SOURCES SOUGHT
99 -- Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) - Rotorcraft Damage Tolerance (RCDT) for Metallic Materials
- Notice Date
- 10/23/2007
- Notice Type
- Sources Sought
- Contracting Office
- FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, AJP-7952 W.J. Hughes Tech Center (ACT)
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- 6158
- Response Due
- 2/29/2008
- Point of Contact
- Karen Mercer, (609) 485-6747
- E-Mail Address
-
Email your questions to karen.mercer@faa.gov
(karen.mercer@faa.gov)
- Description
- Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) TCBAA-08-0002 Rotorcraft Damage Tolerance (RCDT) For Metallic Materials *****The FAA will host the Rotorcraft Damage Tolerance (RCDT) Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) meeting on November 15, 2007 starting at 9:00am. The RCDT BAA meeting is to be held at the FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center. Attendees are required to contact Felix Abali (609 485-7549, Felix.Abali@faa.gov) by November 5 to register for the meeting and to obtain additional meeting detailed information.***** 1. Background The FAA is currently considering the damage tolerance requirement for rotorcraft structures and dynamic components. While the damage tolerance methodology has been extensively and successfully used in fix-wing aircraft structures, rotorcraft has just begun to use it in addition to the safe-life approach. Generally, safe-life, in flight hours, is experimentally determined using the mission profile, flight loads, and S-N data. Using Miner's cumulative fatigue damage rule, a fatigue damage rate for each flight condition is typically calculated by assessing the damaging load cycles per hour from the flight spectrum and loads data, the ratio of the alternating load to the endurance limit, and the cycles-to-failure from a standard component S-N curve. A reciprocal summation of each fatigue damage rate for each flight condition then determines the retirement life of the part being analyzed. In contrast to safe-life, the damage tolerance (DT) approach assumes that an inherent flaw or crack exists in the manufactured part. The life of the part is determined using fracture mechanics methodologies, load spectrum, manufacturing process and operating environment. Based on the computed crack growth life of the inherent flaw or crack, suitable inspection intervals are established so that cracks can be found and repaired long before they achieve a critical length. The effectiveness of the damage tolerance approach depends on several factors that include fatigue crack growth data, initial crack sizes, fracture mechanics and computational methods, effects of shot-peening and cold working, and inspection techniques. The success of implementing the damage tolerance approach to fixed-wing aircraft structures, coupled with the FAA's goal to enhance aircraft safety has lead to RCDT research and development (R&D) efforts for rotorcraft. In 2005, the FAA assessed the current state of RCDT and fracture mechanics technologies. During the assessment, the FAA asked the rotorcraft community for their inputs on fracture mechanics and RCDT-related technologies. The FAA then conducted the gap analysis to identify research needs for supporting FAA rulemaking. Identified RCDT research tasks were then prioritized using the FAA prioritization process and criteria. Finally, a roadmap for RCDT was developed to guide the research to support FAA rulemaking and the implementation of RCDT requirement. 2. Purpose The objective of this BAA is to solicit proposals to conduct the RCDT research to support FAA rulemaking. Particularly, this effort shall support FAR 29.571, 27.571, AC 29-2A, AC 27-1A, AC-29-2C, FAA Order 8110.9 which can be downloaded using the following link: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet 3. Submission Deadlines Technical proposals shall be prepared according to guidelines described in sections 4 (Submission Requirements), 5 (Three-Page Technical Summary Requirements), and 6 (Formal Proposal Requirements). Technical proposals will be accepted until fiscal year 2008 (FY-08) funding for this effort is fully committed. Offerors are therefore encouraged to submit the technical summary proposal as soon as possible before FY-08 funding is fully committed or exhausted. Upon request from the FAA, formal technical proposals addressing the research requirements described in section 6 (Formal Proposal Requirements) shall be submitted not more than thirty (30) business days after the date of the request sent by email. FAA's request will be made via email. 4. Submission Requirements Offerors will submit a three-page technical summary in original and three additional hardcopies of the technical summary prior to submitting a formal proposal. A cover page can be used, but the total number of pages cannot exceed three. The three-page technical summary shall meet the requirements described below. Mail the three-page technical summary and three hardcopies to: Air Traffic Organization Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center Airport and Aircraft Safety R&D Division Airworthiness Assurance R&D Branch Code AJP-6360, Building 210 (Attn: Felix Abali) Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 In addition (not as a substitute for the paper copy), an electronic version of the technical summary proposal will need to be emailed to Dy Le, dy.le@faa.gov. The electronic version shall be provided in Microsoft Word. Submitted electronic proposals shall not have any security protection requiring the FAA to obtain a password or an authorization from the offeror prior to opening the proposal or file. The FAA will not review submitted proposals having security or password protection. Sixty (60) business days or earlier, after receipt of the three-page technical summaries, the FAA will respond to offerors in one of three ways: a. Request for the submission of a formal technical proposal. b. Recommendation to submit a formal technical proposal if certain changes are made or conditions met. c. Rejection of the summary proposal. If requested, the offeror shall submit to the FAA address (Felix Abali) noted above (1) a formal technical proposal with the signature of an authorizing official in original, (2) three additional hardcopies of the formal technical proposal, and (3) a CD containing the formal technical proposal in Microsoft Word. Proposals shall have the signature of an authorizing official. Formal technical proposals shall contain a detailed discussion of the items presented in the selected three-page technical summary. Additionally, formal technical proposals shall address all or some of the research requirements described in section 6 (Formal Proposal Requirements) of this announcement. Formal technical proposals, three additional hardcopies, and a CD containing the proposal in Microsoft Word will be mailed to the FAA (Felix Abali) at the same address as used for the three-page technical summary. In addition (not as a substitute for the paper copy), an electronic version of the formal technical proposal in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF format will be emailed to Dy Le, dy.le@faa.gov. Submitted electronic proposals shall not have any security protection requiring the FAA to obtain a password or an authorization from the offeror prior to opening the proposal or file. The FAA will not review submitted proposals having security or password protection. The FAA shall receive both versions of the formal technical proposals according to the submission deadlines required in section 3 (Submission Deadlines). Formal proposals shall not exceed 50 pages. Formal technical proposals will be evaluated with an approximate FAA response time of ninety (60) business days or less. 5. Three-Page Technical Summary Requirements There is no specific format for the three-page technical summary. At a minimum the summary shall contain the following items: a. Affiliation, contact or principal investigator name, phone number, and mailing and email addresses. b. The specific purpose/objective of the proposed research applicable to FAA rulemaking on RCDT. c. Description of the research approach. d. Description of research outputs and how they will be incorporated in RCDT regulations. e. Description of the metrics used to measure research progress and performance. f. Description of the current technology level (TRL) of the subject technology being proposed for validation and demonstration and the achieved TRL at the conclusion of the proposed research. Standard TRL, GAO/NSIAD-99-162 Best Practices Appendix I - Technology Readiness Level Descriptions, developed by the General Accounting Office should be used and can be downloaded using the following link: http://www.tswg.gov/tswg/techtrans/TRLDefinitions.pdf. The proposals that do not include the current and proposed TRL's will be considered non-applicable to the above AC and therefore outside the scope of this research program. g. Description of research exit criteria (e.g., criteria used to determine if the defined objectives of research have been met). h. Estimated time (e.g., years) for the proposed research. The research period shall not exceed five (5) years. i. Estimated funds required for the proposed effort, including in-house and sub-contracted funds. The estimated cost shall not exceed $300,000 per fiscal year. j. Description of research collaborations, if applicable. Collaborations with other research entity (e.g., Government agencies, rotorcraft industry, and academia) are not required but will also be considered positively during technical summary and proposal evaluation. 6. Formal Proposal Requirements When requested by the FAA, formal technical proposals shall address all or some of the following approaches: a. Development of rotorcraft material electronic database, handbook, and reference for use in RCDT analysis and certification. b. Systematic evaluation of rotorcraft damage and flaw types and sizes (threat assessment) based on the processes and practices used in design, manufacturing, maintenance and overhaul, and service experience. c. Test, validation, demonstration, and technology transfer of existing fracture mechanics and computational algorithms and codes for rotorcraft design and certification. User support and maintenance plans for validated codes are required. d. Expertise and resource to support FAA in-house DT computation methodologies and codes validation. Plan to allocate resources at the FAA William J. Hughes Technical Center is required. e. Demonstration of DT on full-scaled rotorcraft components. f. Development of rotorcraft DT design and management procedures and certification compliance handbook and/or reference g. RCDT and related expertise including risk analysis and probabilistics to support and provide consultations on the RCDT demonstration, implementation, and certification. Proposed support shall address travel plan to support the FAA projects. h. Risks related to technology development, demonstration and validation, transfer, and/or implementation shall be identified. The proposal shall include mitigating strategies for each risk area. The proposals that do not include risks and mitigation strategies will be considered non-applicable and therefore outside the scope of this research program. i. Implementation and technology transfer plan to describe how validated technologies will be used in applicable regulations. The proposals that do not include the implementation and technology transfer plan will be considered non-applicable and therefore outside the scope of this research program. j. Offerors shall provide a detailed cost proposal. All resources including manpower, equipment, travel, and material shall also be identified and categorized. k. Offerors shall propose a detailed work plan including milestones and schedules for the proposed period of performance. 7. Method of Evaluation Proposals will be evaluated in the seven technical areas listed in order of decreasing importance: a. Technical merit b. Utility to RCDT regulations c. Investigative team competency and RCDT experience d. Logical and effective validation, demonstration, and certification implementation strategies e. Technical and implementation risks and the mitigation plan for each f. Effective plan for project completion g. Availability and quality of equipment and facilities Cost and cost realism will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable only. Acceptable proposals will have costs commensurate with the work load proposed and will not be in excess of $300,000 in any fiscal year. 8. Period of Performance: Efforts lasting five years or less will be considered. Multiyear efforts will be funded in yearly increments, providing measurable and adequate performance is shown prior to each new funding increment. 9. Award: Awards will be made on rolling basis and according to the submission deadlines required in section 3 (Submission Requirements).
- Web Link
-
FAA Contract Opportunities
(http://faaco.faa.gov/?ref=6158)
- Record
- SN01439268-W 20071025/071023223439 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |