Winning 2020.1 SBIR Proposal
Proprietary Information Redacted
Not for Resale
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by
any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior
written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and
certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher,
addressed “Attention: Permissions Coordinator,” at the address below.
SBIR Guide
2 Promontory Knoll
Cumberland, RI 02864
www.sbirguide.com
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program - Proposal Cover Sheet
Knowingly and willfully making any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations may be a
felony under the Federal Criminal False Statement Act (18 USC Sec 1001), punishable by a fine of up to $10,000,
up to five years in prison, or both.
SBIR Phase I Proposal
Proposal Number: L201-001-0004
Agency Information
Agency Name:
DLA
Command:
Topic Number:
Proposal Title:
Additively Manufactured A-10 Fuel Cells
Firm Information
Firm Name:
Response Technologies, LLC
Mail Address:
1505 Main St West Warwick RI, 02893-2927
Website Address:
https://www.responsetechs.com/
DUNS:
079804434
CAGE:
7CYJ9
SBA SBC Identification Number: 473184016
Firm Certificate
OFFEROR CERTIFIES THAT:
1. The business concern meets the ownership and control requirements set forth in 13 C.F.R. §121.702.
YES
2. The birth certificates, naturalization papers, or passports show that any individuals it relies upon to
YES
meet the eligibility requirements are U.S. citizens or permanent resident aliens in the United States.
3. It has no more than 500 employees, including the employees of its affiliates.
4. Number of employees including all affiliates (average for preceding 12 months)
YES
10
5. It has met the performance benchmarks as listed by the SBA on their website as eligible to participate
6. It has registered itself on SBA’s database as majority-owned by venture capital operating companies,
YES
NO
hedge funds or private equity
7. It has more than 50% owned by a single Venture Capital Owned Company (VCOC), hedge fund, or private
NO
equity firm
8. Firm's PI, CO, or owner, a faculty member or student of an institution of higher education
NO
9. The offeror qualifies as a (select all that apply):
None Listed
10. Race of the offeror (Check all that apply):
White
11. Ethnicity of the offeror:
12. It is a corporation that has some unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all
NON-HISPANIC
FALSE
judicial and administrative remedies have not been exhausted or have not lapsed, and that is not being
paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax
liability
13. Firm been convicted of a fraud-related crime involving SBIR and/or STTR funds or found civilly liable for
NO
a fraud-related violation involving federal funds
14. Firm's Principal Investigator (PI) or Corporate Official (CO), or owner been convicted of a fraud-related
NO
crime involving SBIR and/or STTR funds or found civilly liable for a fraud-related violation involving federal
funds
15. Verify that your firm has registered in the SBA'S Company Registry at www.sbir.gov by providing the SBC Control ID# and uploading
the registration confirmation PDF.
SBC Control ID#: SBC_473184016
Supporting Documentation: Upload the registration confirmation PDF as proof of registration:
• SBA Registration.pdf
16. Is 50% or more of your firm owned or managed by a corporate entity?
NO
17. Is your firm affiliated as set forth in 13 CFR §121.103?
NO
Firm Affiliated
Name
Address
Printed Name
Ed Bard
Number of Employees
Signature
Title
Ed Bard
President
Business Name
Date
Response Technologies, LLC
12/12/2019
Audit Information
YES
Has your Firm ever had a DCAA review?
Last Audit Date: 12/20/2019
Agency Firm:
Point of Contact (POC) Name: REDACTED
DCAA Northern New England Branch Office
POC Phone: REDACTED
59 Lowes Way
POC Email: REDACTED
Lowell 01851
Was your accounting system approved by the auditing agency?
YES
Last Update Date: 12/16/2019
Was a rate agreement negotiated with the auditing agency?
NO
Was an overhead and/or cost audit performed?
NO
Supporting Documentation: Upload the registration confirmation PDF as proof of registration:
• DCAA Report 01361-2020M17740001-Final-Signed.pdf
Are the rates from the audit agreement used for this firm's proposal?
VOL I - Proposal Summary
Proposed Base Duration (in months): 6
Option 1 Duration (in months): 0
Option2 Duration (in months):
YES
Technical Abstract:
Response Technologies’ goal is to provide the DLA and the USAF with qualified self-sealing fuel
cells for the A-10 aircraft platform. A bi-product of this effort will be proven tank constructions
for other legacy aircraft and the future vertical lift. This Phase I’s effort spans three to six
months and is characterized by identifying and documenting all requirements and test methods
to qualify the fuel cells with all stakeholders.
Anticipated Benefits/Potential Commercial Applications of the Research or Development:
Response Technologies’ fuel cells contribute to the following SBIR goals:
• Improved Force Readiness: There are approximately 280 A-10 aircraft in service today, each
equipped with two internal fuel cells, with an average cost of $30k per fuel cell. The current supply
chain for A-10 fuel cells is not able to meet delivery nor quality requirements, which has resulted
in a significant force readiness issue.
• Accelerated Military or DOD System Development Capability: The supply chain is presently at
high-risk, with only one qualified supplier. The supplier recently emerged from bankruptcy, and
its lead times have extended to over 52 weeks. Response Technologies’ additive manufacturing
process improves force readiness by reducing product lead times to less than two weeks, and new
product development times to under six months.
• Reduces Costs: The current fuel cells are experiencing premature sealant activation around the
fittings. Once this occurs, the fuel cells are not flightworthy and are not repairable. This leads to
increased maintenance costs as tanks are swapped in and out of aircraft. Additional handling of
the fuel cells leads to further stress on the seals around the fittings, and thus increases the risk of
fuel cell damage Response Technologies has a novel fitting integration process that should
eliminate fitting leaks and extending fuel cell life.
• Reduce Technical Risks: These benefits combine to assist all legacy aircraft as well as the future
aircraft program.
Disclaimer: For any purpose other than to evaluate the proposal, this data except proposal cover
sheets shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used or
disclosed in whole or in part, provided that if a contract is awarded to this proposer as a result of
or in connection with the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to
duplicate, use or disclose the data to the extent provided in the funding agreement. This
restriction does not limit the Government''s right to use information contained in the data if it is
obtained from another source without restriction. This restriction does not apply to routine
handling of proposals for administrative purposes by Government support contractors. The data
subject to this restriction is contained on the pages of the proposal listed on the line below.
Enter the page numbers separated by a space of the pages in the proposal that are considered proprietary:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
List a maximum of 8 Key Words or phrases, separated by commas, that describe the Project: Fuel Cell,
ERFT, Fuel Tank, A-10
VOL I - Proposal Certification
1. At a minimum, will two-thirds of the research and/or analytical work in Phase I be
YES
carried out by your small business as defined by 13 C.F.R §§ 701-705?
Supporting Documentation: Upload the written approval from the funding agreement officer.
2. Is primary employment of the principal investigator with your firm as defined by 13
C.F.R §§ 701-705?
YES
3. During the performance of the contract, the research/research and development will
be performed in the United States
YES
4. During the performance of the contract, the research/research and development will
YES
be performed at the offeror's facilities by the offeror's employees except as otherwise
indicated in the technical proposal.
5. Do you plan to use Federal facilities, laboratories, or equipment?
NO
6. The offeror understands and shall comply with export control regulations
YES
7. There will be ITAR/EAR data in this work and/or deliverables
YES
8. Proposal for essentially equivalent work been submitted to other US government
NO
agencies or DoD components
9. Contract been awarded for any of the proposals listed above
NO
10. Firm will notify the Federal agency immediately if all or a portion of the work
authorized and funded under this proposal is subsequently funded by another Federal
YES
agency
11. Submitting assertions in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7017 Identification and
NO
assertions use, release, or disclosure restriction
12. The proposing research that utilizes human/animal subjects or a recombinant DNA
NO
as described in DoD I 3216.01, 32 C.F.R. § 219, and National Institutes of Health
Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA of the solicitation
13. Are teaming partners or subcontractors proposed?
NO
14. Are you proposing to use foreign nationals as defined in 22 CFR 120.16 for work
NO
under the proposed effort?
15. Percentage of the principal investigator's total time will be on the project:
20%
16. Is the principal investigator socially/economically disadvantaged?
NO
17. Does your firm allow for the release of its contact information to Economic
YES
Development Organizations?
VOL I - Contact Information
Principal Investigator
Name:
Ed Bard
E-mail:
REDACTED
Phone:
REDACTED
Corporate Official
Name:
Ed Bard
E-mail:
REDACTED
Phone:
REDACTED
Authorized Contract Negotiator
Name:
Ed Bard
E-mail:
REDACTED
Mail
Address:
REDACTED
Phone:
REDACTED
Form Generated on 02/25/2020 22:36:12
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Additively Manufactured A-10 Fuel Cells, Self-Sealing
Executive Summary
Response Technologies’ goal is to provide the DLA and the USAF with qualified self-sealing fuel cells for the A-10
aircraft platform. A bi-product of this effort will be proven tank constructions for other legacy aircraft and the
future vertical lift. This Phase I’s effort spans three to six months and is characterized by identifying and
documenting all requirements and test methods to qualify the fuel cells with all stakeholders. Response
Technologies’ fuel cells contribute to the following SBIR goals:
•
•
•
•
1
Improved Force Readiness: There are approximately 280 A-10 aircraft in service today, each equipped with two
internal fuel cells, with an average cost of $30k per fuel cell. The current supply chain for A-10 fuel cells is not
able to meet delivery nor quality requirements, which has resulted in a significant force readiness issue.
Accelerated Military or DOD System Development Capability: The supply chain is presently at high-risk, with
only one qualified supplier. The supplier recently emerged from bankruptcy, and its lead times have extended
to over 52 weeks. Response Technologies’ additive manufacturing process improves force readiness by
reducing product lead times to less than two weeks, and new product development times to under six months.
Reduces Costs: The current fuel cells are experiencing premature sealant activation around the fittings. Once
this occurs, the fuel cells are not flightworthy and are not repairable. This leads to increased maintenance costs
as tanks are swapped in and out of aircraft. Additional handling of the fuel cells leads to further stress on the
seals around the fittings, and thus increases the risk of fuel cell damage Response Technologies has a novel
fitting integration process that should eliminate fitting leaks and extending fuel cell life.
Reduce Technical Risks: These benefits combine to assist all legacy aircraft as well as the future aircraft
program.
Identification and Significance of the Problem or Opportunity
1.1
Introduction
The following proposed effort is in support of USAF Air Force Material Command (AFMC) 416th Supply Chain
Management Squadron (SCMS). The proposed tasks are in support of product development, developmental tests
and evaluation (DT&E), and source approval of fuel cells for the Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II (A-10).
The research, development, acquisition, and support of the A-10 fuel cells are critical to the success of the USAF’s
A-10 missions. Successful completion of this work will result in improved reliability, force readiness, and
performance of the A-10 aircraft while decreasing both lead times and procurement costs to the DLA resulting in
reduced inventory levels and costs.
The near-term specific task to be executed under this contract is a formalized and key stakeholder acceptance of the
systems requirements review (SRR), as well as all resulting qualification test plans (QTPs). These tasks will all be
conducted in accordance with the qualification and source approval of a new manufacturing method for the supply of
A-10 fuel cells. The A-10 fuel cell subsystem consists of the following:
•
•
Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing Aft; NSN 1560-01-050-2290; 2018 Management Price $31,717.46
Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing, Forward (Fwd); NSN 1560-01-055-9909; 2018 Management Price $27,911.22
This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or
disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded
to this offeror as a result of-or in connection with-the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to
duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the
Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction.
The data subject to this restriction are contained in pages [1-16].
Page 1
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
1.2
Problem
Response Technologies (RT) was engaged by the USAF’s
Figure 1: A-10 Fuel Cell in Storage at Hill AFB
A-10 External Fuel Tanks Program Manager to provide a
briefing on RT’s fuel cell efforts for the DoD. During the
briefing, RT learned that the USAF A-10 program has a
significant shortage of quality fuel cells. The fuel cells are
sole-sourced from American Fuel Cell and Coated Fabrics
Company DBA AMFUEL. According to the USAF, the
fuel cells are leaking around the fittings. This leads to the
activation of the self-sealing material. When that happens,
the fuel cell is considered unfit to fly. The Program
Manager indicated that the shortage is causing force
readiness issues as well as increased maintenance costs as
USAF mechanics attempt to exchange tanks in and out of
aircraft. In addition, the Program Manager added that they
were unaware of any path to get the supply chain caughtup, nor to address the quality issues leading to premature
tank failures. RT was invited to Hill Air Force Base (Hill AFB), Utah to observe the fuel cells and to learn more
about the problem. Following the visit, RT was provided the technical data package for the fuel cells. The USAF’s
A-10 problems appear to be the same challenges NAVAIR is experiencing with the H-53K, UH-1Y, and AH-1Z
rotorcraft platforms.
1.3
Solution Summary
RT uses an additive manufacturing process that at first creates a near net shape textile reinforced structure that uses
advanced industrial yarns that RT has uniquely developed for its additive manufacturing process. Through additive
manufacturing, RT can add strength and reinforcement at the fiber level, while approaching minimum theoretical
weight. The textile is then formed using a non-destructive molding process(es) to get the shape and the interior fuel
resistant chemistry on. Fittings are integrated into the structure and the entire unit is ultimately coated with selfsealing, abrasion resistant, responsive, fuel resistant, and durable coatings.
RT’s patent-pending process was developed by a team with over 200 combined years of development,
manufacturing, and commercialization experience in the flexible composite markets. This experience includes
crashworthy fuel cells. RT’s process results in:
• Elimination of thermoplastic seams
• Elimination of manufacturing and “one-time-use” forms and their subsequent removal
• Elimination of seam-overlap weight, and its material costs, and variation
• Added reinforcements where needed, reducing weight where it is not
• Greater variety of materials in constructions to maximize performance
• Reduced direct labor and its subsequent variation
• Greatly reduced product development time and cost
• Solvent-free chemistry – for greener and sustainable solution as well as eliminating the need for
bleeder cords, patches, and management of hazardous process waste
RT has passed a majority of the MIL-DTL 27422F Phase I qualification tests for the H-60 protection level C
fuel cell to include the 65’ drop test, normal temperature gunfire, and the physical construction tests. The
physical test cube testing has been externally witnessed and verified by Sikorsky and/or members of the DoD.
In addition, RT has manufactured representative article fuel cells for the H-60 and UH-1Y.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume.
Page 2
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Figure 2: RT’s Additive Manufacturing Fuel Cell Process
Redacted Process Flow
Diagram and Pictures
1.4
Value Proposition
Ultimately, RT expects the DOD shall have the following within 24 months of Phase I contract award:
•
•
•
The following qualified and source approved A-10 fuel cells:
o Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing Aft; NSN 1560-01-050-2290
o Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing, Fwd; NSN 1560-01-055-9909
A new qualified domestic fuel cell supplier with four to six-week lead times and 15 to 30 fuel cell per
week capacity
Capability to perform slosh and vibration testing for military application
1.5
Overview of 3-Phase Program and Key Outcomes
Phase I: RT will begin the source approval process and perform a formalized SRR with all key stakeholders for the
source approval process. During the SRR, the requirements verification matrix (RVM) will be accepted and all
qualification-by-similarity attributes will be identified based on prior related work. The resulting test requirements
will be used to create the QTPs for all required testing.
Phase II: RT will attempt to qualify, and source approve the A-10 fuel cells to pass Fairchild specification
PE160S5001 Revision A, as well as any identified additional procurement requirements. (estimated 12-18 months
from date of contract)
Phase III: Successful commercialization will be a fielded, self-sealing fuel cell on the A-10 platform as well as new
product development across other: Land, Sea, Air, and Space platforms.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume.
Page 3
Response Technologies, LLC
2
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Phase I Technical Objectives
RT’s Phase I effort spans three to six months and is characterized by identifying and documenting all requirements
and test methods to qualify the fuel cells amongst all stakeholders. RT proposes to complete all topic requirements
by delivering all project deliverables listed in Table 1.
Table 1: SBIR Phase 1 Project Deliverables
#
A001
Description
Kickoff Meeting with USAF and DLA stakeholders
A002
Monthly Status Reports
A003
Requirements Verification Matrix (RVM)
A004
Master Schedule
A005
Approved Drawing Package
A006
System Requirement Review (SRR)
A007
Qualification Test Plans (QTP) and Qualification Test Reports (QTR)
A008
Final Report and Contract Documentation
3
3.1
Phase I Statement of Work (including Subcontractors’ Efforts)
Phase I Technical Approach
Figure 3: A-10 Fuel Cell Road to Integration
RT’s patent-pending process combines four enabling technologies to achieve the technical objectives specified in
Section 2.
3.1.1
Enabling Technology 1 – Advanced Industrial Specialty Fibers
The current generation of crashworthy fuel tanks date back to the 1970s. Since then, industrial specialty fibers have
improved 3 to 5-fold in performance to weight rations. Some examples of the fibers that could be deployed include:
P-Aramid, UHMWPE, and PBO.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume.
Page 4
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
3.1.2
Enabling Technology 2 – Additively Manufactured Textile Process
V-bed knitting is an established additive manufacturing process used to make seamless and complete textiles
directly on the machine (no subsequent cutting and sewing needed). The technology is currently used for seamless
garments, footwear, and automotive seat components. The technology eliminates the need for large quantities of
yarn and packages of yarn, which reduces the cost and time to manufacture. The technology also allows the
placement of different fibers in specific locations to provide performance, e.g., strength, weight, and elongation
precisely where needed. RT has uniquely modified the V-bed knitting technology to utilize advanced industrial
specialty fibers within the fuel cell constructions.
3.1.3
Enabling Technology 3 – Advanced Chemistries, Nano-Technology, and Micro-Spheres
Advanced Chemistries: RT is utilizing an inner liner with greatly improved fuel resistance over the incumbent state
of the art tanks. This increased fuel resistance is expected to extend the useful life of the tank while reducing
maintenance costs. The external coating is anticipated to use a proprietary blend that increases the durability of the
external coating while also allowing the outer layer to “snap-back” via memory and sealing a large percentage of
any penetration (such as shrapnel, bullet, etc.) prior to the self-sealing mechanism activating. This reduces the
amount of self-sealing chemistry required.
Nano-Technology: Is mixed in with the outside coating to improve durability and potentially assist with electro
static dissipation.
Micro-Spheres: Are added to the self-sealing chemistry to reduce the density of the chemistry and to enable super
absorption of the fuel. This super absorption allows the micro-spheres to dramatically increase in size, thus
plugging the entry and exit wounds with less material.
3.1.4
Enabling Technology 4 – 3D Printed Forms
RT utilizes a large format 3D printer to manufacture fuel cell forms that are highly reliable and repeatable. The
forms are used to manufacture the forms for the fuel cells. This eliminates multiple process steps and waste material
costs. Most importantly, the speed of manufacturing 3D printed forms is measured in hours vs. months.
Figure 4: 3D Representations of A-10 Fuel Cells
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume.
Page 5
Response Technologies, LLC
3.2
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Scope
RT shall provide the engineering services required to execute the Table 2 tasks in support of the USAF A10 supply chain:
Table 2: Summary of SBIR Phase I Work Plan
#
Task
Deliverable
1
Kick-Off Briefing Presentation to key
Stakeholders
A001, A004
2
Systems Requirement Review (SRR)
A002, A003,
A004, A005,
A006
3
Quality Test Plan (QTP) and Reports (QTR)
A002, A007
4
Prepare and submit following documents:
Phase I Final Report, Phase II proposal and
any other report deliverables
A008
MO-1
MO-2
MO-3
MO-4
MO-5
MO-6
3.2.1
Stage 1 Kickoff
Response Technologies will begin the project with a kickoff meeting (A001) with the DLA and USAF stakeholders
to review the scope, SOW, success criteria, and schedule the SRR for this effort. The Master Schedule (A004) will
be presented at the kickoff meeting and agreed upon. The kickoff meeting will be performed at RT’s facility or via
a remote conference call. Following the kickoff meeting,
Deliverable: Kickoff meeting, agreed upon SOW, and Master Schedule.
Period of Performance: Month one of a six-month contract
3.2.2
Systems Requirements Review
RT shall perform an SRR with USAF AFMC 416th SCMS. The SRR shall be a formal review of the conceptual
design and methodology of the two fuel cells (subsystem) to establish the subsystem’s capability to satisfy
performance requirements. RT shall conduct an SRR covering all subsystem elements at Hill AFB or via
conference call. RT shall prepare and submit the SRR agenda and present the following at the SRR:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Review the Master schedule (A004)
RT’s drawing package (A005) to include the 3D fuel bladder and fittings
List of the product requirements from Fairchild specification PE160S5001 and any other procurement
specification to include compliance methods matrix and supporting analyses, documenting compliance via
a Requirements Verification Matrix (RVM) format (A003)
o Any qualification by similarity requirements for Phase I testing shall be addressed. Phase I testing
required to be conducted shall also be addressed in the RVM
Defining the list of hardware configuration and interface requirements items
Identification of risk areas and proposed mitigation efforts
Any additional requirements identified and agreed to
SRR Acceptance Criteria:
•
•
•
•
USAF AFMC 416th SCMS approval of the meeting minutes and actions, to include all material presented
at the SRR. (A006)
Establishment of the functional baseline and the path ahead for resolution of action items.
Approved Requirements Verification Matrix – RVM (A003)
Approved drawing package (A005)
Monthly status reports shall be prepared and presented during this task (A002).
Period of Performance: Month two through four of the six-month contract.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume.
Page 6
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
3.2.3
Qualification Test Plans & Qualification Test Reports
RT shall document all QTPs and corresponding QTRs (A007) based on the approved RVM (A003). (A007) shall be
delivered to USAF AFMC 416th SCMS for review and input and shall include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Testing for all requirements as defined in RVM (A003)
Test facility and corresponding documented testing costs
Test setup, fixtures, and corresponding documented hardware costs
Detailed step-by-step test procedures
Anomaly Report – shall report all anomalies within 24 hours of the occurrence
Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action (FRACAS) – To be submitted to 30 days after failure
occurrence
Test Reports – shall provide test reports within 30 days of test completion for approval CDRL A006
Test witnessing requirements
QTP & QTR Acceptance Criteria:
•
•
USAF AFMC 416th SCMS approval of (A007)
Approval of updated Master Schedule (A004)
Monthly status reports shall be prepared and presented during this task (A002).
Period of Performance: Months three through five of six-month base effort.
3.2.4
Final Report
Response Technologies will prepare the final report and all other final documentation based on contract
requirements (A008). Assuming success, RT would prepare the Phase II proposal for submission.
Deliverables: Final report and Phase II proposal.
Period of Performance: Month six of the six-month contract
3.3
Risk/Mitigation Strategies
For this Phase I effort, RT does not foresee any significant risks based on prior experience and this effort’s scope of
work. Technical risks will be assessed during the SRR for Phase II proposal identification and mitigation.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume.
Page 7
Response Technologies, LLC
L201-001-0004
Related Work
4.1
Significant activities conducted by the Principal Investigator, Proposing Firm, Consultants or Others
Table 4: Activities Directly Related to the Proposed Effort
PI
RT
Significant activity
directly related to the
proposed effort
PI and Organization on
DLA Phase I contract
#SP470115C0106 Fuel
Bladder TOC Reduction
√
√
Sikorsky PO as a
subcontract to AATD
A&AP H-60
Survivability
Improvement Project
√
√
Ft. Eustis and
Sikorksy
4
DLA201-001
Interface with the proposed project
Coordination with
outside sources
Final Report was foundational to the subsequent
Phase II contract, the PO from Sikorsky, and
this Proposal. This effort validated the proof of
the concept of combining the enabling
technologies into a small-scale fuel tank for
general aircraft fuel bladders.
Letter of Support
with Sikorsky
√
In Progress – This PO is for the delivery of four
H-60 fuel cells that meet -27422-F specification
level and are 20% lighter. This is also the
baseline tanks for the Future Vertical Lift [FVL]
program
Sikorsky, AATD,
and Parker
Hannifin for novel
inerting and level
sensing.
Fort Eustis Testing
Facility
√
CRADA established for qualification testing
Working directly
US Army Aviation and
Missile Command
[AMRDEC]
√
Working with AMRDEC on MIL-DTL 27422 F
specification questions and future iterations with
FVL
AMRDEC and
other services as
necessary
DLA Phase I contract
#SP470118P0125 Fuel
Bladder Weight and
Total Ownership Cost
Reduction
√
√
√
Completed – This PO is for continued Phase I
Verification efforts towards MIL-DTL-27422F
DLA, Sikorsky,
CCCDC, and Ft.
Eustis
DLA Phase II contract #
SP470119C0023 H-60
Phase I Fuel Cell Phase I
Qualification
√
√
√
In progress – This contract is for Phase I
Qualification towards MIL-DTL-27422F for H60
DLA, Sikorsky,
Army CCCDC, and
Ft. Eustis
DLA Phase II contract #
SP470119C0032 UH-1Y
Fuel Cell Phase I
Qualification
√
√
√
In progress – This contract is for Phase I
Qualification towards MIL-DTL-27422F for
UH-1Y
DLA, NAVAIR,
Army CCCDD,
Bell Helicopter,
DCMA, and Ft.
Eustis
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Redacted
Pictures of
Related
Work
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 9
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Figure 6: Response Technologies technical traction towards MIL-DTL-27422F Phase I Qualification Testing,
4.2
State-of-the-Art in Fuel Cell Manufacturing
Response Technologies has met with Meggitt, the leading manufacturer for military grade fuel cells. Meggitt
confirmed the current process for manufacturing fuel cells dates to WWII and their original company, Goodyear
Tire & Rubber Company. There are three known fuel cell processes.
The first process involves
manufacturing an inner mold of
plaster and then hand placing layers
of coated fabric over the mold with
adhesives. This allows placing of
reinforcement where needed.
Fittings are installed during the
buildup of layers. The fuel cell is
then placed into an autoclave to
adhere/bond the layers together. The
fuel cell is hit with sledgehammers to
break up the internal plaster mold.
The tank is then submerged in water
to clean out any remaining plaster.
Figure 7: Current Methods for Making Fuel Cells
The second process is a split mold
process. These fuel cells are made in
two parts and then welded/adhered
together in the middle.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 10
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
The third process is welding 2D components into the 3D shape. The 2D components cut from a master roll and then
they are heat or chemically welded to each other.
4.3
Previous Work Not Directly Related to the Proposed Effort but Similar
Table 5: Previous Work Not Directly Related to the Proposed Effort
Related Work
Short Description
Clients for Work
was Performed
Date of
Completion
Development of
Improved Fuel Resistant
Membranes for DoD and
Automotive Fuel Tanks
While at Cooley, members of the team
worked to develop PVDF coatings to
meet performance requirements of DoD’s
large fuel tanks, and professional auto
racing fuel cells
ATL Inc, GTA
Containers, Bell
Avon, FO Berg
2012 - 2014
Increased abrasion and
UV protection for
inflatable hulls
While at Cooley, members of the team
developed superior membranes for longer
life RHIBs.
Wing Inflatables
2014
Reduced Weight and
TOC for Willard Rigid
Inflatable Hull Boats
RT is utilizing its 3D process to develop
additively manufactured sponsons to
reduce weight and TOC
Wing Inflatables
In Progress
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 11
Response Technologies, LLC
5
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Relationship with Future Research or Research and Development
5.1
Anticipated Results
Ultimately, with success, RT expects the DOD shall have the following within 24 months of Phase I contract award
and a follow-on Phase II:
•
•
•
•
The following qualified and source approved A-10 fuel cells:
o Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing Aft; NSN 1560-01-050-2290
o Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing, Fwd; NSN 1560-01-055-9909
A new qualified domestic fuel cell supplier with rapid prototyping capabilities and significantly
shortened product lead times
Production-ready with four-week to six-week lead times, at a capacity level of 15 to 30 fuel cells per
week
Capability to perform slosh and vibration testing for military application
5.2
Significance of Phase I Effort
The efforts in this Phase I SBIR proposal are essential for documenting all requirements and approving RT’s A-10
design prior to testing and developing the A-10 fuel cells. Phase II is essential for developing, qualifying and source
approving the A-10 fuel cells prior to the eventual transition to a program of record.
5.3
Clearances and Certifications
Clearances: There are no current clearances required to continue the product development for the A-10 fuel tanks
and many of the other legacy aircraft.
Certifications: There are no current certifications required to continue the product development for the A-10 fuel
tanks, and fuel cells other legacy aircraft. Prior to manufacturing, RT will need to become AS9100 certified and has
begun building a compliant quality system ahead of time to make the transition faster. Some aircraft platforms may
require ITAR.
Approvals: Response Technologies will need to qualify the A-10 tanks prior to seeking source approval. This effort
will be handled through a follow-on Phase II SBIR.
6
Commercialization Strategy
6.1
Existing Market
In its entirety, the US military fuel cell market is in the order of $254M/yr. The USAF is fielding approximately
400 A-10s with two fuel cells:
•
•
Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing Aft; NSN 1560-01-050-2290; 2018 Management Price $ 31,717.46
Fuel Cell, Self-Sealing, Fwd; NSN 1560-01-055-9909; 2018 Management Price $27,911.22
The fuel cells are currently on long-term contracts with AMFUEL. As identified in Section One of this proposal,
according to the USAF representative program manager, the current supplier is not meeting delivery nor quality
commitments. These issues are causing downed aircraft and increased maintenance costs.
Table 6: Benefits to Accrue from Commercialization to Multiple Markets
Adjacent Markets
Usage
Benefits
Market
Fixed Wing Aircraft
Flexible Fuel Tanks + Self-Sealing
Improved fuel resistance and TOC
Existing $200M
DOD Land & Sea
Replace legacy fuel tanks with Explosion
Resistant Fuel Tanks
Explosion Resistance – Reduces casualties
and property damage; Added self-seal and
fuel resistance
Both
$250M
Missile Defense
Solid State Fuel Tanks
Reduced Weight and Increased Life
TBD
Professional Auto Racing
Explosion Resistant Fuel Tanks
Improved fuel resistance and decreased TOC
Existing
$40M
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 12
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Adjacent Markets
Usage
Benefits
Market
Passenger and
Commercial Automotive
Replace legacy fuel tanks with Explosion
Resistant Fuel Tanks
Explosion Resistance – Reduces casualties
and property damage
Adjacent $24B
6.2
Transition Plan Summary
Response Technologies intends to leverage its additively manufactured fuel cell technology and customer
relationships to manufacture and distribute crashworthy fuel cells.
Table 7: Current Commercialization Traction
Aircraft
Prime
DoD End-User
Comments
H-60 Platform
Sikorsky
Army CCDC - ADD
RT has a PO with Sikorsky to deliver four H60 fuel cells for OT&E in 2020
UH-1Y
Bell
NAVAIR PMA-276
RT is working directly with the DLA and
NAVAIR to qualify and source approve fuel
cells for the UH-1Y in 2020
AH-1Z
Bell
NAVAIR PMA-276
RT has the documentation from NAVAIR
and Bell. The expectation is to start work on
the AH-1Z once UH-1Y tanks are approved
NAVAIR PMA-261
RT is working with NAVAIR on a proposal
to qualify fuel cells for the H-53K; RT has a
proposal with Sikorsky for a modified fuel
cell concept
6.3
H-53K
Sikorsky
FARA/FVL
Sikorsky
Proposals in process
Qualification Requirements
The prime objective is to qualify and source approve the A-10’s fuel cells using Response Technologies’ process.
Fuel cell qualification is defined by meeting Fairchild specification PE160S5001. All requirements will be
identified and documented in the RVM (A003) as part of this effort. RT shall perform all product development and
project management efforts towards the objective.
RT intends to have DCMA production approval in 2020 for UH-1Y production. RT also plans to have its QMS
certified to AS9100-Rev. D in 2020. These certifications will be utilized for this effort.
7
Key Personnel
Table 7: Critical Skills Table
Name
David Pettey
Ed Bard
New Hire
David Andrews
Prime,
Subcontractor or
Consultant
Role/Title
Foreign
National
(Y/N)
Level of Involvement
for Phase II
(% of Time)
CEO
No
Prime
5%
Program Management/PI
No
Prime
25%
Program Coordinator
No
Prime
50%
ME – Tank and Fittings
Drawing
No
Prime
25%
David Pettey: CEO/CTO
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 13
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Background: David has served in C-Suite level executive leadership roles in the international technical products
market spaces. Working with a broad network of global industry thought leaders, David’s thirty plus years of
product development and fabrication experience covers: plastics, molding, foams, fibers, industrial papers, textiles,
nonwovens, specialty chemicals, and composite products. His work experiences range from small privately-owned
companies; The Cooley Group, MH Stallman Company, to large publicly traded, Fortune 100 companies;
International Paper and Burlington Industries. While with Quaker Fabric Corporation, he facilitated taking that
company public. David has significant experience in developing products and intellectual property.
Education: David holds a Bachelor's and Master's degree in Textile Engineering, and a Ph.D. in Engineering
Management.
Relevant Experience: David has managed projects and teams involved in the development of new textiles, fibers,
foams, molding processes, additive manufacturing processes, novel feedstocks, composites and chemical coatings.
David has written patents and has managed testing labs, projects, and teams that have developed similar technical
products.
Role in this Project: David is responsible for all technical projects for RT and will be involved for approximately
25% of his time for this project to include the Sikorsky in parallel project work.
Ed Bard: President – Program Management/PI
Background: Ed Bard is a former US Army officer. He has over 20 years of operations, product development and
technical business development in progressively responsible leadership positions in the military, engineering,
operations, supply chain, sales and business management. Ed has worked in companies ranging from fortune 500
General Cable to startups. Ed has lead operations and business development for three specialty urethane foam
chemistry and 3D molding development and manufacturing startups. He has partnered with R&D to create, protect,
commercialize and exploit novel foam chemistry and processing IP. He has developed a large network of strong
relationships with cutting edge clients and suppliers. Ed has significant experience in the production and
development of B2B solutions.
Education: BS in Chemical Engineering, MS in Business Management and is a certified Lean Six Sigma Greenbelt.
Relevant Experience: Ed has managed projects and teams in complex plastic and foam moldings, resistant chemical
coatings, rapid prototyping and additive manufacturing of parts. Ed led operations and helped to develop and build
the additive process to bring Rogers Corporation’s frothed urethane Poron to the 3D world from cut and formed 2D
panels. Ed is the PI for an unrelated Phase II SBIR – 65% Reduction in Crashworthy Fuel Tank Total Ownership
Costs with the DLA [Contract #: SP470116C0087]. Ed also has experience developing and commercializing
products using novel 3D molded polymer processes, advanced chemistries and has extensive experience in plastics,
extrusion, compounding, coating, molding, and foams.
Role in this Project: The technical portion of this project is expected to take 10% of Ed’s time as he will be primarily
responsible for working with Sikorsky and the DoD stakeholders to commercialize the technology.
Micheal Quackenbush: Director of Operations
Background: Micheal has over 25 years of manufacturing experience. His experience includes process
development/improvements, Quality Assurance, ISO standards, Safety Framework and implementation, Lean
manufacturing, Six Sigma, maintenance systems and Operation management. Mike has led operations as well as
Engineering, Maintenance and Quality Assurance in Fortune 500 General Cable and TE connectivity. In addition, He
has worked in several different types of manufacturing environments ranging from continuous long length
manufacturing, High volume low mix screw machine operations and High speed assembly, stamping and plating
operations.
Education: MS in Industrial and manufacturing Engineering, BA in Mechanical Engineering, BA in fine arts (German
Language) and is a certified Lean Six Sigma Blackbelt and once held lead auditor certification for ISO 16949 for
automotive production and relevant services
Relevant Experience: Mike has managed cross functional teams in a high precision fast passed complex manufacturing
environments. He was a key contributor at the staff level to meet production, customer and internal requirement as
well as control budgetary spend on capital and expense items. In addition, Mike was key in the transfer and startup
of a high speed stamping and assembly process while managing 12 direct reports with a total of 200 employees across
3 shifts.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 14
Response Technologies, LLC
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Program Coordinator: New Hire
Background: This position will likely be a degreed engineer with program management experience. Preferably with
aerospace and/or defense related industry experience.
Role in this Project: Documentation of all deliverables and in Phase II represent RT at outside testing venues.
David Andrews: Senior Mechanical Engineer
Background: David is a mechanical engineer experienced in 3D modeling, machine design, design for
manufacturability, and sheet metal design. Experienced and very comfortable working with both Solidworks and
AutoCAD. Experience working on medical, commercial, and industrial products. A hands-on engineer who likes to
be involved from concept to completion. David has worked for Davis Standard, Parkinson Technologies, and Chase
Machine & Engineering.
Education: David holds a BS in Mechanical Engineering from Bridgewater University.
Relevant Experience: Reverse engineering, machining, Solidworks, CAD, 3D printing, robot controls, and teaching.
Machine installations.
Role in this Project: The function of this position is to reverse engineer the fittings and fuel cells from the drawings,
source fittings, and assist with 3D printer installation, building unique testing rigs, and process tools.
8
Foreign Citizens
There are no foreign citizens currently employed by RT, nor are there any plans to employ any foreign nationals for
this nor any other anticipated projects.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 15
Response Technologies, LLC
9
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Facilities/Equipment
Facilities: RT has R&D, testing, and prototyping assets located at 538 Main St Coventry, RI. To the best of our
knowledge, the facility meets federal, state and local government environmental laws and regulations. RT has a
fully functional analytical lab with over 200 years of collective experience in related material science testing, R&D,
product development and manufacturing.
Table 9: Required Assets for Total Effort
Asset
Function
Location
RT 3D Textile Machine
Additively manufacture textile structure. RT has two of these units.
RT Asset
Proprietary Coating Process
Equipment
Provide shape and coatings to the textile structure while tying in the
fittings securely
RT Asset
Instron 4466
Tensile and Elongation Physical Testing
RT Asset
Vibration Table
To be installed with this effort
RT Asset
Precision Thermal Bath
Fuel Resistance Testing
RT Asset
Hydrostatic Pressure Tester
Ballistics testing
RT Asset
Simet Feed Stock Handler
To process feedstock for 3D textile machine
RT Asset
Fritsch Cytostatic Pulveriser
Adding nano-particles to coatings
RT Asset
Misc. Mixing & Ovens
For mixing and processing chemistries
RT Asset
Titan 3D Printer
3D printer for forms. This equipment is ordered and to be installed
JAN 2020.
RT Asset
Robot Spray System
Robotic and automated chemistry spray system – to be installed in
2020
RT Asset
2D Drop Testing Fixtures
For 2D construction verification
RT Asset
Concrete Drop Pad
To be installed in 2020
RT Asset
Gum Tester
Testing fuel liner for gum residue
RT Asset
Panel Strength/Fitting Pullout
Fixture
Panel calibration and fitting pullout drop testing
RT Asset
Abrasion Testing
For 2D construction verification
RT Asset
Test Cube Test Fixture
RT has three of these for ballistics, slosh testing, and long-term stand
testing
RT Asset
Secondary Containment
For Stand and Fuel Immersion Testing
RT Asset
QUV
Advanced weathering
RT Asset
Slosh and Vibration Table
To be installed in 2020
RT Asset
65’ Crane
Drop Testing
Ballistic Testing Setup
Perform Normal Temperature Gunfire testing
Rental
Ft Eustis
Equipment to be Purchased: RT does not anticipate any capital equipment being purchased with SBIR Phase I
proposal dollars. Any equipment purchased would be done via RT’s operating budget.
10
Subcontractors/Consultants
There are no subcontractors nor consultants required for this effort.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 16
Response Technologies, LLC
11
DLA201-001
L201-001-0004
Prior, Current, or Pending Support of Similar Proposals or Awards
No prior, current, or pending support for proposed work.
Use or disclosure of data contained on this page is subject to the restriction on the first page of this volume. Page 17
Direct Labor
Base
Category
Description
Education
Chemical
Master's
Engineer
Degree
Materials
CTO
PhD
Aerospace
Program
Bachelor's
Engineer
Coordinator
Degree
Mechanical
Mechanical
Bachelor's
Engineer
Engineer
Degree
Engineer
Yrs
Experience
Hours
Rate
Fringe
Total
Rate
25
240
106.76
25,622.40
35
40
106.73
4,269.20
4
360
45.67
16,441.20
30
200
43
8,600.00
Are the labor rates detailed below fully loaded?
NO
Provide any additional information and cost support data related to the nature
of the direct labor detailed above.
Wage rate based on actual pay. Program coordinator is a new hire. RT is
actively seeking this position.
Sum of all Direct Labor Costs is($):
54,932.8
Option
Category
Description
Education
Chemical
Master's
Engineer
Degree
Yrs
Experience
25
Are the labor rates detailed below fully loaded?
Hours
0
Rate
106.76
Fringe
Rate
Total
0.00
NO
Provide any additional information and cost support data related to the
nature of the direct labor detailed above.
No option period
Sum of all Direct Labor Costs is($):
54,932.8
Overhead
Base
Labor Cost Overhead Rate
RATE (%): 42
Labor Cost Overhead Rate
Other Direct Costs Overhead Rate
Overhead Comments:
Overhead is based on 2019 financials per DCAA accounting standards
Overhead Cost ($):
23,071.78
Option
Labor Cost Overhead Rate
RATE (%): 42
Labor Cost Overhead Rate
Other Direct Costs Overhead Rate
Overhead Comments:
Overhead Cost ($):
General and Administration Cost
Base
23,071.78
G&A Rate (%):
20
Apply G&A Rate to Overhead Costs?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to Direct Labor Costs?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to Direct Material Costs?
NO
Apply G&A Rate to ODC- Supply?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to ODC- Equipment?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to ODC- Travel?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to Other Direct Costs?
YES
Please specify the different cost sources below from which your company's
General and Administrative costs are calculated.
SG&A is based on 2019 financials per DCAA accounting standards
G&A Cost ($):
15,851.72
Option
G&A Rate (%):
28.4
Apply G&A Rate to Overhead Costs?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to Direct Labor Costs?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to Direct Material Costs?
NO
Apply G&A Rate to ODC- Supply?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to ODC- Equipment?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to ODC- Travel?
YES
Apply G&A Rate to Other Direct Costs?
YES
Please specify the different cost sources below from which your company's
General and Administrative costs are calculated.
G&A Cost ($):
15,851.72
ODC-Travel
Base
Description: Travel to Hill AFB to meet with
USAF
Location From: Providence, RI
Location To: Hill AFB
Number of People: 1
Number of Days: 3
Purpose of Trip:
To meet with USAF personnel at Hill AFB to go over the RVM for the A-10 fuel cells.
Total Airfare Costs ($): 657
Total Car Rental Costs ($): 240
Total Per Diem Costs ($): 165
Total Other Costs ($): 192
Total Costs ($): 1,254.00
Sources of Estimates:
GSA for hotel and per diem. Americal airlines portal for flights lowest fare $80 total car
rental per day with all taxes
Explanation/Justifications:
This trip is required to see existing tanks and make sure all customer (USAF)
requirements are documented and met. Current specification is dated and likely not up
to date vs needs of DoD.
Option
Description: None
Location From: None
Location To: none
Number of People: 0
Number of Days: 0
Purpose of Trip:
NA
Total Airfare Costs ($): 0
Total Car Rental Costs ($): 0
Total Per Diem Costs ($): 0
Total Other Costs ($): 0
Total Costs ($): 0.00
Sources of Estimates:
NA
Explanation/Justifications:
NA
ODC-Summary
Details
ODC-Travel
Total
1,254
Base
Do you have any additional information to provide?
NO
Option
Do you have any additional information to provide?
NO
Profit Rate/Cost Sharing
Base
Cost Sharing ($):
-
Cost Sharing Explanation:
Profit Rate (%):
5.12
Profit Explanation:
Total Profit Cost ($):
4,869.65
Option
Cost Sharing ($):
-
Cost Sharing Explanation:
Profit Rate (%):
0
Profit Explanation:
Total Profit Cost ($):
Total Proposed Amount ($):
4,869.65
99,979.94
Ed Bard, Response Technologies, LLC
Jan 15, 2020
Jan 15, 2021