Army 8. Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions
Yüklə 0,91 Mb.
|
|
PHASE II: Mature the technology and/or process to scale-up to meet the up to 50,000 units per month throughput rate. Demonstrate a pilot production line that meets required production rates (using inert samples). Test samples from the production line to ensure products meet performance requirements. Submit a final report documenting the production process and parameters, including equipment/supplies required, test results, and recommendations for further process refinement. The final Phase II pilot production line shall be delivered to the Government to a site TBD. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The objective goal of this SBIR project is to integrate the resulting technology/process in a government load-assembly-pack (LAP) facility, therefore it is important that the capital costs associated with implementing the results be kept at a minimum. This technology has widespread commercial applicability with any product with complex shapes requiring robust yet affordable marking techniques. REFERENCES: 1. A Basic Overview of the Pad Printing Process, Peter Kiddell http://www.epsvt.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/1.Articles_A%20basic%20overview%20of%20the%20pad%20printing%20process.pdf 2. NORYL N190X material property datasheet, Matweb, http://www.matweb.com/ and enter "SABIC NORYL N190X" in the search box 3. PEO Ammunition Systems Portfolio Book, 2012-2013, pages 97-109, http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA567897 4. MIL-STD-810G; https://www.atec.army.mil/publications/Mil-Std-810G/Mil-Std-810G.pdf
TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Weapons OBJECTIVE: Develop an advanced gauge that will measure blast overpressure at the mortar or artillery weapon and provide that data to the fire control computer or other computerized systems for analysis and use in decision making. DESCRIPTION: Assessing the soldier's blast exposure is important to prevent traumatic brain injuries and hearing loss, and assisting the trauma team in guiding triage with blast exposure data. Currently Blast Over Pressure (BOP) for artillery and mortars is tracked using the weapon’s digital fire control system (DFCS). If the DFCS malfunctions, the crew reverts to a manual BOP exposure tracking method. This conservative technique assumes the worst case exposure which limits the amount of rounds to be fired. The advanced blast gauge system would accurately measure the actual individual exposure to safely optimize the allowable number of rounds to be fired. This system would allow for accurate tracking of exposure in unusual scenarios not captured in training and/or the operational manual (e.g. unusual terrains and firing proximity). Ideally, the blast gauge would be integrated with the weapon’s digital fire control and automatically provide data to the crew chief and platoon/battery leadership to support informed decisions during live fire training and combat missions. PHASE I: Study various options for measuring BOP and include modeling and simulations and laboratory testing to validate that the proposed solutions would meet system requirements. At the conclusion of Phase I efforts, submit a report on the engineering analysis of the proposed options and results of modeling, simulations and/or testing. Propose the solution(s) that should be continued in Phase II with adequate justification. Phase I option will include delivery of the initial System Requirement Specification (SRS) which will annotate technical requirements and verification methods. The SRS shall be approved by the government. PHASE II: Build prototype systems and demonstrate that prototypes can perform in operational environments while providing the required information to the fire control computer. Demonstration at a government facility may be required to demonstrate the operational environment. A surrogate fire control computer (i.e. ruggedized laptop with simulated fire control software) can be used to support the demonstration in lieu of integrating with the actual fire control system. Produce final prototypes that meet system requirements per the SRS. Submit a final report that describes the testing performed on the items, and contains technical data on the gauge, simulated fire control software, and any other product deliverable. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Phase II will consist of integrating the new BOP gauges into the fire control systems of mortar and artillery systems and deploying as appropriate. This technology has commercial application for any occupation subject to loud noises caused by sonic events (such as well drilling, rock blasting, building demolition, etc.), as well as certain sporting events such as football. REFERENCES: 1. Brain Vulnerability to Repeated Blast Overpressure and Polytrauma; Long, Joseph B; May 2012 2. Standardization of Muzzle Blast Overpressure Measurements; Patterson, James; Coulter, George A.; Kalb, Joel ; Garinther, George; Mozo, Benjamin; APR 1980 3. An Introduction to Detonation and Blast for the Non-Specialist; Wilkinson, C. R. & Anderson, J. G.; NOV 2003 4. Use of Blast Test Device (BTD) During Auditory Blast Overpressure Measurement. Test Operations Procedure (TOP) 4-2-831; DIRECTORATE FOR TEST MANAGEMENT ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD TEST BUSINESS MANAGEMENT DIV; 12 AUG 2008 KEYWORDS: Blast Over Pressure, Traumatic Brain Injury, Hearing Loss, pressure gauge, blast attenuation, artillery, mortar
TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Weapons OBJECTIVE: investigate and develop innovative reserve battery technologies that provide the required pulse power, exceed the 20 year shelf life, survive severe gun launch shock and heat environments, and are affordable and readily available within the commercial marketplace. DESCRIPTION: Current reserve batteries used in munitions meet operational requirements, however suffer performance loss at extreme temperatures and are only able to be used once (not conducive for emplaced munitions). Additionally, there is no significant commercial market for the reserve batteries used in munitions, so the cost is higher than it should be and availability is lower. The proposed project aims at developing new reserve power systems with energy management architectures and initiation methods that make the power system programmable to fit various application missions. Prior to activation, the energy storage system remains in a quiescent state with negligible self-discharge, power drain or leakage. Activation may occur via remote control or various triggering mechanisms and once activated the power system must be capable of providing a relatively low amount of electrical power over periods that may be as long as one month while being capable of providing short duration high power pulses on demand. Shelf life of the proposed power system concept is expected to exceed 20 years and the temperature performance of the energy storage system must meet full military required operational and storage temperature range of -65 deg. F to 165 deg. F. Additionally, the power system must be capable of being deployed by low and high spins rounds and withstand high launch accelerations and flight vibration. The power systems being sought by this topic must be scalable, miniaturizable and must be safe to operate across the harsh environments produced by military applications. The power system must be capable of providing a relatively low amount of electrical power over periods that may be as long as one month while being capable of providing short duration high power pulses on demand. As an example, the power system must provide 180 mW of power at 9 Volts over 30 days, while being capable of providing at least five pulses of 2-4 seconds duration of power at 5 and 9 Volts with 0.5 and 1 A current, respectively. It is highly desirable that the power system provide relatively fast initiation (200 mS), but power for the indicated pulses be available in 20-30 msec upon demand. The new power systems are desired to occupy relatively small volumes, 16 cubic cm threshold and less than 1 cubic cm objective. PHASE I: Study various novel reserve battery chemistries and designs that can provide the required nominal low and high pulse power over a 30 days period following activation. The feasibility study is expected to include and modeling and simulations and laboratory testing of the critical components of the candidate power system concepts, and development of a strategy for achieving the best possible power system architecture for minimal volume, initiation mechanisms, and all other system components, to meet power and application objective of topic. At the conclusion of Phase I efforts, a selected design meeting the power requirements of a host application would have to be proven feasible, in order to be ready to advance to the project Phase II. Phase I option will include delivery of the initial System Requirement Specification (SRS) which will annotate technical requirements and verification methods. The SRS shall be approved by the government. PHASE II: Build full-scale reserve power system prototypes and test in relevant environments, including simulated launch events. Demonstrate that prototypes can survive in operational environments while providing voltages and power requirements under simulated load conditions. Produce final prototypes of each design that meets power requirements mentioned in the description, conduct survivability and performance tests. Develop a manufacturing plan for transitioning from prototypes to low rate initial production. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The objective goals of this SBIR project is the insertion of this novel reserve power system into a number of military applications with small and medium power requirements over long periods of times, which might be days, weeks or over a month, which may include short periods of high power requirements (pulses). Such power systems may be used to power devices in gun-fired munitions or mortars or devices that are deployed by air or hand placed.
REFERENCES: 1. Handbook of Batteries - Linden, McGraw-Hill, “Technology Roadmap for Power Sources: Requirements Assessment for Primary, Secondary and Reserve Batteries”, dated 1 December 2007, DoD Power Sources Working Group. 2. Macmahan, W., “RDECOM Power & Energy IPT Thermal Battery Workshop – Overview, Findings, and Recommendations,” Redstone Arsenal, U.S. Army, Huntsville, AL, April 30 (2004). 3. Linden, D., “Handbook of Batteries,” 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY (1998). 4. R. A. Guidotti, F. W. Reinhardt, J. D., and D. E. Reisner, “Preparation and Characterization of Nanostructured FeS2 and CoS2 for High-Temperature Batteries,” to be published in proceedings of MRS meeting, San Francisco, CA, April 1-4, 2002. 5. Delnick, F.M., Butler, P.C., “Thermal Battery Architecture,” Joint DOD/DOE Munitions Technology Program, Project Plan, Sandia Internal Document, April 30, 2004.
TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Air Platform The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their country of origin, and what tasks each would accomplish in the statement of work in accordance with section 5.4.c.(8) of the Announcement. OBJECTIVE: Develop data models, architectural concepts, and components for use in developing a common avionics to engine interface, including data modeling for general Full Authority Digital Engine Controller (FADEC) interfaces to the avionics suite. The intent is to have common reusable software for engine controllers that are Future Airborne Capabilities Environment (FACE™) Units of Portability (UoPs) and that also meet airworthiness or security requirements unique to the US Army. This would ensure that as engines are updated that integration with respect to the avionics suites in use by the Army is simplified and streamlined and also that the data model for common engine information is complete. DESCRIPTION: The US Army is developing an Improved Turbine Engine that will upgrade the current engines on Black Hawk and Apache platforms and pave the way for Future Vertical Lift (FVL) engine programs. Modern engines utilize FADEC technology, which is complex and highly specialized, thus it is highly unlikely that in competitive engine procurement a common FADEC will be procured for future engines. It is likely that FADEC technology will be used and upgraded as an ongoing improvement for the Army both in modernization and in new program development. While it may not be possible to fully isolate change for integrating future FADEC technology (e.g. reuse a common FADEC on any engine), the information from the engine is brought forward into the avionics suite for use by various software applications and for display to the crew. This data represents a subset of the total complex data that a FADEC or other engine controller requires for that unique function. The common data required by the typical avionics suite to interface with FADEC may benefit from a common data model and one or more software components that abstract the complexities of a specific engine and specific FADEC. Ideally, a common abstraction layer for engine interface could be built including common FACE Conformant Units of Portability (UoP)s that will ease the integration burden on platforms with disparate avionics suites receiving upgraded engines. Appropriate data rights to the key interfaces, including the data models and architectural artifacts for integration, will be desired and discussed post award to ensure reuse of the key interface definitions is enabled for non-proprietary information and data. It is not the intent of the Government to possess rights to prior innovations that may be leveraged or any proprietary products or developments. Classified proposals are not accepted under the DoD SBIR Program. In the event DoD Components identify topics that will involve classified work in Phase II, companies submitting a proposal must have or be able to obtain the proper facility and personnel clearances in order to perform Phase II work. PHASE I: Design and demonstrate innovations related to common engine interface technology, including abstraction of FADEC or engine controllers that would reduce the integration cost and complexity for modifications or replacement independently of the avionics or engine. Common actions such as weight and balance, fuel calculations, master caution and warnings, engine performance display to the crew, and vehicle health monitoring depend upon common information from the engine. The Phase I approach should fully identify key data elements and the architectural approach to a common engine software interface, including the specification of one or more FACE UoPs that will be constructed in Phase II. PHASE II: Develop a fully functional prototype working with at least two commercial FADEC implementations and two avionics suites to demonstrate cross-platform implementation of the same data model. An acceptable demonstration may be in a lab environment with representative FADEC emulators, thus avoiding cost associated with vehicle integration or flight testing; however, the demonstration must include partnership with multiple actual FADEC vendors to ensure that the solution is not unique to a single specific vendor. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The small business is expected to demonstrate a clear marketing plan for dual-use in civil aviation. FADEC components are common in the civil aviation market, thus the problem set represented by this SBIR has significant commercial potential. The developer should demonstrate a plan to obtain funding from non-SBIR government and private sector sources to transition the technology into viable commercial products REFERENCES: 1. Future Airborne Capabilities Environment (FACE), Hardware Open Systems Technology (HOST), DO-178, DO-254, ARINC 429, ARINC 664, Avionics Full-Duplex Switched Ethernet (AFDX), ARINC 653, ARINC 661, Risk Management Framework (RMF), DoDI 8500.01, DoDI 8510.01, MIL-STD-882E, SAE ARP 4754, SAE ARP 4761 KEYWORDS: FADEC, ITE, Improved Turbine Engine, Engine Controller, FACE, IMA, AFDX, Cybersecurity, Information Assurance, OFP, RMF, Risk Management Framework, HOST, MBSE, Integrated Modular Avionics, Software Airworthiness, Software Assurance, Design Assurance, Model Based Systems Engineering, Avionics Software Development, Intrusion Detection, Security Monitoring, Auditing, RTOS, Safety-Critical
TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Materials/Processes OBJECTIVE: The objective of this SBIR is to develop parts made with alternative manufacturing technologies to be integrated into bridges or other high strength structures. DESCRIPTION: Typically, connections are the most difficult part to design, manufacture, and test in bridges and other structures. From a design perspective, military bridge connections are typically unique to the system due to each system having different loading requirements. As military vehicles become heavier, bridge capacities must also increase. Nearly every increase in bridge capacity requires an extensive effort to design and test a connection to support the increased vehicle weight. Typically, the connections are then designed to be the most robust and heaviest part of the system and end up with a large amount of wasted material that is not highly stressed. Traditionally, connections in military bridging are made from high strength materials and involve time-consuming manufacturing processes. For example, a bridge connection may be forged, rough machined, heat treated, final machined, assembled, line-bored, and post-processed. Each process then requires a unique fixture and typically will only work for that specific bridging system. Military bridging systems are often manufactured in relatively low volume with a large production run not exceeding 1,000 parts. These time consuming manufacturing processes are taken so that the final product is lightweight, strong, durable, and easily assembled in the field, usually by a pin/clevis type joint. This results in the connections being the most expensive part of the bridging system to manufacture. In addition, conventional manufacturing methods for these extreme conditions have been proven to fail before the threshold requirements are met. This SBIR seeks to understand the impact of using alternative manufacturing technologies on cost, strength, durability, weight, structural efficiency, and manufacturability of the bridge connection. We are looking for designs that optimize material layout within a given design space, for a given set of loads, boundary conditions and constraints with the goal of maximizing the performance of the integrated system. Technologies such as additive manufacturing allow for great flexibility in design, and complex geometry does not generally impact cost of the part. This SBIR seeks an innovative solution to develop a connection that is easily scalable to different loading requirements, is structurally efficient, and is easy to manufacture. In order to support various vehicles on a range of bridging systems, there are different load capacity requirements. On the low end, a connection should maintain a 15,000 lbs sustained tensile load representative of a dead load plus a maximum live load of 200,000 lbs. On the high end, the connection should maintain a 200,000 lbs sustained tensile load representative of a dead load plus a maximum live load of 500,000 lbs. The connection should not weigh more than 75 lbs and 250 lbs at low and high end respectively, and be no larger than 400 cubic inches for the low end and 2000 cubic inches for the high end. The connection should be able to support a minimum of 10,000 fatigue cycles, with 30,000 to 50,000 as the objective. PHASE I: The Phase I effort will assess the feasibility and performance characteristics for using alternative manufacturing technologies in bridging and other structural applications, specifically at the connections. These studies should include discussions with TARDEC to identify specific requirements for connections manufactured using this technology, such as strength, durability and weight of the connection. The goal would be to develop a concept for a connector design that is producible using alternative manufacturing technology, scalable to meet the different loading requirements at the high and low end of the loading spectrum, and can take advantage of the increasing geometric complexity that these technologies can accommodate. Analysis of the design concept should include plans for integration into a larger structure, to be determined as part of initial discussions with TARDEC, that could be made of various materials and the determination of techniques to reduce the amount of material wasted during manufacturing. Small scale component testing, which may include but is not limited to Fatigue, Overload, Corrosion, Finite Element Analysis, Modeling & Simulation, Tensile, Micro Structure Analysis, and Fracture Toughness may also be performed to obtain an initial assessment of the manufacturing process viability and connection design performance. Phase I should begin to analyze the effectiveness of different materials in their ability to meet the requirements and be used to manufacture connections using alternative manufacturing techniques. PHASE II: Phase II should further develop the concept from Phase I for a scalable connector design, to include material selection, manufacturing process selection, and geometry optimization. As part of the effort, 1 or more full scale prototype connection(s) should be manufactured and tested in overload, fatigue and environmental to verify the analysis performed in Phase I. The effort should also include information on how to integrate the new design into the larger structure identified in Phase I. Phase II shall result in a full scale prototype that meets or exceeds current connector designs, manufactured using alternative manufacturing processes, which will be delivered to TARDEC for further evaluation. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Phase III work will further demonstrate the capability of the technology to be utilized for a variety of large structures. The technology will initially be used for rapid development, prototyping, and manufacturing of connections in military bridging structures. Other commercial opportunities include development and prototyping of civil structures through alternative manufacturing technologies. These connections would provide cost effective solutions that maintain high strength and durability. Due to the flexibility in alternative manufacturing techniques, the connections could be quickly optimized for different loadings and applied to different industries as applicable. REFERENCES: 1. (Reference removed by TPOC on 12/21/17.) Yüklə 0,91 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|