The RuBee Wireless Weapon Tag Firearms Calibration Protocol,
Firearms Healthcare Program, and Firearms Diagnostics
Laboratory
RuBee wireless weapons tags with shot counting, Mean Kinetic
Shots (MKS) and advanced Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) can
improve small arms maintenance and healthcare, with process free,
automatic weapon diagnostics and weapon visibility.Visible Assets,
Inc. December 6th, 2009 Version 1-20 Copyright 2009 Visible Assets
Contacts: John Stevens [email protected], 617-395-7601 Craig Weich
[email protected], 617-264-0101 Visible Assets, Inc. 195 Bunker Hill
Ave Stratham, NH 03885
Confidential
1
Table of ContentsOVERVIEW
......................................................................................................................3
1.1. THE IMPULSE RESPONSE FUNCTION OF A WEAPON
............................................................4 THE
VISIBLE ASSETS RUBEE WIRELESS WEAPON TAG
..................................6 1.2. BACKGROUND: VISIBLE CUSTOM
WAVEFORM ENGINE MICRO-CHIP.....................................6
1.3. WHATS UNIQUE ABOUT VISIBLE ASSETS WEAPON TAG?
.................................................7 THE STANDARD
FIREARM CALIBRATION PROTOCOL ................................10
1.4. THE IMPULSE RESPONSE FUNCTION AND KPI
WORKFLOW................................................11 1.5. THE
20/20 WAVEFORM MANAGER, 20/20 WAVEFORM
ENGINE.......................................13 FIVE IMPULSE
RESPONSE FUNCTION TO TAG KPIS CASE STUDIES .....13 1.6. MEAN
KINETIC SHOTS (MKS) AND BARREL TEMPERATURE
............................................13 1.6.1. KPI
Conclusions..............................................................................................16
1.7. I1 INTERVAL AS A RATE OF FIRE KPI.
......................................................................16
1.7.1. KPI Conclusions
.............................................................................................18
1.8. UNEXPECTED CARBINE FIRE RATE
REDUCTION...............................................................18
1.8.1. KPI
Conclusions..............................................................................................19
1.9. AMMUNITION KPIS AND AMMUNITION
QUALIFICATION....................................................20
1.9.1. KPI
Conclusions..............................................................................................21
1.10. ANOMALOUS WAVEFORMS LEADING TO LOW RATE OF FIRE
..........................................21 1.10.1. KPI
Conclusion..............................................................................................23
1.11. WHAT ELSE HAVE WE LEARNED
..............................................................................23
ADVANCED DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY AND
PROGRAMS..........................24 1.12. FIREARM WEAR PROTOCOL
.......................................................................................24
1.13. FIREARM CATASTROPHIC FAILURE PREVENTION
PROTOCOL.............................................25 1.14.
FIREARM REPAIR PREDICTOR PROTOCOL
......................................................................26
HOW WILL THIS ENHANCE SAFETY AND REDUCE
COSTS...........................26
Confidential
2
Overview Reliable and accurate firearms have been the keystone
of national security for many hundreds of years. New small arms
designs have focused on reduced need for maintenance and enhanced
accuracy and reliability, yet few truly dramatic changes have been
introduced since 1860 when Christopher Spencer filed the US patent
on the first magazine fed, automatic carbine. In contrast, over the
last five decades the automobile has seen dramatic and disruptive
changes that produced lower cost, highly reliable automobiles. This
has been done through the use of microchips both to control and
manage complex mechanical functions, and to diagnose and warn the
driver of problems before they occur. Yet, after over 650 years of
firearms use, common hand carried weapons used for security or
protection do not even have a simple mileage indicator (number
rounds fired), let alone any advanced analysis or control of
complex mechanical events. Examples of failed weapons in the battle
field as recently as a few months ago (see Guns Failed US Troops in
Afghan Battle) have led to tragic losses of life, and military
setbacks. This leads to a question, where is the small arms
micro-chip and how can it prevent failure, or at least anticipate
failure, before it occurs? The US government has made it clear that
a microchip capable of shot counting will be a requirement for the
next major purchase of army carbines (see M4 Revamp) Visible has
designed a wireless weapons micro-chip, based on advanced patented
signal processing methods and a new low power wireless
communication standard (IEEE 1902.1) known as RuBee. RuBee, unlike
RFID, works on steel and is not stopped by water or people. The
chip as a result can be embedded in most small arms, as an
ultrathin wireless tag. The tag has a ten-to-fifteen year battery
life on Lithium coin cell batteries, provides critical performance
data, and advanced diagnostic data, over the wireless data link.
The RuBee weapons tag provides five key functions: 1. Weapons
Visibility: Full weapons visibility within an area or armory
physical inventory, ATF audits, as well as wireless check-in/
check-out of weapons, and wireless weapon exit/ entry detection and
management. The armory visibility systems and the diagnostic data
are integrated into an Oracle based weapons management application
that manages a RuBee network of weapons tags known as armory 20/20
(see armory 20/20). 2. Rounds Counting: Simple Rounds management
functions consisting of several registers that provide tabulated
total rounds fired from a weapon using an accelerometer sensor
embedded in the RuBee tag. 3. Mean Kinetic Shots: An optional
second set of registers that tracks an advanced wear factor known
as Mean Kinetic Shots (MKS) based on calculated barrel temperature,
and first order and second interval statistics on total rounds
fired. 4. Advanced Key Performance Indicators: Real-time advanced
weapon preventive diagnostics using weapon specific Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs) specific and custom to the weapon. KPIs derived
from the calibration described 3
Confidential
below. These KPIs are read via the low power RuBee data link.
Many optional advanced interval statistics, including simple rounds
per minute vs. time, histograms, waveform widths, and waveform
interval statistics, all tied to failure based on parts and
maintenance of the specific weapon model. 5. Impulse Response
Functions: High quality Impulse Response Functions (IRF) waveforms
of acceleration vs. time based on a standardized calibrated
accelerometer. Provided through a special mil specification
connector, digital scope. Used to discover and calibrate the Key
Performance Indicators (KPIs) necessary for real-time weapons
diagnostics in the field. Also used as an objective engineering
tool in firearm design laboratory to collect detailed performance
data. In this white paper we describe the detailed calibration
protocols necessary so that a RuBee weapons tag can provide
accurate real-time Shot Counting, MKS functions, and KPIs as field
diagnostics for in-use active weapons. We also describe how to
establish an advanced diagnostic maintenance diagnostic laboratory
program for any weapons platform. 1.1. The Impulse Response
Function of a Weapon The Impulse Response Function (IRF) is key to
any metric tied to performance of a weapon. The IRF is a waveform
that plots acceleration vs. time when the weapon is fired, and may
be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1 The IRF provides an objective map of all the mechanical
events that occur when a Confidential 4
round is fired. A typical IRF is illustrated in Figure 1, with
key mechanical events identified. It is important to emphasize that
since the mechanics and mechanical events for different model
weapons are different, we would also expect to see changes in IRF
from one weapons platform to another. The IRF is unique for new
weapon designs or models, but it is reassuring that it is typically
the same for any given model or similar design (see Figure 2
below). For example, the IRF waveforms for a piston based SCAR and
Sig AR 556 are quite different from those of a direct impingement
M4. However, The Colt and Bushmaster M4 (same weapon different
manufactures are near identical.
Figure 2
Figure 3 The IRF is conceptually similar to the routine
diagnostic Electrocardiogram Confidential 5
(ECG) used in hospitals, but for a firearm. We must carry out
clinical protocols to understand the IRF for each new weapon to see
what it looks like in both health and sickness. The KPIs are
metrics that are calculated within the RuBee weapons tag, providing
reproducible and reliable diagnostic measurements anywhere using a
simple, low cost field reader or an in armory smart rack.
The Visible Assets RuBee Wireless Weapon Tag Advanced diagnostic
equipment is available to weapons designers: high speed video
cameras, acoustic shot counters to establish firing rate, and
calibrated accelerometers to quantify performance. However, these
instruments are large and complex, and therefore not usable on a
routine basis in the field. The RuBee Weapons Tag is the first
fully integrated signal processor designed for use on any weapon,
including small arms such as carbines and handguns. The RuBee
Weapon Tag provides a range of functions, from simpler things like
number of shots fired, as well as advanced predictive diagnostics
based on shape and timing of complex waveforms found in the IFR.
1.2. Background: Visible Custom Waveform Engine Micro-Chip Visible
Assets, Inc., a US based New Hampshire company, has developed a
very low power wireless communication technology, known as RuBee.
RuBee became an international standard, IEEE 1902.1, in 2009. RuBee
is not RFID, and is unique as a wireless communication system in
that does not use radio signals. RuBee uses magnetic signals, and
as a result is not affected by water or people, and can actually
have enhanced range on steel. Visible has worked closely with many
of the leading small arms companies, leading software companies
(Oracle), and the DOE over the last two years to create a weapons
visibility network based on RuBee. Visible worked closely with Mr.
Brad Stinson at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to establish the
first fully automated weapons visibility systems for armories that
provides real-time inventory, as well as check in/ check out and
User ID (see Oak Ridge White Paper). The weapons visibility network
armory 20/20 is currently in use and being installed at many
additional DOE sites (see armory 20/20 Video). Armory 20/20 places
RuBee weapons tags in each weapon, either on the grip or some other
standard location. These weapons tags each have a low power
microcontroller, with memory, options for sensors, and on-board
signal processing. The key is that weapons tags can be small,
reasonable priced, use very low power, and can be placed at a
standard, reproducible location on any weapon model. They run on a
coin sized battery for up to 15 years and require zero maintenance.
Many armory 20/20 weapons visibility customers requested the
ability to count rounds fired as a mileage and maintenance
indicator as a tag feature. In other words, in addition to reading
the ID, serial number, date of manufacture etc. of the weapon when
it placed on a rack, they wanted armory 20/20 to also read the
current number of cumulative shots fired on each weapon and include
that data in its inventory report. Visible Assets, Inc. addressed
the problem by adding an accelerometer to the Confidential 6
circuit, with a simple threshold level detection on the output.
The company has extensive signal and image processing experience,
with several Ph.D. physicists and engineers, with many papers and
one book on the topic (see J. K. Stevens, Volume Investigation of
Biological Specimens). Visible quickly discovered that the output
of accelerometer attached to any weapon at a standard location
produced waveforms far more complex than anyone had anticipated. It
was possible, for example, to get a waveform where the weapons bolt
hitting the rear stop produced a larger impulse than that of the
actual round leaving the barrel. The data clearly indicate that any
weapon is a very complex mechanical system. Over the course of the
next 18 months, the company developed a new low power, high speed
signal processing chip (waveform micro-engine) specifically
designed for both shot counting and capture of Impulse Response
Functions (the acceleration vs. time waveform) for the M4, M16,
M249, Sig P226, Sig P250, Sig 556, Glock pistols, and a variety of
other weapons. It became clear over the course of developing the
shot counter and as we examined many thousands of waveforms from
variety of handguns and carbines that other valuable diagnostic
information was contained in the IRF waveforms produced by the
accelerometer. Analysis of these IRF waveforms made it clear that
we could also detect defective parts, lubrication status, weapon
wear, ammunition inconsistencies, and other key kinetic parameters
predictive of the weapons health. 1.3. Whats Unique about Visible
Assets Weapon Tag? Several companies make shot counter tags,
however all other shot counters use standard off the shelf packaged
parts, not full custom integrated chips. As a result they do not
include advanced diagnostics, have limited counting accuracy, do
not meet MILSTD-810G (see Figure 4), and all are far too are too
large for handguns. No other shot counters have a secure wireless
link that can also provide full weapons visibility, and no process
reading of the tags registers. No other companies provide fully
integrated weapons visibility products similar to armory 20/20.
Summary is provided in the table below, and an example handgun
RuBee tag is illustrated in Figure 2.
Tag Brand A Brand B Brand C Visible
Shot Count Y Y Y Y
M4 Accuracy 80% 80% TBD 99.3%
Interval Counts N N Y Y
Hand Guns N N N Y
Advanced Diagnostics N N N Y
Waveform Analysis N N N Y
Mil Spec 810G N N N Y
Weapons Visibility N N N Y
Confidential
7
Figure 4
Confidential
8
Figure 5
Figure 6
Confidential
9
The Standard Firearm Calibration Protocol This is the standard
protocol developed in collaboration with Mr. Brad Claridge at the
US Department of Energy, National Training Center in Albuquerque
NM. A more detailed whitepaper and videos are available at
http://www.rubee.com/NTC. Four test weapons are required (in this
case M4s were used). One is new and unused, the other three have
from 2,000 to 5,000 rounds fired and have been used for routine
training. The standard test protocol was followed for each weapon
consisting of 10 single rounds, with delays of several seconds
between rounds, followed by two 28 round magazines in full auto
mode. Waveforms are recorded and stored in the 20/20 Waveform
Manger.
Figure 7
Confidential
10
1.4. The Impulse Response Function and KPI Workflow The Impulse
Response Function and data flow that lead to Key Performance
Indicators is shown below in Figure 7 Figure 8 illustrates use of
small portable readers. A p-Rap may be used to capture IRF
waveforms for any weapon, or a digital scope. A pRap can capture
and hold about 8 hours of IRF data. The same p-Rap or Smart Shelf
may be used to harvest KPIs from a weapon.
Figure 8
Confidential
11
Figure 9
Figure 10
Confidential
12
1.5. The 20/20 Waveform Manager, 20/20 Waveform Engine The
waveforms and data are stored in the 20/20 Waveform Manager
database that includes digitized IRF data, the date and time of
data collection, firearm model, serial number, and all other
details that might be important for IRF analysis. We can go through
hundreds of stored IRFs quickly and select those we want to
analyze. Figure 2 shows above typical weapon Impulse Response
Function collected by a high speed oscilloscope and stored in 20/20
Waveform Manager. The 20/20 Manager can manage hundreds of
thousands of waveforms as well as provides detailed statistics
analysis of these IRF. The 20/20 Waveform Engine makes objective
and quantitative measurements of intervals, pulse heights, and
widths on all IRFs and exports those to a form that can be imported
to any standard statistics or data analysis package (Mat Lab or
DataDesk for example). These tools make it possible to quickly find
differences or relationships between waveforms as well as changes
within a set of waveforms from a single weapon and statistics on
groups of waveforms. The basic ten IRF metrics we use, and quantify
are illustrated below in Figure 9. These 20/20 tools are used to
discover new fundamental Key Performance Indicators for a given
weapon. These KPIs are incorporated into the Weapons Chip so it has
ability to manage and detect health of the weapon in field
operation without complex equipment. Finally, if Mean Kinetic Shots
is to be included as a tag KPI, the temperature time constant for
the weapons barrel model must be measured, and a wear factor based
on actual wear must also be measured (see Section 4.1 below). Five
Impulse Response Function to Tag KPIs Case Studies We provide five
simple example case studies how analysis of IRF has produced new
KPIs or provided important information about performance beyond
simple visibility functions, and shot counting. 1.6. Mean Kinetic
Shots (MKS) and Barrel Temperature Mean Kinetic Shots (MKS) is the
first and most important KPI beyond just rounds fired. MKS is
calculated in the RuBee Tag as an optional KPI. Basic shot counting
(number of rounds fired) is important and useful, however a weapon
that has fired 400 rounds one shot at a time will not show same
wear as 400 shots in full automatic mode. Barrel temperature may be
calculated based on the rate of shots fired, once we know the
temperature time constants for a weapon. Each time a round leaves
the weapon it transfers some of its kinetic energy to the weapon
via friction. This increments the temperature by a fixed, known
amount. The weapon over time dissipates the kinetic energy by
cooling down, and that loss is based on the time constant of the
weapon (see details M4 Thermal Model). A simple thermal model can
be used to predict Confidential 13
barrel temperature and that in turn may be used to calculate a
more precise wear factor we call MKS. Figure 11
Figure 12
Confidential
14
Figure 13
Figure 14 Confidential 15
1.6.1. KPI Conclusions MKS may be used as a second order shot
counter as predictor of barrel wear based on interval statistics
and calculated barrel temperature (see Figures 12 and 13). It must
be calibrated to specific weapons platforms and will be based on
time constants for loss of barrel heat.
1.7. I1 Interval as a Rate of Fire KPI. Detailed waveform
analysis was performed as seen in Figure 7-9 using 20/20 Waveform
Engine signal processing tools on all captured IRF waveforms (266
total). Figure 6 above shows basic protocol, and Figure 14 (below)
shows rate of fire histograms for each of the four weapons tested.
These graphs show a distribution of rates from a high of 800 rounds
per second to a low of 650 rounds per second. The second set of
histograms in Figure 15 shows the distribution of I1 intervals -
the interval between the first pulse and the second pulse. It is
clear that these two sets of data are inversely related.
Figure 15
Confidential
16
Figure 16
Confidential
Figure 17
17
Figure 16 shows the cross-correlation values between I1
(Interval 1) and the rate of fire in auto mode. Each weapon is
color-coded. This graph shows a very high correlation between these
two metrics (over .91 for all weapons). 1.7.1. KPI Conclusions
These results seen in Figures 14,15 and 16 clearly show that we can
measure interval I1 in a weapon that has been shot in single shot
mode and predict the fully automatic mode rate of fire. Rate of
fire is probably one the best indicators of general health of a
weapon, and is one of the leading QC tests used to ensure a weapon
functions correctly when manufactured. This means we can simply
collect the I1 interval statistics in the Weapon Chip as a
histogram similar to that seen in Figure 15, store it in memory for
the last 30 rounds fired, and provide diagnostic information by
simply reporting the value of that interval, even if the weapon is
only shot a few times in single shot mode. That means that when the
weapon is placed back on a rack after use we can predict its rate
of fire no mater how the weapon has been used. If that predicted
number is below 650 rounds per minute, the weapon likely needs to
be cleaned or serviced. 1.8. Unexpected Carbine Fire Rate Reduction
This is a simple example how changes to a weapon can lead to
unexpected performance changes. A M4 variant used by NATO (C7) was
tested and calibrated using the RuBee Weapons Chip.
Confidential
Figure 18
18
A M203 grenade launcher was added to the weapon and calibration
was repeated. It became clear that the addition of the grenade
launcher added enough weight that the time required for the bolt
carrier to hit the rear stop was increased by about 30% and the
next round chambered event was also delayed by 30%. The net effect
is that the firing rate of this weapon went from 750 rounds per
second to 680 rounds per second as a result of the grenade launcher
addition. 1.8.1. KPI Conclusions These data illustrate that changes
in timing may occur when accessories are added to a weapon. The
addition of mass to an existing weapon may reduce the rate-of fire
and make the weapon appear to be malfunctioning. In fact, the
weapon performance may be compromised by this additional mass, but
it does not necessarily mean the weapon requires any maintenance.
However, based on data below it may also be possible to modify the
spring tension in the rear bolt stop to overcome the reduced firing
rate and increased mass.
Confidential
19
1.9. Ammunition KPIs and Ammunition Qualification The I1
interval (time for Slide or Bolt to hit rear stop) is also a good
indicator of the ammunition quality and caliber used in the shot.
The timing and strength of the pulse seem to be highly correlated
to selection and round type. In this case, the weapon is
essentially being used as an analytic tool to qualify ammunition,
but it also demonstrates that the IRF can be used as a KPI for
ammunition used in a weapon. Figure 18 is from the 20/20 Waveform
Engine and shows the IRF graphs from a Sig Sauer P226, after some
processing with a correlation of the average waveform (IFR filter).
It shows a data set of 10 empty chambers, 10 empty cartridges, 10 @
100 grains and 10 shots of 124 grain high performance (4 sets of 10
traces from front to back). A 1 msec window was used top graph is
3D and lower graph is top graph in to top 2D view.
Figure 19
Confidential
20
1.9.1. KPI Conclusions Ammunition type and characteristics may
be detectable via the IRF. It is possible to use the IRF for
ammunition tests and acceptance QC metrics. In effect the weapon
becomes a test bed however, variability and other important
munitions characteristics may be reliably detected and reported.
1.10. Anomalous Waveforms Leading to Low Rate of Fire
Figure 19 below illustrates Rate of Fire from two different Sig
Sauer AR556s. The first weapon (A) has a normal rate of fire (over
700) and consistent over 30 round magazine. The second weapon (B)
has an inconsistent rate of fire and is below 600 rounds per
second.
Figure 20
Confidential
21
Figure 21 Figure 20 shows normal IRF from weapon A, and compares
the three rounds that were selected in Figure 19 for weapon B. The
top weapon B IRF is round 9 in the burst. It is relatively normal,
although there is no second pulse that would be present if the bolt
carrier firmly impacted the rear stop. The bolt carrier rear stop
pulse would be expected to be about 20-25 milliseconds after the
shot pulse. A small second pulse is present after the second shot
pulse in the trace of round 23. The middle IRF for weapon B is
round 17. It has the slowest reload of all the rounds in this
burst. Both it and round 23, which is the bottom trace, have an
unidentified event pulse (labeled UID) that occurs about two thirds
of the way to the following shot pulse. At this point the bolt
carrier has passed it rear most position, reversed its direction
and the bolt has not yet closed before firing the next round. The
unidentified event pulse is most likely the bolt impacting a new
round from the magazine and accelerating it into the chamber. It is
possible that this collision, which is not normally significant
enough to show up in a shot trace, is actually the cause of the low
rate of fire for that round. Instantaneous rate of fire plots and
shot acceleration traces from Visible Weapon Tags, as well as plots
and traces from the Visible Shot Library web site, are useful
diagnostics in the determining the health and nominal operation of
weapons. These data show several events during bursts fired from a
Sig 556 carbine that may well be incipient jamming events. The
location of the UID events in round 17 and 23 are very similar, yet
cycle times for both rounds were significantly slower (10% and 20%
respectively) than a nominal round in the same burst, suggesting
that the slow down occurred during the UID Confidential 22
event. It appears that the UID events involve extraction of
kinetic energy from the bolt and bolt carrier, thus causing the
slower cycle, and possibly indicating a less positive chambering of
the subsequent round.
1.10.1. KPI Conclusion The weapons tag should optionally
maintain registers for the last 30-40 I1 intervals as well as last
30-40 rate-of-fire intervals. Histograms similar to those seen in
Figures 14 and 15 may be calculated from this data, however the
same data makes it possible to provide time series graphs similar
to those at the top of Figure 19. These make it possible to also
calculate the variability of that rate-of-fire, and that may be may
be an important KPI and predictor of jamming. 1.11. What Else Have
We Learned
In addition to the I1 interval histogram and ammunition result
above we have noticed or seen many other relationships in the data
collected to date. For example we have seen changes in width of the
first impulse in the new M4 in very short period of time (200
rounds), and we have noticed similar changes in Sig Sauer 556.
There appear to be many interesting relationships between I1 and
I2, and the ratio of I1 and I2 may change with use. The size or
height of the pulse 2 seems to be related to a weapon jamming in
certain situations.
Confidential
23
Advanced Diagnostic Laboratory and Programs These results make
it clear that after the initial firearm calibration many new KPIs
will continue to appear from IRF data. It is also clear that
programs should be established within a formal diagnostic weapons
healthcare laboratory that examine long term wear as well as
carry-out programs that detect specific defect signatures for a
part or common problem found in a specific model weapon. A variety
of test protocols are possible, but we focus on three initial test
protocols that will create a full waveform library of IRF waveforms
for any the test weapon and will guarantee the in-use weapons will
be the best maintained weapons in the world. The first protocol
examines routine long-term weapons wear during normal use and
document changes seen in both waveforms and performance over a
period of six months. Each test weapon is equipped with a RuBee tag
with waveform connector option. Each weapon will be stored and
maintained in RuBee Smart Racks at test site location. Students,
trained users and armorers will use these weapons for routine
training. The shot counting data will be captured on a regular
basis (several times a day) and data logged, as well as visibility
data documenting who used a weapon, time used, and rounds fired.
Waveform data will be collected periodically in these weapons over
the course of six months, and analyzed as described above. The
second protocol provides maximum stress firing in auto mode to
catastrophic failure. The weapon maybe programmed to create a
warning in advance of that failure. The third protocol is based on
current records showing what typically has to be routinely repaired
and replaced the weapon. The typical list for a carbine includes
about 20 parts that either break or wear out and must be replaced
on a regular basis. We propose to take a set of new test weapons,
characterize individual waveforms, and systematically replace
working parts with broken parts. This provides a signature, or
change in the Waveform, that might allow advanced notice of a
problem. 1.12. Firearm Wear Protocol
We equip one site (typically a training site) with a RuBee
enabled Smart Rack. The rack holds 24 weapons and data may be
harvested on a daily basis. We do three initial standard tests on
each weapon: 1. Standard Protocol outlined in Figure 6 with all IRF
waveform data stored. 2. Weapon is placed in fixed stand (range
space will be needed with electricity) and use 6 test rounds to a
100 yard target to show cluster repeatability and accuracy. Factory
weapons specification on most carbines is normally cluster within
1.5 inch. 3. Micrometer barrel analysis and confirmation that all
normal replaceable parts are in proper working order. Confidential
24
All but four control weapons (total 20) on each rack will be
placed in normal training use, with selected weapons used by staff
to ensure high round counts. The goal will be to have an average
round count of 3,000 over that six month period, with a minimum of
4 weapons at over 6,000 rounds. All visibility data and shout
counting data will be tabulated using standard armory 20/20
Waveform software systems. Twenty weapons placed in normal use and
once a month all 24 weapons will repeat tests outlined in 1-3
above. In addition, we will not clean four weapons until they reach
a failure point, and clean/inspect another four after each monthly
test. By this process, we will collect data on four weapons that
are essentially unused over six months, four that are used until
failure occurs, four that are well maintained, 12 that are typical
in use weapons, with the ability to confirm at the Visible test
site. This study will show what natural wear and required parts
replacement does to a weapon over time and how that is reflected in
the IRF waveform. Additional standard metrics similar to the I1
interval may be found with this data. As these metrics are
discovered, they can be added to the fixed functions in the Weapon
Chip as standard output for early diagnostic and detection of any
problem without the requirement to do full IRF waveform analysis.
1.13. Firearm Catastrophic Failure Prevention Protocol
As a weapon is stressed because of rapid fire, combat any weapon
can jam, mechanically fail, and in some cases actually melt (see M4
Revamp, Guns Failed US Troops in Afghan Battle). At the same time
any weapon will always be put to its limits in the field, it is
simply important to provide an indicator when those limits have
been reached before damage can not be reversed. One of the most
critical tests is to stress the weapon into catastrophic short-term
failure. This protocol is simple: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Four total
weapons used for test. 15 x 30 round magazines (450 rounds). Full
auto mode for all 450 rounds in fewer than 3 minutes. Impulse
Response Function captured for all 450 rounds. Temperature of
Barrel monitored as per Section 1.6. Interval Statistics collected
and compared to 5 as per Section 1.6.
The single most important outcome will be ability to predict
with IFR and a KPI imminent non-reversible, catastrophic failure
before it occurs. This can be converted to real time warning to the
user via the RuBee link and a visual indicator or audio indicator
in users headset.
Confidential
25
1.14.
Firearm Repair Predictor Protocol
The second focused project will take four new weapons and
introduce malfunctions to them, based on known standard problems.
For example, the standard list of carbine malfunctions is listed
below: 1. Dirty or foreign matter 2. Broken or missing gas rings 3.
Weak or broken hammer spring 4. Weak or broken Extractor spring 5.
Weak or broken piston spring 6. Defective piston 7. Loose carrier
key 8. Weak or broken trigger spring 9. Broken bolt catch 10. Weak
or broken ejector spring 11. Weak or dirty action spring 12. Worn
firing pin Again the standard waveform test protocol described in
Section 1.3 will be used as an initial standard test. We will
systematically re-create each of these 12 common problems or other
items that are typical maintenance items on each of the four test
weapons and repeat the standard protocol. The key is to see if we
can find any consistent changes in the IRF waveform that might
predict similar problems in field-based weapons. Again the plan is
to incorporate these waveform changes that are discovered into the
firmware contained in the Weapons Chip so that diagnostic can be
made in real-time and harvested by any RuBee system without the
need for IRF waveform collection.
How Will This Enhance Safety and Reduce Costs We think this
healthcare program can be justified both as a cost reduction basis
as well as provide enhanced safety throughout the organization. The
weapon waveform library and the program may also contribute to
objective, rapid selection of best new weapons modifications as
well as individual weapon QC and selection upon receipt of new
weapons from manufacturing. Finally, the IRF waveform may also be a
powerful method for objective selection and testing and selection
of ammunition suppliers and all accessories. Objective criteria may
now be developed for abnormal variability as well as optimal
performance based on IRF criteria within a specific model for
specified ammunition. The safety issue is simple and clear. With
many weapons now owned and managed by most organizations, and many
different users, it is virtually impossible to guarantee that each
user has a weapon that is in action ready service and
maintained.
Confidential
26
Some current maintenance programs typically require that a
weapon is rebuilt twice a year. It should be clear that rebuilding
a weapon as a preventive maintenance measure has many hidden costs
beyond the labor. For example, it may often be the case that a
problem exists in any weapon before the six month inspection and
rebuild takes place.
Example economic savings: Only stocking necessary replacement
parts that would be needed for maintenance, thus reducing the stock
of unneeded parts. Reducing lost or wasted training time due to
weapon malfunctions. Reducing additional wear by possibly excluding
some scheduled maintenance or limiting it to annual inspections.
Reduced possibility of accidents related to cleaning or training.
Improved quality control of ammunition and ammunition
selection.
Confidential
27