JEFOP_ Gatlin_Transonic Truss-Braced Wing 19JUN20 Signed dfy.pdf

June 19, 2020

TO: 12/Research and Development Contracting Branch, Office of Procurement

Attn: Zach Wright

FROM: 267/Gregory M. Gatlin, Aerospace Research Engineer, Research Directorate

SUBJECT: Justification for Exception to the Fair Opportunity Process (JEFOP) for

New Task Order entitled “Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Low-Speed and

Buffet Wind Tunnel Tests” with The Boeing Company on Contract

NNL16AA04B, Total Estimated Cost $4 Million.

In accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2), the following information is provided to support this justification:

I. Recommendation

NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) intends to initiate a new cost-plus fixed fee (CPFF) task order with the Boeing Company (Boeing) under the Basic and Applied Aerospace

Research and Technology (BAART) contract. The purpose of this new task order is to continue to evolve the M=0.80 design of a Transonic Truss-Braced Wing (TTBW) configuration, while continuing to strive for fuel burn reductions as much as 60%. The second portion of a high-lift system wind tunnel investigation initiated in the previous contract phase will be completed, and a buffet wind tunnel model will be designed, built, and tested.

These efforts will move the configuration to a higher technology readiness level thereby further enabling the opportunity for a flight demonstration vehicle. This task order will be part of the NASA Advanced Air Vehicles Program.

There have been four prior phases of research and development contract work that have led to the current technology level of the TTBW. The first three phases were competed amongst

NASA’s SMAAART Contracts NNL08AA16B and NNL10AA05B contract holders resulting in awards to Boeing for each of these contract phases. The fourth phase was awarded noncompetitvely to Boeing under the BAART contract. Boeing has also been working to develop this technology internally, with internal funds, since 2009. As a result of these efforts, Boeing proprietary design tools and methods have been used to evolve the TTBW technology to its current state today. Based on Boeing’s past work and the use of company proprietary methods to develop this technology, Boeing is the only company capable of performing the proposed follow-on work. This new proposed task order builds upon Boeing efforts as described below.

II. Background

As part of the NASA Advanced Air Vehicles Program (AAVP), the Advanced Air Transport

Technology (AATT) Project is performing research into concepts, technologies, and tools that will enable dramatic reductions in noise and emissions, and increase the performance (reduced fuel burn) characteristics of subsonic/transonic fixed wing aircraft. The AATT project pursues a multi-generational approach addressing the needs of today but with an emphasis on establishing the technological foundations necessary to enable the capabilities needed in the decades ahead. Prior to the AAVP, the Fixed Wing Project within the Fundamental

Aeronautics Program funded a number of research projects for the purpose of addressing multiple N+3 goals, including reduced noise, emissions, and energy consumption. In an effort to reduce energy consumption, propulsive and aerodynamic efficiency increases have been addressed in recent research investigations, including a Phase I study conducted by Boeing under SMAART Contract NNL08AA16B Task Order NNL08AD01T for a total cost and fixed fee of approximately $1.9M. A key outcome of this study was the conceptual design of the Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) Transonic Truss-Braced Wing

(TTBW) configuration. This configuration showed significant potential to contribute to meeting NASA N+3 goals; however, also highlighted was a significant uncertainty in the wing weight estimate.

The successes of the Phase I study led to a SUGAR Phase II study, also conducted by Boeing under SMAAART Contract NNL08AA16B Task Order NNL11AA00T for a total cost and fixed fee of approximately $8.6M. The objectives of this study were to further refine the

TTBW configuration and reduce the uncertainty in the potential benefits with specific focus on reducing the uncertainty of the wing weight. The study included the development of a detailed full-scale, finite element model (FEM) of the wing and fuselage. This model was used to optimize the wing design subject to multiple design constraints including flutter. To validate the flutter predictions, an aeroelastically scaled wind-tunnel model was designed, fabricated, and tested. Additional goals of the wind-tunnel test were to demonstrate flutter suppression and assess the control law effects on gust loads.

Successful achievement of the Phase II goals in turn led to another follow-on study, Phase III, which was also conducted by Boeing under SMAAART Contract NNL10AA05B Task Order

NNL14AB51T for a total cost and fixed fee of approximately $4.6M. The Phase III task called for a higher fidelity refinement of the TTBW design at M=0.745, as well as the design, fabrication, and wind tunnel testing of a 4.5-percent scale model to verify performance.

Additional objectives of the Phase III task were to identify remaining technical challenges associated with the application of a truss-braced wing to a modern transport aircraft and provide recommendations. One more objective was to further evolve the M=0.745 design to a higher cruise Mach number, approaching M=0.80, and to provide a preliminary design report.

Extending the vehicle design to M=0.80 under Phase III enabled increased aircraft productivity and more closely aligned the vehicle with market demand in the single-aisle domestic transport class. It was also understood that a detailed design effort like the one conducted to define the M=0.745 aircraft was required to properly assess the drag associated with wing-strut interference on the M=0.80 aircraft. This was particularly true since the difficulty of obtaining an interference-free configuration increased with Mach number. The higher fidelity refinement of the TTBW design at M=0.745 completed by Boeing provided them with key and unique experience that was invaluable in the completion of the higher fidelity refinement of a M=0.80 configuration. All three phases described above were competed; however, Boeing was the only company to bid on the Phase III task.

Upon successful completion of the Phase III task, a Phase IV task was prepared and awarded to Boeing. This task was awarded noncompetitively to Boeing under the BAART Contract

NNL16AA04B, Task Order NNL17AA46T for a total CPFF of approximately $12.8M. The

Phase IV task was entitled “Transonic Truss-Braced Wing High-Speed and Low-Speed

Design and Tests” and included work in the following areas: Objective 1 - Conduct a high fidelity refinement of the TTBW design at M=0.80, develop an advanced M=0.80 conventional tube-and-wing configuration for comparison, identify remaining TTBW technical challenges, and provide recommendations; Objective 2 - Design and build a wind tunnel model of the M=0.80 configuration and conduct a high-speed wind tunnel investigation to verify performance; Objective 3 - Conduct a high fidelity refinement of the high-lift system design; and Objective 4 - Design and build, a high-lift configuration wind tunnel model, and conduct a low-speed wind tunnel investigation to verify performance. In addition, the aeroelastic Finite Element Model (FEM) was updated for the M=0.80 configuration, airplane center of gravity and inertias were determined to facilitate horizontal and vertical tail sizing, and wing control surface assessments were conducted to specify the control surface layout.

Boeing leveraged results from the previous 3 research tasks to support the Phase IV task.

III. Nature and/or Description of Required Supplies/Services

This proposed new task order for Phase V entitled “Transonic Truss-Braced Wing Low-Speed and Buffet Wind Tunnel Tests” includes a follow-on, low-speed wind tunnel investigation that is a continuation of the low-speed test conducted at the end of the Phase IV task and a new buffet wind tunnel model and wind tunnel investigation. A low-speed wind tunnel investigation conducted at the end of the Phase IV task produced valuable and encouraging results on the high-speed configuration. However, due to unexpected operational difficulties encountered with the wind tunnel model support system, the test matrix was only partially completed. Thus, the low-speed wind tunnel investigation proposed under this new task order will use the existing low-speed wind tunnel model and it will build upon the testing and results from the last low-speed wind tunnel investigation. A wind tunnel model appropriate for the buffet wind tunnel test does not exist, so a new wind tunnel model designed specifically for a buffet test will be required.

The low-speed wind tunnel investigation will consist of pre-test preparations, conducting a 7-week, single shift wind tunnel test, and analyzing and reporting the results. The anticipated cost of this effort is approximately $1M. The buffet wind tunnel investigation will consist of pre-test preparations, having a wind tunnel model designed and built, conducting a 4-week, double-shift wind tunnel test, and analyzing and reporting the results. The anticipated cost of this effort is approximately $3M. The knowledge and expertise Boeing has gained throughout the multiple phases of the tasks completed, along with the limited rights data of the wing airfoils and associated pressure data, results in the Boeing Company being the only company suited to conduct the follow-on work identified. The total estimated value of this proposed new task order is $4M. This proposed new task order fits within the scope of the BAART contract Performance Work Statement under A.2 Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics, and

Acoustics: A.2.1.1, Advanced Configurations, A.2.1.2, Integration and Interaction of Aircraft

Components, and A.2.2, Computational Modeling and Simulation. Further, this proposed new task order falls within the BAART contract performance period and within the maximum contract value.

IV. Identification of the Exception to Fair Opportunity and Supporting Rationale

FAR 16.505(b)(1)(i) requires the Contracting Officer provide each awardee under a multiple award contract, a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,500 unless a statutory exception applies. Specifically, the exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for this acquisition is FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), which states that “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.” The work in this proposed new task order builds upon extensive past efforts with Boeing to develop a Transonic Truss-

Braced Wing vehicle directed at satisfying the N+3 goals of reduced fuel burn and reduced emissions. Boeing has carried out four phases of work, as previously described, to evolve the

Transonic Truss-Braced Wing configuration that was first tested in the Phase III wind tunnel investigation. Boeing proprietary methods have been used throughout these first four phases to develop the current unique and cutting-edge configuration. Key portions of the results, along with the final configuration, were provided with limited rights. These limited rights data would make it prohibitive to award the current task to another company. Based on

Boeing’s successful efforts in Phase I, II, III, and IV, they have developed the unique expertise relative to the design of the current Transonic Truss-Braced Wing configuration.

The lessons learned throughout the evolution of the configuration provide a unique and high level of experience and understanding by Boeing that would be unmatched by any other contractor at this point in time. Because of their long history of designing, wind-tunnel testing, evaluating, and further evolving the TTBW design, Boeing is the only source capable of providing the continued testing and development of TTBW. Boeing’s unique knowledge of the technology, including the design tools, testing processes, and previously resolved technical issues and upgrades, make Boeing the only source capable of providing the required services within the timeframe specified and without substantial duplication of cost. Award to any other company would result in duplication of cost to NASA that would not be recovered through competition as NASA has already invested approximately $27M.

V. Determination by the Contracting Officer That the Anticipated Cost to the

Government Will Be Fair and Reasonable

The CPFF amount for this acquisition will be determined fair and reasonable by the

Contracting Officer prior to award of this proposed new task order. Actions anticipated to ensure reasonableness will be accomplished using the procedures and criteria contained in the

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), NASA FAR Supplement (NFS), and other regulatory documents as applicable. Detailed documentation and justification of reasonableness will be disclosed in the Price Negotiation Memorandum (PNM) which will be prepared using the evaluation of Boeing quoted pricing, compared to the Independent Government Estimate

(IGE), and the pricing of previous similar efforts. Certified cost or pricing data will be obtained and used in determining a fair and reasonable cost.

VI. Other Facts Supporting the Justification None.

VII. Actions the Agency May Take to Remove or Overcome Any Barriers To

Increasing Fair Opportunity Before Any Subsequent Acquisition For the

Supplies or Services

LaRC may have future requirements that can only be met by Boeing. However, the

Contracting Officer will continue to scrutinize all SOWs received to ensure fair opportunity is appropriately given. LaRC typically looks for proactive steps that can be taken to eliminate barriers to competition for future requirements. However, there are limitations with regard to use of existing data, as Boeing has only authorized the Government limited data rights.

Because of the design and configuration of the software tool components, it makes it difficult to compete amongst other vendors. Additionally, LaRC has no known future requirements for this technology at this time and lacks the ability to incentivize the other BAART contractors to invest the substantial sums that would be required to establish an alternate source for this service.

Technical Certification:

I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the data furnished above is complete and accurate.

Gregory M. Gatlin Date

Aerospace Research Engineer, Configuration Aerodynamics Branch, Research Directorate

Contracting Officer Certification:

I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the data furnished above is complete and accurate.

Zachary M. Wright Date

Contracting Officer

Concurrence:

Liliana J. Richwine Date

Head, Research and Development Contracting

Branch, Office of Procurement

Stephen P. Delange Date

Office of Chief Counsel

Susan E. McClain Date

Procurement Officer

Determination:

Based upon my review of the above, I have determined the exception that precludes the fair opportunity process for this acquisition as stated in paragraph IV applies to this task order.

David F. Young Date

Competition Advocate