Page 7 - GCN, Oct/Nov 2017

How to verify a 3D-printed object
BY MATT LEONARD
As 3D printing grows more popular for medical devices, military equipment and even habitats for deep-space exploration, hacks or errors can put users in danger. Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and Rutgers University-New Brunswick, however, have revealed ways to double check the validity of such objects.
Researcher Luis Garcia, a Ph.D. candidate at Rutgers, said a 3D-printed object could have flaws for several reasons, including an attack on the computer running the printer, an operational error or a third party trying to save on materials.
One way to assess the integrity of
the printing is by monitoring sounds created by the 3D printer and tracking the movement of the extruder that deposits the material. Garcia said researchers can tell if the printer is following the software instructions, and they can shut down the printing process as soon as a discrepancy is detected.
Another technique is to embed a secondary material “in the model in a pattern only known to the customer/ verifier,” he said. His team inserted gold nanorods in the filament sent to a manufacturer and could verify that the model was printed correctly by the location of the nanorods in the finished product. •
Army uses gaming tech to crowdsource innovation
BY SUSAN MILLER
The Army has set up a virtualized, game-like environment where soldiers can crowdsource ideas about equipment, tactics and team organization.
Part of the Early Synthetic Prototyping (ESP) effort, Operation Overmatch creates realistic scenarios in which teams of soldiers fight advanced enemies using emerging capabilities. The data from those simulations will be used to evaluate new ideas, inform areas for further study and ultimately get new technology to the battlefield faster.
“What we want is two-way communication, and what better
medium to use than video games?” said Lt. Col. Brian Vogt, ESP project lead at the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s Army Capabilities Integration Center.
The approach lets the Army explore hundreds or even thousands of vehicle and weapon prototypes at a fraction of what it would cost to build the capability at full scale, Vogt added.
“Soldiers have the advantage of understanding how equipment, doctrine and organization will be used in the field,” said Michael Barnett, chief engineer at the Army Game Studio and project lead for Operation Overmatch. “And they have immediate ideas about what to use, what to change and what to abandon.” •
ReadMe
What: “State IT Procurement Negotiations: Working Together to Reform and Transform,” a report by the National Association of State CIOs and the National Association of State Procurement Officials.
Why: Most CIOs and CPOs believe their current procurement processes save money and offer the best value, but there is some debate about whether those acquisitions are as effective as they could be.
Findings: A task force issued recommendations to help state IT officials work together to centralize IT procurement, develop partnerships to improve the procurement process, and reform policies and legislation. Those recommendations include:
• Clearly define roles and responsibilities during the procurement process with the ability to identify and address key challenges and proactively collaborate to plan and streamline each IT procurement.
• Centralize the procurement management process to increase the state’s buy-in power and allow the state to save time and money.
• Use iterative and non-waterfall procurement strategies when appropriate to improve procurement cycles, add flexibility and reduce risk.
• Explore small-scale IT procurement negotiations to build the case for widespread adoption.
Full report: is.gd/GCN_NASCIO
GCN OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2017 • GCN.COM 7