25
Page 1 VS. VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS .

Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 1

VS.

VS.

CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING

SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER

VS.

Page 2: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 2

ATK SRM / Indian Head TSE

I. Conventional vs. SRM/TSEII. HistoryIII. Motor Data – Conventional vs. SRM PelletsIV. SRM Installation

Page 3: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 3

CONVENTIONAL PROCESS FLOW

CONING

Rolled PowderSELECTIVE SAMPLINGREAL TIME REVIEW

SLITTING AND CARPET ROLLINGCARPET ROLL

PACK

EVENSPEED PASTE BLENDING

CHEMICALS

PASTE REST

METAL DETECTING

NITROCELLULOSE NITROGLYCERIN & CHEMICALS INTO PROCESSING WATER

SLURRY MIXING

CENTRIFUGEWRINGING

WEIGHING

ANNEALING

PRESSING

SAWING

END INHIBITING

DOWEL RODDING

SPIRAL WRAPPING

CUFF TRIMMING

END SLEEVING

UT/RTR 100% INTERNAL INSPECTION

IN PROCESS AGING

FINAL INSPECTION

LOTTING & PACKING

MAGAZINE STORAGE

Rocket Manufacturing

Nitroglycerin

PREROLL

Page 4: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 4

CONVENTIONAL PROCESS

Page 5: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 5

SRM / TSE PROCESS FLOW

CONING

Pellet Manufacturing

SHEAR ROLL MILL

PASTE BLENDING

PASTE REST

METAL DETECTING

NITROCELLULOSE, NITROGLYCERIN, & CHEMICALS INTO WATER SLURRY MIXING

CENTRIFUGE WRINGING

WEIGHING

TWIN SCREW EXTRUSION

CUT TO LENGTHNET O.D. EXTRUSION

END INHIBITING &END SLEEVING

SPIRAL WRAPPINGCUFF TRIMMING

RTR 100% INTERNAL INSPECTION

IN PROCESS AGING

FINAL INSPECTION

LOTTING & PACKING

MAGAZINE STORAGE

MK90 Grain Manufacturing

NG Area

PELLET STORAGE & CONDITIONING

UT INSPECTION

Page 6: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 6

SRM /TSE PROCESS

Page 7: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 7

SRM MILESTONESATK Funded/ATKMANTECH/ARDECESTCP/Indian HeadNot Funded

4/99 ATK Blended Paste for Germany11/99 ATK & IH Participated in SRM Trials in Germany4/00 ATK Rolled remaining paste into Carpet Roll6/00 N00174-00-C 0011 – ATK Shipped 100 Lbs. of Inert Simulant to IH7/00 IH TSE 1st Trials w/ Inert Simulant1/01 ATK Received AA-2 Pellets from Germany3/01 ATK Shipped AA-2 Pellets to IH4/01 N00174-01-C-0002 – ATK Shipped 200 Lbs. of Inert Simulant to IH5/01 ATK & ARDEC Participated in JA-2 SRM Modeling in Germany6/01 ATK Rolled Pellets into Carpet Roll7/01 ATK Extruded Grains from Conventional CR & SRM Pellet CR10/01 ATK Fired Grains from both Lots12/01 N00174-01-C-0002 – IH TSE 1st AA-2 runs1/02 ATK Shipped JA-2 Pellets to ARDEC

Page 8: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 8

SRM FUTURE GOALS

ATK Funded/ATKMANTECH/ARDECESTCP/Indian HeadNot Funded

10/02 ATK Installation of 200mm SRM at Radford11/02 DAE30-02-R-0810 – SRM Modeling Phase II – ATK installation of

Thermal Imaging Camera 12/02 ATK Completion of 200mm SRM Live Proveout1/03 DAE30-02-R-0810 – SRM Modeling Phase II – ATK SRM AA-2 Trials1/03 N00174-01-C-0002 – IH TSE AA-2 Grains w/ New Die3/03 N00174-01-C-0002 – ATK Process & Fire Grains from IH SRM/TSE

Grains6/03 N00174-01-C-0002 – Optimization of SRM & TSE Process1/04 N00174-01-C-0002 – ATK Complete Plan & Cost Estimate

for Full Scale SRM/TSE Production Facility

Page 9: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 9

SBR @ 165°F

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0.85

Pressure

SB

R (

in/s

ec)

Conventional CR CR from Pellets

Page 10: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 10

SBR @ -65°F

0.4

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

0.65

0.7

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

Pressure

SBR

(in/

sec)

Conventional CR CR from Pellets

Page 11: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 11

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

Ingredient Conventional CR SRM CR

% NC 51.82 51.17

% NG 38.33 38.48

% TA 2.35 2.37

% DNPA 2.12 2.10

% 2-NDPA 2.01 1.99

% LC-12-15 3.33 3.59

Page 12: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 12

GRAIN DIMENSIONS

 

 

  

Measurements Conventional CR SRM CR

Length (in.) 31.379 31.380

OD (in.) 2.568 2.568

ID (in.) 1.270 1.272

Aft web (in.) 0.658 0.656

Forward Web (in.) 0.655 0.652

Weight (lbs) 7.600 7.600

Page 13: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 13

BALLISTIC RESULTS

Normal NormalParameter Production Normal Pellets Production Normal Pellets

Action Time(sec) 1.164 1.139 1.148 1.026 1.032 1.025

Impulse(lbf-sec) 1490 1480.3 1480.2 1538 1527.6 1528.5

Max Thrust(lbf) 1650 1651.5 1650.8 1951 1879.5 1901.7

Spec. Impulse(lbf-sec/lb) 213.3 213.0 213.0 220.2 219.7 219.9

SRM SRMCold Motors @ -50°F Hot Motors @ +150°F

Page 14: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 14

Shear Roll Mill Pilot Plant Layout

Page 15: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 15

SRM & PELLET CONVEYOR

Page 16: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 16

SRM & PELLETIZER

Page 17: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 17

PASTE CONVEYOR & LIW FEEDER

Page 18: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Page 18

PASTE HOPPER & CONVEYOR

Page 19: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Nitrocellulose Based Propellant Manufacturing Waste Minimization

Wayne Thomas

Naval Surface Warfare Center

Indian Head Division

Page 20: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

PROGRAM OBJECTIVESAT INDIAN HEAD

• Produce a MK 90 propellant grain from SRM pellets and reduce the amount of waste generated at extrusion.

• Test fire grains in heavy weight hardware.

Page 21: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

Continuous Processing of AA2 Pellets

• 4 processing runs on the 40 mm extruder have been carried out.

• The run objectives were to familiarize Indian Head with processing double base pellets in a safe manner on a twin screw extruder and to exercise our processing equipment with double base.

• Our first objectives were met and we have reached several conclusions.

Page 22: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

AA2 EXTRUDED GRAINS

• The first double base grains extruded at Indian Head were extruded through tooling that was originally designed for extruded composite propellant. The grains were well consolidated and dimensionally stable.

Page 23: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

FIRST GRAINS

• The grains from the first extrusion were smaller than the die diameter.

• For the next extrusion we changed extrusion parameters.

• We changed extrusion temperature and rate. Reducing temperature and increasing extrusion rate.

Page 24: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

SECOND ATTEMPT

• We attempted to change extrusion parameters and we found that consolidation would be a problem as we attempted to change grain dimensions.

Page 25: Page 1 VS. CONVENTIONAL ROLLING – CONVENTIONAL PRESSING SHEAR ROLL MILL – TWIN SCREW EXTRUDER VS

CONCLUSIONS

• We were unable to control grain dimensions. • This has led us to pursue the design of a MK

90 die. • We have procured hardware to help us with

collecting the rheological data that is needed for the design.

• At our current extrusion parameters we are operating safely.