Inactive

The Army Contracting Command – Redstone, on behalf of the Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) Aviation & Missile Center (AvMC) Technology Development Directorate – Aviation Technolog... The Army Contracting Command – Redstone, on behalf of the Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) Aviation & Missile Center (AvMC) Technology Development Directorate – Aviation Technology (TDD-A) requests information in the form of white papers in order to identify novel structures technologies to support Future Vertical Lift (FVL) and the enduring fleet of Army rotorcraft listed below. Novel structures technologies are desired to push the envelope of speed, endurance, payload capacity, and operational availability of these platforms. Structures technologies currently at Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 2-3 are of interest to understand what effort would be needed to further mature them to TRL 6. Technologies of interest include, but are not limited to: design for composites, composite manufacturing, joining methods, structural health and damage assessment, and structural energy storage devices. Preferred technology solutions are platform agnostic/independent (can be applied to one or more Army aviation platforms) and improve multiple TDD-A Structures Technology Objectives. A list of technology objectives is provided below. FVL Platforms: Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA), Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA), Future Tactical Unmanned Aircraft System (FTUAS) Army Rotorcraft Enduring Fleet: UH-60, AH-64, CH-47 Information on areas of specific interest include the following; note that some areas may overlap: Design For Composites. Army rotorcraft platforms are moving away from primarily metal airframes and towards partially composite or all-composite primary airframe structure. Improved design methodologies are sought to fully leverage inherent composite material capability. Technologies or designs that improve structural efficiency, manufacturability, repair, durability & damage tolerance, sustainability, and cost are also sought. Specific technical information detailing the design trade space associated with potential advantages and disadvantages is of interest. Composite Manufacturing. Leveraging experience from other industries to enhance Army rotorcraft composite structures manufacturing is of interest. Unique manufacturing capabilities developed in other industries such as automotive, marine, sports, wind energy, and space are sought which may provide enhanced composite manufacturing capability for future Army rotorcraft. An example of a manufacturing improvement that the rotorcraft industry may capture is significant reduction in production time using injection molding onto pre-formed parts. Other interests include but are not limited to continuous compression molding, stamp forming, continuous cured thermosets, electron beam curing, and UV cure resin. Each manufacture method may provide specific benefits, as well as penalties or costs. Understanding the current as well as desired future state of the art of a manufacture method and the advantages and disadvantages of each will help inform future decisions. Joining Methods. Joining methods encompass any technique that attaches two or more components together and transfers load across the joint. For rotorcraft design, this includes joining of metallic, composite, or hybrid components. Improved joining methods such as bonding, mechanical interlock, metal fittings, ultraviolet (UV) cured resins, snap cure resins and fused methods are desired for a variety of metal and composite matrix materials. Efficient and low-cost joining methods are of interest which mitigate: stress concentrations, disruption of composite fibers and galvanic corrosion initiation points. Also, innovative temporary or reversible joining methods for ease of manufacturing, maintenance, and repair analogous to locator pins, clamps, and tape are of interest in order to understand the state of the art as well as new technologies that could improve these processes. Structural Health and Damage Assessment. Robust capability is sought to routinely and autonomously assess rotorcraft structural health with the goal of reducing maintenance burden, supporting maintenance free operating periods, reducing life cycle cost, and increasing durability and damage tolerance of Army rotorcraft airframes. Technologies of interest that enable structural health and damage assessment include: structural health monitoring sensors, advanced modeling techniques, data fusion/data truth assessment, robust damage detection algorithms, remaining useful life algorithms based on flight regime, intuitive user interfaces, technologies aligning with modular open system approach (MOSA), technologies aligning with digital twin, and underlying enabling technologies. Database Frameworks and Artificial Intelligence for Rotorcraft Structures. Recent advances in artificial intelligence entice research and development into front-end rotorcraft structural designs through large-scale analysis of past rotorcraft to enable characterization of structural design attributes that are may be of benefit to future Army rotorcraft. Database frameworks for collecting and cataloguing of relevant data to fully characterize previous rotorcraft platforms and extract beneficial attributes salient for investment are of interest. Furthermore, database frameworks may provide a clean, organized repository of information suitable for artificial intelligence algorithm development enabling “Big Data” trade studies. Modular Open Systems Approach applied to database frameworks and artificial intelligence algorithm development to support flexible scalability, technology transition, and future technology development is desired. Structural Energy Storage Devices. Structural energy storage devices have the potential for multifunctionality through energy storage capacity and structural load bearing capability. Technology solutions must offer potential for improved weight and range with energy densities comparable to modern state-of-the-art supercapacitors and/or batteries. Additionally, understanding challenges and risks associated with structural integration and integrity of energy storage devices are of interest as well as ways to mitigate challenges and enable successful technology application for military rotorcraft. Technology Objectives (TOs): The following is a list of the TDD-A Structures Branch technology objectives: Durability and Damage Tolerance: Increase the resistance to, and performance level in the presence of, structural damage. Contributions achieved through tough, high strain capable structures; designing for repair and inspectability; load and damage sensing; probabilistic integrity determination. Parasitic Weight: Reduce add-on, non-primary weight from mission enablers. Contributions achieved through multifunctional structure, embedded components, application of composites, smart/adaptive structures, lightweight design, better understanding of variability effects on structural response. Structural Efficiency: Improve the specific load capability per pound of component structure. Contributions achieved through structural concepts, loads prediction, static/dynamic stress analysis, prognostic, and embedded sensors. Stress/Load Prediction: Improve loads determination and stress prediction accuracy. Contributions achieved through data mining, global to local stress prediction, non-linear analysis, control laws, embedded sensors, probabilistic methods, and improved understanding of failure initiation and progression. Structural Component Development Time: Reduce the time required to design, fabricate, test, and evaluate rotorcraft structure. Contributions achieved through development of virtual prototype, virtual testing, integrated product and process development, modeling and simulation, design of experiments, building block approach, and probabilistic methods. Manufacturing Cost: Reduce the cost to fabricate rotorcraft structure. Contributions achieved through reduced labor and material cost, lean practices, virtual prototyping, quality, and 6-sigma design for manufacturability. Airframe Crashworthiness: Increase structural airframe/component crash energy absorption capability. Contributions achieved through energy-absorbing fuselage design, management of crash energy attenuation, improved modeling accuracy, and up to full-scale drop testing. Structural Operational Availability: Increase structural airframe/component operational availability. Contributions achieved through high-reliability concepts, reduced maintenance, damage tolerant design, inspection and repair methods, structural replacement approaches, structural health monitoring, load and damage sensing, and integrity determination. Responses to this request should address the following: Company name, website, Point of Contact (POC) name, phone number, and email address. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) business size(s), Business status: 8(a), Small Disadvantaged Business, HUBZone, etc. Status as a U.S. entity, or foreign-owned, foreign-controlled, or foreign-influenced company. Summary of relevant prior experience with the subject technology, including contract number(s). A background of the technology area including a description of the current state-of-the-art. How the novel structure technology is relevant to FVL or the enduring fleet. Address the TO(s) that will be improved. If possible, provide quantifiable metrics related to any TO(s) that will be improved and substantiation for the expected advancement of TO(s). Address the TO(s) that may be adversely affected. If possible, provide quantifiable metrics for any TO(s) that might be adversely affected. If possible, provide technical effort needed to further mature / develop the technology to a Technology/Manufacturing/Integration Readiness Level (TRL/MRL/IRL) of 6. See resources listed for definitions. Address the technical risks associated with the development of the technology. If possible, address potential mitigation strategies. If possible, provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) of the cost to develop this technology to a specified readiness level. Any additional information deemed applicable. Useful links include the following: 2009 DoD TRL Deskbook: https://www.acqnotes.com/Attachments/Technology%20Readiness%20Assessment%20Deskbook.pdf 2020 DoD MRL Deskbook: http://www.dodmrl.com/MRL%20Deskbook%20V2020.pdf This Request for Information (RFI) is for informational purposes only. Proposals are not requested or accepted at this time. In accordance with FAR 15.201(e), responses to this notice are not considered offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. The decision to issue a solicitation will be solely within the Government’s discretion. If a solicitation is released, it will be posted to https://sam.gov. Any information submitted in response to this RFI is voluntary. This notice is not to be construed as a commitment by the Government, nor will the Government reimburse any costs associated with responses submitted. The Government will not provide responses to submissions. Reponses received will help shape a future solicitation, as applicable, and will help to inform the appropriate acquisition strategy. If proprietary information is submitted it shall be appropriately and specifically labeled as “proprietary”. It is the respondent’s responsibility to clearly identify information considered proprietary data. Any such proprietary data will not be released outside the Government. All responses must be UNCLASSIFIED. Please do not submit attachments with files ending in .zip or .exe; and ensure only search enabled .pdf, .doc, .docx, .xsls, or .xls documents are submitted. Responses shall be submitted via email containing a subject line that reads “W911W6-23-RFI-0004 Response” to the points of contact listed by the specified date and time required for response.