Special Issue:

Ships Navy Experts Explain

the Newest Material &
Structural Technologies

AMPTIAC is a DOD Information Analysis Center Administered by the

Defense Information Systems Agency, Defense Technical Information Center
 The issue you hold in your hands has been 14 months in the
making. It began with a simple idea: turn the spotlight on the
age-old art of building ships. We wanted to show the exciting
new technologies that are offering novel materials for ship con-
struction, changing the way ships are built, and indeed creating
one of the most fundamental shifts in Navy combatants since
steel replaced wood.
This simple mission turned
out to be much more complex.
The project underwent a num- Editorial:
ber of different iterations, but
finally settled in and came There’s More to AMPTIAC
together. It has been a labor of
love for yours truly, for I really
than the Quarterly
do believe that even though air-
planes and tanks often grab the
spotlight, Navy ships are still the most challenging structural
and materials engineering systems fielded in today’s military.
Nothing has the complexity, impact, size, and sheer force of a
fighting vessel, nor can many things capture the imagination in
quite the same way.
So here it is, finally, and I am thankful that it is done. Not
just because it is off my desk and I can get on to the next proj-
ect, but we are proud because AMPTIAC has compiled some-
thing that probably has not existed before: an overview of the
newest technologies being incorporated into structures and
materials for use aboard Navy combatants. And the people pro-
viding the perspective are the experts at the Office of Naval
Research, NSWC-Carderock, and the Naval Research Lab. You
won’t find this level of detail, variety, and expert content
focused on this subject anywhere else.
That all being said, there is one critical feature of this publi-
cation that needs some attention: the DOD center behind it.
Some of you out there have been reading this publication for
seven years now. You undoubtedly remember about two years
ago when we shifted over to our current layout format and full
color reproduction. You also have probably noticed that we are
publishing these large special issues fairly often. It is all a part
of our mission to bring you the most in-depth, focused, and
technologically exciting coverage of Defense materials and pro-
cessing advances available anywhere.
But the side effect of the more noticeable and attention-
grabbing Quarterly, is that
AMPTIAC itself has lost some
attention. The reality is that the
center has grown with numer-
ous projects, focused reports,
and database efforts over the
past few years, but there are
many out there that may read
this publication and not even
know that the center exists.
We want to put more emphasis on the other efforts
AMPTIAC is involved in, and let our customers and potential
customers know that we are here for you. We help with ques-
tions, assist in materials selection, and provide consultation on
a variety of materials and processing-related issues. We have
more than 210,000 DOD technical reports in our library and
direct access to hundreds of thousands more throughout DOD,
DOE, NASA, and other US Government agencies. We have
dozens of focused reports tailored to specific technology areas
and many more compiling vast amounts of data into hand-
book-style resources.
The basic message here is to take note of this magazine, read
it, and enjoy. But if you think AMPTIAC is just the Quarterly,
Think Again.
Wade Babcock
Editor-in-Chief
http://iac.dtic.mil/amptiac

Editor-in-Chief The AMPTIAC Quarterly is published by the Advanced Materials and Processes Technology Information
Wade G. Babcock Analysis Center (AMPTIAC). AMPTIAC is a DOD sponsored Information Analysis Center, administratively
managed by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).
Creative Director The AMPTIAC Quarterly is distributed to more than 15,000 materials professionals around the world.
Cynthia Long
Inquiries about AMPTIAC capabilities, products and services may be addressed to
Information Processing David H. Rose
Judy E. Tallarino Director, AMPTIAC
315-339-7023
Patricia McQuinn
EMAIL: amptiac@alionscience.com
h t t p :/ / a m p t i a c . a l i o n s c i e n c e . c o m
Inquiry Services URL:

David J. Brumbaugh
Product Sales
Gina Nash
Training Coordinator
Christian E. Grethlein, P.E.
We welcome your input! To submit your related articles, photos, notices, or ideas for future issues, please contact:
AMPTIAC
ATTN: WADE G. BABCOCK
201 Mill Street
Rome, New York 13440
PHONE: 315.339.7008
FA X : 3 1 5 . 3 3 9 . 7 1 0 7
EMAIL: amptiac_news@alionscience.com

INTRODUCTION
The performance of future Navy warships requires novel and
innovative material and structural systems to meet ever increas-
ing design requirements. The application
of composite materials for the primary
structure of Navy surface combatants
offers the potential to meet these per-
formance goals in the areas of increased
payload fraction, reduced life cycle costs
and improved survivability.
Fiber/matrix composite laminates as
well as cored, composite sandwich
systems have consistently been shown,
in both military as well as industrial
applications, to result in weight savings
of up to 70% compared to traditional
metallic structures. This weight savings
can be used to maintain the necessary
stability criteria as a ship accommodates
additional payload or weapons systems
and increases in tonnage throughout
its service life. The reduced weight may
also be used to increase ship speed or
mission range.
The wide-scale use of composite tech-
nology on Navy ships is dependent on
affordability. The large size of ship struc-
tures requires non-autoclave manufac-
turing processes that produce consistent,
high-quality parts. SCRIMP® (Seemann
Composites Resin Infusion Molding
Process) and other vacuum-assisted
processes have evolved over the last
decade to deliver the necessary laminate
quality at cost-competitive prices. This
affordability is increased through antici-
pated life cycle cost savings made possi-
ble through the non-corrosive nature of
marine composite resin systems. Unlike
steel, these materials do not rust and are highly resistant to
chemical and environmental effects.
Weight savings and affordability are key considerations for any
Patrick Potter
Ship Hull, Mechanical and Electrical Systems Science and Technology Division
Office of Naval Research
Arlington, VA
ship design. The primary driver for the current interest in com-
posite structures for Navy warships however, is in the area of
improved survivability. The laminated nature of composites pro-
vides opportunities for integrated electro-
magnetic designs that minimize radar cross
section, improve antenna performance,
and enhance the structural integrity from
blast and ballistic effects resulting from
weapons. The combination of these
unique features is simply not achievable
with traditional steel ship designs.
BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
Figure 1. AEM/S System Composite
Steel has been the structural material of
Mast on USS Radford (DD 968). choice in Navy warships for the past 100
years. Inserting a new material system
which requires a new structural concept as
well as a totally different manufacturing
process is difficult. It requires overcoming
the resistance to change that comes from a
familiarity and knowledge base developed
through a century of experience with steel
design and performance.
Over the past 15 years, the Navy has
incrementally demonstrated the maturity
of marine composite technology and suffi-
Figure 2. Artist Concept of Composite
ciently mitigated the risks to the point that
Masts on LPD 17-Class Amphibious Ships. composite structural applications are tran-
sitioning into the fleet. These applications
have included the installation of the
Advanced Enclosed Mast/Sensor (AEM/S)
System on the USS Radford (DD 968)
(Figure 1) and the under-construction
LPD 17-class amphibious assault ships
(Figures 2 and 4). These successful transi-
tions helped Northrop Grumman Ship
Systems (NGSS) to propose an all-compos-
Figure 3. NGSS DD(X) Concept with
ite topside for its DD(X) design (Figure 3).
Composite Superstructure.
The acceptance of composite systems into
the fleet has been made possible through a series of Navy-
and industry-funded development and risk mitigation programs
which investigated the ability of composites to meet Navy
The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 3 37
 BREAKING THE “STEEL” PARADIGM:
CERTIFYING COMPOSITES FOR USE ON SHIPS
No matter how much benefit composites may represent to the
shipbuilding industry and the Navy, they still have to be certi-
fied safe and effective for use aboard ships. These validation
efforts address the most critical issues a Naval ship will face; fire,
explosions, and harsh environments being just a few. The fol-
lowing sections present some of the research efforts which have
endeavored to prove composites’ mettle.

Fire Performance
Standard composite shipbuilding materials will typically burn
and produce smoke and toxic fumes when subjected to large
fires. To offset these characteristics, a systems approach must be
taken that combines fire resistant coatings and insulations as well
Figure 4. LPD 17 with AEM/S System Ready for Christening. as active suppression systems into or on the structure. The Navy
has conducted numerous small and large scale tests to fully char-
requirements in the acterize these material systems. This testing includes small
areas of fire per- coupons in a cone calorimeter to determine heat release rates,
formance, blast and burn through tests to evaluate the insulating capabilities of coat-
shock resistance, ings and insulations, room corner tests to evaluate flame spread,
e l e c t ro m a g n e t i c on up to full-scale structures subjected to multiple fire scenarios.
effects, environ- (For a more in-depth look at fire performance of shipboard com-
mental conditions posites, please see the article by Sorathia in this issue.)
and a host of other The structure in Figure 8 is a two-level portion of a compos-
generic and Navy- ite ship structure that was subjected to fire scenarios ranging
specific technology from a small trash can fire up to a 60+ minute UL1709 fire
Figure 5. Half-Scale Composite Mast areas. The scope exposure, representative of a large fuel-spill. These tests have
and One-Third-Scale Composite Hull and objectives of shown that composite sandwich structures coupled with the
Demonstration Test Articles. appropriate passive and active systems can meet or exceed Navy
these programs has
included applied research targeted at understanding the capabili- requirements for fire.
ties and limitations of differing composite applications (such as a
composite version of a traditional mast design) or investigating Weapons Effects
various manufacturing processes for composite ship hulls. (See Navy composite ship designs are unique from the commercial
Figure 5.) More focused development programs have included sector in that they must withstand the severe environments
composite enclosures as alternatives for existing steel structures on associated with weapons effects. The pressure and shock waves
current destroyers (Figures 6 and 7) as well as advanced technolo- resulting from an air blast or underwater explosion represent
gy demonstrations investigating integrated structural and electro- significant design requirements. Simulated nuclear air blast test-
magnetic concepts for a low-observable composite stack system. ing on numerous composite structures have shown protection
The lessons learned from these and other demonstration levels similar to, or better than, appropriate steel structures with
programs are the basis for the confidence in the current technol- weight savings up to 50%. Examples of some of the structures
ogy readiness level of composites in the Navy. tested over the past ten years are shown in Figure 9.

Figure 6. Composite Helicopter Hangar. Figure 7. Proposed Composite Director Room Enclosure.

38 The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 3

 Full-Scale Modules
(Hat-Stiffened and Sandwich)
Half-Scale
Hat-Stiffened Panels
Full-Scale Hat-Stiffened Panel
Figure 8. Full-Scale Multiple Compartment Figure 9. Various Blast Test Articles.
Fire Testing.
Underwater explosions result in extremely high acceleration
loading on decks and bulkheads. These inertial loads govern the
design of composite-to-composite joints as well as the founda-
tion methods for outfitting attachment. Research into both of
these phenomena has produced an understanding of the out-of-
plane failure modes in the joints as well as development of
design guidelines for equipment mounting techniques. (See
Figure 10.)
Reduced Signatures
The layered configuration of laminated structures allows
opportunities to embed and integrate specialized materials into
the composite lay-up which provide improved electromagnetic
performance. Past Navy efforts have also explored various ways
to enclose, embed or integrate features into the structure that
result in reduced radar signatures. As depicted in Figure 11, the
AEM/S System program developed a composite mast concept
with frequency selective structural panels enclosing the ship’s
rotating antennas.
Other programs have investigated the possibility of embed-
ding planar antennas into structural members. One such effort
to demonstrate large, integrated composite structures (funded by
NGSS) is shown in Figure 12. The need for simple structural
lines and uncluttered flat surfaces in order to meet future require-
ments will accelerate this type of testing and development.
Electromagnetic Shielding
Surface ships operating in a battle group are subject to elevated
levels of electromagnetic (EM) energy from the many antenna
and sensor systems on modern warships. Fiberglass laminates
do not inherently provide sufficient EM shielding suitable for
this environment. It is necessary to add additional conducting
layers into the laminate or sandwich to reflect this EM energy.
Various materials suitable for this task have been characterized
across a range of frequencies in the mode-stirred testing cham-
Quarter-Scale
Mast Panels
Full-Scale
Barge Shock
Tests
Joint Tests
Figure 10. Examples of Full-Scale & Component
Shock Tests.
ber located at NSWC’s Dahlgren Division. These tests have
demonstrated sufficient shielding levels with standard carbon
mat and metallic-coated mesh products that are easily incorpo-
rated into the laminate production process.
Environmental Effects
Extensive quantification of material properties has been per-
formed across the range of environmental conditions appropriate
to surface ships. Standard low-temperature cure composite
shipbuilding materials are subject to reductions in strength and
stiffness due to both increased temperature and moisture. For
typical resin systems used in the maritime industry, temperature
is especially critical. Navy tests have shown that the combination
of ambient temperature and solar heat flux loading can result in
temperatures in excess of 175 ˚F in typical sandwich structures.
Standard E-glass and vinyl-ester laminate systems are shown in
Figure 13 to lose approximately 25% of their strength at this
temperature, with more rapid losses at only slightly higher
temperatures.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The projects presented here only begin to describe a few of the
multi-disciplinary topics that are needed and have been inves-
tigated to promote composites’ transition into the Navy’s future
surface combatants. Further proliferation of composite technol-
ogy into the surface fleet will use and build on the developments
and knowledge gained over the past 15 years of Navy research
in this area. A challenge to this wider usage is the development
and adoption of standard design and acceptance criteria.
Numerous efforts over the years have greatly increased the
understanding of the design process and sufficiently mitigated
the risks associated with particular composite applications.
However, a process comparable to the design data sheets used
for steel construction does not yet exist. Similarly, the vast expe-
rience with aerospace composite procedures and specifications
The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 3 39
 Frequency
Selective
Surfaces
Structural
Laminate
Carbon
Structural Reflective
Laminate Layer

Balsa
Core
Structural
Laminate

Foam Core
Material

Figure 11. Conceptual Diagram of the AEM/S System. Figure 12. Demonstration of the Composite
Integrated Structure.

do not fully lend themselves to the unique issues and materials
associated with the surface ship side of the Navy. This effort needs
to be tackled by a combined effort of industry and government
initiatives.
A further challenge is that even as current composite applications
become more accepted and standardized in design and
manufacturing, the underlying technology and threats continue to
move forward. Next generation composite ship structures will need
to provide better performance to meet more severe blast, ballistic,
and electromagnetic requirements than ever before. Achieving this
in an affordable system will require improved resin systems, better
core materials and a total integration of technologies into a true
multi-layered, multi-functional structural system. Incorporation
of these technologies and many others will forever change the
appearance, design, and performance of the Navy’s future surface
ships, as seen projected in Figure 14.

Flexural Strength versus Temperature

(Dry, warps parallel 9.6 oz./yd2 woven roving)
80 100 Reduced Sensor Weight & Speed Damage Resistance
Signatures Integration Improvements to Weapons Effect
70

60 75
Strength (ksi)
Strength (ksi)

50

40 50
30

20 25
10

0 0
70 85 100 115 130 145 160 175 190 205 220 Affordable
Temperature (˚F)
Figure 14. Evolution of the Surface Combatant.
Figure 13. Effect of Temperature on Laminate Strength.

Patrick Potter is a Program Officer at the Office of Naval Research in the Hull, Mechanical and Electrical Systems
Science & Technology Division. He manages research efforts directed toward improving the performance of future US
Navy surface ships through the Hull Life Assurance Thrust. Prior to joining ONR, he was employed for 12 years as an
engineer/naval architect in the Survivability, Structures and Materials Directorate of the Naval Surface Warfare
Center’s Carderock Division. In that capacity he conducted research in the area of advanced composite structures for
Navy ships. He has a Bachelors of Science degree in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Maryland as well
as a Masters of Science degree in Structures & Dynamics from the George Washington University. He is currently tak-
ing classes through the Navy War College in the area of Strategy & Policy.

40 The AMPTIAC Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 3