SPECIAL NOTICE
20 -- Request for Information for Multi-Application Shipboard Energy Magazine Requirements Development
- Notice Date
- 4/19/2017
- Notice Type
- Special Notice
- NAICS
- 335999
— All Other Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, NAVSEA HQ, SEA 02, 1333 Isaac Hull Avenue SE, Washington Navy Yard, District of Columbia, 20376, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20376
- Solicitation Number
- N00024-17-R-4129
- Archive Date
- 6/3/2017
- Point of Contact
- Mark Kinney, Phone: 2027813681
- E-Mail Address
-
mark.kinnery@navy.mil
(mark.kinnery@navy.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- The Naval Sea Systems Command is hereby issuing a Request for Information (RFI) on behalf of PMS 320 (the Electric Ships Office) seeking information from electrical equipment manufacturers, systems integrators, academia, and other interested parties to support the development of an electrical Energy Magazine (EM) for use in power systems applicable to naval warships. The EM is a system of power conversion, energy storage media, and controls combined together into one or multiple modules to enable directed energy weapons, electronic warfare, and sensors to meet present shipboard distribution system requirements while allowing multifunctional use of the energy storage assets. An EM is further defined in the 2013 Naval Power Systems (NPS) Technology Development roadmap (TDR) and the 2015 Naval Power and Energy Systems (NPES) TDR (available from http://www.navsea.navy.mil ) as a common, modular, scalable intermediate power system that could be used across multiple mission systems and ship installations. EM is a term that recognizes the emerging role of capacitive, kinetic, and chemical stored energy in the readiness kill chain where energy may physically take the place of ammunition, explosives, and/or ordnance. The Navy has developed a draft performance specification and desires industry review and feedback and also recommendations addressing specific issues within the draft, as appropriate. The DRAFT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR ENERGY MAGAZINE MULTIAPPLICATION HARDWARE DEVELOPMENT, Revision 1.0, dated Oct 2016 contains controlled unclassified information and is therefore marked Distribution Statement D (Distribution authorized to Department of Defense (DoD) and DoD contractors only). Also available is a spreadsheet format of the associated Functional Requirements Document (FRD), which contains all performance requirements included in the specification; maps specified, derived, and verification requirements from source documents to the specification; and provides verification traceability at applicable test locations. These documents can be provided upon request via email to mark.kinney@navy.mil and upon verification that the requestor is a bona fide U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) contractor familiar with the procedures to handle technical data packages that may include limited distribution information. Evidence in the form of an executed DD Form 2345 (MILITARILY CRITICAL TECHNICAL DATA AGREEMENT) will be required prior to receipt. The draft documents are a collection of specifications that could be used to define a notional EM system. One approach being considered is to refine a specification that could be used to acquire future distribution equipment which would interface with present (shipboard back-fit) or future (forward-fit) distribution buses, while providing shared energy storage to shipboard systems. Key facets of this specification are modular construction/assembly (enabling changes to be made as the ship ages without a complete redesign or exchange of power conversion modules); increased capacity; and minimized obsolescence. Not all the sections within the documents will remain, but they are being left in this version for comment and informational purposes. For example, in a finished acquisition specification, the introductory paragraph of Section 3, as well as, all of Section 3.1 may be removed. Section 3.2 will change from a general discussion of EM Acquisition Parameters and Specification Sheets, to one that is tailored for the particular acquisition that is being ordered. Examples of this tailoring for three notional applications are given in Appendix A of the specification document. Also, since this family of equipment could be desired for future shipboard architectures, new versions of 1399 distribution interfaces are referenced. These are just notional values and, while reflecting aspects of new distribution systems that share energy storage, they are not to be inferred as values that will come out in a new interface specification. A separate RFI was issued to solicit industry comment on these interface standards (see announcement N0002417R4202). It is noted that only US domestic sources of supply will be considered for any of the components contained within the EM. RESPONSES: It is with the above understanding that PMS 320 is interested in having vendors of power electronics cabinets, energy storage modules, and power distribution system integrators answer the questions below and comment on the provided documents. 1. With the intent of specifying input, output, and stored energy modules that are selected based on required interfaces and configured into power and energy conversion module, does the concept based on the specification clearly define the end product, or is more definition required? 2. In the specification document in Section 1.1.1 for Type Designation, the nomenclature for defining the functionality of a particular configuration of an EM is described. Using this section and an example configuration identified as "EM02-C04/12/600-01B" (an Energy Magazine with a MIL-STD-1399/680 Type 1 (4160VAC) front end with 12kW-hour capacitive energy storage, with a peak power discharge of 600kW for load leveling of pulse loads through a bidirectional MIL-STD1399/LVDC Voltage I (375VDC), Type I output module), what additional information beyond what is contained in the documents would be required to produce an EM, assuming a level of engineering detail as described in the Appendix A examples is provided? 3. How may the electronic interfaces change if a rotating storage device was selected instead of traditional battery and capacitive components? How would a rotating storage device change the topology, controls, dynamic operations, etc.? What is the impact of a hybrid of multiple energy storage media types? 4. What parts of the specification are unclear and need additional detail? 5. Are there any layout or format changes that are recommended based on review? 6. Are there any requirements included that drive cost and, if so, what are they and how could the requirement be relaxed to result in a more affordable and yet equally capable EM? Which ones could be eliminated by substituting a suitable commercial alternative (including non-US specifications)? 7. List any requirements that are thought to be over prescriptive or should be removed and provide associated rationale. Some requirements cannot be changed as they relate to such things as shipboard integration factors, such as hatch-ability). 8. Is the specification written sufficiently to enable cabinets to be swapped out without a complete enclosure rebuild? 9. Are there more specifications required to define parsing of controls at the cabinet level? 10. What applications do you see a need for galvanic isolation and specific grounding schemes, such as hard negative rail or midpoint grounding? 1 1. How would you combine different energy storage media and functions at 1000 VDC? 12. Are there technologies or approaches that facilitate the paralleling of energy storage components (e.g. multiple battery and/or capacitor strings at a common interface voltage), and ensure consistent energy flow under dynamic and fault conditions? Is it beneficial to have energy storage components separate from power conversion components? What additional hardware would be required if the energy storage is separate from the power conversion cabinet? Please list any pros and cons for these choices. 1 3. Please provide your perspectives on breaker vs breaker-less protection? If breaker protection is preferential, should a breaker be contained within the constraints of the cabinet or in a separate switchboard? How would you protect the energy storage section of the cabinets? 14. Given the restriction on having only US sources of supply for the EM components, what visibility do you have in your supply chains on the sources of supply and whether they are foreign or domestic in nature? 15. What is the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the constituent technologies that would be necessary to meet the intent of the specification document and what are the development steps necessary to result in a shipboard ready system (including associated timelines)? Responses and comments are requested by 4:00 pm (EST), on May 19, 2017. However, submissions will be accepted after this date, but feedback may not be as timely or contribute to NAVSEA's development process. Information should be e-mailed to Mark Kinney at mark.kinney@navy.mil. Questions can be submitted electronically to mark.kinney@navy.mil (with copy to joseph.tannenbaum@navy.mil) or by phone at (202) 781- 3681. A clean format version of this RFI is available upon request to the points of contact noted above. Responses are requested to be provided electronically and acceptable formats include Adobe PDF, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel and Microsoft PowerPoint files. The information provided will assist NAVSEA in future developments, procurements and acquisitions. The comments provided should not contain proprietary information. However, if some of the background on the comments provided is considered proprietary to the respondent, that portion shall be segregated and labeled as such and will be treated as Business Sensitive and will not be shared outside of Government activities and agencies without the permission of the provider. It is noted that membership of the extended Navy team includes Government support contractors and no information will be shared with non-Government employees without express permission from the source of the information. All submissions become Government property and will not be returned. This RFI in no way binds the Government to offer contracts to responding companies. Defense and commercial contractors, including small businesses, veteran-owned businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned business, HUBZone small businesses, and women-owned businesses are encouraged to participate. Academia and other research organizations are also encouraged to participate. This RFI is the initiation of market research under Part 10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and is not a Request for Proposals (RFP). All information shall be provided free of charge to the Government. NAVSEA may request further information regarding the capabilities of respondents to meet the requirements and may request a presentation and/or a site visit as deemed necessary. Follow-up questions may be asked of responders for clarification, but this will not indicate a selection or preference. Responders are advised that the U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in response to this RFI. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future RFP or other solicitation, if any is issued. Classified material will not be accepted.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/NAVSEAHQ/N00024-17-R-4129/listing.html)
- Record
- SN04477810-W 20170421/170419234837-b7044458dffbe14ce7b87247025c62b1 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |