MATERIAL PROPERTY AND EXTRUDED ALUMINUNCO) ARMY … · 2014-09-27 · ad-a164 933 technical report arccb-tr-85001 material property and fracture testing of 7075-t6 extruded aluminum

I ID-A±64 933 MATERIAL PROPERTY AND FRACTURE TESTING OF 70?5-T6 II EXTRUDED ALUMINUNCO) ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT CENTER WATERYLIET NY C.IUNCLASSIFIED M A SCAVULLO ET A.NY9 RC-R161 FG1/

7m u R. NE 5 hEC-EEEI FO 91

Jiim

103W2m

Iiii1.

IIII1 Illll Llf r 2.2.

1111 .. 1 12.0

1.51111j.

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

~~~~~. . ... " " .""' .". " " -. . . . . .,.."..."-.. -,....-. -: -... .~ . -,. . . . . ... " ,=

d •~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~. . . . . . . . . ....-.-..-........ -... .-.. ,.'-,,, ,¢v---:-'.-..v' .,.;-'..,....,-.-..,...,.. . .' -.nMW

...... J.

AD-A164 933

TECHNICAL REPORT ARCCB-TR-85001

MATERIAL PROPERTY AND FRACTURE TESTING

OF 7075-T6 EXTRUDED ALUMINUM

M. A. SCAVULLO

J. H. UNDERWOOD DTICJ. A. KAPP :LECTE

FEB 05 98"J. J. ZALINKA

NOVEMBER 1985

~US ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERCLOSE COMBAT ARMAMENTS CENTER

BENIT WEAPONS LABORATORY CNE

WATERVLIET N.Y. 12189-4050"

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

, S'r

DISCLAIMER

The findings in this report are not to be construed an an official

Department of the Aimy position unless so designated by other authorized

documnts.

The use of trade name(s) and/or manufacture(s) does not constitute

* an official indorsement or approval.

DISPOSITION

Destroy this report when It is no longer needed. Do not return it

to the originator.

07

. . -.. -.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Dote Entered)READ INSTRUCTIONS

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM'I1. RE PORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

ARCCB-TR-85001

4. TITLE (fnd Subtitle) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

MATERIAL PROPERTY AND FRACTURE TESTING OF 7075-T6EXTRUDED ALUMINUM Final

S. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(s) 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(&)

M. A. Scavullo, J. H. Underwood, J. A. Kapp, and

J. J. Zalinka

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK

*US Army Armament Research & Development Center AREA A WORK UNIT NUMBERS

Benet Weapons Laboratory, SMCAR-CCB-TL AMCMS No. 4111.16.2990.0

Watervliet, NY 12189-4050 PRON No. IA327F7SIA1A

II. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

US Army Armament Research & Development Center November 1985 L

Close Combat Armaments Center ,, NUMBER OF PAGES

Dover, NJ 07801-5001 2114. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADORESS(I different from Controlling Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of thls report)

UNCLASSIFIED15. DECLASSI FICATION/ DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE

I. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abetrac entered In Block 20, II dltermt Iom R pet)

IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

IS. KEY WORDS (Continue on revereo slde f nc.aerv and Identify by block number)

Aluminum Fracture7075-T6 SabotsExtrusion Kinetic Energy Projectiles .

Material Properties

The results of an experimental investigation into the material properties of7075-T6 extruded aluminum used in the production of sabots for kinetic energy.<projectiles are presented. A comparison is made of two suppliers' materials,and a test is described that will show a difference exists in the twosuppliers' materials.

DO F U03 M@nos or I Nov yS Is o0.OaTa UNCLASSIFIED

SIECUMIY CLAMIICATION OF ThIS PAGt (l1ban Date bnteed) -!a

• .. . . -.- % .- . -. .-. .. .. . .. .%.. . . -. -%% . . . * • , .'- . ~%

7- ,t. * * * - ~ ~ * * * * *

- * r -r * V Wr h WsW 7 -7 -w - -7 - -7 W-7

TABLE OF CONTENTSPage

INTRODUCTION 1

MATERIAL S 2

SPECIMENS 201

TESTS AND APPARATUS 2

DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS 3

General 3

Tensile Tests 3

Toughness Tests 4

CONCL US IONS 6

REFE RENCES 7

TABLES

I. MEASURED YIELD AND ULTIMATE STRENGTHS FROM M833 SABOTS 8

II. MEASURED PLANE-STRAIN FRACTURE TOUGHNESS FROM M833 SABOTS 9- :c:.III. MEASURED SLOW NOTCHED BEND ENERGY FROM 4833 SABOTS 1.0

IV. MEASURED SLOW NOTCHED BEND ENERGY FROM M833 SABOTS 11

V. MEASURED SLOW NOTCHED BEND ENERGY FOR R-L SAMPLES TAKEN 12FROM RECENT SUPPLIER NUMBER 2 EXTRUSIONS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Schematic of a sabot petal showing the orientation of test 13

s pecimens.

2a. Schematic of SNEE test fixture. 14

2b. Typical load deflection curve for an SNBE test. 15

3. Photograph of an extruded section with the associated 16photomicrographs and ultrasonic responses. B

D)iA ib~itio"I

K Availability CodesIAvail anid/or

3 Dist Special

-.-.... A% .ji

7 _7 _

Page

4. Micrographs of specimens taken from opposite sides of anextrusion, at a magnification of 500X perpendicular to theextrusion direction. ,

a. Specimens K(3 and K(30 showing similar micrographs. 17

b. Specimens Fl and Fl* showing dissimilar micrographs. 18

c. Specimens Li and Lie again shoving dissimilar micrographs. 19

1A1

V. .r-

INTRODUCTION

In the Spring of 1984 during acceptance testing of the 833 projectile,

severe breakip of the aluminum discarding sabot was observed. This breakup

had not been noted previously. The acceptance tests were being conducted ..-

because a new supplier of extruded 7075-T6 aluminum was being used. The task

of this unit was to determine if there were any differences in the material

properties of the two suppliers' materials. Since both materials obviously

met the specifications (tensile strength and elongation), a different series

of tests was considered and conducted. Fracture toughness was considered

because brittle, fragmentation failures were observed. klso, tests were

mainly conducted at -40*F because the breakups occurred at this temperature;

however, testing was conducted at room temperature for information and for

determining trends in the data.

We conducted two types of toughness tests in two orientations. The

toughness tests were the traditional KIc test described in ASTM Method (ref 1) .'..

E-399 and a test described as Slow Notch Bend Energy (SNBE). The second test

measures the total energy-to-failure for a notched Charpy specimen. The

specimen orientations studied were the longitudinal and transverse directions,

that is, the L-R and R-L orientations of Reference i. Two groups of materials

were investigated, one with no observed failures from supplier number 2, the

other with many observed failures from supplier number I.

Our investigation also included metallography, chemistry, and scanning '...,

1"Standard Test Method for Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic . ".Materials," 1985 ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM,Philadelphia, PA, 1985, pp. 547-582.

II%t

k

electron microscopy (SEM) observations. In this report, we will touch on

those areas as well as the mechanical properties testing.

MATERIALS -

The materials were supplied as extruded sectors and finish-machined

petals from the extrusion. The materials from both suppliers met the

established requirements in terms of the yield strength, elongation, and

chemistry. There may have been some differences in the type and amount of

plastic work in the materials of each supplier. The material will be

described as supplier number 1 and supplier number 2 material.

SPECIMENS

The specimens were removed from the material as described in ASTM E-399

(ref i) and as shown in Figure 1. The specimens were machined using the same

equipment and, as much as possible, the same machinist. In the case of the

SNBE test, the notch was put in using the same equipment (a broach) and thus,

should have only minor variations from one suppliet to the other.

TESTS AND APPARATUS

Figure 2a is a schematic of the SNBE test. It shows a standard Charpy

(ref 2) sized bend specimen mounted for a three-point bend test. The tests

were conducted in a servo-hydraulic tensile test machine. The tensile machine

1"Standard Test Method for Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic '.*

Materials," 1985 ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM,

Philadelphia, PA, 1985, pp. 547-582.2"Standard Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials," 1985ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 235-258.

U2N 2 :..:::~

*.- .r5A

:,. --. - - .).? -. .. . . .-../ . .,,. .: .. -. -.. .,,.-,.-. . ., -.- ; .. - . -. ..- .- -. - -, -.; :-. -..... :' -.. . . ... - = "

55I..

was run in the stroke control mode and the time to fail a specimen was

approximately 1.5 minutes. The deflection of the specimen was measured

slightly offset from the midpoint of the beam, and the conversion to load-line

displacement is shown. Figure 2b shows a load deflection curve where the

deflection has been converted to load-line deflection and the area under the

curve is the energy-to-failure of a specimen. K

The other tests such as tensile and Klc tests were conducted according to

the applicable ASTM specification.

DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS

General

In the beginning of the testing, a distinct difference existed in the two

suppliers' materials, but as testing was continued on materials produced later

in the cycle of production, the lower results of the tests from the better

supplier began to fall into the range of the higher results of the other

supplier. Metallographic results also showed some phenomena that were

unexpected. The experimental test results will generally be present-d

chronologically to show how the data gathering progressed, and then

conclusions will be drawn from the entire data base.

Tensile Tests

Table I presents the yield and ultimate strength results for the two

suppliers' materials measured in the two orientations. The longitudinal tests

were conducted on specimens 0.550 inch in diameter and the transverse tests

were conducted on specimens 0.160 inch in diameter. These were standard and '

&. ."" "" ' " " "'.- '. . -. " -. "".. .€ "- .... ? .' " . ' -" ''-.- - -.. '''...''' .2"' -"" " " - " . ." - .' ." -.3""

small-size specimens from ASTM Method E-8 (ref 3). The results of the tensilp.

strength tests are inconclusive as one supplier was higher at times, while the

other supplier was higher at other times. The trend that strength increases

with lower temperatures was expected.

Toughness Tests

Table II presents the results of KIc testing conducted on the two

suppliers' materials. The only significant difference that can be seen is

from tests conducted in the R-L direction where the supplier number 2 material

was 15 percent better at room temperature and 19 percent better at -40*F.

Table III presents the results of SNBE tests conducted on the two

suppliers' materials. Here we can see that the supplier number 2 results are

superior in both the L-R and R-L orientations. The SNBE test results at -40 F

showed that the supplier number 2 materials are 20 percent better. Since the

failures occurred at -40°F and the rear skirt failure and parts of the other W2

failures were considered to be basically R-L in nature, the SNBE test in the

R-L orientation conducted at -40*F was chosen as the test to be concentrated

on for future testing.

It is worthy of note that in prior work (ref 4) SNBE tests gave a better -:

description of the ability of a notched component to survive launch loading

than did the Kic tests. Thus, the prior work and the current work gave

3 "Standard Methods of Tension Testing of Metallic Materials," 1985 ASTM AnnualBook of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1985, pp. 130-151.4j. H. Underwood and M. A. Scavullo, "Fracture Behavior of a Uranium orTungsten Alloy Notched Component With Inertia Loading," Fracture Mechanics:Sixteenth Symposium, ASTM, STP 868, (M. F. Kanninen and A. T. Hopper, eds.),ASTM, 1985, pp. 554-568.

4%%

J,-.

similar results ~in this resect, and the basic resnis believed to beth

same. Since the component in both cases was notched and was not believed to

be cracked, the SNBE test of a notched specimen gave better results than the

K c test of a precracked specimen. -i

Table IV presents the results of additional SNBE testing conducted on the

two materials. For the R-L tests a t -40*F the materials of supplier number 2

show a clear advantage over those of supplier number 1, although due to the

range of the data, some of the supplier number 2 material falls into the highL

range of supplier number i. This could be a reflection of the fact that not

all items produced using supplier number I material fail.

Table V presents the results of the SNBE test conducted at -40°7 an the

most recent material produced by supplier number 2. An interesting result is

that a sample taken from either side of an extrusion can produce different

measurements. Figure 3 shows an extruded section with the test samples shown

penciled in at either side. At the top are photomicrographs taken

perpendicular to the extrusion direction showing considerably more aligned

second phase particles on one side of the extrusion than on the other. This

can also be detected ultrasonically as shown by the two ouptuts of an

ultrasonic sensor. Figures 4 a, 4b, and 4c show photomicrographs of actual

specimens. Figure 4a shows an extrusion that had equal properties from side

to side, and the photomicrographs show equal distribution of second phase

particles on both sides. Figures 4b and 4 c depict the case of unequal test

results and unequal photomicrograph results. The specimens showing the

least amount of aligned structure orientation also demonstrate the lower SNBE.

5

CONCLUSIONS

1. KIc shows only slight differences between the two suppliers'

materials in both orientations and at both temperatures. Only the the R-L

orientation fracture toughness could be used to separate the two materials.

2. SNBE in both orientations and at both temperatures demonstrates a

j4difference in the two suppliers' materials.

3. Later in the material production cycle, supplier number 2 (the

seemingly better supplier) supplied material with SNBE nearly as low as

sdsupplier number 1 and with side to side variations not previously observed. " ..

I t

-•. . ."

|. ". ".*

REFERENCES -1

1. "Standard Test Method for Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness of Metallic

Materials," 1985 ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM,

Philadelphia, PA, 1985, pp. 547-582.

2. "Standard Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials,"

1985 ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA,

pp. 235-258.

3. "Standard Methods of Tension Testing of Metallic Materials," 1985 ASTM

Annual Book of Standards, Vol. 03.01, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1985, pp.

130-151.

4. J. R. Underwood and M. A. Scavullo, "Fracture Behavior of a Uranium or

Tungsten Alloy Notched Component With Inertia Loading," Fracture

Mechanics: Sixteenth Symposium, ASTM, STP 868, (M. F. Kanninen and A. T.

Hopper, eds.), ASTM, 1985, pp. 554-568.

,: .. -.

7

. .. . . . . . . . . .

- -- I-- -o -O .-

-1 00"" °

to .I

S r- r-, Io o

• ., I I I I " . "I- , I , - .• 0 0 • I

I I I I I - -I - I

In W

E -I 1 6

en co 0 % Lt

- I .__ _ . . . .. ...4,.-

42)- V.- '0 I I o o ...

* F-,'.'.' '0,I I I - " I ' m " '

0 .0

-. ,-4 .,I" I .. 0m "-. ''I I ! I - " '

tZ3 0 1 0 00

--4

Ir 0% 0~ w

*:.: ,. . .. .... ... . . . .. . . ... .... . ... .. .... .._ . ... . .. .. .. -.-%- :

-40% t% In all

00~ 0%

00

I -~ 0 - r enI 0

t60 ON 0%1 1 1 m4 *4-4 as 4 *l w I -

2 1 C 0 00 1 0% ON

-% -~ -- -t -. - - - - -2

* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c -T.* . '.- .. k

AI

C1 C4

It

PL, -4

c 0 I

-4

I 0

=C w

-N N

*n :HL C40I

CA u

En 0 . .

-...

w. o

0 "" .

* n I 0

tA- -0

I W

-~CIO

w M

I -4

Z 10

_ . . . . . .. __ , .'-.

3=.0I J- .*

---------------- ------------- °

I I II I

0 I 0,

I I I

*' ' ' .. "'"" "•'"" ' I "I"-"~ "I :"' """"" ' "" " " "" ", ' *" .N " "

. . ..- - - - -- -

.. ,.'.

-- - - -

CA I

: -4 1I cI I . . . . .

I~~e N~I~.- 0

0- I I_ .. ,~ ,- ... , .. ..

- - - - - -. .. - - ." ,.Gi,', ,,.4 , ,- ,N ,' C.'

* "I I "I " .'.Iw4 9 o 4 . .-4 -4

. - - - - - - - - - - - -.- -.

- -, --.- - - -

co I

-,•

L...- - - - -- -- -

. 0 cn -,

I I I , " i i

-..

-- - - - - - -

cu -49e

-41-0 0I I I I I I I

'4-~ - --i - -- - ---

TABLE V. MEASURED SLOW NOTCHED BEND ENERGY FOR R-L SAMPLES

TAKEN FROM RECENT SUPPLIER NUMBER 2 EXTRUSIONS

I I SNEE in.-lbs.IIdentification Number* I (at -40 0F)

L2 I26.0I

I L3 I26.7

L3- I22.2 -

Li 25.2**

L1 I 16.2** I

KII 22.9I 4

KI 22.5I

I K1 21.5

K3 I25.1.**

K3 I26.0**

F3 I17.6I

F2 I19.9I

F2-I 18.7I

Fl 17.5** IL

Fl-I 25.7** I

*The letter indicates a heat number and the number Kindentifies a sector from a matched set to providea sabot. The dot indicates a sample taken from the

popposite side of the extrusion as shown in Figure 3.

**Indicates micrographs are shown in Figures 4a, b, and c.

12

dII

~-.----- ' * . - -.- b

# = . 9...

wix

LU

2- Z

go

0 0

-U

0w

00

to

4

CD

LUU

U))

U) w

z0

o

• , .-. ,

Ca..

', o-m".

0= " 'U"%.

a",'=

° .0

I9.4rrU

.°°'

13. 1

dp

104

%I %.'.

#/41- I-IRAE POIMPr

I TI//S A C,4A IS SL OW N072C/,'EL)

zOI0,4 8END E-A/EAG6Y, /A(h-7.-/b.

lb.

Figure 2b. Typical load deflection curve for an SNBE test.

'is

-' .-

~JZ2I *-.~- .~-L- W. -

2 77

Fiur 3. Phtgah fa xrue etonwt h ascae

photomirograps and ltrasoirso e.

a1

0.

.. • . , . _ .,~ 3.= * + -4 --) . .-.. .-- oo ,I . . ,.... :., , .

4W%

-171

-.. j . :9- 2- o ,

. .-

__ . ,- -- - . . - • . , +; -,

- , + ," ..... *... I*

- - ,+.

. +. ". -V .-

K3 26.0 in.-lb

a. Specimens K3 and 4 s ,s mc-r a _.17.. ."" "b.-- -

-- c. • + " " - J - O " "

+ . ' o,-6

- .:- -- )-= - J - ., . _.- . ++ + .i + -+ c - -

. . - '. --- _. _ - .+"- .

. -+, + ... , , - '.+ -' + + .. .+- - ,.,.+, _. .-_*' -- . .

, -.... , . . .-,- '... _" -",- '. - - "" - - . ,-. .. .,

K3@ 26.0 in.-lb @,..,

Figure 4. Micrographs of specimens taken from opposite sides of an ,extrusion, at a magnification of 500X perpendicular to the i

extrusion direction. I.a. Specimens K3 and K3* showing similar micrographs. "

17

,-.....-

~ -2 ~ *; •S *:. ;-

30.7

V..

Pi 25. in-l

4b. ~ ~ ~ ~ *~. Spcmn ladFO hwn ismlr irgah 5O

. .5,nu

'IP

0 4M

4 - x

Ll- 25.2 in-

V

m ~ d7

-t ?d

LIO 25.2 in.-lb

4c pcmn L n l gisoigdsmlamcrrph 5X)

S 19

TECHNICAL REPORT EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION LIST

NO. OF NO. OFCOPIES COPIES

ASST SEC OF THE ARMY COMMANDER

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT US ARMY AMCCOMATTN: DEP FOR SCI & TECH 1 ATTN: SMCAR-ESP-L1THE PENTAGON ROCK ISLAND, IL 61299

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20315COMMANDER

COMMANDER ROCK ISLAND ARSENALDEFENSE TECHNICAL INFO CENTER ATTN: SMCRI-ENM (MAT SCI DIV) 1ATTN: DTIC-DDA 12 ROCK ISLAND, IL 61299 . -

CAMERON STATIONALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 DIRECTOR

US ARMY INDUSTRIAL BASE ENG ACTVCOMMANDER ATTN: DRXIB-M 1US ARMY MAT DEV & READ COMD ROCK ISLAND, IL 61299ATTN: DRCDE-SG 15001 EISENHOWER AVE COMMANDERALEXANDRIA, VA 22333 US ARMY TANK-AUTMV R&D COMD I

ATTN: TECH LIB - DRSTA-TSLCOMMANDER WARREN, MI 48090

ARMAMENT RES & DEV CTRUS ARMY AMCCOM COMMANDERATTN: SMCAR-FS 1 US ARMY TANK-AUTMV COMD '

SMCAR-FSA 1 ATTN: DRSTA-RCSMCAR-FSM I WARREN, KI 48090SMCAR-FSS 1SMCAR-AEE 1 COMMANDERSMCAR-AES I US MILITARY ACADEMYSMCAR-AET-O (PLASTECH) 1 ATTN: CHMN, MECH ENGR DEPT ISMCAR-MSI (STINFO) 2 WEST POINT, NY 10996

DOVER, NJ 07801US ARMY MISSILE COMD

DIRECTOR REDSTONE SCIENTIFIC INFO CTR 2BALLISTICS RESEARCH LABORATORY ATTN: DOCUMENTS SECT, BLDG. 4484

ATTN: AMXBR-TSB-S (STINFO) 1 REDSTONE ARSENAL, AL 35898ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, MD 21005

COMMANDERMATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS ACTV US ARMY FGN SCIENCE & TECH CTR

ATTN: DRXSY-MP ATTN: DRXST-SD IABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, MD 21005 1 220 7TH STREET, N.E. -

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22901

NOTE: PLEASE NOTIFY COMMANDER, ARMAMENT RESEARCH AND DEVBLOPMENT CENTER,US ARMY AMCCOM, ATTN: BENET WEAPONS LABORATORY, SMCAR-CCB-TL,

WATERVLIET, NY 12189, OF ANY ADDRESS CHANGES.

;..'

7" .W .- r .",

TECHNICAL REPORT EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION LIST (CONT'D)

NO. OF NO. OF

COPIES COPIES

COMMANDER DIRECTORUS ARMY LABCOM US NAVAL RESEARCH LAB

MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY LAB 2 ATTN: DIR, MECH DIV iATTN: SLCMT-IML CODE 26-27, (DOC LIB) 1

WATERTOWN, MA 01272 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20375

COMMANDER COMMANDER

US ARMY RESEARCH OFFICE AIR FORCE ARMAMENT LABORATORYATTN: CHIEF, IPO 1 ATTN: AFATL/DLJ i-

P.O. BOX 12211 AFATL/DLJG 1

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27709 EGLIN AFB, FL 32542

COMMANDER METALS & CERAMICS INFO CTRUS ARMY HARRY DIAMOND LAB BATTELLE COLUMBUS LAB 1ATTN: TECH LIB 1 505 KING AVENUE2800 POWDER MILL ROAD COLUMBUS, OH 43201ADELPHIA, NM 20783

COMMANDERNAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CTRATTN: TECHNICAL LIBRARY 1

CODE X212DAHLGREN, VA 22448

NOTE: PLEASE NOTIFY COMMANDER, ARMAMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER,US ARMY AMCCOM, ATTN: BENET WEAPONS LABORATORY, SMCAR-CCB-TL,WATERVLIET, NY 12189, OF AN-- ADDRESS CHANGES.

2[ . ?[[[

CHIEF, DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING BRANCH,

ATTN : SMCAR-CCB-D-DA,

-DPi

~-DR1;. ~~-DS (SYSTEMS)I-..-,"-TEH-DS (ICAS GROUP) E DSI O S

'" ~~-DC1 '--"

CHIEF, ENGINEERING SUPPORT BRANCHATTN: SMCAR-CCB-S 1

-SE i. I

CHIEF, RESEARCH BRANWCH -i ']ATTN: SMCAR-CCB-R 2

-R (ELLEN FOGARTY) 1

-RA 1-RM 1

-RT 1"'-."

TECHNICAL LIBRARY NCH

ATTN: SMCAR-CCB-TL

TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS & EDITING UNIT

ATTN: SMCAR-CCB-rL

DIRECTOR, PROCUREMENT DIRECTORATE I

DIRECTOR, PRODUCT ASSURANCE DIRECTORATE 1 :'

NOTTE: PLEASE NOTIFY DIRECTOR, BENET WEAPONS ABORATORY, ATTN. SCAR-CCB-TL,

OF ANY ADDRESS CHANGES.

..c.

* DIRECTOR,,. . .,_ ,, RDC AS-.. SURANCE. ,. DIRECTORAT., E ;-..I.... : , , :: ,. ,

*-~-.

B

* .5' ~.5'S'* *~~~S'd. d

/ f

-

a.9-

aFullED

S

- h- .9~.

--- S. '.5-S

.. ~S**' '5'r ** S .5

t\.' '~'-.

is..'. .''.

r *

4\ ~DTIc- ~

.-...5