Atch 02 - SOO Sample Task 1 Armor Coupon Testing.docx

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS)

FOR

ARMOR COUPON TESTING

1. PROJECT OBJECTIVES: Evaluation and live-fire testing of 12 different armor coupons.

2. BACKGROUND: The Program Manager (PM), Family of Special Operations Vehicles (FOSOV) is responsible for evaluation of emerging vehicle technologies, testing of candidate commercial and tactical vehicle systems, research, development, engineering, procurement, and sustainment of FOSOV material solutions. PM-FOSOV is responsible for central program management of SOF Ground Mobility Platforms from cradle to grave.

3. SCOPE: SOF vehicles face many threats in the field. PM-FOSOV is always examining the effectiveness of different armor solutions to guard against these threats. For research and development purposes different armor solutions need to be fire tested to determine the ballistic resistance of metallic, nonmetallic, and composite armor against small arms projectiles.

This effort will test and evaluate 12 different armor solutions, that will be developed or procured by the Contractor and who will provide the Government with material certifications for each. The coupons will be a 2’ by 2’ piece of the complete armor recipe. The armor coupons will contain four different material types (Rolled Homogenous Armor (RHA), High Hardness Steel (HHS), 6AL-4V (Titanium Alloy, ASTM alloy Grade 5) and 5083 AL with a Tenyslon/Dyneema (hybrid ballistic liner) and be tested at three different thicknesses as listed below:

A. Rolled Homogenous Armor (RHA), ¼” thick B. RHA, 3/8” thick C. RHA, ½” thick D. Hardness Steel (HHS), ¼” thick E. HHS, 3/8” thick F. HHS, ½” thick G. 6AL-4V (Titanium Alloy, ASTM alloy Grade 5), ¼” thick H. 6AL-4V (Titanium Alloy, ASTM alloy Grade 5), 3/8” thick I. 6AL-4V (Titanium Alloy, ASTM alloy Grade 5), ½” thick The 5083 AL with ballistic liner will be tested at a total thickness of 1”. The 1” thickness will be composed of a sandwich of the 5083 AL and three different ballistic liner ballistic liner hybrid combinations as follows:

J. 1/8” thick 5083 AL, ¾” thick Tenyslon/ Dyneema combination, 1/8” thick 5083 AL for a total of 1” thick armor. Tenyslon/ Dyneema combinations to be 50/50.

K. 1/8” thick 5083 AL, ¾” thick Tenyslon/ Dyneema combination, 1/8” thick 5083 AL for a total of 1” thick armor. Tenyslon/ Dyneema combinations to be 40/60.

L. 1/8” thick 5083 AL, ¾” thick Tenyslon/ Dyneema combination, 1/8” thick 5083 AL for a total of 1” thick armor. Tenyslon/ Dyneema combinations to be 30/70.

The armor coupons will be tested against six different ballistic threats or weapon calibers. Those are:

1) 20mm Fragment Simulating Projectile (FSP)

2) 30 cal. FSP

3) 50 cal. FSP

4) 7.62mm x 51 Armor Piercing (AP)

5) 7.62mm x 51mm (M80 Ball)

6) 7.62mm x 39mm Non-AP

The armor coupons should also be tested at two different angles of obliquity. The angles to be used are 0 degrees and 30 degrees.

Multiple samples of each of the 12 panel compositions may be required to accomplish the range of threat testing. A minimum of 1 panel per threat, which for 12 armor coupon solutions being tested by 6 different threats means there will be a minimum requirement of 72 panels.

4. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS: Testing shall be performed in accordance with:

· MIL-STD-662F— V50 BALLISTIC TEST FOR ARMOR

· NATO STANAG 4569—PROTECTION LEVELS FOR OCCUPANTS OF LOGISTIC AND LIGHT ARMOURED VEHICLES

· MIL-DTL-46593B—PROJECTILE, CALIBERS .22, .30, .50, AND 20 mm FRAGMENT-SIMULATING

5. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS:

Task 1 – Evaluate the twelve different armor coupon samples. Evaluation factors include:

a. Weight: Compare weight of different coupons to each other. Provide table rating coupons from heaviest to lightest.

b. Ballistic protection: Evaluate different material types as listed in material spec sheets. Take note of strengths and weaknesses expected with use of each material.

c. Cost: Evaluate different materials in terms of cost. Record costs associated with material and if the material is seen to be easy/difficult to use in mass production and if this would decrease/increase a program costs.

Task 2 – Documentation: Develop and execute a test plan for the twelve different armor coupons. The Government shall concur with the test plan prior to start of test. Provide a written report, with recommendations including fielding risk assessment, cost vs. performance (return on investment) consideration, and performance comparisons, documenting the results of testing. The final report may be submitted in contractor format, however final approval / acceptance requires review of content by the Government.

Testing will be performed to the V50 ballistic limit for each armor coupon. Procedure for this is described in MIL-STD-662F. Information to be recorded for ballistic limit will be impact velocities used in computing V50's with highest partial penetration, lowest complete penetration, range (spread), and velocities of all rounds.

6. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS:

• Quality Standards: Testing should prove to not perform below the baseline.

• Timeliness Standards: The test plan shall be developed within 10 days after SOW. Fire testing should be completed within 30 days after Government approval of the test plan. A draft test report shall be submitted NLT 10 days after completion of testing. Final report shall be submitted 10 days after Government review of the draft report

7. SECURITY: Work to be performed is UNCLASSIFIED. Security is in accordance with Paragraph C.10 of STS PWS.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (QAP): QAP to be performed in accordance with Paragraph C.4 of the STS PWS.