report no. 96-46

FINAL REPORT DECEMBER 1997

REPORT NO. 96-46 rv*

2.75-INCH, HYDRA 70, PA151, ROCKET PALLET FIRST ARTICLE

TESTING (FAT)

rt*r«"» ir,~.- .•- ■ ECO

Prepared for: U.S. Army Armament Research, Development

and Engineering Center ATTN: AMSTA-AR-ESK Rock Island, IL 61299-7300

Distribution Unlimited

O.S- A*M y

VALIDATION ENGINEERING DIVISION SAVANNA, ILLINOIS 61074-9639 SAVANNA, ILLINOIS

AVAII.ABII.rTYNOTTCF

A copy of this report will be furnished each attendee on automatic distribution. Additional

copies or authority for reprinting may be obtained by written request from Director, U.S. Army

Defense Ammunition Center, ATTN: SIOAC-DEV, 3700 Army Depot Road, Savanna, DL

61074-9639.

DISTRIBUTION INSTRUCTIONS

Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return.

***

Citation of trade names in this report does not constitute an official endorsement.

***

The information contained herein will not be used for advertising purposes.

UNCLASSIFIED ShCUKI IV CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGL

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188

1a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

UNCLASSIFIED 1b. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS

2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY

2b. DECLASSIFICATION / DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE

3. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

UNLIMITED

4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

96-46

5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center

6b. OFFICE SYMBOL (if applicable)

SIOAC-DEV

7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION

6c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)

ATTN: SIOAC-DEV Savanna, IL 61074-9639

7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)

8a. NAME OF FUNDING / SPONSORING ORGANIZATION

U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Centei

8b. OFFICE SYMBOL (if applicable)

9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

AMSTA-AR-ESK 8c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)

ATTN: AMSTA-AR-ESK Rock Island, IL 61299-7300

10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

PROJECT NO. TASK NO. WORK UNIT ACCESSION NO.

11. TITLE (Include Security Classification)

2.75-Inch, Hydra 70, PA151, Rocket Pallet First Article Testing (FAT) 12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)

Quinn D. Hartman 13a. TYPE OF REPORT

Final 13b. TIME COVERED

FROM TO

14. DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day)

1997 December 15. PAGE COUNT

16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION

17. COSATI CODES FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP

18. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

19. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

The U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center (DAC), Validation Engineering Division (SIOAC-DEV), was tasked by U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) to conduct MIL-STD-1660, Design Criteria for Ammunition Unit Loads, First Article Testing (FAT) on the 2.75-inch, Hyrdra 70, PA151, rocket pallet produced by Delfasco of Tennessee, Greeneville, TN and Lockheed Martin, Burlington, VT. The MIL-STD-1660 testing revealed several design deficiencies that had to be corrected before the pallet would pass the MIL-STD-1660 test criteria. Modifications that were made to the pallet design included a larger pallet adapter aligning pin and strengthening plates under the pallet deck above the four corner pallet posts. After these modifications were made, the pallets were able to meet MEL-STD-1660 test criteria. (Continued)

20. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT

UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED CUsAME AS RPT. CZIDTIC USERS

21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

UNCLASSIFIED 22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL

JEROME H.KROHN 22b. TELEPHONE (Include Area Code)

815-273-8929 22c^

DD Form 1473, Jun 86 Previous editions are obsolete

i SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

UNCLASSIFIED

19. ABSTRACT (continued).

Prior to discovering these problems, Delfasco and Lockheed Martin had fabricated and welded several hundred pallets and adapter sets. These pallets and adapters did not meet MEL-STD-1660 test criteria so they could not be accepted without modifications. Several attempts were made before an acceptable modification was found. The modification consisted of side reinforcers that were welded to the inside and outside of the four corner posts of the pallet. The modification did not eliminate all the cracking in the deck that occurred during the testing, but did prevent the pallet post from pushing through the deck in a potentially damaging fashion as occurred during the testing of the original pallet design. The modified pallets were approved for U.S. Army (USA)-wide use, but only as a means for utilizing those pallets that were already fabricated. All future pallet production was to use the strengthening plates under the deck above the four corner pallet posts.

u

U.S. ARMY DEFENSE AMMUNITION CENTER

VALIDATION ENGINEERING DIVISION

SAVANNA, EL 61074-9639

REPORT NO. 96-46

2.75-INCH, HYDRA 70, PA151, ROCKET PALLET FIRST ARTICLE TESTING (FAT)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART PAGE NO.

-1 1. INTRODUCTION

A. BACKGROUND 1-1

B. AUTHORITY 1-1

C. OBJECTIVE

D. CONCLUSION

2. ATTENDEES 2-1

3. TEST PROCEDURES 3-1

4. TEST EQUIPMENT 4-1

5. TEST RESULTS 5-1

6. PHOTOGRAPHS 6-1

7. DRAWINGS 7-1

in

PARTI

INTRODUCTION

A. BACKGROUND. The U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center (DAC), Validation

Engineering Division (SIOAC-DEV), was tasked by U.S. Army Armament Research,

Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) to conduct ML-STD-1660, Design Criteria for

Ammunition Unit Loads, First Article Testing (FAT) on the 2.75-inch, Hydra 70, PA151, rocket

pallet produced by Delfasco of Tennessee, Greeneville, TN and Lockheed Martin,

Burlington, VT.

B. AUTHORITY. This test was conducted IAW mission responsibilities delegated by the U.S.

Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command (AMCCOM), Rock Island, IL. Reference

is made to the following:

1. Change 4, 4 October 1974, to AR740-1, 23 April 1973, Storage and Supply Activity

Operation.

2. AMCCOM-R, 10-17, Mission and Major Functions of USADACS, 13 January 1986.

C. OBJECTIVE The objective of the tests was to determine if the pallets produced by Delfasco

and Lockheed Martin met MIL-STD-1660 test requirements prior to the acceptance of the pallets

by the U.S. Army (USA).

D. CONCLUSION. The original pallet design as produced by Delfasco failed to meet the test

criteria of MEL-STD-1660, Design Criteria for Ammunition Unit Loads. The deck of the pallet

adapter cracked at the corner posts and the bottom adapter aligning pins sheared off as a result of

the repetitive shock test. Modifications were made to the original pallet design to correct these

deficiencies. The modifications consisted of an additional thickness of material welded to the

1-1

bottom of the pallet deck above the four comer posts and larger diameter aligning pins on the

bottom pallet adapter. After these modifications were made, the pallets produced by Delfasco

and Lockheed Martin were able to meet MEL-STD-1660 test criteria.

Prior to discovering the design deficiencies, Delfasco and Lockheed Martin had fabricated

and welded several hundred pallets and adapters in an effort to get ahead of the production

schedule. These pallets and adapters were of the original design and were not capable of

meeting MIL-STD-1660 test criteria. In an effort to salvage this production, additional tests

were performed to determine if there was a cost-effective modification that could be made to the

pallets that would allow them to meet MEL-STD-1660 test criteria. Several attempts were made

before an acceptable modification was found. The modifications consisted of side reinforcers

that were welded to the inside and outside of the four corner posts of the pallet and a larger

diameter bottom adapter aligning pin. The modification did not eliminate all the cracking in the

deck that occurred during the testing, but did prevent the pallet post from pushing through the

deck in a potentially damaging fashion as occurred during testing of the original pallet design.

The pallets with this modification were approved for U.S. Army (USA)-wide use, but only as a

means for utilizing those pallets that were already fabricated. All future pallet production was to

use the strengthening plates under the deck above the four corner pallet posts.

1-2

PART 2

MAY - SEPTEMBER 1996

ATTENDEES

Quinn D. Hartman General Engineer

DSN 585-8992 815-273-8992

Jerome H. Krohn Supervisory General Engineer DSN 585-8908 815-273-8908

Thomas J. Michels Supervisory Industrial Engineer DSN 585-8080 815-273-8080

Mark Rehmstedt Packaging Specialist DSN 793-8206 309-782-8206

Nora Hipschen DSN 793-8204 309-782-8204

Captain Mike Ryan

Roy Buckrop

Director

U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center ATTN: SIOAC-DEV 3700 Army Depot Road Savanna, JL 61074-9639

Director U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center ATTN: SIOAC-DEV 3700 Army Depot Road Savanna, IL 61074-9639

Director U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center ATTN: SIOAC-DES 3700 Army Depot Road Savanna, IL 61074-9639

U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center


U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center


Industrial Operations Command ATTN: AMSIO-SMI-H Rock Island, IL 61299-6000

Industrial Operations Command ATTN: AMSIO-IOE-P Rock Island, IL 61299-6000

2-1

ATTENDEES (CQNT)

Larry Handler Lockheed Martin 802-657-7479 Ordnance Systems

Lakeside Avenue Burlington, VT 05401-4985

2-2

PART 3

TEST PROCEDURES

The test procedures outlined in this section were extracted from MIL-STD-1660, Design

Criteria for Ammunition Unit Loads, 8 April 1977. This standard identifies nine steps that a

unitized load must undergo if it is to be considered acceptable. The four tests that were

conducted on the test pallets are summarized below.

A. STACKING TEST. The unit load was loaded to simulate a stack of identical unit loads

stacked 16 feet high, for a period of one hour. This stacking load was simulated by subjecting

the unit load to a compression weight equal to an equivalent 16-foot stacking height. The

compression load was calculated in the following manner. The unit load weight was divided by

the unit load height in inches and multiplied by 192. The resulting number was the equivalent

compressive force of a 16-foot-high load.

B. REPETTTTVE SHOCK TEST The repetitive shock test was conducted IAW Method 5019,

Federal Standard 101. The test procedure is as follows: The test specimen was placed on, but

not fastened to, the platform. With the specimen in one position, the platform was vibrated at

1/2-inch amplitude (1-inch double amplitude) starting at a frequency of approximately

3 cycles per second. The frequency was steadily increased until the package left the platform.

The resonant frequency was achieved when a 1/16-inch-thick feeler gage momentarily slid freely

between every point on the specimen in contact with the platform at some instance during the

cycle or a platform acceleration achieved 1 +/- 0.1 Gs. Midway into the testing period, the

specimen was rotated 90 degrees and the test continued for the duration. Unless failure occurred,

the total time of vibration was two hours if the specimen was tested in one position and three

hours for more than one position.

3-1

C. EDGEWISE ROTATION AT. DROP TRST This test was conducted using the procedures of

Method 5008, Federal Standard 101. The procedure for the edgewise rotational drop test is as

follows: The specimen was placed on its skids with one end of the pallet supported on a beam

4-1/2 inches high. The height of the beam was increased if necessary to ensure that there was no

support for the skids between the ends of the pallet when dropping took place, but was not high

enough to cause the pallet to slide on the supports when the dropped end was raised for the

drops. The unsupported end of the pallet was then raised and allowed to fall freely to the

concrete, pavement, or similar underlying surface from a prescribed height. Unless otherwise

specified, the height of drop for level A protection conforms to the following tabulation:

GROSS WEIGHT

(WITHIN RANGE

LIMITS)

(Pounds)

DIMENSIONS OF

ANY EDGE, HEIGHT

OR WIDTH (WITHIN

RANGE LIMITS)

(Inches)

HEIGHT OF DROPS

ON EDGES

Level A Level B

(Inches) (Inches)

150-250 60-66 36 27

250 - 400 66-72 32 24

400 - 600 72-80 28 21

600-1,000 80-95 24 18

1,000 - 1,500 95-114 20 16

1,500 - 2,000 114-144 17 14

2,000 - 3,000 Above 145 - No limit 15 12

Above - 3,000 12 9

D. INCLINE-IMPACT TEST This test was conducted by using the procedure of Method 5023,

Incline-Impact Test of Federal Standard 101. The procedure for the incline-impact test is as

follows: The specimen was placed on the carriage with the surface or edge to be impacted

3-2

projecting at least 2 inches beyond the front end of the carriage. The carriage was brought to a

predetermined position on the incline and released. If it was desired to concentrate the impact on

any particular position on the container, a 4- by 4-inch timber was attached to the bumper in the

desired position before the test. No part of the timber was struck by the carriage. The position

of the container on the carriage and the sequence in which surfaces and edges were subjected to

impacts was at the option of the testing activity and depends upon the objective of the tests. This

test was to determine satisfactory requirements for a container or pack, and, unless otherwise

specified, the specimen was subjected to one impact on each surface that has each dimension less

than 9.5 feet. Unless otherwise specified, the velocity at time of impact was 7 feet per second.

3-3

PART 4

TEST EOT ITPMENT

A. Compression Tester

1. Manufacturer:

2. Platform:

3. Compression Limit:

4. Tension Limit:

Ormond Manufacturing

60- by 60-inches

50,000 pounds

50,000 pounds

B. Transportation Simulator.

1. Manufacturer:

2. Capacity:

3. Displacement:

4. Speed:

5. Platform:

Gaynes Laboratory

6,000-pound pallet

1/2-inch amplitude

50 to 400 rpm

5- by 8-foot

C Tnclined Plane

1. Manufacturer:

2. Type:

3. Grade:

4. Length:

Conbur Incline

Impact Tester

10 percent incline

12-foot

4-1

PART 5

TEST RESULTS

The test pallets were inertly-loaded to the specified design weight using two

4- by 4-inch lengths of lumber, two 2- by 4-inch lengths of lumber, and a quantity of ammunition

simulant to bring each individual container to the required weight. Special care was taken to

ensure that each container had the proper amount of weight in order to achieve a realistic pallet

center of gravity (CG). The following sequence of tests were conducted in an effort to:

1. Qualify the Delfasco fabricated and Lockheed Martin welded pallets and adapters that

had been fabricated according to the original design specifications then modified in an effort to

meet MIL-STD-1660 test criteria.

2. Qualify the Delfasco fabricated and Lockheed Martin welded pallets and adapters

constructed with the modified design.

3. Qualify the Delfasco fabricated and welded pallets and adapters with the modified

design.

Unless otherwise noted, all the pallets and adapters in the following test sequences are

Delfasco fabricated and Lockheed Martin welded.

A. Pallet 1. Pallet No. 1 from the initial first article submissions.

Date: 20 May 1996 Weight: 2,030 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches

5-1

1 Compression Test. The test pallet was compressed with a load force of 8,960 pounds

for 60 minutes. No damage was noted as a result of this test.

2 Repetitive Shock Test. The test pallet was vibrated 60 minutes at 230 rpm. During a

routine inspection, the containers and bottom adapter were noted to have shifted approximately

2 inches relative to the pallet base. Further inspection revealed that the adapter aligning pins on

the bottom adapter had sheared off during the vibration. No additional testing was conducted on

this pallet.

B. Pallet 2. Pallet No. 2 from the initial first article submissions. Bottom adapter and pallet

modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6.

Date: 22 May 1996 Weight: 2,030 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches

Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches

1. Compression Test. The test pallet was compressed with a load force of 8,960 pounds for

60 minutes. No damage was noted as a result of this test.

2- Repetitive Shock Test. The test pallet was vibrated 90 minutes at 235 rpm in the

longitudinal orientation and 90 minutes at 175 rpm in the lateral orientation. Several small

cracks were noted to have formed in the pallet posts next to the pallet skids at the completion of

the longitudinal vibration test. No additional cracking was noted at the completion of the lateral

vibration.

3 Edgewise Rotational Drop Test. The test pallet was edgewise rotationally dropped from

a height of 24-inches on the longitudinal drops and 14-inches on the lateral drops.

5-2

4. Sling Compatibility Test. The test pallet was lifted off of the ground using the toplift

adapter by four points, three points, two diagonal points, two adjacent points, and one point. No

shifting of the containers or permanent deformation of the toplift was noted.

5. Incline-Impact Test. The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height

of 8-feet. No additional damage was noted at the completion of the test.

6. Post Test Inspection. Following completion ofMIL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was

disassembled and inspected for additional damage. Two of the cracks that were noted during the

vibration test were determined to be severe enough to allow the pallet post to penetrate into the

pallet load. Because of the severity of the deck cracking, the test pallet was considered to have

failed MIL-STD-1660 test criteria.

C. Pallet3. Pallet No. 3 from the initial first article submissions. Bottom adapter and pallet

modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6.

Date: 23 May 1996 Weight: 2,030 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches



2. Repetitive Shock Test. The test pallet was vibrated 90 minutes at 225 rpm in the

longitudinal orientation and 90 minutes at 175 rpm in the lateral orientation. Upon completion of

the longitudinal vibration, the pallet was elevated and inspected from the bottom side. Cracks

were noted to have formed around the pallet posts at the bell end of the pallet.

5-3

3- Edgewise Rotational Drop Test. The test pallet was edgewise rotationally dropped

24-inches on the bell end of the pallet and 14 inches on the first lateral drop. The remainder of

the drops were conducted at 15 inches after the discovery of the change in drop height

specifications was noted. As a result of the drop tests, the bell end of the pallet had the posts

pushed through the pallet deck into the bottom adapter while the non-bell end of the pallet did

not show the same type of damage.



shifting of the containers or permanent deformation of the toplift was noted.



6. Post Test Inspection. Following completion of MIL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was

disassembled and inspected for additional damage. No additional damage was noted to have

occurred since the inspection after the edgewise rotational drop tests. Because of the severity of

the deck cracking, the test pallet was considered to have failed MIL-STD-1660 test criteria.

D. Pallet 4. Pallet No. 1 modified from the initial first article submissions. Bottom adapter and

pallet modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6. Testing restarted at the point

where the adapter pins failed during the longitudinal vibration testing previously conducted on

20 May 1996.

Date: 24 may 1996 Weight: 2,030 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches

5-4

1- Repetitive Shock Test. The test pallet was vibrated 30 minutes at 220 rpm in the

longitudinal orientation to complete the longitudinal orientation started on 20 May 1996. Minor

cracks were noted in the pallet posts next to the skid at the completion of the longitudinal

orientation. The test pallet was then vibrated 90 minutes at 165 rpm. Upon completion of the

lateral orientation, the test pallet was elevated so the bottom of the pallet deck could be

inspected. The cracks noted at the completion of the longitudinal orientation had not increased

significantly. Cracks were noted to have formed in the pallet base around the corner posts of the

pallet.

2. Edgewise Rotational Drop Test. The test pallet was edgewise rotationally dropped

15-inches on all four sides of the pallet. No additional cracking was noted to have occurred in

the pallet based when inspected from the bottom side of the pallet.

3 • Sling Compatibility Test. The test pallet was lifted off of the ground using the toplift


shifting of the containers or permanent deformation of the top-lift was noted.


of 8-feet. No additional damage was noted upon completion of the test.

5. Post Test Inspection. Following completion of MIL- STD-1660 testing, the pallet was

disassembled and inspected for additional damage. Three of the four corner posts of the pallet

were noted to have pushed up through the pallet deck into the bottom adapter. Since this damage

represented a potential hazard to the containers on the pallet, the pallet was considered to have

failed MIL-STD-1660 testing.

E. PalleLl Pallet No. 1 from the second submission of pallets and adapters. The bottom

adapter and pallet were modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6 and the side

reinforcers on the four corner posts. The initial side reinforcers that were used extended up to

5-5

the bottom of the pallet base on the inside of the comer posts but stopped at the strengthing bend

on the pallet deck on the outside of the comer pallet posts (see photographs on pages 6-14 and 6-

15).

Date: 12 June 1996 Weight: 2,035 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches

1. Compression Tftst. The test pallet was compressed with a load force of 8,985 pounds for



longitudinal orientation. Upon completion of the longitudinal vibration, the pallet deck was

noted to have cracked at the strengthening bend where the outer side reinforcers had been welded

to the deck material. No additional testing was conducted on this pallet.

F. EalleLfi. Pallet No. 2 from the second submission of pallets and adapters. The bottom

adapter and pallet were modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6 and the side

reinforcers on the four comer posts. The portion of the outside reinforcers that was welded to the

strengthing bend on the pallet base was ground off to prevent the deck cracking that took place

on the previous pallet.


1 Comnres sion Test The test nail


5-6

2. Repetitive Shock Test The test pallet was vibrated 90 minutes at 225 rpm in the


the longitudinal vibration, the pallet was elevated and inspected from the bottom side. Small

cracks were noted to have formed on the outer edges of the pallet base on the outer edges of two

corner posts. No change was noted in the cracking after the lateral orientation.

3. Edgewise Rotational Drop Test The test pallet was edgewise rotationally dropped

15-inches on all four sides. No change in the cracks was noted after the completion of the

rotational drops.

4. Sling Compatibility Test The test pallet was lifted off of the ground using the toplift



5. Incline-Tmpact Test The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height


6. Post Test Inspection. Following completion of MIL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was

disassembled and inspected for additional damage. The cracks that occurred during the

longitudinal vibration were noted to be more substantial when viewed from the top side of the

pallet base. Because of the severity of the deck cracking, the test pallet was considered to have

failed MIL-STD-1660 testing.

G. Pallet 7. Pallet No. 1 from the third submission of pallets and adapters. The bottom adapter

and pallet were modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6 and the side

reinforcers on the four corner posts. The second set of side reinforcers that were used extended

up to the bottom of the pallet base on both sides of the corner posts.

5-7

Date: 06-24-96 Weight: 2,035 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches






cracks were noted to have formed in the pallet posts along the skid. No cracking in the pallet

deck was evident when viewed from the bottom side of the pallet.

3 Edgewise Rotational Drop Tfsst. The test pallet was edgewise rotationally dropped


rotational drops.




5 Incline-Tmpact Test The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height


6 Post Test Inspection. Following completion ofMTL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was

disassembled and inspected for additional damage. Small cracks were noted to have formed in

the pallet deck on the inside portion of the corner posts. Since the side reinforcers prevented the

pallet post from pushing up through the pallet base into the bottom adapter, the pallet was

considered to have passed MTL-STD-1660 testing.

5-8

H. PalleLS. Pallet No. 1 from the first submission of pallets and adapters with the strengthening

plates added to the bottom side of the pallet base above the four comer posts.

Date: 24 June 1996

Weight: 2,035 pounds

Length: 70-3/4 inches

Width: 29-3/8 inches

Height: 43-1/2 inches

1. ComDresi sion Test. The test nail





cracks were noted to have formed in the pallet posts along the skid and two cracks were noted to

have formed in two of the comer posts next to the strengthening plates.



rotational drops.




5. Tncline-Tmpact Test The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height


6. Post Test Inspection Following completion of MIL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was

disassembled and inspected for additional damage. The cracks that were noted after the

longitudinal orientation of the repetitive shock test had not propagated. No cracking was noted

5-9

in the pallet deck material.

I. Pallet 9. Pallet No. 2 from the third submission of pallets and adapters. The bottom adapter

and pallet were modified to accept the larger adapter pin AC200000453-6 and the side

reinforcers on the four corner posts. The second set of side reinforcers used extended up to the

bottom of the pallet base on both sides of the corner posts.







cracks were noted to have formed in the pallet posts along the skid.



rotational drops.






5-10



longitudinal orientation of the repetitive shock test had not propagated. Minor cracking was

noted to have formed in the pallet deck material at the inside corners of the four corner posts.

Since the side reinforcers prevented the pallet post from pushing up through the pallet base into

the bottom adapter, the pallet was considered to have passed MIL-STD-1660 testing.

J. Pallet 10 Pallet No. 2 from the first submission of pallets and adapters with the strengthening

plates added to the bottom side of the pallet base above the four corner posts.

Date: 26 June 1996





1. Compression Test The test pallet was compressed with a load force of 8,985 pounds for








rotational drops.




5-11

5- Incline-Impact Test. The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height


6. Post Test Inspection. Following completion of MEL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was



in the pallet deck material. Two cracks were also noted to have formed in two of the four comer

posts next to the strengthening plates.

K. Pallet 11 Pallet No. 1 from the first article submission of pallets and adapters that was

fabricated and welded by Delfasco.

Date: 18 September 1996 Weight: 2,040 pounds Length: 70-3/4 inches Width: 29-3/8 inches Height: 43-1/2 inches

1 Compression Test. The test pallet was compressed with a load force of 9,000 pounds for






3 Edgewise Rotational Drop Test. The test pallet was edgewise rotationally dropped


rotational drops.

5-12




5. Tncline-Tmpact Test The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height






L. Pallet 12. Pallet No. 2 from the first article submission of pallets and adapters that was

fabricated and welded by Delfasco.

Date: 20 September 1996












15 inches on all four sides. No change in the cracks was noted after the completion of the

rotational drops.

5-13

4 Sling Compatibility Test. The test pallet was lifted off of the ground using the toplift

adapter by 4-points, 3-points, 2-diagonal points, 2 adjacent-points, and 1-point. No shifting of

the containers or permanent deformation of the top-lift was noted.

5 Incline-Impact Test. The test pallet was incline-impacted on all four sides from a height


6. Post Test Inspection ■ Following completion ofMIL-STD-1660 testing, the pallet was




5-14

PART 6

PHOTOGRAPHS

6-1

U.S. ARMY DEFENSE AMMUNITION CENTER SAVANNA, IL

PHOTO NO. A0317-SCN-96-145-2556. This photograph shows the pallet positioned on the scale during the inert loading of the containers.

6-2

■«-•

(0 0> +— c o (0 CO (1) 1— Q. E

_J o u < z +-

Z D) < C

> < ■a CO *_«

■ a> rr ro w a. i- 0 z UJ

** o $ z o o (0 h- x: z Q.

(0 3 S

i_

o S o < Q 111 CO

OT z 1- II . UJ Q

u> in io

>- CM i

^ IO

K "t

< 1 CD

CO 0) i

-> Z o CO h- ^ CO o <

Ö z O 1- o I 0.

6-3

2 ■

a: LU

Z LU Ü Z o

5 < HI CO

LU U_ LU Q

Of < CO Z>

0)

0)

<D

to c CO

0)

o

Q.

0}

CO I CO

Q.

5 o> o 5 JO Q.

CO

O O (O t

o> Z Ü . CO c

r: co

O z o 1 Qo,

6-4

z

< co i

or HI i- z UJ o z g

< UJ co z UJ u_ UJ Q

<

co

co i— CD ^»

co

Cü «*- 1— CD ^ CD J= CO

CD J=

C o

75 Q. CD

JZ

CO

o JZ co

JZ a.

O o

JZ Q. CO

CO in co ■ in

■ CD O)

ü CO ■

co o <

c o

O £ 0- o

6-5

D) C i_ 3 T3 (0 <-> C o Q.

<D i_ x: *-• >»

_J ^ T3

< Z

(D

Z O) < C > <D < .O CO ♦*

1 Q)

rr (0 LU Q. 1- (D Z LU Ü

to 5

T' o O (0 h- i=

z CD 3 S O S O < Q. UJ CO OT z LU 1- II - LU Q

o CM in

>- CO ■

< ■ CD

co ■ 3 ^ **

^ W D a> to t: .■ >» S- Ä ^™ TSZ

CO P s ■« < s. oi Z o o £> - ~ o m

I 92 Q-£

6-7

10 *»• J c 1 o 1 CL 1 «•■* 1 c 1 a> 1 u CO TJ CO o 3 >.

-J ^ ^^ ■D

< z

CO

z o> ^ c > © < .O CO «

1 © on a LU Q. (- CD

LU Ü Z o 0> J- ^ z a.

CO

5 o S B < LU CO W

2 LU

JE 1-

U_ . LU Q

CN CNJ

> CO 1

5 a: < CO 0> £» b 7^ CJ *=

CO CO J OL

- £ 8 8 < O)

e ( 3 To Z CO

< D£ i — o> < D c ■ r 3 1 ' Ä.-D

6-8

0) x: *•■* 1

o> c

'I— 3

■o ^* c o Q.

C o >»

-J .o •^™ ■o

1 z OJ < c > © < .a CO *< 1

1 — a CD LU Q.

1- CD Z HI CO Ü $ z o o (0 1- £

z a. as

o 5 "5 < ex UJ CO CO •— z LU

XZ

LL LU Q

co CM

>- CO i

5 IT

in

< 5 CO ■ Z> z

Ü CO *J ^' «o h» «D

22 >» o .*: <s

. t^*

~ E £8 O » X .E Q_ o>

6-10

LJ a) *■*

(0 (D ^^ u (0 a. E

J C

< u z. -? <D < £Z

> r < o CO ^j

a> tr CO UJ Q. h- ID z UJ to o £ T' o o JL.

CO

H- JC

z Q. (0

3 S O ^ O < rz

a UJ CO m z UJ 1- u_ UJ Q

CM

>- CO ■

a: ID

< ■ CD

CO ■ -> Z u

CO h- ^~ CO o <

Ö z o H O X Q_

6-11

O) c l_ 3

T3 T3 <D i_

3 Ü Ü O

_J (0 •™~ n

♦^

< <D z OJ z CO < b > CO < ■0

CO 1

"co c

a: 0

UJ

z ■a T3 CO

UJ CO o $ -7 0

0 .c CO

h- JZ

z Q. CO

3 S DJ

0 2 0 < a. UJ to

z UJ

JZ 1-

II > UJ 0

CO

in >- CO

a: 10

< CD CO ■ Z)

0317

-SC

N

test

ing.

<o . CO

o<°. Z 1

2° h- tf>

HO

IL

-

Q_ Is»

6-13

<D

CD

6-14

<D x: ** o +■*

T3 <D T3 T3 CD

to £

Hh>*

_J as ♦^

< (D z. Ü z o < «Ü > .E .* < (D U

>- a» to (D "O 1 "Ö -K

a: »^ w i- CO h- CD Q.

z = ü in ü z Is o H O t Z £ 3

m o J) r- °

S 2 8 < III o > CO z

O CO

Q.~ LU .2 c u LU Q Th

ac

ki

>- ^ o 1> a: o <i> <

S£ Q- CO O) o --> Z «o

Ü O co *; i tr h- o CO % o Ü. < fe

d-s Z to o 8 I" H- O a> ? ö Q. Q.

6-15

z

I

UJ »- z UJ Ü z o

< UJ CO z

UJ

111 Q

<

CO

u ■D

ex

CD

(0 x: CO

o 5 u 0)

CD c o CO I CO .c Q. s o o

XT Q. CO 'r- *-

al S £ 0> S z w

CO ~

8.2 <S Ö « Z CD

I- o o Z f s

6-16

■*■*

^ i> ^ 2. £ <D

1 c x:

side

re

insi

de

: I L. r~

ts o 3 L! o — «... ■* <D o

_J J= © fc r3

I 1 < z £3 z < .2 Q. > "5> © < o £ CO

I (D £ QC to 5> LU 1- er

n Id

in

z ±i <b LU CO $

Ü x: o z 1- H-

o CO CO

1- 5 o z CO 05 ID x: >»

Q. c S £ o <

phot

og

nfor

cer

UJ CO z

""K UJ u_ CO *<D

..y< HI Q "* > CNJ W

Hfl s tr 40

1 ut

er

< ti) o CO zi

317-

SC

N-9

si

tion

of th

e

V

PH

OT

O N

O.

AO

The

alte

rnat

e po

i po

st.

6-17

<D JZ *■*

o *■*

TJ <D TJ CD £ CO (0 $

^^ _] CO

£ fc ♦<

< o z ♦*

z <

CD E

> 4— o < CO CD

Ü 1 0)

on 5. UJ CO h- z X HI 0) Ü x: "5 Z ~* co o co *=

5 co

Z o to OT CO

3 .- o 5 fc? 5 CO jo < S»E LLI CO Z

B8 Q-.C UJ to "*"' u. ■= CD

UJ P 5> v - * s S co o: 3 CD

< ? CO

CO 5 a> i x:

=> Z **

CO £

CO CD O j= < CO

■ o ( 0 ~ 7 ■*

( ̂ «D

1 ™T -«■* < D JS> ?« i X Q.

6-18

PART 7

DRAWINGS

7-1

I

I

si« IS

i 5 ? ?§ 8 8 8 ?|

* i i s s g was 5 3 "■ a

I- il II ! IS &1 SS 9

IIS

si Bi!

&3ft SoS

lall

J

4

x

K :

I» D

i

s s

«^

2*

3i

II

?? 5*

süasiSis

£

2 iaMR2 - "3 " % IgJt--o >- o a Ss'a^- SB - 3 E-SxSffi „2

* *si°üi* öS » -„us*» _s

SK -ass rn£ §ZJSo

gu. 9S-J ■

a s5dB5i3^*s

Up i*ä

.<Bu-_i£jSSs^0-»st:SS

■FfSSSSSSSSä! Sw - •=i=is3|d3la5SÖ£Sg3 .iiiSoiasaaatsaccSc K

o* ? < i 55

< i

m

§

o.

r~ i

2 5m

§^

Wl

■ a

-:i ►^i":!

' -

« a

23 -It-

lux

Si

is QE

1

I

s «?. 38

S3«

!i! !i ill

a *

«I ? 3

S

I

§2 o q o >

' -

gi-ll

S!

r>itS

v a* v

s UJ

flQ *Ni

2*

S3

1 1

as

S99 ???

$388 mi Si

t

uj a

«£! o «SIS**

I iiil3l jvi^- «r ? QTlUM

s§ Is vs S3-1

a= — O UJ

Cd to

00

8

a.

1

gas

o an UJUJl/)

0 >- •— UJ

01 ■* <UJ

! _

i s

-I»- .

2i

Is o* in -^rtn

?? as

gas

i i s

II.IT

-Raaais

2—«iri «

n

3

n

C

n

W

K

JLa

■^

JS S

;i

Im f

ä

I. (5 »13

UJ p p a a s s s R

a i i 8 t |

z

a

9! 8

u a 5

i i a

5 i i i

- P • i 8

i

, p i i 8 i t

o» oi

_ tx m T s s Jo 2 £

2 i i $ i S| S3 is

R =

a»

rnöfM 99?

SSSIS

§ä

-SS SV"' ZJO

»Sä8« STSSS 532S!S£ 2 U» tA

c*BläaEu£

S — oJm

inn»

St 2

*\J ©CM

h J- §r — £ © —

•*!■;

J W vy^

o

Ö

IOI i

9H

^

j." , .* m p-» ui

in a: b *•

8 si

m

CM CD

O 2 O > L_l

33*

is ■«8

;.!;:

J i1! It! I

F 7 fflJS I

0

s

t-J

a 55

1

1

CD « !

^ in

1 1

1

s or «< CL

2 s i_i •<

A»

i aa

Si

UJ(D Ott

n JE 8.

??? UgaSS

!s§ gf

I p

«is .

Spgs

3—dm

h R 8

fT\

"\: Ra!

r" — *** a 5

Si

Eg S3

e a

a»

5

i g s

«T3 c

m to c\

S3!S8

iä

1—

4» m O'OJOJO'© «PO3D°O?ö

' 0rPrP' -!o°©°o' -j _i—_o

Co I le

R2

S VI

I is a ui

§1 £~S T 31°

. 2£S 4 Hinz

s Is I 58_

rssss

iss ss uiei P via 5£is 55 55Ka £S

3~8 £ ES V» ■ ^ W-"

53SS=- SS

aaäH »-v»

dVSSS q3 BSBI8 89

ZWUOogM

cv m -+*n

n

i

9? as

?9 gas

!i

i. Si2 SI2

Ilia;

|l!iSE

R=

Si

I fMCD

QnP_p ~f

. °o°o0

•

<D mm

St

I

K3 =

m

S

S

**»f» C

Z "* —

CO

?i ?is-

! ,_

ri1

Üi' Hi Si *

i H

lux

if Sä

?? 38

N

S3»

IS

Hi

a§£2

3'5'S! Tg .25

2* £

gSlss S — ** m

g Li.

E

5

03

"1=1 "ST.

Wl

318

^■T

183

■in

0 t—1

n z ULJ 2: t—I

a

I_I

in p»

s O in CO 10

m 03 m 0 m

in CM

T m

■«

in t—

0

a in

CD r-

§ t—

■<

T 03 U3

0

§

CM 1 as to

1

00 CO

o o

Is S a

111

I

sz

oa

3 9 >-

5

5

o m o o > LJ

Q_

si on

dT a: in §1 to

in

S||o tQ (o

= "&£ rgi-j>/ mug

£ 3* >- i-i Z<^l tno< MUJffl i/ii— crcr

sis!

LJ

IS

LU

■< _J Q_

O Q. □_

(/0 O Q_

- 1

o m o Pi o

i CM

CM

S«

*s

|! 1 II I

sss

aa

S-.

LU i/j • - <a

< Luai -It-

►— US *-> z crz Ü! LU 35 I— < 1— iB^ C/l Q.1-1

z 0 S§ »-* U.-1-i I— 1— -} 03 GD £2 »H

or SE »— (•> a. n »—• Q.1-* a ■<□

tu

§ 1— t—

i— _l _1

z - 5 i it CE »— i_i l_J

111 fi CXI

u IM r~ o o

ff en o S _co

— o s i>- Ol în CD 00 00 cn

CM CM n O CM CM CM CM n CM O OOl 1 1 LU 1 1 i a CD CM Z r~ — CO 1 OO ^ o — o in 1 1 L_l i i i a m CD t—i LU (Mm 9>in aiai I z cnoi

6 K-

1—

h- C/0 üj OO Ol

in m S w Z >— cx> o o m om Ö i-" Z <int\o oa OO

«t UJ CD TJ- TJ- TT ma o rn H a- 2: O) 1— t— >—<x> m cc

UJ I— i^ CM m ?S 1— CD LU CE ucozz in z: L3 t—t =J 2: z: 2: Z =3 a era. Q- Q- «t O otroL Ljcr CC l_l I UJ crczu. Lu a O UJ l_l CE O-UJ w — z z -^

-t CD l_J a LU

gs~s9 *g3i9

S^ § ujrv

ä§£s IU4NU.

isas =lSS5

I H - ii ^ yr&tj SS5H S- 5_IUI{CjSS^fi

S sa=*aSoSS5

i ii^Piil » ojc ire* as ***

et tu) Z(P^<>-1^ "

- MSSSSS -58 Z MJQÜJ.f Q s ggtvÄiSsa-

5 ial. E«*gäii ii-îc-i^l -^£S*

u,|S55c:âSSS5

QQZiDCU.UJ JM cj«

u,-£2£eiI*-£a: .S£

!JR:U.>-

3| Sm uM

ö »s

|og.-oS ZZ%, 2äsisS-.35aj£5|

KJ LU S- fi r- cC SiÜ_Q- *3*** ' St- t— 3J^-E

•«sü£ü!*J$islS

jMg cd

SSL*":

s°-y=£S

2S523* Es -i* >- z wi uj -

ssdE*a

inS. unoi 5 «

OS oi E

SS fi i V *

£ £

i i £ I 3) V)

S!

LU

iJ5

zu • blOC MUJ( HOC côi

*_Q-cr u— oi ■—•«_» _j»—

r3j 4<l

B

bO

111 5

-s

m ^r o o o o o CM L_J

0 CM

CO CM

LU Z o

Ho 3 a

• sl □

LU n - . <co < LUUJ _J>-

1— LU •—• z eez: UJ 1—1 X U_l UJ >-"Z 1— JD <c m 1— 3H n CL."-«

r- CEZ 0 OO »—1 LL.1-1 1— 1— -i ao m LUCQ 1—* >>— rr oer t— CCI- C^) CL(^ »—1 Q.I-1 0 <Q

?? g

OI

(O

s

CD

«•1

= 3 i i as

O I CM<

0( i

CM O) S

2

ua

i ■ i

U3

UJ

—1 - s

o

a in 3 o o o

l_l «t o

a.

in

lO a

m o m

m in

a 3 o o o O OJ

cr Q.

in

to o

(O m •<

cr

o CM a

-5 LUCD

a!2

CM at CD UJ I I—

— ■<

cc I—I li]

t/1 •< X UJ

I-CM"

o I

U3 o

ID o

■<

1 "

CD

r in in S3 o o gg o o (M CM l_) l_J «t ■<

cr cr «t •< a. a. cr a.

in

X

8

o I—I cxi

s

8

CO

R

S

8

S ino) r~io

si s

I

55

S

Is

!-• •< JO. ■<

_J I ■<

_l

£1 • * ** # !

£1 UJ

m in ^r o o o o o C\J LJ «<

_ o eg 00 CM

So

^

li!

ill

UJ t/i • • <a •< LUUJ _it-

►— UJ i—i z cr x UJ •-* ifi Hi < i— 41 <y\ Q->->

7 arz O oo •—i li."-* »— »— ig ss *—* >•-< cr ocr >— tr»- C/1 Q.C/» •-4 a.« a <a

CM I

ID o I

01 03

t/1 — -c \n mo

LJOl =3 —

o o az azaz Q_ LU

«cm

i

3

o — CM —

I I t-- CM O —

I CM O oi cn

o o o o CM CM

cr a. a. az O LJ LJPO — LULU —

L3

cr a

O cr

o

lit CE LJ

LJ UJ D_ (•0

13

LL

I^Jxi ill ^

^ az zee to a. _J LU L3 OLU LU Q_ LUX o_ zsz^zcazzo UJ1— n >—I 1— Q. H t— O h*~* CXLJ — O Z a H ZC^LLU.

LU Z LU =3 w OO ox LU O X LLLU ... Tt— i— Mt- LJ LU LU — (yi «c (•) OCC LU LJ TT X ZXUJ3HCE

LU o UJHOOZ3 -1— X X <-< Z t<0 «C O

«C «C X Mjtuj az n •—• X LJ a t— a «c CD "-• \ LU Z LU 3 «C

1— LU LU I— >—• ►— L3 ^ _! V CL «C C/l Cl L_l=3 «t ornw<< O _1 _l 1—O t— - LL UJOWÜMV >t— 3 <i- coa

«C LJ z in •-« 00 o Z LU L3X O —J cn _i i—i ZOUlUJw

rvi LU i-i LL. x => m OL3 • cc cr ar i— tr ■«

ZEZ «C LU t— _l *•—! JJ o LUtLU.H'-i G^l-M Z X o z «c - ZCKVt »i— o o>~- MOUIC O l-ZU<H n- 3B n- LU ^CC ° _s£

1 ID X - n o a*— UJ a x - LU X IT) LL Z 1— m LU LU o LL x •—• — <St «C «C =3 t— -«CO — Z>- UOZH

CJ • • c-» o cr x >—< i— >—> «in(T]M<MJII 1— LU

-SO Z i n«<o z "-" v— z x LUO O l-t uzcu-o—ooi— z oo t— 1 LUtLKZZU «t o .«£ jzut-uj cr

.-cr - m _j MHUimanico uo u_in -O.ZQZCi-i'-'OU.

>- _j a. a. n LL O

n LU LJ az O n a LU >— n LU L3

«c I— «c a X LU 1—»

_i

& => n

n n LU (X C3 a «c CZ>

LU X «c z U.

S FO

RGEC

RAFT C

ORP.

P.O. BO

X 387

FT.

SMIT

H, AR

72902

HELG

ESEN INDUSTRI

ES,

INC.

7261 HIGHWAY

60 W

EST

HARTFORD.

WI 53027

cr LU CD

z I— X

Q.

o r- o

in

T •*»■ o CM

LU L3 «C LJ

o o (O

O CD

lO

111 §il ■1 *

■ ■I?

g N

H e

s-

LU C) - • <o

«c LULU _JI-

t— LU H-i T" azx. Ill t—t X LJ_I UJ t-iZ 1— J3 < m 1— 3H c/i Q.M

7 crz o oo i—i LL«-" \— t— ~3 az) m ujm i—i >>-< rr orr t— iri- ci Q.M »—i Q.l-1 a <o

11 sg

[ 5 i

t

1 P

1"

f SB IK

I =1

a si

I iHfi

!

AH I

§

*=3 .Sä

HUE**;

glisisiissalisi

«I 2*

S3

8

a 7? 38

R3'~

ill azg

z 5 £

0 s O

u. s

UJ * In

a s 5

U s 3

as

3 m

* B s.

w 1 |

w

\

\ \ \ I

I I I I I I

I (

Ü I I 1 I

giu 5s

a

P.

JTT

1 * 1 '

• UJCN

*

»1 a.»— 3S

CD CD 00 o o o o o CM

33

J lil

in

lie« BÜ3

-J!

8^

I £2 OS UJCD

oac

report no. 96-46

Documents