Enhanced Counter Air Projectile IPT 2004

1
Enhanced Counter Air ProjectileIPT 2004

• Phase 1 Baseline Review
• February 5, 2004

2
ECAP Operational Concept
3
Outline

• Part 1 Concept Description Document
• Present a summary of the CDD
• Part 2 Baseline Design
• Describe Technical Features
• Part 3 Baseline / CDD Assessment
• Evaluate the Baseline Design with requirements
  brought forth in the CDD

4
Part 1 Concept Description Document

• Introduction to the Concept Description Document

5
Characteristics of CDD

• Concept Description Document (CDD)
• Defines Enhanced Counter Air Projectile (ECAP)
• The communication between the customer and the
  Project Office
• The rule book for our designs
• To be signed on Feb 9,2004

6
Performance Requirements

• Maximum range of 2km, with a minimum range of
  500m and a preferred maximum range of 4km
• Handle up to a 83km/hr wind gust and sustained
  winds of up to 65km/hr
• Environmental and safety considerations
• Must meet standard environmental requirements
• No toxic materials
• 90 probably of kill with 10-15 round burst
• Baseline Target
• 240mm rocket
• Head on
• 100-1000m high
• 500m/sec

7
Functional Requirements

• 40mm diameter
• Must interface seamlessly with current systems
• No new handling requirements
• Function with current weapons platforms
• Must meet all current storage and shelf life
  requirements

8
Requirement Compliance Matrix
PERFORMANCE ATTRIBUTE Possible Configuration States Possible Configuration States Possible Configuration States Possible Configuration States Possible Configuration States
Threat Rockets Mortars Artillery Aerial Comb.
Max Range lt 1km 2 km 4km gt4km Comb.
Shots Per Kill 1 2-10 11-15 gt15 Comb.
Mobility Human Wheeled Vehicle Tracked Vehicle Other Comb.
Simultaneous Targets (Assumed) 1 5 10 gt10 Comb.
Launch Detection Range (Derived) 1 km 2 - 5 km 6 - 10 km gt 10 km Comb
Shots per second (Derived) lt20 20 21 80 gt80 Comb
Shots Before Reload (Derived) lt 150 150 151 -300 gt 300 Comb
Cost per Kill (Assumed) low med high Very high Comb.
9
Systems Examined
Bofors
MK44
THEL
Phalanx
Patriot PAC 3
10
Evaluation
11
Part 2Baseline Design
12
Systems Engineering

13
Baseline Concept Overview

• Fall 2003 study by graduate students
• Baseline based on preliminary CDD
• Constructed from recommendations by each
  discipline area
• The ECAP projectile was assumed to be a fire and
  forget round

14
Baseline Guidelines and Assumptions

• Guidelines
• Head-on Target Engagement
• Cost not an Important Factor
• One Target Engagement
• Maximum roll rate of 40 Hz
• 240 mm cross-section target
• Incoming target at 500 m/s
• Assumptions
• Muzzle Velocity of 1500 m/s
• No radar errors
• 10,000 g shock load
• No Gravity

15
(No Transcript)
16
Discipline Areas

• Seekers and Guidance
• Controls
• Navigation and Power
• Modeling and Simulation
• Launch Platform

17
Seekers and Guidance
18
Seekers and Guidance

• The sensor section of a missile is responsible
  for finding, detecting, acquiring, and tracking a
  target until missile-target intercept.
• Target seekers are categorized as either
• - active Generates, transmits and
  receives energy
• - semi-active Receives signal from ground
  base
• - passive Depends on energy radiating
  from the target
• The sensor section of a missile is responsible
  for finding, detecting, acquiring, and tracking a
  target until missile-target intercept.

19
Baseline Seeker

• The seeker system recommended was a millimeter
  wave (MMW) strap-down seeker.
• The guidance system recommended was a semi-active
  homing with proportional navigation.

20
Controls
21
Aerodynamic Configuration

• Design Possibilities(Assuming Spinning Bullet)
• Propulsive Control
• Thrusters
• Aerodynamic Control
• Bent-Nose, Fins
• Baseline Design Decisions
• Bent-Nose Control
• Cone
• Low drag, packaging

22
Aerodynamic Analysis

• Objective
• To Determine if Bent-Nose Control Provides
  Sufficient Forces to Adequately Steer the Bullet
• Datcom Inputs
• Mach Number Range
• Angle of Attack Range
• Nose and/or Body Characteristics
• Datcom Outputs
• Force Coefficients and Body Pressures
• Excel
• Integration of Pressure Coefficients to Obtain
  Normal and Axial Forces

23
Considerations

• Datcom
• Cannot Model Bent-Nose
• Non-Spinning Bullet
• No Connection Between Analysis and Simulation
• Smart Materials could have limited deflection (lt1
  degree)

24
Navigation and Power
25
Technical Considerations

• Time of Flight 8 to 10 seconds
• Activation Time 0.2 to 0.3 seconds
• Power Required

Seeker Control TOTAL
Power (W) 1 0.028 1.028
Nominal Voltage (V) 10 1 - 118 11- 119
Nominal Current (A) 0.1 - -
26
Thermal Batteries--Pros

• For this application a thermal battery should be
  used.
• Already commonly used in missile applications.
• Proven to have an acceptable shelf life.
• Tested and proven to withstand harsh temperature
  and acceleration conditions
• There are existing thermal batteries that are
  within ECAP size constraints.

27
Thermal Batteries--Cons

• Power requirements posed a problem when sizing
  battery.
• Controls required a huge range of voltages which
  demanded larger batteries.
• Power requirement for controls was excluded from
  baseline design.

28
Modeling and Simulation
29
Simulation

• Simulation of missile launched at a
  non-maneuverable target.
• Simulation takes into account
• Atmosphere- Speed of Sound, Density
• Aerodynamics Drag Forces
• Propulsion Thrust Force
• Mass properties
• Motion - Missile velocity and position
• Target Velocity and Position

30
Simulation Inputs

• cRocket code Takes into account
  3-Degrees-of-Freedom
• Target Inputs
• Initial Range 4000m
• Initial Altitude 500m
• Initial Velocity 500m/s (incoming)
• Projectile Inputs
• Muzzle Velocity 1500 m/s
• Mass 1.383 kg
• Intercept
• Range 2817 m
• Altitude 473 m
• Closing Velocity 1466 m/s
• Time of Flight 2.368 s

31
Simulation Output
32
Simulation
Pros - Able to duplicate results for the
baseline. - cRocket code
provides a simple model for first order
simulations. - The code is modular and
portable, hence it is easy to use. Cons -
Only 3 degrees of freedom, -
non-maneuvering target, - no wind and gust
models, - no propulsion model
using thrust table, - does not take into
account the rotation of the bullet
- launched from the launch platform.
33
Simulation

• Recommendations
• - In order to take into account the
  rotation of the bullet and the forces that effect
  it, a better simulation software (PRODAS) is
  needed to provide higher fidelity models of the
  missile and the target

34
Advanced AnalysisESTACA
35
ESTACA Team Members

• Martin ALEXANDER
• Marielle RUFIN
• Romain MONNERY
• Clement DUCASSE

• Michael MEUNIER
• Baptiste QUINQUET 
• Thibault RICOURG
• Francis ZADRONZYNSKI

36
ESTACA
CURRENT PROGRESS

• Task 1 ESTACA students will review 1 European
  Gun system and return 3 PowerPoint slides by Feb.
  9
• Task 2 Structures Stress analysis will be
  performed on the baseline design. Files will be
  sent to UAH by March 1 to begin construction of a
  rapid prototype model
• Task 2 Fluids Detailed CFD aerodynamic
  analysis of the Baseline Design will be sent to
  UAH by March 1.
• Weekly Tele-conferences scheduled starting
  Monday, February 9 to discuss status of tasks.

37
Launch Platform
38
Baseline Launch Platform Description

• No gun system was considered for the Baseline
  Design.
• A microwave radar system was selected for the
  Baseline Design and it was assumed to be perfect.

39
3-D Prototype
The 3D model was produced from a CAD model using
a 3D printer at the Prototype Integration
Facility at AMRDEC.
40
Part 3

• Baseline Assessment

41
Baseline Assessment

• This assessment addresses, compares and contrasts
  the baseline design requirements and the CDD
• This assessment also provides a brief analysis of
  possible launch systems

42
Baseline AssessmentSimilarities

• Can attain required hit/kill ratio, depending on
  fragment impact speed.
• 40mm diameter.
• The baseline design has the ability to kill the
  baseline threat.
• Chosen seeker is all-weather capable.
• Bent-nose guidance system can operate within
  specified roll-rates.
• Offers no atypical EM and/or radioactive
  emissions.
• No chemical emissions also battery chosen to
  extend shelf life.

43
Baseline AssessmentDissimilarities and Issues

• Length of the baseline design 259 mm (about 10
  in). The ATK MK44, for example, employs bullets
  that are 170 mm (6.7 in) in length.
• Battery does not supply enough voltage to run all
  of the on-board systems.
• Bent-nose control design has the potential to
  interfere with the forward-mounted seeker.
• Previously mentioned length issue can also
  conflict with storage and operational
  requirements.

44
Baseline AssessmentLaunch Platform

• The following slide compares the CDD requirements
  (for firing rate, etc.) to a baseline gun
  system.
• The baseline launch system does not fully meet
  the CDD requirements.
• Therefore, rate-of-fire requirements would need
  to met through either a modification of the
  baseline or another existing system, or through
  increasing per-round accuracy such that the
  rate-of-fire requirement is effectively nullified.

45
Baseline Assessment