Enhanced Counter Air Projectile (ECAP)

1. X-Caliber Enhanced Counter Air Projectile (ECAP)

2. Team Four

3. Project Office Bristol Hartlage

4. Serve as communicator between X-Caliber and customer Inform team of deadlines and keep everyone on schedule Project Office

5. Need Further defense against rockets, artillery, and mortar The greatest killer of soldiers in the battle field is the mortar (Robert H. Scales, Jr ) Requirements 40 mm round, compatible with a current system 90% probability of threat hit to kill The Need and Requirements

6. Systems Engineering Heather Dimeler Courtney Sellers

7. Guidelines Reason 240 mm Threat Diameter Baseline Threat Specification 500 m/s Threat Horizontal Velocity Baseline Threat Specification Head-on Engagement Baseline Threat Specification 2 km Range; 500 m Altitude Threshold Maximum Range Requirement; Intermediate Altitude Requirement (-) 1 deg. Launcher Elevation Error Evaluate Guidance, Low angle error most difficult 0 m/s Crosswinds, Standard Day Air Simplification and Consistency Assumptions Hit-to-Kill is Volumetric Intersection of Threat and Projectile Evaluate Guidance Volumetric Intersection is a closest approach distance of no more that 140 mm The distance between the centerline of a 240 mm rocket and a 40 mm round. Project Standard Conditions

8. Concept Overview • De-spun flared-tail design • Efficient and cost-effective • Compatible with current launch platforms • Can be fired interchangeably with guided and non-guided 40mm rounds • Ground based radar system and processed by an on-board computer

9. Cross Sectional View

10. Operational Scenario Threat: 240mm diameter rocket at an altitude of 500m and traveling at 500m/s

11. LP4 Performance Evaluation

12. Isometric View of LP4

13. Controls Miles Owen

14. Gimbaled Flared Tail

15. Actuators

16. Potentiometer for angular positioning of tail Accelerometer and de-spin motor feedback Tail actuating DC-motor feedback Magnetometers Orientation

17. No loss of solid rocket motor upon launch Simple two-component actuation system Advantages

18. Power April Jacks Miles Owen

19. 50 Volts, 5.8 Amps, and 290 Watts maximum load Three phase AC generator Assumptions Generator and motor are reciprocals Bearing friction causes rotor rotate at max = 100 Hz Generator

20. Generator constant (Kg = 0.955) K g = NtNp -------------------------------------------  Npp e(t) = Kgsin(t) E = Kg RMS Losses - 6 poles, 3 phase, RMS = 0.409 - E = (0.909) = Kg Torque Developed - T = KgI = 5.73 Nm High Inertia Rotor  needed Generator Design Equations

21. Diode bridge Four voltage regulators Slip rings Case around tail DC motor and magnetometers for wires Circuit Diagram

22. Seekers and Guidance Paxton Crick Jennifer Whitton

23. Schematic of Tail Section • Uses command guidance with proportional navigation • Receives a signal through 4 door stop antennas located on the tail section • Saves space, weight, cost, and manufacturability

24. Parameter P Wavelength [λ] 7 Value Gain (g) Gain [g]  (wavelength) 9.091 mm – 7.692 mm 48.9-57.8 Gain (dB) [G] Gain (G) (dB) 16.9-17.6 f (frequency) 33-39 GHz Beam width [BW] BW (beam width) 14.32°-12.12° A (usable area of antenna) 793.75 mm2 L (length of antenna) 63.5 mm W (width of antenna) 12.7 mm T (thickness of antenna) 2.032 mm Parameters and equations used in calculations of the door stop antenna

25. Modeling and Simulation John Hill Ernest Smith

26. Aero Model

27. SUCCESSFUL Stabilized gyroscopically with a value greater than 1 6DOF Trajectory predicted range, induced yaw, and pitch SIMULATION ISSUES Control system could not be completely simulated using due to de-spun flare Correction factor obtained from pitch and induced yaw PRODAS Results

28. Aerodynamics • Stability Analysis • Gyroscopic Stability is –1.364 • Center of Pressure is behind Center of Mass Mach Vs. Drag Coefficient

29. 6DOF Trajectory Velocity vs. Time & Pitch vs. Time

30. 6DOF Trajectory (cont.) Induced Yaw Vs. Time & Z-dir. Vs. X-dir

31. Centrifugal Acceleration Achieved • Non-spinning round modeled in DATCOM • 18 g’s pulled

32. Launch Platform/Prototyping Matt Feeny

33. Bofors L/70 MK44 Chamber Volume 600 cm^3 265.00 cm^3 Barrel Length 2423.800 mm 2516.8 mm Gun Barrel Bore 40.030 mm 40.025 mm Bore Groove Depth 41.200 mm 41.00 mm Rifling Depth .450 mm 0.488 mm Groove Land Ratio 2.489 1.384 Number of Land Grooves 16 16 Start Angle 3.912 deg 0.0 deg End Angle 6.665 deg 5.517 deg Twist 27.01 cal/rev 32.53 cal/rev Projectile Free travel 0.0 mm 0.0 mm Forcing Cone Half Angle 2.48410 deg 4.00651 deg Maximum Effective Range 4000 m 1500 m Transportation Wheeled Wheeled Shots per second (Derived) 7.5 6.67 Barrel Life 9000 Rounds 9500 Rounds 40 mm Gun Systems

34. MK44 Diagram

35. Production Analysis Gary Campbell

36. Weight factor (Wl ) Cost of one bullet ( C1 ) Cost of manufacture n, bullets (Cn ) (n) is the number of bullet for production Production Cost

37. C1 = $ 800 * Wl0.54 Cn = C1 * Llog2n 10,000 Cost per unit = ∑ Cn / 10,000 n=1 Formulas used to obtain cost

38. C1~ $2135 Number of unit to produced 10,000 Average cost of one unit Cn~ $526 Cost Obtained

39. Average production cost does not exceed cost of producing one bullet Allows for extraneous cost Manufacturability

40. Conclusions and Recommendations

41. LP4 satisfies all requirements outlined in the CDD Rapid production due to readily available components Conclusions

42. Perform further analysis using a more advanced simulation program Field testing before deployment Recommendations