Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

OPTIMIZED LIGHT TACTICAL VEHICLE

U.S. Army Tank Automotive


Research, Development and
Engineering Center

James Capouellez, Kari Drotleff, Gregory Wolfe, Alan Cichosz, Floyd Helsel, Andrew Mikaila, US Army, Research
Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM), Tank Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center
(TARDEC), 6501 E. 11 Mile Rd, Warren MI, 48397 (586) 282-8541
Joseph R. Pickens and Robert W. Semelsberger Jr., Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC), 100 CTC Drive,
Johnstown, PA, 15904 (814) 269-2783
Steve Kerr, GS Engineering, Inc., 47500 US Hwy 41, Houghton, Mi 49931 (906) 482-1235
Ed Wettlaufer, Altair Engineering, Inc., 1820 e. Big Beaver, Troy, MI 48083 (248) 614-2400
Pierre Massoud and Julie Wood, World Technical Services, Inc (WTSI), 2301 W. Big Beaver Rd, Suite 921, Troy, MI
48084 (586) 698-0762
Brett Barringer, AVL, 47519 Halyard drive, Plymouth, MI, 48170 (734) 414-9668

ABSTRACT
U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research Development
and Engineering Center (TARDEC) technology has been
developed, tested and proven to meet M-ATV current
mine blast requirements with commercial seats and
current HMMWV crushbases. TARDEC achieved this
success by inventing a new vehicle underbody shape to
mitigate most of the energy produced by the mine [1].
The shapes effectiveness is increased by combining high
strength aluminum alloys with friction stir welding to
provide high strength yet extremely elastic welds, and
honeycomb material and composites to further eliminate
energy transferred to the crew. To make the technology
more applicable for military needs/requirements, a
concerted effort focused on making the vehicle lighter,
lower, provide better ergonomics, and minimize
sustainment/life cycle costs. TARDEC developed a
software program to optimize weight, height, and interior
volume yet maintain superior mine blast performance, as
demonstrated by TARDEC previously. State of the art
armor and structural material such as ceramics,
composites, and honeycomb materials were utilized to
further reduce the weight of the vehicle.
The Optimized Light Tactical Vehicle (O-LTV) has
undergone preliminary mine blast finite element analysis
that has shown that the structure should be able to survive
a blast 4 that is four times the threshold requirement for
the M-ATV (this analysis does not include the energy
absorption kit installed under the vehicle, which should
provide additional mine-blast protection). Weight studies
have indicated that it is possible to produce this type of
light tactical vehicle (LTV) at a combat vehicle weight
with full payload less than 15,400 lbs with frag kit 5
(FK5), FK7, and M-ATV underbody protection. No light
tactical vehicle in the US military now or in the near
future has the mine blast performance as demonstrated by
TARDEC. Perhaps most importantly, TARDEC has
developed a new design philosophy that may enable the
US military to keep that completive edge where it counts
most, on the battlefield.

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

Figure 1: Optimized Light Tactical Vehicle


1. INTRODUCTION
The US Military has long been the dominate leader for
ground vehicle military technology. Maintaining this
technological gap into the future is going to require
adaptability, foresight, and a strong commitment to be the
best. In support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), the U.S. Army and
Marine Corps have been investing in Mine Resistant
Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle systems that provide
much-needed mine blast protection. These MRAP
systems are in the medium and heavy tactical truck
classes, and limit the ability to use the massive MRAPs
for chasing terrorists in urban areas, off main roads, and
over less stable bridges. [2]. Seventy-two percent of the
worlds bridges cannot hold the MRAP, says Brig. Gen.
Ronald Johnson, assistant deputy commander for plans,
policies and operations [3]. Its heft also restricts several
of the vehicles from being transported by C-130 cargo
aircraft or the amphibious ships that carry Marine
equipment and supplies. Pentagon budget documents
calculate the cost to fly one MRAP (from Charleston
AFB) to Iraq at $135,000 [4]. Weight and cost place
limitations on usage of the MRAPs within theater,

Page1

especially such areas found in Afghanistan. The cost for


transportation and sustainment of the MRAP family of
vehicles is significantly greater than the High Mobility
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV). More
importantly, resources required for transportation and
other life cycle costs for MRAPs and M-ATVs will
adversely impact available resources for vehicles,
equipment, technology, training and man-power for
current contingencies and future battles.
2. MONSTER GARAGE APPROACH
TARDEC was challenged by the then Vice Chief of
Staff (GEN Richard Cody) to design an underbody
structure that would provide a HMMWV with the same
mine blast protection as a full-size MRAP vehicle.
TARDEC was further directed to lead a joint governmentindustry collaborative effort to identify existing
technologies that could improve current light tactical
vehicle systems. To accomplish these goals, TARDEC
assembled a government and industry team of subject
matter experts (SMEs) consisting of nearly 100 associates
from more than 20 organizations and companies in a
Discovery Channels Monster Garage like approach.
The team looked at innovative government and
commercial technologies, leveraged existing research and
development (R&D) programs, examined test and
engineering data, reviewed lessons learned from
OIF/OEF, and used high fidelity modeling and simulation
(M&S) analyses to optimize the design solutions and
balance trades. Lead by TARDEC, this government
industry consortium was able to identify a vast array of
technologies, in less than a month, which could benefit
light tactical vehicle systems. By 2009, 29 of the
32 technologies recommended during the Monster
Garage process were being incorporated into light
tactical military systems.
3. UNDERBODY PROTECTION
As part of the Monster Garage program, it was
quickly determined that underbody shape and structure
played a large role in providing protection from land
mines and under vehicle IED threats.
The challenge of developing underbody structures
that would provide greatly increased underbody blast
protection in a vehicle that is half the weight and twice as
close to the threat is not new. The South Africans utilized
an LTV similar to the HMMWV, during the South
African War [5]. Many kits for these vehicles were also
developed to counter the evolving threats. However, the
South African LTV Achilles heel was its inability to adapt
a kit to protect it from land mines. Eventually, the South
Africans abandoned the traditional LTV and developed a
new fleet of vehicles that were significantly heavier

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

(medium to heavy tactical vehicles) that were high off the


ground. These vehicles were the origin of the current
MRAP vehicles [6].
To have good mobility like the HMMWV, a vehicle
has to be close to the ground with a large wheel base. The
V shape required to benefit a wide vehicle like the
HMMWV would greatly reduce the ground clearance of
the vehicle, potentially reducing the survivability of the
HMMWV or the vehicle would have to be so high off the
ground that stability becomes an issue. Other issues of
concern include enclosing fuel systems, drive lines,
engines and transmissions packaged inside the V that may
overheat. The MRAPS and M-ATV vehicles maximize
ground clearance and hull shape, leaving them high off
the ground, placing them at risk to be easily detected and
destroyed in future battles.
4. THE INVENTION OF THE DOUBLE V CAB
The most advanced technology that resulted from the
Monster Garage Process was the design of the opposing
double V armor cab. The key aspects that make the
double V armor hull superior to the traditional South
African style is that the V in the middle of the hull is the
furthest from the ground, providing over 36 inches of
ground clearance, similar to MRAPs. The longitudinal

Figure 2: Double "V" Cab Invention

V s were designed and integrated such that an


underbody blast at the center of the vehicle (which is
typically the worst case scenario) would be sliced by the
V and flow past the underbody without imparting a large
amount of energy to the cab. This was because the
impingement angle to a centric mine blast was low
enough to allow supersonic flow over nearly all the
material except for the center V.
The design also breaks up the mine blast so that the
plates are not significantly loaded to put a concentrated
load on a weld. Additionally, the angle of the
longitudinal Vs was steep enough so that a blast normal
to the long apex axis of the V would have to be centered
off to the side of the vehicle. The expectation would be
that the blast would flow in the path of least resistance
and little energy would be transferred to the vehicle.

Page2

This concept was further validated through modeling and


simulation.
5. ADVANCED MODELING & SIMULATION
As part of this program, several underbody hull
designs were evaluated using modeling and simulation
(Figs 3-5), including the double V hull, a traditional Vshaped hull, and complex shaped hull that would only
maximize venting for a centric blast. The HIP team
improved on the typical Lagrangian solution by adding
an ALE (Arbitrary Lagrange Euler) [7] mesh to simulate
the air and explosive to capture the mechanical - fluid
interactions [8-9] of the event.

In addition to a hull breach and overpressurization of


the cab, a critical element for fatalities/casualties is
energy being transferred to the occupant through the
vehicle. The baseline used for comparison was the
amount of kinetic energy that is transferred to the cab
from the mine blast.
Figure 6 shows how effective the opposing double V
cab is at reducing energy transferred to the hull structure.
The TARDEC Double V hull performed significantly
better than all the other solutions. From the graph, the
traditional V has approximately 7 times more kinetic
energy transferred to hull in comparison to TARDECs
double V underbody cab. The dashed line in the chart
shows the energy change from moving the threat 12
inches rearward (more normal to the center V). This
graph shows a desired result in that the energy being
transferred to the vehicle is relatively consistent and not
based on location along the centerline.

Figure 6: Graph of Kinetic Energy Transferred to the


Cab Based on Assumptions Above

6. DEVELOPMENT OF DOUBLE V ATDS


US Army Vice Chief of Staff GEN Richard A. Cody
gave the direction to build demonstrators to gain a better
understanding of whether or not the designs would realize
the modeling and simulation (M&S) predictions. This
effort became known as the HMMWV Improvement
Program (HIP, formerly known as Monster Garage). The
HIP followed the same process used in Monster Garage in
that experts from private industry and government were
brought together to brainstorm solutions to challenges to
expedite the best solutions. Once the technologies
identified in Monster Garage were transitioned to the
vehicle Program Managers, TARDEC then focused on the
remaining hurdle, the underbody protection system. The
Vice Chief of Staff of the Army tasked TARDEC through
the Department of the Army (DA) to demonstrate that
MRAP protection levels for underbody mine blast and
underbody IED blast/fragmentation are attainable on a
lightweight tactical vehicle. Based on this guidance,
TARDEC continued development of
Lightweight Vehicle Underbody Protection
System (LVUPS) Demonstrators.
7. OPTIMIZED WELDING PROCESSES
Engineering analysis conducted early in
the Monster Garage and LVUPS programs
concluded that high strength aluminum (Al)
alloys, such as 2139, 2195, or 2519 would be
the optimum material solution for
fragmentation and blast requirements [10-16].
Alloys 2139 and 2195 have ballistic
performance that is approximately 20 percent
better than the Army standard Al armor alloy
5083[11]. Yield strength and ductility, critical
parameters for mine blast performance, of
high-strength Al alloys are approximately 40
percent greater than 5083. However, failures
from mine blasts typically occur where the
plates are joined together. This is because the

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

Page3

blast pressure acting over the plates produces a stress riser


along the edge of the plates. Thus the maximum energy
the structure can withstand requires a joint that can absorb
the greatest amount of energy.
Research concluded that friction stir welding (FSW)
would produce a joint that would be able to accept the
greatest amount of energy. Friction stir welding (Fig 7) is
a revolutionary manufacturing process that produces
Joint Line

Profiled Pin
Shoulder

Workpiece

Figure 8: Comparison of FSW Joints to GMA Welded Joints.

Anvil

Stir Zone

Figure 7: Pictorial Representation of the Friction Stir


Welding Process

solid-state welds by utilizing a non-consumable, rotating


tool that when transverses along the joint line, creates
friction and plastic work that heats, softens, and
mechanically stirs material across the joint producing
high strength, highly ductile, low distortion welds that can
absorb a lot of energy before they fail.
Development and testing of FSW for high strength
aluminum alloys, directed by TARDECs PIF team,
demonstrated a significant improvement over
conventional gas metal arc welding. A comparison of the
amount of energy that a FSW joint can withstand in
comparison to current production methods of GMA
welding is made in Fig 8. This means that a ballistically
welded cab of Al 2139 could have a 20-percent
improvement in ballistics and fragment protection,
however it could have an 85-percent improvement in
mine blast protection by utilizing FSW.
Because friction stir welding can weld virtually any
aluminum and even dissimilar aluminum alloys, it allows
the designer to use the best material for the job. This also
means that designs can take advantage of the new
aluminum alloys as they are discovered or developed,
such as 2139. FSW also minimizes many of the
environmental health and safety (EH&S) concerns
relating to traditional arc welding and is truly a green
technology since the process requires no consumables
such as filler wires or shielding gases for aluminum alloys
and produces virtually zero emissions and dangerous
fumes, as shown in Figure 9.

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

Friction stir welding is also a very controlled process


that can be fully automated and results in a high quality
weld every time unlike GMA. Most importantly,
TACOM LCMC Industrial Based Operations (IBO)
performed an assessment on friction stir welding. The
result of the assessment was that friction stir welding is a
viable process in a production setting and the underbody
system can be integrated at Army Depots. This was
expected since FSW is basically taking two pieces of
material together, clamping it, and having the tooling
traverse through the joint.

Figure 9: Rotating Friction Stir Weld Tool Making


a Weld in Thick Aluminum Plate

8. TESTING & EVALUATION OF UNDERBODY


BLAST PERFORMANCE
TARDEC produced four demonstrator vehicles that
consisted of a monocoque friction stir welded lower hull
joined to a representative rolled homogeneous armor
(RHA) upper cab integrated onto an M1151 (HMMWV
Lightweight) chassis.
All the demonstrator structures were tested at the
Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Aberdeen, MD. The Army
Research Laboratory assessment indicated that all
threshold testing resulted in no injuries except for one
potential leg injury out of the four fully instrumented
Hybrid III anthropomorphic test devices used for each test
[10]. Test results also show that the objective

Page4

requirements could be achieved by upgrading the seats to


currently available seating technology.
The key to success was the double V design that
vents the threat away from the crew compartment. While
the occupant compartment was not penetrated and
remained intact, the rear cargo compartment was treated
as sacrificial and vented the blast by allowing the energy
to go with the components being blown off the vehicle.
Although parts were found hundreds of feet away from
the event, the cab never went more than one to two feet
higher than its original position. The cab acted as if it
was isolated from the event while the blast flowed around
the cab. This technology is owned by the government and
a Special Notice entitled Design Approach for Armoring
Tactical Vehicle Cabs under USA-SNOTE-080313-015,
dated March 13, 2008 was used to transition the
developed hull design, material and manufacturing
process technologies to the DoD community.
Although the LVUPS or HIP cab successfully
demonstrated that MRAP protection is possible on a LTV,
it was not light enough to be used on a fielded HMMWV
chassis. Also the height of the cab would have to be
lowered for traditional transportation.

Figure 10: FSW HMMWV Lower Double V-Hull Prior to Assembly


With the Upper Cab Structure and Integration Onto the HMMWV
Chassis.

9. VEHICLE DESIGN OPTIMIZATION


This program identified significant vehicle design
issues, but a bigger issue is whether or not a vehicle can
be designed to a continuously evolving threat. Can the
design be significantly adaptable so that it can quickly
change as the threats change? Side and overhead
protection kits can be quickly integrated onto vehicles.
History has shown that underbody protection is one area
that is extremely difficult to update with a kit due to
ground clearance issues, significant added weight, and
increasingly complex threat scenarios. Adverse impacts
to the automotive performance of the vehicle have to be
addressed as well.
The one part of the cab that cant be changed is its
structure. Generally, once the structure is designed, the
entire structure would need to be replaced to be updated.
The greatest stress loading that is going to be placed on
the structure is going to come from a mine blast.

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

TARDEC, in conjunction with its industry partners,


developed a mine blast software program that worked in a
CAD software package to quickly evaluate how design
changes would impact survivability. This software could
also be used in conjunction with CAD optimization tools
to optimize weight and size while optimizing mine blast
performance.

Figure 11: CAD Mine Blast Optimization Tool, Developed


by TARDEC.

While optimizing the shape for mine blast, one


could hold a floor width constant, roof to floor dimension
constant, and roof to ground constant so that interior
height constraints could be met and the vehicle height
requirement as well as seat width requirement could also
be met at the same time, which are critical parameters for
the HMMWV. This software was developed because it
can provide an extremely quick analysis and did not
require highly detailed finite element analysis (FEA) and
meshing of the model. This allowed various cab
underbody shapes to be evaluated and then optimized,
enabling engineers to quickly evaluate many design
options to develop the best structure. This structure was
then validated with high fidelity FEA mine blast software
analysis. This tool was able to remove approximately 800
lbs from the structure, reduce the height of the cab to 78
inches and significantly improve ergonomics while
maintaining superior mine blast performance.
TARDEC continued to utilize the Monster Garage
process to apply automotive racing weight reduction
optimization tools and apply them to mine blast analysis.
In racing, topology optimization software is utilized to
take the vehicles structure and allow the FEA program to
eliminate mass, but maintain a predefined safety factor.
This process used by winning organizations on the racing
circuit and leading automotive consultants who can
typically reduce the weight of a chassis by 25% in typical
commercial vehicles.
This technology was combined with mine blast
software analysis to determine the minimum structure
required to handle the stresses produced from the

Page5

Figure 12: Morphing Weight Optimization Applied to the


Optimized LTV Cab, rear view.

simulated mine blast. Due to time limitations, only one


analysis could be performed. The parameters for the
analysis was to hold a minimum thickness of 3/8 inch
thick plate everywhere and allow material removal
everywhere else, with the max stress having a factor of
safety of 1.2. This analysis concluded that 1,790 lbs
could be removed from the structure and still handles the
stresses from the mine blast.
To make the vehicle more adaptable to
reconfiguration, TARDEC utilized an A cab + B kit + C
kit approach. (Fig 13) By separating the armor into three
separate layers, a highly advanced underbody armor
system can be developed. The A cab or hull will still be
friction stir welded, but it would be pocketed. The
pocketed section is the structure required to handle the
stresses of the blast. The pocketed areas are filled with
lightweight armor solutions specifically tailored to
mission specific threats. Above this section would be a
thick section of energy absorbing material to space the
skin, which is the third layer of the original armor.
Options for optimizing this type of armor package are
almost endless. By dividing the armor and extending the
layer, the performance of the armor is increased against
fragmented threats. This also allows the skin layer to
manage a significant amount of energy from the blast
through deformation. Aluminum honeycomb, a typical
energy absorbing material, is used because it is light and
absorbs a huge amount of energy before transferring what
remains to the base plate.
This optimization could then be combined with
TARDECs Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Survivability
Army Technology Objective (TWVS ATO) armor
developmental program. Utilizing the best armor
packages currently available, a total of 998 lbs can be
removed from the original HIP vehicle. However, by
varying materials and thicknesses, the governmentindustry team believes that the morphing & structural load
path analysis software tool combined with further armor
developments could substantially reduce the weight of the
optimized LTV cab further.

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

Figure 13: A cab + B kit + C kit Underbody Armor Approach

9.1 RUN-FLAT TIRE IMPROVEMENTS


(RUN-FLAT INSERT ELIMINATED)
Further survivability enhancement and weight
reduction are achievable by replacing the current run-flat
tire technology that utilizes run-flat inserts with advanced
tire technology (Fig 14) [17]. New tire technology has
been developed that substantially increases survivability,
eliminates the need for heavy run-flat inserts, significantly
reduces air pressure requirements and provides full (or
near full) speed capability in degraded/damaged mode
(punctured tire).

Figure 14: Survivability Enhanced, Variable Footprint,


Lightweight Runflat Tire

This run-flat technology is built directly into the tire,


yet maintains the normal variable footprint of a traditional
pneumatic tire. This makes the tire/wheel assembly much
lighter and far more survivable than normal military runflat technology. A significant developmental effort has
gone into evaluating the technology for light trucks to
heavy duty platforms like the Stryker. The tire is
comprised of carbon fiber encapsulated composite hoops
incorporated into the tire tread. The undertread layer
adheres the tire tread to the primed encapsulated
composite hoops. These composite hoops are equally
spaced above the belts in the undertread region. Carbon
fiber is utilized with the binder so that the resulting
composite has high modulus and high strength.
This system allows the tire to function normally even
with no air pressure in the tire. This characteristic is
especially important for military vehicles. Recent testing

Page6

of a retreaded HMMWV prototype tire has demonstrated


800 mile run-flat capability at speeds of 50 mph without
failure. This range would enable a military vehicle to
complete a mission without having to change a tire.
Additional testing has also demonstrated run-flat
capability at a load rating as high as 5,000 lbs. This was
achieved by taking a standard HMMWV tire (rated to
only 3,750 lbs), removing the tread of a new tire, adding
the carbon fiber hoops and retreading the tire.
The HMMWV prototype tire was evaluated on the
road wheel and passed the FMVSS DOT 139 test criteria
for Light Truck. The load deflection curve is the same as
the standard pneumatic tire except at a much lower
pressure. This means that the ride and handling is going
to be very similar to the standard tire.
By eliminating the run-flat, approximately 115 lbs
can be eliminated from the HMMWV or 250 lbs from a
JLTV. However, if the need for a spare tire can be
eliminated, a huge weight savings occur by eliminating
the spare tire and spare tire carrier. This could result in a
weight reduction of an additional 250 lbs. By eliminating
the run-flat inserts, logistics would also be significantly
reduced because only the tire would have to be replaced
when the tire is damaged. Logistic and maintenance
issues with inserts are eliminated and life cycle costs
would be reduced for most if not all platforms that utilize
run-flat inserts. More importantly, the tire would enable
the vehicle to complete its mission before it would need to
be repaired.
9.2 ADDITIONAL OPTIMIZATION WEIGHT
REDUCTION
One of the greatest areas for weight reduction was the
rear cargo area. The heavy hatch was eliminated because
the protection was consolidated onto the cab. This is one
area on the baseline HMMWV that a lot of weight is
wasted with minimal benefit.
TARDECs Light Tactical Vehicle ATO armor
developments can also be used to further reduce the
weight of the cab by replacing the all aluminum doors
with advanced composites. Additional weight savings
can be achieved by improving the shape and optimizing
the material thickness for the glass frames for the doors
and windshields.
The shape of the cab was also modified to maximize
the space inside the cab and to allow for the packaging of
all the hardware required to be installed in the HMMWV.
Utilization of the hardware and suggestions by military
personnel were constantly feed into the conceptual
optimized light tactical vehicle. Figures 15 shows the
optimized light tactical vehicle packaged and partially
integrated onto the HMMWV ECVI chassis.

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

9.3 LIGHTWEIGHT ENGINE & POWER


UPGRADE
During the conceptual development for the
Optimized Light Tactical Vehicle the team kept in close
contact with developments from the Fuel Efficiency
Demonstrator (FED) Program. One key development that
could optimize the LTV is utilization of a lightweight 3.0
Liter engine. This engine is 400 lbs lighter than the
current engine and is expected to produce 225 250 hp
and provide more torque than the current engine. This is
a win-win because it is lighter, more powerful, & has the
potential to match up with the existing HMMWV
transmission.
CONCLUSIONS
To make the tested TARDEC technology more
applicable for military needs/requirements, a concerted
effort focused on making the vehicle lighter; lower, with
improved ergonomics, yet minimizing sustainment,
support, and life cycle costs. To make an optimized LTV,
the structure is going to have to survive a significant mine
threat and yet have appurtenances to take advantage of
better technology as it is continuously being invented and
developed for current and future threats. The optimized
light tactical vehicle designed by TARDEC has
undergone preliminary mine blast software analysis and
shows that the structure should be able to survive a blast 4
times that of the M-ATV threshold and even more by
employing energy mitigation devices to the structure.
Initial weight studies have indicated that this capability
along with FK 5 and FK 7 protection can be integrated
onto a HMMWV chassis and yet be lighter than the
currently fielded HMMWV with FK 5 only.
Most importantly its got to be economical long term.
By making the base structure light, it will provide a high
degree of transportability options that will save cost in the
future. Further, by being able to remove significant
amount of weight while operating in peacetime, the life
cycle cost of the hardware can be significantly reduced.
If a LTV can provide the same protection as an M-ATV,
the greatest savings may result from transitioning some
missions from an M-ATV or MRAP to a LTV integrated
onto a legacy platform (HMMWV) that has a
considerably lower overall cost. Furthermore, by being
able to have a structure that can quickly adapt and
integrate life saving technology to a vehicle platform the
cost to expedite the development of full vehicle platforms
could be eliminated and most importantly the time to get
the technology to theater to protect the soldier could be
significantly reduced. Market research has indicated that
integrating this technology onto the HMMWV chassis via
RECAP may be a viable economical option and might be
completed within the cost limitations of a RECAP effort.

Page7

The evolution of this program has resulted in


numerous spin-outs of technology and capability. For
example, the Fuel Efficiency Demonstrator (FED)
program used the Monster Garage process as the baseline
process because of its success. The Double V was the
first fore to aft V hull structure and was shown to

industry. Perhaps more importantly, it is a new design


and development philosophy the Monster Garage
approach that can quickly take cradle to grave
considerations and researcher to user feedback and feed
that information into the upfront initial design so that the
US military can quickly come to optimized solutions.

Figure 15: Optimized Light Tactical Vehicle


Acknowledgements: The author would like to give special recognition to Laurie Austin (Assistant Product Manager, PMLTV) who funded the invention of the Double V cab for a two door armor program, and once again to Laurie Austin,
James Soltesz, and Luis Hinojosa (Associate Director, Center for Ground Vehicle Development & Integration, TARDEC)
for their support and guidance in development of many key technologies that have supported the war fighter. Final thanks
and recognition goes to the Program Manager Combat Engineer/Material Handling Equipment (PM CE/MHE)
for their support in development of many breakthrough technologies that significantly contributed to the development of the
Optimized Light Tactical Vehicle.
References:
[1]. Capouellez, James, James Soltesz, Andrew Mikaila, and Floyd Helsel, Lightweight Vehicle Underbody Protection System (LVUPS) Increases Crew
Protection, Accelerate, July-Sep 2009.
[2]. Richard Lardner, Armored Vehicle Cut Threatens Industry, The Washington Post, December 4, 2007
[3]. MRAP Impedes Operations, National Defense, January, 2008
[4]. Karen Schmitt, Defense Transportation Journal, MRAPs ASAP, Feb 2008, pp 12-18
[5]. Peter Stiff, Taming the Landmine, 1986, Galago, Alberton RSA
[6]. Casspir, BAE Systems, 2006, Retrieved 15 September 2010 from http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/bae_prod_landa_casspir.html.
[7]. Donea J. et al, "An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian finite element method for transient dynamic fluid-structure interactions" Computer methods in
applied mechanics, 1982.
[8]. Von Neumann J. Richtmeyer R., "A method for the numerical calculation of hydrodynamical shocks" Journal of applied physics, 1950.
[9]. Mendelson A. "Plasticity: Theory and Application" MacMillan Co. New York, 1968.
[10]. K. Colligan, G. Nickodemus, P. Konkol, J. Solich, Mechanical and Ballistic Shock Performance of 90 Corner Friction Stir Welded Aluminum Alloy
5083 and 2195, TR No. 01-059, Combat Vehicle Research, October 30, 2001.
[11]. K. Colligan, G.H. Nickodemus, J.R. Pickens, Mechanical & Ballistic Properties of 2195 Weldments, Interim NCEMT Report, TR. No. 02-066,
September 30, 2002.
[12]. L.S. Kramer, M. McCall, G.H. Nickodemus, J.R. Pickens, Ultra High Performance Structures and Armor, Application of Al-Li Alloy 2195, TR
No. 06-003, Concurrent Technologies Corporation, February 28, 2006.
[13]. P.J. Konkol, K.J. Colligan, J.R. Pickens, Friction Stir Welding for the Manufacture of Combat Vehicles, TR No. 02-067, Combat Vehicle Research,
August 30, 2002
[14]. K. J. Colligan, J. E. Gover Jr., S. A. Krem, W. J. Majer, J. C. McHenry, J. R. Pickens, R. J. Ritter, and S. P. Vaze, Alloy 2519 X4 Mine Blast
[15]. Kevin J. Colligan, Paul J. Konkol, James, J. Fisher, and Joseph R. Pickens, Friction Stir Welding Demonstrated for Combat Vehicle Construction,
Welding Journal, Vol. 82, No. 3, AWS (2003).
[16]. Ucok I., Colligan K. J., McHenry J. C., Semelsberger R. W., Pickens J. R., Friction Stir Welded Mine Blast Structures - Interim Report, NMC Tr.
No. 07-003, February 5, 2007.
[17]. Capouellez, James. Survivability Enhanced Run-Flat Variable Footprint Tires. 2010 NDIA Ground Vehicle Systems Engineering and Technology
Symposium, August 17-19 2010, Dearborn, Michigan.

UNCLASSIFIED:DistributionA.
ApprovedforPublicRelease

Page8

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi