. A A.....

I 11111111I
1111 I IIIIr/lrll
TECHNICAL.
INFORMATION
CENTER

./ ,5 0644 00004879 7

AGT 1500 POWERPACK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (M41 TMEPS)

CONTRACT NUMBER DAAE07-87-C-R006

MARCH. 1991

VOLUME I OF II

J. Edwards and R. Brayer

General Dynamics Land Systems Div.
38500 Mound Road
Sterling Heights, MI 48310

By GDLS DOCUMENT O0. DB-87-04057-00]A

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE:

TNMTTRD

U.S. ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE COMMAND

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER
Warren, Michigan 48397-5000

ao;.o1.

L 12)_
 NOTICES

This report is not to be construed as an official Department of the Army

Position.

Mention of any trade names or manufacturers in this report shall not be

construed as an official endorsement or approval of such products of
companies by the US Government.

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not retura it to the

originator.
 Unclassified
SECURITY CLASISIFICATION -OF
THIS PAGE RE O TDOCUMENTATION
D C M N A I N PAGE
REPORT P G
ia. REPO SECURITY CLAFCATOM lb RESTRMCTVE MARKINGS

Unclassified None
2,. SECURITY CLA.CTION AUTHORIT R
& oISTRIBUTrN/.LANuTY O REPOF
N/A APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE:
21. DECLASSIFICATIONIDOWNGRAING SCHEDULE DISTRIBUTION IS UNLIMITED.

4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

DB-87-04057-001A DB-87-04057-001 leOe 7vI?. /35?v

GO.
NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Sb OFFICE SYMBOL 7X. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION
General Dynamics (NApWomb,) U. S. Army
Land Systems Division Tank Automotive Command
S. ADDRESS (C11% Se and ZiP Code) 7b. ADDRESS (ct. and ZIP Code)
mSI
38500 Mound Road U. S. Army
Sterling Hts, MI 48310 Tank Automotive Command
Warren, Michigan 48397-5000
Si. NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING St OFFICE SYMBOL & PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT-IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
ORGANIZATION (IfAppENCae) DAAE0 7-8 7-C-R00 6

Or- ADDRESS (City, State and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS
PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT
ELEMENT NO. NO. NO. ACCESSION NO.

11. TITLE (Inchufd S1curtty Clme1dckn)

UGT
-P 1M.Powezpac.
f.;P nT =an. TC l ment Project
rove RKeport .. (Ml TMEPS)
12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)
Edwards Jonathan Robert
13a. TYPE OF REPORT 13b. TIME COVERED 14. DATE OF REPORT Oer.Month, Day) IS, AGCOUNT
Final IRos5/87 To6 /90 119 9 0, 10, 25 178
1W.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION

17. COSATI CODES IL SUBJECT TERMS (Cowinue on ,wnmw ifnemmm y ddentlfy by block numer)
FIELD GROUP SUBsGROUP TMPES, Transverse Mounted Engine Propulsi n
System, Automotive Test Rig, Self Cleanin
Air Filter, Vehicle Accessory Gearbox
1ItABSTRACT (Cmndnue an imwue Nf, Vy aid kwewo' y&/bj& nwnftq
The Transverse Mounted Engine Propulsion System Scientific and
Technical Report presents the design, trade-of fs, performance
and cost data developedunder contract DAAE-07-87-C-R006. This
report contains design summaries for all automotive hardware
designed and integrated into the automotive test rig. Follow-on
goals are also presented for future design activities.

20. OISTRIBUTIONIAWJILABILTY OF ABSTRACT 21.ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFIATION

UCL.AssIFIEDIUNUMITED [ SAME AS RPT. C3 OTIC USERS Unclassified

22s. NAME OF RESPONSIBILE INDIVIDUAL 22b, TELEPHONE NUMBER 22C. OFFICE SYMBOL
M. M. eferon574-7513
JeffersonAm Co) AMSTA-RGR
DO FORM 1473, 84 MAR 83 APR EDITION MAY BE USED UNTIL EXHAUSTED
ALL OTHER EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. SECURITY CIBIFcaTION OF THIS PAGE
Unclassified

109/2417
 SUMMARY

The Transverse Mounted Engine Propulsion System (TMEPS) is a low

cost, low risk evolutionary step for powerpack design. TMEPS
offers an integrated, compact automotive system including:

"o Compact space efficient powerpack.

"o Improved fuel efficient transversely mounted AGT-1500

engine.

" XT1100-3 seven speed transmission with transverse

gearbox.

" A new compact mounted selfcleaning air filtration

system.

" Integrated demand responsive powerpack cooling system

with a dynamic increase in heat rejection.

"o Integrated underarmor auxiliary power unit for reduced

fuel consumption, longer engine life, and independent
Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) supply.

TMEPS supports improvement in lethality and survivability by

providing the following benefits:

"o As a result of more efficient packaging, the TMEPS

Automotive Test Rig (ATR) powerpack opens up 47 cubic
feet of usable space in the powerpack compartment, per
contractual requirements. The follow-on configuration
can provide up to 76 cubic feet of usable space.

"o Improvement in vehicle performance and agility.

"o Improvements in fuel economy over MIAI.

"o Top speed is improved over MIA1.

"o Improved diagnostic/prognostics are incorporated

through digital engine and controls.

" Powerpack commonality is maintained with 90 percent of

the engine and 46 percent of the transmission with
respect to MIAl hardware. Fifty-six percent commonality
is achievable for the transmission with follow-on
configuration.

The TMEPS ATR successfully rolled-out on May 9, 1990. Following

break-in testing at the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant (DATP), the

2
vehicle was sent to Milford Proving Grounds (MPG). The ATR was
subjected to six days of intensive vehicle testing on primary
and hilly cross-country roads. The vehicle was then returned to
General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) for instrumentation removal
and vehicle storage.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Title Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION 10

1.1 Background 10

2.0 OBJECTIVES 14

3.0 CONCLUSIONS 15

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 17.

5.0 DISCUSSION 18

5.1 Concept Description 18

5.1.1 Engine and Air Induction 18

5.1.2 Transmission and Final Drive 22
5.1.3 Auxiliary Power Unit and Accessory Drive 22
5.1.4 Cooling and Exhaust System 25
5.1.5 Hydraulic System 25
5.1.6 Fuel System 25
5.1.7 Electrical System 25
5.1.8 Driver's Control System 25
5.1.9 Vehicle Structure 31
5.1.10 Life Cycle Cost 31

5.2 Design 31

5.2.1 Engine and Air Induction 31

5.2.2 Transmission and Final Drive 55
5.2.3 Auxiliary Power Unit and Accessory Drive 71
5.2.4 Cooling and Exhaust System 86
5.2.5 Hydraulic System 101
5.2.6 Fuel System 113
5.2.7 Electrical System 118
5.2.8 Driver's Control System 132
5.2.9 Structures 136

5.3 Vehicle Performance 143

5.3.1 Performance Goals 143

5.3.2 Automotive Performance 143

5.4 Life Cycle Cost 154

4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)

Section Title Page

5.4.1 Introduction 154

5.4.2 LCC Methodology 154
5.4.3 LCC Assumptions 161
5.4.4 LCC Results 162
5.4.5 LCC Summary 166

DISTRIBUTION LIST DIST. 1

APPENDIX I TME Interchangeability Demonstration Test

Report No. LYC 90-18

APPENDIX II AGT 1500A TACOM TME Fuel Economy Demonstration

Test Engine T202N
Report No. LYC 88-39

APPENDIX III Final Report for the Development of a Rotating

Element Self-Cleaning Air Filter (RESCAF)

5
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Title Page

1-1. M1 Current and TMEPS Propulsion Systems 11

Installation

5-1. TMEPS Engine Compartment 19

5-2. Engine (AGT 1500) and Air Induction 20

Installation

5-3. Engine Hardware Improvement 21

5-4. Transmission (XT1100) Installation 23

5-5. Auxiliary Power Unit and Accessory Drive 24

Installation

5-6. Cooling and Exhaust System Installation 26

5-7. Hydraulic System Installation 27

5-8. Fuel System Installation 28

5-9. Electrical System Installation 29

5-10. APU/SCAF Control Panel 30

5-11. MI Current and TMEPS Propulsion System 34

Installation

5-12. Self-Cleaning Air Filter (SCAF) System 35

5-13. Engine Hardware Improvements 36

5-14. Casting Processes and 42

Benefits of Single Crystal Blade

5-15. Comparison of Present Production Bearing 44

and Improved RAM-D Conrad Bearing
Configurations

5-16. Five Percent (5%) and Production HP 45

Nozzle

5-17. Sungear 47

5-18. RAM-D Position 5 Seal Design 48

6
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.)

Figure Title Page

5-19. RAM-D Position 10 Seal Design 49

5-20. TMEPS XT1100 Transmission 56

5-21. XT1100 Transmission Envelope 60

5-22. Range Number Optimization 62

5-23. XT1100 Final Drive Schematic 63

5-24. Final Drive Sprocket Design 70

5-25. Auxiliary Power Unit 72

5-26. Hydrostatic Drive System 77

5-27. Direct Drive System 78

5-28. Multiple Speed Transmission Drive System 79

5-29. Main Engine Bleed Air and Direct Drive 81

Gearbox System

5-30. Multiple Power Supply System 82

5-31. Transmission Accessory Drive System 83

5-32. Direct Drive and Hydrostatic Drive System 84

5-33. Cooling and Exhaust System 87

5-34. S.ingle Fan Performance - Static Pressure 90

Versus Flow Rate

5-35. Single Fan Cooler - Heat Rejection Versus 91

Airflow

5-36. Single Fan Cooler - Air Pressure Loss 92

Versus Airflow

5-37. Single Fan Cooler - Oil Pressure Versus 93

Oil Flow

5-38. Cooling System Flowpath 95

7
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.)

Figure Title Page

5-39. Seal/Retainer Configuration 99

5-40. TMEPS Hydraulic System Block Diagram 102

5-41. Hull/Turret Drive System 103

5-42. Accessory Cooler and Fan Drive System 105

Flow Block Diagram

5-43. TMEPS Fuel System 114

5-44. Vehicle Electrical Power Block Diagram 126

5-45. APU/SCAF Control/Display Panel 127

5-46. System Block Diagram 128

5-47. Auxiliary Networks Box 131

5-48. TMEPS Brake Control System 134

5-49. Structural Design Modifications 137

5-50. TMEPS Vehicle Rear View Configuration 139

5-51. Test Cell Configuration 145

5-52. Test Cell Installation 146

5-53. Clean Barrier Filter Media 148

5-54. Contaminated Barrier Filter Media 149

5-55. Contaminated Barrier Filter Media 150

5-56. Life Cycle Cost Comparative Analysis, 155

MIAl 1991, MIAI 1986 and TMEPS

5-57. Hardware Work Breakdown Structure 156

5-58. Fleet Size and Commonality Perspective, 159

Adding TMEPS Configuration to Fleet

5-59. Life Cycle Cost Methodology 160

8
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page

1-2 Engine Improvements 13

5-1 Transmission Features Comparison 64

5-2 Transmission Range Comparison 65

5-3 Air Side Fin Comparison 96

5-4 Grill and Cooling Fan Areas 97

5-5 Induction-Exhaust Cooling, TMEPS/MIAI 98

5-6 TMEPS Electrical Load Analysis 121

5-7 Engine Performance (Comparison) 144

5-8 Engine Power in Vehicle (Installed) 147

5-9 Hardware Commonality 158

5-10 TMEPS Average Unit Production Cost 163

Estimate Summary by WBS

5-11 Total Life Cycle Cost Results, MIAI 164

1991, MIA1 1986 and TMEPS

5-12 Comparison of Total Life Cycle Costs, 165

Cost Drivers/Cost Savers

9
1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Science and Technology report on the TMEPS program was

prepared by GDLS for the AGT1500 Powerpack Improvement Project
in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Army Tank
Automotive Command (TACOM) under contract DAAE07-87-C-RO06.

This report presents the conclusions of the program for the

period from October 1986 through June 1990. It covers the
concepts, program objectives, design, goals, technical approach,
tradeoffs, design analysis, seleted design, vehicle performance
analysis and the life cycle cost plan.

1.1 Backoround

A transverse powertrain system study was initiated in July 1985

to enhance the effectiveness of the M1 tank. An unsolicited
proposal was submitted in August 1986 and a contract was awarded
to GDLS in October 1986. Modification of the ATR vehicle was
initiated in November 1986. A design concept, using the MIA1
XT1100-3B four speed hydrokinetic transmission, modified for
transverse input, was successfully presented on 12 April 1987 in
a preliminary design review (PDR). The contract was
subsequently modified in July 1987 to incorporate a seven speed
transmission in place of the four speed transmission. The PDR
was repeated on 15 December 1987 to include the new XT1100 seven
speed transmission. The Government accepted the PDR and agreed
to proceed with the critical design phase.

The current propulsion system on the M1 series tank is

constructed in a "T" configuration, that is, the engine
centerline is perpendicular to the transmission centerline.
This configuration was analyzed for improvements in space claim,
weight avoidance, efficiency (performance and fuel consumption)
and logistics support impacts, resulting in the development of
the Transverse Mounted Engine Propulsion System. TMEPS presents
an attractive packaging approach and also provides a propulsion
system with a significant improvement in performance and growth
potential.

A comparison of the present and proposed propulsion system

installation is illustrated in Figure 1-1. The compact TMEPS
packaging provides an increase in available underarmor space.
The improved hardware will provide increased powertrain
efficiency, fuel economy, weight reduction potential and
auxiliary power utilization.

10
 4001

00

Figure 1-1 M1 Current and TMEPS Propulsion Systems

Installation

11
The vehicles discussed in this report are defined as follows:

"o Ml~l-86 - 1986 Production vehicle at 63 tons gross

vehicle weight (GYW)

"o Ml~l-91 - TACOM directed 1991 configuration of 1966

production vehicle at 65 tons GYW, which will include 14
RiAM-D recommended engine improvements, external
auxiliary power unit (APU) and RAM-D self cleaning air
filter (SCAF) system.

"o TMEPS - The transverse mounted engine propulsion system

evolved in 1966 production vehicle at 65 tons GVW which
will incorporate nine of the 14 RAM-D engine recommended
improvements, and an underarmor. full service APU.

The recommended engine improvements are catagorized according to

their attributes, as seen in Table 1-2.

The program was performed in three phases: preliminary design

concept, detailed design, and fabrication/test. These phases
were separated by formal program decision gates e.g. Preliminary
Design Review/Critical Design Review (PDR/CDR) that culminated
in the fabrication, assembly, and test of the TMEPS ATR.

12
Table 1-2. Engine Improvements

Engine Improvements TMEPS MIAl-91 Attributes

RAM-D
1. Polygon drive system X X R,C
2. Deep Groove #11 and #13 Conrad bearing X X R,C
races
3. Increased (5%) cooling flow HP turbine X X R,C
nozzle
4. Increased (root) durability HP turbine NO X R,C
blades
5. Alternate (VASCO) Sungear material X X R,C
6. Increased (25%) lubricant flow reduction X X R,C
gearbox
7. Non-lube flex coupling powershaft NO X R,C
8. Improved durability combustor X X R,C
9. Improved durability recuperator core X X R,C
10. Metalic piston ring seal #3 bearing NO X R,C
11. Improved durability #5 and #10 oil seals X X R,C
12. Upgraded fuel pump drive coupling NO X R,C
13. Upgraded fuel handling unit Seals X R,C
Only
14. Wireless high pressure rotor assembly NO X R,C

PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMY

1. Improved low pressure compressor X NO F,P
2. Improved high pressure compressor X NO F,P
3. Combustor (attitude 90 degree change) X NO T
4. High pressure turbine nozzle X NO F,P
5. Improved power turbine X NO F,P
6. Low pressure turbine nozzle X NO F,P
7. Revised control schedules X NO F
8. Increased pre-load and improved X NO F,P
material recuperator core
9. Reduced volume accessory gearbox X NO
10. Powerpack/vehicle interfaces X NO T
11. Digital Electronic Control Unit X NO F
12. Self Cleaning Air Filter System X NO P,R,C

Legend - Symbol Definition

X in vehicle
T essential for transverse mounting
F impacts fuel efficiency
P impacts vehicle dynamic performance
R impacts RAM-D
C impacts LCC

13
2.0 OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the program were:

" Experimentally develop, demonstrate and evaluate, in a

vehicle, fuel efficiency improvements for the MIA1
Abrams tank transmission and engine.

"o Experimentally incorporate and evaluate, in a vehicle,

other selected powerpack components and system
improvements which may contribute toward reduction of
Life Cycle Costs.

"o Increase powerpack power density.

14
3.0 CONCLUSIONS

3.1 TMEPS Proaram

The TMEPS Program demonstrated the viability of transversely

mounting the AGT-1500 turbine engine in an Abrams MiAl vehicle.
Through transverse mounting and redesign of automotive systems,
engine compartment space was made available for a variety future
weapon system upgrades. The automotive test rig was designed and
fabricated to evaluate several automotive technology advancements
for future application on heavy military vehicles. Results of
these technology areas are provided in the following paragraphs.

3.2 Powerpack Integration

The AGT-1500 turbine engine was successfully mounted transversely

to an Allison seven speed transmission within an Abrams engine
compartment'. All necessary support hardware including an
underarmor auxiliary power unit were integrated within the
chassis without exceeding basic width and height requirements.

3.3 Poweroack Operation

The TMEPS powerpack performed well during its limited test

program. Orivability, braking, and control were described as
good. Most automotive performance tests were met including
creep, turn radius, top speed, and fuel economy. Acceleration
and speed on slope exhibited strong performance, but somewhat
below epectations. It is believed that these latter
characteristics could have been optimized with further testing.

3.4 Self-Cleanina Air Filter

The self-cleaning air filter provided filtered air to the engine,

auxiliary power unit and nuclear biological chemical filter
system compressor throughout testing. Follow-on design work may
reduce the packaging volume of this item.

3.5 Coolina System

The ring cooler design selected performed as designed without

failure throughout automotive test rig operation. Adequate
cooling was maintained for engine oil, transmission oil and
santotrac 50 lubricant. Modulation of the engine and
transmission cooling fans was successful in reducing fuel
consumption during off peak cooling load heat rejection.

15
3.6 Auxiliary Power Unit

The John Deere rotary diesel auxiliary power unit was able to
provide adequate power to operate the vehicle's nuclear
biological chemical system compressor, self-cleaning air filter
scavenge fan, main hydraulic pump and provide electrical power to
charge the batteries.

3.7 Continuously Variable Transmission

A near constant gearbox speed was maintained by the CVT for all
engine operating ranges from idle to maximum speed. This allowed
maximum efficiency operation of all accessories regardless of
engine speed. This technology will be useful for applications
where constant speed drives are necessary.

16
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The design activity of the TMEPS program culminated in a one week

evalUation of the ATR. This was due to funding and schedule
constraints. Testing was concentrated on vehicle mobility
performance. There was only limited testing of the CVT, APU and
SCAF systems. General Dynamics Land Systems recommends a six
month follow-on program be funded to provide additional testing
of the TMEPS ATR. Testing of the ATR would be performed at
General Dynamics Land Systems and at an appropriate heavy tracked
vehicle proving grounds. Performance deficiencies will be
evaluated and software/hardware corrections will be made during
this testing. During this time, detailed evaluations of the CVT,
APU and SCAF system will also be performed.

17
5.0 DISCUSSION

5.1 Conceot Descriotion

The TMEPS propulsion system will be installed into the MIAl

vehicle with the capability of vertical installation and removal
(Figure 5-1). The MIAl vehicle was ballasted to a 63 ton GVW.
The propulsion system and test rig vehicle incorporated the
following modified hardware:

"o Engine and Air Induction

"o Transmission and Final Drives

"o Auxiliary Power Unit and Accessory Drives

"o Cooling and Exhaust System

"o Fuel System

"o Electrical System

"o Hydraulic System

"o Driver's Control System

"o Vehicle Structure

5.1.1 Engine and Air Induction. Figure 5-2 presents the engine
and air induction system locations. The prime mover of the
TMEPS vehicle is a modified AGT 1500 turbine engine.
Approximately 90 percent of all the engine parts are common with
the AGT 1500 MIA1 engine. The intent of these changes is to
improve power train efficiency, fuel economy, and RAM-D. The
major engine hardware modifications are shown in Figure 5-3.

"o Improved High Pressure (HP) Turbine

- Reduced Blade Cooling
- Single Crystal Material
- Trenched Cylinder
- Increased (Geometric Flow Area) Nozzle

"o Reduced Volume Accessory Gearbox

- Hydraulic Pump and Pad Removed

"o Digital Electronic Control Unit

- Schedule changes to improve fuel economy and
durability

"o Low Pressure Nozzle

- Geometric flow area reduced for cycle rematch

18
Figure 5-1 TN1EPS Engine Compartment

19
 ENGINE

00

00

00/

SCAF

SCAF 3 I 1CF
INTAKE

Figure 5-2 Engine (AGT 1500) and Air

Induction Installation

20
IPOWE ~RjvlN-
VTANET
. ANDZ~
-TURIN RAV-
13cIE S
aeC~S 3AD
tjiCvjFAS D S 'Tip

4 1 CONWTROL :UNC-

AL VALVEG

BLE

5-3 ~~q~.re
$ar ~ ~Ar

di.6
 "o Fuel Efficient Power Turbine
- Rotor and nozzle aerodynamic changes to improve part
power fuel efficiency
- Tighter clearances on the variable geometry PT vanes

"o Recuperator
- Higher preload
- Hastelloy-S material
- All laser welded construction

Air induction to the engine is through the left rear sponson.

The air will flow through the engine integrated Self Cleaning
Air Filter (SCAF) which includes the precleaners and a rotary
barrier filter. A pressurized cleaning nozzle forces the
barrier filter contaminants into the vacuum eje ctor nozzle with
high pressure air. A scavenge blower purges the ejector nozzle
and exhausts the debris to the vehicle rear. The system
provides clean filtered air to the main engine, APU, and NBC
system.

5.1.2 Transmission and Final Drive. The TMEPS XT1100

hydrokinetic transmission is a modified XIIOO-3B currently used
in the MIAI vehicle (Figure 5-4). The XT1100 provides superior
range coverage through the use of seven forward and three
reverse speeds. The transmission retains the X1100 hydrostatic
steer unit, parking and service brake system, torque converter,
and utilizes a new digital ECU to control range control
functions and to communicate with the engine digital ECU. The
transmission also incorporates four Power Take Off (PTO) pads to
power the accessory drive system, the powerpack cooling system,
including a spare alternator drive.

The TMEPS final drives use the same MIA1 mounting but will not
be interchangeable with the MIAI units. The gear ratio is
changed from 4.667 (MIAI) to 5.067:1 (TMEPS).

5.1.3 Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) and Accessory Drive. An

underarmor APU is used to provide reduced fuel consumption,
alternate electrical and NBC power, and reduce main engine run
time, (Figure 5.5). Clean air is ducted to the APU from the
SCAF system. The APU system consists of a John Deere rotary
engine with integrated starter, fuel conditioning system,
cooling system, and back air filtration, and is coupled to the
vehicle accessory gearbox (VAG) to power the alternator, NBC
compressor, SCAF compressor, scavenge blower and hydraulic pump.
The APU exhaust is ducted to the rear of the vehicle.

The accessory drive system interfaces with both the constant

speed APU and the variable speed automotive transmission PTO.
Utilizing an integral continuously variable transmission (CVT),
the VAG supplies a constant speed drive for the following
accessories:
22
 TRANSMISSION

:------------ --------- -----

-------------
0
------------------

IT

1 00

000

T-
5-

Ah

0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0

Figure 5-4 Transmission (XT1100) Installation

23
 VEHICLE ___

ACCESSORY GEARBOX

------................... APU EXHAUST

AUXILIARY 0- --
POWER
UNIT

CONTINUOUSLY
VA RIA BLE
TRANSMISSION----- - -

Figure 5-5 Auxiliary Power Unit and

Accessory Drive Installationl

24'
 "o During Main Engine Operation
- NBC Compressor
- Alternator
- SCAF Compressor
- Scavenge Blower
- Main Hydraulic Pump

"o During APU Operation

- NBC Compressor
- Alternator

5.1.4 Cooling and Exhaust System. A mechanical cooling fan

drive system is integrated to the powerpack (Figure 5-6). There
are two integrated ring coolers; each contain a fan and a
diffuser within the cooler space claim. The fans are
individually clutched for independent operation and mounted to
the transmission power takeoffs. The coolers are shrouded to
control air circulation in the engine compartment.

The exhaust of the APU, main engine and coolers will exit from
the vehicle rear similar to M1A1.

5.1.5 Hydraulic System. The current MlAi hydraulic pump is

retained for the hull/turret drivesystems, (Figure 5-7). This
pump also drives an accessory cooling fan motor during main
engine operation.

5.1.6 Fuel System. The vehicle front fuel tanks supply fuel to
the engine, APU and smoke generator system, (Figure 5-8). The
fuel is pumped directly from both tanks and thereby eliminate a
more complex fuel transfer system. The ATR fuel system provides
sufficient range for automotive testing only and is not
indicative of a production vehicle. A full-up fuel system
design is not to be accomplished as a part of the test rig
program.

5.1.7 Electrical System. The electrical system interfaces with

the engine and transmission, CVT-Accessory Drive Gearbox, SCAF,
hydraulics, APU, NBC system, fuel system, and fire suppression
system (Figure 5-9). The electrical system is configured around
four 6TL 120 amp-hour batteries and a 650 amp, 28 volt DC
alternator driven by the APU or 120 main engine. An APU/SCAF
control panel to monitor APU and SCAF operation is designed for
and installed in the driver's compartment (Figure 5-10). An
auxiliary networks box is designed for and installed under the
turret basket to power TMEPS peculiar accessories.

5.1.8 Driver's Control System. The driver's controls

(throttle, steering, parking, service brakes, and shifting) are
essentially unchanged but require different cable routing and
connecting configurations.

25
 SCAVENGE BLOWER
EXHAUST

7=- ENGINE EXHAUST

DUCT

ENGINE AND TRANS.

MISSION COOLING

_ _YSTEM

Figure 5-6 Cooling and Exhaust Installation

26
 ACCESSORY COOLER
* (INCLUDES HYD. HEAT EXCHANGERI

HULL/TURRET----------
HYDRAULIC PUMP

Figure 5-7 Hydraulic System Installation

27
 0
-.
----- -

SMOKE GENERATOR PUMP ----

FUEL MANIFOLD

PRIMARY FUEL FILTER

FUEL WATER SEPARATOR

Figure 5-8 Fuel System Installation~

28
 AUXILIARY HYDRAULIC FLOW
NETWORK BOX ALTERNATOR CONTROL SOLENOID

TRANSMISSION
DIAGNOSTIC -------
DATA READER0
APU DISCONNECT
PANEL TAIL-
APUISCAF CONTROL
DISPLAY PANEL SCAF PLENUM CONTROL BOX , / LIGHTS
CVT CONTROL
UNIT

ENINE
DIAGNOSTIC TRANS ECUECU
DISPLAY - I\0L
TRANSDISCONNEC(4
EC FM..
ENGINE
PANEL j0D BATTERIES

ENGINE DIGITAL NEGATIVE POSITIVE REGULATOR PRIME POWER

ECU BUS BUS INTERRUPTER

Figure 5-9 Electrical System Installation

29
 AUXILIARY POWER UNIT EMERGENCY

o 0IOVER
SPEED 0RPM0 ST-OP 0

10 1__________
OIL PRES OIL LEVEL HI TEMP AIR FILTER ABORT
LOW LOW COOLANT CLOGGED

STARTED

MANUAL FAULT COOL DOWN

SERVICE

START
SCAF PPi

AUTO MAN 0

0 AUTO OVER SHUT DOWN 0

RIDE

Figure 5-10 APU/SCAF Control Panel

30
5.1.9 Vehicle Structure. The vehicle rear hull structure is
modified to accommodate the transverse powerpack (engine and
transmission), exhaust systems,, SCAF, access doors, and grilles.
Ballistic protection and structural integrity will be maintained
equivalent to MIAl. Ballistic protection will not be provided
on the ATR vehicle although space claim is provided.

5.1.10 Life Cycle Cost (LCC). The LCC analysis has been
conducted using the RCA price models of costing to estimate
development, production, operation, and support costs (less
overhaul) for the three vehicles (MIAl-86, M1A1-91, and TMEPS).

5.2 Desian

The changes to the MIAI vehicle hull and its propulsion system
interfaces, to accommodate the TMEPS propulsion system, are
presented and discussed herein. Thq technical approach, goals,
design analysis, tradeoffs, and selected designs are presented
for each design system. The systems discussed are:

"o Engine and Air Induction

"o Transmission and Final Drives

"o Auxiliary Power Unit and Accessory Drive

"o Cooling and Exhaust System

"o Hydraulic System

"o Fuel System

"o Electrical System

"o Driver Control System

"o Structure
5.2.1 Engine and Air Induction.

5.2.1.1 Goals. Improvements were demonstrated through use of

an Automotive Test Rig (ATR). The engine and air induction
system goals were:

GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

ENGINE

Powerpack Density Increased Same as ATR

Increase

31
GOAL AETME2S MI-TMEPS (FUTURE)

ENGINE

Environmental Specifications
Same as MlAl Same as MlAl Same as M1Al

Engine Idle

Normal Idle-900 RPM Normal Idle Same-900 Same as ATR

TAC Idle-1300 RPM RPM TAC Idle-1300 RPM

Modular Interchange-
ability Maintained Maintained (Except Same as ATR
Accessory Gearbox)

Starting At Temperature Extremes

Same as M1Al Same as MiAl Same as MlAl

Starting Attitudes
Same as MlA1 Same as MlAl Same as MIA1

Fuel Consumption (ref. Section 2.1.3.1)

10% Weighted Im- 10% Weighted Improve- 15% Weighted
provement ment Guranteed Improvement
Projected

Powerpack Clearance
Maintain MIAI Exceptions will be Same as ATR
Standards identified

Engine Controls
Digital ECU w/ Digital ECU w/ Same as ATR
Diagnostics Diagnostics

Engine Cycle Tempera- Maximum not Exceeded Same as ATR

ture
T 7 not to Exceed
MIAl

Powerpack Mounting

Vertical removal of Vertical Removal Same as ATR

powerpack

AIR INDUCTION

Filter Life lOX improvement demonstrated

Same as MlAI over M1AI Same as ATR

Filter Efficiency
Same as MlAl Same as MIA1 Same as ATR

32
5.2.1.2 Technical Approach. An improved AGT 1500 turbine
engine is the prime mover for the M1-TMEPS vehicle. It is
transversely mounted with its axis parallel to the transmission
axis, as opposed to the "T" configuration in the MIAI vehicle
Figure 5-11. This transverse mounting provides a more efficient
utilization of space by providing a higher density propulsion
system.

The SCAF, Figure 5-12, is integrated with the engine and mounted
to the bellmouth. As the SCAF barrier filter drum cycles, *a
cleaning nozzle backwashes the clean side of the barrier filter
with high-pressure air into the vacuum ejector nozzle. The
cleaning nozzle air is supplied by the SCAF compressor mounted
on the vehicle accessory gearbox. The dirt particles pass into
a scavenge fan through a duct and out the rear of the vehicle.

The design guidelines for the engine were:

"o Eliminate the NBC engine bleed for increased fuel economy
and RAM-D.
" Retain maximum individual parts commonality with current

AGT 1500 engine for minimal logistics impact.

"o Minimize hull structure modifications.

The engine characteristics are equivalent to the M1AI

configuration except for:

" Removal of the hydraulic pump to the vehicle accessory

gearbox

"o Reduction in specific fuel consumption

TMEPS internal hardware changes compared to MlAI-86, Figure

5-13, to improve fuel economy and RAM-D are:

o Power Turbine - Blade profile change

o Recuperator (Hastelloy-S and increased preload)

o High pressure turbine - single crystal blades

o High pressure turbine - trenched cylinder

o Digital Electronic Control Unit (ECU)

o High pressure and low pressure nozzles - minor

modifications to flow areas

33
 .. .......... 1

Aj. -----
(-
wU

Figure 5-11. Ml Current and TMEPS

Propulsion System Installation

34
 ENOWN

1 00

Sal

SCCAR NTK

Figure 5-12. SCAF Installation~

35
 0

/I
A:

- -

Figure 5-13. Engine Hardware Improvements

36
 "o Polygon drive for accessory gearbox

"o Deep Groove #11 and #13 Conrad bearing races

"o Increased (5%) cooling flow high pressure turbine nozzle

"o Alternate (VASCO) sungear material

"o Improved durability #5 and #10 seals

"o Upgraded fuel handling unit seals

"o Incresed (25 percent) lubricant flow in reduction gearbox

The air induction design guidelines were:

" Reduce unit space claim and weight by minimizing active

filter face area.
" Reduce operating and support costs by increasing filter
service interval by a factor of ten.

"o Reduce air inlet restriction.

"o Provide stationary back-up filter.

5.2.1.3 Design Analysis. The program objective is to

demonstrate by cell test a minimum 10 percent weighted fuel
savings as compared to current MIAI product fabrication
specification E2180C based on ATR (63 Ton) Peacetime Annual
Usage duty cycle with NBC off, corrected and adjusted to 67F,
500 FT ambient conditions. The engine speeds and loads for duty
cycle comparisons shall be the same as in the annual peacetime
usage scenario. Those portions of the duty cycle which contain
APU operations shall be deleted from the comparison for the MIA1
and TMEPS.

Mission Fuel Consumption Analysis/Testing

The predicted program SFC design criteria improvements relative

to the MiAl Fabrication Specification (engine only - no APU)
are:

" ATR SFC Guarantee (condition-peacetime, 87F, 500 ft.

altitude, weighted average) 10%

"o ATR SFC program goals 12%

"o FSED/production goals 15%

37
The major component contributors to the 10% peacetime fuel usage
reduction (FSED Engine, GVW 65 tons, 876F, 500 ft. altitude)
are:

Component: Scheduling/ Recuoerator Power Gas

Controls Turbine Producer

Contribution: 4.3% 2.1% 2.6% 1.0%

Diqital Electronic Control Unit (DECU)

The DECU incorporates the operating schedules for the improved

fuel economy TMEPS engine. These schedules included power
turbine stator open and closed positions, temperature limits,
interstage bleed, inlet guide vane (IGV) position, and fuel flow
control. These scheduled, in addition to hardware improvements,
provide improved fuel economy. The digital ECU also contains
diagnostic software sufficient to replace the STE-Mi hardware
relating to the engine. Diagnostic information will be
displayed with both a window on the side of the ECU and a hand
held set-com located in the driver's station. Communication
with the transmission ECU will be attained through a data bus.

Recuperator Performance Analysis and Module Tests

The recuperator incorporates a new core design, with the

following improvements:

"o Material change to Hastelloy-S from current IN-625

- Provides 10 percent lower expansion coefficient

- Improves predicted life for axial cracking mode by a
factor of 2X.

"o Preload increased from 15000 to 25000 lbs.

"o Improves effectiveness by 3 percent

"o Provides 20 percent of total peacetime fuel usage

reduction

"o Additional improvements resulting from ongoing improvement

programs will be factored into present production as
validated.

- Convolutions over triangles

- ID football bumpers
- Stress relief
- Sunburst plate modifications

The recuperator test results are as follows:

38
 High Density High Density
Factor Desion Point Actual FEP#1 FEB#2

System Effectiveness 70.4 63.5 69.8 69.2

at 1200 SHP

Gas Side Pressure

Drop - Percent -2 9.7 11.5 11.5

Preload - (Kips) 33 30 25 18

NOTE: Fuel Economy Program (FEP) #1 is similar to TMEPS

configuration with the exception that FEP #1 used IN 625
as opposed to Hastelloy-S material.

Recuperator

The recuperator contributes about 21% of the total engine

peacetime mission weighted fuel savings relative to the MIAI
Engine Fabrication Specification. The recuperator influence
coeficients are:

0 1% increase in effectiveness lowers mission fuel

consumption by 0.7%.
o 2% decrease in gas side pressure drop lowers mission fuel
consumption by 0.5%.

The long range (1991 production) improvement goals are:

o Performance - 2% mission fuel consumption improvement

due to:

o Effectiveness

o Pressure drop

o Full interchangeability with existing core

Power Turbine

The power turbine used blade angles that produce high

efficiencies in the low power range where specific fuel
consumption improvements are more significant. Power turbine
stator first stage nozzle guide vanes have extended operating
range to provide a better engine match.

The design criteria for part power efficiency improvement were:

39
 o Raise peak efficiency by one percent over MIAI
Production.

o Move the peak efficiency operating point to a 13% lower

flow function.

o Maintain the 1500 SHP capability as a minimum.

The improvements obtained through rig tests were:

o Peak efficiency operating point was demonstrated at 12

percent lower flow function (preliminary)
o Peak power capability was maintained in conjunction with
other components

Gas Producer

The design objectives were:

o Increase low power surge margin of LP and HP compressors

by 2.8 and 4 percent, respectively, to compensate for
power turbine and bleed closure at idle speed.

o Increase HP turbine flow function by 4 percent

o Decrese LP turbine flow function by 2 percent

o Maintain component efficiencies

The configuration modifications made were:

o HP and LP housing tip treatment at the first two stages

o HP turbine single crystal blades with reduced cooling

flow

o HP rotor and nozzle geometric flow area increased by 4

percent

o HP turbine cylinder modified to incorporate trenching

o LP turbine nozzle geometric flow area reduced by 2

percent.

The gas producer components rig tested were:

o HP and LP compressor (baseline and TMEPS)

o HP and LP turbine nozzle (baseline and TMEPS)

o Trenched cylinder

40
The results of the tests were:

o HP Compressor Tip Treatment

- A 4 percent increase in surge pressure ratio was noted

at speeds of less than 85 percent. This is not
significant.

0 HP Manifold Diffuser and Idle Bleed Closure - no increase

in low speed surge margin and a seven percent increase at
high speeds with efficiency penalty.

o LP Compressor Tip Treatment - no noticeable increase in

surge margin noted.

o HP and LP Turbine Geometry and Cylinder Trenching -

predicted flow function adjustments achieved without
efficiency penalty.

The selected approaches were:

o Incorporate trenched cylinder

o Tip treatment and manifold diffuser were not incorporated

for ATR

o Tip treatment for the compressor section was not used.

ATR used on production compressor.

Engine Heat Rejection Analysis

Engine heat transfer into the transmission transfer case was

reviewed to verify that the strength of the transfer case was
not adversely affected. An analysis of field data was conducted
and showed that the heat transfer into the transfer case does
not result in temperatures exceeding desired limits.

Other Engine Hardware Changes

Single Crystal Reduced Cooling HP Turbine Blades

The single crystal blade, developed under RAM-D II growth

program provides higher strength than the conventional equiaxed
or directionally solidified grain structure (Figure 5-14).
TMEPS used this design because cooling flow was reduced from 3.4
to 2.0 percent (increases metal temperature 1001F), which
contributes approximately 10 percent of the overall engine fuel
consumption reduction. The relative blade stress rupture life
comparison is:

41
 SINGLE CRYSTAL
ISC102-11

- SINGLE
- ,CRYSTAL
BLADE

DIRECTIONALLY -
SOLIDIFIED - i
CONVENTIONAL- _
EQUIAXED

i-
.I~'( 'STARTER
"". BLOCK
HOT / / /// f BASE
CERAMIC
MOLD CHILL PLATE (STARTER SLOCKI

CHILL
Schematic of Casting Processes PLATE

CONSTANT S-R LIFE

100
80

60 -- L= 100*F(APPROX)

40

w
c 20
S~CURRENT
EQUIAXED
10 SINGLE CRYSTAL

TIME/TEMPERATURE PARAMETER

Figure 5-14. Casting Processes and Benefits

of Single Crystal Blade

42
 Blade Cooling Flow Relative Stress Rupture Life

Equiax Production Base Base

Equiax Production Reduce by 1.4% Reduce by 50%

Single Crystal Reduce by 1.4% Increase by 5X

Polyvon Drive System Accessory Gearbox

The splined production configuration can experience difficulties

due to the large number of close fitting parts, the potential
for accumulated unbalance, and requirement for slip fits during
operation.

The polygon system assures improved RAM-D in that the preload is

maintained on the position 11 and 12 bearings by substituting a
three lobe polygon drive for the involute spline. This
eliminates the pilot bushings of the production configuration
and assures free movement between the bevel drive shaft and the
spline coupling. The design was extensively tested as a part of
the RAM-D program and performed well.

Deep-Groove, Position 11 and 13 Conrad Bearing Races

The present bearings are an angular contact ball type with the
inner race counterbored so as to produce a cusp (Figure 5-15).
Fatigue failures have occurred due to ball contact with the
cusp, as well as inadvertent installation in the reverse
position.

A deep groove Conrad type ball bearing eliminates the cusp,

improves RAM-D, and eeduces system costs. The Conrad bearings
are interchangeable with production bearings.

Increased (5 percent) Cooling Airflow High Pressure Turbine

Nozzle

Nozzle deterioration and circumferential cracking have caused

performance degradation. The outer shroud design life limits
the durability of existing nozzle configurations. Propagation
of the circumferential cracks can cause severe mechanical damage
to the engine.

The RAM-D 5 percent cooling airflow nozzle was revised to

increse the amount of vane cooling air from approximately 3.2 to
4.8 percent, thus reducing the temperature by 200F during
transients and 120*F during steady state operation (Figure
5-16).

43
 COUNTERBORED INNER RACE

, 7-

EX: PRESENT PRODUCTION

VTWO PIECE RIVETED

RETAINER

CONRAD BEARING

Figure 5-15. Comparison of Present Production Bearing

and Improved RAM-D Conrad Bearing Configurations

44
 PLENUM CHAMBER --

5 PERCENT HP NOZZLE

CAST- IN PASSAGE .

COOLING AIR IN

Figure 5-16. Five Percent (5%) and Production HP Nozzle

45
The material for the improved RAM-D nozzle is C-101 instead of
IN718. The nozzle is fully interchangeable with the current
production hardware.

Alternate iVASCO) Sunqear Material

The present production sungear (AMS6265 material), (Figure 5-17)

is susceptible to frosting, pitting, and spalling of the gear
teeth. Tests indicated the source of distress as high frequency
alternating tooth stresses caused by gear meshing or induced
cavitations of the lube in the gear mesh.

The VASCO material is a high hot hardness steel with increased

compressive strength (12%) and increased scoring resistance.
The configuration is interchangeable with MIAI production
hardware.

Improved Durability #5 and #10 Seal (Figure 5-18)

Position 5 seal failures cause oil leakage resulting in

increased oil consumption and visible smoke in the engine
exhaust. Seal installation and breakage problems were
eliminated by incorporation of a control gap seal and redesigned
seal runner.

Position 10 seal, (Figure 5-19), was redesigned to eliminate the

oil leak path between the seal housing and retaining plate. The
seal is made part of the retaining plate giving the seal
increased rigidity. A wave spring on the rear side of the seal.
was incorporated to hold the seal against the runner.

Increased (25%) Lubricated Flow in Reduction Gearbox

The increased capacity oil pump, with 25 percent higher flow

capability than the M1A1 pump, provides increased lubrication
flow to the gear mesh, reducing temperatures and tooth distress.
The pump incorporates additional durability improvements such as
a self priming capability, increased strength coupling and
lubricant impregnated bearings. It is interchangeable with the
standard production engine.

Air Induction

The air induction system receives air through the left rear
sponson ballistic grille. Air flows through the grilles into an
engine mounted plenum which contains the precleaners and a
rotary barrier filter. The grille incorporates foreign object
damage (FOD) screens.

46
2ND POWER TURBINEI

SUNGEAR____

Figure 5-17. Sungear

47
 DIAPHRAM

SEALING ELEMENT

RUFDTNNER N

KNIFE EDGE INNER RIMS LOW PRESSURE TURBINE HUB

PRODUCTION POSITION 5 SEAL

SOUD HOUSING
ELIMINATES
DIAPHRAM

REDESIGN LOCK-CUP

RUNNERROUNDED NUT

RAM-D POSITION 5 SEAL DESIGN

Figure 5-18. RAM-D Position 5 Seal Design

48
 RETAINER PLATE

METAL PORTION OF SEAL

WAVE SPRING
RETAINING RING

...... CARBON PORTION OF SEAL

"O"RING \ SEAL HOUSING

RUNNER

Figure 5-19. RAM-D Position 10 Oil Seal

49
Pre"leaner Confiouration

The mounting of the precleaner was evaluated using several

options:

o Integrated engine mounted

- Wraparound precleaner
- Top mounted vertical precleaner

0 Sponson hull mounted precleaner with engine mounted

barrier filter

In analyzing the engine integrated precleaner, a comparison of

the wraparound and top mounted configuration resulted in the
following:

o Wraparound

- Reduced volume
- Increased service complexity
- Interferes with 7 speed transmission

o Top Mounted

- Allows more compact package

- Provides large vortex tubes
- Reduced pressure drop
- Ease of servicing
- Completely under armor
- Eliminates critical interface seal between barrier and
precleaner
- Removable with engine
- Complete unit for "Ground Hop" operation

It was concluded that the integrated top mounted vertical

precleaner was the best selection.

Sponson/Hull Mount - A sponson/hull mount stationary filter

study was also conducted with the following criteria:
- Fit the same envelope as the rotating SCAF with a
stationary filter
- Improve life, comparable to rotating unit goals

The conclusions drawn from analysis and testing were:

o The pressure drop across the filters was 34 percent

higher than the design goal of 19 inches of water at 11
lb/sec airflow.

50
 o The distortion indices were not acceptable.

o Extensive redesign would be required to relocate the

precleaner from the sponson to the engine compartment.

o Donaldson SCAF was selected over the stationary non-SCAF

filter as a better approach.

Scavenge Flow Analysis

A precleaner tube analysis was performed to determine the size

and estimated scavenge flow performance.

The precleaner tube analysis results were as follows:

Description SMALL TUBE LARGE TUBE

Tube size (diam x length) 0.75" x 2.375" 1.5" x 4.37"

Number of Tubes 1232 293

(in single panel)

Flow rate/tube (SCFM) at full 7.5 - 8 31.67

power

Air velocity (Ft./Min.) at

full power 2526.1 2580.7

Pressure drop (inches of water) 3.5 to 4 6.2

In comparing the large and small tube scavenge airflow

performance (reference Figure 5-12), the large tube was
selected.

Barrier Filter Confiauration

The SCAF barrier filter pleat configuration was studied to

maximize its efficiency and minimize the pressure loss. A rig
test was conducted by varying the pleat density from 4.5 to 7.5
pleats per inch and determining the pressure drop at various air
velocities.

An optimum of 6 pleats per inch at 20 feet per minute air

velocity was selected. This will provide 4.2 inches of water
loss through the media and 200 hour life at zero visibility dust
condition.

51
The total SCAF filter system rig tests with a full scale element
were performed to define the pressure drop. With the optimum
pleat spacing and vehicle configuration inlet, the total system
loss was 15.6 inches of water as compared to 19.5 inches
(maximum) specified per the MIA1 System Specification.

Detail Design Analyses Testing

o Seal Life and Drag Torque Analysis

The barrier filter to engine inlet were evaluated. An

elastomeric lip seal and a ferrofluidic seal were tested using a
scaled down model in a 200 hour life test.

The. test results were as follows:

"o Lip seal

- Pressure capability verified (160-200 inches of water)

- Demonstrated 200 hour life, with no degradation
- Acceptable drag

"o Ferrofluidic Seal

- Pressure capability verified (160 - 200 inches of

water)
- Demonstrated 200 hour life; some seal distress noted
- Low drag
- Seal integrity maintained during frequent
shutdown/start-up cycles

The elastomeric lip seal was selected over the ferrofluidic

seal. A back-up (alternate) teflon lip seal with graphite
impregnated skirt was also tested. No measurable leakage was
noted as well as no reduction in mechanical integrity.

5.2.1.4 Tradeoffs. Trade studies were conducted on the engine

and air filtration as follows:

o ENGINE

- Increased recuperator preload design vs. high density

design
- Maintain current AGT 1500 engine maximum cycle
temperatures vs. increased temperatures.
- Eliminate all engine bleed requirements vs. engine
bleed for air filter cleaning only.

o AIR FILTRATION UNIT

Barrier Filter Options

52
 - Surface loading vs. depth loading media.

Detail Desian Tradeoffs

- Integral mount with existing inlet vs. modified engine

inlet.
- Continuous clean vs. pulse jet.
- Electric motor driven vs. hydraulic.
- Independent air supply for cleaning vs. engine bleed.
- 3 barrier elements vs. 5.

5.2.1.5 Selected Design. The selected design for the engine

and air induction were as follows:

"o ENGINE

- 90% parts commonality with AGT 1500 M1/M1A1 engine.

- Utilizes following IRAD technology elements:
oo Single crystal blades.
oo Digital ECU
- Utilizes following TACOM fuel economy program elements:
oo Power turbine
oo Mission optimized fuel schedule
oo Digital ECU
oo Increased preload recuperator
- Modular interchangeability - to be verified by test.
- Eliminates NBC bleed
- Main hydraulic pump removed from engine

"o AIR FILTRATION UNIT

- Electrically driven rotating element self-cleaning air

filter.
- Integral engine mounting.
- Vertical mounted precleaners and rotating drum.
- Mounting design fully interchangeable on existing M1A1.

The engine and air induction subsystem goals and compliances are
as follows:

GOAL ATR-TMEPS Ml-TMEPS (FUTURE)

ENGINE

Powerpack Packaging Factor Increased Same as ATR

Increase

Environmental Specifications

Same as MlA1 Same as MIAl Same as MlAI

(1) Results reported in Appendix I.

53
GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

ENGINE

Engine Idle

Normal Idle-900 RPM Normal Idle Same - Same as ATR

900 RPM

TAC Idle-1300 RPM TAC Idle - 1300 RPM

Modular Interchangeability

Maintain Maintained (1) Same as ATR

(Except Accessory
Gearbox)

Starting at Temperature

Extremes

Same as MlAI Same as MIAI Same as M1AI

Starting Attitudes

Same as MlA1 Same as MIA1 Same as MIAl

Fuel Consumption

10% Weighted Im- 10% Weighted Im- 15% Weighted Im-

provement pro Y5r ent Guaran- provement Pro-
tee jected

Powerpack Clearance

Maintain MIAI Same as ATR Same as ATR

Standards

Engine Controls

Digital ECU Digital ECU w/ Digital ECU w/

w/Diagnostics Diagnostics Diagnostics

Engine Cycle Temperature

T Not to Exceed Maximum Not Same as ATR

MyAI Exceeded

(1) Results reported in Appendix I.

(2) Textron achieved a 15.3% reduction in a TACOM witnessed
test performed 20 October 1988. Results are reported in
Appendix II.

54
GOAL ATR-TMSPS Ml-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Powerpack Mounting
Vertical Removal
of Powerpack Vertical Removal Same as ATR

AIR INDUCTION

Filter Life lOX Improvement

Demonstrated

Same as MlAl Over MlAl1I) Same as ATR

Filter Efficiency

Same as MIA Same as MlAl Same as ATR

5.2.2 Transmission and Final Drive. The ATR demonstrator

transmission is an Allison Transmission Division (ATD) XT1100,
Figure 5-20. The XT1100 is a transverse input, cross drive,
hydrokinetic transmission with seven ranges forward and three
ranges reverse, electronic shift control, hydrostatic steering,
and wet multiple plate braking system. Its transfer case is
designed to mount the AGT 1500 turbine engine and includes a
power takeoff (PTO) dccessory drive package.

The final drives are a coaxial planetary design, which are

configured to adapt the XT1100 transmission to the MlA1 hull and
sprocket bolt patterns.

5.2.2.1 Goals.

Transmission and Final Drive

PARAMETER GOALS

Configuration Mate With Transverse AGT 1500

Power Takeoff Two Forward facing Horizontal PTOs

and Two Powerpack Mounted Cooling
Fan Drives

1. 425 HP - Accessory Drive

2. 60 HP - Spare Drive

(1) The SCAF achieved 200 hours demonstrated life in a

laboratory test performed at Donaldson Co. as reported in
Apendix III.

55
if t:

CLl

556
 PARAMETER GOALS

3. Two 125 HP Capability Cooling

Fan Drives

Interchangeability Maximum Extent w/X1100-3B (MIA1)

Ratios Meet or Exceed MIA1 Performance

Steering Meet or Exceed MIA1 Performance

Brakes Meet or Exceed M1Al Performance

Torque Converter Same as MIAl

Powerpack Removal Vertical

Dry Weight Minimize Increase Over X1100-3B

(MIA1)

Operating Environment Same as MIAI

Final Drive Configuration Maintain Current Mounting

Configuration

5.2.2.2 Technical Approach. The transmission design guidelines

were:

" Integrate with transversely mounted AGT 1500 engine to

provide a compact/dense propulsion system arrangement
compared to the production MIA1 powerpack.

"o Provide mounting points for the powerpack.

"o Retain commonality with production base.

"o Provide mounting and drive mechanism for required

ancillary equipment.

"o Provide cooling fan modulation for fuel economy.

"o Improve brake friction material.

o Provide multiplexed communication data bus (with engine)

capability with hardwire backup.

" Provide increased performance and efficiency, enhanced

maintainability features, and built-in-test-equipment.

57
The final drive design guidelines were:

"o Provide appropriate ratio reduction required to match the

transmision output to achieve MI rated top speed.
"o Provide a design which will attach to the hull identical

to the current M1A1 production final drive.

"o Retain current M1A1 track sprocket.

"o Provide a saddle-type mounting for the transmission

output/final drive input trunnions.

"o Retain commonality with production base.

5.2.2.3 Design Analysis.

5.2.2.3.1 Transmission. The space claim views of the XT1100

transmission are shown in Figure 5-20. The transfer case
transversely mounts the AGT 1500 engine and provides the drive
for powering vehicle ancillary equipment.

The torque converter is MIAI common and is mounted on the same

centerline as the range pack. Provisions are made for four PTOs
which will be engine driven. The PTO pads are located as shown
in Figure 5-21. Two pads have vertical drives mounted on top of
the transmission and two are horizontally driven from the front
of the transfer case. One PTO (425 HP) drives the accessories,
the other PTO (60 HP) is a spare. Power for the cooling fan
PTOs is taken from the torque converter input by a bevel gear
set and transfer gearing. These cooling fan drives are
clutchable for fuel economy and water fording.

Steering is accomplished by an M1A1 common hydrostatic unit in

the XT1100 center section assembly, with a variable displacement
pump, fixed displacement motor of radial piston design. The
speed ratio of the steering unit is proportional to the pump
displacement with system pressure dependent upon resistance to
steer.

A gear and bearing design life analysis showing a comparison of

componentry lives with the MiA1 X1100 transmission was
accomplished and is summarized as follows:

58
 TRANSMISSION SUBSYSTEM DESIGN ANALYSIS
GEAR AND BEARING LIFE ANALYSIS

M1A1 63 TONS MIAI 65 TONS MiAl 65 TONS

AGT 1500 AGT 1500 AGT 1500
1122 NHP 1358 NHP 1358 NHP
X1O00 XT1100-3B XT1100
P/N NAME PERCENT* P/N NAME PERCENT P/N NAME PERCENT

P2 SUN GEAR 100 P2 SUN GEAR 93 P3 NEEDLE 94

11669546 TIMKEN BRG 100 11669546 TIMKEN BRG 93 TAPERED BRG 100
11669544 TIMKEN BRG 103 11669544 TIMKEN BRG 97 P4 NEEDLE 125
P1 NEEDLE 109 P1 NEEDLE 98 P5/P6 NEEDLE 136
12267994 HYATT BRG 106 12267994 HYATT BRG 99 P2 SUN GEAR 137
P2 NEEDLE 109 P2 NEEDLE 101 ROLLER BEARING 171

"* TOTAL TRANSMISSION 100 TOTAL TRANSMISSION 90 TOTAL TRANSMISSION 98

PERCENT LIFE OF X1100 MiAl LOWEST LIFE COMPONENT

** PERCENT LIFE OF X1100 MIAI TRANSMISSION

59
 U,7

UC
L
c-0

VI
LO

I- LWL LW

o -

ff.
Uj6.
0

6-41

LL

Figure 5-21. XT1100 Transmission Envelope

60
The range pack provides seven forward and three reverse ranges.
The selection of the range package was a function of the
sprocket power required, (Figure 5-22). A comparison of TMEPS
vs. M1AI transmission characteristics are shown in Tables 5-1
and 5-2.

The transmission hardware common between the (XT1100 and

X1100-3B) is:

Torque converter, TC897

Hydrostatic steer unit
Steer system controls
Output planetaries
Oil filter assembly (Ml)

In a breakdown by part number, the production commonality is 46

percent.

5.2.2.3.2 Final Drive. The final drive design is simmilar to

the current M1AI hardware. Mounting to the hull is identical to
the M1A1. Final drive commonality is:

"o Output Bearing

"o Output Seal

"o Disconnect System

The ATR demonstration final drive is designed to provide the

appropriate reduction ratio required to match the XT1100
transmission output speed to the desired rated vehicle top
speed. This reduction is achieved with a simple planetary unit
having a ratio of 5.067:1. A schematic of the final drive is
shown in Figure 5-23.

5.2.2.4 Tradeoffs.

Transmission

A range pack option performance comparison provided a criterion

for selecting a seven-speed range pack for the XT1100 is as
follows:

X1100-3B POTENTIAL XT1100

4-SPEED 6-SPEED 7-SPEED

MECHANICAL RATIO COVERGE (x:1) 4.6 5.9 8.3

AVG. SPROCKET HP (1305 NHP IN) 1044 1106 1130

61
 1300

1250

AVERAGE
SPROCKET 1200,
POWER,
HP

1150-

1100 , ,,
0 2 4 6 U 10

NUMBER OF RANGES

Figure 5-22. Range Number Optimization

62
 RING

PLANET

CARRIER

INPUT/XMSN _ _ _OUTPUT/SPKT

Figure 5-23. XT1100 Final Drive Schematic

63
 TABLE 5-1 TRANSMISSION FEATURES COMPARISON

XIIOO-3B XT1100

INPUT DRIVE T-DRIVE TRANSVERSE

NO. RANGES: FORWARD/REVERSE 4/2 7.3

FINAL DRIVE MIAl (4.67:1) NEW (5.07:1)

RANGE CONTROLS ELECTRIC - HYDRAULIC ELECTRONIC

BRAKES OIL COOLED FRICTION OIL COOLED

PLATES FRICTION
PLATES

MAXIMUM VEHICLE SPEED (MPH) 41.96 45.0

TRACTIVE EFFORT 150,170 252,968

VEHICLE WEIGHT 63.2 TONS 65 TONS

TE/WT AT 65 TONS 1.19 1.95

COOLING SYSTEM TWO AXIAL FANS TWO CENTRIFUGAL

MECHANICALLY- FANS MECHANICALLY
DRIVEN NOT -DRIVEN MODULATED
MODULATED

MAXIMUM HEAT REJECTION

(125 DAY) (BTUs/MIN AT
RPM)
- AT .7 TE 11382 AT 1692 4565 AT 1743
- AT MAXIMUM SPEED 9978 AT 3075 9864 AT 3075

FLUID MIL-L-2104C MIL-L-2104D

GRADE 30 15W40

64
Table 5-2. Transmission Range Comparison

MI~A1

GEAR RATIO 5.8773 3.0207 1.8909 1.2777

GEAR EFFICEINCY 94.67 94.42 95.36 95.85
GEAR STEP SIZE 1.9457 1.5975 1.4799
GEAR INERTIA 106.6 24.06 11.67 9.75 (Ib-ft-sec**2 xmsn output)
STEER RATIO 2.34 1.52 1.30 1.19
STEER RADIUS (ft.) 19.1 37.1 58.7 88.3

RATIO COVERAGE MECHANICAL - 4.6

RATIO COVERAGE (WITH TORQUE CONVERTER) - 9.9

IE .Ls TE/GVW=65 tons

90 F @ 2000 ft. 140,157 1.08
87 F@ 500 ft 149,031 1.15

TM~EP
1s 2n -rd -lul 5bh 6t 7th
GEAR RATIO 8.9533 5.6455 3.7101 2.4486 2.0217 1.5153 1.0798
GEAR STEP SIZE 1.5859 1.5217 1.5152 1.2112 1.3342 1.4033
GEAR EFFICEINCY 96.19 96.39 96.54 96.95 97.35 96.50 96.2
GEAR INERTIA 164.4 61.0 26.5 14.0 11.6 7.5 5.2
(Ib-ft-sec**2 @ xmsn output)
STEER RATIO 6.72 2.75 1.89 1.51 1.40 1.29 1.20
STEER RADIUS (ft.) 10.3 16.4 24.9 37.7 46.0 60.5 84.3

RATIO COVERAGE MECHANICAL - 8.3

RATIO COVERAGE (WITH TORQUE CONVERTER) - 17.8

I TE/GVW=65tons
90 F @ 2000 ft 249,457 1.97
87 F @ 500 ft 265,867 2.05

65
5.2.2.4 Tradeoffs.

Transmission

A range pack option performance comparison provided a criterion

for selecting a seven-speed range pack for the XT100 is as
follows:
X1100-3B POTENTIAL XT1100

4-SPEED 6-SPEED 7-SPEED

MECHANICAL RATIO COVERAGE (x:1) 4.6 5.9 8.3

AVG. SPROCKET HP (1305 NHP IN) 1044 1106 1130

MAX. FWD. SPEED (MPH) 41.5 45 45

MAX. REV. SPEED (MPH) 20 13 20

PEAK TE/GVW (STALL) 1.18 1.34 1.99

HEAT REJ. @.7 TE/W (BTU/MIN) 13644 9816 4772

NO. ROTATING CLUTCHES/TOTAL NO.

CLUTCHES 2/5 3/6 2/6

An analysis of the cooling fan drive alternatives resulted in

the selection of mechanical gear drive with disconnect clutches
based on the following assessment:

CONFIGURATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

Hydrostatic Drive o Constant Speed o External Hydraulic

Cooling Fans Lines

o Minimum Gear o Requires Hydrosta-

Train (Oil Flow tic Pump Control
Lines Flexible)

o Incresed Cost

Mechanical Gear Drive o Simple Design - o Fan Speed Varies

Low Technical with Input Speed
Risk
o Maximum Power Loss
at Fan Maximum
Speed

o Large Number of
Gears

66
 CONFIGURATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

Mechanical Drive o Known Technology o Requires Addition

Disconnect Clutches - Low Risk of Rotating
Clutch, Control,
and Hydraulic

o Allows Disengag- o Apply Cores in

ing Second Fan Transmission
When Cooling not
required (Reduced
Power Loss)

Mechanical Drive with o Moderate Techno- o Requires Addition

Fluid Coupling Dis- logy Risk of Coupling, Con-
connect trols, and Large
Volume Feed Cores
to Coupling in the
Transmission

An assessment of the braking system resulted in selection of wet

friction plate brake configuration based on the following:

Hybrid: Retarder o Reduced Spin Loss o More Complex Con-

and Wet Plate trols

o Reduced Wear
Elements

o Adjustment Not o May Increase Oil

Required Flow Passage Re-
quirements

o Allows More Pack- o Reduced Capacity

aging Options in Mechanical
Backup

Wet Friction Plate o High Degree of o May Require Ad-

Commonality with justment
X1100-3B

o Simple Controls - o Generates Wear

Common with Particles
XI100-3B

o High Capacity o Higher Spin Losses

Parking Brake

o Simplif ied Oil

Flow Path

67
 CONFIGURATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

o Vast Production
Experience

o Simplified
Diagnostic and
Repair Procedure
A-three brake shaft system was selected based on the following
assessment:

CONFIGURATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

Two Shaft o Emergency Braking With o Requires New

the Service Brake Vehicle
Pedal Linkages

o Reduces the Required o Nonlinear

Hardware Internal to Service Brake
the Transmission Mechanism is
required

Three Shaft o Uses Current Vehicle o Requires the

Linkages Use of the
Parking Brake
System for
Emergency
Braking

Final Drive

The final drive removable hub versus integral (fixed) drive

sprocket design is compared in Figure 5-24.

The selection of the final drive removable hub versus integral

(fixed) drive sprocket design was based on the following:

CONFIGURATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

Integral Sprocket Hub o Allows Increased o New Inboard

Planetary Length Sprocket Required
(2 Piece)

o More Ratio o Increased

Flexibility with Length/Weight
Compound Planetary

o Utilizes 10% of
Current P/Ns

68
 CONFIGURATION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

Removable Sprocket o Utilizes 50% of o Limited Ratios

Hub Current P/Ns Available

o Output Seal and

Bearing Design
Proven

o Utilize Current
MIAI Hub and Sprocket

5.2.2.5 Selected Design. The following is a summary of the

selected transmission and final drive design which conforms to
the vehicle performance requirements:

o Input configuration is transverse for AGT 1500

o Two accessory drive PTOs

- one forward facing PTO (425 HP) to drive accessories

- one forward facing PTO (60 HP) as spare drive

o TC 897 series torque converter (Same as MIA1)

o Fan Drive System

- Two mechanical PTO fan drive systems

- PTOs are clutchable for fuel economy
- PTOs driven by a separate ancillary gear case
mounted onto the transmission

o Incorporate MIA1 hydrostatic steer drive

o Controls

- Digital electronic control unit

- Embedded diagnostics
- Steering, brakes
- True pivot steer
o Final drive trunnion/hull rear torque arm mounting
system

o 46 percent commonality with X1100-3B (MIAI)

o Incorporate simple planetary final drive with MIA1

removable sprocket hub.

The transmission and final drive is in compliance with the

following:

69
 C.,Iii -

,.o III " '"

0. ill -'-
I N.I

I ,'

Ii
Ia

Figure 5.24. Final Drive Sprocket Design

70
GOAL ATR TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Configuration

o Transverse Transverse Same as ATR

Power Take-offs

o 425HP Access-
ory Drive "425HP Accessory Drive Same as ATR

Power Take-offs (Continued)

o 60 HP Spare Drive 60 HP Spare Drive

o 60 HP Spare
Drive 60 HP Spare Drive

Interchangeability

o Maximize Commo- 46% Commonality Up to 58%

nality with with X1100-38 (MIAI)
X11OO-3B (MIAl)

Ratios

o Necessary to Meet 7-Speeds Forward 6-Speeds Forward

or Exceed MlAl 3-Speeds Reverse 2-Speeds Reverse
Performance Ratio Coverage is
Higher than MlAl

Steering

o Meet or Exceed TMEPS Min. Steering Same as ATR

MIA1 Performance Radius - 10 Ft

Brakes

o Meet or Exceed Exceeds MIAi Same as ATR

MlAl Performance

Powerpack Removal

o Vertical Removal Vertical Removal Same as ATR

Operating Environment Same as MIAI Same as MIAI

Final Drive Configura- Bolts Directly to Same as ATR

tion Current MA11 Hull

71
GOAL ATR TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Torque Converter Same as M1Al Same as MIA1

5.2.3 Auxiliary Power Unit and Accessory Drive. The auxiliary

power unit (APU), Figure 5-25, provides electrical power and
pressurized air for the NBC system when the main engine is not
operating. An addditional APU benefit is main engine cold start
assistance by recharging the batteries and providing alternator
output for the main engine starter. The APU is located under
armor. The accessory drive system interfaces with both the APU
and the transmission PTO to supply a constant speed drive for
the following accessory systems:

"o NBC Compressor

"o Alternator

"o SCAF Compressor

"o Scavenge Blower

"o Hydraulic Pump

Accessibility to the APU and accessory drive system is at the

top deck access panel or engine compartment bulkhead.

5.2.3.1 Goals.

PARAMETER GOALS

APU John Deere Rotary Diesel (80 HP) Including:

- Engine with Starter

- Electrical System Less Battery
- Fuel Conditioning
- Cooling System or Provision for
External Cooling
- Air Filter or External Provision

NBC Output Compressor Providing Continuously

200 - 230 SCFM
38 PSIG Minimum

Electrical Output Five Kilowatts Between 18 and 30 Volts DC

72
Figure 5-25. Auxiliary Power Unit

73
 Drive for
Accessory Drive Provide Constant Speed Accessory
the Following Systems:

o During Main Engine Operation

- SCAF Compressor
- NBC Compressor
- Alternator
- Scavenge Blower
- Hydraulic Pump

o During APU Operation

- NBC Compressor
- Alternator

PARAMETER GOALS

APU - 11 Cubic Feet Maximum

Size

Environmental Speci- Same as MlAl

f icat ions

Minimize Weight Impact

Weight

5.2.3.2 Technical Approach.

were:
Auxiliary Power Unit. The design considerations

(DC) power and full NBC

18KW of direct current
" Provide
protection during APU operation.

at nominal power
at the rate of 3.7 gallons/hour
" Use fuel
requirements.
control/display in driver's
"o Provide interface with

stat ion.

air supply for main engine and APU.

"o Provide common
considerations are to obtain the
Accessory Drive. The design
following operating characteristics:

dual source drive for accessories.

"o Provide
vary from
Provide a constant speed output as input speeds
"o RPM (100 percent) from the
1.800 RPM (idle) to 6300
transmission PTO.

74
The power required for the accessory drive components is as

follows:

Component Horsepower Speed (RPM

o Scavenge Blower 3.1 5693

o Alternator 38.0 3000

o Hydraulic Pump 50.0 3750

o NBC Compressor 40.0 13069

o SCAF Compressor 25.0 4941

5.2.3.3 Design Analysis.

Auxiliary Power Unit

The John Deere APU is used to supply power to drive accessories.

The design meets TMEPS requirements for power (80-100 HP) and
volume not exceeding 11 cubic feet.

The APU is a single rotor stratified charge engine designated as

SCORE 70, Model 1007R. It will be coupled to the accessory
drive and will be self sufficient in operation. The following
are its characteristics:

-Displacement 0.7 liters

Weight 198 lbs (less cooling system)
Volume 5.35 cubic feet
Rated speed 6,000 RPM
Rated power 80BHP (60KW)
Compression ratio 8.5 to 1
Turbocharger pressure ratio 2.2 to 1
Ignition Spark Assisted Stratified Charge

The APU includes an integral heat exchanger and a cooling fan.

In comparison to the naturally aspirated engine, the selected
turbocharged/intercooled configuration provides:

"o Increased power density

o Improved nominal fuel economy

"o Lower exhaust gas temperatures

"o Stable power level at varying altitudes

75
The APU impact on TMEPS fuel consumption for a Peacetime Annual
Usage with NBC ON/OFF is:

Configuration Fuel
NBC-ON NBC-OFF
Gallons Gallons
TMEPS with APU 3772 3163
TMEPS without APU 5240 4222

The APU is integrated in the space previously occupied by the

M1AI hull ammo rack and will occupy 11 cubic feet. A screen for
cooling air inlet is provided in the top deck.

Crew accessibility to the APU cool and air filter will be

through a top deck door. Powerpack removal is required in order
to remove the APU.

The concept of a common air filtration system for the APU and
powerpack versus a separate system was evaluated as follows:

0 APU air supplied by SCAF system eliminates need for

additional APU precleaner.

o Deep water fording requires less preparation with SCAF

than a conventional filter system and allows for APU
operation during fording if necessary.

0 SCAF requires less maintenance than conventional filter

system.

o Separate systems do not require as much ducting.

The common air filtration system is used. The APU contains a

barrier filter for operation when the powerpack and SCAF is
removed.

The NBC airflow/compressor sizing analysis was as follows:

"o Prioritization valve on the current M1A1 regulates

variable pressure into the NBC from the powerpack.

"o A constant output compressor eliminates the need for a

prioritization valve.

"o Removal of the prioritization valve reduces the pressure

requirement from 44 to 35 psig.

76
The NBC compressor characteristics are:

Airflow and Pressure - 215 + 15 SCFM at 35 psig

Size and Weight - Less then one cubic foot and
55 lbs.
Cooling - Oil
Efficiency - Approximately 70%

Alternator

The alternator requirements established are:

Rated output - 15 KW
Voltage DC - 28

The MIAl alternator provides sufficient power for the ATR where
a load study revealed power requirements of:

o Silent watch electrical load, 1.8 KW

o Nominal electrical load, 6.1 KW

The alternator power rating was chosen to provide growth

capability.

Vehicle Accessory Gearbox (VAG)

The vehicle accessory gearbox with a continuously variable

transmission (CVT) provides a constant speed drive to all the
accessory components. The CVT incorporats a torodial disk
design which is an off-the-shelf item supplied by the Self
Changing Gears Ltd. The CVT supplies a constant 2700 RPM input
to the vehicle accessory gearbox from the powerpack PTO, where
speeds vary from 1800 to 6300 RPM. The vehicle accessory
gearbox is also required to be driven by the APU and provide a
constant output speed to the NBC compressor and alternator.
5.2.3.4 Tradeoffs. The continuously variable transmission
drive was compared with the following design alternatives:

Alternative System Descriotion Evaluation

Hydrostatic Drive Hydraulic pump and motor Requires an addi-

System provides constant speed tional reservoir,
(Figure 5-26) into vehicle accessory heat exchanger and
gearbox plumbing (increase
space claim
weight). Low
efficiency.
Direct Drive Drive shaft from trans- Degraded accessory
(Figure 5-27) mission PTO to vehicle performance at less
accessory gearbox. Pro- than main engine
vides variable speeds full rated speed.
to accessories
Multiple Speed Driven by the transfer Requires additional
Transmission case PTO, provides development time
Drive constant speed for TMEPS applica-
(Fioure 5-28) tion.
77
 -N-3C HYDROSTATIC DRIVE

-- t -- PTO
APUM * I

Figure 5-26. Hydrostatic Drive System

78
*APU

PTO
L DRIVE SHAFT

Figure 5-27. Direct Drive System

79
APU

ALT. MULTIPLE SPEED

TRANSMISSION

80
 Alternative System Description Evaluation

Bleed Air and Direct Main engine bleed air Impacts space claim
Drive Gearbox operates NBC and SCAF and weight require-
(Figure 5-29) Systems. Direct drive ments.
gearbox powers alter- Impacts main engine
nator, scavenge internal operating
blower and hydraulic temperatures.
pump.
APU operates NBC com-
pressor and alternator
.. when main engine is off.
Multiple Power Main engine to power a Degrades perfor-
Supply direct drive gear- mance at low engine
(Figure 5-30) box. speeds. Impact on
APU operates con- weight and space
currently with main claim.
.. engine.
Transmission j Add accessory drives Increased hull
Accessory Drive to transmission case. packaging flexibi-
(Figure 5-31) Integrates a CVT to lity.
the transmission -
provides constant

Direct Drive and During main engine Requires additional

Hydrostatic Drive operation, transfer compressor and al-
(Figure 5-32) case PTO powers a ternator.
direct drive gearbox Impacts space claim
and a hydrostatic and weight and com-
unit. Direct drive plexity.
gearbox operates the
scavenge blower,
hydraulic pump and
alternator. Hydro-
static unit would
power the NBC and SCAF
compressor.
APU would power a
separate NBC compressor
and alternator.

5.2.3.5 Selected Design. The selected design includes the

following:

"o John Deere Score 70 Rotary Engine (80 HP)

"o Self Contained Cooling System For APU

81
 X '
APU Cr

PTO
DRIVESHAFT

TO NBC LE1ED
AIR

PUMP
TO SCAF

Figure 5-29. Main Engine Bleed Air and

Direct Drive Gearbox System

82
 __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ PTO

DRIVESHAFT

Fiur
530 Mltpl Pwe Sppy yse

83
 NBC SCAF ALT HYD SCAVENGE
COMP COMP PUMP BLOWER

a I a

-S I S |

OPTIONAL INTERNAL CVT

TRANSMISSION

Figure 5-31. Transmission Accessory Drive System

84
 MSCAVENGE

APU M

AL PUJP PTO

ALTERNATOR

HYDROSTATIC UNIT

NBC
COMPRESSOR

Figure 5-32. Direct Drive and Hydrostatic Drive System

85
 Engine Coolant
- Vehicle Accessory Gearbox (During APU Operation)
- Accessories
- Intercooler for Turbocharger

o Stand Alone Fuel Conditioning System

- Transfer Pump
- Fuel/Water Separator
- Filters

o Air Source for APU and NBC Provided by SCAF System

Additional Barrier Filter Included on APU and NBC

Compressor for Periods When Powerpack is Removed

o Vehicle Accessory Gearbox with Continuously Variable

Transmission for-Constant Speed Accessory Drive During
Main Engine Operation or APU Operation

- NBC Compressor
- Alternator
- SCAF Compressor
- Scavenge Blower
- Hydraulic Pump

o 16 Kilowatt Alternator

o Accessibility to APU and Accessory Drive

- Top Deck Access Panel

- Engine Compartment Bulkhead

The auxiliary power unit and accessory drive compliances are:

GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

System

John Deere Rotary John Deere Rotary Rotary Diesel

NBC Output

200-230 SCFM 200-230 SCFM 200-230 SCFM

38 Psig Minimum 38 Psig Minimum 38 Psig Minimum

Electrical Output

5 Kilowatts 18 Kilowatt Alternator 5 Kilowatt Alterna-

tor

86
GOAL ATR-TMEPS MI-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Constant Speed Self Changing Gears Self Changing Gears

Accessory Drive Continuously Variable Continuously Varia-

Transmission ble Transmission or
Direct Drive

Size-APU

11 Cubic Ft. Max. 11 Cubic Feet 4 Cubic Feet

Size-Accessory Drive
and Accessories

9.5 Cubic Feet 9.5 Cubic Feet 9.5 Cubic Feet

Maximize Accessi- Access Door Provided Consider Redesign

bility Top and Front. Re-
placement Requires
Powerpack Removal

Enhance Cold Start APU Operation APU Operation

Capability

Minimize Weight APU - 240 Lbs. Minimize Weight

Vehicle Accessory
Gearbox 200 Lbs.

5.2.4 Cooling and Exhaust System. The powerpack cooling system

is mounted on the transmission tFigure 5-33). The cooling
system includes identical sets of fans, diffusers, fan drives,
coolers, and a cooler duct, sealing, oil supply and return
lines. The mechanically driven fans provide airflow to meet
powertrain cooling requirements. The system uses existing fan
technology.

The exhaust system provides ducting for the main engine,

scavenge blower, and APU exhaust directing it to the right rear
vehicle grilles.
5.2.4.1 Goals. The following are the goals of the cooling and

exhaust systems for the engine and transmission:

Parameter Goal

System Provide a mechanically driven

cooling system

87
 SAENGE BLOWER
EXHAUST

______________ - ENGINE EXHAUST

ENGINE AND TRANS.

MISSION COOUNG

SYSTEM

Figure 5-33. Coolin~g and Exhaust System

88
Powertrain Cooling Transmission oil at or below
265F sump and 315F cooler inlet
temperatures, and engine oil at
or below 325F at cooler inlet
for 125F ambient at tractive
effort of .67/.70 NBC on/off

Accessibility Improved over MiAl

Environmental Same as MlAP (System

Specification)

Weight Equal to or less than MIAI

Exhaust Minimize recirculation

Water Fording Accommodate vehicle fording up to

48 inches of water without kits.

5.2.4.2 Technical Approach.

Cooling System

The design guidelines for cooling the engine and transmission

were:

"o Mount.cooling system on powerpack

"o Provide access for transmission oil filters

"o Provide removable Foreign Object Damage (FOD) screen

"o Provide adequate inlet grille area for each fan

"o Provide a system capable of rejecting 10,111 BTU/min from

transmission oil
o Provide a system capable of rejecting 3500 BTU/min from

engine oil

"o Provide engine compartment air circulation

"o Provide engine and transmission cooling margin

Exhaust System

The design guidelines for the exhaust of the main engine,

scavenge blower and APU were:

89
 "o Must have a quick disconnect for APU exhaust

" Restriction of exhaust back pressure no greater than

MIA1/MI

"o Use currrent duct mounting design to engine with revised

access

"o Provide sealing for vertical integrated powerpack

removal/installation

"o No hot air exhaust will be routed to the top deck

"o Provide for scavenge blower exhaust route

5.2.4.3 Design Analysis. The cooling system removes heat from

the engine and transmission lubricating oil with two ring type
coolers. The coolers transfer the heat to the cooling air which
is pulled in through the top deck, routed radially from the fans
through the coolers and exhausted to the rear of the tank.

The exhaust system accepts the exhaust flow from the main
engine, and APU. The system uses the current MIAl smoke
generating hardware..

Cooling System

The cooling fans are designed to meet the powerpack cooling

space allotment and performance requirements. Both fans
together are capable of flowing a total of 15,152 cfm of air
(density 0.066 pounds per cubic feet) at 14 inches of water
static pressure through the cooling system. A performance
assessment of a single fan at 9,000 and 10,000 rpm (air density
0.066) is shown in Figure 5-34. The fans selected will require
a total maximum of 76.8 HP for top speed operations. The
annular heat exchanger assemblies will be capable of cooling the
powerpack oil at the maximum vehicle speed and when the vehicle
tractive effort is 70% of the gross vehicle weight (GVW) in
ambient air temperatures of up to 125F.

The cooling point for the ATR is at the maximum vehicle speed.
A single cooler assembly performance assessment was made and
consists of the following:

"o Heat Rejection versus Airflow, Figure 5-35.

"o Air Pressure Loss versus Airflow, Figure 5-36.

"o Oil Pressure Loss versus Oilflow, Figure 5-37.

90
 CALCULATED PERFORMANCE
FAN, MIXED FLOW
SPEED: NOTED
DENSITY: .066 LBS/FT
*15 I-/

14

13 1) 9000 RPM
1 2) 10000 RPM

S/11

T/
C 10 /10
'U
CC 9
C,,
LU

2., 7
I-

Cf) 6 40

5 30 L

4 20

4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE - CFM

Figure 5-34. Single Fan Performance - Static

Pressure vs Flow Rate

91
 7,000

6.000

_z
2 5,000

z
2 4.000
IP-
'U,
'U,

, 3,000
'U

"0 ENGINE OIL FLOW: 33.5 LBS'MIN

ENGINE OIL TEMP: 325 OF
2,000-
00XMSN OIL FLOW: 320 LBS/MIN

XMSN OIL TEMP: 0

255 F

1.000 -MSN OIL TEMP: 265 F

CALCULATED DATA

L I I I
300 400 500 600 700 800

AIR FLOW (LBS/MIN)

Figure 5-35. Single Fan Cooler - Heat

Rejectlon vs Airflow

92
 15.0

14.0--

13.0--

LU

(A
U.

IL

LU
m 10.0--
Un
Cu
eL .10-- SIGEUI

9.0

AIR IN TEMP. 135 *F

BOTH CIRCUITS
(ENGINE & XUSN)

CALCULATED DATA

300 400 500 600 700 800

AIR FLOW (LOS/MIN)

Figure 5-36. Single Fan Cooler -Air

Pressure Loss vs Airflow

93
 * 40.0

35.0

30.0

S 25.0

a.
0

m
U. 20.0

'I

-J 15.0

-ENGINE OIL .0 P@325 F

10.0 - XUSN OIL P @ 25 OF

Q-XUSN OIL AP @ 265 OF

5.0

S I I I I
100 200 300 400 S00 600 700

OIL FLOW (LOS/MIN)

Figure 5-37. Single Fan Cooler - Oil

Pressure Loss vs Oil Flow

94
The estimated flow, velocity, and static pressure losses at
various flowpath stations within the cooling system were
graphically summarized, Figure 5-38. In addition, the powerpack
inlet and outlet temperatures and airflow areas were also
analyzed.

An airside fin comparison study was made for selecting cooling

fin type and fins per inch spacing. This study compares
louvered fin designs used on MI/MIAl with the TMEPS selected
perforated straight fins for flow, heat transfer area, pressure
loss and heat re.ection capabilities. This data supported
selection of the perforated straight fin configuration and
spacing that meets powerpack cooling requirements, including
10-15 percent margin. The selected straight fin configuration
is less susceptible to clogging and easier to clean than the
M1A1 louvered fin coolers.

The straight perforated fin, aligned and spaced at 20 fins per

pressure loss and environmental requirements. The cooler

straight fin spacing (20 PPI) compares favorably with the
effective fin spacing of the M1AA fin coolers at 17, 20, and 27
FPI for the primary, auxiliary, and engine coolers,
respectively. The fin data summary is shown in Table 5-3.

Comparison data was collected for the cooling fan inlet and
inlet grille areas for the MIAI and TMEPS (Table 5-4). A
comparison was also made for the induction, cooling and exhaust
system (Table 5-5). These comparisons were used as design
guides.

Exhaust System

A graphic analysis was made to determine the optimum mounting

bolt access arrangement. From the analysis, it was concluded
that the exhaust duct should have an access panel in the upper
skin' and that the fasteners at the interior should be safety
wired to prevent loosening and potential accidental recuperator
damage.

The analysis also indicated that the duct could be supported at

the hull by a seal and retainer configuration shown on Figure
5-39.

5.2.4.4. Tradeoffs.

Cooling System

The cooling system trade-off analysis showed that because of the

limited available space betweeen powerpack and hull, a
conventional system, including fan/transition duct/slab cooler,

95
 - 0

%0~
%Q % nr4 1 M In
0 %0 '0
co o

0 I4 N 1- r4 W) M n L

I 4. I --4I

V.~ co ri- 4 +a a 14r~ 1

C1~

4 O2 x
1- 01 Ac x >4 Cac 4I4U
4 >4
U cm4 c" w I% U - u
wu wa~
0:a H
14
E-4 x1
z ~a
Cu raa C CaC13 Cu Ca C
Ca~~. a~C w b a w.2

4 0 0 U Occ 0 0 Ix
U
~~~~~~
u U U C C ,cl C 0, , C U Ui a, C

I-4 N
ii V in %0

Ca

'0 ~141
0C4

--g 0

onI
- I
z

In I

"in

" I I I !"r l 1I1.111 III

V
",,,.. : i, I I I t I ' I

Figure 5-38. Cooling System Flowpath

96
Table 5-3. Air Side Fin Comparison

TMEPS
FREE FLOW SURFACE HEAT REJECTION EFFECTIVE FIN
2 2
FIN CONFIGURATION AREA FT AREA FT Z, P AIR alMIN SPACING - FPI

XMSN PLAIN, PERFORATED. 20

.375 H, .008 Til, 20 FPI .144 37.104 21.09 IWG 442.19
SAME AS SAME AS SAME AS SAME AS 20
ENGINE SAME AS TRANSMISSION TRANS' TRANS- TRANS- TRANSMISSION
MISSION MISSION MISSION

FREE FLOW SURFACE2 HEAT REJECTION EFFECTIVE FIN

2
FIN CONFIGURATION AREA FT AREA FT .% P AIR B/MIN SPACING - FPI
PRIM. XMSN LOUVERED,
.375 H, .006 TH, 10 FPI .162 21.002 27.4 IWG 434.34 17

AUX.XMSN LOUVERED, 442.49 20

.375 H, .006 TH, 12 FPI .160 24.295 33.7 IWG

ENGINE LOUVERED,
.375 II, .006 TII, 16 FPI .156 30.881 48.8 IWG 453.72 27

LOUVEIIE FIN PERFORATED FIN

97
Table 5-4. Grille and Cooling Fan Area

z wU
U. LLJ L-

LU W 0
J. 0

U,

ouj
wJ

<WdC C

WW
-J 0 c
a a aQ

00

- dO

Ow CD C
- c\J

z
0

98
Table 5-5. Induction -Exhaust Cooling TMEPS/M1~1

U)' C6 a t 52 C
CL '.3 - S *2u C,
N9. r: -g'0 U

Z Of
C-~~ C U IU. 11

OCOJ. -SC US'fl

c
0

8i

2 02q .0.

-~0 -o

-- C ~S WUo

S@ zco CA

Uj
0 0

aa
LU

2c m

CC

.5=

CD U
a.
M

oo .
0 C
S

0 0 0 C
0O

_ C M

99
 T-BOLT &NUT

1.00 TO 1.25 INTADPOLE SEAL

EXHAUST DUCT
HULL BACK PLATE

"SEALRETAINER

FLANGE --(HOMES ON HULL)

BACK PLATE /

Figure 5-39. Seal/Retainer Configuration

100
would exhibit interference. In addition, more than two fans
would be required.

The use of two identical ring-coolers with integral fan/diffuser

assemblies, on the other hand, provided a cooling package that
could be accommodated in the space available and could be
mechanically driven.

Exhaust System

There were two options for exhaust duct routing. One approach
exits the exhaust at the rear of the vehicle and the other
directs exhaust over the vehicle left or right side. Since
exiting over the side would significantly alter the IR
signature, the rear exhaust as selected.

5.2.4.5 Selected Design. For reasons given in Section

5.2.4.4., the selected cooling system consists of integral
fan/diffuser/cooler assemblies, transmission PTO driven. These
fans take air through an intake grille in the top deck, disperse
the air through a-n annular diffuser into an annular cooler and
exit through a collector duct and ballistic grille at the
vehicle rear.

The selected exhaust duct concept routes exhaust gas to a

vehicle rear exit. The construction is similar to Mi/MIAl, and
the shape is basically driven by powertrain component packaging.

The engine/transmission cooling and exhaust system goals and

compliances are:

GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURES)

Powertrain Cooling:

Transmission at or Transmission at 255F Same as ATR

Below 265*F Cooler Inlet. Engine
Sump Temperature at or Below 325*F_
and 315F Cooler Cooler Inlet for 125*F
Inlet. Engine at Ambient and Max. Vehicle
or Below 325F at Speed
Cooler Inlet for
125"F ambient at
Tractive Effort of
.67/.70 NBCC ON/OFF

Provide a Mechani- Provided Same as ATR

cally Driven Cooling
System

101
 GOL TR-TMEPS Ml-TMEPS (FUTURES)

Accessibility tIn- Improved A~ccessibility Same as ATR

proved over Ml~1 Over Ml~I
E n v i r o n m e n t a l -S am e E n v i r on m e n t -S a m e a s S a m e as M l~ l
as M1A1 M1I~1

Weight-Equal to or Weight Less Thain Ml~l Same as ATR

Less Than MIA1

EXHAUST:

Minimize Recircula- No Hot Air Exhaust Same as ATR

tion Through Top Deck
Accommodate Fording Accommodate Fording Same as ATR
up to 48' Without up to 48" Without
Kits Kits

5.2.5 Hyraulic System. The ATR hydraulic system is similar to

the Ml~1 system (Figure 5-40). It includes the following
(Figure 5-41):

o Hull/Turret Drive System

- Hydraulic pump
- Hydraulic reservoir assembly

o Accessory Cooler and Fan Drive

5.2.5.1 Goals. Goals for the Hull/Turret drive system and
accessory cooler fan drive system are as follows:

Hull/Turret Drive System

PARA~METERGOL

"o Hydraulic Fluid/flow Same as MlAl

Fluid MIL-H-46170, 1650 + 50 PSI,
27 GPM at Idle

"o Environmental Same as MiAl

"o Weight Minimize Weight Increase

"o Safety Reduce Potential for Leaks

Accessory Cooler and Fan Drive

102
 00

44

LU

L.UL<

C- z
Ro
< zn

LU
>z
> 0
U- 0

103
 ACCESSORY COOLER
(INCLUDES HYD. HEAT EXCHANGER)

HULLITURRET
HYDRAULIC PUMP .......... .....

104
 PAAPE GOALS

o Cooling 2120 BTU/min heat rejection

"o Airflow Sufficient to provide required cooling

"o Fluid MIL-H-46170 and Santo Trac 50

"o Environmental Same as MIAl

"o Weight Minimize weight increase

"o Safety Same as MIAI

5.2.5.2 Technical Approach;

Hull/Turret Drive System

The main hydraulic pump (same as MIAI) is driven from the VAG at
a constant speed of 3750 rpm. On the MIAl engine accessory
gearbox, the main hydraulic pump is dependent on the engine
compressor speed. The hydraulic pump will provide a flow of 33
gpm at a discharge pressure of 1600 psi. The hydraulic
reservoir assembly was modified and relocated from the left side
of the vehicle to the right side.

The design guidelines for the hydraulic hull/turret drive system

were:

o Provide equivalent (to M1A1) power for the hydraulic

hull/turret drive system.

o Ensure retention of current main hydraulic pump.

o Eliminate quick-disconnects to reduce potential for fire

hazards.

o Provide improved fittings to eliminate or significantly

reduce fitting leakage.

Accessory Cooler and Fan Drive System (Figure 5-42).

The accessory cooler hydraulic motor is used to power the

cooling fan which reduces the vehicle accessory gearbox and
accessories oil temperature. It will only provide cooling when
the main engine is in operation. The CVT/APU control valve
diverts oil flow from the accessory cooler to t-he APU heat
exchanger to cool the oil when the main engine is not running.
The design guidelines for the accessory cooler and fan drive
systems:

105
 UL

II
0 Mw

zoz

'fRI
w4

Figure 5-42. Accessory Cooler and Fan Drive

System Flow Block Diagram

106
 " Provide 200 BTU/min cooling for hull/turret drive hydraulic
system

o Provide 1,900 BTU/min cooling for CVT/accessories

"o Provide necessary fan horsepower to meet cooling

requirements
" Provide combined heat exchanger for hydraulic and vehicle
accessory gearbox oil to minimize space claim

"o Locate to optimize airflow for cooling fan

"o Reduce fluid leakage by using improved fittings

5.2.5.3 Design Analysis. The hydraulic system analyses

conducted were:

o Hull/Turret Pump Size Analysis

- Flow at Different Speeds

The current M1A1 pump operates through a variable range

from 3000 to 5000 rpm with a flow of 28 to 47 gpm,
respectively. Analysis was conducted to select an
optimum constant speed for TMEPS pump operation. The.
TMEPS pump operates at a constant speed of 3750 rpm
providing a flow of 35.7 gpm which meets vehicle maximum
flow requirements.

- Main Pump Suction Pressure Drop at Different

Temperatures

The main pump is relocated approximately 10 feet from

the current M1A1 main reservoir. An analysis was made
to determine the location affect on cavitation. The
analysis indicated that a safe condition is realized for
all line sizes and ambient temperature ranges of the
hydraulic oil, if the reservoir was relocated to the
right side of the vehicle, behind the main bulkhead.

5.2.5.4 Tradeoffs.

Hull/Turret System

The Hull/Turret system design alternatives evaluated were:

o Face Seal Fittings versus MS Flareless Fittings

107
 Characteristics

Face Seal MS Flareless Fittings

" No distortion of sealing o Could distort due to excessive

surface due to excessive torque
torque

"o Sharp torque rise indi- o No clear indication of over

cates proper torque limit torquing

"o Soft seal - readily o Metal to metal seal - not

adapts to surface damage adaptable to surface damage

" Hand tight fitting will o Needs precise torque to avoid

not readily leak leaking

" Operating pressure from o Operating pressure - up to

vacuum to 6000 psi 3000 psi

"o Vibration resistance - o Vibration resistance - very

excellent good

"o Assembly and disasembly - o Assembly and disassembly -

no springing of asso- needs springing
ciated tubing for
clearance

Face seal fittings were selected over MS flareless fittings for

incorporation into the design.

108
 o Heat Exchanger - Combined versus Separate

The following characteristics comparison was m-de:

One Combined Heat Exchanger Separate Heat Exchangers

o One cooler replaces two o Needs two separate coolers

separate coolers

o Needs one fan for both o Needs one fan for each
coolers cooler

o Needs one fan drive o Needs one fan drive for

each fan

o Small size allows it to be o Cannot be located in spon-

located in sponson for op- son for optimum air intake
timum air intake and ex- and exhaust due to large
haust space requirement

o Design allows more space in o Design will reduce availa-

the engine compartment ble space in the engine
compartment

"o Low weight o Weighs more

" Less complex than separate o More complex system due to

cooler system extra line routing, transi-
tion ducts, two fans

One combined heat exchanger is integrated into the design.

109
Accessory cooler and Fan Drive

The accessory cooler and fan drive alternative designs evaluated

were:

o Ring Cooler versus Slab Cooler

Characteristics

Ring Cooler Slab Cooler

" One cooler replaces two o Needs two separate coolers

coolers

"o Needs one fan drive o Needs two fans

" Small size allows it to be o Can not be located in spon-

located in sponson for op- son for optimum air intake
timum air intake and ex- and exhaust due to its
haust large size

"o Design allows more space in o Design will reduce availa-

the engine compartment ble space in the engine
compartment

"o Requires less space o Requires more space

"o Weighs less o Weighs more

"o Less complex system o More complex system due to

extra line routing

" Higher cost due to higher o Lower cost due to off-the-

initial development cost shelf hardware

A ring cooler was selected for the TMEPS design.

110
 "o Hydraulic versus Mechanical Drive for Auxiliary Cooling Fan

Characteristics

Hydraulic Drive Mechanical Drive

"o Easier to locate in the o Very difficult to provide

sponson for optimum air mechanical drive in the
intake and exhaust sponson with pulleys, belts
or gears
"o Relatively more compact o Requires more space to
provide fan drive in the
sponson

"o Provide flexibility to o Most of the components

locate some of the compo- must be located in the
nents away from the sponson vicinity of the sponson,
where it is difficult to
find more space

"o Design allows more space in o Design will reduce availa-

the engine compartment ble space in the engine
compartment

"o Requires less space o Requires more space

"o Weighs less o Weighs more

"o Less complex system o More complex system due to

compicated pulleys and
gearing arrangements

"o Lower cost o Higher cost due to

extremely complex arrange-
ment

or
Hydraulic drive for the cooling fan was selected.

"o Hydraulic versus Electrical Drive for Auxiliary Cooling Fan

Characteristics

Hydraulic Drive Electric Drive

"o Sufficient power is availa- o Sufficient power is not

ble to drive the fan available to drive the fan

"o Relatively more compact and o Requires large size 24 volt

it saves space motor to drive the cooling
fan

" Can be located in the spon- o Cannot be located in the

son for optimum air intake sponson due to large motor
and exhaust position size. This requires com-
plicated ducting for air
intake and exhaust

" Design allows more space in o Design will reduce availa-

the engine compartment ble space in the engine
compartment

"o Weighs less o Weighs more

"o Rear Cooling Air Exhaust vs. Top Deck Cooling Air Exhaust

Characteristics

Rear Cooling Air Exhaust Top Deck Cooling Air Exhaust

"o Minimum impact on vehicle o Relatively larger impact on

heat signature heat signature
"o Open cavity in sponson forms o Ducting required
a natural duct

"o Saves space o Needs space for the duct

"o Low weight o Weighs more

"o Less complex system due to o More complex system due to

low number of parts extra duct routing

"o Low cost due to low number o Higher cost due to more
of parts parts

112
A rear cooling air exhaust route was selected.

5.2.5.5 Selected Design. The hydraulic hull/turret drive and

accessory cooler fan drive systems selected concepts are:

o Production Hull/Turret Pump (Constant Speed 3750 - 100 RPM)

o Elimination of Quick Disconnects wherever possible

o Use of Face Seal Fittings

o Pump Mounted on Vehicle Accessory Gearbox (VAG)

o No plumbing Separation Required During Powerpack Removal

o Combined Annular Hydraulic Fluid Cooler/Accessory Cooler

o Relocated Hydraulic Reservoir for Reduced Low Temperature

Cavitation Susceptibility

o Constant Speed Fan Drive Hydraulic Motor 1650 + 50 PSI,

Pressure, 7 GPM Flow

o Rear Exit Exhaust

The Hull/Turret Drive System Compliances Are:

GOALS ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

System Performance Hydraulic System Same as ATR

1650 + 50 PSI

Hydraulic System
1650 + 50 PSI

Environment

Same as MIAl Same as MIAl Same as ATR

Weight

Minimize Wt. 35 Lb Increase Same as ATR

Increase
Safety

Same as MiAl Eliminated Quick Same as ATR

Disconnects and
Reduced Potential
for Leaks

113
The Accessory Cooler and Fan Drive System Compliances Are:

GOALS PARAMETERS MI-TMEPS (FUTURE)

System Performance Hydraulic System Same as ATR

1650 + 50 PSI
Hydraulic System
1650 + 50 PSI

Heat Rejection 2800 Meets Same as ATR

BTU/min

Environment

Same as M1AI Same as MIA1 Same as MlAI

Weight

Minimize Wt. In- 20-lb Increase Same as ATR

crease

Safety

Same as MlAI Reduce Potential for Same as ATR

Leaks

5.2.6 Fuel System. The propulsion system incorporates a

reconfigured fuel conditioning system which performs the same
functions as the MIA1 system. The APU has its own integral fuel
conditioning system. The ATR fuel system (Figure 5-43) provides
fuel to the APU, the main engine, and the smoke generator system
from the front MIA1 fuel tanks. For the ATR, the MA11 engine
compartment and sponson fuel tanks, with their respective pumps
and fuel level sensors, are removed.

Two fuel pumps were located under the turret basket. One pump
supplied fuel to the APU, the other supplied fuel to the main
engine and smoke generator system.

5.2.6.1 Goals. The design goals for the fuel system were:

PARAMETER GOALS

*Range

NBC ON 279 Miles Nominal

NBC OFF 289 Miles Nominal

*Vehicle Fuel Capacity 473 Gallons Minimum

(255 Gallons ATR Only)

114
LEFT FRONT
FUEL TANK10 RIGHT FRONT
149 UEL TANK

CRW COMPARTMENT
'UL"HEAO MANUAL SHUTOFF

SMOKE ENGINE COMPARTMENT

. ,L )il
NOZZLES r" ... . ..
~~~FE UL
.. T...---I PUMPEi
FIJ:ELPIJMP
CONTRO

BACK PRESSURE I6
CHECK VALVE
INLINE FILTER

(10 COUPLJNG (TYP)

INUNE FUEL
PUMP

ORAIN]
r PRIMARYFITER I

, I FWU) ORAIN
FUEL MANIFOLD
9RAII

Figure 5-43. TMEPS Fuel System

115
 PARAMETER GOALS

*Under Armor Capacity 78% Based on Fuel for 289 Mile

Range

Fuel Types Same as MlIA

Emergency Operation Provide Manual Shut-Off

Same as MlAI

*Starting Attitude 60% Longitudinal 40% Side Slope

Same as MIAl

Starting Temperature -25"F to 125"F Without Kit: Down

to -65 With Kit

Environmental Same as MIAI

Weight Reduce

*NOTE: To the nature of the ATR peculiar design, the ATR does
not meet these MIA1 requirements. The starting attitude
requirement may not be met at low ATR fuel tank levels.
5.2.6.2 Technical Approach. The design guidelines for the fuel
systm were:

"o Provide fuel to:

- Main engine
- APU
- Smoke generator system

"o Fuel capacity targets:

- ATR - 255 gallons

- Use existing (MlAI) front fuel tanks only

"o Interface requirements:

- Main engine (850 lbs/hr at 4-22 psig)

- APU (35 lbs/hr at 4-22 psig)
- Smoke generator pump (560 lbs/hr at 0-10 psig)
- Electrical

00 Fuel sensors
oo Pump operation
oo Pump sequencing

116
 o Modes of operation:

- APU only
- Main engine only
- APU cool down, main engine and smoke generator

o Fuel conditioning hardware integral to APU

5.2.6.3 Design Analysis. The ATR configuration relocates the

current MlAl oroduction fuel water separator and primary filter
to a fuel mounting plate on the main engine. Only one fuel
disconnect on the fuel mounting plate is required for powerpack
installation and removal.

A combination flow control and pressure reduction manifold is

incorporated on the outlet side of the fuel water separator to
reduce the engine and smoke generator system fuel pressure.
This manifold is mounted to the fuel mounting plate on the
engine resulting in an integrated modular design with the other
mazor fuel conditioning components.

The manual shutoff valve is added to the fuel manifold to stop

fuel flow to the engine. With this configuration, less fuel
will be entrained between the engine and the valve after valve
closure, resulting in a shorter period of time between valve
closure and engine shut down compared to MIA1.

Two separate fuel pumps are necessary to satisfy the flow

requirements of three unique systems. One pump provides fuel to
the APU system at a maximum rate of 35 lbs/hr. The second pump
provides fuel to the engine and the smoke generator systems at a
combined rate of 1410 lbs/hr. Fuel to the engine is supplied at
a maximum rate of 850 lbs/hr. The modified MIAl smoke generator
system is designed to operate at a maximum rate of 560 lbs/hr.
This system was inoperative for the ATR.

The ATR fuel system was designed to comply with all existing
M1AI characteristics with the following exception:

o Under armor capacity (78 percent) not required for ATR.

o ATR starting attitude 60 percent longitudinal, 40 percent

side slope - longitudinal (at low fuel levels).

o Range

o Fuel capacity

5.2.6.4 Tradeoffs

The following tradeoffs and analyses were developed.

117
 o Two fuel pumps versus one main fuel pump

- One pump cannot meet flow extremes (35 lbs/hr to 1410

lbs/hr)
- Additional fuel filtration is not required for APU
- Pressure regulation is not required for APU

"o No day tank versus day tank

- No fuel transfer or fuel level sensing systems required
(systems required for day tank)
- Maintainability (fewer components - easier access)
- Cost (fewer components)
- Less complex system (componentry and electronics)

"o Manifold versus line plumbing

- Fewer interconnects (potential leaks)

- Improved assembly
- Reduced maintenance
- Unitized component assembly

5.2.6.5 Selected Design. The selected fuel system design is:

"o Basic Fuel System

- Fuel pumped directly from front fuel tanks

oo No day tank
oo No intertank fuel transfer system
oo New fuel manifold required for
- Pressure Regulation
- Flow Direction

"o Fuel Pumps

- Two pumps (ATR peculiar)

oo APU Pump (35 lbs/hr)

oo Engine and smoke generator pump (1410 lbs/hr)

"o MIAl Smoke Generator

"o ATR Fuel Capacity 255 Gallons

- Front fuel tanks only

The fuel system compliances are:

118
GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Vehicle Fuel Capacity 255 Gallons 473 Gallons minimum

(Dependent on
vehicle
configuration)

Underarmor Capacity (78%) Not Required Over 90%

Fuel Types Same as MIAl Same as MIAl

Emergency Operation - Provided Provided

Provide Manual Fuel
Shutoff

Starting Attitude - Longitudinal at Same as MIAI

60% Longitudinal, 40% Low Fuel Levels
Side Slope Questionable for
ATR

Starting Temperature Sufficient for Same as MIAl

Extremes - -25F to ATR Testing
125F Without Kit,
Down To -65 with Kit

Environmental Sufficient for Same as MIAI

ATR Testing

Weight Reduced TBD

5.2.7 Electrical System. The vehicle electrical system

consists of a power source, power control, and a power
distribution system. A two-wire isolated return electrical
system is used where the power ground wire is routed with the
corresponding hot wire in a twisted pair to maintain
electromagnetic compatibility.

5.2.7.1 Goals. The electical system goals were:

PARAMETERS GOALS

o Power 24V DC, 300 amp-hour batteries, 650 amp

oil cooled alternator
Two (2) wire distribution

o Operation 18-30V DC

o Starting -25F to +125F without kits, down to

-65F with kits

119
 PARAMETERS GOALS

"o Silent Watch Capable of starting at -25F after one

hour silent watch

"o EMI/EMC Same as MIAl

"o Environmental Same as MlAl

"o Power Outiet Same as MIAI

"o Weight Minimize weight increase

"o Auxiliary Power 5KW, 28V DC APU

"o Powerpack Provide quick-disconnect panels to

facilitate vertical powerpack removal

"o Harnesses Twisted pair, RFI shielding as necessary,

coded per schematic diagram

5.2.7.2 Technical Approach. The ATR electrical design

guidelines were:

"o Use existing NBC control system from tank commander's panel
in the turret

"o Provide ability to switch automtically between APU and

engine driven NBC system

"o Use existing lead acid batteries (6TN)

"o Use existing M1AI hardware, where possible

o All equipent/boxes shall be grounded to vehicle structure

"o Use same control/instrumentation except APU/SCAF

" Provide fire safety improvements for electrical power

system

"o Use prime power interrupter to protect batteries, power

cables, and prevent fires

"o Electrical system must interface with the following

subsystems:

- Powerpack (engine/transmission)
- CVT - Accessory drive gearbox
- SCAF
- Hydraulics

120
 - APU
- NBC system
- Fuel system
- Fire suppression system

5.2.7.3 Design Analysis. The system power source consists of

four MS35000-3 lead acid batteries (see below) in accordance
with MS drawing 35000. These batteries are connected In series-
parallel to provide 24VDC, 240 amp-hour capacity. With the APU
running, the battery system provides sufficient electrical
capacity to satisfy the engine cold starting requirementes of
-25oF without a cold start kit, and -650F with a cold start kit.
In addition, the emergency (short duration) dormancy power
requirement will be met.
Battery Characteristics

Type Military type 6TL (lead acid)

Quantity 4
Battery connection Series - parallel
Capacity (each pair) 120 amp hour
Voltage output 24vdc (alternator off)
Weight (each) 71 lbs.

A projected distribution of electrical loads is shown in Table

5-6. The charging system uses a 650 amp oil cooled alternator
with a solid state voltage regulator (see below). With the CVT
operating at a constant speed of 3000 rpm, the alternator
delivers between 26.8 and 30.2 volts to the batteries when
operated In an ambient temperature range of -650 F to +125 0 F,
respectively.

Alternator Characteristics

Voltage 25.8 to 30.2 vdc

Output 650 amps - 28 volts @ 3000 rpm
Cooling Oil
Flow 2.85 gpm min 0 2000 rpm
Weight 95 lbs
Special provisions Waterproof

Two utility or auxiliary outlets are provided (24 vdc nominal),

one each in the turret and hull. In addition, each outlet is
provided with a 15 ampere automatic reset circuit breaker. A
NATO slave receptacle will also be provided for standard slaving
capability to/from other vehicles.

121
Table 5-6. TMEPS Electrical Load Analysis

00

Ch 0 N 0n 0 Sn.-

'
do LM LM to0

00L

N3 N

00

Sn 0en 0 0 S S
C4 -4

1; 001 -4, I~

0 0) 0
0

j 00 > 14 4VA N

bjA 0 9 -4->

0 N N
In00

V 93

fa U 0
* 0 0
-44o 4j to0
0 0 1.

0 0J 0 &)
a0 - 4 u4
.-En- .a. 00

0 u-I 0 O ~ 0
1022. *l
Space claims have been verified for the following:

o APU ECU

"o APU/SCAF Control Panel

"o Engine Disconnect Panel

"o APU Diconnect Panel

"o Batteries, Busses (Left Sponson)

"o Auxiliary Network Box, PPI, Regulators

"o Transmission Digital ECU

"o Diagnostic Data Readers (Engine and Transmission)

"o CVT ECU

5.2.7.4 Tradeoffs. The electrical subsystem design
alternatives were evaluated and are presented herein.

Four (4) Lead Batteries versus Six (6) Batteries

o (4) 6TL Batteries

- Less space and weight

- Less cables, clamps and terminals
- Less maintenance
- Less costly
- Capability to start main engine with APU running at
ambient temperatures less than -25F

o (6) 6TN Batteries

- More space and weight

- More hardware
- More maintenance
- More cost
- Capable of starting main engine without APU running at
ambient temperatures less than -25"F

A four battery system is integrated in TMEPS.

SinQle versus Two Alternators

o Single Alternator

- Driven from VAG overrunning clutch by either APU or main

engine

123
 - Single alternator can be controlled by one regulator
- Less expensive system
- More complicated alternator driving method
- Requires less space

o Two Alternators

- More expensive system

- Requires more space due to addition of hardware
- Requires two voltage regulators
- Less complicated alternator driving method

One alternator is integrated into the TMEPS design.

Battery Cable Connection vgrsus Bus Connection

"o Bus Connection

- Bus connection to battery terminals can cause
misalignment under shock and vibration
- Misalignment may cause loose connection
- Loose connection to battery terminals may cause arcing
due to presence of air gap
- Arcing may lead to battery fire

"o Cable Connection

- More flexible connection than bus connection

- Prevents misalignment problem
- Better resistance to vehicle shock and vibration
conditions
- Cable connection have proven to reduce fire hazards in
M6OA3 tank

TMEPS utilizes cable connections for the batteries.

Prime Power Interrupter (PPI Alternatives)

o With PPI

- Can protect batteries automatically

- Add protection to positive power bus, starter cables,
alternator cables, cables to HPDB
- Power to auxiliary network box cannot be turned off
without using PPI, since the auxiliary networks box is
directly connected to positive power bus

o Without PPI

No protection of batteries, starter cables, alternator

cables, cables to HPDB

124
 Power to auxiliary network box cannot be turned off with
master power switch

A prime mower interrupter is an integral part of the TMEPS

electrical design.

Seoarate APU/SCAF Control Panel versus Modified (DMP/DIP)

Driver's Master Panel (DMP)/Driver's Instrument Panel (DIP)

"o Separate APU/SCAF Control Panel

- No modification of OMP
- Simple modification of DIP
- More realistic design approach for ATR
- Requires less electrical harness modification

"o Modified DMP/DIP

- APU/SCAF monitoring function can be added to modified
DIP
- APU/SCAF control function can be added to modified OMP
- Requires redesign of DMP, DIP housing, face panel,
mounting, PC boards, and harnesses

A separate APU/SCAF control panel is designed for the TMEPS ATR.

Remote APU Control Panel versus Local APU Panel

o Remote APU Panel/Display

Permits APU start/stop by the driver

Considered APU control from turret by commander and
rejected due to lack of sufficient capacity in the
turret slipring

o Local APU Control/Display

- Inconvenient
- No accessibility for the driver
- Will not permit monitoring of APU

A remote APU control panel is located in the driver's

compartment.

Modification of Hull Networks Box (HNB) versus Separate

Auxiliary HNB

o Modify Existing HNB

Space for only six new circuit breakers

125
 - Cannot accommodate eight additional new breakers
- No space for 10 new relays
- No space for adding three PC boards
- Require change of housing, cover, inside mounting,
harnesses
- Require new connectors for harnesses

o Auxiliary Networks Box

- Very simple modification to existing HNB

- Less electrical harness modification required

An auxiliary networks box is integrated in the TMEPS electrical

system.

Diaital APU RPM Meter versus Analog Meter

o Analog Meter

- Cannot install in the available space in the APU/SCAF

panel
- Experienced problem in M1 tank due to shock and
vibration-

o Digital Meter

- Requires less space

- Can be installed in APU/SCAF panel

A digital RPM meter is in the APU/SCAF panel.

5.2.7.5 Selected Design. The vehicle electrical power is

provided by four MS35000-3 batteries and a 18KW alternator. The
batteries provide basic power to the vehicle via the Auxiliary
Network Box and Hull Power Distribution Box (Figure 5-44). Bus
bar battery interconnects are replaced by cables to avoid Bus
bar fires due to misalignment problems. In addition, increases
spacing between the positive and negative buses is provided.

A positive regulator interlock control is added to ensure a

smooth transition between APU and main engine opration. An
additional feature which has been incorporated into the
electrical system is the ability to activate the Auto-Trip for
the Prime Power Interrupter (PPI) to disable the alternator
field in case of a system short circuit.

The remote APU/SCAF Control and Display Panel (Figure 5-45) is

located in the driver's compartment. The ECU for the APU has
been located under the turret basket. The system block diagram
is shown in Figure 5-46.

126
 NI
SPEEDOWTlER. OIL TEMPI PRESSUR
PARKING A SERVICE BRAKE

DRIVERS DRIVERS .IL

MATE . - L; UI4:. -W M ENGNE STARlED
* * ISHIFT 5Se

SELECTOR

SIAANOSTI

MUINETRPUG
AISTTISTOP EAYUPIO
aG

OMER$ APUXIIR TNGINERSIS2TRAN

AEcIsoE* AM STR ITEMOCI 0I TEMPLA

Figure
5-44. VehicOeElcRil Powe BlocADTgra

PGWER
SCF127I
 .
AUXIUARY POWER UNIT EMERGENCY
OVER
0 SPEED 0 RPM 0 STOP____________

1 _--
0 0
OIL PRES OIL LEVEL HI TEMP AIR FILTER ABORT
LOW LOW COOLANT CLOGGED

STARTED
MANUAL FAULT COOL DOWN
SERVICE

O'b START
SCAF PPI

AUTO MAN

0 AUTO OVER SHUT DOWN

RIDE

i4

Figure 5-45. APU/SCAF Control/Display Panel

128
6"

129
The design approach also includes the following

Powerpack/SCAF/CVT features:

"o Electric controlled clutches in the VAG

"o Relocated modified quick-disconnect panel for the powerpack

"o New harness trough located on the engine

"o Automatic/Manual/SCAF auxiliary cleaning cycle initiation

"o SCAF plenum control box interface

"o Digital ECU for the main engine

"o Digital ECU for the transmission

"o Digital ECU for the CVT/VAG

"o RS-422 communication link between the engine and

transmission ECUs with a hardwire backup

Fuel System - Electrical

The electrical hardware to control the fuel system was modified

for the ATR configuration to reflect the following changes.

"o Revision of the fuel level sensor wiring in the sponson

areas to accommodate removal of rear tanks

"o Revision of the left and right pump wiring circuits

"o Addition of the electrical circuit for the APU fuel pump

"o Addition of the smoke generator solenoid circuits

NBC System - Electrical

This system is modified to allow manual NBC system actuation

after the APU or main engine starts. In addition, since the NBC
system is co-powered, the CVT Electronic Control Unit controls
engaging/disengaging of the NBC compressor clutch.

Fire Suppression and Detection System - Electrical

With the addition of the APU and subsequent supporting hardware,

new wiring harnesses were designed to accommodate relocation of
various fire sensors. New fire sensors, wiring, and amplifiers
were also used. Should a fire develop and a second shot is
required, automatic shutdown of the APU will occur.

130
Hull Networks Box

The Hull Networks Box required circuit revision due to

modifications of the existing fuel and NBC systems, and the
addition of a transmission digital ECU.

Driver's Instrument Panel

Wiring changes have been implemented to accommodate deletion of

the sponson tank's fuel level sensors. Additional wiring
changes have been made to allow the APU "caution" and "CVT
fault" signals to be displayed on the panel.

Hull Power Distribution Box

Minor internal modifications have been made to accommodate the

PPI.

Auxiliary Networks Box

Due to space claim constraints, the current Hull Networks Box

(HNB), would not allow the addition of 14 new circuit breakers,
10 new relays, and 3 new Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) required
for TMEPS. A new Auxiliary Networks Box was designed and
integrated to accommodate these required additions, Figure 5-47.

Wiring Harnesses

Twenty existing wiring harnesses required rework or redesign.

Fourteen new harnesses were also required.

Electrical System Compliance

The electrical system compliances for the ATR were:

GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Weight Insignificant Weight Same as MIA1

Minimize Weight delta
Increase

Auxiliary Power 18KW, 28V DC 18KW, 28V DC

5KW, 28V DC

Powerpack Removal Provided Same as ATR

Provide quick-
disconnect to
facilitate vertical
powerpack removal

131
 4W4

4I

Figure 5-47. Auxiliary Networks Box

132
GOAL ATRlTE2F MI-TMFPS (FLITURFP

Harnesses Same as MlA1 Same as ATR

Twisted pair, RFI
shielding (as
necessary), coded
per schematic

Power 24V DC 200 AH (4) Same as ATR

24V DC 300 AH (6) Batteries 650A Oil
Batteries, 650 AMP Cooled Alternator, 2
Oil Cooled Alter- Wire 18-30V Operation
nator, 2 wire,
18-30V

Starting -250F to +1250F With- Same as ATR

-25F to +125F out Kits, Down to
Without Kits, Down -65F with Kits
to -656F with Kits

EMI/EMC Same as MIAI Same as MIAI

Same as M1AI

Safety Improved Same as ATR

Same as MlAl

Power Outlet Same as MIA1 Same as M1AI

Same as MIAI

5.2.8 Driver's Control System. The TMEPS driver's control

system consists of steering, braking, throttle, and shift
controls. For all driver controls, the configuration/hardware
of the TMEPS driver's compartment is the same as the M1A1,
including the forces required to operate the controls.

5.2.8.1 Goals. The driver's control system goals were:

PARAMETER GOAL

o PARKING - Same as M1A1.

o THROTTLE - Same as M1A1.

o STEERING - Same as M1A1.

o SERVICE BRAKE - Same as MIAI.

o SHIFTING - Same as MIAI.

133
5.2.8.2 Technical Approach. The primary difference between
TMEPS and M1AI control systems was in the routing of the cables
in the engine compartment. New cable routings were required for
TMEPS.

During the development of the transmission controls system (see

Section 5.2.2) an analysis was made in regard to the number of
shafts to be employed for brake application. A two shaft system
would have used one shaft for both service and left side parking
brake functions; and the remaining shaft for the right side
parking brake. A three shaft system, similar to the current
M1A1 configuration (with respect to force and rotation
requLirements) was chosen to minimize the addition of new
hardware design.

5.2.8.3 Design Analysis. The steering and brake control cables

are mounted on the transmission. The braking and steering
cables/linkages are the same as the MiAl, except for routing.
The shifting and throttle controls are electrical connection
with the engine and transmission ECUs. The throttle and shift
controls are similar to the M1A1 configuration, with the
exception of the electrical harness routing.

Control of the braking system is mechanical, with a large

percentage of the brake system hardware identical to the
production X1100-3B hardware.

The service brake and left parking brake (Figure 5-48) cables
are routed from the top of the transmission down and under the
engine. The steering control cable is routed down, behind the
transmission, and fed under the transmission and engine. To
facilitate the steer cable routing, a groove was designed in the
transmission casting. Interference from the cooling and exhaust
system prevented routing cables over the top of the powerpack on
the left side. The right side parking brake cable is routed
over the powerpack. This approach was selected to avoid the
tight bends that would result if the cable were routed under the
oowerpack.

All cables are capable of being disconnected forward of the

oowerpack. Covered cables running from the bulkhead to the
disconnects are secured to the hull and will stay with the
vehicle during powerpack removal. Likewise cables mounted to
the powerpack will stay with the powerpack.

5.2.8.4 Tradeoffs. A tradeoff study as conducted for a

mechanical/hydraulic parking brake system (MlAl) vs. a hydraulic
system (RAM-D). The M1A1 system was selected for TMEPS due to
the following advantages over the RAM-D system:

134
 Maa-

Lur5-48 MP rk CnrlSse

135r
 - Safety - No potential for engine compartment fire hazard
- Keeps all hydraulic components forward of the bulkhead
- Reduces technical complexity
- Uses conventional and economical off-the-shelf hardware
- Not subjected to heat/soak-back
- Reduces space claim
- Provides quick-disconnect; easy maintenance, and
handling
5.2.8.5 Selected Design. The driver's control system selected

concepts are:

"o Servicce Brake

Service brake configuration differs from M1A1 only in
routing of the cables, location of the linkages, and the
location of the brake shaft on transmission

" Steering

- Steering differs from M1A1 only in the routing of the

cables, location of the linkages, and the location of
the steer shaft on the transmission

"o Parking Brake

- Parking brake differs from MIAI only in routing of the
cable, location of the linkages, and the location of the
parking brake shafts on transmission

Throttle and Shift Controls

- Throttle and shift controls will be similar to existing

MiAl configuration with the exception of the routing of
electrical harnesses.

The driver's control system goals and compliances are:

GOAL ATR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Controls such that a 5th Same as M1A1 Same as ATR

percentile male operator
may properly operate.

Service Brake Same as M1A1 Same as ATR

Parking Brake Same as MIA1 Same as ATR

Steering Same as M1A1 Same as ATR

Throttle Same as M1A1 Same as ATR

136
GOAL AmJ-.EPS MI-TMEPS (FUTURP)

Shift Same as M1A1 Same as ATR

5.2.9 Structures

5.2.9.1 Goals

PARAMETERS GOALS

o Ballistic Protection Same as M1AI1 (space claim

for ATR)

o Structural Adequacy Same as M1A1

o Engine Compartment Same as MIAI

o Access Doors and Grilles Provide necessary access

doors and grilles

o Vehicle Geometry Same as M1A1 (except

length)

5.2.9.2 Technical Approach. The M1A1 production hull structure

(pilot vehicle 120-4) was modified to accommodate the TMEPS
propulsion system. The ATR vehicle was not required to maintain
ballistic integrity in the modified areas, since it will be used
as a test bed, however, the space claim for ballistic protection
is provided. To minimize cost, some parts were fabricated from
mild structural steel instead of armor steel. This substitution
did not affect the structural integrity of the hull.

The major structural design guidelines (Figure 5-49) were:

Top Deck

"o Provide space for Denver grilles

"o Provide sufficient support to modified top deck

"o Provide necessary grilles and access doors

o Use existing M1AI hardware wherever possible

Sponson

o Design for the left sponson air induction, batteries and

buses

137
APO AIR HEAT EXCHANGER
IuN COOUNG FAN
INTAKEACCESS

ACCESSORY DRIVE FILL .......

TUBE ACCESS
TRANSMISSION COOLING
FAN AIR INTAKE
FILTERS &
FUEL SYSTEM
SHUT OFF
VALVE ACCESS ENGINE
MAINTENANCE
ELECTRIC QUICK ACCESS
DISCONNECT BOX
ACCESS

BATTERY
COMPARTMENT
ACCSS0ACS

PLAN VIEW

Figure 5-49. Structural Design Modifications

138
 o Design' for the right sponson engine exhaust and

auxiliary heat exchanger

Hull Structure (Figure 5-50)

o Provide welded rear grilles for engine and oil cooler

exhausts

o Extend rear side walls to support rear grilles

"o Relocate lifting eyes and tail lights

"o Modify hull rear structure

"o Modify hull ammunition compartment and doors supporting

structure for APU

Turret Basket

o Modify turret platform hatch to facilitate new auxiliary

network box installation

Weight

o Minimize weight without degrading ballistic protection

and structural adequacy.

5.2.9.3 Design analysis

o Hull Measurement Analysis

Dimensional measurements were taken inside the engine

(pilot vehicle 120-4) to establish the minimum structure
to facilitate design and location of the powerpack and
other components. This was done using laser system
which measured the vehicle engine compartment at
specified grid locations. Measurements were also taken
inside the engine compartment of 10 production vehicles
at the Lima Tank Plant.

o Liftino Eye Analysis

The rear lifting eyes are relocated to accommodate the

new engine exhaust design which exists through the right
sponson rear wall, Figure 5-50.

A preliminary stress analysis of the new design for the

lifting eyes indicates that they are structurally sound.

The new location of the lifting eyes does not

accommodate the pin clearance on one side of the right

139
Figure 5-50. TMEPS Vehicle Rear View Configuration~

140
 lifting eye for slinging/lifting per MIL-STD-209 G.
However, the pin can be inserted from the other side of
the right lifting eye in the shackle, to lift the
vehicle.

o Heat Signature Analysis

A preliminary heat signature review was performed on two

different cooling exhaust grille designs, one with the
airflow downward, the other rearward. TMEPS will
proceed with the grille design which directs the exhaust
air downward. The impact on heat signature will be
addressed as a part of a follow-on program.

o Denver Grille Evaluation

The air intake grilles will protrude one inch above the
top deck. This increased height would be addressed in a
follow-on program to develop a shorter Denver grille.
Preliminary ballistic evaluation shows that a shorter
grille with narrower spacing between adjacent louvers
can be used. Airflow and ballistic testing would be
required to validate the new design.

o Hull Deflection Analysis

A hull deflection analysis was conducted to determine

the degree of hull deflection when traversing Profile IV'
and the six (6) inch staggered bump course. The
analysis was performed using an M1AI hull with the top
deck and rear grille doors installed.

The analysis indicates that the maximum relative

displacement is negligible. In addition, the TMEPS hull
is expected to be stiffer, due to the replacement of the
MIA1 rear grille doors with a solid structure/grille
assembly.

o Reaction Loads/Deflection analysis

An analysis was performed to determine reaction loads

induced by the engine/transmission combination on the
trunnion supports, left and right side torque reaction
members. In addition, the deflection at the engine
mount and the shear force at the range housing was also
determined. This data was used to design the
engine/transmission support points, and attaching bolt
clamping loads.

141
 o Weiaht Analysis

The ATR fully fueled weighed 120,900 pounds. This

weight did not include crew or combat load. The actual
increase in vehicle weight from the original MA11
configuration was 300 pounds.

5.2.9.4 Tradeoffs. Trade studies were conducted in the

following areas:

"o Top Deck - One or two piece construction

" Denver grille versus new ballistic design versus M60

grille design

"o Maintenance access doors - optimize access

"o Lifting eyes - longer versus shorter (at new location)

"o Tail light - hinged door versus fixed bolted door

5.2.9.5 Selected Design

Top Deck

The top deck was modified to provide access doors and air intake
grilles with mounting similar to the M1A1.

Left Sponson

The left sponson fuel cell was removed and the structure
modified to accommodate batteries, bus bars, and the SCAF air
intake. Access to the four batteries is through two hinged top
doors.

Riqht Sponson

The right sponson fuel cell and batteries were removed and
replaced with the engine exhaust duct and auxiliary heat
exchanger. In addition, the inner and rear sponson walls were
also removed and the top deck extended to cover this area.

Turret Basket

The turret platform was modified to facilitate installation of a

new auxiliary networks box.

Hull Structure

The following hull structural modifications were also required:

142
 o The existing lifting eyes were relocated. Two side plates
of the transmission cooling fan exhaust grille are used as
lifting eyes. A torque box is also designed for the right
hand lifting eye to transfer load to the hull wall.

o The existing tail lights from the rear of the sponson have
been relocated on the new powerpack mounting access covers
on the rear plate.

o The existing hinged rear grille doors are replaced by two

separate welded grilles. The engine exhaust grille is at
the rear right sponson. The bottom louver is detachable to
facilitate track installation. The transmission cooling
fan exhaust grille is located at the center of the rear
plate to exhaust hot air downward. A vent hole is also
provided to vent compartment air.

o A steer cable access door is provided on the rear plate.

o The hull ammo compartment inner wall and its door frame is
removed to facilitate mounting and access to the APU.

0 The inner and rear right sponson walls are removed to

facilitate engine exhaust duct routing.

The vehicle structure goals and compliances are:

GOAL AIR-TMEPS M1-TMEPS (FUTURE)

Ballistic Protection Ensure Space Claims MIA1 Equivalent

(Protect Components)

Structural Adequacy MIA1 Similar M1AI Similar

Engine Compartment MIA1 Similar M1AI Similar

(Waterproof Bulkhead) (Modify Bulkhead for
TMEPS APU)

Access Doors and Design as Required as required

Grilles

Vehicle Geometry MIA1 Equivalent M1AI Equivalent

(Except Length)

143
5.3 Vehicle Performance

5.3.1 Performance Goals. The performance goals for the TMEPS

ATR vehicle were to provide improved fuel economy, maintain or
exceed MlA1 vehicle automotive performance (at 63 tons) and
achieve M1 automotive performance (at 60 tons) where possible.

The TMEPS ATR vehicle with full fuel load, less crew, was
weighed at 120,900 pounds (60.5 tons). Prior to testing, the
vehicle was upweighted to 126,000 pounds (63 tons). Initial
plans to test the vehicle at 130,000 pounds (65 tons) were
abandoned, due to insufficient ballast storage space.

5.3.2 Automotive Performance. This section compares predicted

TMEPS performance with actual measured data. Where possible, an
:l.tir f verfvrm~mce deviation is provided.

Textron Lycoming has recently completed post calibration and

diagnostic testing of engine T202 and the RESCAF used during the
vehicle test. Additional testing and inspection of RESCAF is
sccheduled to be completed by 30 October 1990. At that time,
Textron will provide additional data and evaluation results.

5.3.2.1 Vehicle Acceleration. The time required to accelerate

from 0 to 20 mph on a hard surface road with NBC system off and
tactical idle on was measured in the forward direction only.
Due to the transmission configuration, the vehicle would not
obtain the M1AI specified 20 mph reverse speed. Consequently,
reverse acceleration time to 20 mph was not tested. A
comparison of MA1P specification and TMEPS measured acceleration
data is provided below:
2 3
Time to M1A1 1 TMEPS TMEPS
20 mph Minimum Measured Corrected
(Sec) (Sec) (Sec)

7.5 8.7 7.9

Notes: I Performance based on 63 ton vehicle, 90"F

ambient, 2000 ft elevation.

2 Performance based on 63 ton vehicle, 60.5F,

29.44 in Hg.

3 Acceleration time with back-up engine corrected

for proper Engine Control Unit (ECU) and 63 ton
weight. Performance based on 63 ton vehicle,
60.5F, 29.44 in Hg.

144
The TMEPS ATR acceleration goal of 7.0 sec was not met.
Subsequent investigation has ruled out the engine as the sole
cause of the reduced performance. Results of this investigation
oresented in Section 5.3.2.2.

5.3.2.2 TMEPS Post Engine Investigation. The TMEPS program

concluded in June 1990 with a one week vehicle demonstration at
Milford Proving Grounds. The vehicle performed well but the
mobility characteristics, most noticeably acceleration was lower
than expected. Although there are many factors contributing to
this performance, Textron Lycoming and Donaldson Company elected
at their own expense, to further investigate the post test
performance of the engine and SCAF filter elements.
Accordingly, following the completion of the Milford testing,
the engine (SN T202T) and the SCAF barrier filter elements were
returned to Textron Lycoming in "as used" condition for further
testing investigation. As a part of this investigation, the
barrier filters were subsequently returned to the Donaldson
Company for their independent assessment.

The testing at Textron Lycoming, illustrated in Figures 5-51 and

5-52, disclosed the following results:

Table 5-7. Engine Performance (Comparison)

Engine Ambient Engine Inlet

Condition At: Date SHP/ OF Temp. ( ) 'F NH

Acceptance Mar. 6 1541 69 71 100.6

Un-installed

Field Return Based on 1498 69 71 100.6

Un-installed Sept. 21

Data

Engine H.P. 43

This engine, when installed in the vehicle and adjusted for

losses imposed by inlet grill, exhaust duct and exhaust grill
defined by GDLS and ambient/measured engine inlet temperature
relationships, would produce power into the transmission as
shown in Table 5.

145
 PAN

Figure 5-51. Test Cell Configuration

146
Figure 5-52. Test Cell Installation

147
Table 5-8. Engine Power in Vehicle (Installed)

Filter Condition SHP

T202T Engine Clean 135e

T202T Engine As Returned 127o

Reduction Due To Filters 88

Note: Engine only power reduction of 43 SHP is included in

Table 5.

The field filters were returned to Donaldson Company for

analysis, where Textron's pressure drop measurements and the
abnormal oil contamination were confirmed. Donaldson also
reported the filters have a substantial amount of carbon
particles indicative of abnormally high exhaust ingestion
(Figures 5-53, 5-54 and 5-55). Donaldson was not able to
chemically identify the type of oil, but compared with their
previous test experience with oil contamination, this oil has
very high surface tension. The oil stain color (light
yellow-green) is consistent with the Monsanto Santotrac 50
Traction Lubricant used in the Continuously Variable
Transmission and the Vehicle Accessory Gearbox, which the GDLS
engineers described as similar in color to the yellow-green of
Prestone Anti-freeze. This traction type oil characteristically
has a surface tension in excess of lubrication oil. Donaldson
reported that engine oil on the other hand appears a more golden
yellow color on filter media.

Although possible identification of the oil type is not

available, the stain's color indicates the Santotrac 50 as the
possible contaminant. GDLS reported there was a seal failure in
the NBC compressor which is lubricated by Santotrac 50. Also,
GDLS reported there was evidence of Santotrac 50 on the inlet to
the SCAF. This further supports the possibility of Santotrac 50
being the source of the barrier filters contamination. However,
without a definite analysis, we cannot rule out the possibility
of other oil contamination possibly occuring during the test lab
operation at Allison Transmission.

Analysis indicates that the 131 SHP reduction would be predicted

to result in slightly less than a one second increase in
acceleration time when adjusted for the conditions and vehicle
weight that prevailed during the testing. This one second
increase in acceleration time accounts for slightly less than
half of the increase in acceleration time experienced at Milford
Proving Grounds compared to the expected time.

148
 Clean Media Clean Media *'.jA

,1J4,
~~41

7~ J

f >~,

.0

4, "fy 0"
Fix
01"t j~tZ
TA" j

Or1 ,A -
lei ou

Clatoo a / ' ~'' '

You ~ f P
7

~ ' <~~-
~ " k4~

tyl j" too IA'W

C"
-t '75, 4 #
A4

lop3
Figur Cl40ar e F l e e i

149s
Ctaiae 'ea-!Contaminated Media

Ii.

V
--

~x

150
Contaminated Media Contaminated ,,edia

Z 4

Contaminated Media -7 Cnaiae eia 4~j~>~''

4, n atedMedi

'5,tr .55

407~~S "~' .. 5

40~i

41Af~

'j k, .

;6'5

1' ~ 5~=
5 5 "5 *'5I"

I ~
.49 9I''~Z.~'~'
S.~

Figur 5-5.CntmnaedBrreFltrMei

151
At the conclusion of the field test, engine T202T and SCAF
filter were returned to Lycoming for post test calibration. A
new engine and filters were Installed in the vehicle and a short
experimental parking lot evaluation shoved a recovery of
aproximately one second In acceleration as well. Based on
this, it Is concluded that other portions of the system were
also contributors to the acceleration time experienced.

1. Engine power was reduced by 43 SHP as a result of field

operation; cause most likely dirty compressor.

2. SCAF pressure drop increased significantly as a result of

field testing; cause most likely excessive oil contamination
from an unknown source.

3. Total estimated engine/SCAF power reduction resulting from

field test was 131 SHP.

4. 131 SHP reduction contributed about 1.0 seconds to the

increased acceleration time experienced at Milford Proving
Grounds compared with the expected time.

5. Other system losses contributed an additional 1.0 seconds to

the increased acceleration time.

5.3.2.2 Vehicle Sustained Speed. Vehicle sustained speeds were

measured on level hard surface road for forward and reverse
vehicle operation with NBC system off. A comparison of vehicle
data with MlAl specification requirements Is provided below:

Direction MIAll TMEPS 2

Minimum Measured
(MPH) @ 63 tons
(MPH)

Forward 41.5 44.0

Reverse 20.0 12 mph 3

Creep (forward) (2.5 1.45

Notes: 1. Performance based on 63 ton vehicle, 900F

ambient, 2000 ft. elevation.

2. Uncorrected data at 63 ton vehicle 60.50F

ambient at 29.44 in Hg.

3. Transmission configuration limited max

reverse speed to 12 mph.

152
5.3.2.3 Rolling Resistance. A rolling resistance test was
performed with the final drives disconnected. This data
indicated that the actual rolling resistance of the vehicle was
less than projected. Actual and projected TMEPS ATR rolling
resistance values are presented below:

Speed TMEPS Measured TMEPS Projected

(MPH) (16/ton) (lb/ton)
5 73.0 78.6

10 82.5 89.0

15 95.2 107.7

5.3.2.4 Fuel Consumption. The vehicle fuel consumption was

measured with the vehicle in tactical idle and also while
traveling at 29 mph. These tests were performed on dry level
road with NBC system off. Test results are presented below:

Vehicle Fuel Consumption

Speed TMEPSI MlAl 2

(MPH) 63 Ton 63 Ton
(PPH) (PPH)

29 360.12 357.6

0 89 104.48

(Tac. idle)
Notes: 1. 60.5 0F Ambient, 29.44 in. Hg.
2. 900 F, 2000 ft. elevation.

The TMEPS ATR demonstrated a significant reduction in tactical

idle fuel consumption over the current MlAl powerpack.
The APU fuel consumption was measured with the following
approximate loads:
5KW Alternator Output 9 Hp load
Scavenge Blower on 3 Hp load
15 GPM, 1600 PSIG Hydraulic pump 16 Hp load
Vehicle Accessory Gearbox Spin losses 9 HD load
Total Accessory load 37 Hp

153
Fuel consumption data is provided below:

APU Fuel Consumption

1 2
TMEPS TMEPS
Measured Pro ected
(PPH) (PPH)
19.64 19.26

Notes: 1. 80"F ambient

2. 87F ambient

5.3.2.5 Vehicle Steering/Handling. The TMEPS ATR was sub3ected

to radius and pivot steering tests on level dry pavement. In
addition, the vehicle was tested for level road drift. Level
road drift is performed at 20 to 30 mph to determine the amount
of lateral drift in 100 feet of travel. Test results are
compared to MIAl specification values below:

STEER/PIVOT/LEVEL ROAD DRIFT

TEST MIA1 SPEC TMEPS

Rt Turn 20 ft 11 ft 0 inch
Lft Turn 20 ft 11 ft 3 inch

Rt Pivot 39 ft 22 ft
Lft Pivot 39 ft 22 ft

Lateral Drift -36 inch 5 inches

in 100 ft.

The TMEPS ATR was also operated on hilly cross country secondary
road course. This test provided qualitative vehicle handling
data from four separate drivers. The conclusion of the test was
that the vehicle exhibited nominal steering characteristics
throughout the course.

5.3.2.6 Auxiliary Automotive System Performance. The TMEPS ATR

incorporated several auxiliary automotive systems which were
tested concurrently with the automotive testing. These systems
included the vehicle accessory gearbox, air handling, hydraulic,
electrical and cooling systems. Proper operation of these
systems was verified by onboard vehicle systems and related
instrumentation. There were no auxiliary automotive system
anomolies reported during vehicle testing.

154
5.4 Life Cvcle Cost

5.4.1 Introduction. A Life Cycle Cost (LCC) assessment for the

TMEPS program was performed. The analysis compared TMEPS to the
two alternative vehicle configurations defined earlier: MIAI
1986 and M1Al 1991. The Operations Research Department at GDLS
performed the analysis using standard methodologies and TACOM
approved assumptions. A hybrid RCA PRICE and LOTUS spreadsheet
model facilitated the costing process.

The LCC results portrayed in Figure 5-56 show the TMEPS

configuration to be less costly than the MIA1 '86, yet
predictably more costly than MIAI '91. Development, production
and support costs are segmented to show their respective
contributions to total LCC. For a fleet size of 4320 vehicles,
TMEPS is 4 percent more costly than the MlA1 '91, but 9 percent
less costly than the MIAI '86. Notice that the Operations and
Support (O&S) costs illustrated for TMEPS an'd M1A1 '91 show
significant savings over the MIAI '86. These savings can be
largely attributed to the presence of an APU in these
configurations. See "LCC Results" for additional detail.

These results are very encouraging for TMEPS especially when

factoring in the potential value of freeing up space in the
tank. Other than generating O&S cost savings, the M1A* '91 as
an alternative has very little to offer. Its configuration
while optional from an LCC perspective, is probably not the
optimal design for the Abrams tank of the future.

5.4.2 LCC Methodology. A major challenge in formulating the

methodology for this study was the issue of commonality and how
best to consider it in the analysis. By the time TMEPS is
fielded in June 1992, over 7,700 Abrams tanks will have been
fielded with T-configuration powerpacks. At these quantities,
commonality becomes a very important consideration.

In this analysis, each candidate configuration possesses its own

degree of commonality with the fielded fleet. Part of the
analytical challenge was to assess the commonality offered by
the M1A1 '91 and TMEPS configurations, since these alternatives
deviate from the configuration in the field. The MlAl '86 is
nearly 100 percent common with what is in the field by
definition, while MiAl '91 and TMEPS offer less than 100 percent
commonality.

A careful study reveals .that several hardware items/systems

would be impacted with the implementation of TMEPS. Some of
these represent LCC savers while others are LCC costers.
Altogether, 21 separate elements have been identified and
organized into hardware Work Breakdown Structures (WBS) for
anlysis. Figure 5-57 details each of these elements. An

155
 LIFE CYCLE COST COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
M1A1 1991 VS TMEPS VS M1A1 1986
(MlAl 1986 BASELINE EQUALS 100%)

100%
T COST CATEGORY:
0 91% DEVELOPMENT
T 87%
A PRODUCTION
L
SUPPORT

L
C
C

P
E 100%
R 93%
C 86%
E
N
T
A
G
E
MIA1 TMEPS MIAI MlAl TMEPS MlAl
1991 1986 1991 1986
4320 VEHICLES 1320 VEHICLES

Figure 5-56. Life Cycle Cost Comparative Analysis,

M1A1 1991, M1A1 1986 and TMEPS

156
L HARDWARE WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE I
TRANSMISSION 1 FORWARD ENGINE] HYDRAULIC 1ELECTRICAL
MODULE COMPONENTS COMPONENTS

REAR ENGINE FR ATR

FINAL DRIVES MODL
MM ODULEL
IE EXTINGUISHER
SYSTEM
BATMERY
COMPARTMENT

STRUCTURAL
COMP:ONENTS
EN:GINE
ACCESSORIES
1 FUEL SYSTEM
ELCTRONIC
CONTROL &
TJC S DISPLAY

EXHAUT ACCESSO0RY BRAKE, AUXILIARY

ST GEARBOX STEERING & POWER UNIT (APU)
SYE G O THROTTLE P

AIR INDUCTION
COOLING
SYSTEM
NBC
SYSTEM
1 VEHICLE
ACCESSORY
J GEARBOXI

SCAF/ESCAFHARDWARE APPLICABLE TO GIVEN CONFIGURATION

SYSTEM M1Al 1986 MIAl 1991 TMEPS

Figure 5-57. Hardvare Work Breakdown Structure

157
analysis of the TMEPS configuration reveals that a great deal of
commonality exists among the major cost drivers in the system.
Even the transmission which is new is 46 percent common. Table
5-9 summarizes how the WBS boxes were categorized in terms of
being unchanged, new or modified.

With the WBS established, two fleet size LCCs were generated:
One at 1320 vehicles and another at 4320 vehicles. The approach
used was to consider unchanged and modified hardware separately.
If the box was labeled as unchanged, it was considered common
with the fielded fleet. If the box was considered new or
modified, commonality benefits/payoffs did not apply.

Figure 5-58 offers a fleet size and commonality perspective. By

the assumed TMEPS deployment date of 19929 7747 Abrams tanks
would have been produced and deployed. Adding 1320 or 4320
vehicles to the fleet would encompass producing and deploying
both common and unique hardware (except for M1A1 '86).
Capturing the LCC for the common hardware at the 1320 fleet size
was accomplished by generating an LCC at 9067 vehicles, another
at 7747 vehicles, and then calculating the difference (9067
minus 7747 = 1320). This approach allowed the Operations
Research Department to more realistically cost out production
and support costs for the common hardware, since production
economies and existing Army logistical support resources were
taken into account.

The new and modified hardware, however, would not benefit from
production economies, nor would there be any logistical support
in place for them. Therefore, it was costed like any new item
entering production and the Army Supply System. For the 1320
fleet size, this meant that these boxes in the WBS were
evaluated at a'1320 production and sustainment quantity.

The 4320 fleet size was evaluated in exactly the same manner.
The purpose of costing a larger fleet size was to quantify the
LCC benefits of TMEPS through the end of Abrams tank production.
Specifically, the focus was to show how O&S costs accumulate
over time.

To support the implementation of this methodology,the RCA PRICE

models were used in conjunction with a host of LOTUS
spreadsheets. Figure 5-59 illustrates the modeling process from
a global perspective.

The RCA PRICE models were used to calculate the majority of the
development, production, operation, and support costs used in
this interim LCC assessment. They were calibrated with average
unit production cost estimates which were rigorously researched.

158
Table 5-9. Hardware Commonality

HARDWARE COMMONALITY
VEHICLE CONFIGURATION
HARDWARE ELEMENT: MIAl 1986 MIAI 1991 TMEPS
TRANSMISSION UC UC N/M
FINAL DRIVES UC UC N/M
STRUCTURE UC UC N/M
EXHAUST SYSTEM UC N/ M N/ M
COOLING SYSTEM UC UC N/ M
AIR INDUCTION UC N/A N/A
REAR ENGINE MODULE UC UC UC
ENGINE ACCESSORIES UC UC UC
ACCESSORY GEARBOX UC UC N/M
FORWARD ENGINE MODULE UC UC UC
HYDRAULIC COMPONENTS UC UC N/M
FIRE EXTINGUISHER SYS. UC UC N/M
FUEL SYSTEM UC UC N/M
BRAKES, STEERING ETC. UC UC N/M
NBC SYSTEM UC UC UC
ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS UC UC N/M
BATTERY COMPARTMENT UC UC N/M
ELECTRONIC CONTROL & DISP. UC UC N/M
AUXILIARY POWER UNIT N/A N/M N/M
SCAF/RESCAF SYSTEM N/A N /M N/ M
VEHICLE ACCESSORY GEARBOX N/A N/A N/M

COMMONALITY STATUS WITH CURRENT FLEET

UC UNCHANGED N/M NEW/MODIFIED N/A = NOT APPLICABLE

159
 o
Z Z

Cm.C U,
4WU) (

OL O Pt

M U. =C
WUo Z to P '

U) G

Z0

0- U W.
L,
Wz j

N wU

IL wiiO
so c~ 00

4 0 a, M ~
WO 0 0 0)0
>- C4 - I.I

Figure 5-58. Fleet Size and Commonality Perspective,

Adding TMEPS Configuration to Fleet

160
 LIFE CYCLE COST METHODOLOGY
INPUT
VEHICLE
CHARACTERISTICS DEVELOPMENT
OPERATING HARDWARE COSTS
PROFILE MODULE PRODUCTION
MAINTENANCE COSTS SPREADSHEET ANALYSIS

R DATA
DAM
TRANSPORTATION INITIAL
RATES SUSTAINMENT SPARES COSTS GENERATES TOTAL LCC
FOR COMMON & UNIOUE
PRODUCTION S HARDWARE USING RCA
a PRICE OUTPUT
DEPLOYMENT COSTS
SCENARIOS ACCOMMODATES
COMMONALITY IMPACT
ASSESSMENT

SFACILITATES DETAILED
PROFILE SACOMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
CONSIDERATIONS OVERHAUL OF LCC DETAIL RELATING
AND
COSTS TO BASE AND PROPOSED
SYSTEMS
ORANGFUEL

'ION
OVERHAUL
RATES
FUEL USAGE

FUEL RATES LIFE CYCLE COST

RESULTS

Figure 5-59. Life Cycle Cost Methodology

161
The maoority of these AUPC estimates were obtained from actual
vendor quotes or were estimated in-house by GDLS. All in-house
estimates wre coordinated with the TMEPS Program Office.
Elements which are normally not costed by the model were
estimated using a series of LOTUS 123 spreadsheets. Training
cost impacts were not assessed in these figures.

5.4.3 LCC Assumptions. The following key assumptions which were

coordinated with the Government have been incorporated into the
LCC analysis: I

o The support period for a TMEPS configured vehicle, an

MiAl '91 vehicle, and an MiAl '86 vehicle, is 20
years.

o Average peacetime annual operating tempo for high

usage vehicles is estimated at 255.5 engine-hours or
934 miles per year. Average operating miles per hour
is 3.66. Per agreement with TACOM, operation and
support costs for low usage tanks are not included in
this analysis. (TMEPS becomes even more cost
competitive when these vehicles are considered.

Percent of

CONUS High Usage 38

Europe High Usage 37
POMCUS Low Usage 25

" The LCC modeling assumed a Full Scale Engineering

Development (FSED) start date of 1 March 1989 with a
completion date of 1 October 1992.

" One prototype TMEPS configured vehicle will be build

during the Advanced Development phase. During FESD,
nine prototype TMEPS configured vehicles with five
spare powerpacks will be built.

"o All development costs for MiAl '86 and MIAl '91 are
considered sunk.

"o TMEPS production program initiation is November 1991

with first article delivery date of October 1992 and
a production completion date of:

1320 vehicles - February 1995

4320 vehicles - May 2001

162
 o TMEPS production is assumed at a rate of 40 vehicles
per month or 480 vehicles per year.

o No additional test equipment is needed to support a

TMEPS configured vehicle.

o Table 5-10 summarizes the average unit production

cost estimates used in this analysis.

5.4.4 LCC Results. The results of the analysis as summarized

in Table 5-11 show the MIA1 '91 as the configuration offering
the lowest total LCC to the customer. Its LCC for 4320 vehicles
is 12.9 percent ($846 million) less than MIA1 '86 and 4.2
percent less ($253 million) than TMEPS. Its externally mounted
APU, Self-cleaning Air Filtration System, and RAM-D improvements
generate substantial O&S cost savings at a relatively modept
production cost investment. On the downside, MiAl '91 frees up
no additional space for ammunition, fuel, or any other competing
resource. As such, although it offers the lowest LCC, it may
not be the most cost-effective alternative.

The TMEPS configuration, on the other hand, does free up a

significant amount of usable space in the vehicle, as well as
other tangible benefits. Its LCC though somewhat higher than
MIA1 '91 is still less than MIAI '86. Additional analysis-
'ihod ba parformad t4 datarmirna if tha cuatfar can hanfit
from the space TMEPS frees up. If the space can be used to
enhance operational effectiveness, TMEPS may emerge as the most
cost-effective configuration of the three. Like MiAl '91, TMEPS
is an O&S cost saver. In fact, relative to MIAl '86, TMEPS
generates more than $1 billion in O&S savings over a 20-year
support period (for 4320 vehicles), largely because of its
internal APU and improved reliability characteristics. These
savings more than offset the larger investment in development
and production TMEPS requires over the MiA1 '86. As a result,
TMEPS possesses a lower total LCC.

Notice from the results that the major discriminator between

TMEPS and the MIAl '91 (at 4320 vehicles) is in the area of
production. Included in the production cost category are all of
the nonrecurring, recurring, engineering, data, system test and
evaluation, and initial spares costs aplicable to each
alternative. TMEPS as a configuration requires not only more
hardware, but hardware which is more technologically advanced.
The data gathering effort reveals that these requirements will
necessitate both recurring and nonrecurring production cost
investments at a level above that of the MIAl '91.

Table 5-12 details the total LCC at 4320 units for each
configuration. A review of these results provides additional
perspective on how the total LCC accumulates for each candidate.

163
Table 5-10. TMEPS Average Unit Production Cost Estimate Summary
by WBS

TMEPS AVERAGE UNIT PRODUCTION COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY BY WBS

MiAI 1986 VS NiAI 1991 VS TMEPS ATR

TMEPS ATR DELTA TMEPS ATR DELTA

MIAI 1991 COST TMEPS ATR COST OVER/(UNDER) OVER/(UNDER)
BOX # WOS ELEMENT MiAI 1986 COST WITH APU WITH APU MIAI 1986 BASE MIA1 1991 BASE
-------------- ----------- $137,264.00
----------- $140j000.00
---------- - ---------
$2,736.00 : - ---------
$2,736.00
1 TRANSNISSION $137,264.00
2 FINAL DRIVES (SET) $23,088.00 $23,088.00 $16,000.00 ($7,088.00) ($7,088,00)
3 STRUCTURE $11,601.00 $11,601.00 $10,000.00 ($1,601.00): ($1,601,00)
4 EXHAUST $1,412.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 $88.00 $I,500.00
5 COOLING SYSTEM $10,594.00 1 $12,184.00 $18,419.00 $7,825.00 $6,235.00
6 AIR INDUCTION $6,667.00 $0.00 $1,950.00 ($4,717.00): $1,950.00
7 SCAF OR RESCAF $0.00 $27,500.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 ($2,500.00)
B REAR ENGINE MODULE $142,400.00 $151,289.00 $148,820.00 $6,420.00 ($2,469.00)
9 ACCESSORY GEARBOX $13,700.00 $13,700.00 $13,700.00 $0.00 $0.00
10 ENGINE ACCESSORIES $21,912.00 $21,950.00 1 $24,985.00 $3,073.00 $3,035.00
11 FORWARD ENGINE MOD $131,100.00 $133,341.00 $132,566.00 $1,466.00 (775.00)
12 HYDRAULIC COMPONENTS $1,615.00 $1,615.00 $1,749.00 $134.00 $134.00
13 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SY $4,077.00 $4,077.00 $4,280.00 : 203.00 1 $203.00
14 FUEL SYSTEM $7,397.00 $7,397.00 $7,597.00 $200.00 : $200.00
15 STEERING, BRAKES ETC $5,263.00 1 $5,263.00 1 $5,215.00 ($48.00): ($48.00)
16 NBC SYSTEM $31,755.00 $31,755.00 $31,467.00 ($288.00): ($288.00)
17 ELECTRICAL COMPONENT $9,359.00 $9,799.00 $13,755.00 $4,396.00 : $3,956.00
18 BATTERY COMPARTMENT $1,304.00 $1,304.00 $869.00 (435.00): ($435.00)
19 CONTROL t DISPLAY $16,250.00 $17,340.00 $19,877.00 $3,627.00 $2,537.00
20 APU SYSTEM $0.00 $12,000.00 $16,670.00 $16,670.00 $4,670.00
21 VA6/CVT $0.00 $0.00 $16,560.00 $16,560.00 I $16,560.00
S$0.00

WBS COST TOTALS $576,758.00 I $622,467.00 $650,979.00 I $74,221.00 $28,512.00

164
 Table 5-11. Total Life Cycle Cost Results, M1A1 1991, M1A1 1986
and TMEPS

TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST RESULTS

MIAl 1986 VS TMEPS VS MIA1 1991
1987 SM

1320 VEHICLE- PRODUCTION SCENARIO

CONFIGURATION DEVELOPMENT PRODUCTION O&STOTAL

MIAl "1986" SUNK $999.259 $1,011.289 $2,010.548

TMEPS $100.320 $1,149.075 $626.871 $1,867.266

MIA1 "1991" SUNK $1,092.110 $638.105 $1,730.215

4320 VEHICLE PRODUCTION SCENARIO

CONFIGURATION DEVELOPMENT PRODUCTION O&sTAL

MIAI "1986" SUNK $3,276.127 $3,308.596 $6,584.723

TMEPS $100.320 $3,702.776 $2,188.890 $5,991.986

MIA1 "1991" SUNK $3,573.787 $2,164.956 $5,738.743

165
5-12. Comparison of Total Life Cycle Cost, Cost
Drivers/Cost Savers

COMPARISON OF TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COSTS FOR A 20 YEAR SUPPORT PERIOD

MIAI *1986" VS MIAI 41991' VS TMEPS
COST DRIVERS / COST ISAVERS)
COST SUMMARY
BYWBS
ELEMENT- 4320 UNITS (1987 CY$000) TMEPS DELTA TMEPS DELTA
OVER/(UNDER) OYER/(UNDER)
WBSELEMENT: MIAI 1986 MIAI 1991
M TREPS MIAI 1996
H MIAI 1991

I TRANSMISSION $757,480 $756,935 $740,766 ($16,714): ($16,16?)

2 FINAL DRIVES $116,415 $116,415 588,602 ($27,813): ($27,813)
3 STRUCTURE $59,364 $59,364 $56,171 ($3,193l): ($3,193)
4 EXHAUST SYSTEM $77,992 so $74,350 ($3,642)1 $74,350
5 COOLING SYSTEM $107,478 $116,122 $138,883 $31,405 $22,761
6 AIR INDUCTION $250,699 t $0 $17,929 ($232,769): $17,929
7 REAR MODULE, ENGINE $184,852 5815,366 $806,048 $21,1961 ($9,318)
8 ENGINE ACCESSORIES $134,952 $138,063 $155,236 $284 $17,173
9 ACCESSORY GEARBOX, ENGINE $78,605 $74,954 $77,450 (51,155); $2,496
10 FORWARD MODULE, ENGINE $9893,921 $904,846 $892,492 (391,429): ($12,354)
11 HYDRAULIC COMPONENTS $14,5651 $14,565 1 $15,474 $909 $909
12 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SYSTEM 530,819 $30,818 $32,737 51,919 :1,919
13 FUEL SYSTEM $226,921 $226,921 1 $214,307 ($12,614) (512,614)
14 BRAKES AND STEERING CONTROL 5147,690 $147,690 $139,756 ($7,934(1 37,934)
15 NBC SYSTEM $269,074 $269,074 1 $245,294 (23,780): ($23,780)
16 ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS $159,493 $170,362 $276,946 $117,453 : $106,384
17 BATTERY COMPARTMENT $41,018 41,018 $22,793 ($18,225): ($18,225)
18 ELECTRONIC CONTROL AND DISPLAY $103,149 $114,193 1 $125,584 1 $22,435 $11,401
19 INTEGRATION AND TEST (COMMON ITEMS): 5151,963 $153,202 596,337 ($55,606)1 ($56,845)
20 AUXILIARY POWER UNIT so $367,823 $548,221 $548,221 : 1180,399
21 SCAF/RESCAF SYSTEM so $225,184 $212,376 $212,376 1 ($12,808)
22 VEHICLE ACCESSORY GEARDOX/CVT 0
so0 s 93,445 $93,445 $93,445
23 INTEGRATION & TEST (UNIQIJE ITEMS) o0 $7,551 Il581813 181,8131 $74,262
24 FUEL USAGE $252,754 1 1183,825 $146,146 3(106,608)l ($37,679)
25 ENGINE OVERHAUL $1,815,521 $804,262 $692,810 3(1,122,711): ($111,452)

LIFE CYCLE COST TOTALS i $6,584,723 55,738,743 $5,991,986 ($592,737):

3 $253,243

166
5.4.5 LCC Summary. The LCC effort presented herein was based
on available data that could be obtained on prototype hardware
designs. These designs were developed to support the TMEPS
Automotive Test Rig and would be refined in subsequent follow-on
development stages. Never-the-less the LCC did provide an
analysis and perspective which was useful in optimizing the
design and trade off decisions made during the conduct of the
TMEPS program. The absolute values presented in this LCC study
could be expected to change under the influence of a full FSED
follow-on. These changes would generally be expected to be in
the positive direction.

167
 DISTRIBUTION LIST

Copies

Commander
U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command 50
ATTN: AMSTA-RGR
Warren, MI 48397-5000

Commander
U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command
ATTN: AMSTA-TSE
Warren, MI 48397-5000

Commander
U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command
ATTN: AMSTA-TMS
Warren, Mi 48397-5000

Commander
U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command 14
ATTN: AMSTA-DDL
Warren, Mi 48397-5000

Commander
U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command 2
ATTN: AMSTA-IRDB
Warren, MI 48397-5000

Commander
U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command 20
ATTN: AMCPM-GCM-SM
Warren, MI 48397-5000

Dist - 1