Navy SBIR NX191 (ADAPT) Solicitation

OBJECTIVE: The U.S. Navy (USN) seeks to develop enabling technologies for the use of soft inflatable structures as components to undersea payload launch and recovery (L&R) systems. Inflatable structures using seawater as the inflation medium are particularly attractive to the USN because of their ability to produce large developable shapes possessing significant load-carrying capacities and stiffness when inflated and for their ability to achieve smaller form factors and volume reductions when deflated.

DESCRIPTION: The current state of inflatable soft structures technologies can provide unique solutions to many challenges limiting today’s Undersea Warfare (USW) launch and recovery operations. Inflatable soft structures have been successfully developed for DoD, NASA, industry, etc. and are generally categorized in the following sectors:

• Inflatable control surfaces,

• Deployable energy absorbers,

• Temporary “on-demand” structures

Successful design and performance of soft inflatable structures is attributed to technological advancements derived from:

• High Performance Fibers (HPF) including but not limited to Vectran®, DSP® (dimensionally stable polyester), PEN (polyethylene napthalate), Spectra® (ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene), Kevlar®, and others,

• Novel fabric architectures and 3-dimensional preforms capable of unique mechanical behaviors,

• Continuous weaving processes for elimination of seams,

• Robust Physics-Based Modeling (PBM) methods with Fluid-Structure Interaction (FSI) capabilities,

• Material test methods for characterization of multi-axial mechanical behaviors for inputs to numerical models.

Collectively, these advancements have established a sound technology base; one that can be readily leveraged for innovative solutions to soft structure designs requiring significant load-carrying capacities, shock mitigation, dynamic energy absorption, rapid deployment, large deployed-to-stowed volume ratios, and fail-safe modes of operations.

This effort seeks to develop a soft inflatable structure, with a compact and predictable deflated shape, for payload recovery operations. The inflated and deflated configurations will be compared to established deployed-to-stowed volume ratios. The inflatable structures considered for use may include, but are not limited to, control volumes constructed of inflated skins, membrane bladders, coated fabrics, and hybrid (soft/rigid) material systems. Hybrid structures may include inflatable elements with semi- or fully-rigid reinforcements serving as deployment shaping controls. Seawater, supplied through an integral pump, will be the inflation medium.

The key challenge to taking advantage of their space saving potentials is managing the deflated shape and resulting form factor especially in the presence of crossflow velocity fields. This challenge is increasingly difficult for larger structures that are not accessible to personnel as the inflated components are deflating. Payload L&R systems operating at prescribed submergence depths require that the inflatable components function in a deterministic, repeatable and predictable manner in the undersea environment.

The minimum operational constraints are:

• Inflation media is seawater

• Submerged operational depth: 100 ft (inflating and deflating)

• Operational cycles: 1000

• Minimum size of inflatable features: 6” diameter x 36” length

• Assist vehicle recovery via submarine standard 21-inch diameter by 25-foot long tube

• Crossflow velocity: 5 knots

• Inflate to full pressure in 15.0 seconds

• Maintain internal pressure for 24 hours

• Provide pressure relief for internal pressure exceeding 2.5x ambient pressure within 5.0 seconds

• Variance in deflated volume envelope: < 10% over 1000 operational cycles

The volumes of the soft inflatable structures at the inflated and deflated states will be determined through simulations, experiments and demonstrations. The developable shapes upon reaching the inflation pressures will be predicted through modeling simulations and measured from experiments. The deflated shapes and form factors will be predicted through modeling simulations and measured from experiments.

Work produced in Phase II may become classified. Note: The prospective contractor(s) must be U.S. owned and operated with no foreign influence as defined by DoD 5220.22-M, National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual, unless acceptable mitigating procedures can and have been implemented and approved by the Defense Security Service (DSS). The selected contractor and/or subcontractor must be able to acquire and maintain a secret level facility and Personnel Security Clearances, in order to perform on advanced phases of this project as set forth by DSS and ONR in order to gain access to classified information pertaining to the national defense of the United States and its allies; this will be an inherent requirement. The selected company will be required to safeguard classified material IAW DoD 5220.22-M during the advanced phases of this contract.

PHASE I: Proposers must provide concept designs, simulations of initial prototype designs, test results from laboratory experiments, and other relevant documentation to demonstrate that the proposed technical solutions are feasible for accomplishing the stated objectives and will meet the performance parameters set forth in the description.

By submitting Phase I proof of feasibility documentation, the small business asserts that none of the funding for the cited technology was reimbursed under any federal government agency’s SBIR/STTR program. Demonstrating proof of feasibility is a requirement for a Direct to Phase II award.

PHASE II: For this topic, proposers must meet the following program requirements for each round to be considered for the next round: Round I: Select and optimize a soft inflatable structure including material selections, hydraulic layout design and manifolding (as required), inflation/deflation sequencing, hard-to-soft-goods connections for vehicle recovery from a notional launch tube. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round I shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $250,000.

Round II: Identify operational, safety and environmental issues of proposed designs and will perform risk identifications, risk assessments and risk mitigation plans during the concept development stage. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round II shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $500,000.

Round III: Prototype build of the proposed soft inflatable structure and testing to validate achievement of the deflation objectives stated in the description. The prototype soft inflatable structure including deflation capability shall be delivered to the US Navy for testing in accordance with the operational requirements stated. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round III shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $750,000.

It is probable that the work under this effort will be classified under Phase II (see Description section for details).

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Round IV: Installation of a final Prototype system into a submarine horizontal torpedo tube for operational test and evaluation for vehicle recovery. This Round may result in a limited number of licenses of the technology to allow for testing of the technology in various conditions and by multiple end users. The resulting technology will be of significant interest to the oil, power and telecommunications industries which rely on UUVs for monitoring and exploration of pipelines and cables on the seabed. Subsurface vehicle recovery would be a significant benefit.

REFERENCES:

1. Hulton, A., Cavallaro, P., and C. Hart, C. “MODAL ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENTAL TESTING OF AIRINFLATED DROP-STITCH FABRIC STRUCTURES USED IN MARINE APPLICATIONS.” 2017 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Tampa, FL, November 3-9, 2017, IMECE2017- 72097. http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=2669415

2. Cavallaro, P., Hart, C., and Sadegh, A. “MECHANICS OF AIR-INFLATED DROP-STITCH FABRIC PANELS SUBJECT TO BENDING LOADS.” NUWC-NPT Technical Report #12,141, 15 August 2013. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a588493.pdf

3. Sadegh, A. and Cavallaro, P. “MECHANICS OF ENERGY ABSORBABILITY IN PLAIN-WOVEN FABRICS: AN ANALYTICAL APPROACH.” Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, vol. 62, pp. 495-509, March 2012. https://www.jeffjournal.org/papers/Volume7/7.1.2Sadegh.pdf

4. Cavallaro, P., Sadegh, A., and Quigley, C. “CONTRIBUTIONS OF STRAIN ENERGY AND PV-WORK ON THE BENDING BEHAVIOR OF UNCOATED PLAIN-WOVEN FABRIC AIR BEAMS.”, Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2007 pp. 16-30. https://www.jeffjournal.org/papers/Volume2/Sadegh.pdf

5. Avallone, Eugene A., Baumeister III, Theodore, and Sadegh, Ali M. Marks’ Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, 11th Edition (Chapter: Air-inflated fabric Structures by P. Cavallaro and A. Sadegh), McGraw-Hill, 2006, pp. 20.108-20.118. https://www.amazon.com/Marks-Standard-Handbook-MechanicalEngineers/dp/0071428674

6. Cavallaro, P., Sadegh, A., Quigley, C. “BENDING BEHAVIOR OF PLAIN-WOVEN FABRIC AIR BEAMS: FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION APPROACH.”, 2006 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Chicago, Ill, November 05, 2006, IMECE2006-16307. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a456155.pdf

7. Cavallaro, P., Sadegh, A. and Johnson, M. “MECHANICS OF PLAIN-WOVEN FABRICS FOR INFLATED STRUCTURES.” Composite Structures Journal, Vol. 61, 2003, pp. 375-393.

8. Quigley, C., Cavallaro, P., Johnson, A., and Sadegh, A. “ADVANCES IN FABRIC AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSES OF PRESSURE INFLATED STRUCTURES.” Conference Proceedings of the 2003 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE2003-55060, November 15-21, 2003, Washington, DC. http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=1595613

KEYWORDS: Undersea Payloads; Launch and Recovery Systems; Soft Structures; Inflatables

 

OBJECTIVE: The U.S. Navy (USN) seeks to develop enabling capabilities for launch and recovery (L&R) operations of Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) from submarines at prescribed submergence conditions. More specifically, there is a need to launch vehicles of different hull diameters from a standard 21-inch diameter by 25-foot long tube (ocean interface). To prevent damage to the tube and vehicles, and to stabilize the vehicle’s orientation throughout the launch event, a UUV Sabot System (UUVSS) is sought. Vehicles will be launched under their own power and the UUVSS will separate from the vehicle upon exiting the tube. The UUVSS can be designed as either expendable or nonexpendable.

DESCRIPTION: The current state of inflatable soft structures technologies can provide unique solutions to many challenges limiting today’s Undersea Warfare (USW) operations, capabilities and system designs. Inflatable soft structures have been successfully developed for DoD, NASA, and industry and are generally categorized in the following sectors:

• Inflatable control surfaces

• Deployable energy absorbers

• Temporary “on-demand” structures

Expendable UUVSS’s must exit the tube with the vehicle; once reaching the free field, the UUVSS will detach from the vehicle with no hardware connections remaining between the UUVSS and the tube. Nonexpendable UUVSS’s shall remain inside the tube throughout the launch event and will be recovered for reuse by the weapons crew. The UUVSS will eliminate the need for multiple launch tubes of different sizes to support launch operations for the range of UUV sizes required and will minimize mission reconfiguration activities.

The minimum operational and associated requirements for the UUVSS follow:

• Launch capable for UUV’s in the 12-inch to 18-inch diameter sizes

• Launch from submarine standard 21-inch diameter by 25-foot long tube

• Launch at submergence depths to 100.0 feet

• Launch in crossflow speeds up to 5.0 knots

• Inflate to 2.5x depth pressure in 15.0 seconds

• Maintain internal pressure to 3.5x depth pressure for 24 hours

• Provide pressure relief for internal pressure exceeding 2.5x depth pressure within 5.0 seconds

• Protect UUV control surfaces

• Perform 30 launch cycles

• Prevent interference with tube opening/closing operations

Successful design and performance of soft inflatable structures is attributed to technological advancements derived from:

• High Performance Fibers (HPF) including, but not limited to, Vectran®, DSP® (dimensionally stable polyester), PEN (polyethylene napthalate), Spectra® (ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene), Kevlar®, and others

• Novel fabric architectures and 3-dimensional preforms capable of unique mechanical behaviors

• Continuous weaving processes for elimination of seams

• Robust Physics-Based Modeling (PBM) methods with Fluid-Structure Interaction (FSI) capabilities

• Material test methods for characterization of multi-axial mechanical behaviors for inputs to numerical models

Collectively, these advancements have established a sound technology base; one that can be readily leveraged for innovative solutions to soft structure designs requiring significant load-carrying capacities, shock mitigation, dynamic energy absorption, rapid deployment, large deployed-to-stowed volume ratios, and fail-safe modes of operations.

The UUVSS shall consist of a generally soft or soft/rigid hybrid inflatable structure and a seawater pump interface (SPI). The SPI will connect the UUVSS soft structure to the tube seawater pump, which will be used to controllably inflate and deflate the UUVSS with seawater as the inflation medium. Both inflation and deflation operations will be performed after the UUVSS is configured onto the vehicle and the vehicle is positioned inside the tube.

The soft structures considered for use in developing the UUVSS may include, but are not limited to, control volumes constructed of inflated skins, membrane bladders, coated fabrics, and hybrid (soft/rigid) material systems. Hybrid sabots may include inflatable elements with semi- or fully-rigid reinforcements serving as deployment shaping controls, friction minimizing contact interfaces, etc. The pressurization media for all inflatable components will be limited to seawater.

PHASE I: Provide concept designs, simulations of initial prototype designs, test results from laboratory experiments, or other relevant documentation to demonstrate that the proposed technical solutions are feasible for accomplishing the stated objectives and meeting the performance parameters set forth in the Description.

By submitting Phase I proof of feasibility documentation, the small business asserts that none of the funding for the cited technology was reimbursed under any federal government agency’s SBIR/STTR program. Demonstrating proof of feasibility is a requirement for a Direct to Phase II award.

PHASE II: Round I: Optimize the UUVSS design including material selections for the soft structural components, hydraulic layout design and manifolding, inflation/deflation sequencing, porting to a generic tube seawater pump, hard-to-soft-goods connections, and environmental factors. Testing of the UUVSS prototype shall be conducted by the U.S. Navy in accordance with stated objectives. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round I shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $250,000. Round II: Identify operational, safety, and environmental issues of proposed UUVSS designs. Perform risk identifications, risk assessments, and risk mitigation plans from the concept development stage. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for

Round II shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $500,000.

Round III: Build a prototype of the proposed UUVSS and test to validate the above requirements for launching UUVs from a 21-inch tube. Deliver the prototype UUVSS to the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Newport, RI for testing in accordance with the stated operational requirements. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round III shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $750,000.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Launch and recovery of commercial watercraft (e.g., Jet Skis) is an opportunity space for dual use.

REFERENCES:

1. Hulton, A., Cavallaro, P., and Hart, C. “MODAL ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENTAL TESTING OF AIRINFLATED DROP-STITCH FABRIC STRUCTURES USED IN MARINE APPLICATIONS.” , 2017 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Tampa, FL November 3-9, 2017, IMECE2017- 72097. http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=2669415

2. Cavallaro, P., Hart, C., and Sadegh, A. “MECHANICS OF AIR-INFLATED DROP-STITCH FABRIC PANELS SUBJECT TO BENDING LOADS.” , NUWC-NPT Technical Report #12,141, 15 August 2013. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a588493.pdf

3. Sadegh, A. and Cavallaro, P. “MECHANICS OF ENERGY ABSORBABILITY IN PLAIN-WOVEN FABRICS: AN ANALYTICAL APPROACH.” Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, vol. 62, pp. 495-509, March 2012. https://www.jeffjournal.org/papers/Volume7/7.1.2Sadegh.pdf

4. Cavallaro, P., Sadegh, A., and Quigley, C. “CONTRIBUTIONS OF STRAIN ENERGY AND PV-WORK ON THE BENDING BEHAVIOR OF UNCOATED PLAIN-WOVEN FABRIC AIR BEAMS.”, Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, Vol 2, Issue 1, 2007 pp. 16-30. https://www.jeffjournal.org/papers/Volume2/Sadegh.pdf

5. Avallone, Eugene A., Baumeister III, Theodore, and Sadegh, Ali M. Marks’ Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, 11th Edition (Chapter: Air-inflated fabric Structures by P. Cavallaro and A. Sadegh), McGraw-Hill, 2006, pp. 20.108-20.118. https://www.amazon.com/Marks-StandardHandbook-Mechanical-Engineers/dp/0071428674

6. Cavallaro, P., Sadegh, A., Quigley, C. “BENDING BEHAVIOR OF PLAIN-WOVEN FABRIC AIR BEAMS: FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION APPROACH.”, 2006 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Chicago, Ill, November 05, 2006, IMECE2006-16307. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a456155.pdf

7. Cavallaro, P., Sadegh, A. and Johnson, M. “MECHANICS OF PLAIN-WOVEN FABRICS FOR INFLATED STRUCTURES.” Composite Structures Journal, Vol. 61, 2003, pp. 375-393.

8. Quigley, C., Cavallaro, P., Johnson, A., and Sadegh, A. “ADVANCES IN FABRIC AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSES OF PRESSURE INFLATED STRUCTURES.” Conference Proceedings of the 2003 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE2003-55060, November 15-21, 2003, Washington, DC. http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=1595613

KEYWORDS: Unmanned Underwater Vehicles; UUV; Launch and Recovery Systems; Soft Structures; Inflatables

OBJECTIVE: In order to minimize straight pipe length requirements, a technology is sought that can expedite the establishment of a fully-developed flow profile after non-straight pipe sections such as elbows and bends. The solution should readily integrate with existing piping and should produce minimal pressure drop. Furthermore, it is required that the solution does not induce cavitation and does not produce excessive vibrations.

DESCRIPTION: Pumps and flow meters require a consistent, developed flow profile to function properly. Typically, a developed flow profile is achieved after direction changes, or flow disturbances, through a minimum required length of straight pipe. This length requirement negatively impacts packaging as ship arrangement space is extremely valuable. Additionally, minimum straight length requirements can drive the suction inlet of pumps high in the ship to the detriment of net positive suction head. Thus, minimizing straight pipe requirements can have a significant impact on the final product (e.g. ship design and layout of spaces within the ship, manufacturing requirements, and maintenance times). The goal is to minimize straight pipe length requirements without significant drops in flow pressure, or affecting suction inlet positive pressure in pumps located higher in the ship.

PHASE I: Proposers must provide test results from laboratory experiments, simulations using initial prototype designs, or other relevant documentation to demonstrate that the proposed technical solution is feasible of improving flow downstream of pipe directional changes. Straight pipe lengths to achieve uniform, swirl free flow profile shall be decreased by approximately 50% from the baseline non-conditioned flow profile, accomplishing the objective stated above, and will be able to meet the performance parameters set forth in the description.

By submitting Phase I proof of feasibility documentation, the small business asserts that none of the funding for the cited technology was reimbursed under any federal government agency’s SBIR/STTR program. Demonstrating proof of feasibility is a requirement for a Direct to Phase II award.

PHASE II: Round I. Build of the prototype apparatus for full flow-profile after non-straight pipe sections. The prototype must be able to readily integrate into existing piping systems and be capable of demonstrating that it meets the above requirements. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round I shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $250,000.

Round II. Prototype Demonstration of Viability: The initial prototype will be tested in a laboratory or shop room that simulates operational conditions. The Government will observe the prototype tests and provide feedback. A prototype performance report and an updated prototype design will be provided to the Government at the end of Round II. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round II shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $500,000.

Round III. Pilot Testing in an Operational Environment: The prototype(s) from Round II will be evaluated in an operational environment selected by the Government. The operational environment may be at one or more locations and may include multiple tests. Government representatives will attend tests and will provide feedback to the performer. The performer will use operational test results and Government feedback to refine the prototype for continued testing. A fully functional prototype and a detailed report on prototyping test results will be provided to the Government at the end of Round III. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round III shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $750,000.

Round IV. Operational Test and Evaluation in Multiple User Scenarios: Additional prototypes from Round III with detailed installation and operating instructions will be provided to the Government during Round IV. The Government or a non-Government partner (under an NDA) will test and evaluate the prototype in multiple operating environments as selected by the Government or the non-Government partner. The performer will assist in these tests and evaluations as requested by the Government. SBIR funding (if available) for Round IV will require non-SBIR government funds included as a 1:1 Cost-Match for any amounts over $500,000. The number of end users and prototypes required, as well as the operational scenarios to be run are not yet defined. Therefore, this option is currently unpriced.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: This technology will have commercial application in any industrial fluid piping systems currently used in oil, gas, and power plant applications.

1. International Organization of Standards ISO 5167-2:2003(E). Measurement of fluid flow by means of pressure differential devices

2. The Practical Pumping Handbook, Elsevier Science, ISBN: 9781856174107

3. Blaine D. Sawchuk, Dale P. Sawchuk, Danny A. Sawchuk, “Flow conditioning and effects on accuracy for fluid flow measurement” American School of Gas Measurement Technology 2010

4. Laws E M and Ouazanne A K, 1994. Compact installations for differential flowmeters [J] Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 5 79-85

5. M. Anwer, R. M. C. So, and Y. G. Lai. Perturbation by and recovery from bend curvature of a fully developed turbulent pipe flow. Physics of Fluids A (1989-1993), 1(8):1387–1397, 1989.

6. A.K. Ouazzane, R. Benhadj, (2002) "Flow conditioners design and their effects in reducing flow metering errors", Sensor Review, Vol. 22 Issue: 3, pp.223-231, https://doi.org/10.1108/02602280210433061

KEYWORDS: Fully-Developed Flow; Piping; Flow Control

OBJECTIVE: Today’s sailors are asked to perform ever increasing tasks and thus need to be at peak performance. Restful sleep is essential to achieving this peak performance, yet the close working quarters inside submarines can be detrimental to sleep cycles. Therefore, materials and uses of materials to bolster the natural sleep cycle for more restorative rest are desired. Additionally, sound damping materials may be used to reduce mechanical or other noises onboard platforms.

DESCRIPTION: Solutions are sought that provide the acoustic performances necessary to meet the objective described above for sailors. Proposed solutions may be new materials with improved acoustic properties, or they may be established materials used in new, creative manners.

Chosen materials and use of materials must provide a continuous acoustic level for individual bunks on a submarine not to exceed 30 dB [Ref 1]. While typical crew bunks measure 76” X 26” [Ref 2] with approximately 2 feet between bunks, these numbers may vary somewhat, and so proposed solutions must accommodate variable sizing. Implementation cannot involve direct contact with the sailor (e.g., no headphones) and cannot hamper the sailor’s movement or prevent immediate actions (e.g., rapid bunk exit). Furthermore, proposed solutions must not create total sound isolation and must allow sailors to hear sounds associated with any urgent situations. All materials and uses of material must meet all strict fire and safety requirements on a submarine including flame resistance. The material should also be applicable to placement on mechanical and other noise sources onboard a submarine. Cost and ease of use of materials will also be considered when determining viability of a solution.

PHASE I: In the initial 5-page proposal, proposers must provide test results from laboratory experiments, simulations using initial prototype designs, or other relevant documentation to demonstrate that the proposed technical solution is feasible for accomplishing the objectives stated above and will be able to meet the performance parameters set forth in the Description. In addition, the initial proposal must provide requested information on tasks and costs for each of the four (4) rounds of incremental funding at each Milestone Decision, as described in detail in the Technical Proposal Guideline.

By submitting Phase I proof of feasibility documentation, the small business asserts that none of the funding for the cited technology was reimbursed under any federal government agency’s SBIR/STTR program. Demonstrating proof of feasibility is a requirement for a Direct to Phase II award.

PHASE II: For this topic, proposers must meet the following program requirements for each round to be considered for the next round:

Round I. Prototype Development: Manufacture a material that can be easily assembled into a functioning prototype and meets the acoustic performance requirements. A prototype design and a preliminary early prototype construction will be shown to the Government. A report will be provided to the Government describing material manufacturability, material performance, and prototype design at the end of Round I. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round I shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $250,000.

Round II. Prototype Demonstration of Viability: The material and design from Round I will be used to produce one or more initial functioning prototypes. The initial prototype will be tested for its acoustic damping performance in a laboratory or shop room that simulates operational conditions. The Government will observe the prototype tests and provide feedback. A prototype performance report and an updated prototype design will be provided to the Government at the end of Round II. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round II shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $500,000.

Round III. Pilot Testing in an Operational Environment: The prototype(s) from Round II will be evaluated in an operational environment selected by the Government. The operational environment may be at one or more locations and may include multiple tests. Government will attend tests and will provide feedback to the performer. The performer will use operational test results and Government feedback to refine the prototype for continued testing. A fully functional prototype and a detailed report on prototyping test results will be provided to the Government at the end of Round III. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round III shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $750,000.

Round IV. Operational Test and Evaluation in Multiple User Scenarios: Additional prototypes from Round III with detailed operating instructions will be provided to the Government during Round IV. The Government or a nonGovernment partner (under an NDA) will test and evaluate the prototype in multiple operating environments as selected by the Government or the non-Government partner. The performer will assist in these tests and evaluations as requested by the Government. SBIR funding (if available) for Round IV will require non-SBIR government funds included as a 1:1 Cost-Match for any amounts over $500,000. The number of end users and prototypes required, as well as the operational scenarios to be run are not yet defined. Therefore, this option is currently unpriced.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Round IV delivers a fully functional prototype or product with detailed operating instructions to the Government and non-Government partners (e.g., Electric Boat shipyard) for evaluation in real-world environments. Round IV may result in a limited number of licenses or purchases of the prototype or product to allow for testing in various conditions and by multiple end users. The resulting technology will be of significant interest to the commercial sector for acoustic control in personal close-quarters and for machinery noise abatement.

REFERENCES:

1. “Night Noise Guidelines for Europe.” World Health Organization Report, 2009. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/43316/E92845.pdf

2. Fleet Sheets Custom Bedding Co. “Size Guide”, https://www.fleetsheetsusa.com/pages/size-guide

KEYWORDS: Acoustic; Noise; Sleep; Materials

OBJECTIVE: Columbia-Class submarines have a higher steel preheat requirement than previous classes. Currently, welders suffer from heat exhaustion (especially during the summer months) and the new Columbia requirement will only exacerbate this problem. Increasing weld times by just a half-hour in aggregate would yield immense productivity gains. Clothing materials that reduce the thermal body temperature of welders while maintaining ergonomics and dexterity will significantly mitigate this issue. Furthermore, this heat reducing material can be leveraged to decrease equipment heat loads and thus increase performance periodicities.

DESCRIPTION: Solutions are sought that provide the thermal control performance necessary to meet the objectives described above for shipyard personnel. Proposed solutions may be new materials with improved thermal control properties, or they may be established materials used in new, creative manners.

Chosen materials and use of materials must increase welders’ aggregate work time by a minimum of 30 minutes and maintain thermal comfort for the worker while performing other shipyard tasks. The material may provide a barrier against external heat, but must not entrap heat on the worker or on equipment when used to decrease heat loads. Wearing of the material as clothing must not hamper worker full freedom of movement and dexterity (i.e., the application cannot require use of an external cooling unit or connections). All materials and use of material must meet all strict fire and safety requirements for the shipyard [Refs 1,2]. Cost and ease of use of material will also be considered when determining viability of a solution.

PHASE I: For the initial 5-page proposal, proposers must provide test results from laboratory experiments, simulations using initial prototype designs, or other relevant documentation to demonstrate that the proposed technical solution is feasible for accomplishing the objectives stated above and will be able to meet the performance parameters set forth in the Description.

In addition, the initial proposal must provide requested information on tasks and costs for each of the four (4) rounds of incremental funding at each Milestone Decision, as described in the Technical Proposal Guideline.

By submitting Phase I proof of feasibility documentation, the small business asserts that none of the funding for the cited technology was reimbursed under the federal government’s SBIR/STTR program. Demonstrating proof of feasibility is a requirement for Direct to Phase II award.

PHASE II: For this topic, proposers must meet the following program requirements for each round to be considered for the next round:

Round I. Prototype Development: Manufacture a material that can be easily assembled into a functioning prototype and meets the thermal performance requirements. A prototype design and a preliminary early prototype construction will be shown to the Government. A report will be provided to the Government describing material manufacturability, material performance, and prototype design at the end of Round I. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round I shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $250,000.

Round II. Prototype Demonstration of Viability: The material and design from Round I will be used to produce one or more initial functioning prototypes. The initial prototype will be tested for its thermal control performance in a laboratory or shop room that simulates welder operational conditions. The Government will observe the prototype tests and provide feedback. A prototype performance report and an updated prototype design will be provided to the Government at the end of Round II. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round II shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $500,000.

Round III. Pilot Testing in an Operational Environment: The prototype(s) from Round II will be evaluated in an operational environment selected by the Government. The operational environment may be at one or more locations and may include multiple tests. Government will attend tests and will provide feedback to the performer. The performer will use operational test results and Government feedback to refine the prototype for continued testing. A fully functional prototype and a detailed report on prototyping test results will be provided to the Government at the end of Round III. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round III shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $750,000.

Round IV. Operational Test and Evaluation in Multiple User Scenarios: Additional prototypes from Round III with detailed operating instructions will be provided to the Government during Round IV. The Government or a nonGovernment partner (under an NDA) will test and evaluate the prototype in multiple operating environments as selected by the Government or the non-Government partner. The performer will assist in these tests and evaluations as requested by the Government. SBIR funding (if available) for Round IV will require non-SBIR government funds included as a 1:1 Cost-Match for any amounts over $500,000. The number of end users and prototypes required, as well as the operational scenarios to be run are not yet defined. Therefore, this option is currently unpriced.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Round IV delivers a fully functional prototype or product with detailed operating instructions to the Government and non-Government partners (e.g., Electric Boat shipyard) for evaluation in real-world environments. This Round IV may result in a limited number of licenses or purchases of the prototype or product to allow for testing in various conditions and by multiple end users. The resulting technology will be of significant interest for commercial welding, hot construction, and athletic wear.

REFERENCES:

1. Clarification of OSHA's position on FR Clothing for welders, https://www.osha.gov/lawsregs/standardinterpretations/2012-01-12

2. OSHA Welding, Cutting and Brazing, https://www.osha.gov/lawsregs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.252

KEYWORDS: Thermal; Heat; Welder; Comfort

The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with section 3.5 of the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws.

OBJECTIVE: Develop a compact fuel cell system (e.g., stackable fuel cells, hydrogen and oxygen fuel sources, all balance-of-plant equipment including by-product management components) capable of producing, at a minimum, 500 kW of power. Minimize the overall volume and weight of the overall system and system complexity, which is vital for deployment (e.g., underwater manned and unmanned platforms, surface ships, forward operating bases). Ensure that the system has a fast start-up time (<5 minutes), demonstrates high reliability, and shows ease of maintenance and repair of its lowest replaceable units.

DESCRIPTION: Fuel cell systems have performance advantages (e.g., higher operating efficiencies, lower maintenance costs) and arrangement flexibility in a power distribution system over diesel generators. The fuel sources for a diesel generator are diesel and air while the sources for a fuel cell are hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen does not exist on its own in nature and must be extracted or reformed from another compound (e.g., water, fossil fuels). Some fuel cell systems use stored hydrogen that has already been extracted elsewhere, while others reform hydrogen from liquid or solid fuels when needed. The desired output voltage from the fuel cell system shall be between 700 and 850 Volts Direct Current (VDC). Commercially available fuels cells use either pure oxygen or oxygen from atmospheric air as their fuel sources. All fuel cells are susceptible to performance and life degradation (<1% cell voltage degradation per 1000 hours of operation) by impurities in their fuels (e.g., hydrogen is required to be at a minimum 99.97% pure). For successful military use, a fuel cell system shall be able to maintain performance and predicted life in rugged environmental conditions (e.g., atmospheric air at a temperature range between -40°C and 45°C with high humidity and containing sand, salt, dust, and other particles). Minimizing the overall volume (maximum of 0.9 ft3/kW) and weight (maximum of 60 lb/kW) of the overall system and system complexity is vital for deployment.

PHASE I: Provide a detailed system concept for 500 kW system in a manned submarine, specifying all components (e.g., fuel cells, fuel sources, balance-of-plant equipment) and a breakdown of their volume and weight. Provide predicted performance and operational details at 100% rated load (e.g., fuel consumption rates, cooling requirements [air, water, rates, temperature range], waste heat generation, by-product generation, required electrical power for pumps, control system and other equipment) from simulations, laboratory experiments, or other relevant documentation that demonstrates that the proposed technical solution can feasibly accomplish the Objective and will be able to meet the performance parameters set forth in the Description. Proposers must provide details for a scaled prototype (e.g.,10, 10 kW) that can be developed in Phase II to verify and validate the Phase I concept. Develop System Preliminary Hazard Analyses (PHA) and standing operating procedures (to be updated in Phase II).

By submitting Phase I proof of feasibility documentation, the small business asserts that none of the funding for the cited technology was reimbursed under any federal government agency’s SBIR/STTR program. Demonstrating proof of feasibility is a requirement for a Direct to Phase II award.

PHASE II: For this topic, proposers must successfully complete the following program requirements for each round to be eligible for funding for the next round:

Round I. Proof of Concept - the firm is required to design, manufacture, and test a scaled demonstration prototype system to verify the performance and operational details from Phase I. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round I shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $250,000.

Round II. Prototype Demonstration of Viability: A full scale prototype will be built and tested in a laboratory or shop room that simulates operational conditions. Validate the volume and weight predictions of all components using the built and functional prototype system. Ensure that the prototype system demonstrates the profiles provided in the attached tables (available in SITIS). Government representatives will observe the prototype tests and provide feedback. A prototype performance report and an updated full scale prototype design will be provided to the Government at the end of Round II. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round II shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $500,000.

Round III. Pilot Testing in an Operational Environment: Based on successful verification and validation, refine the full-scale fuel cell system based on lessons learned from the prototype development and test effort. The prototype(s) from Round II will be evaluated in an operational environment selected by the Government. The operational environment may be at one or more locations and may include multiple tests. Government representatives will attend tests and will provide feedback to the performer. The performer will use operational test results and Government feedback to refine the prototype for continued testing. A fully functional prototype and a detailed report on prototyping test results will be provided to the Government at the end of Round III. As stated in the solicitation, the period of performance for Round III shall not exceed 6 months and the total fixed price shall not exceed $750,000.

Round IV. Operational Test and Evaluation in Multiple User Scenarios: Additional prototypes from Round III with detailed installation and operating instructions will be provided to the Government during Round IV. The Government or a non-Government partner (under an NDA) will test and evaluate the prototype in multiple operating environments as selected by the Government or the non-Government partner. The performer will assist in these tests and evaluations as requested by the Government. SBIR funding (if available) for Round IV will require non-SBIR government funds included as a 1:1 Cost-Match for any amounts over $500,000. The number of end users and prototypes required, as well as the operational scenarios to be run are not yet defined. Therefore, this option is currently unpriced.

PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Package the system into standard shipping container(s) (specific size(s) will be based on final Phase II concept design) for use in lieu of diesel generators on surface ships and land-based sites for both military and commercial end users such as pleasure crafts, small cruising boats, ferries, and harbor patrol boats.

REFERENCES:

1. Hikosaka, N., “Fuel Cells: Current Technology Challenges and Future Research Needs.”, 29 October 2012.

2. Vielstitch W., Lamm A. & Gasteiger H.A., “Handbook of Fuel Cells: Fundamentals, technology and applications”. (c. 2003 – 2009) 3. Profiles of Continuous Operation (Uploaded to SITIS 03/xx/2019)

KEYWORDS: Power Generation; Fuel Cell