Army 17. 1 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The resulting successful technologies will be evaluated and qualified in the end item(s) for possible implementation in current or future mortar systems. Successful technologies will be incorporated into future ongoing production of mortar weapons/ammunition as product improvements. Potential commercial applications include jet turbine engine modeling and design, as well as possible application to hybrid engine design and residential or commercial heating systems.

REFERENCES:

1. Army Field Manual 7-90, Tactical Employment of Mortars, October 9, 1992. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/7-90/

2. Mortar Increments, General Dynamics Ordnance & Tactical Systems. http://www.gd-ots.com/download/Mortar%20Increments.pdf

120mm Mortar System Accuracy Analysis, Raymond Trohanowsky, US Army RDECOM-ARDEC, May 17, 2005. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005smallarms/tuesday/trohanowsky.pdf

4. MODELING AND NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF INTERIOR BALLISTIC PROCESSES IN A 120mm MORTAR SYSTEM, Ragini Acharya, 2009. https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/files/final_submissions/5428

5. Design and Wind-Tunnel Analysis of a Fully Adaptive Aircraft Configuration, D. Neal, M. Good, et al., Am. Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, vol. 1727, pp. 1 9, 2004.

6. Computation of the Circular Error Probable (CEP) and Confidence Intervals in Bombing tests, Armido DiDonato, November 2007, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a476368.pdf

KEYWORDS: mortar, propulsion, aerodynamics, aeroballistics, pressure, forces, flight dynamics,

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Weapons

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 innovative additive manufacturing (AM) technologies and/or processes that that will produce a full-up munition.

DESCRIPTION: As AM technologies become more mature, the US Army envisions the ability to “print” an entire full-up munition on a single AM machine/production line. However, integrating metal/polymer components, electronics, sensors and energetics into a single AM environment is very challenging and likely beyond the scope of a typical SBIR program. Therefore the focus of this topic will be to investigate cutting edge AM technologies and processes as they relate to the needs of producing full-up munitions, and identify any required technology and/or process gaps that would be needed to complete the AM “toolbox” for a full-up munition. An end-to-end analysis is required, to include modeling, from material selection and qualification, definition of design parameters, printing and product qualification processes, robustness of the supply chain, and transactional issues such as data transfer. The result will be a gap analysis of the current state vs the “to-be” state, and proposed solutions to address the gaps. Ideally the culmination of the Phase II will be demonstration of the gap solutions on a pilot production line either at the contractor’s facility or elsewhere, utilizing the 40mm “low velocity” ammunition for demonstration purposes. Inert substitutes will be used to demonstrate printing of energetics. No energetics processing is required at the contractor’s or other commercial facility.

PHASE I: Perform a detailed analysis of the end-to-end process needs of printing a full-up round. Based on that analysis, assess the feasibility of current and emerging AM technologies and processes to address those needs, and identify the gaps that would require new and specialized technology and process solutions. Further identify new and specialized technology concepts that would address the identified gaps, including an analysis and rationale of why the solutions were selected to fill those gaps. The result of Phase I will be a report citing 1) results of the end-to-end analysis of process needs, 2) assessment of current and emerging AM technologies that can apply to printing a full-up round, and 3) proposed solutions to any gaps identified between the current state and the desired state. The report will include detailed supporting data and rationale, and a proposed prioritization of gap solutions that can be addressed within the scope of the Phase II.

PHASE II: Develop specific technology or process solutions based on the prioritized gaps identified in Phase I, and individually demonstrate the full functionality of each in a laboratory environment. Produce models and prototypes of the inert 40mm round using the newly developed technologies for evaluation, focusing on the individual processes and technologies developed. Once the developed solutions are proven out individually, integrate the individual solutions into a single lab scale AM environment, demonstrated by production of prototype inert 40 mm rounds. The result of Phase II will be demonstrated AM technologies used to produce a full-up 40mm munition, along with all required supporting documentation and analyses, including but not limited to process documentation, AM machine capabilities and limitations, material requirements.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The resulting successful technologies will be demonstrated using a pilot production line and assessed for implementation in the ammunition plant. Potential commercial applications vary widely for any item that is comprised of multiple components and materials (such as mobile phones)

REFERENCES:

1. Additive Manufacturing Methods, Techniques, Procedures, & Applications - Enabling Technologies for Military Applications, Ralph Tillinghast, US Army RDECOM-ARDEC, April, 2015. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2015armament/wed17417_Tillinghast.pdf

2. Additive Manufacturing Energetics and Electronics, Army ManTech Manager, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM), Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC), Munitions Engineering and Technology Center (METC), ATTN: RDAR-MEM-L, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-

3. Additive manufacturing: opportunities and constraints, A summary of a roundtable forum held on 23 May 2013 hosted by the Royal Academy of Engineering. http://www.raeng.org.uk/publications/reports/additive-manufacturing

4. Opportunities, Challenges, and Policy Implications of Additive Manufacturing, General Accounting Office Report, GAO-15-505SP, June 2015. http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/670960.pdf

KEYWORDS: additive manufacturing, 3D printing, munitions manufacturing, 40mm, production processes, integrated production, fuze manufacturing

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Materials/Processes

OBJECTIVE: Develop an innovative industrial scale biogenic process to convert propellants and/or energetics into usable byproducts such as biofuel.

DESCRIPTION: The US Army has a large stockpile of unused propellants and energetics that have exceeded their useful life and must be disposed of. Rather than burning and/or detonating this excess material, the US Army wishes to convert it to something that could be re-used, such as biofuel. This would have a double benefit, it would reduce emissions from burning and detonation activity, as well as create a usable product that would reduce the demand on fossil fuels. For the purposes of this SBIR, the focus will be on M6 Propellant, which has the following composition: 87% Nitrocellulose, 10% Dinitrotoluene, 3% Dibutylphthalate, and less than 1% Diphenylamine and Potassium Sulfate.

PHASE I: Perform scientific analyses on the feasibility of one or more approaches to convert propellants and energetics into usable byproducts, documenting the results in a final report. Conduct laboratory studies/experiments as needed to demonstrate feasibility of the proposed process(es). Inert surrogates for the propellant/energetic shall be used, no live energetics shall be used in Phase I. The result of Phase I will be a report citing the results of Phase I studies with supporting data and rationale, and a recommendation on continued work in Phase II

PHASE II: Optimize the process(es) resulting from Phase I, demonstrate the full capability of the process in a laboratory environment (either at the contractor’s facility or at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ), using either live or inert energetics. Scale up the process(es) to industrial level in preparation for transition and demonstrate at a pilot facility. The result of Phase II will be a scaled process that has demonstrated success in converting propellants/energetics into usable by-products, including all related production documentation and instructions. The contractor shall also ensure that the resulting process(es) comply with all national and regional laws and regulations.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The process will be transitioned to a production facility to reliably convert the propellant/energetics.

REFERENCES:

1. "What is M6?” US Environmental Protection Agency; https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/part_2_-_facilitator_dialogue_presentation_2.12.2015.pdf

2. “Material Safety Data Sheet for Explosive M6 Propellant” - US Environmental Protection Agency; https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-12/documents/06-9530601.pdf

3. "Propellants” – Ammunition Pages; http://www.ammunitionpages.com/download/167/PROPELLANTS%20COMPOSITIONS.pdf

KEYWORDS: demil, propellant, energetics, biofuel, enzymes, bacteria, environmental, air quality

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: Design and demonstrate rapid and agile component development technologies for graphical reuse in modular avionics architectures, incorporating emerging standards-based avionics approaches such as ARINC 661, Future Airborne Capabilities Environment (FACE), Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Control Segment (UCS), Integrated Modular Avionics (IMA), Hardware Open Systems Technologies (HOST), Open Mission Systems (OMS), Joint Common Architecture (JCA), System of Systems Architecture (SOSA), and/or other standards for reusable avionics.

DESCRIPTION: Reusable and modular software drive improvements in commercial software development, but in the avionics domain, particularly in defense aviation, rapid and agile software development practices, innovations in Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE), Software Design Patterns, and improvements in software development and testing processes are limited. New research and the emergence of standards create new opportunities to innovate avionics architectures in ways to implement a “highly aligned” (to what?) and “loosely coupled” (in what way?) paradigm to achieve more modular software.

Very often in avionics software, the reuse of graphical components is limited due to airworthiness restrictions; however, recent standards such as ARINC-661 and FACE have provided the possibility of safety critical graphical components (or “widgets”, etc.) to be provided in a reusable package then configured during integration to the specific needs of a platform. Relatively little actual demonstration of such cross vendor and cross platform reuse has occurred. This is of significant interest to the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) community of interest because it both invites participation from smaller software companies that specialize in component development and also maximizes potential reuse of PVI for training, simulation, and actual avionics across a wide variety of platforms, including unmanned ground stations.

FACE Units of Portability (UoPs) and ARINC-661 must be incorporated for acceptance; use of other open standards is encouraged.

PHASE I: Design and demonstrate innovations for the overall Mission Systems Architecture (MSA) to allow rapid integration of new capabilities through FACE UoPs and similar emerging standards. Capabilities might include primary flight display (PFD) components, radio interfaces, engine interfaces, sensor management screens, navigation, and various flight planning user interfaces. Phase I Deliverables will include software design artifacts. The sponsor can provide Real Time Operating System (RTOS) lab environment support for proof of concept on Phase I prototypes.

PHASE II: Develop a prototype architecture suitable for a proof-of-concept demonstration on avionics hardware. The proof of concept will demonstrate; hardware portability across hosts (different flight display hardware), software modularity, and a representative avionics architecture supplied by the sponsor. Phase II Deliverables will include functional software and completed designs. Capture of requirements, design, and verification results will support qualification and certification.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The small business is expected to obtain funding from non-SBIR government and private sector sources to transition the technology into viable commercial products. Component toolkits and graphical widgets have broad application in the civil avionics domain, including commercial and private aircraft. The innovation of technology and processes in support of rapid fielding of avionics and improvements to the security of the aviation architecture will benefit the defense and commercial avionics industrial base, perhaps also crossing into automotive or other embedded software domains.

REFERENCES:

1. FACE Technical Standard, ARINC-661, ARINC-653, POSIX, DO-178, DO-326, AR 70-62, MIL-STD-882E, SAE ARP 4754, SAE ARP 4761, Risk Management Framework

KEYWORDS: FACE, IMA, JCA, HOST, OMS, SOSA, MBSE, Joint Common Architecture, Integrated Modular Avionics, Software Airworthiness, Mission Systems Architecture, Reusable Avionics Software, Model Based Systems Engineering, Avionics Software Development

A17-083

TITLE: Advanced High Speed Scalable Dense Memory Payload for Army Group UAS

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Electronics

OBJECTIVE: Develop a High capacity and low mass/volume non-volatile Solid State Disk (“SSD”) of 100’s of Terabyte Capacity in order to record high-resolution video for multiple hour-long missions. The multi Terabyte SSD will be designed to interface with Unmanned Aerial System Payloads (EO/IR/Multi Spectral) as well as Ground Control Video and Data Processing Systems.

DESCRIPTION: There is an urgent need for significant improvement in power density management and development of new design tools that enable 5-10 times reduction in size, weight, and cost—a level unachievable with conventional manufacturing technologies. These objectives are now attainable through emerging miniaturization-manufacturing technologies that enable the integration of dense processor/memory building blocks into high performance electronic system solutions for the DOD. Advanced miniaturization technology will be rapidly inserted into UAS payloads and ground video storage systems that will increase on board and ground sensor processing and sensor storage without increasing payload size and weight, thereby enhancing the capability of space and mass-constrained platforms such as manned and unmanned aerial vehicles. The integration of this miniaturized SSD will build more functionality onto a small footprint including 1) High write bandwidth of a minimum of multi GBs/sec for said SSD (up to 20 GBs/sec), 2) On board video processing capability that can stream high-resolution video (up to 4K) to the ground station in real-time, 3) Significantly reduce latency from image capture to ground station possession as well as providing the highest quality of video possible real time to enhance situational awareness while providing actionable intelligence, and 4) inserting 100’s of Terabytes (even Petabytes) of data storage capacity in the same mass constrained device.

PHASE I: Currently, there is no known sensor SSD that can meet the Army Unmanned Aviation future mission requirements to record long endurance missions. Applicants should demonstrate that they have the ability to innovate, invent, mature, modify, and miniaturize sensor electronics technology for integration with future unmanned aircraft sensors. Applications should propose an advanced sensor miniaturized electronics technology for investigation for the Phase 1 task with rational on why they believe it to be the best technology for investigation and development. Advanced miniaturized electronics technology should be capable of dramatically increasing performance (100’s of Terabytes of storage) while decreasing Size, Weight, and Power over any existing storage devices now in operation. Applications should provide rationale on why they are well suited for developing the proposed sensor electronics technology. Phase 1 tasks will be to conduct technical analysis, trade studies, and development planning that provide a clear technology path for a SSD prototype development in Phase 2, with a high likelihood of success. Phase 1 should show that the SSD is technically achievable, is cross platform migratable and scalable across a wide range of the existing Groups of UAS (Groups 1-5), designed with an open architecture for rapid plug and play. The Total Ownership Cost and Technology insertion Return on Investment will be calculated over the Army’s future UAS Roadmap. Phase 1 will study payloads and missions to determine the amount of Terabyte Capacity is required in order to record longer missions.

PHASE II: Further develop the SSD mechanical and electrical demonstrator including a demonstration of the open architecture mass storage devices across multiple sensors. Verification of program applications and benefits should be analyzed and reported. Research and Design the Solid State Disk for multi Terabyte Capacity meeting Size, Weight, and Power requirements of the payload. Transition from Phase 1 to Phase 2 should be based in part on the applicants understanding of the technical challenges, the plan to manage the technical risks and a rough order of magnitude cost estimate of a commercialized end product. Phase 2 deliverables include a working prototype tested in a lab environment, ground demonstration, analysis of the technical capability, test report, a final report that documents the Phase 2 effort in detail, a plan for integration onto an unmanned aircraft as well as ground control systems and a plan for further sensor electronics maturation and development that will lead to a successful Phase 3 effort.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Further development and maturation of the SSD ready for integration of the SSD onto an aircraft for a flight demonstration of the technology as well as ground demonstration into the next generation ground system. Transition from Phase 2 to Phase 3 should be based in part on the applicants understanding of the technical challenges and the plan to manage the technical risk. Phase 3 deliverables include a successful ground and airborne test, analysis of the technical capability, test report, a final report that documents the Phase 3 effort in detail, ROM cost estimate of the technology size, weight and power results.

REFERENCES:

1. RQ-7B Shadow Tactical Unmanned Aircraft System (TUAS) http://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/aviation_shadow-tuas/

2. U.S. Army Unmanned Aircraft Sytstem Roadmap https://fas.org/irp/program/collect/uas-army.pdf

3. Patent US 8,587,126 B2, “Stacked microelectronic assembly with TSVs formed in stages with plural active chips”, Tessera, Inc., Nov 19, 2013

4. Patent US 8,735,287 B2, “Semiconductor packaging process using through silicon vias”, Invensas, Corp, May 27, 2014

5. Richard Crisp, “Manufacturing Drivers in Semiconductor Roadmaps”, Proceedings from 2013 MEPTEC, Semiconductor Roadmaps

KEYWORDS: Solid State Drive, Miniaturization, Electronics, Memory and Capacity

TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Electronics

OBJECTIVE: Develop material solution that will facilitate moving Brigade and Battalion command post RF emitters/antennas elements a sufficient distance away from the supported command post in order to increase survivability against indirect fire without significant degradation of communication systems performance.

DESCRIPTION: The desired solution at completion with provide the commander the ability to selectively or fully remote terrestrial radio emitting elements 300 (threshold) - 500m (objective) away from the supported command post platforms. Solution should be deployable in no more than 30 minutes. Command posts typically have 4-8 SINCGARS (e.g. VRC-92, VHF 30-80 MHz) emitters; 4-6 HMS MANPACK and 2-4 MNVR radio emitters UHF 225-450 MHz and L-band 1350-1390, 1755-1850 MHz); 1 HNR C- band radios (4400-4900 MHz) and 1-2 VRC- 104v3 HF radios (1.6-60 MHz). Waveform supported include SINCGARS, HF/ALE, Wideband Networking Waveform (WNW), Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW), and Highband Networking Waveform (HNW). Radios may be mounted within vehicles or dismounted within the command post. Physical and non-physical methods of interconnection are acceptable. Modularity and serviceability are key factors. It is expected that solutions will require electrical power at the remote location, however this footprint should be minimized, and solutions that can provide or reduce power consumption are desired. The resultant product of this effort would be transitioned to PM Warfighter Information network or PM Tactical Radios, or both, or the Army’s future Command Post Modernization program that is in the requirements definition phase. Commercial application of this technology could include use for commercial trunk wireless systems where combining multiple RF bands is desired, such as those radio systems supporting public emergency, fire and police personnel, in both fixed and transportable environments.

PHASE I: The Phase One deliverable will be a comprehensive white paper describing:

• Trade study focusing on methods of accomplishing remote radio/antenna placement for military HF, VHF, UHF, L-band, and C-band radio systems

• Analysis of approaches and opportunities for signal aggregation based on command post radio and platform distribution

o Include an analysis of potential antenna aggregation for multiple transmitters and several receivers sharing the same antenna e.g. several devices sharing a single antenna

o Include an evaluation of the potential for aggregating transceivers by band with transceivers as a service capability e.g. VHF sharing, UHF sharing, L band sharing