A Study on the Ability to Analytically Predict

Mechanical Failure due to a Pyrotechnic

Shock Environment.

Speaker: Sean P. Keon

Authors: Sean P. Keon
Meryl R. Mallery

Ensign-Bickford Aerospace &

Defense Company
Uniquely Designed
June 26-28, 2007 Test Specimens

1
 Pyrotechnic Shock Testing
Presentation Overview

• General Overview of Study

• Pyrotechnic Shock and the Effect on Hardware
• Structural Analysis Techniques
• Test Specimen Description
• Determination of Resonant Frequency
• Pyrotechnic Shock Testing
• Structural Analysis of Pyrotechnic Shock
• Technical Observations
• Go-Forward Plan

2
 General Overview of Study
Choose a Design Analyze Design Determine Actual
Concept Concept Resonant Frequency
- Keep it simple - Select appropriate material - Perform 1G Sine Sweep
- Uni-axial failure mode - Predict Resonant Frequency - Compare to Analysis
- Low Resonant Freq. - Analyze for break strength

Subject Test Specimens to Real Pyro-Shock

- Accelerometers installed on each specimen
- Which ones broke?
- How do the results compare to analytical prediction?
100000.00
70000 F SRS Point7:+X
F SRS Point8:+Y
50000 F SRS Point9:+Z
40000 F Ov erall lev el -3db s pec
F Ov erall lev el nominal s pec
30000
F Ov erall lev el +6db spec

20000

Adjust the Test Parameters 10000

Re-Calibrate Analytical Model

7000

5000

based on Re-Calibration
4000

3000

2000

- Option #1 – adjust breaking and Failure Predictions

Log
1000

g
800
600
500

- How well does the SRS reflect the

400

300

strength of test unit.

200

damage potential of a given shock

100

70

- Option #2 – adjust magnitude of

50
40

30

test?
20

pyrotechnic shock source 10.00

100.00 200 300 400 500 600 700 1000
Hz
2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 10000.00

3
 General Overview of Study
Objectives
• Acquire data to validate and refine EBA&D’s structural
analysis process for assessing design susceptibility to a
pyrotechnic shock environment.
– Currently, EBA&D’s structural analysis process lacks empirical test data.
– What are the best analytical tools to use for such a structural analysis?
– What pyrotechnic shock data is the most useful when assessing damage
potential? Is it the Shock Response Spectrum? Is it the Pseudo Velocity
Response Spectrum?
• Creation of an innovative test tool, with tunable resonant
frequency and breaking strength.
– Pyrotechnic shock overtest monitor.
– Validation tool for assessing accelerometer data accuracy at low
frequency.

4
 General Overview of Study
Objectives
• Continue to further understand the real energy present in a
pyrotechnic shock event.
– EBA&D will segway our understanding of pyrotechnic shock into an
ability to build components that are effectively designed to perform in
the rigorous environments required by our customers.

5
 Pyrotechnic Shock
The Effect on Hardware
• Definition of Pyrotechnic Shock is:
Location
“The response of a structure to high-frequency, of Failure

high-magnitude stress waves that propagate

throughout the structure as a result of an explosive
event….” [Davie, Bateman, Ch. 26 S&V Handbook]
– Results in a near instantaneous velocity change in
Mechanical Failure
the test fixture and test specimens. of Electrical
Connector
• Pyrotechnic Shock can be mechanically
destructive.
– EBA&D has witnessed mechanical failure of many
metal (aluminum & steel) components.
• Shear Pins, Fasteners, Separation Planes
LSC Sheath
Deformation, End
Seal Destruction

6
 Pyrotechnic Shock
The Effect on Hardware
• Structural Analysis of Ordnance Disconnect,
during the design phase, did not predict the
mechanical failure that eventually occurred. Location
of Failure
• Structural Analysis for Pyrotechnic Shock does
not appear to be straight-forward.
– What magnitude of pyrotechnic shock overtest
Mechanical Failure
should be anticipated? +6dB, +12dB? of Fastener
– Does the Shock Response Spectrum
provide us with enough
information to perform
a thorough structural
analysis?
Ordnance Disconnect for FCDCAs: Mechanical Failure at
separation plane due to pyrotechnic shock test.

7
 Pyrotechnic Shock
Structural Analysis Techniques
• Current EBA&D Analytical Approach for Shock Modeling
– Evaluate Design for critical regions that may be most affected
by shock loads.
– Import CAD representation of part which has been defeatured,
as necessary for efficient modeling, into ANSYS Workbench
11.0.
– Obtain material properties – typically minimum strength
properties.
– Determine resonant frequency of the component.
– Review overall shock requirements and determine shock input
at component resonant frequency.
– Review customer required safety factors.

8
 Pyrotechnic Shock
Structural Analysis Techniques
– Run nonlinear static structural analysis w/equivalent static
acceleration.
– Analysis method known to be conservative due to the short
duration nature of a pyrotechnic shock event.
• Additional Analytical Options
– Conduct a Fully Explicit Dynamic Analysis in LSTC LSDYNA

9
 Pyrotechnic Shock Study
Test Specimen Description
Design Goal: Test Specimen with adjustable breaking strength and resonant frequency.

• Simplistic design with a uni-axial failure mode.

• Target Resonant Frequency, 300 – 500 Hz.
• Targeted to break when subjected to 1000 G’s at its resonant frequency.
• Material: 7075-T7351
– Notch sensitive material
• Machined Notch Defines the “Break” Location
– Designed to minimize tolerance stack-up on critical design features
– Single notch on one side of beam
reduces tolerance variations on Basic Test Specimen, No Added Weight

notch base thickness.

• Different weight steel cylinders used to
adjust part resonant frequency and
breaking strength.
– (Small, Medium and Large)

10
 Pyrotechnic Shock Study
Test Specimen Description

Test Specimen Steel Cylinder

Mounting Holes
(2 places)

Accelerometer
Mounting Port

Main Body measures Notch

1 inch x 1 inch Thickness of
0.070 inch Uni-Axial
Material: 7075 Aluminum
Failure Mode
“Z-Axis”

11
 Pyrotechnic Shock Study
Determination of Resonant Frequency
• The resonant frequency was determined for test samples #7, #8,
#9 using ANSYS 11.0 and compared to measured values from a
1G sinusoidal sweep on a vibration table.
Small, Added Weight Determined
Test Notch Wall Medium, or Due to Predicted
Resonant
Specimen Thickness Large Cylinder and Resonant Frequency
No. (inches) Cylindrical Bolt Frequency
(Sine Sweep)
Mass (grams)
Test Specimen
7 0.0657 Large 70.14 342 344 Undergoing Sine
Sweep Test
8 0.0669 Medium 58.00 395 398

9 0.0715 Small 46.40 482 469

NOTE: resonant Frequency predictions are within

2.7% of measured values.

12
 Pyrotechnic Shock Study
Determination of Resonant Frequency

• Designing for specific resonant frequencies has been tricky.

– The addition of mass to promote mechanical failure causes a
significant decrease in
resonant frequency.
• Acceleration values
decrease at a rate of
~ 10 dB/Oct with
decreasing resonant
frequency.
– Despite having the highest
breaking strength, the Test
Specimen with the Small
Weight exhibited failure
more often than the
Medium and Large Weight.

13
 Pyrotechnic Shock Testing
• Three (3) Test Specimens mounted per shock test
– 1 w/ Small Weight ≈ 480 Hz (resonant frequency)
– 1 w/ Medium Weight ≈ 400 Hz
– 1 w/ Large Weight ≈ 350 Hz
Typical Shock Test Set-Up
• Each Test Specimen had an
Accelerometer mounted to it.
– PCB 350B02 Accelerometer
– Measuring Z-Axis Only
• Aluminum Pyro-Shock Fixture
with welded shelf for product
mounting.
• Typical Shock Source: 10 feet
of 25 gr/ft Detonating Cord.
– PETN Explosive Core

14
 Pyrotechnic Shock Testing

NOTE: Acceleration at PNF for Specimens 1, 2, 3, are from the 3rd Pyrotechnic Shock

15
 Pyrotechnic Shock Testing
• Exact Value from Shock
Response Spectrum is used for
comparison to analytical model.
• The 3 SRS Curves (to the right)
represent test specimens 4, 5, 6.
– Data is fairly consistent across
the three.
• Test Specimen #4.
– Permanently Deformed from
pyrotechnic shock.
– At ƒres = 485 Hz,
Accel. = 2,515 G’s

16
 Structural Analysis for
Pyrotechnic Shock
• ANSYS 11.0 Test Specimen Model
7075 T7351 Material Properties
1000 G Body
Fixed Load MIL-HDBK-5H
Support Ultimate Strength = 67,000 psi
Yield Strength = 57,000 psi
Elongation = 6%

Certified Inspection Report

Ultimate Strength = 74,500 psi
Yield Strength = 64,600 psi
Elongation = 15%
Notch
Thickness Analysis Results are presented
with the material properties
specified on the Certified Material
Inspection Report

17
Structural Analysis for
Pyrotechnic Shock
Plastic Strain Contours Spec. #8
.0669 Notch Wall Thickness
Medium Cylinder
All Contours in Red
1000 G Load
exceed Plastic Strain
of the Material,
which is15%

Fracture Predicted

18
 Structural Analysis for
Pyrotechnic Shock
Plastic Strain Contours Spec. #9
.0715 Notch Wall Thickness
Small Cylinder
1000 G Load

Max Strain Shown is 1.9%

Fracture is NOT Predicted

19
 Structural Analysis for
Pyrotechnic Shock
Small, Added Weight
Test Medium, or Due to Predicted
Test Results
Specimen Large Cylinder and Fracture
Fracture?
No. Cylindrical Bolt w/1000 G's
Mass (grams)
Yes
4 Small 46.4 No
2500 G's
Yes No
7 Large 70.14
w/1100 G's
No
8 Medium 58.00 Yes
w/1300 G's
No
9 Small 46.40 No
w/2250 G's

• Why does the analysis predictions and test not correlate well?
– Does SRS provide an accurate representation of load the part sees?
– Is specimen damping different from SRS assumption (Q=10)?
– Is the short duration shock load not accurately modeled with static
analysis?

20
 Pyrotechnic Shock Study
Technical Observations
• Test Specimens are withstanding significantly higher
acceleration values (as extracted from the SRS) than was
analytically predicted by the process described on
Slide 10.
• Experiencing difficulty in causing mechanical failure in test
specimens with resonant frequency less than 450 Hz.
• Uni-Axial Failure Mode has been effective. Permanent
deformation has been easy to identify.
• Noteworthy results for Test Specimen with Small Weight:
– No evidence of deformation with Accel. = 2,250 G’s (#9)
– Permanent deformation with Accel. = 2,500 G’s (#4)

21
 Pyrotechnic Shock Study
Go-Forward Activities
• Further Review of Pyrotechnic Shock Data
– Review Power Spectral Density of Accel. Time History.
– Create Pseudo Velocity Response Spectrum plots.
• Test Specimen Modification
– Focus on Test Specimen with Small Weight
– Lower Breaking Strength by Reducing Notch Thickness
• 0.055” thickness
– ƒres = 369 Hz with Small Weight
– Predicted Breaking Load: < 1000 G’s
• 0.060” thickness
– ƒres = *TBD*
– Predicted Breaking Load *TBD*
• Future Plan to Design X and Y Axis Test Specimen #2
Test Specimens “Desired” Mechanical Failure

• Future Plan to Study Shear Pin Failure

22