Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF OCTOBER 13, 2005 FBO #1417
MODIFICATION

A -- Concept exploration research and development in support of Structual Integrity Monitoring Systems, Multifunctional Sructures for Ballistic Protection and Spaced Armor Protection System

Notice Date

10/11/2005
 

Notice Type

Modification
 

NAICS

541710 — Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
 

Contracting Office

Aviation Applied Technology Directorate, ATTN: AMSRD-AMR-AA-C, Building 401, Lee Boulevard, Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5577
 

ZIP Code

23604-5577
 

Solicitation Number

W911W6-05-R-0007
 

Response Due

10/31/2005
 

Archive Date

12/30/2005
 

Small Business Set-Aside

N/A
 

Description

Amendemnt 0001 to soliciation W911W6-05-R-0007 is issued to provide clarification to all prospective offerors. The proposal closing date of 2:00 pm EDT 31 October 2005 will remain unchanged as a result of this amendment. 1. Is the focus of Topic 01-2006 Structural Integrity Monitoring System structures only or are systems included? The desire for Topic 01-2006 is a Structural Integrity Monitoring System. A sensor based system to monitor structural health to determine structural integrity is desired. This topic is intended to focus on aircraft structural components (frames, stringer s, bulkheads, skin, rotors, etc.) not engines, weapons, or flight controls. 2. Is one intention of the intentions of Topic 01-2006 Structural Integrity Monitoring System to focus on legacy retrofit for currently fielded fleet? Topic 01-2006 is intended to focus on generic aircraft structures. The desire is not to develop an aircraft specific solution, but rather a technology that could be applied to existing legacy airframes as well new aircraft designs. Therefore an open arch itecture, flexible system is desired. The developed technology, however, could be demonstrated on an existing aircraft structural component. 3. What are the particular components and failure modes of interest to your group? Please identify key areas which you would like to see damaged growth monitored for demonstration/proof-of-concept purposes. The Army ultimately desires a structural integrity system for a wide range of rotary wing, fixed wing, and ground vehicles. Because of the variety of structural configurations, this effort initially concentrates on demonstrating the feasibility of this te chnology on generic structure. Once proven effective, we would like to expand the demonstration to a relevant helicopter structural component, such as a frame, bulkhead, stiffener, skin section, rotor, etc.. This follow-on demonstration may or may not oc cur under this specific BAA effort. Also, the fact that rotorcraft operate in very harsh environments needs to be considered in the proposed solution and demonstration. As for damage modes, we would ideally like to detect and monitor any and all damage that would ultimately impact the structural integrity. This would include, but not be limited to crack initiation and growth from both static and dynamic loading, environm ental issues such as corrosion, delamination, impact events (ballistic or low velocity), and crash or hard landing event, etc... By detecting and monitoring damage, the intent is to determine the structures integrity and potentially forecast useful life o f the component. Please keep in mind that these goals are very outreaching and may or may not be achievable under this specific effort. 4. In the BAA it is stated that As an effort to better monitor rotorcraft's structural integrity, AATD is interested in developing and applying a Structural Integrity Monitoring System (SIMS) for the health monitoring of metallic and composite structural components. As a result of differing materials and failure modes, unique SIMS solutions maybe required for composite and for metals. Is TRL 6 demonstration of the SIMS to only metallic or only composite components acceptable? In this event, much of the SIMS and algorithms maybe common between materials but sensing devices and data analysis methods may differ. Ultimately, a TRL 6 demonstration is desired for both metallic and composites, however keep in mind: Topic 01-2006 has the potential for multiple awards, which may address only part of the topic's objectives. 5. In the BAA it stated AATD seeks proposals to develop and apply SIMS technologies to legacy and future rotorcraft generic structure. In development of the technical approach, some PHM technologies are better suited to legacy or future platforms. In making judgments between conflicting approaches, does AATD give priority to legacy or future platforms? No priority will be given, however a system with open architecture that could be applied to many different structural configurations is ultimately desired (if possible). In keeping with this end goal, this effort intends to concentrate on proving the SIMS technology on generic aircraft structure. 6. Regarding Topic 02-2006, threat is described as 7.62 mm AP. Is this the M2 round? The threats for US floor armor typically refer to Soviet rounds, e.g. 7.62x39 mm Type PS (ball) and 7.62x39 mm Type BZ (AP). The US/NATO 7.62 mm AP M2 is in general a harder round to defeat. While the synopsis does not specify the particular AP round, sp ecificity in any proposal will assist the Government in making a meaningful value judgment. 7. On page 3 of 6 (bottom of page) in the Spaced Armor Protection System portion (03-2006) of the BAA, the protection requirement(s) of the desired system is/are based upon threats ranging from 7.62 to 14.5mm. Question: is AATD looking for four systems, o ne for each threat, or one system that will stop all threats described? Obviously, the approach for the two paths would be much different. Any approach, including those in the question, that develops the spaced armor concept with its inherent weight benefits, and is applicable to a rotorcraft system, will be considered. Consistent with the Department of Defense's Rotary Wing Vehicle (RWV) Technology Development Approach (TDA), the offeror should take into consideration the weight requirements and/or weight constraints of aircraft ballistic protection. It is pointless to meet a certain level of protection if the weight is impractical for rotorcraft. Rotorcraft armor systems currently in use are capable of defeating 7.62 mm ball. An improvement to at least 7.62 mm AP is desired.
 

Place of Performance

Address: Aviation Applied Technology Directorate ATTN: AMSRD-AMR-AA-C, Building 401, Lee Boulevard Fort Eustis VA

Zip Code: 23604-5577

Country: US <SOURCE>ftpArmy
 

Record

SN00914030-W 20051013/051011211931 (fbodaily.com)
 

Source

FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

---

| FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |