SITIS Topic Details

Proposals Accepted:  
Program:  SBIR
Topic Number:  A10-166 (Army)
Title:  Overhead Threat Protection (OTP)
Research & Technical Areas:  Materials/Processes
Acquisition Program:  
 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 3.5.b.(7) of the solicitation.
  Objective:  To develop an Overhead Threat Protection (OTP) system for direct hit survivability that can withstand or dissipate specified static and dynamic loads without failure.
  Description:  The US Army requires a novel Overhead Threat Protection (OTP) frame structural system which will cover a volume, such as a shelter, at a set standoff. The support structure of the protection system must span over the covered volume and not enter through it. The system will undergo a constant static load over the entire structure as a base load (in addition to the weight of the structure). The OTP will support the weight of ballistic paneling directly on top of the structure and a pre-detonation layer at a five foot stand-off. Large dynamic (impulse) overpressure loads must be withstood or dissipated by the OTP system while resulting in minimal deflection into the shelter within the covered volume. TEMPER Tents (frame(1) and airbeam(2) supported) are the initial covered shelters for application of this concept. There are several critical design constraints for this system. There must be connection points to attach ballistic paneling (directly on the structure) and pre-detonation layer paneling (5 psf at 5 foot standoff). The connection points for the ballistic and the pre-detonation paneling shall be spaced every 3 feet in the vertical and horizontal direction (3 x 3 grids). The system must also be anchored to the ground and be capable of withstanding 50 mph steady winds with gusts to 65 mph. Currently available commercial items are not viable options to meet the desired specifications for a number of reasons. Some of these downfalls include: one-time use, low durability and lack of robust design for expeditionary use. Performance, deployability, and cost will be heavily weighted aspects during the review of proposals. Factors defining deployability include weight, transportation package, durability, and ease of erect and tear down processes. The preferred concept structure will be as light as possible to achieve the required specifications. Ideally, the system would be able to deploy over the volume it covers with no need to displace anything within the volume. The cost is usually determined by materials and manufacturing processes; it is encouraged to use low cost materials and standard processes as frequently as possible. The ease at which the solution allows for ballistic panel installation and comprehensive panel coverage will be an important characteristic. The OTP must also be able to continue to support a static gravitational load (its own weight and that of the ballistic and pre-detonation panels) even with the loss of some structural supports. With this in mind, high reparability is a desired characteristic of the system. Preferably, the concept developed for this system would allow it to be scaled to different volume coverage if needed in the future. A possible solution for this project may be a mobile bunker-like shelter that provides ballistic protection from all sides while remaining above ground and transportable. Another possible route could be to supplement the existing Modular Ballistic Protection System (MBPS) with a strictly Overhead Threat Protection system as MBPS currently provides ballistic protection to shelter sidewalls. It should be understood that the small business is not responsible for providing the ballistic paneling or pre-detonation layer material, only the support structure and deployment system. Specification Target Static Loading (ballistic and pre-detonation panels) 35 psf Normally Reflected Pressure 550-700 psi (impulse) Positive Phase Duration 2-3 msec Volume Under Structure 26 ft. x 38 ft. x 15 ft. (W x L x H) [1] Survivable Support Loss 10%, Continuous Durability/Deployability 20 Erect/Strike Cycles Support Structure Weight 7 psf or less [1] Dimensions of frame and airbeam supported TEMPER Tents with a 3 ft. stand off from tent shell.

  PHASE I: In Phase I, the main focus is to develop the Overhead Threat Protection (OTP) concept, resulting in a sub-scale (1:3) model of the structure. This need not be a functional model, only proof of concept showing the protection/coverage possibilities and deployability characteristics. Above is a table of the specifications that must eventually be met by a fully developed prototype, this must be kept in mind when creating the sub-scale model. The challenge of this topic comes in the magnitude of the dynamic forces that require dissipation. Be aware that impulse loading is dramatically different than static loading and what seems like an unreasonable number (550-700 psi) is not in the case of impulse overpressure, although this is still a challenging force. The ability of the structure to handle the impulse load is a matter of dynamic force dissipation or transfer, not structural loading. The support loss criterion of 10%, continuous is meant to convey that the system can have 10% of its load support mechanisms removed in a row, or one after the next, without complete structural failure. As mentioned above, the principle deliverable of Phase I is a 1:3 scale, proof of concept model of the system. In addition to the scale model, validated Finite Element Analysis (FEA) models should be constructed and analyzed for the overpressure impulse loading and static loading. FEA models should provide supporting data that the concept can perform as promised at full scale. A formal report of the FEA analysis and subsequent design improvements is expected.

  PHASE II: Phase II should provide three full scale, functional prototypes built with knowledge gained from, and suggested improvements upon, the Phase I sub-scale concept model. The prototypes are to be tested under the equivalent loads given in the list of specifications in the description. Testing of overpressure load survivability is a government organization task and is not expected to be administered by the small business. The first major deliverable will be an initial report of results, analysis, and design improvements is to be produced following the first round of testing. The second deliverable will be a cost and manufacturing feasibility report that is developed alongside with the full scale prototype. A final round of design improvement implementations will be made and testing will follow on three revised full-scale prototypes. A full final report detailing the structures performance under the testing loads is required by the end of Phase II.

  PHASE III: The commercial outlook for this system is heavily military, but the versatility and multiple applications of the structure is a considerable advantage. Multiple branches of the US Military would have interest in a mobile overhead protection structure with high load strength and durability. Possible applications still exist for the private sector. Applications such as hurricane survivability shelters and hazardous commercial work environments (where blasts are a danger ex. chemical, gas, or fuel processing plants) are very possible markets to transition this product into.

  References:  1. MIL-PRF-44271C - Performance Specification, TENT, EXTENDABLE, MODULAR, PERSONNEL (TEMPER)

2. NSN 8340-01-558-4701 (tan) and 8340-01-559-3852 (green). Outdoor Venture Corp. Air-Supported STAT 32 Tent, MFR# OVAST-324422T

3. Quigley, Claudia, Karen Horak, Ryan Devine, Habib Dagher, Larry Parent, Eric Landis, Keenan Goslin, and Eric Cassidy. THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF MODULAR BALLISTIC PANELS FOR FABRIC SHELTERS. Tech. U.S. Army Natick Soldier Center, 01 Nov. 2006. Web. <http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA481058&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf>.

4. AR-70-38 - RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION OF MATERIEL FOR EXTREME CLIMATIC CONDITIONS

5. MIL-STD-810G - ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS
AND LABORATORY TESTS, Methods of interest 516.6, 517.1 & 522.1

6. (DELETED 8/6/10 because reference is a FOUO document and is not available to the public.)

7. Kappos, Andreas J., ed. Dynamic Loading and Design of Structures. New York: Spon Press, 2002.

8. Numerical simulation of structural response and damage to simultaneous ground shock and airblast loads, by Chengqing Wu and Hong Hao, International Journal of Impact Engineering, Volume 34, Issue 3, March 2007, Pages 556-572.

9. Impact of a shock wave on a structure on explosion at altitude, by S. Tr lat, I. Sochet, B. Autrusson, K. Cheval and O. Loiseau, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Volume 20, Issues 4-6, July-November 2007, Pages 509-516
Selected Papers Presented at the Sixth International Symposium on Hazards, Prevention and Mitigation of Industrial Explosions, Sixth International Symposium on Hazards, Prevention, and Mitigation of Industrial Explosions.

10. Modeling of simultaneous ground shock and airblast pressure on nearby structures from surface explosions, by Chengqing Wu and Hong Hao, International Journal of Impact Engineering, Volume 31, Issue 6, July 2005, Pages 699-717.

11. Blast load assessment using hydrocodes, by B. Luccioni, D. Ambrosini and R. Danesi, Engineering Structures, Volume 28, Issue 12, October 2006, Pages 1736-1744.

12. Calculation of equivalent static loads and its application, by Woo-Seok Choi, K.B. Park and G.J. Park, Nuclear Engineering and Design, Volume 235, Issue 22, November 2005, Pages 2337-2348.


Keywords:  Support structure, shelter, force dissipation, high loads, overhead protection
Additional Information, Corrections, References, etc..
Ref #6: NOTE: Ref. 6 has been DELETED 8/6/10 because reference is a FOUO document and is not available to the public.)
Ref #13: Fig. 1 Tricons and Additional Information from TPOC for A10-166. A10_166 Ref 13 Fig 1 Tricons Addl Info from TPOC.doc
Questions and Answers:
Q: Ref. No. 6, UFC 3-340-01. Cover sheet to this document states - "This document not available on the internet." Can you please provide a source? Thank you.
A: The reference that is used is a FOUO document, and it has been removed from the solicitation according to the SITIS/SBIR rules. (Ref. 6 deleted 8/6/10)
Q: Ref. No. 2. MFR# OVAST-324422T. Please clarify what this reference consists of, and provide a source. Thank You.
A: OVAST-324422T is a manufacturers reference number for a TEMPER air-supported shelter on GSA, feel free to search for it here:

https://www.gsaadvantage.gov

Dimenesions for this solictiation were dirived from this tent, although a solution may not necessarily be used in conjunction with this shelter.
Q: NOTE: Please see new Ref. 13 uploaded in SITIS 8/17 which includes Additional Information from TPOC for A10-166 and also includes "Figure 1 Photo of Tricons", and the following information:

A main objective of the OTP effort is to develop a structural system that can withstand the given loading and is also capable of being set up and taken down quickly. More robust permanent or semi-permanent structures have been developed, but in this effort it is important that the system be designed to be expeditionary.

It would be desirable for the system to be packaged in a tricon container. In expeditionary camps, a 10,000 lb forklift is often the only material handling equipment. So keeping the packed container weight under 10,000 pounds is desirable. Multiple systems could be packed in one tricon.

Fire resistance capabilities are desirable.
A: o
As of midnight September 1, questions for solicitations SBIR 10.3 and STTR 10.B will no longer be accepted.
To read the solicitation for full proposal preparation and submission details click here.

Record: 21 of 367