Munitions Manufacturing

A Call for Modernization

Committee to Evaluate the Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise (TIME) Program

Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization Munitions Manufacturing A Call for Modernization Committee to Evaluate the Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise (TIME) Program Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was sponsored by the United States Army under Grant No. Army/DAAE 30-99-1-0801. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of the Department of Defense or the U.S. government. Available online at the National Academy PressWeb site at <http://www.nap.edu>. Available in limited quantities from: Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 202–334–3124 bmaed@nas.edu Copyright 2002 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine National Research Council The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an advisor to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I.Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Wm.A.Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE THE TOTALLY INTEGRATED MUNITIONS ENTERPRISE (TIME) PROGRAM JOE H.MIZE, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater (Ret.), Chair JOHN G.BOLLINGER, University of Wisconsin, Madison REGGIE J.CAUDILL, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark RAY E.EBERTS, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana MARK S.FOX, University of Toronto, Ontario RAJIT GADH, University of Wisconsin, Madison DAVID GREENSTEIN, Commerce One, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THOM J.HODGSON, North Carolina State University, Raleigh RICHARD L.KEGG, Milacron, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio (Ret.) RICHARD E.NEAL, Integrated Manufacturing Technology Initiative, Heiskell, Tennessee DEBORAH S.NIGHTINGALE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge JEFFREY L.RUCKMAN, Resultant Manufacturing Services, Walworth, New York PAUL K.WRIGHT, University of California, Berkeley NRC Staff PATRICK J.DOYLE, Program Officer (since September 2000) JOHN F.RASMUSSEN, Program Officer (until September 2000) BONNIE SCARBOROUGH, Program Officer (until November 1999) TERI THOROWGOOD, Research Associate JUDITH L.ESTEP, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization BOARD ON MANUFACTURING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN JOSEPH G.WIRTH, Raychem Corporation, Mt. Shasta, California (Ret.), Chair F.PETER BOER, Tiger Scientific, Inc., Boynton Beach, Florida JOHN G.BOLLINGER, University of Wisconsin, Madison PAMELA A.DREW, The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington ROBERT EAGAN, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico EDITH M.FLANIGEN, UOP Corporation, White Plains, New York (Ret.) JOHN W.GILLESPIE, JR., University of Delaware, Newark JAMIE C.HSU, General Motors Corporation, Warren, Michigan RICHARD L.KEGG, Milacron, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio (Ret.) JAY LEE, United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, Connecticut JAMES MATTICE, Universal Technology Corporation, Dayton, Ohio CAROLYN W.MEYERS, North Carolina AT&T University, Greensboro JOE H.MIZE, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater (Ret.) FRIEDRICH B.PRINZ, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California JAMES B.RICE, JR., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge JOHN B.STENBIT, TRW, Inc., Fairfax, Virginia DALIBOR F.VRSALOVIC, AT&T Labs, Menlo Park, California JOEL SAMUEL YUDKEN, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C. NRC Staff TONI MARECHAUX, Director

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization Preface The U.S. Army has, as one of its responsibilities, the role of single manager for conventional munitions for all of the armed services. In this role it is responsible for ensuring that an adequate manufacturing capability is maintained within the munitions industrial base (MIB)—the total collection of munitions manufacturing facilities in both the private and public sectors—to meet the combined services’ munitions requirements. The Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) current replenishment policy stipulates that the munitions stockpile must be able to meet peacetime needs (training, testing, replacement of obsolete weapons, sales to foreign governments, and weapons upgrading) and support two near-simultaneous major regional conflicts. It further stipulates that sufficient manufacturing capability be retained to replenish the stockpile within 3 years following such conflicts (GAO 1996a). Under this policy, there is no longer a requirement to surge the MIB (rapidly increase production) during conflicts. However, production rates are to be increased following conflicts until the stockpile has been replenished to its specified level. The Army has a twofold plan to achieve rapid replenishment by (1) increasing production at dedicated munitions manufacturing facilities, and (2) subcontracting to qualified commercial facilities that agree to maintain dual-use manufacturing capabilities. The Army’s ability to utilize commercial firms for rapid replenishment by means of technology and process transfer, however, is severely hampered by the relatively primitive state of government-owned munitions facilities, which generally are not equipped to make effective use of information systems and modern manufacturing technologies. Similarly, the Army’s ability to introduce new munitions within a reasonable time frame is unacceptable by modern industrial standards. Its munitions development and manufacturing enterprise lags far behind that of most commercial organizations in the use of commercially available information technologies, such as computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing systems, communications networks, commercially available process controllers, and Internet-based communications. Consequently, design and development cycles are far too long, and transferring a new munition into full-scale production is a lengthy, inefficient, and costly process of trial and error. The lack of state-of-the-market information systems inhibits effective communication within the supply chain. The Army has yet to take advantage of the information and

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization communications technologies mentioned above for creating direct, real-time links between manufacturing and business (or enterprise) processes such as financial and management reporting and production control systems. The Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise (TIME) program was initiated in 1997 with the objective of updating the Army’s munitions manufacturing capability. The program was to focus on reducing the time required for the development of new munitions and their transition to production. It was also to focus on creating the ability to communicate electronically among various elements of the MIB in order to more rapidly and cost-effectively replenish stockpiles following conflicts. One of the goals of the program was to achieve an integrated solution that tied together all elements of the business enterprise from the Department of the Army down to the shop floor, including product design and testing, the supply chain, production, logistics, production scheduling and control, financial accounting, performance measurement, and overall management reporting. The TIME program is being managed by the Armaments Research, Development, and Engineering Center (ARDEC) of the Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. ARDEC’s mission, which may be found online at <http://w3.pica.army.mil/ardec/>, is as follows: …to provide research, product development and full life cycle engineering for ammunition, weapons, sophisticated fire control (targeting) technology, and explosives and propellants. We serve our customers by exploring advanced technologies, designing new products, supporting the manufacturers with product and manufacturing know-how, trouble shooting user problems in the field and supporting demilitarization (demolition). TACOM-ARDEC requested that the National Research Council (NRC) evaluate the TIME program and make recommendations for future direction. In response to that request, the NRC established the Committee to Evaluate the TIME program under the direction of the Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design. The statement of task is included in the Executive Summary and in Chapter 1. The committee based its findings on detailed presentations by participants in the TIME program, site visits, a review of selected literature, and, perhaps most important, a diverse base of experience in industry and academia. Chapter 1 of this report provides background information on the U.S. munitions industrial base and on DoD’s changing policies and requirements and describes the TIME program. Chapter 2 assesses TIME’S approach to enterprise integration (enterprise architecture, networking, and systems); Chapter 3 assesses the program in terms of its impact on routine munitions production and replenishment. TIME’S approach to product realization, with an emphasis on the introduction of new products, is covered in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 looks at machine tool controllers, particularly TIME’S heavy investment in the Open Modular Architecture Controller. Chapter 6 describes the various demonstrations that TIME includes for validation purposes, and Chapter 7 benchmarks the TIME

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization program against two previous NRC studies dealing with manufacturing: Visionary Manufacturing Challenges for 2020 (NRC 1998) and Defense Manufacturing in 2010 and Beyond (NRC 1999). In Chapter 8 the committee presents its overall conclusions and recommendations. Appendixes A, B, and C describe some related efforts, Appendix D consists of short biographical sketches of the committee’s members, and Appendixes E and F contain a glossary and an acronyms list, respectively. Joe H.Mize, Chair Committee to Evaluate the TIME Program

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization Acknowledgments The Committee to Evaluate the Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise Program would like to thank the following individuals for their presentations: Robert Burleson, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; David Carey, Primex Technologies; David Fair, U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC; Nat Frampton, Real Time Development Corporation; Carol Gardiner, HQ U.S. Army Materiel Command; Al Gonsiska, TIME program; Tony May, Raytheon Consulting Group; Thomas McWilliams, U.S. Army WECAC; Tom Miller, Raytheon Consulting Group; Ed Morris, Lockheed Martin; Charles Osiecki, U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC; Sam Rindskoph, Louisiana Center for Manufacturing Sciences; Robert Rohde, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology; Steve Rosenberg, U.S. Army TACOM-ARDEC; Eric Stevens, VEPortals.com; and Jerry Yen, General Motors Powertrain Group. The committee would also like to thank the Raytheon Consulting Group for hosting a committee meeting. This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The contents of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to the thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Henry Alberts, University of Maryland; Richard Curless, Cincinnati Machine; George J.Hess, Ingersoll Milling Machine Company (retired); Richard H.Johnson, consultant, Alexandria, Virginia; Kenneth J.Laskey, SAIC; Thomas Munns, ARINC; Hyla Napadensky, Napadensky Energetics, Inc. (retired); and John Stenbit, TRW, Inc. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations and they did not they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by James J.Solberg, Purdue University. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization Finally, the committee gratefully acknowledges the support of the staff of the Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design, including Bonnie Scarborough, study director (until November 1999); John F.Rasmussen, study director (until September 2000); Patrick J.Doyle, study director (since September 2000); Teri Thorowgood, research associate; and Judith L.Estep, senior project assistant.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   MUNITIONS MANUFACTURING IN THE UNITED STATES   10     History and Current Status,   10     The Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise Program,   13     Study Objectives and Approach,   16 2   ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION   23     Introduction,   23     Technologies Enabling Agile Manufacturing,   24     Networking and Connectivity,   30     Assessment of Enterprise Integration,   33 3   THE APPROACH TO MUNITIONS REPLENISHMENT   42     Introduction,   42     Munitions Replenishment Policy,   42     Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise Replenishment Strategy,   43     Concerns Regarding Replenishment,   44 4   PRODUCT REALIZATION   57     Approach to Product Realization,   57     Committee Assessment,   66 5   CONTROLLERS   75     Introduction,   75     Industrial Needs and Desires,   76     Commercial Off-the-Shelf Controllers,   77     Efforts to Develop Open Modular Architecture Controllers,   78     Committee Assessment of Controllers,   90

OCR for page R1
Munitions Manufacturing: A Call for Modernization 6   DEMONSTRATION AND VALIDATION   97     Introduction,   97     Demonstration Projects,   98     Validation,   105 7   BENCHMARKS AND METRICS   110     Introduction,   110     Visionary Manufacturing Challenges for 2020,   111     Defense Manufacturing in 2010 and Beyond,   120     A Word of Caution,   131 8   CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS   132     Munitions Manufacturing Policy,   132     Munitions Industry Capabilities,   132     Technical and Program Approaches,   134     Program Plan and Schedule,   138     REFERENCES   141     APPENDIXES   147 A   Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise ManTech Project,   147 B   Machine Controllers,   150 C   Open Modular Architecture Controller,   158 D   Biographical Sketches of Committee Members,   178 E   Glossary,   184 F   Acronyms,   191