FA9101-25-Q-Slipper_Wear-541330.pdf

28 Feb 25

MEMORANDUM FOR VENDORS REGISTERED UNDER NAICS CODE 541330 –

ENGINEERING SERVICES

FROM: AFMC/AFTC/PZIA (Arnold)

SUBJECT: Sources Sought Market Research Request: JESTR Slipper Wear – Modeling and Simulation

Software and Development of Wear Reduction Techniques

Disclaimer:

This sources sought notice is for information purposes to assist the Government in developing an acquisition strategy, if funding is received. It does not constitute a solicitation and shall not be construed as a commitment by the Government; therefore, this is not a request for quote. Responses in any form are not offers or quotes and the Government is under no obligation to award a contract / agreement as a result of this announcement. No funds are available to pay for preparation of responses to this announcement. Any information submitted by respondents to this request is strictly voluntary.

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code:

The anticipated NAICS code for this requirement is 541330 – Engineering Services with the business size standard of $25M.

Requirement Overview:

During sled tests at the Holloman High Speed Test Track (HHSTT) and other sled tracks, sleds are constrained to the rail by metal ‘slippers’ that wrap around the rail head and ensure the sled follows the trajectory defined by the track. Slipper wear, or the removal of slipper material, continues to be a limitation for certain sled tests. The physical interaction between the slippers and the rail during sled testing is not well understood. Excessive slipper wear is thought to be caused by large forces generated from impacts between the slippers and the rail, friction forces applied over time, and potentially other interaction effects. High speeds and long travel distances tend to increase slipper wear, but the accurate prediction of slipper wear has proven to be challenging. Slippers that wear to the point of structural failure are of most concern, especially with higher velocities and longer travel distances expected in the future. One of the central problems in the development of wear-resistant materials for use in slippers is the lack of a validated, high-speed slipper wear prediction model. Without a validated prediction model, the amount of wear slippers are likely to experience during a sled test cannot be accurately predicted.

This notice is to inform Industry that the Arnold Engineering Development Complex is seeking sources that have the capability to provide the following products:

1. Develop a physics-based model to predict slipper wear caused by slipper rail interaction during sled runs at the Holloman High Speed Test Track (HHSTT) to an accuracy of within +/- 10% of actual wear. The model will be based on measurable sled run parameters such as sled type, weight, velocity profile, quasi-steady state sled forces, etc.

2. and material properties of the slipper wear surface, the rail, and any coatings used. The model will be implemented via software that can be run on a government owned computer system. A limited amount of government furnished slipper wear data is available for use, however it is

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE TEST CENTER (AFMC)

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE CALIFORNIA

anticipated that additional data may be required to fully develop and validate the slipper wear model.

3. Using the slipper wear model, create a catalog of slipper wear mitigation techniques providing a summarization of each method, an estimate of the effectiveness and cost of each method compared to the standard practice of using slippers fabricated from 4130 steel, and any ancillary effects of using the method to reduce slipper wear. Sled testing may be required to validate the effectiveness of specific wear mitigation methods selected by the government.

The contractor must be capable of furnishing all required labor, material, facilities, and equipment to produce the required physics-based model and associated software.

Government Market Research Request from Vendor

1. Provide supporting documentation justifying the vendor’s capability of meeting this requirement.

If the vendor has been awarded previous contract(s) and / or agreements that are similar in nature, provide details.

a.

2. Provide business CAGE code and business size – large or small. If a small business, identify if the business is a HUBZone, 8(a), SDVOSB, WOSB, or EDWOSB.

3. If available, identify pre-existing contract vehicle(s) that would be available to the Government for the procurement of the requirement such as: DoD ESI, General Service Administration (GSA)

Federal Supply Schedules, NASA SEWP, or any other decentralized contract vehicle the

Government could utilize.

4. If the Government determined to utilize a FAR based contract to procure the requirement, provide an estimated total evaluated price.

5. Identify subcontractor(s) that would be needed to support this requirement, if any.

6. If the Government made the determination to procure the requirement using authority 10 U.S.C.

4022 - Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain prototype projects, provide supporting documentation justifying how the company would satisfy at least one criteria of the

Appropriate Use of Authority requirement detailed in (d)(1)(A)-(C) within the authority:

(A) There is at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research institution participating to a significant extent in the prototype project.

(B) All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government are small businesses (including small businesses participating in a program described under section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638)) or nontraditional defense contractors.

(C) At least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by sources other than the Federal Government.

7. If the Government determined to procure the requirement utilizing 10 U.S.C. 4022, provide an estimated cost to develop a prototype for this requirement, and specify which prototype definition, or combination of definitions, that best fits the vendor’s vision of prototype development. Prototype definition – 10 U.S.C 4022 (e)(5)(A)-(F):

(A) a proof of concept, model, or process, including a business process;

(B) reverse engineering to address obsolescence;

(C) a pilot or novel application of commercial technologies for defense purposes;

(D) agile development activity;

(E) the creation, design, development, or demonstration of operational utility; or

(F) any combination of subparagraphs (A) through (E).

8. If the Government determined to procure the requirement utilizing 10 U.S.C. 4022, provide an estimated cost to develop the finalized requirement in the follow-on production phase once the prototype was determined successful (10 U.S.C. 4022(f)).

9. Provide any notable standard business practices in regards to data rights and intellectual property pertaining to the prototype and follow-on production phase.

10. Provide experience related to metal fatigue studies and software programming.

NOTE:

- Upon receipt of vendor’s submission, the Agreements Officer (AO) / Contracting Officer (CO) will pull the vendor’s NIST SP 800-171 Assessment date and score. The vendor’s assessment date shall be no older than three (3) years old to receive other than Distribution A documentation, if other than Distribution A documentation arises.

- The AO / CO will pull and consider the vendor’s Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS)

Supplier Risk score from Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) upon receipt of submission.

Submission Details:

- Submit Responses To: greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil

- Submission Due Date: 14 March 2025, 10:00 AM CST

- Submission Requirements: 11 – 12 Font Size, no more than 10 pages (excluding cover page), Word or PowerPoint

GREGGORY C. JONES, NH-III, DAF

Contracting Officer / Agreements Officer mailto:greggory.jones.4@us.af.mil