-than-desirable procedure because it consumed fuel at a prodigious rate. Gate Climb

orders were reserved for emergency conditions

only. Finally, someone had recognized the

seriousness of our situation, and in less than

a minute, two things happened.

First, the copilot announced over the inter- com, "I can see the Papas' afterburners in the

climb. They're heading our way." Second, the

MiG's radar sweep suddenly became silent. The MiG pilot had likely also seen the after- burners and thought it best to head home to Hanoi. The MiG had broken off. We would

live another day. But our night was not over. Over our objections. Cricket once again sent

us northward above the undercast in another wasted effort to find targets. Once again,

the "Blue Bandit" call echoed over the radio,

and once again we dropped low and dashed

south. This time, however, the bandit didn't even come close. We turned tail and ran at the first hint of a problem. And believe it or

not. Cricket tried to send us north again.

2
On this third attempt to send us into harm's

way, our flight engineer reminded the pilot that we had, in running from the MiGs, exceeded the maximum allowable sustained turbine inlet temperature for our engines for over 40 min.

They could now theoretically fail at any minute

(a very unlikely event given the robustness of

the Allison T-56 engine, but it sufficed).

"Ah, Cricket, this is Spectre. Be advised that we have accumulated over 40 minutes of over-temp on our engines. We think it pru- dent at this time, sir, to RTB [return to base].

Else, we might have to declare an emergency

at any moment." The implied threat worked.

"Roger, Spectre, Cricket. Understand. You are cleared to RTB. Nice working with you

tonight."

The brief, italicized sections that you noted represent instrument readings or physical quantities on which life-or-death decisions depended. For example, what if the engine intake operating temperature sensor system were giving an incorrect reading, due to lack of accurate cali- bration? Either the engine could have failed while on the mission or, by not pushing it as close to the limit as possible they might not have escaped the enemy fighter. What if the

radar warning receiver or their main communications receiver had inadequate sensitivity that had not been detected during routine maintenance, due to improperly calibrated test equipment? The results are easily imagined! The same could be said for any of the equipment

highlighted above that supported the mission. The projects sponsored by the CCG at NIST have impacted virtually all of these areas and many more. But before presenting a sampling

of these projects, let's find out how the partnership started.
I

i

!

i

I
In order to understand the genesis of the

CCG and the rest of the story, we must return

to the heyday of the cold war. The launch of

Sputnik and the subsequent development of

missile weapons by the three services

demanded unprecedented accuracy of

measurements. Comparability of measure- ments among U.S. manufacturers and the

military depots that accepted deliveries of

ordnance and other military equipment was now absolutely essential. In the field, precise

electrical, mechanical, and optical measure- ment instruments were needed to ensure

that weapons were in a constant state of

readiness.

This led to the formation of metrology (the

science of measurement) and calibration organizations within the services whose

duties were to assure that all such measure- ments were within the necessary tolerances

and were consistent with measurements

made in other parts of the organizations and

industry. This was addressed by setting up

primary service standards laboratories to which all military calibrations were related. These laboratories in turn derived their refer- ences from the U.S. national standards at NBS (NIST),to which industrial measure- ments are also referenced.

By the mid 1 960's each of the services had a

fully developed metrology program and

organization and a designated primary stan- dards laboratory. A brief history of each service's metrology organization is presented at the end of section Part 1. Coincidentally, in the early 1960s an industry-wide association of calibration laboratories was formed under

the leadership of NIST and key industry and

military metrology engineers. This came to be

known as the National Conference of

Standards Laboratories, known today as NCSL

International. (A short history of NCSL

International can also be found at the end of

section Part 1). At their annual conferences

technical papers on metrology problems

were presented, discussions held on how to best utilize the calibration services that NIST

provided, and to exchange ideas and experi- ences in order to develop a nationwide infra- structure of calibration facilities traceable to

NIST.

At a luncheon gathering at one of these conferences around 1965, three high level per- sonnel from the services' metrology pro- grams met with a representative from NIST

who had been instrumental in the formation

of NCSL. Corporate memory has it that the

luncheon participants were: Jerry Hayes

(Navy), Melvin "Dutch" Fruechtenicht (Army),

Ray Bailey (Air Force), and William Wildhack

(NIST). The conversation quickly turned to

several problems that had developed with

NISTs support of the military's primary laboratories. The rapid growth of the DoD cali- bration workload was straining NIST's capabilities, resulting in the service laboratories

vying for priority in having their needs fulfilled. Uncoordinated piece-by-piece scheduling was also driving up the cost of NIST's

services.

The answer was fairly obvious. The services

needed to coordinate their scheduling of cal- ibrations in a way that would provide a uni- form workload throughout the year. In return NIST could then contract at a lower

cost for a predetermined number of military calibrations and provide a more defined date

for completion of the work. An unofficial committee was formed, called the ANAF

Working Group (for Army, Navy, and Air Force), composed of a representative from

each service and appropriate NIST staff. But

soon, a more formal arrangement was needed to ensure stability as personnel changed

over time. This led to the formation of the

CCG, which was recognized by the DoD on December 2, 1966. A memorandum of

understanding (MOU) was developed

between NIST and the DoD that became

effective August 22, 1 968, and formalized the
relationships outlined above. It also allowed

for future areas of cooperation in the development of metrology engineering and support. On September 10, 1968 the CCG was

taken under the aegis of the DoD Joint

Logistics Commanders and became the main

component of the Joint Technical

Coordinating Group for Metrology and

Calibration (JTCG-METCAL), now called the

JTCG-CMT (for Calibration and Measurement

Technology). Copies of some of the original

and current authorizing documents for these

groups can be found in Appendix B.

With the emergence of new technologies

during the following years, the more important work of the CCG became anticipating

requirements that these technologies would

force upon the military metrology organizations. A special sub-group of the CCG called the Engineering Working Group was formed

for this purpose. As needs were identified,

early consultation with NIST determined

whether new national measurement stan- dards and techniques would need to be

developed. If so, the CCG sought support

from the military project offices to fund the

development. Eventually this led to the

establishment of Engineering R&D budgets

in the three services specifically to support

development of metrology.

During the peak of the "Star Wars" program,

a NIST/CCG Liaison position (filled by a NIST

staff member) was established, and for a time this individual had an office in the

Pentagon. The purpose of the position was

to help the CCG and NIST gather and analyze

up-to-date information regarding measure- ment and standards requirements associated

with new military systems while they were

still in the R&D phase. This individual also

raised the level of awareness of the defense

R&D community regarding the importance

to defense readiness of accurate measure- ment capabilities.

Although the R&D funding varied significantly from year to year, the work usually continued at a steady pace. If commercial applications appeared in the offing, a NIST funded

research project was sometimes associated

with the technical area in which the DoD

was interested. This project carried out the more basic research required by the new

technology, while the CCG-funded project was concerned with applying the measure- ment techniques to the military require- ment.

Over the years the services used several managerial and funding arrangements.

Often the service with the greatest immediate need acted as the project sponsor and

provided the required funding. Sometimes

the funding was shared by more than one

service, with one of them taking the man- agement lead. In a number of instances,

basic research had already been initiated at NIST in collateral areas that provided a head

start to the CCG projects.

Also with the advent of large military pro- grams that involved all three services the

DoD would often establish a central Program

Office. When these programs discovered

that they needed to develop new metrology

standards, methods or equipment, they

turned to the CCG and made use of the well- established arrangement with NIST to accomplish the work. These included the

MILSTAR Program Office (a satellite communications system) and the Strategic Defense

Initiative Organization (SDIO), later known as the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization

(BMDO). These organizations would supply

funding support for specific metrology

development projects while one of the services acted as lead service manager.

Certain advantages to these arrangements

should be immediately apparent.

Cooperation rather than competition, and

the lack of the "not-invented-here" syn- drome generated economies not only in
metrology research but also in areas not at

first foreseen. Sharing in the developnnent

of measurement standards and methods at NIST led the CCG to joint service procure- ments of test equipment in appropriate

technologies. Common test procedures were developed and shared by the service

laboratories. But these and many other such

consequences are beyond the scope of this narrative.

Major advances in microwave, electro-optical, electrical, and physical/mechanical sci- ences have resulted from these projects.

When, often within a few years, commercial

applications were developed for these technologies, the measurement infrastructure was already in existence at NIST and could

be disseminated quickly to U.S. industry, as needed. The explosive commercial growth in the use of lasers, fiber-optic communication,

and microwave cellular radio over the past

three decades can be traced, at least in part, to the existence of this infrastructure.

What We

Jk

The following two sections present examples

of CCG-sponsored projects chosen by the

NIST staff on the basis of technical signifi- cance, substantial benefits for the military,

and/or related commercial applications.

They are but a brief sample of the over 500

projects completed to date. In Part l,we

have selected six that are concerned with

subjects that the non-scientist would more

easily understand. These descriptions have

been written in narrative form with a minimal use of technical terms and jargon, given

the nature of the work. Part 2 covers 72

additional projects in more esoteric scientific areas that are described in greater technical

detail. Appendix A includes a numerical

listing of all the CCG projects since 1968, for which records could be recovered.

Over the last 35 years since the inception of

this research partnership almost every area

of technology has been represented. During

any particular period the current projects

naturally reflected the immediate requirements of the military services at that time. As new technologies arose, greater emphasis was placed on developing improved metrology in those areas. In order to reflect scientific timeliness in the presentations, many of

the projects described in the following sec- tions are from the last decade. Hence they

reflect the technologies requiring the greatest investment during the period of the last ten to fifteen years, namely those related to

electro-optics. Previous decades would have

shown major investments in areas such as microwave/millimeter wave or physical and

mechanical metrology.

9

Will my Gas Mask Leak?

One of the major concerns during the

Desert Storm conflict was the possible use

of chemical warfare, such as nerve agents

or biological agents, by the Iraqis. An

important element of the individual protective equipment issued to U.S. troops is a gas mask. As anyone who has tried one of

these on in a military surplus

store knows, it

is difficult to get an airtight

fit around the

face because

faces come in

all sorts of

shapes and

sizes. The Army

wanted to have

a method that

could be used

in the field to

test the fit on

individual sol- diers. An essential element of such a device is a method of

measuring and accurately quantifying the

amount of leakage.

One promising way to determine the

quality of gas mask fit is by measuring

and comparing the ambient aerosol concentration outside of the fitted masks to the aerosol concentration inside. Small

aerosol particles are used as surrogate gas test agents because they behave in a

similar manner and have nearly the same

fluid-dynamical properties as the airflow streams. The particles can identify both

leaks in the mask and inefficiencies in the filters.

The Army, working with TSI, Inc., an

aerosol instrument manufacturer, has

developed the M41 Protective

Assessment Test Systems (PATS) shown

Field testing chemical protective equipment.

here to test and verify the goodness of fit for the gas mask on the individual person that is issued the device. The M41 PATS are tested and verified by the Army Primary Standards

Laboratory using specialized fit-test calibra- tion stands, condensation nuclei counters,

and laser alignment systems.

The fit test procedure is illustrated below.

This technology is believed to provide a complete diagnostic of the integrity of the

mask, the filter and the fit to the individual. As illustrated, leakage is measured by means

of two condensate particle counters (CPCs)

that count both the ambient aerosol concentration and the concentration within the

mask.

There are currently no aerosol concentration standards for the CPCs, nor are there

certified reference materials available for standardization of aerosol concentration.

Traceability is based currently upon con- sensus methods and standards. To ensure

quality, the weakness of the traceability process for aerosols requires extensive process control, proficiency testing, and

technical auditing.

The M41 tester con- nected to gas mask

that is mounted on a mannequin head.

(Courtesy of TSI, Inc)
Laser

Light

Source

Focusing

Optics

Receiving

Optics

Breatiiing .Zone

Leal(age

Ambient

Sampling

PortX

Ambient AirDetector

Alcohol

Soal(ed

Cylinder

Schematic showing how a small aerosol is used to challenge a gas mask. The M4 1 is able to sense and count 80 nm particles by using them as droplet nuclei. The droplets grow to sufficient diameter

to be detected by laser light scattering and idividually counted. (Courtesy of TSI, Inc.)

Through the CCG an Army-supported project

has been initiated at NIST. The objective of

the project is to provide measurement assur- ance to the U.S. Army for their gas mask fit- test method by assuring the accuracy of the

aerosol concentration measurement integral to this test method. An aerosol-concentration standard test method, traceable to NIST is needed. This standard method will enable the

calibration of Condensation Particle Counters

that are currently used to calibrate l\/141 Protective Assessment Test Systems (PATS) for the Army. This is an ongoing project at NIST;

results are expected in 1 to 2 years.

Lest one think that this is a purely military

problem, fire fighters and emergency per- sonnel responsible for cleaning up accidental industrial and transport spills of toxic substances also use gas masks. Undoubtedly

this technology will be extended to private- sector uses once manufacturing costs can be

reduced and a calibration method traceable

to NIST established.

This work is being conducted at NIST, Gaithersburg, under CCG project 474.

Where in the World Am I? GPS (Global Positioning System)

receivers have become almost

necessities to explorers, campers,

sailing enthusiasts, and luxury car owners. It will be only a matter of

time until these devices become

standard equipment in most automobiles.

GPS receivers work by measuring

the differences in timing of signals

from several satellites in the GPS

constellation. These satellites have

ultra-stable atomic clocks that control the timing of the signals and

their frequencies. Any small deviations in their signals and orbits are monitored by even more precise

systems located at the national standards

laboratories of many countries including, in the U.S., NIST and the Naval Observatory. The

data from these

ground meas- urements are pooled to generate correc- tions that, when

applied to the

data transmitted to a GPS

ground receiver, allow its location to be

known to within a few feet almost any

place on earth.

Commercial GPS receiver. (Courtesy Hammacher Schiet

It should come as no surprise that this sys- tem was developed first for the military. Even today, in times of international crisis, the military can add a small amount of

"scrambling" to the signal to degrade its accuracy somewhat except for government

users.

12
.mm

Commerdalphase noise standardlicensed by NISI

(Courtesy Femptosecond Systems.)

Critical to the

operation of the GPS (and

many other

communication systems)

is the ability to determine

the purity or

lack of noise

in the many

signals present within the equipment

employed. The presence of phase noise on

these signals eventually shows up as a time

uncertainty, which translates into an uncertainty in the position of the GPS receiver. During the development of the GPS system

it became apparent that both a national

standard for phase noise, traceable to NIST, and a method of easily comparing such

noise to commercial measuring equipment, were needed. Existing methods were so time-consuming that only engineering models

and spot tests could be

conducted.

In 1984 the CCG contract- ed with NIST to develop a technical approach and

measurement equipment

to meet these needs. By

1991 NIST had produced

a broadband standard

and an automated meas- urement system to compare other equipment to the standard. Four of these systems were deliv- ered to the military services. During the next six years further work

extended the frequency

range of the equipment

into the millimeter-wave

region of the spectrum

and produced a portable

broadband standard that could evaluate

other noise measurement systems and commercial equipment. A patent was obtained

for this design and licensed to industry for commercial production. NIST capabilities now exist that will satisfy both military and

civilian measurement requirements in this

field for the foreseeable future.

Beyond these specific needs, the research

conducted under this project resulted in major breakthrough improvements in lownoise solid-state circuits, frequency synthesizers and atomic clocks. But without the initial requirements and support provided by

the CCG, NIST is unlikely to have entered this measurement field.

This worl< was supported by CCG projects 198,

199, 305, and 390.

NISTPhase noise measurement system at the Navy Primary Standards Laboratory, San Diego, CA.
Selecting the

Right Target; or. You Can't Hit It if You Can't See It Most readers probably recall the

Strategic Defense

Initiative (SDI) by the more popular name

given to it by the

press, the Star Wars

Initiative. Although

its initial direction

has changed significantly since inception, including a name change to the

Ballistic Missile Defense

Organization

(BMDO), the technological challenges

remain. Trying to

intercept a hostile missile has been

likened to "hitting a bullet with a bullet." Interception is possi- ble and has been demonstrated in selective

flight tests. However, making an interceptor

collide with a warhead, when they are both

travelling nearly 16,000 miles per hour in opposite directions, is an extremely challenging task. To complicate matters further, a

missile defense system hardly ever gets a chance for a second shot as there is only a small window of opportunity, particularly at mid-course, when the actual warhead is deployed toward its intended target.

Radar of course can do some of the guid- ance chores, but many missiles have the ability to confuse the defense either by using

the remaining deployment debris or specially designed dummy warheads. Early on the

need for other ways of "seeing" became eviLBIR absolute cryogenic radiometer.

dent. The extremely cold backdrop of space, not much above absolute zero, provides a perfect opportunity to "see" the scene with

focal-plane-array IR (infrared) sensors. Since

there are subtle temperature differences

among the various deployed components of

the hostile missile, determining which is the

real warhead should be possible.

But while there had been great advancements in the sensitivity of IR focal plane sensors, the ability to accurately measure their performance was lacking. In response to this situation, the CCG in 1986 requested that NIST undertake a survey of current and

future DoD LBIR (Low-Background Infrared) calibration requirements, and to recommend

a program to meet these needs. In this case, "low background" refers to the very cold

background found in space, approximately

20 K (423° below zero Fahrenheit).

Based on a NIST survey of military and industrial sites involved in the SDI program, a plan was developed with the following key ele- ment: NIST would develop an LBIR calibra- tion chamber with an absolute cryogenic

(cooled) radiometer as the standard detector. This would provide primary calibration services for industry and the military so that

all subsequent field calibrations would be

traceable to NIST. A CCG project was then

initiated under Army sponsorship, funded by

the SDI program, and subsequently trans- ferred to the Air Force.

As the SDI transformed into the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) and

practical, space deployable IR sensors were

built, an experiment to test the capabilities

of IR sensing and discrimination in a real missile-defense context was initiated in the early

1 990's. The experiment was called the

Midcourse Space Experiment (MSX). An IR sensor called the Spatial Infrared Imaging

Telescope III (Spirit III) would be deployed in space and measurements made of the radia14
tion from small man-made objects

released by the test vehicle. Measurements would be made

against different backgrounds such as deep space, auroras, and other phe- nomena such as the Earth's "limb," that slight halo that surrounds the cir- cumference of the Earth when viewed

from space. The data from this experiment, if successful, would be archived

to serve as a reference point for future remote-sensing programs.

Therefore state-of-the-art calibration of Spirit III became very important.

The calibration team devised a scheme, based on three interlocking

calibration methods, each independently traceable to NIST standards: ground

based, using the LBIR chamber mentioned

above; stellar calibration standards; and

deployable reference spheres (about the size of a marble and a golf ball). The amount of energy the spheres would radiate at differ- ent temperatures was measured at NIST. The

The MSX experiment tripod.

stellar (star) calibrations were made at observatories and referenced to standard sources

at NIST. Spirit III also made measurements of the stars as a crosscheck of its calibration. Although the experiment may be somewhat

difficult to visualize, the following figure may

help one to understand the concepts.

The MSX experiment was conducted in 1996,

and all of the careful preparation and cali- bration effort paid off. Everything worked

according to plan and

excellent data were

obtained. While much

additional research and

engineering work must

occur before a feasible and reliable military

interceptor can be

developed, the basic

data for "looking" at the

target with infrared sensors now exist.

This work was conducted

under CCG projects 354S,

4045,41 OS, and 432S.

Loadiffg the calibration fixture for the reference spheres

into the LBIR at NIST.

Ex penmen: of \hc

Ba\\i*Hc M[ul« 0«fe^se Crganlzstlon (BMOO) '
FUR image ofa tank in darkness.

(Courtesy FSI Corp.)

To See the Unseen—from Desert

Storm to Saving Energy

The acronym FUR (forward-looking infrared)

may not be familiar to many readers, but any- one who has seen James Bond and his hightech arsenal knows about "night-vision" goggles. FLIR is defined in the Photonics

Dictionary [3] as:" ... a night-vision device

that uses one or more infrared sensors to scan

a scene in the 3 to 5, or 8 to 1 2 jam (micrometer) spectral wavelength region, convert the

infrared radiation to electronic data and pres- ent the resulting image on a television-like

display. The term originally referred to air- borne systems but now is used for any real- time thermal imaging system."

The advantage of such a device to the military is obvious and thus not sur- prising that much of the

initial development work

was done either for or by

DoD laboratories. As the

technology improved, it was evident that the exist- ing method of measuring

sensitivity of these devices was woefully inadequate.

The technique used a photomultiplier, a vacuum-tube device left over from World War II. Besides lacking sensitivity, the device was electrically noisy and

unstable at best; an improvement by a factor of 1 0 was needed. The CCG tasked NIST to develop a method and equipment that could be used to calibrate night-vision goggles by use of new silicon photocell devices

that NIST had developed for some very-highsensitivity radiometers. In response, NIST

designed six high-sensitivity transfer-stan- dard detectors, three photometers and three

silicon radiometers that are suitable for very- low level-optical radiation measurements.

These radiometers and photometers were

widely utilized as working standards in the

services' primary standards laboratories.

Night-vision device detector standard.

A new radiometric method was developed

for calibrating the night-vision radiometric

standards and field-level night vision test

sets. These test sets are used to calibrate night-vision goggles against NIST-developed

detector standards. As a result of this six- year research effort, the safety and reliability

of night-vision military operations was dra- matically improved.

While these partic- ular standards were used exclusively by the mili- tary services,

industry quickly

realized the great

commercial potential for night-vision

technology. Today, numerous vari- eties of nightvision devices are available to consumers at reasonable prices. In developing these, man

ufacturers relied upon the calibration tech- nology developed at NIST for the military.

An example of a common commercial application is shown in the figure below. Energy

audits for buildings are easily conducted by

NISTprimary calibration facility for night-vision

detector standards.
observing the sources of thermal leakage,

which then can be remedied by various means.

This work was conducted under CCG projects

370 and 404.

fy performance and enable manufacturers to produce a uniform product. The military has

used lasers for all the applications that industry has, but has additionally developed

specialized uses such as target designation

and missile defense.

Building heat loss imaged by FUR technology.

(Courtesy FSI Corp.)

From Star Wars to Pocket Pointers

Some research and development efforts con- ducted by NIST for the CCG cannot be

described easily by only one or even a few

projects. As rapid advances in a technology

took place an almost continual series of projects, each building on the ones before, was

required to solve new problems that arose as the military sought to employ these

advances in its operations. This is particularly true for lasers. Great scientific strides were

necessary to turn what were at first scientific curiosities into the tools of industry, medicine, and military weapons. Each advance

required new types of measurements to veriI Industrial laser used

for micro-machining metalparts.

(Courtesy Spectra

Physics)

The most common measurement required

by laser users is determining the amount of

power or energy contained in the laser beam. For almost every laser application,

knowledge of the power output is critical for assessment of effectiveness as well as for safety evaluation. This is doubly so for mili- tary applications.

However, this was not a simple matter due to

certain unique properties of

lasers as compared to those of

other light sources. These are:

(a) the radiation is spatially and

temporally coherent, which can

create interference problems

due to windows or other optics

with parallel surfaces, (b) the

beams have nonuniform powerdensity profiles that necessitate

measurements across the entire beam, and (c) the energy is contained in a relatively small

cross-sectional area. This can

lead to very high power or energy densities that can damage or degrade detectors and other optics. If the

laser is pulsed, then additional measurement

problems are involved.

The standard device for measuring the

power in a laser beam is called a calorimeter.

This device converts the light energy into an

equivalent amount of heat when the beam

strikes a totally absorbing surface inside the

calorimeter. There is a consequent rise in the

target's temperature, which rise can be converted into an electrical signal and measured. Although simple in principle, months

of evaluation are required to determine and

evaluate sources of uncertainties in the

measurement.

front view ofNIST BB-Series

calorimeter (with the cover plates removed).
NIST began developing standard calorimeters in the mid-1 960's. The CCG began supporting this effort in the early to mid-1 970's and, through a series of projects, has continued this support to the present day. This support enabled NIST to develop a suite of electrically calibrated calorimeters for use as primary standards. These are specifically: (a) Cseries calorimeters, for low-to-medium con- tinuous-wave (cw) laser power or energy

measurements, (b) K-series calorimeters, for high (up to 1 kW) cw laser power or energy

measurements, and (c) Q-series calorimeters,

for pulsed-laser measurements in the nearinfrared wavelength region. (The nearinfrared is the wavelength region that mili- tary range-finders and target designators

use.) Copies of these standard calorimeters were built and installed at the Air Force Primary Standards Laboratory.

In addition to the above efforts that support

both military and civilian laser metrology

needs, the CCG also funded NIST to work on

projects that were specifically tailored to military applications. One such effort was the

development of two large calorimeters

called the BB-series. These large (weighing

about 400 kg), electrically-calibrated

calorimeters were built to measure the out- puts of very high-energy lasers (HELs) being

developed by the military to be used in defensive weapons systems of the "Star Wars" program. Due to discrepancies in power measurements among different contractors, the CCG, DARPA, and NASA tasked

NIST to help resolve the issue.

As a result, the BB-series calorimeters were

built in the mid-1 970's and transferred to the

Air Force Primary Standards Laboratory,

where they were used to perform highpower measurements (up to 100 kW) at vari- ous HEL sites around the country. These

calorimeters are the only such devices in existence anywhere and are still in operation

today. The Air Force uses these calorimeters

for on-site calibration measurements as well

as at remote locations, such as LHMEL (Laser

Hardening of iVlaterials Evaluation

Laboratory) at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio,

where they test materials for high-power

lasers. Through current CCG support, NIST

maintains its collaboration with scientists involved with current HEL work such as the

Space-Based Laser and the Airborne Laser and provides consulting support to these

efforts.

Sometimes the problem can be just the

opposite—too little energy to measure.

Military aircraft often use a pulsed laser to target enemy assets and use the return

reflections to determine range and velocity.

Due to the low reflectivity of most objects

and attenuation by the atmosphere, the

return signals typically have very small amplitudes. The laser pulses also have very

short durations (nanoseconds) as this allows

a more accurate range determination. The

laser range-finder receiver has to maintain

high sensitivity and needs to be checked

periodically in the field with a specifically

designed optical test set that generates a

series of very-low-amplitude pulses simulating reflection from a distant target.

The need by an Air Force contractor to confirm that this type of equipment was being

manufactured with the essential specifications motivated NIST's involvement in this work. Later, field performance verification was needed at the Air Force depots that support the repair and calibration of the optical

test sets used to calibrate the aircraft laser range-finders. Commercial equipment that could calibrate the low signal levels and

measure the relatively fast (nanosecond)

pulses at the same time was not available. Through the CCG, the Air Force engaged

NIST to develop transfer standards for peakpower and pulse-energy, as well as a 1 .06 ^m

calibration system at NIST.

As a direct result, NIST established a calibra- tion system that measures laser peak-power
TheAPD-800 pulsed-laser radiometer (black box) being used to

calibrate an optical testset.

and pulse-energy at wavelengths of 1 .06 jim

and is traceable to national standards. A

portable instrument called a pulsed-laser

radiometer is calibrated and then used as a transfer standard at the customer's site. In this manner, calibration traceabiliy is provided to the military and DoD contractors. Operation within prescribed power levels is vital in order for laser targeting systems to function at their specified range. Early ver- sions of the radiometers were calibrated with an uncertainty of about 12 %. Updated tech- nology and improvements in the calibration system have allowed this uncertainty to be

cut in half, depending on the particular

instrument.

Later in the early 1990's,

Navy aircraft were experiencing problems with their

laser targeting receivers,

which were more sensitive than those of the previous

decade. The manufacturer's

field test sets were indicat- ing failure of many of the

receivers to meet specifications, but when their receivers were returned to the depot no problems were

found. Each unnecessary

return cost the Navy

$13,000. Through the CCG,

the Navy contracted with

NIST to develop a new peak-power laser radiometer to calibrate the test set supporting aircraft laser receiver pods. In response

NIST developed the APD-800 radiometer,

which is 10 times more sensitive than the

earlier unit, much easier to use in the field, and does not require cryogenic cooling.

Since the initial development, more units have been constructed and this transfer stan- dard has been implemented in several Navy

and Air Force facilities around the country. It

is estimated that use of this portable transfer standard has saved millions of dollars in unneeded depot returns over the years. Follow-on interest in this radiometer by the

Army led to CCG support of the development of an adaptation that can measure

pulse energy and peak power in the same

instrument. At this time, only the Army fields this version of the radiometer.

Continuing support by the CCG under Navy

sponsorship led to the development of a radiometer operating at 1 .5 ]xm to support

the next generation of laser receiver systems.

New laser range-finder systems being delivered

Air Force F-16 with LANTIRN laser target designator/rangefinder pod.
for the military are operating in the 1 .5 ^inn wavelength region, due to concerns for eye

safety. A prototype radiometer is currently

under development to provide a field-level instrument to serve as the calibration transfer standard at wavelengths in this region.

And what has all this to do with pocket

pointers? The capabilities developed at NIST, as a result of CCG support, provided the necessary metrological equipment and knowledge to support industrial-safety measure- ments of the energy output of the laser diodes in the popular pointers used by

speakers to highlight important points on

projection screens.

The importance of this work can be judged

by the number of existing airborne platforms

supported, including the A-6E Intruder, F/A1 8 Hornet, AV-8B Harrier, F-1 1 7 Stealth

Fighter, and the Hellfire missile.

This work was supported by approximately 1

different CCG projects.

No More Messy Wet Cells for DC

Measurements

All of us who drive automobiles and use

flashlights are familiar with two kinds of

chemical batteries that generate DC voltage,

although we sometimes misuse the scientific names. Technically the flashlight uses a primary "cell" (or several of them in series). The

arrangement used for automobiles (or with a different chemical regime, for laptop computers) is correctly referred to as a battery

which is composed of several rechargeable

secondary cells. Both primary and rechargeable secondary cells are manufactured in either a dry form, e.g., a flashlight cell, or in a wet form as found in automobile batteries.

For most of the 20'^'^ century the standard

calibration source of DC voltage for laboratories was a specially designed saturated cadmium sulfate wet cell, commonly called the

Weston cell. If properly fabricated and properly handled, it was an excellent source of constant voltage. However, not only did it possess all the problems of any liquid wet

cell but, if the best stability were desired, it could not be physically moved from place to

place. This might be fine for a high-level

standards laboratory but was totally impractical for portable meters, which therefore

had limited accuracy.

Two scientific developments were to change

this situation. One of the early developments of the semiconductor industry was

the Zener or reverse-breakdown diode. If this device is connected to an appropriate cur- rent source, a constant voltage is developed

across the Zener diode. This voltage to a large degree is independent of changes in current, and in some cases insensitive to modest changes in temperature. While their long-term stability did not match that of the

Weston cell, they were useful as short-term

transfer standards.

A short while later a major breakthrough

occurred in the generation of a known, stan- dard DC voltage. The behavior of this device,

called the Josephson junction, is based on

rigorous physical laws (see description in the

following section, part 2). Many years were

required to reduce this device to practice,

but it is now used in all of the highest-level

standards laboratories. Unfortunately, it requires cryogenic cooling, which limits its portability, and its size is cumbersome (it doesn't fit in your pocket).

Since Weston standard cells did not immediately disappear from secondary-level laboratories, these cells were calibrated against the

Josephson junction standard by use of a
Commercial Solid-state voltage standards.

(right - Courtesy Fluke Corp. left - Courtesy Datron Corp.)

Zener-diode voltage source as a short-term,

intermediate transfer standard. In performing these calibrations over a six-year period,

NIST scientists gained considerable knowledge about the diodes' behavior, leading to

their possible use as secondary built-in stan- dards for portable equipment. These data were published in the scientific literature and

work was pursued on equipment specifically

designed to calibrate Zener diode voltage

standards.

As part of a plan to influence manufacturers

to incorporate needed capabilities into DC

Zener diode voltage performance standards,

the Air Force Metrology Program sponsored

a CCG project to write NBS Technical Note

1 239 [3]. Then, requirements for manufacturers to comply with that publication were

incorporated into a solicitation to procure

DC Voltage Standards for the Air Force's Precision Measurement Equipment

Laboratories (PMELs). From this start Zener

diode voltage references came to be incor- porated into virtually all portable-voltagemeasuring equipment, including meter cali- brators and independent voltage standards. And yes, some of them do fit in your pocket!

The uncertainty of these standards repre- sented an improvement of over 37 % as compared to the standard cells that they

replaced. This improvement made it possible

to support working-level calibration stan- dards and test, measurement, and diagnostic

equipment to meet Air Force calibration requirements. These DC voltage standards

also permit their use in more

efficient calibration methods

that save approximately 40 %

of the time required by prior standard-cell applications.

Work was conducted under CCG

project 372.

Conclusions

The above are just a sample of some of the

almost 500 projects that were initiated under

this program. Several examples of major cost savings that accrued to military operations

as a result of the CCG Engineering Working

Group's cooperative program with NIST have

been noted. Many more exist that have

never been documented.

NISTscientist calibrating a solid-state DC voltage standard.

Two conclusions seem apparent from this long and successful effort over the last 30-

plus years. First, a solid and dependable sys- tem of cooperation, not only between two

federal agencies, but also among the military

services, has been established for acquiring

the measurement-technology base needed

for today's and tomorrow's military operations. As more joint military operations and

hardware acquisitions are conducted in the

future, the DoD now has a proven mechanism in place for metrology R&D support.

Joint program offices such as MILSTAR and

BMDO have already discovered this benefit.
Second, it is difficult to estimate the value of

the impact that this research has on the U.S. industrial infrastructure. These are the latent benefits to American industry that are real- ized when the technological areas that were opened by the military's research and devel- opment programs later become available to,

and are put to use in, commercial applications. With a common metrology base

already in place, rapid civilian development

of new products results, driving our country's

commanding world-market presence in commercial space applications, telecommunications, computers, and semiconductors.
ISrief Histories:

eeginnings of the MCSI.

The Air Force Metrology and

Calibration Program

The United States Air Force calibration pro- gram was initiated in January 1952. The

Dayton Air Force Depot, located at Gentile

Air Force Station, Dayton, Ohio, developed

and implemented a plan to ensure traceabili- ty to national standards that would apply to

all measurements made on any weapon sys- tem in the Air Force.

The Dayton Air Force Depot was given the

authority to establish a centralized calibra- tion program. Under their plan, the Air Materiel Area Depots were given a set of measurement standards, which were periodically calibrated by the Dayton Air Force Depot using standards traceable to the

National Bureau of Standards.

The operational success of a "Test Shop" pro- gram set up at March AFB, California, on September 1 5, 1 957, led to establishment of the base-level Precision Measurement

Equipment Laboratories, starting with

Westover AFB, Massachusetts, on August 3,

1 959. By February 1 960, there were 1 36

bases outfitted with Precision Measurement

Equipment Laboratories pro- viding the Air Force with a r complete calibration system

that could handle the increas- ingly stringent measurement

needs of the new missile and

aircraft systems.

The Dayton Air Force Depot

facilities were becoming inadequate to support the increasing accuracy requirements of the

Air Force so the search for a suitable replacement facility was begun in 1958. Air Force

Industrial Plant #48 at Heath,

Ohio, contained most of the

features desired, such as the

underground facilities and a stable seismic

environment. On February 1 , 1 959, it was re- designated the Heath Maintenance Annex of the Dayton Air Force Depot. Authorization to begin construction was given by public law on June 9, 1960.

The Dayton Air Force Depot personnel associated with the Air Force calibration program

began their moves to the Heath

Maintenance Annex in April 1 962, and by

June, most had been relocated to Heath,

Ohio. In June, the name was also changed to the 2802nd Inertial Guidance and Calibration

Group under HQ Air Force Logistics

Command. By July 1962, the Metrology function was fully staffed. By the end of 1 962, the

primary calibration labs and the Air Force Measurement Standards Laboratories were

completed, consisting of four levels underground containing 20,000 square feet of lab- oratory area. In November 1962, the facility was named Newark Air Force Station.

In 1965, the Air Force assigned management

of the worldwide Precision Measurement

Equipment Laboratories certification proAir Force Metrology and Calibration Center, Heath, Ohio.
gram to the Calibration and Metrology

Division. In 1968, the 2802nd Inertial Guidance and Calibration Group was deactivated and replaced by the Aerospace

Guidance and Metrology Center (AGMC).

The Calibration and Metrology Division was

changed to the Directorate of Metrology on November 8, 1 968. Newark Air Force Station was renamed Newark Air Force Base in June

1987.

During the 1 990's, privatization took place at Newark AFB. This has resulted in the functions of the Air Force Primary Standards

Laboratories, and Technical Order preparation, being performed by a private contractor. The Air Force created the Air Force Metrology and Calibration Program Office

(AFMETCAL) at Heath, Ohio, to manage

metrology services for the Air Force, retain engineering authority for all calibrations per- formed in the PMEL labs throughout the Air Force, and manage the contractor operated

Air Force Primary Standards Lab. This is the

present configuration of the Air Force Metrology program.

The Army Metrology and

Calibration Program

The Army did not have a unified calibration program until 1962. Prior to that time, a number of individual programs existed, each

designed to meet particular requirements.

(The Ordinance Corps used a 1 ton van car- rying about 20 instruments until 1958. The

Signal Corps used converted buses for their mobile calibration team operations.)

The missile program in the Ordnance Corps

generated a tremendous increase in calibra- tion requirements and, by 1 959, the

Ordnance School at Aberdeen Proving

Grounds, Maryland, was conducting a 1 9- week calibration course to train military, civil- ian, and NATO personnel in measurement

techniques. The Ordnance Corps established

Frankford Arsenal, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, as a Primary Standards

Laboratory for the east coast, and Benecia,

California, as a primary facility for the west

coast. Five Ordnance Depots had been designated as secondary reference laboratories

and were certified by the primary facilities. Each of these five depots had mobile calibra- tion teams to support their area of responsibility.

In 1962, the initial AR 750-25 was published

delineating a single Army Calibration

Program. Frankford Arsenal was designated

the Army Metrology and Calibration Center,

and included the Army Standards Laboratory

primary facility. In 1967, the Army Metrology

and Calibration Center and the Army

Standards Laboratory were moved to their present location, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama,

the home of the U.S. Army Missile Command

(MICOM).

From the late 1970's through the mid1980's the Army consolidated and relocated

virtually all Army test, measurement, and

diagnostic equipment (TMDE) activities and

management functions to Redstone

Arsenal, Alabama. All Army calibration laboratories and support centers were placed

under a common command and control

structure. The new U.S. Army TMDE Activity

(USATA) included all military and civilian calibration teams and laboratories worldwide. It also included the Army's Test Equipment Modernization program

(TEMOD), the Army's general purpose

Integrated Family of Test Equipment (IFTE) program, the Army's acquisition program

for calibration sets (Cal Sets), and the Army's

radiation and dosimetry programs.

During the 1990's,the metrology and calibra- tions program's structure continued to

evolve. The Army Aviation Command was moved to Redstone Arsenal and combined

with MICOM to form a new command. Army

Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM).

TMDE acquisition programs were centralized
U. S. Army Primary Standards Laboratory Complex,

Redstone Arsenal, Alabama

(top photo) Army Primary Physical and Electrical Standards Laboratory

(Building 5435). (bottom photo) Army Radiation Standards and Dosimetry Center (Building 5417).

in a formal program management structure within the new AMCOM. Some USATA field calibration laboratories were closed, others were consolidated, and military presence was

reduced. USATA was consolidated with

AMCOM, even though USATA's director

remains the Army's Deputy Executive

Director for TMDE.

Among the military services, the

Army remains the only straight-line

hierarchy with a single Senior

Executive Service director responsible for all operational aspects of

calibration and metrology, military

and civilian. The Army is also the

only service to have its primary lab- oratory and one of its support centers accredited to ANSI/ISO/IEC

17025.

Today, the U.S. Army metrology, cali- bration, and TMDE support pro- gram is poised to respond to the

Army's global missions, which

stretch from the Middle and Far East to the Pacific, Europe, and

throughout the continental United

States. This support mission

extends from the modern battlefield to the nation's weapons laboratories, and ranges from the twoperson calibration and repair team

to the Army's highest-level calibra- tion laboratory.

The Navy Calibration and

Metrology Program

The Navy's formal program began

back in 1956 with its Bureau of

Ordnance (BuOrd). In part, its cre- ation resulted from the problems

the country was having with missile

failures in a scramble to counter

Soviet military and space developments. In the case of the Navy, a high percentage of TERRIER, Tartar, and TALOS ship-to-air missiles that were accepted at contractor's plants were

being rejected when they reached BuOrd's

ammunition depots. A study was commissioned by BuOrd and performed by the

Missile Evaluation Department of the Naval

Ordnance Laboratory, Corona, California. This

study revealed that a lack of test, measure-
ment, and calibration controls common to both contractor and Navy facilities was the

principal cause.

This inability of the measurements of one

activity to agree with those of another when

testing identical items had serious conse- quences in development, design, and evaluation efforts at the factory, depot, and fleet

levels. These incompatibilities resulted in undue rework and shipping costs as well as serious doubts as to the validity of the meas- urements leading to designs and subsequent factory specifications, emanating from

development activities. As a result, action was undertaken by BuOrd to assure the fol- lowing: that common tests and tolerances were specified at the factories and depots,

that calibration systems were available to

control the uncertainties of the test equipment being used, and that all measurements

were controlled and traceable to one com- mon source, the National Bureau of

Standards.

The formal program to centralize the engineering aspects of metrology and establish a hierarchy of Navy laboratories originally cov- ered only the ammunition depots.The newly

formed Metrology Branch at the Naval

Ordnance Laboratory, Corona, California, was

assigned as the central engineering group to define the requirements of a program,

acquire and distribute measurement equipment for laboratories, prescribe calibration methods and procedures, identify calibration

recall intervals, and train personnel.

Prior to 1 955, some standards laboratories

and calibration facilities existed in prime

contractor plants and the depots of the

Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAir), Bureau of Ships (BuShips), and BuOrd. These were primarily focussed on dimensional measurements, but included some capability for electrical measurements. BuOrd had a prime

interest in gaging of ordnance such as shells and gun barrels, BuShips in dimensional

measurements of shipbuilding materials, and

BuAir in mechanical and electrical measure- ments for aircraft construction and rework

equipment.

With the merger of BuOrd and BuAir, which

became the Bureau of Weapons (BuWeps),

the program included aviation depots.

BuShips "joined" the program around the same time.The Navy's Special Projects Office,

responsible for developing the Fleet Ballistic Missile program, was included in the same

time frame as was the Marine Corps.Thus, a Navy-wide calibration program emerged.

The Office of Naval Material (NavMat) formalized this when, on March 20, 1 959, it released

SECNAV Instruction 4355.1 1 and, in July

1 959, released a document called the

Standards Laboratory Information Manual

(SLIM). It was prepared at the request of the

FBM Special Projects, for use by Navy field activities as well as Navy contractors. With

this action, the Navy Calibration Program has

been tied historically and closely to its fleet and field activities as well as its prime and

subcontractors.

The NOL (Naval Ordnance Laboratory)

Measurement Standards Branch was relocat- ed in January 1 957 to the Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant in Pomona,

California, which included the Navy Gage

and Primary Standards Laboratories. In the

early 1 960's, this was designated as the Navy

Metrology Engineering Center. Soon after, the responsibility for providing primary laboratory services was transferred to the Naval

Air Rework Department of the North Island (San Diego, California) Naval Air Station, and

to the Navy Yard, Washington, D.C. In 1993,

the Navy Yard in Washington was closed and

the facility at North Island took over sole

responsibility. Now known as the Navy

Primary Standards Laboratory, Engineering

Directorate, Naval Air Systems Command, it provides the highest level of calibration to the Navy and its supporting contractors.
Unlike the case in the other two services, the

Navy Metrology Engineering R&D work was

not co-located with its primary calibration laboratory, but situated first at Pomona,

California, as noted above. In the late 1970's

this work was organizationally transferred to the Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach,

California. Beginning in 1986 the component organizations began a physical reloca- tion to the Corona, California, facility, designated the Naval Warfare Assessment Center,

and established as an independent command. While there have been minor reor- ganizations during the 1990's,the group's

metrology and gage missions have remained

intact. Recently they acquired a weapons

test certification function and currently form

the Measurement Science Directorate of the

Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) at the

Corona, California, site.

U.5. Navy Measurement Science Directorate, Corona, California.

NCSL International

The idea for an organization such as the

National Conference of Standards

Laboratories (NCSL) International was first proposed in 1960 by Harvey Lance of the

National Bureau of Standards in Boulder,

Colorado. At that year's Conference on

Electronic Standards and Electronic Measurement, he delivered a paper entitled "Where Do We Now Stand?" His provocative

paper posed six very significant problems

concerning Measurement Standards

Laboratories and suggested that the solution

might be found in establishing an organization whose charter would include a method

for dealing with those types of problems.

The suggestion met with resounding

approval and, in 1 961 , with the backing of a group that was a veritable "Who's Who" of major U.S. corporations, the objectives of the

organization were put forward. With the

authorization of NBS

Director Dr. A.V. Astin,

the Bureau assumed a sponsorship role for the new organization

and assigned William

A.Wildhack as the first NBS liaison to the

NCSL.

Over the years, the

original NCSL organization has expanded to include international members. Its frame of reference has expanded from the Standards

Laboratory to all ele- ments of measurement, and the corporate membership roster is over 1400 organizations strong and

growing. Since 1985,

NCSL International has

operated independ-
Navy Primary Standards Laboratory, North Island, San Diego, CA.

ently from its original NBS sponsor, but continues to maintain a formal liaison and close working relationship with them. (NBS is now

known as the National Institute of Standards

and Technology, or NIST.) In 2000, the name

of the organization was changed to NCSL

International to reflect its continuing and

expanding role in the international metrology community.

Acknowledgements

The editors acknowledge the technical assis- tance of the many NIST staff members both

in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and Boulder,

Colorado, too numerous to name individually, who contributed information on the proj- ects portrayed in this history. Thanks are also due to the following individuals, past and

present, in the metrology and calibration organizations of NIST and the three military services who provided guidance and background material that otherwise would not have been available.

Joe Dressel Program Manager,

NAVSEA Metrology Program,

Dept of the Navy,

Washington, D.C.

Dave Baker

Deputy to the Commander,

Air Force Metrology and Calibration

Program,

Heath, Ohio

John Fishell Executive Director,

Measurement Science Directorate,

Naval Surface Warfare Center,

Corona, California

John Ball Director,

Army Primary Standards Laboratory,

Redstone Arsenal, Alabama

Bob Hinebaugh

Program Manager,

BMD Metrology Program, Heath, Ohio

Skip Shepherd

Program Manager,

Air Force Metrology R&D,

Heath, Ohio

Dr. Harold Click

Program Manager,

Reduced Crew Size Program,

Naval Surface Warfare Center,

Corona, California

JeffWalden

Program Manager,

Metrology R&D,

Naval Surface Warfare Center,

Corona, California

Jim Wheeler

Electronics Engineer,

Navy Primary Standards Laboratory

North Island, California

Mike Cruz

(Retired), Past Director,

Navy Primary Standards Laboratory,

North Island, California
Jerry Hayes

(Retired), Past Director,

Naval Metrology Engineering Center,

Ponnona, California

Del Caldwell

(Retired), Past Metrology Research and

Engineering Manager,

Navy Metrology Engineering Center,

Corona, California

Dr. Brian Belanger

(Retired from NIST), Past NIST-DoD Liaison

References

Part 1.

[1] J. Stiles, "First Person, Singular." JED, The Journal of Electronic Defense, August 2000, pp.74,

35-37. Adapted and reprinted with permission.

[2] Photonics Dictionary, Laurin Publishing Company, Inc. 1 996-2001

.

[3] B. F. Field, "Solid State Voltage Standard Performance and Design Guidelines." Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) Tech Note 1 239, 26 pages (Sept. 1 987).

Part 2.

[4] J. Fu, R. D.Young, and T.V.Vorburger, "Long Range Scanning for Scanning Tunneling

Microscopy." Review of Scientific Instruments 1 992, 63, 2200-2205.

Part 2i Digest of Selected

Projeets by Teehiiieal Area

Electrical/Electronic

1. NIST 100 ampere Transconductance

Amplifier, and AC-DC Transfer Shunts.

CCG Project 425, Air Force sponsorship

Industrial and Air Force needs developed in the early 1990's for AC high-current/high-frequency traceability in such applications as high-frequency welding techniques, har- nnonic power nneasurement by the utilities, and accurate measurement of current in high-current switching supplies by manufacturers of power supplies. There was also the

requirement for NIST traceability of current shunts to support a new 1 00 A, 1 00 kHz

transconductance amplifier coming into use

in the U.S. Air Force's calibration system.

Addressing these needs for NIST broadband

calibration services for electrical current required the development of calibration sources and stable calibration reference

standards. CCG project 425 was established

to develop these capabilities.

A new high-current, wide-band transconductance amplifier was designed and built that provides an unprecedented level of output

current at high frequencies with exceptional

stability. It is capable of converting an

applied signal voltage into a ground-referenced output current up to 100 A rms over a frequency range from dc to 100 kHz with a usable frequency extending to 1 MHz. The

amplifier has an output capability of 1 000 W,

a compliance of ±1 0 V, and can deliver up to 400 A of pulsed peak-to-peak current. The

amplifier design is based on the principle of

paralleling a number of precision bipolar

voltage-to-current converters. It incorporates

a unique ranging system controlled by optoisolated switches that permit a full-scale range from 5 A to 1 00 A. This design is the

basis for a commercial product, the Clarke- Hess Model 81 00 transconductance amplifier, which is extensively used in the Air Force primary and secondary laboratories.

To support this new amplifier, NIST devel- oped new high-current, ac-dc transfer shunts

using a three-terminal, coaxial design, includ- ing wide-band, two-stage current transformers as working standards for the NIST calibra- tion service. Candidate, prototype devices

from commercial sources were evaluated,

but most of the designs submitted were

found to exhibit very large AC-DC differ- ences of the order of 30,000 |jA/A at 1 00 kHz. Such large AC-DC differences can be measured; however, the measurement uncertainty

would become quite large. As might be

expected from shunts with such large fre- quency coefficients, these sample shunts

generally exhibited poor stability, making

them unsuitable as reference standards.

Early work at NIST found that a four-terminal

shunt of surprisingly high quality could be

obtained by paralleling a large quantity of low-power metal film resistors between two

copper plates and connecting the potential

terminal at the center of the resistor matrix.

Testing a Model EL-9800, 100 A, transfer siiunt using the NIST 100 A, transconductance

amplifier and NIST 100 A,

transfer shunt
These shunts of NIST design have small inductance and low skin effect. Their large,

distributed structure allows good thernnal contact to heat sinks. These characteristics make it possible to calibrate the shunt at low

current against existing standards and then

use the device at higher currents at a reasonable level of uncertainty. These NIST shunts

are the basis for commercially made ac cur- rent shunts, the Model EL-9800 made by

Precision Measurements, Inc., and are used

by the Air Force as calibration standards for the Model 8100 amplifier.

2. NIST Wideband Sampling Voltmeter

CCG Project 328, Air Force Sponsorship

Alternating voltages and currents (AC) are easy to measure when they have a pure sinusoidal waveform. In this case, there are exact mathematical relationships among the peak,

peak-to-peak, average, and RMS (root-meansquare) voltage values of the waveform.

However, due to distortion from various

sources, sometimes the signal is not sinusoidal.

When the RMS value (which represents the

heating value of the current) of such a signal

is desired, engineers used to resort to calori- metric determinations, where the signal

under test was used to create heat, and the

rate of heat production was assumed to be

proportional to the RMS value. Besides

being very time-consuming, the measure- ment has uncertainties of its own.

Modern solid-state electronic circuitry can be devised to measure the instantaneous

value of the waveform at closely spaced

intervals in time, creating a digital reproduction of the waveform from which other

parameters can be accurately calculated. When commercial RMS voltage instruments

started entering the military test inventory,

the CCG contracted with NIST to develop a wide-band sampling voltmeter that would

fulfill a number of requirements at lower

uncertainties and be traceable to national

basic standards.

NIST had already begun work on sampling

circuitry. A method and instrumentation for accurately sampling and digitizing repetitive

waveforms was developed in the mid-1 980's and known as a sampling voltage tracker

(SVT). This sampling method is capable of

making state-of-the-art, equivalent-time

measurements for signals with frequency

components up to 2.5 GHz. The rf voltage

measurement accuracy of the SVT has been

shown to be comparable to that of thermal

voltage-converter standards.

The key element in the SVT circuit is a strobed analog comparator, the design of

which is critical to the closed-loop perform- ance that can be realized using this sampling

method. Although the NIST SVT circuit was shown to have excellent performance characteristics, a more convenient form of this sampling method was implemented with a successive approximation feedback loop for establishing the reference voltage. This was

referred to as a Sampling Comparator

System (SCS).

Combining the above with the development

of a timebase that could be accurately syn- chronized to the input signal frequency, this CCG Project resulted in the realization of an

accurate wide-band sampling voltmeter

(WSV) that can span the frequency range

from 1 0 Hz to 200 MHz. This instrument has

a number of unique capabilities, including

the feature of an update rate of at least one measurement per second, even for input sig- nals at 1 0 Hz. The time base has been further enhanced with an improved gated-oscillator

design and an internal calibration algorithm.

With the ability to utilize SCS-based input

probes having different bandwidths, input

signal levels, frequency flatness, settling time,

and uncertainty levels, this instrument can
be used for a variety of measurement appli- cations. For example, the WSV can be used

to support the calibration of the rms voltage

outputs from various commercial multifunction calibrators, such as the Fluke 5700 and

5702A. It can be used as well for the calibra- tion of the rms voltage measurements made

by commercial instruments such as the Fluke

5790 AC Measurement Standard, the

Wavetek4290 AC Measurement Standard,

and the Wavetek 4950 Multifunction Transfer Standard. In conjunction with calibrated

attenuators, the WSV can be used to provide

a convenient, cost-effective means for cali- brating the wide-band (30 MHz) option of

these commercial instruments. Several instrument manufacturers have indicated an

interest in developing a commercial product

based on the design of the NIST WSV.

3. NBS/NIST Phase-Angle Standard

CC6 Project 1 12, Navy, Air Force Sponsorship

Commercial digital phase-angle meters began appearing on the market in the 1970s,

requiring the development of a convenient,

efficient calibration method. Obtaining a meaningful and comprehensive coverage of

all-possible input phase angles, frequencies,

and signal levels made manual testing very

labor-intensive and prone to errors. About

1 980, with their earlier analog Phase

Standards also becoming obsolete and with

a need to calibrate the higher-accuracy, dis- tortion-sensitive, digital phase meters entering their equipment inventories, the services contracted with NBS to develop the NBS

Phase-Angle Standard.

This standard is a digitally synthesized, dual- channel signal source that generates a pair

of sinusoidal waveforms whose relative phase angle is determined from digital memories, 18-bit digital-to-analog converters

(DACs), and an auto-zero phase feedback cir- cuit. Several additional improvements were

later made, such as extending the frequency

range coverage up to 50 KHz.

NIST wideband sampiing voltmeter comparing RMS voltage readings witt) a titermal voltage converter standard.

The development of the NBS/NIST Phase

Standard was recognized by an R&D 100

award in 1 985, and has been the basis for commercial products, particularly the Clarke- Hess Model 5000 and 5500-2 phase stan- dards, both of which the Air Force now maintains in its electronic equipment inventory.

These and similar instruments are now the

nominal standards used to calibrate audiofrequency phase meters in laboratories

around the world.

NIST offers a routine calibration service for commercial digital phase-angle meters and

phase-angle bridges using the Phase

Standard as a known source. Its perform- ance is characterized by means of a precision

sampling phase-meter developed at NIST,
Testing the performance of the NBS/NISTphase angle

standard.

which has been documented to have a rela- tive uncertainty of less than ±0.010° up to 50

kHz. The recent development at NIST of the

wide-band sampling voltmeter described

above has reduced this uncertainty to less than ±0.003°.

The Air Force's procurement of the Clarke- Hess commercial version, mentioned above,

for their Precision Measurement Equipment

Laboratories (PMELs) resulted in an improvement of about 50 % in efficiency for phasemeter calibrations. PMEL technicians favored

the user-friendly digital version over their predecessors, and their computer interfaces

will permit more planned productivity gains once future automation implementations are completed. These Phase-Angle Standards

calibrate phase meters and other test, measurement, and diagnostic equipment that support many weapons systems, including

the F-1 5 Strike Eagle.

4. Josephson-Junction DC Voltage

Standards

CC6 Projects 191, 245, 284

Army, Navy Sponsorship

Direct current (DC) voltage is perhaps the

most fundamental and basic electrical quantity and it is also the foundation of many

other measurements. The output of

many types of sensors that measure

other physical quantities is often in the

form of a DC voltage. The development

of modern solid-state instrumentation

that operates at voltage levels about 10

times lower than those of vacuum tube

circuits created an imperative need for a more precise absolute voltage refer- ence for a national standard.

The Josephson effect, discovered in 1962 by Brian Josephson and earning

him a Nobel Prize, provided the answer. A Josephson junction is constructed of a superconductor-insulator-superconductor

"sandwich" that is cooled to below the

superconducting point with liquid helium.

When such a junction is radiated with

microwave energy in the millimeter-wavelength region, the relationship between the

voltage across the junction and the current through it changes drastically. The normally

linear relationship between voltage and cur- rent is quantized into a "staircase" function,

with the voltage having discrete values that

are a function of the frequency and a proportionality constant called the Josephson

constant. Only fundamental constants of nature are involved in this relationship,

thereby creating an ideal basis for a voltage

standard.

Implementing this method of generating a voltage standard was not easy. Since the

voltage steps are very small, over 20,000 perfect junctions connected in series must be

fabricated to produce a 10 V standard. Also,

since the exciting wavelength is extremely

short the structure must also be very small in order to avoid unwanted circuit effects. Fabrication of the circuit made use of the lat- est in integrated-circuit manufacturing tech- nology to achieve these goals.

The military services saw that this new type

of standard, based on a fundamental law of

nature, offered advantages over standard
!

^^^^

(top) A JJA containing tfiousands ofJosephsonjunctions

fabricated on a single integrated circuit.

(bottom) Enlarged view ofa JJ array.

lljJP y ^^^^^t cells. Any such stan- dard is as accurate ^j^HH'K as another identical HBfl^^HK standard, meaning

fewer intercomparisons with NIST might be required,

with consequent

monetary savings.

The CCG contracted

with NIST during the

1970's and 1980's to perfect this technique, which result- ed in the Josephson

Junction Array (JJA) becoming the new

national DC voltage

standard at NIST. The only disadvantage was that this standard could not in any

sense be considered a portable unit, because

it required continuous cryogenic cooling in liquid helium.

In 1 992, the Advanced Technology Office of

the U.S. Army TMDE Activity, parent organization of the Army Primary Standards

Laboratory (APSL), initiated a program to pull

together the results of many years of CCG

research projects in Josephson-Junction

Array applications. The goal was to develop

the technology necessary to eventually construct a portable JJA voltage standard cooled

by cryogenic refrigeration and rugged

enough to be deployed to Army calibration

facilities in remote locations.

At the time of project initiation, Dr. Clark Hamilton of NIST, Boulder, Colorado, constructed JJA chips and hand-selected those

that operated satisfactorily from each batch.

His laboratory was the only source in the

world for these semiconductor chips. A

research team was put together that includ- ed Dr. Hamilton plus engineers and scientists from a commercial company, HYPRES, which

had experience in fabricating cryogenic

devices. Additional participants included the

Army Research Laboratory and the Army

Primary Standards Laboratory. Funding was

provided through a variety of means, includ- ing a Small Business Innovative Research

grant and direct Army research and development dollars. NIST participation was funded

by the CCG under project 284.

The first technical challenge was to reliably

produce all-niobium JJA integrated circuits

(ICs). APSL used its operating JJA system as a

test bed for prototype ICs. (This JJA system was developed and funded through CCG

projects.) Using transferred NIST technology,

HYPRES quickly produced batches of JJA

Transportable commercialJosephsonjunction voltage standard.
chips, and based on test data conning bacl< from APSL was able to render the NIST

design in all-niobium, and to do so in a pro- duction environment. This advance made

commercialization of JJA technology possi- ble for the first time. HYPRES first produced

and marketed a commercial JJA system in 1994.

Today, many government agencies and pri- vate companies throughout the world own

and operate JJA voltage systems, which give

them the ability to operate with part-per-billion uncertainties that would have been

unimaginable only a few years ago. The JJA voltage standard is an intrinsic (fundamental) standard that has revolutionized the field of precision voltage measurement.

Physical/Mechanical

Interim Testing System for Coordinate

Measuring Maciiines

CCG Projects 318, 379, 394,

Air Force Sponsorship

Coordinate Measuring Machines (CMMs) are used to determine the physical dimensions

of complex manufactured parts. Tens of

thousands of CMMs are employed in U.S. industry, including DoD maintenance and

repair facilities. They are rapidly becoming

the dimensional measurement tool of choice

because of their speed, accuracy, and flexibility. CMMs fulfill both the traditional function

of rejecting "bad" (out-of-specification) parts, as well as supplying "process-control infor- mation" that can be used to improve the

manufacturing process. Consequently,

CMMs must consistently measure parts accurately. If they do not, both safety and cost

issues may be compromised. This program was initiated when a military facility discovered that an unacceptably large number of CMMs were failing the annual recalibration procedure. Hence the need was established

for development of a rapid and thorough

testing procedure that could be used

between the regular calibration intervals.

In 1 994, the CCG contracted with NIST to develop what has become known as the

interim testing system. Prior to this, existing

technology to evaluate CMMs was either expensive ($25,000), time-intensive (many

hours), difficult to establish and maintain cal- ibration, or failed to test important subsystems of the CMM. The interim testing sys- tem, shown in the following figure, behaves

as if it were a large three-dimensional (3-D)

calibrated ball plate. The system achieved

the following objectives:

1 . Comprehensive: provides a check of all CMM components, sampling a large vol- ume of the CMM work zone in 3-D, and is sensitive to common CMM failure modes.

2. Relatively inexpensive: the system costs

less than $10,000.

3. Fast: performs the test in under 30 min.

(typically 15 min.).

4. Calibration: provides traceability to the SI quantity of length, and is inexpensive to

recalibrate.

5. Light weight and robust: under 1 5 kg and

physically robust to allow regular use.

6. Versatile: can be used on many different

sizes and styles of machines.

7. Easy: no special training or special care needed; easy to move and set up.

A key design point is the use of kinematic

mounting, which creates an important "divi- sion of labor," isolating the calibrated stan- dard from all distorting forces and other

structural requirements. Consequently, the

calibrated ball bars are designed for high

dimensional stability and accuracy without concern for rigidity, while the underlying

support frame is freed from metrology

requirements, allowing it to be constructed

from inexpensive materials such as alu- minum extrusions. Additionally, the calibrat- ed ball bars can be rotated by a pneumatic

indexing system allowing these simple one-
dimensional standards to sweep out a large

three-dinnensional work zone. Furthermore,

this mounting method allows the calibrated

ball bars to be easily removed for storage or replacement by a different length selected from a range of 300 mm to 1500 mm; this provides great flexibility to accommodate a wide variety of CMMs.

The CCG-funded CMM interim testing system

is now a commercial product manufactured

and sold by the Bal-Tec Corporation. The sys- tem is in use in numerous industrial and mili- tary facilities, including Kelly Air Force Base

(prior to closure), Pensacola Naval Aviation

Depot, Caterpillar, Inc., and Boeing; its success

is due in part to the cooperative nature of its design. Early prototype systems were sent to

Air Force Bases for critiques, resulting in numerous design improvements. To provide

sufficient metrology capacity for the calibra- tion of ball bars, the Department of Energy's

Y12 Oak Ridge IVletrology Center has made

available several high-accuracy calibration instruments for use by government and

industry.

Initial applications of the interim testing sys- tem identified several defective CiVliVls that were being used to inspect parts on the fac- tory floor; once these faulty CMMs were

repaired, the interim testing system has

maintained the "health" of the CMM population. The system provides more exhaustive

testing in less than half the time of previous

methods. Consequently, its frequent application has allowed the intervals between full calibrations to be significantly extended.

Since a full calibration is a lengthy process in terms of machine "down time," the interim

testing system represents a significant cost

saving. This reduced testing time was particularly useful when an earthquake rolled through Boeing's Seattle facility; by use of

the interim testing system, critical inspection

CMMs were rapidly validated and returned to service without delaying production.

Thanks to the

CCG program,

CMM interim

testing methodologies are now

becoming

accepted as stan- dardized metrological practices.

The most recent

(1997) edition of

the ANSI B89.4.1 standard on CMM perform- ance evaluation now includes a chapter on CMM

interim testing

taken directly

from methods

developed under

the CCG pro- gram. Finally,

interim testing

procedures are

starting to reach the international level and

the CCG interim testing system will provide

measurement assurance that is required for quality assurance standards such as ISO

(International Standards Organization) 9000

and ISO 17025.

RF and Microwave

1 . Radar Cross Section (RCS)

Measurements and Standards

CCG Projects 355, 466, 466F, Air Force and

Navy Sponsorship

Stealth technology is the ability to make our

military platforms, such as airplanes, helicopters, missiles, tanks, and ships, nearly invisible to enemy radar, and depends on measuring a quantity called radar cross section or RCS (a measure of the radar reflectivity of an

object). Each of the services has developed

its own capability for measuring RCS for its particular needs.

The CCG interim testing system with a CMM

evaluation in progress.

37
In general, RCS is measured on a range, tradi- tionally outdoors, where the nneasurement

may be static (object mounted on a nonreflecting pedestal) or dynamic (object in motion such as an airplane). More recently.

An aircraft prepared for RCS measurement on a Navy range.

indoor ranges (compact ranges) are being

used for static RCS measurements. In addition, many of the major aerospace defense

contractors have built their own RCS ranges

to develop and test new radar absorbing

materials and stealth technology.

RCS measurements taken at various ranges on the same targets must agree with each

other within estimated uncertainties to justify confidence in the results. Although the

sources of uncertainty are well known, a comprehensive determination of uncertainties in RCS calibrations and measurements at government or industrial ranges has only

recently been undertaken. Such studies are

essential at every RCS measurement range if the U.S. RCS industry is to maintain its world

leadership well into the new millennium. To

satisfy this requirement there need to be

well-formulated procedures that measure- ment ranges can use to determine the

uncertainties in their system calibrations and

target measurements. Development of stan- dard artifacts, to be used uniformly at all RCS

ranges, would greatly enhance the reliability

of measurements in the RCS community.

Thus, in the late 1 980's several government

RCS ranges formed an association and contracted with NISTto develop a plan and specific procedures for range evaluation which

could be undertaken by the individual ranges on their own schedule. NIST would

provide critiques of the evaluations, technical assistance, and, if required, artifact RCS

test standards to insure measurement consistency. Since the work involved all three

services, the CCG assumed a portion of the

support.

In the context of a DoD RCS Self-Certification Program, the framework of a RCS Range

Book has been proposed to ensure community wide compliance. A DoD Demonstration

Project is in progress to assess the feasibility

and usefulness of such a program.

Currently, NIST is actively engaged in the fol- lowing areas of research to improve the reli- ability of RCS measurements:

1 . Development of a new set of calibration

artifacts to assess and improve calibration accuracy.

2. Implementation of defendable range specific uncertainty analyses throughout the

RCS industry.

3. Establishment of an RCS interlaboratory

comparison program and the correspon- ding technology to enhance confidence in uncertainty analyses, in calibration of RCS

artifacts, and in measurements of unknown targets.

The standard-cylinder set adopted by the

RCS community for calibration of their meas- urement systems is an excellent candidate

for the NIST SRM (Standard Reference

Materials) program. The results of inter-labo-
ratory comparison programs among the RCS

ranges would be more reliable using these

standard-cylinder sets. Currently, NIST is manufacturing a standard cylinder set for in- house use.

To calibrate an RCS measurement system, we

need to know the computed RCS values of the calibration artifacts. NIST is planning to implement a computational effort to deter- mine the cross section of calibration artifacts with known uncertainties. After a national

review of the computational procedures and

results, NIST will recommend that such data

be adopted for Standard Reference Data sets.

NIST has published a standard table of sources of uncertainties known to exist in RCS calibrations and measure- ments and has

recommended

that such a table be adopted as the industry stan- dard for specifying RCS measure- ment uncertainties. NIST already

follows this rec- ommendation in

Its current research in this area. The RCS

community is examining and implementing

various versions of this basic table for their own use. The development of this standarduncertainty table for use in RCS measure- ments increased awareness for the need to thoroughly understand the estimation of uncertainty in all other areas of research in this technology.

Recently, several of the industrial owners of

RCS ranges have become interested in the

progress of this work, in particular the

methodology developed by NIST for self- evaluation of range performance. Significant

Prototype aluminum cylinder set used to calibrate static RCS measurement systems in

the frequency range of2 to 18 GHz. The

cylinders are manufactured to a tolerance of ±0.0127 cm.

cost savings are expected to ensue from this

effort, as better and more repeatable calibra- tion and measurement results will obviate

the need to repeat costly and time-consuming measurements.

2. Thin-Film Coaxial Microwave Power

Detector

CCG Project 393, Navy Sponsorship

During WWII and many years beyond, waveguide was the "conductor" of choice to con- vey signals and transmitter power from one

piece of equipment to another at microwave

frequencies above 10 GHz. It was not until the 1 970's and 1 980's that low-loss cables,

and more importantly, well matched connectors that were usable to 40 GHz and beyond

became available. While waveguide is still required for higher powers, miniature coaxial components and cables are now commonly

used in low-power receivers, signal processors, and measuring instruments.

Newer electronic equipment, in particular

Naval and Air Force avionics and EW systems,

are now incorporating smaller 3.5 mm and

2.4 mm coaxial connectors and cable, even in the lower-microwave region, in order to save both weight and costs.This makes it essential that critical RF measurements, particularly

power, be made with nearly the same accura- cy as in the larger type N connector size or waveguide. Prior to this project, measure- ments traceable to primary standards at NIST

could be made in these smaller connector

sizes only by using adapters, which significantly degrades the accuracy of the measurements.

To solve this problem the CCG contracted

with NIST to develop a new, all-coaxial stan- dard transfer power detector, usable from 10

MHz to 50 GHz. This device would avoid any

use of adapters, and have the lowest uncertainty in transferring the national standards for microwave power from NIST to the services'

il
NIST2.4 mm transfer power detector (shown next to dime).

primary laboratories. This

required a totally new construction approach

that used inte- grated-circuit

techniques borrowed from the

semiconductor

industry and the cooperative assistance of

a major industrial metrology laboratory.

In researching approaches, NIST discovered

that Hewlett-Packard (HP) had developed an

experimental device that with significant

modifications might be used to accomplish

the project's goal. HP had earlier decided

the device was not commercially feasible and had shelved it. Using data and a set of design requirements from NIST, HP manufactured a number of customized devices that were shipped to NIST for further evaluation.

Using modified Type IV Bridge circuitry, for- merly developed at NIST, and later adapted

for military use, a Direct Comparison meas- urement system based on the 2.4 mm coaxial connectors was built, tested, and supplied

to the Navy Primary Standards Laboratory

NIST direct comparison 2.4 mmpower measurement system at NPSL

(NPSL) in 1999. Additional copies of this sys- tem are currently being built for the Air Force and Army Primary Standards

Laboratories.

The use of the new 2.4 mm primary stan- dards, which are directly calibrated in the

NIST microcalorimeter, now allows NPSL to measure power over a larger frequency

range at improved levels of uncertainty.

Also, the use of the NIST-developed Direct

Comparison Measurement System has greatly reduced the time needed to make these

measurements. The combination of the 2.4 mm standards and the Direct Comparison

System at NPSL has resulted in reduction by

order of magnitude in cost over the previously used dual six-port systems.

Development of the 2.4 mm power standard

and the Direct Comparison System also made it possible for NIST to greatly expand

its microwave power measurement services

for industry. 2.4 mm devices can now be

directly calibrated against a primary

microcalorimeter standard, and 3.5 mm

device measurements have been greatly

enhanced. In addition, NIST added a capability to measure thermoelectric power stan- dards, which are becoming much more

important in the millimeter-wave region.

3. Measurements of Electromagnetic Field

Strength

CCG Projects 206, 23 7, 389, 437, Navy,

Army, Air Force Sponsorship

While we are all continuously bathed in very weak electromagnetic (EM) fields from

sources such as distant radio and TV stations,

and even energy from outer space, with no undue effects, high-strength EM fields are a major concern. These may be hazardous to people required to work near high-power

shortwave or radar transmitters. While all of
NIST three orthogonal dipole electric field ir)tensity probe.

the military services have such high-power

equipment, the problem is particularly vexing on Navy ships, since there is so little space available above deck to avoid areas of

high field intensity.

NIST has long been involved in measurement

research and standards for EM field strength

resulting from public safety issues concerning microwave ovens. Also the ability to generate an accurately known EM field in a given

space is a requirement of some antenna-gain

measurement procedures and for calibration of EM hazard probes.

Over the years, as the military services strove

to improve the safety conditions for those

service personnel working in potentially

high-level fields, the CCG contracted with

NIST to provide improved accuracy for instruments used to measure potentially haz- ardous EM fields. The first effort produced a set of design criteria for anechoic chambers

designed for calibrating EM Hazard meter

probes including broad-band "omnidirectional" EM field-level transfer probes. (While

there is no physical implementation of a truly omnidirectional or isotropic probe, we can independently measure the three

orthogonal E or (H) field vectors, and by

summing the squares of their values, we

can compute the energy density at a point

in space. Many, although not all, EM hazard

survey probes use this technique.) The

Army, and later the Navy, used this chamber information to construct EM probe cal- ibration facilities at their primary standards

laboratories.

The Air Force tasked NIST through the CCG,

to develop a special millimeter-wave probe

for EM field measurements.

These measurements were

necessary to protect pilots

and service technicians from

being exposed to moderately high EM field levels from

aircraft-mounted MILSTAR

satellite communication

transmitters.

For many years the electric

(E) field component of EM

fields was the major interest of medical safety personnel.

More recently concern has

also been voiced about the

magnetic (H) field component, particularly at mid-tolower RF frequencies. While we can generally compute the H field from

the E field, if one is far enough away from the

radiating source, this is not possible on Navy

ships where exposures can take place in close proximity to the radiating antennas. The CCG recently contracted with NIST to develop a specialized EM field probe capable

of monitoring both electric and magnetic

ambient fields.

Calibrating EM hazard probe at the Navy

Primary Standards Laboratory anechoic chamber facility.

This new combination probe will use

fiber-optic "connections" between the

sensing probe and

the data recording

equipment instead

of wire cable. Hardwire connections to such probes often

distort the fields being measured and ^

NIST fiber-optic-coupled E and Hprobe.
pick up extraneous noise; this is particularly so where near-field conditions exist. Work

on this probe system is currently under way

with delivery to the Navy slated for late 2002.

4. Automated Near-Field Antenna

Measurement Capability

CCG Projects 1 96, 1 96M, 253S, 302, 303,

Army, Air Force, MILSTAR, and SDIO

Sponsorship

The developnnent of space satellites and

their use in long-distance communications

created the need to more accurately deter- mine the radiation pattern of large

microwave antennas. For example, to optimize customer service and conserve satellite power, the radiation patterns of U.S. satellite TV transmitting antennas are shaped so that the energy falls only on the land mass of

North America. The same is true respectively

of satellites that cover European, Asian and

African countries. The satellite contractors

are paid premiums (or conversely penalized)

for how closely they do or do not meet such

specifications.

When an antenna is physically very large

with respect to the wavelength being used,

AVIACS antenna on NISI near field range.

the true "far-field" pattern can be observed

only at a point far distant from the antenna.

For modest microwave antennas this might

be a few thousands of meters away, but for extremely large, deep-space antennas this point could be over 10 million meters away

(a physical impossibility to measure on the

Earth's surface). Even distances of over 100 meters usually require outdoor ranges where

varying atmospheric conditions and interfer- ence can contaminate the data.

In the mid 1950's NIST developed a method

(both theory and implementation) that can determine the true far-field pattern of a highly-directive antenna from data obtained

by measuring the antenna's radiation in a plane a few meters in front of the antenna. A

small probe antenna samples the amplitude

and phase of the radiation field at points on

an imaginary rectangular grid, located on

this plane. Since the sample points must be

closely spaced, relative to a wavelength,

thousands of data sets must be obtained. All this can be accomplished indoors in a fully

anechoic chamber, immune from the effects of weather.

A complex spatial Fourier-transform method

converts the raw data, which may show little directivity, into the highly directional pattern

expected from a properly designed and

functioning space antenna. Before the

advent of modern computers, this method

would have remained in the theoretical realm.

The military services were quick to take

advantage of this capability and, under

direct contracts, NIST provided measure- ments to the military services of several specialized antennas such as the AWACS and

Firefinder. This led the CCG to contract with

NIST to further develop its capabilities to meet upcoming military requirements. Prior to this CCG-funded work, NIST was unable to provide measurement services for antennas

operating above 30 GHz and had very llmlt-
Army mortar firefinder array antenna.

ed capability for measuring circularly polarized antennas. One of the main results of

this effort was to provide measurement serv

ices for evaluating antenna performance for the MILSTAR program at 20, 44, and 60 GHz.

NIST was also able to evaluate the perform- ance of a 60 GHz prototype Ballistic Missile Defense phased array. These early efforts

later led to the development by NIST of a method for correcting for the effects of

probe position errors at higher frequencies.

The automation of the near-field range

under this project later permitted quick eval- uation and repair of PASS sub-arrays used in the Gulf War in 1991. Repair times were

reduced from nine months to a few

days.

The Navy's Aegis program to pro- vide a class of destroyers with a total three-dimensional, real-time radar coverage, called the SPY 1 radar,

made use of NIST capabilities. The

SPY 1 antenna is a phased array composed of hundreds of individual radiating elements. By changing the

relative amplitude and phase of the

signal fed to each of the elements,

the narrow antenna beam can be

instantly pointed in any direction

without physically moving the

antenna. This allows the radar system to keep track of a huge number of

objects in a threat environment.

However, any failure of individual elements is not easily discovered since the overall per- formance of the antenna degrades only

slowly. A unique feature of the near-field scanning method, which was later implemented by the Navy with NIST consultation,

is its ability to determine faulty elements in an array. An Aegis destroyer can now have

its antennas tested using a mobile scanning

unit in port.

This technology is an example of a more

symbiotic relationship compared to many of

the others described earlier. In this case the

original theory and implementation were

developed at NIST under civilian funding.

The military services then augmented this capability to enable NIST to provide special- ized support for military platforms. In the

future the expanded capabilities developed

for the military will also be used by industry

as communication satellites move up into the millimeter frequency range. The longterm cost savings to DOD and industry on

present programs is estimated to be in the

ten-million-dollar range.

Aegis destroyer with SPY 1 radar.
5. Dual Six-Port Vector Network Analyzer

Development

CCG Projects: 15 total, Army, Navy, Air Force Sponsorship

Precision measurements of impedance,

reflection coefficient, and attenuation of

microwave components have always been

difficult, particularly if both the magnitude

and phase components are desired.

Individual measurement set-ups of specific

equipment were necessary, and because the

measurement devices were imperfect themselves, tedious adjustments were necessary

to cancel out possible errors introduced by

the measurement apparatus.

During the 1 960's, the advent of automated

test equipment running under computer

control made possible a new approach to

NIST waveguide (WR 15) six-port head.

the problem. Using microwave circuit theory, some of which was developed at NIST, measurements of the errors introduced by

the measurement equipment and corrections to the raw test data, for the device

under measurement, became possible.

Second-order residual errors still remained.

but these could be accounted for in the esti- mation of uncertainty.

As computer processors and equipment

interfaces became faster and more efficient,

specific test instruments for general

microwave parameters became possible,

allowing for many measurements of previously unimaginable sensitivity to be made in a very short time. The generic name given to these new microwave measurement sets was

"vector network analyzers" orVNAs.

Two different technologies were used in their development. NIST chose to implement a dual six-port scheme that uses precision DC substitution microwave power

detectors as the data-gathering devices

(Type II and Type IV Power Bridges). These

instruments, which were developed at NIST, had been thoroughly studied and evaluated

for many years. Their use also facilitated measurement traceability to SI derived units. Industry chose another technique involving

direct measurement of amplitude and phase

using a microwave receiver. While still based on the microwave network theory devel- oped at NIST, this technique allowed much

faster operation, which was considered criti- cal for industrial production-line use. Evaluation of the measurement uncertainties

in the industry-developed instrument was more difficult. When the military primary-standards laboratories first decided to transition to VNAs, for several reasons they chose to use the six- port method developed at NIST. Firstly, they were concerned that commercial versions were in their infancy and that the market was rapidly evolving. The services also wanted to be able to call upon the long-term

support and consultation of NIST, assistance that might or might not be available from

the commercial sector. The CGG contracted

with NIST to provide pre-assembled six-port

systems, software, and training in their use and application. These systems are still in
mam tmm

Complete six-port calibration system at NISI

use even though commercial VNAs are used

sometimes for more routine measurements.

Over the last three decades, at least 1 5 six- port projects were initiated as measurement

requirements evolved across the frequency

range from 0.1 MHz to 11 0 GHz.

Improvements and software upgrades were made over time as new, improved components and faster computers came on the

market.

All vector network analyzers need to be cali- brated in order to have their imperfections

quantified and necessary correction terms

for the raw data determined. Various stan- dards such as a known load or termination

impedance, short or open circuits, and precision transmission line sections must be used

for these determinations. There are different methods of employing these standards.

Research conducted during these CCG-sponsored projects resulted in optimizing several

sets of standards and methods to minimize

uncertainties. One of these methods, known

as the TRL (through-reflect-line) method, is now widely used in government and industrial laboratories, and in production testing, for all types of vector network analyzers.

6. Cryogenic Microwave

Noise Standard

CCG Projects 200, 200M, Air Force and MILSTAR Support

Amplitude noise, sometimes called white noise, is the ultimate limiting factor

in reception of radio signals. (The effects of phase

noise discussed earlier in Part 1). Such noise origi- nates from a multitude of

sources, including outer

space, the sun, and actually

any object that is not electrically lossless and whose temperature is greater than

absolute zero. Such noise is also generated

by the electronic circuitry at the input of

sensitive radio receivers. (This does not

include impulsive noise, created by digital circuits and electrical equipment, which

often can be suppressed at its source by

adequate filtering.)

Semiconductor manufacturers have striven to develop devices with higher gain and

lower internal noise. Customers are willing to pay premium rates for the lowest-noise

devices. Measuring the amount of internally

generated noise, which is defined by a term

called noise figure (or noise temperature), is vitally important to manufacturers of semiconductors and communications equipment.

Noise figure measurement requires two dif- ferent external sources of noise whose levels are accurately known. One of these can be a termination at room temperature. For the

other source, the earliest noise standards

used either a temperature-limited diode vac- uum tube, or a common (miniature) fluores- cent light (called a gas tube). The output of

these tubes is coupled to a RF termination,

either directly, or through a section of wave-
Waveguide cryogenic noise source.

guide or coaxial line. By turning the tube on and off, the level of available noise at the

output of the device can be changed. More

recently a special type of zener diode that generates high noise levels, and w/hich can

also be turned on and off easily has been

substituted for tube sources in coaxial sys- tems. However, since the output noise levels produced by these zener diodes can- not be theoretically predicted, they

nnust be calibrated

against a standard,

whose output can be predicted theoretically.

Fortunately, there

is an exact theoretical relationship

between the

absolute temperature of a lossy ele- ment such as a waveguide or

coaxial termination and the avail- able noise power it produces. Since one termination can be at room

temperature, we

only need heat

another termination to a temperature where

its available noise would be sufficiently

greater than that for the one at room temperature. However for the best calibration

results, the ratio of the two temperatures, not

the absolute difference, should be large

enough to accurately determine any nonlinearities in the measurement system, for the

device being measured. In the early implementations using heated waveguide terminations, this meant that the high-temperature source was operating between 800 K and 900 K, almost hot enough to glow. While

excellent results were obtained, operation at

this temperature led to metal oxidation and

mechanical stress. This meant that the primary standard was only used intermittently

to calibrate intermediate gas tube or solid- state noise standards resulting in greater

uncertainties.

For this reason, NIST had not extended its microwave calibration services above X band

(10 GHz). As the MILSTAR program ramped

up, aerospace contractors and the Air Force metrology organization realized that national noise reference standards would eventually be required. With the support of the MIL- STAR Program Office, the CCG contracted

with NIST to develop national noise stan- dards and calibration services for the 20, 44,

and 60 GHz frequency ranges.

Knowing the difficulties encountered with

the former hot waveguide standard, NIST

decided to design and build a set of waveguide, liquid-nitrogen (LN2)-cooled, radiating

absorber units for the non-room-temperature sources. While cryogenic noise sources were available in coaxial structures for fre- quencies below 4 GHz, none, and particularly

radiant ones, had been previously used as waveguide standards in the millimeter-wave

region.

Detailed research was required into the electrical and thermodynamic properties of

materials, and a computerized ray-tracing

program was written to assist in evaluating

the losses in the cooled chamber walls, as the radiation from the LN2-cooled load prop- agated to the output waveguide horn.

As shown in the following cross-sectional

diagram, a microwave "load" fabricated of

porous silicon carbide wicks up liquid nitro- gen, which evaporates at its top surface, thus

establishing an exactly known temperature

for the material. Radiation from the material

is captured by the horn and is available at the output waveguide. Detailed analyses were made of the residual losses from inter-
Level JUL

94 GHz cryogenic noise source: A cross-sectional view.

nal reflections and in the output waveguide

in order to establish a total uncertainty for the source temperature.

When the project was completed, calcula- tions revealed that the cryogenic sources produced lower uncertainties in customer

calibrations than corresponding hot ones would have done. NIST continues to use a

full set of these sources in the microwave

and millimeter wave region above 18 GHz.

Due to the difficulty in constructing and

evaluating this type of standard, they have

not been installed in the service laboratories, nor have they been commercially produced

except on special order. A few have been

specifically made for use at national stan- dards laboratories in other countries. Nevertheless this endeavor is an example of how support from a CCG/NIST research proj- ect successfully solved a critical development and production problem in a major

national defense program.

Electro-Optics

1 . The Foundations and Infrastructure of

Electro-Optical Metrology

(CCG Projects Listed Below)

Behind all of the seeming magic of lasers and fiber-optics there exists a metrology

derived from the basic quantities of nature:

optical power, electricity, and thermodynamic

temperature. Electro-optical metrology relies on instruments such as cryogenic radiometers, optical pyrometers, and black bodies.

From all of these comes the ability to accurately measure the brightness of a common

light bulb or the sensitivity of the night

vision systems.

Not surprisingly, the explosive growth of

high-technology military equipment in the

last few decades required massive upgrades

in NIST's capability to support basic optical

measurements; thus, the CCG had a vested

interest in their support. As in other technology areas, the military requirements were at the time unique, but metrological advances soon supported growth in civilian applications as the technology was adopted by

industry.

Before we describe some of these projects, we will present relevant background infor- mation in order to assist the reader. The key

scientific quantities, and the calibration stan- dards and instruments that NIST uses to measure them, need to be defined. We will

first attempt to provide the reader with the

what, why, and how of optical measurements

and standards. This information should clari- fy the project descriptions that follow.

Optics deals with light—its creation, propagation, and detection. Optics is not limited to the visible part of the electromagnetic spec- trum; the many principles that apply to visi- ble light also apply equally to the ultraviolet
and infrared regions. Instruments called radiometers and photometers are used to measure the intensity of light. The term

radiometer is used to identify the instrument

that measures the intensity of light at any

part of the electromagnetic spectrum,

whereas the term photometer refers to the

Radiati on SourceTransmission ^ ^

. . , Optcs Medium

Detector

CCG 192 - Navy

CCG 339 - Navy

CCG 427 - Air Force CCG 168 - Air Force CCG 311, 463 - Air Force and Navy

CCG 350, 395, 418, 426 - Air Force CCG 439 - Air Force CCG 257S, 309 - Air Force

A functional diagram for a typical electro-optical system and

the projects that will be reviewed.

instrument that measures the intensity of

visible light, as seen by the human eye. Descriptive terms such as infrared radiometer, ultraviolet radiometer, or microwave

radiometer are used to specify the particular

wavelength region in which these instru- ments function.

In general, the term spectroradiometer refers to an instrument that measures the intensity

of radiation at any selected wavelength

region. Optical metrology uses radiometers

and photometers to measure the intensity of

optical radiation. Therefore, in optical

metrology, we are concerned with electro- optical systems that are used to measure

optical radiation and with the materials that transmit or convert optical radiation to electrical signals. The basic building block dia- gram of such an electro-optical system is shown in the following figure.

The radiation source is an object that emits

or reflects light. Common emitters are black- bodies, gray bodies, and lasers. In reality, an

object could be a reflector as well as an emitter. For example, an enemy airplane could be

located by laser-ranging, where the air- plane's reflection of the laser light is viewed

by the electro-optical sensor to determine its location, speed of travel, etc. In an alternative method, a thermal imager that creates an image of the airplane using emitted

infrared light from the airplane could also

identify it.

The transmission mediunn that transmits the

light from the source to the optics could be

the atmosphere, a vacuum, or an optical

fiber, etc. In any case, the optical properties

of the medium, such as absorption, influence

the amount of light that is transmitted to the

optics assembly. The optics assembly is generally used to analyze the light in terms of its wavelength, intensity, and polarization.

Optical components such as lenses, mirrors,

filters, gratings, or interferometers form the

optics assembly designed to meet the

requirements in the optical spectrum of

interest.

The detector detects the light output of the

optics assembly, converting the optical sig- nal into an electrical signal. It could be a photomultiplier,a photodiode, ora multipixel solid-state device. An electro-optical sensor combines the optics and the detector

modules into a single unit.

Calibration of an electro-optical sensor could

be accomplished by using a standard source

or a standard detector. Traditionally, a stan- dard source such as a blackbody at a set temperature is used for calibrations. Calibrations following this scheme are called source-based calibrations. Over the past 15

years, absolute standard detectors called cryogenic radiometers have been developed

that improve the stability and accuracy of

calibrations. Calibrations based on using the

cryogenic radiometer as the standard detector are called detector-based. The CCG proj- ects mentioned in the above figure have

greatly helped NIST to become a world
leader in developing standards for electrooptical sensor calibrations. The CCG projects that enabled NIST to improve the source- based calibrations and the detector-based

calibrations are reviewed separately below.

A. Source-Based Radiometry

Imaging Infrared Systems Support

CCG 192, Navy Sponsorship

Forward-Looking Infrared (FLIR) Basic

Support Standards

CCG 339, Navy Sponsorship

High-Temperature Blackbody Calibration

CCG 427, Air Force Sponsorship

Although their

titles differ, all the three CCG

projects listed above are con- cerned with

the development of black- bodies for dif- ferent purposes. The

Photonics

Dictionary [3] defines a blackbody as "an ideal body that completely absorbs all radiant energy striking it and therefore

appears perfectly black at all wavelengths.

The radiation emitted by such a body, when

heated, is referred to as blackbody radiation. A perfect blackbody has an emissivity of

unity."

A laboratory approximation of such a device

"... consists of a cavity, generally spherical,

made of an opaque material and insulated

from thermal effects, with a small aperture

for entering radiation, which is absorbed by

multiple internal reflection and absorption

Diagram ofa blackbody.

...

." It can be used "... as a reference source

to supply radiation of a given intensity and

spectral distribution ...

."

As absorbers, blackbodies are used to measure the power of laser beams by noting the

rise in temperature caused by the beam's

radiant energy being dissipated inside the

sphere. As a source, it is considered a stan- dard since there is an exact physical law, Planck's law, from which we can calculate the

power at a specific wavelength that is radiat- ed by a perfect blackbody at a given thermodynamic temperature.

CCG project 192 was created to solve a specific problem for the military. They had commercial blackbodies with large areas that were used to test infrared imaging devices.

Getting these calibrated at NIST was difficult to do with existing small-aperture blackbody

standards. NIST developed a variable-temperature water bath blackbody with a large

(10 cm diameter) aperture that has a mini- mum resolvable temperature of 10 mK in its operating temperature range of 288 K to 363

K. The availability of this blackbody greatly

increased the accuracy and reduced the

turnaround time for NIST calibrations.

CCG project 339, in support of ForwardLooking Infrared

(FLIR) technology,

improved the per- formance of the

water-bath black- body by improving

its short- and longterm radiometric

stability. A companion oil bath unit was

also constructed to extend the available temperature range for large-aperture blackbodies up to 446 K.

While blackbodies have been, and still are, used as radiant standards, their uncertainties

NISTstandard water-and oil-bath bakkbodies.
NIST constructed, high-temperature blackbody (zinc melting point).

are larger than desired particularly when

operated at very high temperatures such as 3000 K. NIST has moved to a detector-based

calibration method to determine the radi- ance temperature of such sources. The NIST

implementation, supported by CCG project

427, has resulted in a tenfold reduction in uncertainties over commercial radiance temperature sensors (pyrometers).

B. Detector-Based Radiometry

Photodetector Transfer Standards,

HACR and HACR 2

Primary Standard Cryogenic Radiometer

CCG 1 68, 3 1 1 , 463, Air Force, Navy

Sponsorship

Development of Radiometric and

Photometric Standards

CCG 350, 395, 41 8, 426, Air Force

Sponsorship

UV and IR Spectral Responsivity

Calibration Facility

CCG 257S, 309, SDIO, Air Force

Sponsorship

Calibration Facility for Spectral Irradiance

and Responsivity with Uniform Sources

(SIRCUS)

CCG 439, Air Force Sponsorship

The primary goal of the projects listed above

is to establish capabilities at NIST for calibrat- ing radiometers and photometers at high

accuracies and to develop the methods and

standards necessary to transfer these calibra- tions to various defense applications. CCG

projects 31 1 and 463 supported the development of the Primary Standard Cryogenic

Radiometer. The first such radiometer that was developed at NIST, HACR (High-Accuracy

Cryogenic Radiometer), is the basis for the

radiometric measurement chain established

at NIST. The HACR uses electrical substitution to determine optical power with an absolute

uncertainty of 0.02 %. Optical power is a derived quantity of the International System

of Units (SI) for radiometric, photometric,

color, and optical pyrometric measurements.

The need for a more accurate measure of

power prompted the CCG to fund this project. NIST was an early adopter of the cryo- genic radiometer technology, although most

National Measurement Institutes presently use cryogenic radiometers as their primary

standard for measurements of optical power.

The HACR maintains the measurement

scales of detector spectral power, irradiance,

and radiance responsivity, and improves the

radiometric accuracy throughout the

Optical Technology Division at NIST. HACR

ultimately reduces the uncertainty of the

measurement chain to DoD's primary stan- dard laboratories. Currently, an improved

next-generation version called HACR-2 is under development.

One of the main CCG electro-optical efforts is to switch from traditional source-based cali- brations to detector-based calibrations of

higher accuracy. The uncertainty of the new

detector primary standards is about an order

of magnitude smaller than that of traditional source standards. In turn, a NIST goal is to minimize the measurement traceability

chain between the primary detector stan- dard and field-level calibrations. Generally,

the more steps in the chain, the higher the
measurement uncertainty. Prior to the CCGsponsored detector projects, the measure- ment uncertainty was in some cases more

than three orders of magnitude higher (e.g., source-based calibrations of night-vision

goggles). As a result of CCG-funded research

and development, the previous uncertainties

decreased on average by about an order of

magnitude. This improvement translates to better-quality radiometric instrumentation

and measurement systems in the U.S.

The improved measurement uncertainty of

the primary radiometer standard affects the

overall radiometric calibration chain of the

Optical Technology Division. The accuracy of the two base SI quantities maintained by

NIST (luminous intensity and thermodynamic temperature) in the region above the melting point of silver (1 235 K) have improved by

about a factor of 5. This improvement has

been transferred to both military and civilian measurement systems.

CCG Projects 350, 395, 41 8, and 426 have

supported the development of photometric

and radiometric standards at NIST. In general,

silicon detectors are used in the visible- wavelength radiometers because of their superior linearity, sensitivity, and spatial uniformity. The photometers and radiometers

developed under project CCG 350 have

improved the accuracy of scale realizations and field level measurements.The simple-touse, small field-of-view photometers were

primarily developed for field-level photometric source and detector calibrations. These new devices don't require specialized labora- tory hardware to operate and are therefore

less expensive to use than traditional photometric devices.

In addition to the silicon radiometers and

photometers, near-infrared and infrared radiometers were developed within the CCG

395 project. The developed radiometers are used as working standards for high-accuracy

radiant power, irradiance, and radiance measurements between 1 |jm and 5.2 pm in the

DoD Primary Standard Laboratories. Highperformance electronics and detectors were

selected and/or developed for the radiometers. Filters, diffusers, apertures, room-temperature or cold field-of-view limiters, and

photocurrent meters were applied and optimized to accurately measure the most

important radiometric quantities. Indiumantimonide irradiance meters with very high

sensitivity are utilized in the CCG 418 project

to calibrate field- level infrared tar- get simulators on a standard

detector-base.

The detectorbased calibra- tion will simplify

the present (tra- ditional) source- based target- Radiometers developed at NIST with CCG support. simulator cali- bration procedure and will improve the irra- diance calibration accuracy by nearly a factor of five.

Ambient temperature, long-wavelength

infrared (LWIR), working-standard radiometers were developed within the CCG 426

project. Large-area, single-element, photovoltaic mercury-cadmium-telluride (HgCdTe)

detectors, and integrating-sphere HgCdTe

radiometers were developed as working

standards. Also, linear photocurrent measuring circuits were developed to increase the

range of radiant power measurements. These

radiometric systems will maintain the spectral responsivity scale between the wavelengths of 5 pm and 20 (jm.

High-accuracy working standard radiometers developed at NIST are the calibration

standards used in all DoD laboratories. Use

of the improved standards results in more

reliable and more accurate measurements

in the field and in the military's primary

laboratories.
UVspectral calibration facility.

Ambient IR spectral calibration facility.

As a result of these projects, frequent

replacement and recalibration of traditional lannp standards are not needed (lamps are

still needed but they are not standards anymore). Color-temperature lamps are sources

that are still issued to the DoD's Primary

Standards

Laboratories.

The new photometric and radiometric

standards are better than previous stan- dards because of

higher accuracy, better stability, shorter

calibration and

measurement times,

and less-frequent

recalibrations. As a

result of these new

NIST photometric and radiometric developments, a large number of transfer and working-standard photo/radiometers are used in different NIST projects where calibrations are based on detector standards.

CCG projects 257 and 309 helped the devel- opment of the Ultraviolet (UV) and Infrared

(IR) Spectral Responsivity

Calibration Facilities at NIST. The UV Spectral Comparator

Facility (SCF) is a monochromator-based system that uses the detector substitution method to calibrate photodetector responsivity

from 193 nm to 500 nm.

Absolute spectral responsivities are determined with

measurement uncertainties

ranging from 0.4 % to 4 %,

dependent on wavelength.

An Ambient Background Infrared Detector

Calibration Facility (IRDC) was developed for Project 309. This facility can calibrate detectors and radiometers for spectral power

responsivity in the infrared wavelength

range. The transfer standard of the facility is a cryogenic bolometer which holds the

infrared spectral power responsivity scale with an uncertainty of 0.8 % between 2 |jm

and 20 |jm. The cryogenic bolometer was

calibrated against HACR by means of transfer standard detectors.

As a result of the projects mentioned above,

the measurements with detector standards

of the DoD primary standard laboratories are now directly traceable to the HACR. NIST

uses the detector comparator facilities for DoD calibrations on a regular basis. Additionally, U.S. industry and other government laboratories receive their detector

characterizations from the SCF and IRDC

facilities.

CCG project 439 helped to establish a new

laser-based facility, the facility for Spectral

Irradiance and Radiance Responsivity

Calibrations using Uniform Sources (SIRCUS)

at NIST. This facility was developed to reduce

the uncertainties in detector power, irradi- ance, and radiance responsivity measurements. For example, using the new facility, the uncertainty in irradiance responsivity cal- ibrations have been reduced from 0.5 % to

0.1 % in the visible wavelengths. This

improvement will propagate to the two base

SI units maintained by the Optical

Technology Division of NIST. Future work at

this facility will provide calibration support

for detector arrays requiring spatially uni- form sources.

Working stan- dard detectors

calibrated on the

SIRCUS facility

along with lower

transfer uncertainties will increase the

accuracy of

radiometric and

SIRCUS for UV, visible and near-IR.

0
photometric measurements at DoD. The SIR- CUS facility will continue in the tradition of

the Spectral Comparator Facilities by facilitat- ing the transfer of the new high-accuracy

detector-based calibrations to the military,

academia,and industry.

Beyond the military requirements, the new

capabilities afforded by SIRCUS enable other

NIST projects to achieve higher radiometric,

photometric, color, and optical temperature

measurement accuracy. Other government

projects, such as NASA's Earth Observing

System (EOS), use the higher radiometric cali- bration accuracy offered by SIRCUS.

2. Optical Filters and Fourier-Transform

Infrared Spectrophotometry

CCG 408S,414S, 432S, BMDO Sponsorship

CCG 348, Army Sponsorship

The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization

(BMDO) needed accurate characterization of

filters that are used to reject high levels of

radiation lying outside a narrow transmission

band in the infrared (IR). The exact spectral

character of the blocking must be known to

effectively use the filters with the sensor sys- tems. Since the filters will be deployed in deep space, the transmittance values are required at low temperatures. The BMDO

also employs sensors that use array detectors

for imaging in a wide variety of systems.

These detector arrays are often packaged

with filters for spectral selection. For accurate imaging, the filters need to be spatially

uniform. Some of the filters are designed

with small-scale structure. Required detailed

spatial mapping of filter transmission is not

generally available from filter manufacturers.

Finally, many BMDO systems employ refrac- tive and reflective infrared optical components that need to be well characterized to

predict the performance of their associated sensor systems. The CCG initiated contracts with NIST to improve metrology in this technical area.

Fourier-transorm infrared spectrophotometer with cryostat for

reflectance and transmittance.

Monochromators have traditionally been

used at NIST for spectrophotometry.

However, use of interferometers has become

more prevalent, especially in the IR, because

of the throughput and speed advantages.

These interferometers are called Fourier- transform spectrometers (FTS). They also provide much higher resolution than do

monochromators.

CCG support for the projects cited above

helped to establish the Fourier-transform

(FT) Infrared Spectrophotometry Laboratory

at NIST, and to develop many of its new and

diverse capabilities for optical component

characterization. Among these new capabilities are temperature-dependent transmit- tance and reflectance from 1 0 K to 600 K, and

characterization of infrared index of refrac- tion. Techniques were developed for narrow- band filter characterization, both within- and

out-of-band, at the temperatures and beam

geometry of use. Also, instrumentation for small-area, spatially resolved transmittance
Equipment for evaluating nonlinearities in the Fourier transform infrared spectropiiotometer.

capability for filter characterization has

become available. Unique methods are employed for determining window transmit- tance and emittance, and mirror reflectance and emittance with high accuracy.

While FT-IR instruments have many advantages over grating or prism instruments, one

important disadvantage is measurement

error due to nonlinearities. This error is diffi- cult to quantify and is often overlooked by

instrument users. The resulting unrecognized inaccuracies in the data will propagate

through the application or technology.

CCG-supported project 348 enabled NISTto

carefully study and obtain an understanding

of nonlinearly error mechanisms. This has

resulted in the development of techniques

for eliminating, or otherwise identifying and

quantifying, nonlinearly and other sources of

error. As a result, NIST has established

improved measurement uncertainties for infrared spectral transmittance and

reflectance for both specular and diffuse

materials. The FT Spectrophotometry facility

has benefited a number of DoD/BMDO pro- grams including HALO, SBIRS-Lo, SBIRS-Hi,

and EKV.

Civilian applications include improved

infrared detector standards, infrared radiometer development, boiler chamber

window performance, and characterization

of critical components in support of a number of NASA and NOAA programs such as GOES, EOS, and SIRTF.

3. Fiber-Optic Power Measurements

CCG 272, 440, Navy, Air Force Sponsorship

The metrology that supports the field of

fiber optics is another case where the number of CCG projects at NIST is too large (over

25) to cover individually. Therefore this section will deal with only one narrow aspect;

fiber-optic power measurements.

With the rapid growth of optical fiber-based

telecommunications systems in the mid-tolate 1 980's, the military discovered a concurrent need for establishing metrological support for calibration equipment such as optical-fiber power meters. Optical-fiber power

measurements differ from typical laser power measurements in that the radiation is emitted from the end of a fiber and then

diverges as it propagates rather than being

Optical fibers for communications. (Courtesy of Corning Corp.)

contained in a narrow beam. Recognizing

the special needs inherent in these measurements, the CCG funded several projects at NISTto develop a fiber-based optical power

measurement system.

NIST uses this measurement system to pro- vide accurate optical fiber power meter cali- brations to the military as well as to other
government agencies, and industrial and

academic research laboratories,

improvements to the NIST optical-fiber

power measurement capabilities have also been funded by the CCG, such as the devel- opment of a detector linearity system and

the development of new improved optical

fiber power detectors. NIST has provided the

Air Force and Army Primary Standards

Laboratories (PSLs) with these NIST-built

optical fiber power measurement systems. In addition, all three service PSLs have NISTbuilt detector linearity measurement systems

that they use for performing accurate cali- brations of optical fiber power meters.

To provide higher-accuracy measurements of

optical fiber power, the CCG funded NIST to develop a cryogenic radiometer for use as a high-accuracy power standard. The result of

this effort is the Laser-Optimized Cryogenic

Radiometer (LOCR).The LOCR serves as the

primary standard for NIST's optical fiber power measurements and as a result now

provides measure- ments to the DoD

and others

with a measure- ment accuracy twice

that of pre- vious sys- tems. A

current CCG proj- ect strives to reduce the associated measure- ment uncertainty even more by developing new standard detectors that enable an improved transfer from the LOCR to the actual calibration system.

The explosive growth of optical telecommunications in the past 1 0 years has generated new and critical metrology needs that are of

vital importance to the rapid pace of tech- nology development. Because of CCG supNIST optical fiber power measurement

system.

port, NIST has been one of the few metrology laboratories to keep pace with these fast- changing needs. CCG-sponsored systems

such as those described above have enabled

NIST to provide to this industry the most

comprehensive and accurate measurement

services anywhere in the world.

4. Other Optical Properties

A. Optical Scattering Metrology

CCG 752, Army, Navy, Air Force Sponsorship

CCG 289, Navy Sponsorship

CCG 295, Air Force Sponsorship

CCG 48 1, Air Force Sponsorship

When light strikes a surface, some is absorbed and some is specularly reflected in a direction determined by the laws of optics.

Depending on the nature of the surface, some light will be scattered in other directions. Every reflecting surface, even a mirror,

will scatter light to some extent. Sometimes

the effects are pleasing to the eye, such as

diffuse reflection when light is scattered from a wall painted with a "flat" textured

paint; but in optical devices scattering is usually detrimental. As an unwanted effect, scat- tering must be measured and quantified to specify the performance of equipment.

The bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) quantifies the directional dependence of optical scattering from a material surface. BRDF metrology was initially driven by the designers of large optical

systems used for national defense. The

BMDO has a need for specifying and evaluating large low-scatter mirrors to be used in ground- and space-based sensors as well as energy directed weapons. Prior to the

acceptance of BRDF by the affected communities, polished mirrors were commonly characterized with surface profilers, and those

measurements were used to infer optical

scatter performance. The ultimate scatter
W/S T goniometric optical scatter instrument.

performance of a part, however, can be eval- uated with certainty only by direct measurennent of its scatter distribution. BRDF was

identified as a significant figure of nnerit for specifying mirrors, but there was no standard

calibration throughout the measurement

community.

Realizing its importance to our defense

effort, the Secretary of the Air Force, Office of Research (SAF/OR),

began funding the

development of a lowlevel BRDF program at NISTin 1988, with the

objective of establish- ing a world-class optical scattering facility, extending and refining

BRDF measurements,

and unifying the BRDF

measurement metrology. This was transferred

to CCG funding under

Air Force sponsorship

in 1993.

The approach was to develop a high-accuracy BRDF instrument and methods for transferring the accuracy of the measure- ment through standard artifacts and techniques. In subsequent years the facility has

provided DoD with needed support for sur- face topography profiling, BRDF comparisons among laboratories (round robins),

and development of BRDF calibration stan- dards. By supporting NIST contributions to the development of an ASTM standard test practice, DoD stimulated the emergence of

BRDF as a widespread metrology tool used

throughout the optics manufacturing and

testing communities.

The Goniometric Optical Scatter Instrument

(GOSI) that resulted from DoD funding is a world-class facility, featuring full hemispherical mapping of the BRDF, full polarimetric

capabilities, high angular resolution, a dynamic range of about 1 6 orders of magnitude, and a Rayleigh-scatter-limited instru- ment signature. The unique capabilities of

this instrument have enabled NIST to play a leadership role in the development of polarized-optical-scatter methods that enable dis- tinction among different scattering sources.

Thus, NIST's BRDF measurements and

research have had significant impact on a broad industrial community representing

manufacturers of optical instrumentation

and materials development, semiconductor

inspection, remote sensing instruments,

astronomical telescopes, medical imaging

optics, consumer optical devices, and textiles, paper, paint, and finishes. In addition the

DoD will continue to reap benefits from this research through its applications in target

detection and remote sensing.

The light (radiation) we observe from a sur- face is a combination of light originating

from various sources and reflecting from the

surroundings and light emitted from the sur- face itself. For numerous applications,

including target discrimination, both the

Integrating sphere for measurement ofdiffuse reflectance.
Cryostat for sample temperature coritrol, 10 K to 600 K (for studymg temperature dependence ofemittance).

reflectance and emittance properties of the

target must be understood. Most materials

and surfaces will scatter to some degree.

For these materials all the reflected light

must be collected to determine the

reflectance. This is known as "diffuse" or

"total" reflection. Emittance is a measure of

how well any material emits light (due to its temperature) in comparison to a perfect

blackbody emitter.

Under an earlier CCG-funded project, 289,

NIST established diffuse reflectance stan- dards for the infrared spectral region. This

included a facility for the calibration of DoD

sample material, commercially available stan- dards in the form of Standard Reference

Materials (SRMs),and new measurement

instruments and methods. (SRMs are sample

materials available from NIST that have had

their pertinent characteristics carefully measured so other laboratories and industry can

use them to assure proper performance of

their instruments and traceability to national

standards.)

This project was a cooperative effort between NIST and the Naval Research laboratory (NRL) in Washington, D.C. Instrumentation developed by NIST was

delivered to NRL and the Navy Primary

Standards Laboratory in San Diego,

California.

Very recently, the CCG has funded NIST under

Project 481 to develop measurement stan- dards and methods for angular and temperature dependence of emittance for target dis- crimination. This project will expand upon

current indirect emittance characterization

capabilities at NIST to include temperature

and angle dependence. New instrumentation to be developed will include a facility for measurement of direct emittance for materials at temperatures up to 1 273 K.

Civilian applications for diffuse reflection metrology include the study of flame-retar- dant building materials and the development of protective fire-fighting clothing,

while developments in emittance measure- ments will benefit manufacturers of alu- minum moldings and semiconductor fabrica- tion through improvements in noncontact

thermometry and thermography.

B. Infrared Polarization Standards and

Metrology

CCG 400, Navy Sponsorship

Another characteristic of light common to all electromagnetic (EM) waves is a property

called polarization. EM waves move through

space with electric and magnetic fields that

are orthogonal both to each other and to the

direction of propagation. Polarization is
NIST-developed high contrast IR polarizer.

defined as the angle between the direction

of the electric field and some arbitrarily

chosen direction, usually in the medium of

propagation.

A very commonly encountered use of polarization is in certain types of sunglasses.

These utilize a material that rejects visible

light of certain polarizations, thus reducing

unwanted glare. In the military area on the

modern battlefield, target discrimination

from clutter and decoys becomes more

important as these areas expand into more

efficient countermeasure capabilities. New

ways to provide this discrimination require

examining other properties of light such as polarization and applying it to the infrared sensors so important to modern warfare.

Recent investigations have shown plumes

and natural clutters to be mostly unpolarized. Since light detected from a man-made

target is often partially polarized, polariza- tion could be an effective discriminator for targets. Polarization imaging using a focal- plane array could discriminate between the

natural background and a camouflaged tar- get. Performance of a polarimetric sensor system depends on the quality of polarizers,

retarders, and other optical components

used. In addition, polarization measurements

greatly extend the optical analysis of materials via spectroscopic ellipsometry, polarimetry, and the Kerr and Faraday effects. Other

applications are optical computing, magneto-optical data storage, and pharmaceutical

quality control.

Real polarizers, known as diattenuators,do not completely extinguish the orthogonal

polarization component. Real retarders (phase shifters) may not project the correct retardance and may have a different attenuation for the two orthogonal polarization

components. Undesirable near-specular scat- tering (NSS) degrades not only the polarimetric performance, but also the image quality of an optical system. A polarimetric component can be characterized by the parameters of diattenuation, NSS, and retardance. These parameters must be quantified and

corrected for the optimal performance of an

optical polarimetric system.

Realizing the importance of this metrology

area the CCG, under Navy sponsorship, funded NIST to develop these measurement

capabilities. As a result NIST was able to

establish a new capability for spectral cali- bration of polarization components (linear

polarizers and retarders) in the infrared. This new capability has been used to produce

calibrated standard polarizers for Navy

Laboratories including the Naval Warfare

Center in China Lake, California, and the

Naval Research Laboratory in Washington,

D.C. A critical component specifically devel- oped for the new calibration facility is a nearly ideal "master" standard linear polarizer.

Two of these polarizers were delivered to the

China Lake facility to improve their own

polarimetric capabilities.

C. Surface-Finish Metrology

CCG 254S SDIO Sponsorship

Although less relevant to electro-optical

metrology, surface finish of mirrors is an

extremely important matter to the Strategic

Defense Initiative and Ballistic Missile
Defense programs. In a technology where a mere thumbprint on a mirror can absorb

enough heat to destroy the mirror when irra- diated by a very-high-energy laser beam,

imagine what a tiny bit of roughness in the

mirror's surface could do. In the 1980's,the

BMDO required measurements of mirror

roughness to an accuracy previously unavailable. The CCG supported NIST to develop new measurement techniques and calibra- tion artifacts that could satisfy this need.

Previously, optical interferometry and physical stylus methods were the profiling tech- niques principally used to test optical sur- faces. The resulting profiles and topographic

images generally have dimensions on the

order of 1 nm (nanometer) or more. The vertical resolution of these techniques was as low as 0.1 nm or better, but the lateral resolu- tion was much more limited. It was 0.1 mm

(micrometer) at the very best and typically

0.5 mm or more.

NIST turned to new profiling techniques of scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and

atomic-force microscopy (AFM), which had

been used in the semiconductor industry for profiling the miniature structures of transistors, etc. It also had been used successfully to produce rastered-profile maps of surfaces with sub-nanometer lateral resolution and

0.1 nm vertical resolution or better. A principal limitation of these techniques for optical surface metrology was the short scan length

and hence the small area size that could be

measured. Very little work had been done at the time for profile lengths of 1 0 mm or more on optical surfaces by use of these

techniques [4]. Therefore, there was a gap

between the short profile, high-resolution

STIVl and AFM methods and the surface profiling techniques predominantly used for optics at the time. Important properties of

optical surfaces could be missed until the

gap was bridged.

After extensive

development work

the following objectives were achieved:

• A long-range scan- ning tunneling

microscope with

traversing capability of 500 fim X 500 |Lim, lateral res- olution of about 1 nm, and vertical resolution of 0.1 nm. NIST's calibrated atomic-force microscope witli direct trace- • A calibrated atomic-force microscope (C- ability to tlie SI quantity of ARM) with traceability to the wavelength length in all three axes of of light for all three axes of motion used in motion. an ongoing test service primarily for cali- bration of specimens used to calibrate other atomic-force microscopes.

Specifically, the instrument is used to cali- brate pitch, step height, and linewidth

specimens, and to measure roughness. It has a lateral traversing capability of 50 |am

X 50 |am, a lateral resolution of about 1 nm

for measurement of smooth surfaces, and

a vertical resolution of about 0.1 nm.

• ASTM F181 1-97, Standard Practice for Estimating the Power Spectral Density

Function and Related Finish Parameters from Surface Profile Data.

As a result NIST's capability for surface cali- brations has improved the state of the art of

step-height calibrations to DoD's metrology

laboratories. This enables NIST to provide

traceable roughness measurements at extremely high levels of spatial resolution

and atomic vertical resolution for optical sur- faces used in DoD optics projects.

This capability has also been beneficial to the

semiconductor industry, the data storage

industry, and their suppliers. Specifically, cali- brations and special tests have been per- formed for metrology companies supplying

those industries and the optics industry. In addition, the C-AFM has been used to settle a question arising from systematic differ59
ences observed between measurements of

linewidth by electrical methods and by scan- ning electron microscopes. In addition, the

C-AFM has been used to provide an independent traceable measurement of prototype single-atom step-height standards.

Chemical, Biological, Radiological

(CBR)

Alpha and Beta Calibration Source

Traceability

CCG Projects 32 7, 377, 376, 435, 459, Air Force Sponsorship

CCG 475, 492, Army Sponsorship

The Department of

Defense has used

many thousands of

ionizing-radiationdetector meters

since the beginning of the Cold

War to monitor

potential radiation

contamination

resulting from

weapons tests,

spills or leakage of

radioactive materiADM 300 radioactivity measurement

probes.

als, facility decommissioning, and even

peacetime applications such as radioisotopic

medicines. The meters are typically used at military bases by bio-environmental personnel, by disaster preparedness teams, and by

civil-defense groups. The vast majority of

these ionizing-radiation survey meters must

be calibrated periodically. Precision calibra- tion for surface-contamination alpha and

beta particles has long been a challenge, and

the DoD-NIST partnership has made great

strides to solve these calibration problems.

Emissions of alpha and beta particles are fundamentally difficult to measure.

Calibration traceability to a national standard

that simulates the "real world" of surface

contamination has

been the chief obstacle. Nine projects, in fact, have been initi- ated over the last 10

to 15 years to help

establish real traceability for accurate detector calibrations.

Air Force Primary Standards

Laboratory calibration range for cali- brating ionizing-radiation detectors. The problem was first recognized during

intercomparison

measurements of a series of large-area plutonium-239 (Pu-239) calibration sources known by the military part number

AN/UDM-7. NIST discovered that the sources

varied significantly in thickness and were

easily damaged and generally unstable. They decided to investigate the possibility of

replacing these sources with anodized-aluminum Pu-238 sources, which are more

rugged and uniform. The application had to accommodate Pu-239, however, so it was

necessary to develop the calibration apparatus and appropriate correction factors for converting the response of the instruments

to Pu-238 to their response to Pu-239. This

led to the development of a special calibra- tion "jig" or fixture for holding a detector

close to the calibration source. The fixture also had to be adaptable to the various sur- face monitors used by the three services. This objective has been accomplished.

The traceability problem for beta-particle

calibrations was even more profound. The

standards had to be developed, but even

before that could happen the behavior of

beta particles had to be better understood.

The first CCG beta-particle project resulted in a published paper detailing a beta-particle

model that has gained international acceptance. Ionizing-radiation projects are ongoing, and large-area calibration standards are being developed for distribution to the mili- tary laboratories.
AppeTidix A,

A List of all

as of FY 200

'i

The following is a list of CCG metrology engineering projects. It is as connplete as possible, going back to the beginning of the CCG

in the 1 960's, and continuing through 2001

.

In some cases the information in the table is incomplete, but we have chosen nevertheless to present what was available.

The table is arranged by project number,

which approximates a chronological order. As a time reference, project 100 was assigned

in 1 975, project 200 in 1 985, project 300 in

1 990, and project 400 in 1 995. Project 500

should be designated in 2002.

The next three columns, (1 ), (2), and (3), under the heading "SUFFIX," contain letter suffixes that were occasionally appended to the project number. Column (1) contains let- ter designators that were used to denote

projects with very similar subject matter. These projects were assigned the same number and a letter suffix indicating that another

service was providing support for a different frequency range or configuration. The letters have no special meaning other than as a dif- ferentiator. This project naming practice was abandoned for many years after project

number 225 with the institution of the "Lead

Service" arrangement (see below).

Column (2) is used to designate projects that were supported by one of the joint service

program offices. Here the letter M stands for the MILSTAR Program Office and S stands for either SDIO, the Strategic Defense Initiative Office, or later for its successor, the Ballistic Missile Defense Office (BMDO). In these proj- ects one of the services, usually the Air Force, acted as the lead-service project manager.

Starting with project number 444, when

reduced budgets sometimes required the use of joint service project funding, a project

naming practice similar to that formerly used was resumed. Column (3) contains a letter

suffix used with projects with identical numbers. In these cases, however, the letter A

stands for Army, F for the Air Force, and N for the Navy.

The major column, "Project Title," contains

the title assigned at the time of project initia- tion. In some cases the names are self- explanatory, while in others they are so abbreviated that they admittedly appear

cryptic.

The column labeled "NIST Facility" desig- nates where the work was conducted, with G

standing for the Gaithersburg, Maryland, and

B for the Boulder, Colorado, facilities of NIST. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) also

led the research on a few projects as indicat- ed in this column. IH stands for In-house,

meaning that a service laboratory undertook

the majority of the work.

The next column, "Technology Area," lists the name of the CCG Engineering Working Subgroup currently responsible for the scientific area of the project. The names of these subgroups have changed over the years, and the

present name may not correspond to the name of the sub-group cognizant at the time

of the project.

The last column, "Sponsoring Organization,"

designates which service(s) funded and/or

had oversight over each project. Until proj- ect 1 90, it was not uncommon for the servic- es to contribute equally to the support of

projects, indicating they all had an equal

stake in the projects' results. In some cases only one or two service(s) had a requirement

that was addressed by a project as evi- denced in the table.

However, in the mid-1 980's, the DoD Joint Director of Laboratories recommended that

projects be managed and funded by use of a "Lead Service" concept in order to simplify

management responsibility. Using this approach, all funding and oversight responsi-
bilities for each project now belong to a sin- gle service. It is still true that typically more

than one service has an interest in most projects. The sub-groups of the CCG Engineering

Working Group decide the division of project

responsibilities among the services with a project's lead-service position being filled by

the service having the most pressing

requirements in the project's technical area.

The practice of project funding by a single

service continued until project 444 when

once again, on occasion, more than one service might fund a single project. The method

of designating these projects, using suffix column (3), is explained above. The service

listed as the sponsoring organization on the

first entry of the project number fulfills the

role of lead service project manager.
Table A-1. List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES)

# (1) (2) (3) PROJECT TITLE

NIST FACILITY TECHNICAL AREA

SPONSORING

ORGANIZATION

3 1 lUVV I 1 UJC^l ri phys/mech 4 ri electrical 5 RdsistsncG ScslinQ Tschnic^uGS Q dCUl ICOl Army

6 EPR ^1 1^ Mannetir ivici\ji icii^ f^tandarrt^ \j*icii lueii uo a dcCll ICol Navy

8 1 IICIIIIOI VUlloyC wUIIVCllCl II 1 ipi UVCl MCI IL 0 Army

9 Low Fisid M3Qn6tic Oslibrstion System Q dcn«ii K^l Navy

12 DC Ratio bv AC Ratio Te»rhniniip^ Q dcull lUcll Army

13 Autorrtat^d Vibration Calihratinn RvQtpm Q (Ji lyo/iilcUl 1 15 ^^UOUIULC VIL/Iallwll wallUlallUll wjOldll pnyo/mecn

1—— Air Force 16 Infrsrcd Stsndsrds of RsdisncG pIp^trn-nnti f^a1 Air Pnr/^A

21 C\A/ Hinh Pnwpr Masxi irr^m^nt g IlllUiUWdVc Navy 23 RPr\i Pf^ak rCclK PinUloc il<^ Pnwm* njwci MAaeiiromont nncaoUlcllRTIH iriicrowdve Navy 25 wi^i lai L^dc^fiiui 1 wyoidllo R0 IlllUlUWaVc Army

27 FMu-ivi Pi^lH r iGivj IntpriRftv II iLci loiiy oLciiiuaiuB ^tanHarHc ProniiAnr^v/ i icuudi^y PvtAncifin ^juciioiuii Q milllttflUWdVc i rnufav/p StanHarH^ Vi/iaiiuciiuo W/auAfnrm vvcivduiiii f^^n^ratrir vj^iicioiui Q dcvlf lUdl Air pAr/^A 34 \/ihr'atifin vit^iaijuii Mnnrtnrinn iviwi iiLwi 11 lu wysid ^vQt^m

M

Q |J| lysuiMCUl 1 37 RvQtAmatir* ^ti iHu r»f \/ihratir>n Trancfor ^tandarric Air FAr^A Mil rOrCc 38 .InsiPnh^nn Fffwt \/nltanp ^tanrtarrtQ G B plpf^tri dCwtl pa1 llrdi miiiy, Armu Ma\/\/ i^idvy, miAir Fnr<^P ruiVrC 40 Twn ^tanp lnHiir*ti\/P \/nltanp DiulHpr B ptpctripal dCOll ll#dl ^!i!]y 41 11 ltd laUUI alUI y 1 Idllolci W KJlUvo \tl T\ssoloLal *\X dliU *h^iapi3(«iuaii(^ 0 11 lUal Army

42 ripvplnnmpnt i_/^v^fu^i 1 II, of\ji Hinh 1 (iMi 1 Rp^/^nant r\coui lai ii Frpniipnr'u i^i cuud ivy nvwdd Afv^lprnmptpr \ji i icid (Ji lyo/ii idtfi 1 44 'VI MH7 iHi 1 1^ r\ud Attenuation luaiiui I Mpa^tirpmpnt ivi^aoui ci 1 171 ii- wyovd ^votpm1

1

Q mit^ rnuuaup Navy 46 Kloi^p iiWiiT^ Piniirp ri^uic Mpfpr iviCLd r^alihratnr waiiL/i alui 5 micrnwaup i 1 iiui uwdvc Air Pnrr^ 47 Mi^mu/aup PhaQP Mpaci irpmont R mi f* rmA/av/p 48 Minh 1 ll^^l Prpni 1 1 C\^Udipnpu Ivy \/ihratinn V lUI dllVI 1 Mpa^iirpmpnt IVICQ9UI VI 1 Id 11 Q fji lyo/i 1 icwi 1 Klauu i^dvy, m\Air Pnrr^P ruivc 50 Riirvpv vjui vcy nfv^i \A/a\/p vvavc ^amnlinn wdiiiuiiiiu wyoiciiio ^\/Qtpm^ 1^iiiiivdiiwiio imttatinnQ B mie^ rnwaup

51 vjduuy oysHciii r\c5kUiuLiuii iiiipiuvtfiiidii Armu Air Pnrf*^ 52 t itni|. L/uiiidifi ivicdoLiicfiiciii * DdoCLHaiHi 11 lou uiiici iiduuii oyoiciiio Q 1 1 ll\«l UWdVc Army

56 ^np<^IfW^atinn anH lUlpafii irpmpnt nf Prpni ipncu ^tahilrfv/ wfAAtfi 1 ivduuM di lu fvicdoui d1 ici It ui 1 ic^uc(ii«y otdt/iiity Q mi p> rnu/aV/P 1 1 iiui uwdVc 57 OldL/iC; ^taWp Prpcci r ItfooUlC irp TrancHi 1 ldliS>UUv^lO if^rc Q yjt lyo/l 1 ld«i 1 Amy

70 0\A/ oiyiidi ^innal oyoidfio ^\/^tpmQ oidiiUdiuo ^tanHarrtc - PiftlH niciu IntpnQitu iitidioiiy MpaQiirpmpntc ivicdouiditciiio Q miprnwaup 1 1 iioi uwdVc Armu Air Pnrcp 72 A Imnrrkupd FM ImrMil^P PipIH Mpaci irpmpnt% Q m1 c- rnu/aup 72 B RPlA t /AUdplCI AHantpr Pv/ali tVdIUdllUi latinn/Mpaci 1/ IVlCaoUlirpmont Cl ( Id 11 P^ata L^dld Racp DdoC Q mi nrn\A/a\/p nil Air Pnrr^p l\JI\rX3 72 C r^rvfvipnlp ^MfiyuMviiiVr RPr\ 1 r^iLci Attpniiatinn luaiiwi 1 Mpaci ivicoouiirptnpnt d iici 11 B mi rnwax/P 72 D r^rvrv^pnio wiyuyciii^ RP1^1 Pn\Atf>r ' vWd Mpaciirpmpnt ivicdoui d1 ici It B m1 1 iiu i rnu/aup uwdVc 77 FM[_ivi Pnwpr i^uwci F^pn^itv La^si i9iiy Mptpr ividd f^alihratinn s>>aiiui Qiiui 1 ^vctpm wyotdii B mif^rnu/aup 1 1 iibi wwavc r\i 1 iiy , i^idvy 79 mjiui Ai ttnmatpH 1 kucu oyoidiio ^vo+pmc OLCiiiudiuo ^tanriarrtQ g Army

79 A Mpac ivicdo. noouiaiiuc Afi<£iiranr^ Prrviram ~iv^jidfii /MAP\ ^ivi/^r^^ fnr lui nutuiiidiio Airtmnatir^ KIptu/nrir i^<;iwuin miaiyiCd AnaK/7Pr g 1 1 ii^i uwdVc

81 1 idi lo^Wi iduic iJ\^ vulidyc oidiiUdiu plp^trical Arrny 82 LdOCl ^^dlUIIIIIdd OtdllUdlUo Q plp^t cicvlfm—nnfi^a1 u~\.i(.flit>ai Air Pnr^P 83 1UllfdOUIIIw lltracnnir> Infprf^mmptpr II ltd Id Ui 1 IClCl Q nH\/G/mP/^h AMI Air Pnr/^P nuiwc 87 V WiT rMl^lall l^ldViydUmi OldllUdlUo g m1

i frn\A/aup 1 IIV<l UWdVC miiiy, Armu NIaxA/ i^dvy, miAir Pnr^p nuiirc 88 1_UVV UyilL l_CVd OlailUolUo Q p1dd«ti PT'frn—nnti ^a1 Lrsjfjli^di 89 IIIntpriafv^ratnru lid idiAJi dtui y (^nmnaricnn oui 1 ipdi loui t nf\ji InfrarpH iiiiididj MR^ oidiiuai ^tanHarHQuo Q pdcuLi 1 p^^frn—n (-i~u|jimdi nti a1 miiiy, Armu Mauu i^dvy, miAir Pnrr^P r^ui^c 90 InfrarpH IlllldlCU ^IR^ \liA^ LASldrfLUI Hpfpr^nr OLdllUdlUO ^tanHarHc Q plp/^trn-nntir> a1 Cldrfll (k^^J|Jtll^dl rAiiiiy, Armu Nauu i^dvy, miAir Pnrpp r ijioc 91 llllci IdUUldLUI y Vj^Uiii^mi loUIl l_docl OldllUdlUo g detail U~U|Jtl(^dl Miiiiy, Armu Mauu i>iavy, r\ii Air Pnmp nuiuc 92 Uci9€r Vd<~owiicncu ~uwcr/ energy ivieeioUidTionfco D0 Air FAr/^A 95 nUlUilldlCU Aiitnmatcw4 OldllUdlU ^fanWarH ^oll r^j^mnaratnr '^.^1 1 ipdi dIUI plpntri^al dCV<tl l^^l nil Air Pnrr^ r UlwC 96 Automated AC Voltage Measurement G electrical Air Force 97 EM Field Measurement and Analysis B microwave Navy, Air Force 98 Calibration Services for Accelerometers G phys/mech 99 Six Port Measurement Techniques B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 100 Automated Boksmetric Calibration System B microwave Army

101 Millimeter Wave Standards B microwave Air Force 102 Thermal Coefficients G phys/mech

103 Low Velocity Primary Standard G phys/mech Navy

104 CW Signal Generator B microwave Air Force 105 Pulse Power Signal Generator Calibrator B microwave Air Force 106 Spectral Radiometry G electro-optical Army

107 Laser Standards Measurement Assurance Program B electro-optical Air Force 108 Laser High Power Metrology B electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 109 Laser Beam Characterization B electro-optical Army, Air Force

111 Low Frequency RMS Voltmeter G electrical Army, Navy, Air Force 112 Phase Angle Standard and Measurement Methods G electrical Navy, Air Force 113 1 Support of New Power Standards B microwave
Table A-1. List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES)

# (1) (2) (3) PROJECT 1^ lAV^WbaV TITLE III ^Iv NIST

FACILITY TECHNICAL AREA

SPONSORING

ORGANIZATION

117 Radiac Round Robin G radiologk:al Army, Navy, Air Force 118 Radlac Handbook G radiological Army, Navy, Air Force 120 Laser Target Designator Metrology B electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force

121 High Frequency Automatic AF Admittance Bridge G electrical Army, Air Force 123 Automated AC/DC Thennal Voltage Converter G electrical Army, Air Force 124 Pulse Transition Time Measurement Assurance Program B microvrave Air Force 125 Auto Test System for AC Voltage Calibration G electrical Army, Navy, Air Force 126 DoD Laboratory Independence, Power and RF Voltage B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 127 Temporal Characterization of Pulsed Lasers/Laser Devices B electro-optk:al Army, Navy, Air Force 128 Future DoD Laser Metrology Requirements B electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 129 Laser Rangefinder/Receiver Metrology 8 electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 130 Improved AC High Voltage Divider G electrical Army, Air Force

131 Optical Fiber Standards for Communications B electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 132 Modem Electro-Optical (EO) Technology G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 133 Forvrard Looking Infrared (FLIR) Radiance Standard G electro-optical Navy, Air Force 134 Sidew/inder/lntermed. Wave IR Transfer Radiometer Character G electro-optical Navy, Air Force 135 DoD Infrared /Electro Optical Metrology Requirements G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 136 Fundamental Radionnetry G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 137 Dynamic Electrical Measurements G electrical Army, Navy, Air Force 138 Millimeter Wave Standards B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 139 Kilogram Standard Improvement G phys/mech Army, Navy

140 Waveguide Transmission Line Standards: WR-42, WR-28 B microwave Navy

141 Microvi/ave Antenna Coupler Standard B microwave Navy

142 Satellite Controlled Clocks B Navy

146 Improved Modeling of Diode Detectors B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 148 NBS Self Study Manual on Optical Radiation Measurements G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force

151 Tunable Laser Source B electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 152 Optical Scattering Standard B electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 153 IR High Accuracy Spectrophotometry G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 154 Improved Standards for Wide Ranging Environments G electrical Army, Air Force 155 Automated CapacKance Bridge G electrical Army, Navy, Air Force 156 1.25 MHz IF Standards B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 157 Automatic Test Equipment Metrology G Army, Navy, Air Force 158 Fast Laser Pulse Metrology B electro-optical /\rmy. Navy, Air Force 159 Laser Beam Divergence/Profile Measurements B electro-optrcal Army, Air Force 160 Type N Line Standards for Six-Port Calibration B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force

161 Quality Control for Six-Port Systems B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 162 Solid State Thermal Converters G electrical Army, Navy, Air Force 163 Quantum Hall Effect Resistance Standard G electrical Air Force 165 Extend Dynamic Range of Six-Port to 80 dB or Higher B microw/ave Army, Navy, Air Force 166 Construct/Evaluate Directional Couplers (10-1000 MHz) B microvrave Army

167 Long Wavelength Infrared Spectrophotometry G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 168 LcM Background Infrared Standards G electro-optical Air Force 169 Precision Arbitrary Waveform Generation Methods G electrical Air Force 170 Std. for Oscilloscope Waveform Recorder B electrical Army, Navy, Air Force

1/1 Standards for 3.5 mm Connectors, 18-26 GHz B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 172 Transportable 10 Volt DC Standard G electrical Army, Navy, Air Force 175 New DC Resistance Metrology G electrical Army, Air Force 176 Low Level Germanium Transfer Standard G electro-optical Army, Navy, Air Force 178 Broadband Isotropic Probe Std, 0.01-6 GHz B microwave Army, Navy, Air Force 179 Broadband Isotropk: Probe Std, 4-18 GHz B microvrave Navy

179 B Field Intensity Transfer Standards, 18-26.5 GHz B microwave Navy

180 Improved Manometry Capability G phys/mech Army, Navy, Air Force

181 Jet Engine Temperature Measurement G phys/mech Army, Navy, Air Force 183 Calibration of Alpha Radiac Calibration Test Set G radiological Air Force 185 Automated Temperature Measurement G phys/mech Army, Navy

186 DoD Liaison Support G/B other Army, Navy, Air Force 187 New Impedance Metrology G electrical Army, Air Force 190 Improved Transportable Capacitance Standard G electrical Air Force

191 Josephson Array Voltage Standard (1 Volt) B electrical Navy

192 Imaging IR Systems Metrology G electro-optical Navy

193 Infrared Detector Standards G electro-optical Army

194

~ LWIR Detector Characterization Facility G electro-optical Army

195 Millimeter Wave (MMW) Meas. System for Power & S-parameters B microvrave Air Force
Table A-1. List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES)

# (1) (2) (3) PROJECT TITL F

NIST

FACILITY TECHNICAL AREA

SPONSORING

ORGANIZATION

195 A MMW Meas. System for Power & S-parameters WR-42 B microwave Air Force 195 B MMW Meas. System for Power & S-parameters WR-28 B microv/ave Air Force 195 C MMW Meas. System for Power & S-parameters WR-22 B microwave Air Force 195 D MMW Meas. System for Power & S-parameters WR-15 B microvrave Air Force 195 E MMW Meas. System for Power & S-parameters WR-10 B microwave Air Force 195 M Interim MILSTAR - Power and S-parameters B microwave MILSTAR P O. 196 Nearfield Antenna Measurement Automation B microwave Army

196 M Interim MILSTAR - Nearfield Antenna Measurement Automation B microwave MILSTAR P.O. 197 Precision Coax. Step Attenuator Check Standard (below 26 GHz) B microwave Navy

197 A Precision Coax. Step Attenuator Check Standard (26-50 GHz) B microwave Navy

198 High Accuracy Phase Measurement B microwave Air Force 199 Phase Noise B microw/ave Navy 199 A Phase Noise Measurement Standard (5 MHz-26.5 GHz) B microw/ave Navy

199 M Interim MILSTAR - Phase Noise Measurement Standard B microwave MILSTAR P.O. 200 Noise Temperature Measurement Support B microwave Air Force 200 M Interim MILSTAR - Noise Temperature Measurement Support B microwave MILSTAR P.O. 201 Monolithic Construction for Six-Ports B microvrave Army

202 A Standards for Microwave Power at 10 mW B microwave Navy 202 M Interim MILSTAR - Standards for Microwave Pow/er at 10 mW B microwave MILSTAR P.O. 204 Transportable Calibration Chamber B microwave Navy 206 Broadband Isotropic E-field Probe (10 MHz-26.5 GHz) B microvrave Navy 206 A Broadband Isotropic E-field Probe (26.5-110 GHz) B microwave Navy 207 Piston Gage Metrology G phys/mech Navy 208 Dynamic Pressure, Temperature & Shock Measurements G phys/mech Amiy

209 Laser Peak Power Standards B electro-optical Air Force 210 Photoconductive Switch for Reference Waveform Generator G electrical Army

211 Non-Destructive Test Research G phys/mech Air Force 213 Prototype DC Voltage Measurement System G electrical Navy 214 Multi-range Thermal Converter System G electrical Navy 215 Aerosol Science and Technology G phys/mech Army

216 Space Based Weapons and Measurements G phys/mech Army

218 Gas and Liquid Flow G phys/mech Air Force 219 AC Voltage Standard and Measurement Methods G electrical Navy 220 Modular Calibration Interface G electrical Navy

221 Temperature Sensors G phys/mech Navy 222 Near Infrared Radiometer G electro-optical Navy 223 Study of Environmental Criteria for Standards Laboratory Air Force 225 High Power CW Measurements B microwave Navy 225 B High Power CW Measuremerrts to 1 GHz B microwave Army

225 M Interim MILSTAR - High Power CW Measurements B microwave MILSTAR P.O. 226 30 MHz Attenuation Standard B microwave Air Force 227 Sensor Research G phys/mech Army

228 Vision Intelligent Callbratksn G phys/mech Army

229 X-ray Counting System G chem/bio/rad Air Force 230 MMW Meas. System for Power & S-parameters 2.4/3.5 mm B microwave Army

1 Anechoic Chamber Facility B microwrave Army

232 Advanced ANA Impedance Standards Characterization B microwave Navy 233 Superconducting Thermometer for Bolometric Applications G electro-optical Army

234 Standard Detector for X-ray Sensors G chem/bio/rad Air Force 234 S XUV Spectrometer/t3etector Calibrations G electro-optical SDIO

235 Primary Liquid Flow Standard G phys/mech Navy 236 Precision Arbitrary Waveform Standards G electrical Navy 237 High Current Wideband Transconductance Amplifier G electrical Air Force 238 Cryogenic Power Measurement System B microw/ave Navy 239 Fiber Optic Calorimeter B electro-optical Navy 240 Single Mode Fitier Optic Test Procedure Analysis B electro-optical Navy

241 Imaging IR System Support G electro-optical Navy 242 High Resolution Optical Reflectometry G electro-optical Navy 243 Fast Optical Sampler G electro-optical Navy 244 New Tech IR Imaging Support G electroH3ptical Navy 245 Josephson Array Voltage Standard (10 V) B electrical Navy 246 Dissipation Factor Measurements G electrical Navy 247 Digital Synthesis/Measurement of Wavefoims G electrical Air Force 248 Dynamic Pressure G phys/mech Army
Table A-1. List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES)

# (1) (2) (3) PROJECT TITLE

NIST FACILITY TECHNICAL AREA

SPONSORING

ORGANIZATION

249 Fixed Point Pressure Standards G phys/mech Army

250 Capacitance Bridge Evaluation G electrical Army

251 Automatic Test Equipment (ATE) Calibration Strategies G electrical Air Force 252 S Advanced Angle Metrology G phys/mech SDIO

253 S 60 GHz Probe Position Correction B microvrave SDIO

254 s Surface Finish Metrology G phys/mech SDIO

255 8 Environmental Effects on Optical Fabrication G phys/mech SDIO

256 S Precision Optical Grinding G phys/mech SDIO

257 S Ultraviolet Radiometry G electro-optical SDIO

258 S Megawatt Laser Calorimeter B electro-optical SDIO

259 S XUV Optics Characterization G electro-optical SDIO

260 S Dimensional SEM Standard G phys/mech SDIO

261 s Superconducting Bolometer B electro-optical SDIO

262 Coaxial Connector Gauges and Tools B microwave Army

263 Six-Port at 18-40 GHz B mterowave Army

264 Low Level Laser Measurements B electro-optical Air Force 265 Optical Time Domain Reflectometer (OTDR) Support Facility B electro-optical Navy 266 Laser Heterodyne G electro-optical Navy 267 DC Resistance Standards G electrical Air Force 268 NMR Based Voltage Standard G electrical Air Force 269 Unbalanced Bridge for Resistance Measurements G electrical Navy

271 High Current AC Measurement Standard G electrical Navy 272 Fiber Optic Standard Detector B electro-optical Navy 273 Temporal Pressure/Temperature Phenorrrena G phys/mech Army

274 Automated Physical Measurements G phys/mech Army

275 Gas Mask Leakage Testing G phys/mech Army

276 Fast Pulse Measurement System G electrical Army

277 Thermal Resolution Targets G electro-optical Navy 278 Contactless Liquid Flow Standard G phys/mech Navy 279 AC Voltage & Current Standards G electrical Navy 280 Night Vision Imaging System Measurement/Calibration Support G electro-optical Army

281 Measurement of Low Loss Adapters B microwave Army

282 Coaxial Transfer Standard for Microcalorimeter Calibration B microwave Army

283 Microvrave Povrer at 1 GHz - 1 mW B microwave Air Force 284 Transportattle Josephson DC Voltage Standard System G electrical Army

285 Multi-Junction Thennnal Converters G electrical Army

286 Salinity/Conductivity Measurements G phys/mech Navy 287 Interferometric Optical Time Domain Reflectometer (OTDR) Tech. B electro-optical Navy 288 Single Mode OTDR Standard B electro-optical Navy 289 IR Diffuse Reflectometer and Standards G electro-optical Navy 290 Optical Fit)er Geometry B electro-optical Navy

291 MIMIC Consortium B microwave Navy 292 Gage Block Interferometric Measurements G phys/mech Air Force 293 Multimode Optical Fiber Standard B electro-optical Air Force 294 Optical Power Measurement B electro-optical Air Force 295 Bidirectional Reflectance Distribution Function (BRDF) G electro-optical Air Force 296 Spectral Responsivity G electro-optical Air Force 297 3.5 mm Coaxial Povi/er Standard B microwave Air Force 298 Coaxial Six-Port (18-40 GHz) B microvrave Air Force 299 Noise Calibration Efficiency Improvements B microwave Air Force 300 Noise Calibration Accuracy Improvements B microwave Air Force 301 Coaxial Noise Calibration (10 MHz through 1 GHz) B microvrave Air Force 302 Swept Frequency Antenna Meas (WR22, WR-15) B microwave Air Force 303 Dual Circularly Polarized Probes (WR-42/22/15) B microwave Air Force 304 Gravimetric Hygrometer Primary Standard G phys/mech Navy 305 Phase Noise Standard B microwave Army

306 Advanced AC/DC Difference Metrology G electrical Air Force 307 Improved Film Multijunction Thermal Converters B electrical Air Force 308 AC Resistance Frequency Dependence Measurement G electrical Air Force 309 IR Detector Characterization G electro-optical Air Force 310 Signal Analyzer Measurement System WR-3 B microwave Air Force 311 Photodetector Transfer Standard G electro-optical Air Force 312 Kilowatt C02 Laser Measurement Assurance Program B electro-optical Air Force 313 Built-in Calibration for Fiber Optic Sensors B electro-optical Navy
Table A-1. List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES)

# (1) (2) (3) PROJECT TITLE NIST FACILITY TECHNICAL AREA

SPONSORING

ORGANIZATION

314 RD electro-optical Navy 315 ntyn ~uvvci t\~ i lorioi^r oianuaiu D microwave Navy 316 iviiiiiiiidd Wave OULII\«c OldUlll^allUl 1 R llllUl UWdV*S Army

317 O piiyo/meci 1 318 iiuciiiii 1 coiiiiy <ji ouorutrtaic ivisosufing iviacninc n- phys/mech Air Force 319 ~iiiiieii y/ 1 idiioicf r^icSouic OLofiUoiu^ yj phys/mech Air Force 320 lilKalcvl 1 idltoiIMilallUc; O opcvUlal lAC^IIcClanCc OlanaaiUo ri electro-optical Air Force 321 1 laWCaUliliy Ul r\aUlaL OLailUeliUo \D chem/bio/rad Air Force 322 QAlcllUcU ncvfUciiuy IlllfXAJallUt; OldllUaiU electrical Air Force 325 M lid 1 VI UlMClllU IVIcaoUlelTIt?! iL Ul OlIUll WpUCdl nucfo pD electro-optical Mil roioc 326 oijyj Mill iviuiLiiimuc r\c)i7icimc riutfio g clcUli U upiludl AMI Air ^An^A nUlUc 327 ofj^^iidiiy ridi ueiw.<ioib wiiii luw inuisc cquivaicni "ower ^inc"j RD etectro~optica1 Air Cr\r^a 328 VAyiHahon^ QorT^r\lin/i V/AHpr^Attf^r vviucudiiu odinpfiiiy vuiimcici o electrical Air C^nrAA Mir roice 332 S DIUII cvLfvl Idi r\t;l Ic^ldl lUc L/loll lUUllUl l FUll^llUFI ^Df\LJi ^ OldllUdlUo a AlA*^trA_Ar\ti/*Ql CicUU U'Upilwal 333 S wllllcl lOlUI Idl OtdUlilLy Ul IVidlcIldIo pity9/ITICt.rll OL/tw 334 S AAapt Icl lt.« w|JLIU> IVic?liUluyy piiywillcul 1 SDIO

335 S rMyUo Arni 1^ OaliKratiAn "wdllUi dllUi 1 Qitnfvif+ OUpfAilTI. VlCvLlU^jpilCdl SDIO

336 i«Uioc 1 lyuic iVicaoUI cl I ICIH ~iuyidii( Q IlllUt UWdVc AMI Air ^ArAA nuluc 338 rvcocdiUII al lU lt?9llliy Ul wCldllllU Odyc uiU^no Q piiyo/IIIcUl 1 AMI Air ^ArAA nuiwc 339 imaytny ir\ oysiem ouppun electro-Optical Navy 340 O^AA«Udl lAdUIUI 1 ICU K« OufjpUli. aIA^t'rA_AntiA9

1

CitAfllU'njpimal y^}^y 346 niyii r\c;iiauiiiiy lu v <JUs><;pi loui i vuiidyc OLdiiUdiUo c;IC\-LI lUdI Army

348 I^UI l~I^UI III! led) lUco ll 1 IIMIdlcU rUUIld 1 1 dl lolUI III Opcl.>lIUs>(<Upy eleven u~upii^ Army

350 ~ilwlUlilci[lU OidilUdlUo dllu riUvWJUIt?o aIa/^^ rA_An(i/^9l ClcCIf V-Upil(rCll Air C^Ar/^A AMI run#c 351 Murtipte \A/3VGl6n3th Stsndsrd for l_iQhtw3V6 Oornmunicdtions electro-optical Air Force 352 L^lllfdUllUil 1 CvUUI to o A1 AiMtA_Anti 1 clcLllU~Upiludl Air C^ArAA AMI FUlltfC 353 Stsnddrd L€3K Osiibrstion System o phys/mech Navy 354 3 Low BsckQround Infrsrcd (LBIR) Cslibrstions rio electro~optical OvniJ\J 355 nneiroiuyy ouppoii lui nx-o ivicdouieriicruo RD microwave Ai r CTnr/v

A

AMI rOlUc 357 riDci wpuc Liricdiiiy oidriudiu RD electro-optical Navy 358 ilDel WpilC r'Uldl l^dllUil OldlludlUo p electro-optica1 Navy 359 1 niedu Odtje iviedDUl ciiiciii oidiKieiru w pnyo/rnccn Navy 360 odiiiniy ivicdoui ci (iciiL / Vi.^iiui dLiui i oyoidii Q piiyo/iiicVfi 1 Navy

361 Uaiya LJIdlilcLcr Odo niolUI) odyc rTimdiy oiarKJara piiysviiicuii Navy 362 HiQh PressuTG Oss Oslibrstion phys/mech Navy 363 i^io 1 v./un9Ui iiuiii lui nftiviiv^ iviciiumyy sD miciowdve Air ^Ar/*>A AMI lOlCe 364 L^ynamicaiiy Mppiicu i u[(.)Uc ivieaouieinciuo phys/mech Air ^AP^A AMI r OrCc 365 idal Clc^rlilCdl fUloc V^dllUidllun ot OldiludiUS \j electrical Air Force 366 ntgn MCQUidcy anu oensuive rTfioeiecinc nauiomcier DD ei^^uQ-upiICd1 Air Cr^r/^A AMI roicc 367 High Intensity IR Source AlA^trA_AAtioal clc\«ilu~UpLlOdl AMI Ai r P-rUlUc ArAA 368 S IR Detector Transfer Standards fi electro-optical RMrv^

369 S Infrared Spectral Emrttance ri electro-optical phi no

371 Beta Traceability \D chem/bio/rad Air Force 372 Investigation of Solid State Volt. Ref. Performance Parameters r2 electrical Air Force 374 Calibration Support for Type N Connectors at>ove 18 GHz D microwave Army

375 Optical Fiber Group Index Measurement Standard pD electro-optical Navy 376 Alpha TraceabHity o chem/bio/rad Air Force 377 Microwave High Power System Q mif rAU/9u

A

Air Pnrr*A 378 Laser Power/Energy High Accuracy Standard B electro-optical Air Force 379 Calibration Methodologies for Coordinate Measuring Machines G phys/mech Air Force 380 Mathematical Modeling of Standard Calibration Parameters G electrical Air Force 389 U-Band MILSTAR Hazard Probe B microwave Air Force 390 Phase Noise Implementation B microwave Navy 393 Thin-Film Detector Standard B microwave Navy 394 Uncertainty Modeling for Coordinate Measuring Machines G phys/mech Air Force 395 1 Radiance & Irradiance IR Transfer Standard Radiometer G electro-optical Air Force 396 Absolute Fiber Optic Wavelength Values B electro-optical /\ir Force 400 Polarization Standards G electro-optical Navy

401 Cryogenic Fiber Optic Power Standard B electro-optical Navy 402 Laser Power Standard (1 .5 pm) B electro-optical Navy 403 Dynamic IR Scene Projector Standard G electro-optical Navy 403 Laser Power Standard (1 .5 pm) B electro-optical Navy 404 Calibration of Night Vision Detectors G electro-optical Navy 404 s ! LBIR Detector Primary Standard Improvement G electro-optical BMDO
Table A-1 . List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES) PROJECT TITLE NIST TECHNICAL SPONSORING

4*ff (1) (2) (3) FACILITY AREA ORGANIZATION

406 S Optical Meas of Blackbody Aperture Area/Diffraction G electro-optical BMDO

407 S IR Scene Projector Metrology G electro-optical BMDO

408 S Filter Out-of-Band Blocking G electro-optical BMDO

409 S IR Spectral Transmlttance G electro-optical BMDO

410 8 IR Imaging System/FPA Metrology G electro-optical BMDO

411 S Ballistic Missile Defense Optics Metrology G phys/mech BMDO

412 8 Ground Based Radar Support B mk;rowave BMDO

413 Rapid Blackbody Calibrator G electro-optical Air Force 414 S Bandpass Filter Spatial Uniformity G electro-optical BMDO

415 8 Optical Materials Sub-Surface Damage G phys/mech BMDO

418 Infrared Target Simulator Calibration G electro-optical Air Force 420 Entianced Electrical Sutistitution Radiometer. G electro-optical Air Force 421 Tunable Lasers for Radiometry G electro-optical Air Force 422 Display Measurement Standards G electro-optical Air Force 423 Conical Field Generation System B microvrave Air Force 424 Phase Noise Software B mk:row/ave Air Force 425 100 Amp AC Current Shunt G electrical Air Force 426 Ambient Long Wavelength IR (LWIR) Working Std. Radiometer G electro-optical Air Force 427 High Temperature Blackt)ody Pyrometer G electro-optical Air Force 428 Fiber Optic Chromatic Dispersion Standard B electro-optical Navy 430 Laser Tracker Standard G phys/mech Navy

431 Micro Electromechanical Sensor (MEMS) Standards G phys/mech Navy

431 F Micro Electromechanical Sensors (MEMS) G phys/mech Air Force 432 Infrared Chamber Support G electro-optical Air Force 432 8 National Missile Defense Infrared Chamber Support G electro-optical BMDO

433 Frequency Response Characterization of Capacitors G electrical Air Force 435 Large Area Radiation Source Metrology G chem/bio/rad Air Force 436 High Energy Laser Calorimeters @ 1 .06 pm B electro-optical Air Force 437 E&H Nearfield Probe B microwave Navy 438 High Power Measurement System Upgrade B microwave Air Force 439 Spectral Irradiance & Radiance Calibration G electro-optical Air Force 440 Tunable Diode Lasers for FO Metrology G electro-optical Air Force 441 Improved Thin Film Multijunction Thermal Converter G electrical Air Force 442 Vector Network Analyzer Six-port Verification Standard B microvrave Air Force 443 Full Scale Conical Chamber B microvrave Air Force 444 Transfer Standard for Fiber Optic Power B electro-optical Navy 444 F Transfer Standard for Fiber Optic Power B electro-optical Air Force 444 A Transfer Standard for Fiber Optic Power B electro-optical Army

445 3.5 mm Microwave Power Calibration B microwave Navy 446 Prototype 1 .54 jjm Pulsed Laser Standard B electro-optical Navy 446 F Prototype 1 .54 pm Pulsed Laser Standard B electro-optical Air Force 447 Army Dimensional Calibration Hierarchy G phys/mech Army

448 Improved Temperature Calibrations Improvement G phys/mech Army

449 Wind Tunnel Characterization and Modification ORNL phys/mech Air Force 449 A Wind Tunnel Characterization and Modification ORNL phys/mech Army

450 DoD Metrology R&D Support G/B other Air Force 451 Target Simulator Radiometer G electro-optical Air Force 452 Avalanche Photodiode Det. Improvement - Uniform Scan System B electro-optical Air Force 453 Direct Comparison Power Calibration System 6 microwave Air Force 454 2.92 mm Power Calibration System B microvrave Air Force 455 High Power Mismatch Error Improvement B microvrave Air Force 456 Enhanced Wideband Oscilloscope Characterization G electrical Air Force 457 Next Generation Sampling Comparator Probe G electrical Air Force 457 A Next Generation Sampling Comparator Probe G electrical Army

458 Sampling System for Precision Wideband Measurements G electrical Air Force 459 Large Area Beta Sources G chem/bio/rad Air Force 460 Low Level Dosimetry Tnaceabiltty G chem/bio/rad Air Force 461 Domain Engineered Pyroelectric Detector B electro-optical Air Force 462 Contrast Measurement Standard G electro-optical Navy 463 High Accuracy Cryogenic Radiometer (HACR II) G electro-optical Navy 463 F High Accuracy Cryogenic Radiometer (HACR II) G electro-optical Air Force 464 Tunable Laser System for Laser Metrology B electro-optical Navy 465 Calibration for Fiber Optic Bragg Gratings B electro-optical Navy 465 F Calibration for Fiber Optic Bragg Gratings B electro-optical Air Force
Table A-1. List of CCG projects by number.

CCG (SUFFIXES)

# (1) (2) (3) PROJECT TITLE NIST FACILITY AREA

466 Radar Cross Section Standards B microwave Navy 466 F Radar Cross Section Standards B microvrave Air Force 467 8-12 (jm Infrared Imaging System G electro-optical Navy 468 High Energy Laser Metrology Support B electro-optical Air Force 469 NIST Joint Service R&D Centennial Review G/B other Navy 469 F NIST Joint Service R&D Centennial R&A&n G/B other Air Force 470 Sampling/Synthesis System for Precision Wideband Meas. G electrical Army

472 Quality Assurance Methods for Vector Network Analyzers B microwave Army

473 50 GHz Direct Comparison Power Measurement System B microwave Army

474 Gas Mask Tester Calibration System Project G phys/mech Army

475 Wide Area Planar Beta Standard Development G chem/bio/rad Army

476 Software for 10-Volt Josephson Voltage Standards B electrical Army

477 Prec. Low-Freq. Probe for NIST Wideband Sampling Voltmeter G electrical Army

478 Techniques for Scaling & Frequency Ext. of Impedance Calib, G electrical Army

479 Hydrazine Detector Calibration Support ORNL phys/mech Air Force 480 Low Gas Flow Measurement Assurance Program G phys/mech Air Force 480 A Low Gas Flow Measurement Assurance Program G phys/mech Army

481 Angle/Temperature Dependence of Emittance/Reflectance G electro-optical Air Force 482 High Accuracy Pyrometry to 3200 K G electro-optical Air Force 483 Power Delivery System for Co-conical chamber B microwave Air Force 484 High Accuracy Flow Standard G phys/mech Navy 484 A High Accuracy L-H Flow Calibration Facility G phys/mech Army

485 IR Wavelength Calibration Standard B electro-optical Navy 486 Fourier Transform IR Spectrometer Project G electro-optical Navy 487 Six-Port Vector Network Analyzer Upgrade B microvrave Navy 488 Internet Based Calibration G analytical Navy 489 1 .064 pm Laser Source Update B electro-optical Navy 490 Portable Variable Frequency Capacitance Standard G electrical Navy

491 Fourier Transform MW Sp. Quantitative Anal. Chem. WF Agents G chem/bio/rad Army

492 Wide Area Beta Calibration Standard G chem/bio/rad Army

493 Reverb. Chamber for Microwave/Millimeter Wave Probe Calib. B microwave Army

494 Software Upgrade for Optical Fiber Power Meter Calib. System B electro-optical Army

495 Pulse-Driven AC and DC Josephson Voltage Standard B electrical Army

496 30 MHz Comparison Receiver B microwave Army

497 1 Deployable Dosimetry Laboratory Army IH chem/bio/rad Army

Appendix B. ^^^^^^

The Charter Docume

Present CCG Organia

The First DOC-NBS/DoD (DDR&E-ASD-I&L) Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU)

Au&uBt 22, I9SB

MSMOSAHDOM OF UHBSSSTABDDn

SUBJECT: Proc«dur« for I>«e«zmining , EstlMClng the CoiBt of and

Arranging for th« lUdio and Electronic Calibration Servlcaa

that Dapartaant of Dafanae Actlvltiea Obtain froa th«

Katlooal Bureau of Standarda

1, General

Ihla maaoranduB eatabllahea an agreetMnt between the Department

of Defense (DDRi2-ASD(I£J.)) and tha Departaent of Cotnoerce (Hatloxial

Bureau of Standarda) regarding calibration requireoenta and aervioea

pertaining to radio and electronic atandarda except for Tiiiie and

TIbm Interval Standarda covered by DoD Diroccive 5160.51.

2. Purpoie • The purpose of this agreement ia to cacabllsh a uniform procedure

for: (a) detenaining DoD requiresoants for calibration and calibraclon

engineering services; (b) a joint DqD/NBS review of these requirements

to identify those services E3S can provide and to eadiaate their coot;

and (c) planning to budget and fund the estiiaated coat of the aervices

that-by Biutual agreesMnt are to be provided by H2S.

3, Basis for Aj^reement

(a) The services and facilities of tba Hational Bureau of 'Standards

in radio and electronic etandarda are easential for the support of

DoD operations.

(b) An effective BBS/DoD relationship requires a continuing exchange

of information regarding requlreohenta » capabilitlea, and coata.

4. Frocedurea

(a) A DoD Calibration Coordination Croup (DoD/CCC) conaiatlng of

repreaentatlvaa froa tba Military Departaenta and DSA vill bo the DoD
requlr.!me nta th«t describe (JL) DoD c«ltbr«tloa requlr«me«Ci for ith« next two fiscal y««r:i (11) DoD ciUbr.tlon etvglnearlnji r tquirtaexit. for

thl« t\/o year period and the follovlng t.hr«« flacal. yuar.a.

(b> Hie Director., I;B3. will ravlew the achedule ol! D<>D requlreawintB

•ad prepare a coat eiitliaata before 15 Noveaibej.-.

(c> A flaal achecluLrt of r equlromeiata will be proparncl b^ the DoD/CCG

In cooperatloQ with the DLcac tor, JaiBS by 1 January. The Do) will plan

to budget and fund the estimated coat of the requlrementa tiat have bee:n

utwtlly agreed upon between Che DcD/CCG and KBS. HBS wlllpifla to prcvU« • callbrati.on and aupporuln^ aerviccia progranx Co ineec heoc if«- qulrcmenta

<:<!) Prior to l July, each of thi% Mllicai.7 Departmorita will submit

to a forra-il work ordur. Ihe MlAitJry Dap«i:c»8nt8 vllJl tranefer

Advance funds to NES ct J;ha earliest: f.'.me poaatbla,

(e) For workloade in ad^litton tc. thoa.a already covere<j; bv work ordeira,

'NKJ will charge cha Mllltar}'^ D<jpartE«nt:8 »:he same farts or hourly rates

M» Bvn charged to the ;?ublic. Such adiltJ.on/al workloads can be covered

either by amendment of the orlglnul v^ork ordi^ra or by nuw work ordera.

(f) I'o ::acllitat:« i:raasition- to !:ho above dcacribed procedure, th-s DoD will pltin to provide :!or funded vori: requesj:od durlnvg FY 68 and FY 69

At m level i,t Iea»t equal to the level of fundltig for calibration acrvicea

l.n I'Y '67, subject to the availability of funds.

6'. Revision s

lhf.8 ogreemenc xnay bo reviewed at the request cf the DoD cr the NBS

and revised as mutually agreed betveen the two agencies.

C<>acarr«nce ^^^"ri-r<-^C'^-J^:~, Date 7?/^^

men V. AfltlUj, ftlrectoor, Imtioaal fiureeiu of Stavd^^^T",

Aiiolfltant SeciTix-ar;/ af Defease ( Inutailaf.lOiao >J tond L^giotlcs)
The First JLC Charter for the CCG

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

HEADaUARTCRS UNITED STATES ARMY MATERIEl. COMMAND

WASHINGTON DC, 20313 HEADQUARTERS NAVAl- MATERIAL COMMAND

WASHINGTON, DC, 203«0

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO 4S433

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

10 September I968

JOINT AMC/MC/AFLC/AFSC COMMAITOERS CHARTER FOR THE JOINT TECHNICAL COORDINATING GROUP FOR METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION

1. PURPOSE: A Joint Technical Coordinating Group for Metrology and Calibration

(JTCG-METCAL) is hereby established for the purpose of providing management of

the DOD calibration and metrology program.

2. MISSION : The mission of the JTCG-METCAL is to (a) provide interservice

coordination on matters within the responsibilities of our Commands and (b)

make such recommendations as necessary to insure the viability of the Program.

3- GUIDANCE : The JTCG-METCAL will assure accomplishment of interservice

coordination on:

a. Interservicing of calibration support.

b. Calibration engineering (metrology).

c. Calibration Training.

d. Calibration procediires, methods and related documentation.

e. Measurement agreement audits.

f. Calibration interval establishment and changes.

g. Need for present or additional calibration facilities resources.

h. National Bureau of Standards calibration and engineering services.

h. REQUIREMENTS ; The JTCG-METCAL will (a) within 30 days develop and submit

operating procedures (b) formalize the CCG (Calibration Coordinating Group)

as the principal subgroup of the JTCG-METCAL, and (c) provide guidance and

direction to assist in accomplishing interservice coordination. The CCG was

established as a result of a Joint ASD(I&L)/DDR&E memorandum of 2 December

1966.

5. ADMINISTRATION : Each of us will provide at least one member to the JTCG

and responsibility may not be delegated. The JTCG-METCAL will report to us

in accordance with Operational Instructions issued by the Joint Secretariat.

Sufficient priority and resources will be afforded to pursue its assigned

responsibilities

.

p/iCK G. MRREL'TI//

General USAF I Commander ^

Air Force Logistics Command

General USA

Commanding General

JJ. S/)Army Materiel /Command

General, USAF

Commander

Air Force Systems Command
The Current JLC charter for the CMT (Calibration and Measurement Technology Group)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

HEADQUARTERS US ARMY MATERIEL COMMAND

5001 EISENHOWER AVE.. ALEXANDRIA. VA.2233»<X)01

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB. OHIO 45433-5001

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS (LOGISTICS) WASHINGTON, DC 20350-2000

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND

ANDREWS AFB, WASHINGTON, DC 20334-5000

JOINT TECHNICAL COORDINATING GROUP

FOR

CALIBRATION AND MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY

The enclosed charter dated 30 October 1989 for the Joint Technical

Coordinating Group for Calibration and Measurement Technology

(JTCG-CMT) , Subgroup on Test Measurement and Diagnostic Equipment

(TMDE) Metrication is approved.

CLIFFORD GEIGER

Deputy Chief Engineer for

Logistics for the Navy

Naval Sea Systems Command

ROBERT DUBOIS

Deputy Executive Director

of Test Measurement and

Diagnostic Test Equipment

for the Army

r

LARRY RYANY COLONEL, USAF

Assistantl EXeputy Chief of

Staff forvMaintenance

Air Force Logistics Command

JSSELL 'SSEL L. FLINT, COLONEL, USAF

Director, Acquisition and

Logistics

Air Force Systems Command

DATE : 3 November 1989
30 October 1989

JOINT TECHNICAL COORDINATING GROUP

FOR

CALIBRATION AND MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY

(JTCG-CMT)

SUBGROUP ON TEST, MEASUREMENT, AND DIAGNOSTIC EQUIPMENT (TMDE)

METRICATION

I. PURPOSE. A JTCG-CMT Subgroup on Test, Measurement, and

Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE) Metrication is hereby established to plan

and implement a metrication program for DOD TMDE and metrology

standards.

II. SCOPE . The actions and recommendations of the TMDE Metrication

subgroup are applicable to all DOD elements who own or maintain TMDE

and metrology standards.

III. OBJECTIVE .

a. To establish a joint work group of metrology experts and

TMDE • managers to work with the National Institute of Standards and

Technology and industry in developing a plan of action which will

serve to facilitate the implementation of the DOD Metric Transition

Plan, Task 11, TMDE.

b. To determine the resource impact on TMDE and the metrology

program driven by conversion to the metric system.

c. To serve as the DOD focal point for technical matters

concerning TMDE/Metrology metrication, to develop and provide TMDE

metrication data as required to meet the needs of the Joint Services

and the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

IV. , MISSION.

a. Review types of metrology standards and TMDE required for

electrical, electromagnetic, physical, radiation, and all other areas

of measurement.

b. Determine nvunbers of existing TMDE in field organizations

and metrology standards in DOD laboratories, logically grouped by

measurement categories and capability.

c. Assess the present status of TMDE metrication in DOD, and

conduct market investigations to determine commercial availability

and related costs of required metric metrology standards and software

products that will be necessary for metric augmentations or conversions

.
d. Assess the economic feasibility of metrication of metrology

standards and TMDE in the laboratories and field organizations

examined in mission area b, above; determine the type (hard, soft) of

metrication required; and set priorities and establish milestones for

metric augmentations or conversions determined to be feasible and

necessary.

e. Identify the impact on facilities, operations and training

incident to the execution of the TMDE Metrication Subgroup mission.

V. REQUIREMENTS . The TMDE Metrication Subgroup will:

a. Develop and submit a plan for mission accomplishment,

including milestones, to the JTCG-CMT within 30 days after receiving

the approved charter.

b. Meet at the call of the chairperson, who will convene meetings as required to respond to OSD requirements and meet

milestone schedules. Meeting locations will be rotated to spread the

TDY costs eimong the services. Teleconferencing will be used to the

maximum extent possible consistent with mission accomplishment.

c. Submit written quarterly progress reports signed by the

chairperson and coordinated with all members to the JTCG-CMT within

15 days prior to the end of each fiscal quarter. Report status of

milestone objectives, a summary of the subpanels activities during

the quarter, and planned activities for the following quarter.

d. Provide briefings at the request of the JTCG-CMT chairperson.

VI. ADMINISTRATION .

a. The TMDE Metrication Subgroup will report to the JTCG-CMT.

Written reports will be addressed to Chairperson, JTCG-CMT with

information copies to each JTCG-CMT member.

b. Chairperson of the TMDE Metrication Subgroup will be a representative of the Army Materiel Command, since DOD has designated

the Army as Office of Primary Responsibility. Members of the TMDE

Metrication Subgroup will be provided by the Army, Navy and Air

Force. The Marine Corps will be em invited participant.
The Latest DOC-NIST/DoD (ASD-P&L) MOU

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN

THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

(THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PRODUCTION AND LOGISTICS)

AND

THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

(NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY)

John W. Lyons

Director

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Donaldt'J. Yockey

Under Secretary of Defense

for Acquisition

2 6 MAY 1992

Dated
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN

THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

(THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PRODUCTION AND LOGISTICS)

AND

THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

(NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY)

1. INTRODUCTION

This Memorandum of Understanding establishes an agreement between the Department of Defense

(DOD), the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Production and Logistics, and the Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to define interagency working

relationships on matters of liaison, and technical cooperation and support. It is based on the premises

that:

a. Since high technology military hardware requires high quality measurement and evaluation

standards, the services and facilities of NIST are essential for the support of DOD operations and

readiness.

b. It is a part of MST's stated mission to support DOD requirements relating to measurement

standards, calibration support, and metrology related research, development and engineering.

c. An effective NIST/DOD relationship requires a continuing exchange of management and

technical information regarding requirements, capabilities, and the costs of supporting the DOD

metrology base.

This agreement specifically includes procedures for identifying, estimating the cost of, and arranging

for the calibration services and the metrology research, development and engineering (RD&E)

services that DOD activities obtain on a regular basis from the National Institute of Standards and

Technology. This Memorandum of Understanding supersedes a Memorandum of Understanding

signed in 1978 by Ernest Ambler on behalf of NIST and by Robert Pirie, Jr. and Dale W. Church on

behalf of DOD.

2. PURPOSE

The purpose of this agreement is to establish points of contact and procedures for:

a. The interchange of information on technical requirements and unique research programs

and capabilities that would mutually benefit the achievement of each agency's mission.

b. Coordinating and submitting DOD requirements for calibration and metrology RD&E

services to NIST. Calibration service typically is calibration of DOD measurement standards by
NIST. Metrology RD&E services typically are metrology research, development, and engineering

projects performed by NIST for DOD that result in improved or new measurement services,

techniques, or equipment.

c. NIST review of these requirements to identify those services which can be provided and to estimate their cost.

d. Budgetary plamiing for the funding of the services that by mutual agreement are to be

provided to DOD by NIST.

3. IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES/SCHEDULE

a. DOD and NIST recognize the need for effective communications at the policy-making

level in both organizations in order to implement this Memorandum of Understanding. Both

organizations will strive to maintain and improve effective DOD-NIST coordination. The following

sections set forth specific procedures for achieving the above stated purposes.

b. The principal DOD point of contact for policy matters between NIST and DOD, including Federal Government-wide programs coordination, will be the Chief of the Industrial Quality and

Productivity Division. Other DOD points of contact will be:

(1) For DOD military services requirements planning-Chairman of the Joint Technical Coordination Group for Calibration and Measurement Technology (JTCG-CMT). The Chairman,

JTCG-CMT, also will be the action point of contact (policy matters excepted) for DOD participation

in the coordination of Federal Government-wide metrology and calibration programs.

(2) For technical and/or financial matters relating to metrology RD&E services~The

Calibration Coordination Group (CCG), Engineering Working Group (EWG) of the JTCG-CMT,

consisting of representatives of the Army, Navy, and Air Force.

(3) For technical and/or financial matters relating to calibration services-the NIST

Scheduling Subgroup, Laboratory Operations Working Group of the CCG.

c. The principle NIST point of contact with DOD for policy, planning, or Federal Government-wide coordination matters will be the Physical Measurement Services Program (PMSP)

of the Office of Measurement Services (OMS), Technology Services (TS). Other NIST points of

contact will be:

(1) For financial matters—Advances and Reimbursements, Office of the Comptroller.

(2) For technical matters relating to particular calibration and/or metrology RD&E

services-the appropriate NIST technical division.

(3) For overall technical coordination-the NIST/DOD Liaison (appointed by, and at the

discretion of, the Director of NIST).

d. NIST will conmiunicate promptly with JTCG-CMT whenever changes in programs or support levels are anticipated which will impact calibration services or metrology RD&E support to

3
the DOD. NIST will endeavor to coordinate such changes with the JTCG-CMT in order to minimize

the impact on DOD programs, and to assist affected DOD elements in seeking alternative sources or methods to meet continuing DOD requirements.

e. The CCG NIST Scheduling Subgroup of the CCG will assemble and submit to NIST on or before 1 July of each year a schedule of requirements that describes quantitative DOD calibration services requirements for the next two fiscal years.

f. NIST will review the list of DOD calibration services requirements and submit a cost estimate to the NIST Scheduling Subgroup before 15 August of each year, for the fiscal year beginning 1 October. NIST will provide to each subgroup member an itemized list of fees for each

calibration service requested. NIST will charge the DOD fees no greater than those charged other government agencies for similar calibration services.

g. To facilitate joint program planning and promote technology transfer:

(1) The CCG shall provide NIST a long range forecast, updated at reasonable intervals (The Joint Service Metrology Research Development and Engineering Plan) of anticipated metrology

requirements and related technology development.

(2) NIST shall provide the CCG, on an annual basis, with information on other DOD

funded metrology research, development and engineering projects and shall endeavor, through

meetings with the CCG Engineering Working Subgroups and the Services Metrology Requirements

Conference, to keep the CCG informed of new metrology developments which may affect its programs and mission.

h. In response to metrology RD&E requirements identified by the CCG, appropriate NIST

staff will meet with the respective CCG Technical subgroups at a regularly scheduled meeting to discuss proposed metrology RD&E projects. During these discussions the following points shall be

considered in selecting projects for consideration:

(1) Measurement technology needed to meet DOD operational requirements.

(2) Whether the projects under consideration are appropriate to NIST's mission or might

better be accomplished by private industry.

(3) The availability of NIST resources required to meet DOD requirements in a timely and

efficient manner.

In collaboration widi the subgroup members, NIST will draft work statements and prepare cost estimates for appropriate projects under consideration. Based on these discussions, the subgroups will establish priorities and forward their recommendations to the Engineering Working Group.

i. The military services will plan to budget and fund the estimated cost of the projects that have been mutually agreed upon. NIST will plan to perform the required RD&E project work.

j. The CCG will attempt to insure that adequate funds are available to cover the cost of all services and projects requested of NIST for the next fiscal year. CCG statements of work will

4
identify the CCG member who is to provide the funds for each metrology RD & E project. When the CCG is not authorized sufficient funds to cover all requested NIST services, the CCG will immediately review the requirements, and in consultation with NIST, adjust project priorities and/or

make mutually agreeable adjustments to the project work statements. After work has commenced, the CCG will notify NIST informally as soon as possible of any potential decreases in fiinding and will attempt to give at least 30 days notice of decreases in funding for CCG metrology RD&E projects with the understanding that this time period will be used to negotiate and adjust the NIST program to the change.

k. By 1 September the CCG or CCG/EWG chairman shall forward to NIST a list of the metrology RD&E projects that have been authorized for the following fiscal year and the funding

allocated to each by each service. As soon as possible after the beginning of the fiscal year each

service shall either transfer the allocated funds (or a pro-rated portion thereof on a quarterly basis) or

shall furnish a Letter of Intent specifying the funding to be provided and authorizing charges to be

accrued for work performed on the projects funded by that service. Work will not begin on any

project until such funding or authorization has been received and accepted by NIST.

1. NIST will not accept from DOD components requests for calibration services or metrology

RD&E services to be performed under CCG funding that are not on the submitted lists in 3(e) and

3(k), or approved amendments to those lists. This does not preclude DOD components from

requesting other related metrology RD&E or calibration/special measurement services at NIST,

providing the requesting organization separately funds such ser\'ices.

m. Following the authorization of funds by each NIST Scheduling Working Group member

organization for NIST calibration services, each organization represented on the Working Group will also submit to NIST a quarterly advance, at a minimum for calibration services for that organization.

If funds are advanced quarterly, the last quarterly advance will ensure there are adequate funds to cover all authorized calibration services for that fiscal year.

n. Projects authorized after the start of the fiscal year not already covered by approved work

statements will be covered either by amendments to the original work statements or by new

statements. Estimates of costs associated with the additional projects shall be provided by NIST to the cognizant CCG member organization, and the required funding provided to NIST prior to the performance of the work. Thirty days prior to the end of each fiscal year, NIST will provide to each CCG member organization an estimate of the total cost of each funded requirement of that fiscal year.

0. NIST will provide to the NIST Scheduling Working Group members cost information on

reimbursable calibration services NIST provided DOD. This information will be:

(1) Monthly statements of all calibration services provided to each NIST scheduling

Subgroup member (Air Force, Army, and Navy) due as soon as possible after the end of the month

during which the calibration services were provided. Unless services were paid for in advance, this statement will be accompanied by a Form SF 1080 covering the cost of these services.

(2) A report containing the estimated cost of calibration services remaining to be

performed during the last month of the fiscal year. This report is to be sent to each NIST Scheduling

Working Group member prior to the first day of the last month of each fiscal year.
The Current Organization of the JLC-CMT

JTCG-CMT Organization Asof1 Mar 2002

JOINT LOGISTICS COMMANDERS

OFFICES OF

PRIMARY

RESPONSIBILITY

(OPRs)

1

JOINT SECRETARIAT

INTERSERVICE

SUPPORT

GROUP (IS)

JOINT TECHNICAL COORDINATING GROUP

FOR CALIBRATION and MEASUREMENT

TECHNOLOGY (JTCG-CMT)

CALIBRATION

COORDINATION

GROUP (CCG)

TMDE PROGRAM

STANDARDS

SUBGROUP

CALIBRATION PROCEDURES

WORKING

GROUP

AUTOMATED PROCESSES SUBGROUP

STANDARDS

LAB

OPERATIONS WORKING

GROUP

ENGINEERING WORKING

GROUP

ELECTRICAL/ELECTRONIC SUBGROUP

CHEMICAUBIOLOGICftL METROLOGY SUBGROUP

RF/MICRO/MMWAVE SUBGROUP

PHYSICAL/MECHANICAL SUBGROUP

CAL REQ

PLANNING WORKING

GROUP

ELECTRO-OPTIC SUBGROUP

RADIOLOGICAL SUBGROUP