UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

AD883983

NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

TOApproved for public release, distributionunlimited

FROMDistribution authorized to U.S. Gov't.agencies only; Administrative/OperationalUse; APR 1971. Other requests shall bereferred to Commanding Officer, US ArmyBiological Defense Research Center, Attn:Technical Information Div., Fort Detrick,Fredrick, MD 21701,.

AUTHORITY

Army Biological Defense Research Lab ltrdtd 23 Sep 1971

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

V -AD

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 226

.. .ROCKET SLW IMPACT TESTS

~:* .'.) .::• OF BULK CONTAINERS FOR ETIOLOGICSee•...."".. :O

- "AGENT STORAGE AND SHIPPING

Edwar 4. .. .... Trey

APRIL 1971

cevesee a.

*....... 555: I~ .CCCleo.....:::• _•,m

........ P.. ____

11:1:-12::97-11.. Con C. Watri.u...o. umtgd to U.s. .owerm. apv.a oulysno~t steey are polox vu1.~etea undoe powfawseC of fts:::::;:: m~V r- Im~ S2230.01stta &"pU" &9%11 3971. ftbp

PC CS~s ereqmwt. tc: rhlS d ewmsnt mmt We rufzrui P 00n100"94

*. . ..- ' U-- . j . ... r B iali~i~i box-a". XzAlm-h OW03r,* ~ .... AM& A ahN cbadce AIrafotimt DiV~atOS% wtot rstrick,

Se e.. e..fIdrc14 ifryoW 2101

CC• '::...

............ DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,-1.C..

*....::

• :111 :::::Fort Detrick..... Frederick MarylandSe •e..e.

e N " 4**

DEPARMENTOF TH ARM

Reproducrion of this publication in whole or part

is prohibited except with permission of CommandingOfficer, U.S. Army Biological Defense Research Center,ATTN: Technical Information Division, Fort Detrick,Frederick, Maryland, 21701. However, DDC is authorizedto reproduce the publication for United StatesGovernment purposes.

DISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS

Destroy this publication when it is no longer needed.Do not return it to the originator.

The findings in this publication are not to be construedas an official Department of the Army position, unlessso designated by other authorized documents.

Preceding Page Blank

35Unclassified

SSecurity CIsrLcalion"DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA. fR & D

iS~.~.i, laallc~i.. 1 i(~. a*Of Sht'Srf *8d "WO.PMN 8iDA MWOSOO 0-0 58D.. 001-d -h .^*,, d"00 P-#f I.teelasf.diOft.,"NA TN"a AC T, . TV (Cq #pei Wio) F. mgPOT socumT, CL.*1uP(CAVTeo

Department of the Army UnclassifiedFort Detrick " .AOuP

Frederick. Maryland 21701, REPORT 1r-14

ROCKET SLED IMPACT TESTS OF BULK CONTAINERS FOR ETIOLOGIC AGENTSTORAGE AND SHIPPING

4 OE#ClPT.v.g NOTUC (7p" At C 1 Sod I d•Ma5l, a-te*)

* *U1?NO~tl (F~r~lret .id�. M J• I. • ne#Jai)

Edward L. Trey

6 EILPORT OAVT 7A. TOTAL NO. or PAG0S 6 P- . N mEWS

April 1971 35 I 0one8A. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. Gi. @•08IG ATOR*S AMPORT NU ER1(Sh0b

.Pao,,c.eo. PEMA-51976RI Technical Memorandum 226*b. OTHERt VEPORT NO41S) (A87 AW ft1 oil mr 60 60008"d

a.

AMXFD-AE-T 50401

(0. •OITRI4.TsON *AYENEN

Distribution limited to U.S. Government agencies only;not cleared for public release under provisions of DoD Directive 5230.9;statement applied April 1971. Other requests for this document must bereferred to Commanding Officer, U.S. Army Biological Defense ResearchCenter, ATTN: Technical Information Division. Fort Detrick, Frederick,Maryland 21701.

It. SUPPLrA&NTANT NOTES 12. OPON1OORNG N140LITATr AC TIVrTl

Production and Maintenance Division Department of the ArmyFort DetrickFrederick. Maryland 21701(a. AOITRAC T

,Tests were conducted to determine the capability of 1,465 ml and l-,5-, and 15-gallon etiologic agent container systems to meet the leak testcriteria set forth in proposed Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 42,Section 72.25, U.S. Public Health Service, when subjected to impactforces likely to be experienced in an aircraft crash during landing ortakeoff. Actual tests were conducted on a rocket sled, controlled toprovide impact of test items in a fixed attitude into an essentiallyunyielding concrete slab (target) at velocities from 145 to 165 feet persecond. All containers suffered severe exterior damage# however, themultipled"container systems with internal absorbent cushioning did in atleast one\,attitutde prevent leakage of simulated liquid agents to theoutermost 4ontainer.

14. Key Words

Rocket sled impact testsEtiologic agent containerPHS test criteria

Containers

Testing

-EL&4A • Fo (011 5.0Sl, JAN 54. 4I0N (4

OW, "14 7 , .UnclassifiedIUoCta'tt Ctassool/cegi..

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYFort Detrick

Frederick, Maryland 21701

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 226

'11EXT SLED IMIACT TEST5 OF BULK CO'AV!"ERSFOR ETIOLOGIC AGENT STORAGE AND SHIPPING

Edward L. Trey

pl STRIB'r lON ATMRr

Distribution liiated to U.S. Goverment agencies only.not cleared for public release under provisions of D~oDDirective 5230.9; statenmnt applied April 1971. Otherrequ,.st for this docum-nt must be referred to Cou andingOfficer# U.S. Army Biological Defense Research Center,ATTN: Technical Information Division, Fort Detrick,Frederick, Itaryland, 21701.

Production and Maintenance DivisionCOMHODITY DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING LABORATORIES

Project PEMA 51976R1 April 1971

1

This Document ContainsMissing Page/s That Are

Unavailable In TheOriginal Document

FOREWORD

This test, PM 1003, was conducted as part of PEMA Project 51976R1,Container Shipping Biological, to evaluate the performance of sever).container system designs under test conditions equivalent to an aircraftcrash during takeoff or landing.

Testing was conducted at the Naval Weapons Center, China Lake,California from 5 November 1969 to 18 November 1969.

ABSTRACT

Tests were conducted to determine the capability of 1,465 ml and l-,5-, and 15-gallon etiologic agent container systems to meet the leak testcriteria set forth in proposed Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 42,Section 72.25, U.S. Public Health Service, when subjected to impact forceslikely to be experienced in an aircraft crash during landing or takeoff.Actual tests were conducted on a rocket sled, controlled to provide impactof test items in a fixed attitude into an essentially unyielding concreteslab (target) nt velocities from 145 to 165 feet per second. All containerssuffered severe exterior damage; however, the multiple container systemswith internal absorbent cushioning did in at least one attitude preventleakage of simulated liquid agents to the outermost container.

I

CONTENTS

Fortword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1. INTRODUCTION ....................... ........................... 5

II. DESCRIPTION .................... ................. ......... h

A. Container, Shipping and Storage, Etiologi-. Agent, Capacitit-.I1-, 5-, and 15-Gailon, X14593; XM594; XW,95 ....... .......... 0

B. Container, 1,465 ml, Type 3 . . .. .. .. .. ..... 6 [

III. TEST EQUIPMENT, TARGET, AND INSTRUMENTATION ........ ........... 9A. Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . C

B. Impact Target ...................... ........................ 10C. Electronic Instrumentation ........... .................. .. 10D. Photographic Instrumentation ........... ................. 10

IV. TEST PROCEDURES .................. ......................... .. 14A. Leak Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4B. Vibration Tests I............... ....................... 14C. Pocket Sled Impact Tests ........... ................... .. 14

V. TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................. ................... 28

VI. SUAWY ........................ ............................. 3Y

Distribution List .................. ........................ 33DD Form 1473 ................... ........................... 35

FIGURES

1. Components for XM593, 1-gal Capacity System ........... 72. Components for XM594, 5-gal Capacity System ........ ........... 73. Components for XM.595, 15-gal Capacity System ... ........... . .. 84. Components for 1,465-ml Type 3 System ............ .............. 85. Rocket Sled with Item Secured for Test Run ......... ............ 96. Impact Target, an Unyielding Concrete Slab ....... ............ .. 117. Test Item After Impact Showing Acceleometer Still in Piac.- . . 11

8. A Typical Telemetered Accelerometer and Velocity Recording . .. 129. Layout of Test Area .............. .. ....................... .. 13

10. Vibration Test Installation ............ ................... .. 15

11. Vibration Test Envelope .................. ..................... 1b

12. Fifteen-Gallon System with Crate and Energy Absorbe r ....... 17

13. Five-Ga'lln System at Rest After Side Impact ...... ........... 1714. Side Seam F.iliirc of Light-Wtlt:hi Metal Drumms .... .......... . 1815. Typical iamage to the l,4b5-ml System Bearing Impact vn the Top 18lb. Tjpical Damage to the 1-gal System Bearing Impact on the Top . 19

17. Tipica1l oan-ge to the 1-gd; Syzt'm 9,.aring Impact on the Bottom 1918. Typical Damage to the 5-gal System Bearing Impai r oct a Side . 20I(. Test Run of Two 1-gal Systems Illustrating She !jng Effect

of Target on Bolt Ring Closute .......... .................. .. 2020. Typical Damage to the 1,465-ml System Resulting from Fouling

oL~iing Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

21. Full View of Impact Side Showing Typical Damage to the 5-galSystem . .............. ..................... 21

22. Typical Damage to the 5-gal System Bearing Impact on the bootum .2223. Fifteen-Callon System Impacted on Bottom .. .. .. .. .. . .. 22

24,. Impact- Efect -,F a Crated 15-gal system ..... ............. ... 23

TABLES

1. Pocket Sled Impact Tes' Data .......... ................... ... 242. Performance of All Test Items by Serial Number .... .......... ... 29

3. Numerical Compilation of Performance of All Container Systems . 30

I

I. INTRODUCTION"

The XM593, XM594, and XM595 containers were developed to provide afamily of containers for shipping various quantities of bulk biological

materials without the necessity for overpacking with the CNU-103 and -106shipping containers during air transit. Shipping safety criteria require

that shipping container designs for filling with etiologic agents be

proof-tested by impact testing at velocities between 145 and 165 feet persecond without evidence of content leakage to the exterior. The mostrecently dated (3/17/70) proposed U.S. Public Health Service regulationis quoted as follows: "Large Quantity Shipments (Group D) - Any volumeof etiologic agent may be shipped provided the container will not permitleakage of viable or toxic etiologic agent outside the outermost shippingcontainer following an impact of the agent-filled container into an un-

yielding concrete slab, or equivalent, at a minimum impact velocity of145 to 165 feet per second. For containers that are capable of alwaysbeing oriented in a specific direction during transport, the impact test

will be applied to the forward end of the container. For all other con-tainers the impact test will be applied in three (3) attitudes (top,bottom, side) oriented to the innermost (primary) container that holds

the agent."

Design criteria for compliance with Department of Transportation

proposed tests for hazardous materials containers were also included in

these systems.

During logistics handling in transit, containers filled with viable

etiologic agents will in most cases require refrigeration of variousdegrees. These tests were conducted without their cooling means being

present, assuming that such will during actual use afford additional shock

attenuation in a true air catastrophe.

* This report should not be used as a literature citation in material

to be published in the open literature.

6

II. DESCRIPTION

A. CONTAINER, SHIPPING AND STORAGE, ETIOLOGIC AGENT, CAPACITIES 1-, 5-,AND 15-GALLON, XM593; XM594; )94595

These containers (Fig. 1, 2, and 3) are considered as systems consist-ing of nested separate steel and plastic containers interspaced withliquid- and energy-absorbing materials. The primary containers areliquid-filled to within 10% of their visible capacity. All containerscomprising the system are sealed air-tight with their inherent and supple-mentary closure devices. The physical .haracteristics of these t0reesystems are:

XM593 XM594 XM595

Length, in. 20 28 49

Diameter, O.D., in. 14 19 23

Gross weight, 1b. 42 128 288

Number of containers in assemblySteel, each 2 3 3

Plastic, each 1 1 1

Net fill' gal. 1 5 15

B. CONTAINER, 1,465 ML, TYPE 3

This containe:: is similar in design to those described in Section II.A above except that the steel components are light-gauge food and paintcontainers packed into a fiberboard box (Fig. 4). Physical charactkrigirtcs

Length, in. i0.75

Width, in. 10.75

Depth, in. 12.25

Grosp weight, lb. 11

Number ot containers in assemblySteel, each 2

Fiberboard, each I

Net fill, ml 1 *400

FIGURE 1. Components for XI593, i-gal Capacity System. (1) Primarycontainer, (2) intermediate container, (3) outer container, (4)blocking and cushioning. Non-particulate liquid absorhent cushioningmaterial is uniformlv distributed around primary cont-ainer.

FIGURE 2. Components for XM594, 5-gal Capacity System. (1) PrimarytontaLner, (2) prutective shell for primary container, (3) intermediatecontaincr, (4) outer c-ntainer, (5) •,lOelnr'n and cushioning. Non-particulate, liquid absorbent cushioning material is uniformlydistributed around primary container.

FIGURE 3. Components for X24595, 15-gal Capacity System. (1) Primarycontainer, (2) protective shell for primary container, (3) inter-mediate container, (4) ourer container, (5) blocking and cushioning.Non-particulate, liquid absorbent cushioning material is uniformlydistributed around primary container.

I4

FIGURE 4. Components for 1,465-ml Type 3 System. (1) Primarycontainer, (21 intermediat, container, (3) shipping container,(4) absorbent ci-shioni, .;.

9

1II. TEST EQUIPMENT, TARGET, AND INSTRUMENTATION

A. EQUIPMENT

Impact tests were conducted on the B-4 rocket sled track facility atNaval Weapons Center, China Lake, California. A 120-foot length of trackbetween the breech and a specially constructed impact target was sufficientto achieve the velocity for the desired impact. The test vehicle (Fig. 5)provided a 28- by 72-inch steel bed for mounting the test items. A Model2801 guillotine*, Figure 5, severed the steel fastening cable prior toimpact. Propulsion was provided by 11VAR or ZUNI, solid rocket propellintmotors.

*Holex Inc., San Juan Road, Hollister, Calif.

q. 14 T I

IM T,2

FIGURE 5. Rocket Sled with Item Secured for Test Run.(1) Propulsion rockets. (2) transmitter, (0) trackcoil energizing magnet, (4) guillotine cable cutter.

10

B, IMPACT TARGET

Three reinior, ed concrete blocks (Fig. 6), ach 12 by 4 by 4 feet with

a total weight of 43 tons, were placed in tandem upon a pair of 8-inch by

12-foot steel I beams. Each I beam rests upon three steel-encased concrete

columns 20 inches in diameter by 6 feet long, with 3 feet set underground.

All components are welded together. A 12- by 4-foot by 1/2-inch-thick

steel plate is affixed to the impact side of target.

C. ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTATION

Accelerations and velocities were obtained with sled-borne transmitting

devices via landline systemns. A track coil system was energized by magnets

mounted on the sled to measure impact velocity (Fig. 5). An ENDE•VCO*

Model 2264 AMI (halt bridge piezo-resistive) accelerometer was mounted

180 degrees opposite the impact side on the exterior of one of each side

of the container (Fig. 7) to measure representative decelerations. A

PDM/FWH- telemeter system transmitted the data obtained to provide an

oscillographic record. A typical recording is shown on Figure 8.

D. PHOTOGRAPHIC INSTRUMENTATION

Visual assessment of damage was aided by positioning ground photographic

cameras off track and on portable overhead mounts above the track. Three

16-mm, 4,000 fps Fastex cameras, located one on each side and above target

area recorded moment of impact on color film. Another camera positioned

at an oblique angle to the rear of target recorded approach of test sled

at 400 fps. A layout of the immediate test irea is shown on Figure 9.

Endevco Corp., subsidiary of Beckman. Dickinson Corp., 801 South

Arroya Parkway, Pasadena, Calif.

** Pulse-duration modulated/frequency modulated

Al

'~4.4

[t

FIGURE 6. Impact Target, an Unyiclding Concrete Slab.(1) Steel plate, (2) zeinforced concrete blocks,(3) steel-cased concrete columns, (4) steel I beam.

FICURE 7- T,-,t Itt m Aftcr Impact ShowingAccelercrpter Still in Place.

STA 17

VELOC .A147.9 ft/sec

D 4.5 msec 4._

3700 gPK

FIGURE 8. A Typical Telemetered Accelerometer and Velocity Recording. (Run 5)

13

,4

FIGURE 9. Layout of Test Area. (1) Rocket sled,(2) track, (3) impact target, (4) overhead Fastex camera.

IV. TEST PROCEDURES

A. LEAK TESTS

During assembly all cnntainer components comprising each svstrmexcept the l,4b5-rl size were tested for air leakage at 5 psig in accord-ance with the pneumatic prersure technique of Method 241, Federal Teat

Met•od Standard ltul. All metal containers were fitted with valves forpressurizing to test pressu-e and subsequent relief of pressure. Thesewere auxiliarv' tests to insire non-le-iking compoents for subsequentLmnpact testing. Inas-much as all coitainers either passea h-e initialtest cr were made leak-tight, no further comments are forthcoming. Itwas ncted, however, during disassembly of test items after impact thatconsiderable prsau~e renmained in some of the intact containers. Thispressure in.crease above ambient was due in part to the reduced volume ofthe containers resulting from impact, but failhre in one or more casesto re.lieve leak test pressure is not discounted,

B. V IBRATION TESTS

One container of each size except the 1,465-mi was vibrated in eachpotential shipping attitude in accorda.ce with Method 279, Federal TestMethod Standard 101 (Fig. 10). The maximuan vibration frequencies foreach system were: 1-gal capacity - 500 Hz; 5-gal capacity - 443 Hz;15-gal capacity - 50 Hz. The actual test envelope is shown on Figure 11.No visually observed happenings or accelerometer-recorded data providedinformation of sufficient significance to report findings be.jond mention-ing successful performance of these tests.

C. ROCKET SLED IMPACT TESTS

Five replicates of each size system in each of three different attitudes-•erc .... ted 4 agis& tha target (Fig. t) at velocities indicated inTable 1. (Run 4 aborted because the container was inadvertently leftempty.) After impact, the test items were left undisturbed at their finalpoint of rest for five minutes; then the exterior container and surrounding

area were examined and assessed visually for extent of liquid spillage.Test items were them removed from the track area in essentially the sameattitude at which they came to rest for an additional 15-minute period ofvisual observation away from the test track. Container systems were thendisassembled for assessment of internal damages. Pertinent findings arerecorded in Table 1. Photographs of typical signiiicant results are shownin Figuris 12 through 24.

SColored movie film (Lb-mm), both in. slow motion and real speed, coveringimpact testing is iviilable in Safety Directorate tiles of Fort Detrick,

15

FIGURE IU. Vibratirr TeSt InstIllation. 15-ga)system in crate mounted on Brti tarjaer Model 1025ViLrntion Exciter. Range: Acct hIration 1,000 g;frequený;, 5 Hz to 10.000 Hz.

10 G = 0.0511 (DA) ft 2

1.0 in. + 10%

E 0.3 n + \A•cceleration - G

0 0.01)

0)0

0.001-

\ \$

o.Ooooi-.L ,•\\,2 10 so 200 1,000 5,000

15 20 100 500 2,000Frequency, Cycles per Second

FIGURE 11. Vibration Test Envelope. 'Zest envelope, 2 to 500 cyclesE ; second for vibration (sin o idal motion) test,

17

"4 ZI993 V

FIGURE 12. Fifteen-Gallon Systemwith Crate and Energy Absorber.

FIGURE 13. Five-Callon System at RestAfter Side Impact. A - area of leak.

18

IAI

Air<

0 ~'. ? "

.. •, . ,* -' . : -:r :

FIGURE 14. Side Seam Failure of Light-WeightMetal Drums. Component Item 2 as shown inFigure 2 fnr the XM594, 5-gal capacity system.

JvJ

FIGURE 15. Typical Damage to the 1,465-mlSystem Bearing Impact on the Top.

FIGURE 16. Typical Damage to the 1-galSystem Bearing Impact on the Top.

"At.

FIGURE 17. Typical Damage to the i-galSyst, ' Bearing Impact on thi Mottnm.

20

FIGURE 18. Typical Damage to the 5-galSystem Bearing Impact on a Side.

Or'

FIGURE 19. Test Run of Two 1-gal Systems IllustratingShearing Effect of Target on Bolt Ring Closure.

21

vp

FIGURE 20. Typical Damage to the 1,465-ml SystemResulting from Fouling During Impact.

FIGURE 21. rull View of Impact Side ShowingTypical Damage to the 5-gal System.

22

xa

FIGURE 22. Typical Damage to the 5-galSystem Bearing Impact on the Bottom.

FIflURE. 23. Fiftk<e-01i-ýlon System Impacted on Bottom.

23

FIGURE 24. Impact Effect of a Crated 15-gal System.

IV

24

I0 *8 0~&8488~~I

aao 0 U48 S 8 .C 0 0 vU .~

u4 u.H ~ .4o~~~~~~ a- 48 . 4 881

0 a4868 004 E LI u

00.A- 4.1 . U84 44. 0

CA

40. ~ ~ 0 a" . IC3 .- .8 I6

2 0.4 0 96ga.. . -.

81~~4 08 .014 .0

-.0S 4884 %8 a." 04

E-44. 00 6884 .02 08 0

448 w aw 3

-0.44 0 0.88 1.086 10.0 44

.W8.

01 448

.4. 0 60 .45648' 88848 0 48 404uM0 04 Cu 001

06 a. 0 00r 08448A0 0 .4u U.0 a W t044 1,,

'o84 go86 N' N'-.

4m .6

.4 en1 41~

46w, - 0

8-A-

a 0 @

0- 0 W% W% WN

Cc 10

Prcein Pag Blank 8 8 *0 0 4

25

4a -o 0 4

- ~ ~~~~ 0r r 3i 4 T

T3 0 Ti 0 0 0 .*'4 .40 4 T

a u . 0CT .-~~ a i.

A 4 w 0.03

.4 4.. a. Ell0 -4 .

4 0 0060 0 0"I...0

* 0 60C 0 0( 04 0 q . 4c4 4 06 6d 06 a00

04 W- V QA-' -a0 Ciaa

'.44'v z W.i4C . A, ..- u CM V S 4. 6 4

c4. '.4

a4 0..4 0.. 0 04.M4 S

040

IV..4 '4

26

.4.0.

r 0-O .41:. 1 ..' .5 .0 .4

80 I'm j- -0 0 Va~ A

aJ 0 a4aP .0 r.3

-4sl 00s 0

C0 (4

C o. -0 0.-02 8

0 60- 0 -sJ4 10.. .0

* u n ua c 0-0401

45 Cd .9 0 0

W - 4 W-..o' *.0 V.-'4 a .j ir - a 0.4 o- cC 4k. .4 .

Cu I.C Ceo Z. UC 0C74.J-. "C .~~~q ý gn 0C - x - a-4- o ý . ý 0 . cv .) -m . S~ a g c4 0 .A So w

~ n - 3 .2 V~~;u s.* ow s-C C .0 51 44.'d U 6

-44 APV b '' 4 04 C'i.5 U z5 4 0 C 4 C * CmCC C U U C .

c-U'~ C0 )

o ~ ~~ -o~ -

"do - 3 0 0 (U.4 a 0 a a

27

u. c I

06 *140 he~ 60 a0 O4U 2o c.u

.0 -u q. w. r 0M

0. 0 ' ~ 1 .- 2.. ~ 2 4u . r 4 244t 44 V 0 .

.0 04. 04 4 4. I~1

IV 410C60 14 g

0 44 U 0

w o 1 . ý% !

0400 -) u4 0~1 'a-Vwro ~~ 0-. -C u. r4SC1C1 01

0 4 06 0 c14 60f04.40

o1 w40 w4 6 .40 w bev*

c4. r44 66 0. 14

.4 4 r4 .4 1 14 0

C 0c 1 0 4 14- c 14 A -0 14 04 0 .0 0 06.1 .4 a. 4 o 4

4au 4.2 a.6 w1r M.060.4 0 . -. a

04 -0 t-

to1 0.. 14 6. w4 11 ' A9 . . 4I C 0

.. ~ ~ 04 440 CC *64144 4244A c 0 W,.. C6

.4 061 14,04 6 40 aw Id 04004 0 a a 0.4P .06 44 4

uC4 * a..- Za Goo 0 Ue a- c0 r1.4404 " 04 4.&Z CA u a a

* 4 .4 w j a44bo r 6 v kO' r. ~ "a-

ft .40.0 0 u462-66 60 r 1 .4 04 6 .. 64 0 2 U

-ka 4 aq 00 A o 0Z 0 a4 4~46 6

.'01cm -4u 4044040 M4 0 4

I..04 .~440 442 n.-. UO Z6U 40 .009 0.00 Go

si do41 4 4j I

C4 eq '14a

C4 ~ ~~~~ C4C4r C0 0 -

C4.

0641.1s

00 00 0 00 0 0.0 0

0 0 0

9 9 U 9 .

00 0 0 0ot44 44 W% L414 444.

44 4 44 4 a.a. .4 4444 00n 0c o ' 00 .

28

V. TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Significant minimum data for analyzing results obtained from eachrocket sled run are listed in Tables 1, 2, and 3. Initial trial runsprovided a preview of performance to be expected for each individualcontainer system. Accelerometer data only were obtained during thesetrials. Early results indicated sufficient promise of success forcontinuance of replicate tests.

29

TABLE 2. PERFORMANCE OF ALL TEST ITEMS BY SERIAL NUMBER

Visible Evidence of Liquid LeakateInter-

Svstem Impact Outer mediate Primary

Size & Atti 6 / Con- Con- Con-Ser. No. tude- tainer tainer tainer

1465-01 T No Yes Yes

-02 B No Yes Yes-03 S No Yes Yes-04 T No Yes Yes-05 T No Yes Yes-06 B No No Yes-07-E S No Yes Yes-0e/ S Yes Yes Yes

-0V S No Yes Yes.-10 T No Yes Yes-11 T No Yes Yes-12 B No Yes Yes-13 B No Yes Yes-14 B No No Yes- 15_-/ S Yes Yes Yes

1-002 T No No Yes-003 S No Yes Yes-005 B No No No-006_a/ S No Yes Yes-007 T No No No-008 T No No Yes-009 B No No No-010 B No No No-011 S No Yes Yes

5-004 T No Yes Yes-005 B No No No-006 S Yes Yes Yes-007 T No No Yes-008 T No Yes Ye.)-009 B No No Yes-010 B No No Yes-011 B No Yes Yes-012 S Yes Yes Yes-013 B No No No-014 T No No No-015 T No No Yes-017 S No Yes Yes-018 S Yes Yes Yes-0191I S Yes Yes Yes

15-005 B No No No-003 B No No No

a. Fouled by rocket sled attachment hardware.

b. T = top, B - bottom, S = side.

31

It was determined during these trials that the 1,465-mi system would beenhanced by adding strapping to the outer container. For this purpose fourgirthwise reinforced plastic straps were added and justified. The exteriorfiberboard boxes were severely deteriorated by excessive dryness but stillperformed fairly well.

Two design concepts of the 15-gallon system (Figures 5 and 12) wereimpacted to obtain engineering data for final determination of energyabsorber requirements. These limited tests indicated that the initialdesign of the basic system is adequate to meet prescribed test criteriawithout protection of an added overpack and energy absorber.

Damage is most severe when cylindrical container systems are impacted

with their sides oriented parallel to the target. First of all, attachment

of test items to the sled in this attitude to insure positive release at

moment of impact is difficult and, although several variations were tried,"hang-ups" did occur. Of the four cylindrical, side-impacted test items

that failed to meet the test criteria, three were foxiled by attachment

cables. The leaks, however, were limited to a liquid trickle from a rn rrow

separation of outer drum covers at a point where body chimes were flattened

by the side impact. In no case was there any splatter about the target

area and the leakage did not commence until containers came to rest after

impact action. Figure 13 shows'a typical leak for systems cf this size

that sustained a side impact.

The innermost metal containers (Item 2, Fig. 2) of the 5-gallon systems

proved inadequate. These containers were originally equipped with bail

handles that were removed for tests; however, the bail mounts welded to the

drum bodies provided an easy starting point for side-wall rupture. Areas

adjacent to side-seam welds in thin-gauge container metals are also suscep-

tible to fracture. Figure 14 illustrates this characteristic failure.

The cttitudes selected for all tests were in strict accord with the most

literal interpretation of proposed regulations. Impacting the top and

bottom of a cylindrical container is generally accepted; however, some

schools of thought question the validity of selecting a side for a third

impact attitude, and impacting a leading edge of the top or bottom of the

outer container has been suggested.

A 3-inch clearance was provided for the rocket sled to pass under the

target after impact. This imposed a shearing force 3 inches from the bottom

of the test item (Fig. 19 and 23). It has been suggested that a full-face

impact would be more desirable.

preceding Page BlankI

32

VI. SUMMARY

7stablishment of control measures to insure use of the components andmaterials of the quality and quantity prescribed by appropriate engineer-ing drawings, coupled with precise assembly and adherence to closure and

-aling instructions, should consistently produce systems that meet currentiLatutory requirements.

Thirteen of fifteen 1 ,465-ml systems meL the established criteria.Failure of two others may be attributed to fouling of rocket sled attach-ment cables. Selection of a better grade of fiberboard material andaddition of reinforcement strapping for the outer container would improvethis design considerably.

Nine of nine 1-gallon systems met the established criteria. However,three items that impacted on their sides permitted liquid leakage beyondthe intermediate container but not beyond the outer container.

Eleven of fifteen 5-gallon systems met the established criteria. Thefour item--- that allowed varying small amounts of liquid leakage beyond thewalls of the outer container were side impacts and two of these showedevidence of fouling by their rocket sled attachments. The excellent per-formance of this system on the top and bottom attitude impacts meritsconsideration for its classification as being capable of orientation ina specific direction during transport as provided for in proposed statutes.Appropriate marking and loading instructions could be utilized to insurethe latter.

Two 15-gallon systems were impacted in one attitude only and each metthe established criteria. One item consisted of the basic assembly asshown in Figure 3; the second item was fitted with a plywood crate andenergy absorbcr on the impact side (Fig. 12). These two systems wereimpacted as trials to obtain engineering data, so additional replicatesfor qualification were not scheduled.

The container systems evaluated by these tests are fully described onthe following Fort Detrick drawings (Code Identification 24744):

1-gal XK593 - Drawing SK-D-19665-gal XK594 - Drawing SK-D-1939

15-gal XM595 - Drawing SK-D-19491,4 6 5-ml - Drawings are not available because the project

wag cancelled before all work was completed.

The accelerometer readings recorder! for these tests (1,900 to 3,900 g)indicate impacts of a severity exceeding any expected during an actual air-craft crash. Standard In-flight recorders register a maximan of 1,000 g

(FAA TSO C5IA).'1]