16S Nozzle Contour Study

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) FA9101-18-R-0045, Supply Flow Quality and Increased Mach Number Design and Analysis for Arnold Engineering Development Complex (AEDC) Wind Tunnel 16S 26 February 2018 THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS NOT A NOTICE OF SOLICITATION ISSUANCE. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. This RFI is ISSUED for the purpose of developing a viable solicitation that will best communicate the Government's requirements to industry. Response to this RFI is strictly voluntary and will not affect any firm's ability to submit an offer if, or when, a solicitation is released. The requested information is for planning purposes only and does NOT constitute a commitment, implied or otherwise, that a procurement action will be issued. No entitlement to payment by the Government of direct or indirect costs or charges will arise as a result of the submission of information in response to this RFI. The Government shall not be liable for or suffer any consequential damages for any improperly identified proprietary information. Proprietary information will be safeguarded in accordance with the applicable Government regulations. Formal notices will be on posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website, http://www.fbo.gov/ . GENERAL INFORMATION: The Air Force Arnold Engineering Development Complex (AEDC) is in the process of determining the acquisition strategy for the design and analysis of improved nozzle contours for improved flow quality as well as design and analysis for increasing the Mach number capability to Mach 6 from Mach 4.75. System Description: Supersonic Wind Tunnel 16S AEDC's Propulsion Wind Tunnel (PWT) Tunnel 16S is continuous flow, variable density, wind tunnel with Mach number range of 1.5 to 4.75. Maximum stagnation pressure varies with Mach number to a maximum of approximately 1 atm. Maximum stagnation temperature is approximately 600 degF. Tunnel 16S has a 2-D flexible Laval nozzle that is approximately 100 feet long and has a square 16 foot by 16 foot exit. The nozzle contour is set with two rows (top and bottom) of 27 jack station on each side (east and west) for a total of 108 jacks). In addition at station 0 there are a total 8 additional slope jacks. Each flexible wall consist of six sections 8 feet wide that are joined together so that the total is 16 feet in height. The four sections of plate are jointed together with pin lap joints. The lap joints have a lower working stress than the continuous section of the plates, thus limiting the amount of curvature the nozzle contour can have in lap joint regions. Nozzle flexible plate that is in the throat section contains a pre-bend to accommodate the higher curvature required in this region. Two of the limiting factors of the nozzle contours exceeding Mach number of 4.75 are the limited travel capability of the nozzle's downstream hinge (jack station 7) and the non-operability of slope jacks at station 0. It was discovered in the 1960s as the nozzle contour approaches Mach number 5.0 the downstream hinges did not extend sufficiently. Modifications to this hinge were designed and built circa 1970, but never installed. This hardware remains in storage at AEDC. The station 0 slope jacks have been practically non-operational since IOC (1960). These slope jacks have been in a locked positon since the 1960s. Program Description The AEDC 16S Improved Flow Quality and Extended Mach Number Project has been initiated and is funded by the United States Air Force Test Investment Planning and Programming (TIPP) process. This RFI covers the analysis and design of improved nozzle contours and improvements to existing nozzle structure to support increased Mach number service. The primary objectives of this program are: - 1. Conduct an aerodynamic analysis to design new nozzle contours. The new contours shall be designed to meet the flow requirements shown in Table 1. The contractor shall submit a final report which includes nozzle contour points on the air side surface at the jack locations, jack pin positions, jack lengths, jack loads, tape indicator lengths, indicator tape readout, station zero angle. - 2. A trade study shall be conducted of, at least, the following nozzle design approaches. Others may be included with prior Government approval : - a. Sivells, J. C., "A Computer Program for the Aerodynamic Design of Axisymmetric and Planar Nozzles for Supersonic and Hypersonic Wind Tunnels." AEDC-TR-78-63, December 1978. - b. Evvard, J. and Marcus, L. "Achievement of Continuous Wall Curvature in Design of Two-Dimensional Symmetrical Supersonic Nozzles." NACA TN-2616, January 1952. - c. Korte, J., "CAN-DO, CFD-Based Aerodynamic Nozzle Design & Optimization Program for Supersonic/Hypersonic Wind Tunnels." AIAA 92-4009, July 1992. - d. Varner, M., "Application of Optimization Principles to Flexible Wall Nozzle Design - A Case Study." AIAA 86-0775. - e. Current state of the art CFD optimized contours The trade study shall include cost, schedule, and accuracy of the approach. The trade study shall include engineering judgment and citation of research into the potential approaches to determine the top two approaches. The contractor shall utilize the top two approaches to characterize the Mach 1.6 and 4.0 contours in order to show the expected difference in flow quality. TABLE 1 - FLOW QUALITY REQUIREMENTS Required for Temperatures from 120F to 650F Spatial Mach Uniformity Spatial Flow Angle Uniformity, deg 1.5 ? M ? 3 0.2%, 0.4% 0.05, 0.1 3 < M ? 6 0.5%, 1% 0.1, 0.2 - 3. Create a nozzle contour design tool capable of fully characterizing the aerodynamic contour jack points, optimizing the contour as required by the chosen method, and verifying that the contour will meet the stated flow quality criteria. The tool shall also be capable of providing preliminary plate stress analysis as an optimization tool such that each preliminary contour is not required to undergo a detailed FEA (Finite Element Analysis). The contour design tool shall not require the Government to procure additional software and Government purpose data rights shall be given along with the tool. Detailed instructions on the use of the design tool shall be provided to the Government. - 4. Review the existing design to allow the nozzle to move up to the Mach 6 contour. This shall include the suitability of the redesigned downstream gate, the suitability of the current actuators for length and load rating of the existing design to allow the nozzle to move up to the Mach 6 contour. - 5. Review the station zero slope jack design. This shall include necessity of moving the slope jacks for both flow quality downstream of the nozzle exit plane and plate stress up to Mach 6. A trade study shall be conducted between repairing the current system vs a re-design. - 6. Perform design and analysis on any portion of the plate system which must be redesigned to allow Mach 6 operation. This may include but is not limited to, increased jack lengths, improvements to the downstream gate, and improvements to the station zero jack assembly. - 7. Conduct a thermal analysis of the nozzle and fixed walls to determine the effectiveness and need for the strip heaters which were installed to prevent high thermal stresses during hot operation. This analysis may require incorporation with the aerodynamic model to determine if plate jack length adjustments must be made to meet flow quality requirements at high temperatures. This analysis shall be incorporated with the structural analysis to determine plate thermal stresses. - 8. Conduct a structural analysis of the nozzle including plate stress analysis, determination of expected jack loads, and confirmation of the suitability of the plate protection system. The plate protection system study shall include validation of the current system settings and that the system protects from a runaway condition of up to 3 sequential jacks. The plate protection system limits are particularly important regarding the protection of the nozzle plate vertical lap joints as these joints potentially limit plate contours particularly at high Mach numbers. PURPOSE: AEDC intends to use the information gathered from this effort to begin to assess capabilities and interests in all aspects of the work to be performed, in order to begin formulating an acquisition strategy for a potential follow-on contract(s). In order for AEDC to begin its assessment, please respond to as many of the following questions as you can/or are applicable to your company: - 1. Complete Table 2 on the following page for each Attachment 1 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Element in accordance with the following instructions: - a. Capable - Does your company have the capability to perform the design and analysis for AEDC? If you have only a partial capability, indicate the extent of the capability. List any capabilities which you would team with an outside contractor. - b. Interested - Is your company interested in potentially competing for the entire scope of this effort or a portion thereof? - c. Total Experience - How many years has your company performed this type of work? - d. Government experience - How many years has your company performed this type of work on a Government contract? - e. Minimum Contract Length - To be worthwhile to your company, what is the minimum contract length you would recommend? Table 2 - WBS for Improved Flow Quality and Increased Mach Number Operation WBS Element Capable In total or in part? Interested In total or in part? Total Experience Gov't Experience (contracts) Recommended Contract Type Minimum Contract Length 1. Aerodynamic Analysis 1.1 Supersonic Mach Number Contour Generation 1.2 Familiarity with the approaches requested 1.3 Ability to verify flow quality of proposed contours 1.4 Ability to produce a design tool for generating contours 1.5 Tooling Fabrication for Composite Structure Manufacturing 2. Mechanical Design 2.1 Structural Design 2.2 Mechanism Design 3.1 Thermal Analysis 3.1 Thermal Analysis 3.2 Combined Thermal/Structural Analysis 4. Structural Analysis 4.1 Structural Analysis of flexible nozzle plates 4.2 Structural Analysis of mechanisms - 2. Please describe any involvement your company may have had in contracts similar in nature to the areas in which you have expressed an interest. - 3. When you respond to this RFI, please identify the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code you think is appropriate for the areas in which you have expressed an interest. - 4. How many employees does your company have? - 5. Attached is the current AEDC Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) clause for your reference (Attachment 2). - a. Please comment on any issues/concerns/challenges you have with the current wording of the clause. - b. What should the Government be considering in terms of possible changes to this clause? - 6. What topics would you like to have discussed in future Government/contractor meetings? Please include the following with your response: Name and address of firm Point of contact and telephone number Average annual revenue for the past three years and number of employees Business size (per question 12) Affiliate information: Parent company Joint venture partners Potential teaming partners Please submit any additional comments or suggestions that you would like to share with us regarding this acquisition. Email your responses to the Contract Specialist, Ms. Stacey Lamb at stacey.lamb.1@us.af.mil and the Contracting Officer, Mr. Adam Foret, at adam.foret.1@us.af.mil by close of business on 5 April 2018. Please note that official information regarding this acquisition will be provided by the Contracting Officer. Any information received from other sources should not be relied upon as official. Any questions/comments received from industry will NOT be posted on public web sites. Further information and descriptions of AEDC facilities may be found on our web site www.arnold.af.mil by following the link in the center of the page under Spotlights to the Test Facilities Guide.