UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

ADB018985

NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

TOApproved for public release, distributionunlimited

FROMDistribution authorized to U.S. Gov't.agencies only; Test and Evaluation; 16 JUN1977. Other requests shall be referred toAir Force Packaging Evaluation Agency,AFALD/PTP, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433.

AUTHORITY

USAFALD ltr dtd 27 Jan 1982

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

DI~rSlrr3ION LIMITED TO U. S. T -737'Government aece ny j~l VAJCrN.7-73r"Wefwie evaluation ofmilitary hard ure. Other

•P, requests for thin document 0-

x.uat be referred to AIPALD/PTP,W•ight-Patterson AFJ O0 4A433. -•

' P ULfROBBIKS

ikterials Engineer

Autovon 787-4292Comercial.I (513) 257-4292

, THE ,JgKLOPHENT OF, qLOUU

-:DEVICES FOR FLEXIBLE OUNTAINE23 I-L- ---

18!A= POWM PA(MAGING EVALUAJIGN AGZHCY

Y:1 Writht-Potterson AFB OHi "5433

,10

CbK

(/7• He')*

S :~'I' */ ',.

NOTICE

flflrfl :t;%-mtr-'rPk 0mw n- ,4 cvntmnIm .. niesc- On. n.ii M,.t ii ni. p~uiene.+ ot ýwr itn Cornn"egn

with a definife'y rehated government procurement operation, the i:nited X•itaue C(vernment thereby incurs no reapenHi-bility whatsoweer; and the fact that the government may have formulated. furnished, or in any way supplied th.e •siddrawings., specificntiona. or other data, W• not to be res:arded by ii.-olicut.nn or otherwise as in any manner licoensing theholder or any other )erson or corporation, or conveying any rights or permission to manifacture, use, or sell any patentedinvention that mey in any way he related thereto. This roport is not to 1w used in whole or in part for advertising or galesptnrpo'w•.

ABSTRACT

The development of an improved closure system for the construc-t.lon of flexible engine containers in conjunctioi. with the develop-ment of new barrier material; (PTPT Report No. 76-21) has beencompleted. A thorough study of designs, materials, and marufactur-ing processing was conducted. An extruded polyurethane standupclosure met the requir,•mentc% for etticient opening and closing andproviding a controlled environnmen.t for protection of militaryhardware when installed on the new improved flexible enginecontainer (PTT Report No. 76-21). Field tests are recommendedbefore approval of production quanlit.ies.

W B/S.,• •;," . " , .. ,-. -- -

PREPARED BY: PUBLICATION DATE:

Materials Engineer \ ,, /

• _.... ---- • /- - ,

MATTHEW A. VENETOS JAe-•---woMFSON

Chief. Materials Engrg Division Director, Air Force Packagin..Air Force Packaging Eval Agency Evaluation Agency

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ................ ........................... .

TABLE OF CONTENTS... . ........ ....................... iii

INTRODUCTION .......... ......................... . 1

DISCUSSION .............. .......................... . ...

State of the Art and Deficiencies Present ClosureSystems ..................... ......................... 1

Closure Designs and Evaluations ........... ............ 4

Global Chemical Systems Incorporated Development Work . . 7

TESTING AND EVALUATION .............. .................... 14

CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

RECOMMENDATIONS ................ ...................... .. 22

ILLUSTRATIONS:

Figure 1. Flexible Container, MIL-C-9959, Type III(60 Day Storage Life ......... ............. 2

Figure 2. All P'szic Closure Extruded From PolyvinylChloride ................. .................. 2

Figure 3. Metal Tooth Type Closure ....... ........... 3

Figure 4. Closure Design Considerations ..... ......... 5

Figure 5. Selected Closure Designs ......... .......... 6

Figure 6. Evolution of Closure Extrusions ShowingDimensional Control Problems - AAE Report 320 . 8

Figure 7. Mintgrip Closure Extruded of ChlorinatedPolyethylene AAE Corp. Report 320 .... ....... 9

iii

S(1 1•8 -

Page

Figure 8. Typical Minigrip Closure Design; AAE #10

Closure Desigi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 .

Figure 9. Global Three Track Layflat Closure ........ .. 11

Figure 10. Global Two Track Stand-Up Closure . . . 12

Figure I1. Global Flexible Container, TF-34-CE-100, With

Three Track Layflat Closure ... ......... .. 12

Figure 12. Close-Up View of the Closure Device WithSnap Fastener .......... ................ .. 13

Figure 13. Close-Up View With Closure Device Partially

Open ........... ..................... ... 13

Figure 14. One Cubic Foot Test Container Mounted on TestFixture in Environmental Chamber ......... .. 16

Figure 15. Engineering Drawing of Flexible Container forF-100 Engine (F-15 Aircraft) ... ......... ... 19

Figure 16. F-100 Engine Mounted on Randling Dolly . . .. 20

Figure 17. Top Half of Container Installed .. ....... .. 20

Figure 18. F-100 Container/Engine Mounted on 4-WheelTrailer ............ ................... .. 21

TABLE I - Water Vapor Transmission Rates of one Cubic FootFlexible Containers (Not Desiccated) ......... .. 15

TABLE II - Specific Protection Period Evaluationi, MIL-C-9959,Type I Container Environment - 804 RH at 80'F . . 17

DISTRIBUTION LIST ................ ..................... .. 23

DD FORM 1473 .... ......... ............................. 24

iv

INTRODUCTICN

The puripose of this project was to develop a closure system toprovide an efficient opening and closing device, easy anc simple tooperate whizh when installed on a )ttL-C-9959, "Container, Shippingand Storage (Flexible)", will provide a controlled environment forstorage and protection of military items.

ThIs report outlines the history of the development program, thedeficiencies in the present state of the art, closure designs andeval-ations by All American Engineering Corporation, Global ChemicalSysttms Incorporation development work, testing and evaluation, anddescribes the successful completion of a satisfactory closure systemwich an extruded polyurethane closure device.

DISCUSSTON

The development program was divided into Reveral work programsas follows: Study of the state of the art and deficiencies of thepresent closure systems; contractual developmen~t pr:ogram with AllAmerican Corporation; and the development work by Global ChemicalSystems Incorporation under the guilance of AFPEA.

State or the Art and Deficiencies in Present Closure Systems.

Flexible conainert designed and fabricated in accordance withL'L-C-9959 have met with unusual and utilitarian success in the

storage and environmental protection of many milicary items(Figure 1). For many itemL, it is the most efficient, cost-effectivemethod of preservation w~th the additional benefit of effectivehandling and trdnsporting techniques. However, the methods ofclosing and opening (closure devices) have been limited to threetypes or methods, viz,, (1) heat sealing of the plastic-typemacerlal6 to soften and fuse the interface of the material togetherto make an effective seal; (2) the common slider fastener deviceknown as "zipper", constructed of plastic/rubber-like materials(Figire 2), and (3) metal interlocking teeth in a plastic or rubberstrip or sheet (Figure 3).

The plastic festener ha3 two edges designed to fit together soas to be fastened when a slider draws the two edges together. Theedges remain together until they are released by drawing the sliderin the opposite direction over the edges. The metal fasteneroperates similat Ly except that the edges of the plastic-rubber-like

Figure 1. FLEXIBLE CONTAINER, Min-C-9959,

TYE 1il (60 DAY STORAGE LIFE)

Figure 2. ALL PLASTIC CLOSLrRE EXTRUDED

F-ROM POLYVINYL, CHLORIDE

2

FIGURE 3. :IETAL TOOTH TYPE CLOSURE

Imaterials have metal teeth and hollows which fit into each othersnugly. To insute 3 good water vapor seal, a plastic/rubber-likuseal is provided as the fastener is clo!.ed. Adheslves and pressuresensitive tapes have been used in selected applications.

The heat sealed closure is deficient in that it is limited:(1) by the requirement for a source of heat; (2) by the number ofopenings and closings which is, in turn, dependent upon the amountof material .... for successive "heat seals"; and (3) by thethermoplastic materials themselves that can be softened by heat andfused together to make a seal.

The all plastic slide fasteners have proven to be difficult toopen and close particularly on large items such as flexible containers,MIL-C-9959A, for aircraft jet engines. It has been found that thepresent design. should have improved barrier qualities against watervapor.

The metal fastener deficiencies are" (1) the metal teeth areeasily damaged in use so as to make the closure inoperable anddifficult to repair in the field; (2) the presently used plastic/rubber-like materials to which the metal teeth are attached are notthermoplastic; thus, presenting difficulty in fabrication of con-tainers when the heat sealing techniques are preferred for :ostsavings reasons; and (3) the presently available barrier-type metaltype fastener is too costly a method of closure, particularly onmany smaller sized containers.

Adl,:sive systems have been ruled cut by the more complicated andcostly fabrication required. Pressure-sensitive tapes have not foundacceptability because of the difficulty in sealing surfac:es thatbecome oily, dirty, and/or are inherently difficult to spal.

Closure DesIgns and Evaluations.

A contract, Develop.ment of Closure Devices for Flexible Containers,was awarded to the All American Engineering (AAE), Wilminigton,Delaware, 30 Jun 1972. F"he contractor, during Task i, deeilopedfifteen design consideraticns (Figure 4). Two designs, numbersseven and ten, were selected for further study (Figure 5). Theselections were based on preliminary Water Vapor Transmission Rate(WVTR) test results and manufacturing feasibility (referenicc AllAmcrican Engineering Report No. AF 312). The Talon OEB Metal ToothSlide Closure was also recommended [or further development subjectto the success of the extruded polyurethane desipns. i.umbers seven

4

1 2 3

4 6

7 8 9

10 11 12

14 15

Figure 4. CLOSI;RI: -. D)L"I(;N (UNSIDERATION'S

V . Seal050" Polyethylene foam

#L-2fO0 from Hercules. Inc.Male Fxr rs ion

,----"'Uniroyal" Thermoplastic Female FxtrusionUrethane #E 85 or \ "U-Tj-niroyal" TherinoplasL!requivalertJ Urethane #F-85 or equi\41~en 1

L.Malv Yxtrupýion77Ornoy a I" -I x r rmop Iast ik

Female Yxtrusion Urethane 4E--85 or equivalent.S"Uniroyal" Theroplastic

Urethane 4E-9 orequi alent

CLOSURIFE #7 CG1,SUO-_t" •ý 1

Figure 5. SELECTED CLOSURE DESIGNS

6

and ten.

luring the Task I1, greet effort was made to extru, t-1- t,,,oselec-ed designs from polyurethane. Unforeseen technrdcr.n diffi-ultipswere encounteied in extruding the polyurethane. Dimensional controland flexibiiity of the closures were the two major deiiciencies(Figure 6). The contractor ia'!ed to solve these problems, rnd .hecontract was terminated.

Concurrent -7ith this c.,r:-"act, development and iivestigation wascordacted .ito closure devices uy the Minigrip Corporation, Orange-

Sbirg, New York (Figure 7). Minigrip closure designs and one of theselect-4 :losure design3 of AAT Corporation were very --imilar(Fig'.re 8). IMinigrip Corporation had perfected the ex rusion ofseveral plastic materials, buc not polyurethane. AAE lid conductWVTR tests on the several of the Minigrip plastic extrusions anereported the results in their Report AF-320. The WPVTR of theclosures did meet the requirements for flexible containers, MIL-C-9959.H:aever. Minigrip and AAE were not interested in developing thietechniques f~r extruding polyurethane minigrip type closures whichwould be acceptablp for HIL-C-9959 -ontainers. They believed thatthe technical difficultieE were t'oo great to be overcome.

Global Chemictl Systems Incorporated Development Work.

The Global Chemical Systems 'orporaLion approached the AFPEA ontheir polyurethane civers for alrcraft jet engines ,-nd helicoptercovers. They indicated that they were interested in upgrading theirbarrier materials and closuce devices to meet the A-- Force require-ments of flexible container%, MIL-C-9959. AkPEA nresented thcDotentials of polyurethane/saran comiposite films, and the extrudedpolyurethane minigrip closure designs

The Global Chemical Systems made ý.rrdngements with the Minig.ipCorporation for the use of their equipient and 'facilities fordevelopment of polyurethanie Minigrip designed clc•s'rcs. After severalmonths of -ffort a three track "lavflat" (Figure 9) end I two track"stand-up" (Figure 10) closure designs were perfected. Figure 11

shows a 310obl FlExible Container, TF 3I-GE-100, with a three track"layflat" cloZ:ur,- device. Figure 12 anu 13 shows the two track"standi-up" closure Instailcd ini a `-lQtý engine conteAner. Thie twotrack "stand-up" closure was selected tor use ir flexible containersbecause of the ease of opeping ani clo;sin, presFure without thenecessity of a special, tool. Finger p es.ure s sufficient to clcsethe closure duvice.

Figure 6. EVOLUTION QF CLOSUR EXTRUSIONS SHOWING

DOPCENSTONAL CONTROL PROBLEAS-MAAE REPORT 320

iS

Figure 7. MINIGRIP CLOSURE EXTRUDED OF CHLORINATEDPOLYETHYLENE AAE COP13. REPORT 320

9

TYPICAL MINIGRIP CLOSURE DESIGN

AAE 6110 CLOISIRE DESIGN

Figure 8

10

4ý

Figure 10 GLOBAL TWCý TRALK STANDUP CLOSURE

4Mr

WMI THREE TRACK LAYFLAT CLOSURE

.12

Figure 12. CLOSE-l? VIEW OF 'ME CLOSURE

DEV'CE WITH SNAP FAST:ENLR

Figure 13. CIOSE-UP VIEW WITh CLOSUREDEVICE PARTIAILY OPEN

1 3

TESTiNG AND EVALUATION

Table I shows the results of WVTR tests on one cubic foot testcontainers. The evaluation of the WVTR effectiveness of the closuredevices was conducted according to a modified Method 3030 of FederalTest Method Standard 101B, which is described in the Appendix ofPTPT Report 76-21, "The Development of Barrier Materials For Fle,:ibleAircraft Engine Containers". The Global one cubic foot containerwith the 24" length closure had a WVTR approximately equivalent tothe DuPont #264-3-1 cubic f, container without a closure device(difference of 0.01 grams/100 sq. in./24 hrs.). Since a 2' x 2' x 5'container made from DuPont #2a4-3-1 barrier material with a Talonmetal tooth closure gave over one year protection (did not reach 40%RH) outside at Eglin AFB, FL (AAE Report AF-275-A) without redesicca-tion,it can be safely assumed that a flexible conainer constructedof Global #4051 barrier, and the extruded polyurethane closure shouldexhibit approximately the same protection under simila- conditions.

Figure 14 shows the WVTR testing device of a one cubic foot testcontainer with 24" length closure device mounted on a test fixtureplaced in an environmental chamber.

The data in Table II further confirms that a flexible containermanufactured from Global barrier material #4051 and the extrudedpolyurethane closure device will meet the specific protectio- periodof •ne year without redesiccation as required by MIL-C-9959, Type Icontainer. This table shows the results of a simulated test using10% of the desiccant required for a one year prctection period. Thecontainer reached 31% at the end of 37 days (approximately 10% of364 days). This is equtvalent to more than a one year protectionperiod (10 x 37 days - 370 days).

By projecting the time to reach 40% RH from the 311/ R1, the testcontainer would require a total of 60 days. Tbis indicates that acontainer with 100% of the desiccant required by MIL-C-9959, Type IconLainer will give over 1-1/2 year specific protection period.Further testing is being conducted to confirm these projections.

it should be noted that a container with no clocure device (heatsealed) will give an estimated 2-1/2 year protection period. Thisindicates that the newly developed clo,;ure device, althougL. superiorto previous closure devices, does allcl moisture vapor into thecontainer.

14

0.4- 0

*0-41 00

0 0 0 0L C

co 0wp c

5i I

Zn 0 ,

0 1

0 >4 41 0.

w 0 --

Z. 4, -'-4 c,, 015

01

w4.4

H 4C4

10 a '.0

Hu D L) 0 0) 0

O4 0 L) 1

0dC

4154

Figure 14. ONE CUBIC FOOT TEST CONTAINER MOUNTEDON TEST FIXTURE IN ENV[RONTMENTAL CHAMBER

1 6

I

HON

~z

,-4 0 :HO-4U

I.-.t

1, C). .. 4

W- 1- -,-4- a r

0- .0-

0 r 00 V0

L) czONH p

I7-

i0

04 I

L) I Q

HIn

Hn L)

C)0 P.-

UJZ a) co

4 -- 1

4-1

41 J-I 4-1 0 a TZ0 u E a 0 0Q --

17

The ease of opening and closing was checked out on sections ofextruded closure devi ,2s, and an aircraft engine cover TF-30-GE-100provided by Global Cher.cal Systems Corporation. The closure

devices were easily opened and closed at room temperature. Thecontainer was placed in a cold chamber at 32'F. After 24 hours, thecontainer closure device was opened a.1d closed with moderate effort.At OF, the closure device beca.ýe moi'e rifid, and difficult to openand close. At -32*F, the closure was not operable; however, theclosure did nor fracture upon bending. These results wereconsidered accw::able (PTPT Report No. 76-21).

The Global Chemical Systems will certify that the closure meetsall other physical property requirements of MIL-C-9959 including theresistance to aging, light, synthetic lubricating fluids andpetroleum products.

Twenty prototype flexible containers designed according toGlobal Drawing Code Identification No. 5403, "Envelope, EngineProtective Outline and Mounting", for F-100 engine (Figure 15) have

been procured and are to be used for field test and evaluation.

The First Article fit and function test was conducted at Pratt& Whitney Aircraft Corporation, Hartford, Connecticut. The assemblyof the flexible container to the F-100 engine was pccformed easily,and the closure device was closed by finger pressure withoutauxiliary tools. The performance of the container through the FirstArticle fit and function test was satisfactory, and the testindicated that in field use the container should perform excellently.

Figure 16 shows the F-100 engine (without cover) that was usedduring First Article fit Li.- function test. Figure 17 shows the top

half of the container installed. Figure 18 shows the container/engine assembly mounted on 4-wheel trailer ready for transportation/storage. Figures 12 and 13 are close-ups of the closurc device.

The straps, with snap fasteners, for reinforcement betteen the two

halves of the container should be neotd.

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this project, to deveiop a closuri' system forMiL-C-995q, "Container, Shipping and Storage (Flexible)", thatwould be easy and simple to operate and would maintain a controlled

environment for storage and protection of military items h:•; hbeen

accomplished. The Global Chemical Systems Corporation extruded

18

! 2Li. ii

c i •

k d I

j~

LIN

- .7-

, •,• .,-

ij

I~-

-I-iI

*-o ' I

Figu~re 16. F-100 ENGINE MOUNTED) ON HANDLING DOLLY

I IT14,

Figure 17. TOP HANIF OF CONTAINER INSTALLED

20

rk

ii

Figure 18. F-100 CONTAINER/ENGINE MOUNTED

ON 4-WHEEL TRAILER

2i,

polyurethane "stand-up" closure device meets the requirements foreasily installing and removing flexible containers from aircraft jetengines. Field testing will complete the evaluation program.

RECCAC NDATIONS

It is recommended t0-at field tests and evaluatiqn be conductedon the Globel closure device Jnstalled on the 20 prototype F-100flexible engine contir.pis procured from Global ChemicalSupply Corporation using barzier material, Global #4051, in conjunc-tion with the field tests av recommended fn PTPT Report No. 76-21,"Th. Levelopment of Barrier Materials For Flexible Aircraft EngineContainers".

It is recommended that the requiremen , for closure devices in

KiL-G-9959 be revised to specify the improved characteristics ofthe newly developed closure device.

722

DISTRIBUTION LIST

HQ UJSAF/LGTN I

Defense Documentation Center 12

Tobyhanna Army Depot/AMSTO-T I

AFSC/SUP 1

O0-ALC/DSTC 2

OC-ALC/DSP 2

SA-ALC/IDSP 2

SM-ALC/DSP 2

WR-ALC/DSP 2

JKfPTC, Aberdeen Proviny Grounds, MO 21005 2

A FALD/PT 1

AFALD / PTPT 10

AFAILD/P'IP Library 30

Naval Supply Systems, Code 0321B, Wash DC 02376 1

Naval Log Engrg Grp, Cheatham Annex, Williamsburg, VA I

Aval Ship R&D Ctr, Code 2841, Arinapoli,, '0 21402 1

HIQ US Army Aviation Systems CommandDRSAV-EKS, P.O. Box 209, St. Louts, MO 63166 2

Naval Air Engineering Center (ESSD)

Code 93, Lakehurs , NJ 2

23

IINCI ASST1 I ________SECURITY CL. ASNSI F IC TION OF TVIS PAGF f"-~ 0-~. F,111

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE REDINSTRUCTIONS

IREPORT NUMAI R 12 OVT ACCESSION NO. 3 RV( IRIENT'S CATALOG NUMBEP

PTPT Report No. 7A-37 -I_______4. TITLE. (-,d T5I~I~ TYS OF~ GETPO;'T & ERO COVER' S

Th,2 Devolopment of Closure Devices ForFlexible Containers 6 P-PCAF ORMINS A.. R.PO . . 17

____________ ____ TPT Rprt: No. L7637 *ITITO~O03 CONTRACT OIR GRAN7 NIMBEIl(,,

PAUL ROBBIINS

3 PEROR.ISMINC- QIIANIYSAT(ON N AME ýNl)C ALDR5SS tO ý,PAIVCA FCLiW Z;ET. PJ ECT. TAo,ALREA 8 WORK -)NI7 'UMaFERS

WPAFf', 011 45433 AFPEIA project No. 75-P7--30It ONR~p 10OFEVICE NAMPANT) ADGGRESS R1 RPORT GA TF

AFALD/PTPT Ncvernber 1976WPAFB, OH4 45433 ______________]28 __

.F4 MOVI'OnIIFkG -AGENCY AblE A ADOONE S(.f difiefft~,r Imo CPnIi.,*i- 0ffIr-) . ECUIY LA .(oI1',,P

UTNCLASS I FIEDF.' 0 U. LSII F 50 ONOAI'

-1 G 1S PIUION STA T-TEMENr (.f t h . R.P- I;

DISTRIBUTION LIMITED TO U.S. Goveri-ment agencies only;7Sevaluation of military hardwase.. Otiwi

requests for thIs document must be referred to AFALD/PTP,

n I YT RI 8U TI1N S T A T E M EN H ( T A .At r. ph, B, ~ .,, If diffT.-1(. -Tho'

IS StIPRI F MENTARY N01 ES

Cont;UP'n-r 'Polyuirethane 7, i ppu rFlexiblbiI Cent I pner Barr i or Mate r ials Closer'. Devi (,WatIer yap r T'-ansriissloa Rate F- 100 Enig nc Cont at nr i'las xt riI

S ARSTPACT .1d.N -tn,..,t',I1.,,So

L- Wis developme-nt of an improved closuire s3ystemn for the crIflstrtjctiton elI.l.f Iung ine cont ainers Lu conjunc tion wI Is thre develIopment of new bar ni.- mat or i 1;(PT12-1 Report No. 76-21)~ h-as been comj7 I*.Ttedf. A thorough st odv of desigonsIstand-up closure rwot the requlrrment~s for o-ff intent openhing apd c lO~ing andLlirovidIng ar cont rolled e'svi ronment for protw t ion fit mill tory harrdware %diit'linrsi-lled onl tilt neow improved fji xjh c tg Iir cont a inetr ( P'fPTl HBport No I21

ý.ield ty~sq arc Locorrnendcd bcer 'pLo)dofpoductioii quilotit~s ,C-

DD 1473 o.JI 1 I~O NOV AS 1, I)SiQLf STF

_'I, AIRITV 17LASSIEi AflInN (IF THIS P A.>, (K4,., I)� w-d