Solid Propellant Oxidizer Alternative to Ammonium Perchlorate

OUSD (R&E) MODERNIZATION PRIORITY: Hypersonics TECHNOLOGY AREA(S): Weapons The technology within this topic is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services, including export of sensitive technical data, or the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items. Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals (FNs), their country(ies) of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work (SOW) tasks intended for accomplishment by the FN(s) in accordance with the Announcement. Offerors are advised foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under US Export Control Laws. OBJECTIVE: Identify, develop, and demonstrate a solid propellant oxidizer alternative to Ammonium Perchlorate (AP). DESCRIPTION: State-of-the-art composite solid propellants commonly use AP as an oxidizer. An alternative oxidizer to AP is needed to address potential future supply chain risk, and provide future missile systems increased performance while meeting Insensitive Munitions (IM) requirements set forth by 10 USC 2389. This topic seeks to develop and demonstrate an alternative oxidizer to AP in a solid propellant formulation with equal or greater performance (e.g. density-specific impulse) when compared to a typical AP/hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene/aluminum composite propellant. Solutions must primarily address an AP alternative, but may also include changes to other constituents of the propellant formulation to compensate for performance differences associated with the oxidizer, if any. Propellants formulated with the developmental oxidizer must achieve Hazard Classification 1.3C or better (less sensitive) and be able to pass the following standardized IM test parameters and passing criteria as defined by MIL-STD-2105D and associated NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG): Fast Cook-off (STANAG 4240); Slow Cook-off (STANAG 4382); Bullet Impact (STANAG 4241); High-Velocity Fragment Impact (STANAG 4496); Sympathetic Detonation (STANAG 4396). PHASE I: Develop a proof-of-concept solution; identify candidate oxidizer and conduct analyses for predicted performance and sensitivity for both the individual oxidizer ingredient and a composite propellant utilizing the candidate oxidizer. Perform initial sensitivity screening (electrostatic discharge, friction, shock, etc.) for the oxidizer. Results will be documented for Phase II. PHASE II: Expand on Phase I results by producing oxidizer in sufficient quantity to fully characterize oxidizer sensitivity (making sure to consider potential increased sensitivity as a function of particle size), and formulate into a composite solid propellant. Demonstrate performance of propellant (via strand-burn burn rate and small scale motor hot-fire test). Demonstrate ability of propellant cast into a motor to pass the aforementioned IM tests, specifically slow cook-off and bullet impact. Manufacturing and quality control processes should be identified to minimize batch-to-batch variability. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The developed solution should have direct insertion potential into missile defense systems. Conduct engineering and manufacturing development, test, evaluation, qualification. Demonstration would include, but not limited to, demonstration in a real system or operation in a system level test-bed with insertion planning for a missile defense interceptor. REFERENCES: US Insensitive Munitions Policy Update, DTIC. MIL-STD-2105D. Yang, Brill, and Ren, Solid Propellant Chemistry Combustion and Motor Interior Ballistics. George P. Sutton, Rocket propulsion Elements; Introduction to Engineering of Rockets 7th edition, John Willey &Sons, 2001. KEYWORDS: Insensitive Munitions, Propellant, Oxidizer, Propulsion, cook-off, bullet impact