Meeting the Energy Needs of FUTURE WARRIORS
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
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 supported by Contract/Grant No. DAAD19-03-C-0046, between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of the Army. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-09261-2 (Book)
International Standard Book Number 0-309-53344-9 (PDF)
Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
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 M. 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 adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg 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 M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON SOLDIER POWER/ENERGY SYSTEMS
PATRICK F. FLYNN, NAE, Chair,
Cummins Engine Company, Inc. (retired), Columbus, Indiana
MILLARD F. ROSE, Vice Chair,
Radiance Technologies, Huntsville, Alabama
ROBERT W. BRODERSEN, NAE,
University of California at Berkeley
ELTON J. CAIRNS,
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California
HUK YUK CHEH,
Duracell, Bethel, Connecticut
WALTER L. DAVIS,
Motorola Corporation, Schaumburg, Illinois
ROBERT H. DENNARD, NAE,
Thomas J. Watson Research Center, IBM, Yorktown Heights, New York
PAUL E. FUNK, U.S. Army (retired),
University of Texas at Austin
ROBERT J. NOWAK, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (retired),
Silver Spring, Maryland
JEFFREY A. SCHMIDT,
Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corporation, Boulder, Colorado
DANIEL P. SIEWIOREK, NAE,
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
KAREN SWIDER LYONS,
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C.
ENOCH WANG,
Central Intelligence Agency, McLean, Virginia
DONALD P. WHALEN, U.S. Army (retired),
Cypress International, Arlington, Virginia
Board on Army Science and Technology Committee Advisor
ALAN H. EPSTEIN, NAE,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director,
Board on Army Science and Technology
ROBERT J. LOVE, Study Director
DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Research Associate
TOMEKA N. GILBERT, Senior Program Assistant
BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
JOHN E. MILLER, Chair,
Oracle Corporation, Reston, Virginia
GEORGE T. SINGLEY III, Vice Chair,
Hicks and Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia
DAWN A. BONNELL,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
NORVAL L. BROOME,
MITRE Corporation (retired), Suffolk, Virginia
ROBERT L. CATTOI,
Rockwell International (retired), Dallas
DARRELL W. COLLIER, Private Consultant,
Leander, Texas
ALAN H. EPSTEIN,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
ROBERT R. EVERETT,
MITRE Corporation (retired), New Seabury, Massachusetts
PATRICK F. FLYNN,
Cummins Engine Company, Inc. (retired), Columbus, Indiana
WILLIAM R. GRAHAM,
National Security Research, Inc., Arlington, Virginia
HENRY J. HATCH, (Army Chief of Engineers, retired)
Oakton, Virginia
EDWARD J. HAUG,
University of Iowa, Iowa City
MIRIAM E. JOHN,
California Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore
DONALD R. KEITH,
Cypress International (retired), Alexandria, Virginia
CLARENCE W. KITCHENS,
Hicks and Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia
ROGER A. KRONE,
Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, Philadelphia
JOHN W. LYONS, U.S. Army Research Laboratory (retired),
Ellicott City, Maryland
JOHN H. MOXLEY,
Korn/Ferry International, Los Angeles
MALCOLM R. O’NEILL,
Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland
EDWARD K. REEDY,
Georgia Tech Research Institute (retired), Atlanta
DENNIS J. REIMER,
National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, Oklahoma City
WALTER D. SINCOSKIE,
Telcordia Technologies, Inc., Morristown, New Jersey
WILLIAM R. SWARTOUT,
Institute for Creative Technologies, Marina del Rey, California
EDWIN L. THOMAS,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
BARRY M. TROST,
Stanford University, Stanford, California
JOSEPH J. VERVIER,
ENSCO, Inc., Melbourne, Florida
Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director
WILLIAM E. CAMPBELL, Administrative Officer
CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate
DEANNA P. SPARGER, Administrative Associate
DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Research Associate
Preface
The Army’s future force will continue to be based on highly capable dismounted soldiers. The success of these future warriors will depend on enhanced situational awareness, that is, detailed knowledge of the location and capabilities of both friendly and enemy forces, and on improved access to lethal weapons, including those that might be called upon from supporting forces. To enable the transition to such a future force, the soldiers’ uniforms, weapons systems, sensors, and communication capabilities are all going through a period of revolutionary development. Perhaps the most critical of these new developments are power supply systems to allow the new electronics-based equipment to function effectively for missions up to 72 hours in length.
Ensuring adequate power for soldiers on the battlefield is by no means a simple problem; otherwise, the Army would not have asked the National Research Council (NRC) to do this study. It is a multidimensional challenge requiring multidimensional approaches, and the solutions involve a full consideration of power/energy systems, including the energy sources, energy sinks, and energy management.
Developers of the original Land Warrior suite of equipment grappled with shortcomings in power as well as the relative immaturity of computer and electronics technologies. Future soldiers, operating in concert as part of a light and mobile force, will depend heavily on networked applications for both situational awareness and access to supporting fires. As a consequence, power for communications-electronics will become the most critical component of warrior capabilities.
Each new capability brings with it a claim on existing weight and space to be borne by the dismounted soldier. For the soldier to function effectively, these weight and space assertions must be limited. Key to this management process will be controlling power demand and providing the power and energy systems that place minimal weight and space demands on the soldier.
With a vision of the Future Force warrior provided by the Army, as well as the results of previous studies on the subject, the NRC Committee on Soldier Power/Energy Systems was chartered by the Army to review the state of the art and recommend technologies that will support the rapid development of effective power source systems for soldier applications. The committee was also asked to review opportunities and technologies for reducing and managing power use. To accomplish this, the committee members necessarily represented a broad range of technical expertise, from computers, communications, low-power electronics, and multiple areas of energy sources, to military logistics, operations, and training. (See Appendix A for biographies of the committee members.)
I would like to express my personal appreciation to the committee members for their helpful and objective participation in reviewing the status of technologies and programs and in recommending directions for future activities. This report is the product of their efforts and consensus. I would also like to express the committee’s appreciation to the NRC staff for the large logistic and administrative effort that was required to complete the report.
Patrick F. Flynn
Chair, Committee on Soldier Power/Energy Systems
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its 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 review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Henry W. Brandhorst, Auburn University,
Douglas M. Chapin, MPR Associates, Inc.,
Bruce S. Dunn, University of California at Los Angeles,
David E. Foster, University of Wisconsin,
Samuel Fuller, Analog Devices,
Gilbert Herrera, Sandia Laboratories,
Nguyen Minh, General Electric Hybrid Power Generation Systems,
Leon E. Salomon, U.S. Army (retired),
Clarence G. Thornton, Army Research Laboratory (retired), and
Robert Whalin, Jackson State University.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Alton D. Romig, Jr., Sandia National Laboratories, who 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.
Figures and Tables
FIGURES
2-1 |
Graph showing the crossover points for battery and fuel cell power systems as functions of available energy and system mass, |
|||
2-2 |
24-hr mission at 20-W average power, |
|||
2-3 |
72-hr mission at 20-W average power, |
|||
2-4 |
24-hr mission at 100-W average power, |
|||
2-5 |
72-hr mission at 100-W average power, |
|||
2-6 |
System mass versus total energy, |
|||
3-1 |
Characteristics of an ideal battery: (a) constant voltage and (b) constant capacity, |
|||
3-2 |
Power source efficiency variation with load, |
|||
3-3 |
Typical voltage discharge profiles, |
|||
3-4 |
Doyle’s Li ion model results for capacity versus average power, |
|||
3-5 |
Power profile of a user interaction with a mobile computer, |
|||
3-6 |
Soldier power demand for 20-W average, 50-W peak 10 percent of the time, |
|||
3-7 |
Performance of hybrid as compared with performance of single components in power load cyclic profile of 9 min, 12 W, and 1 min, 40 W, |
|||
4-1 |
Comparison of various means of exoskeletal actuation on the basis of stress/strain product capabilities, |
|||
4-2 |
Generalized Ragone plot of different power sources, |
|||
5-1 |
Energy and area efficiency of different chips from 1998 to 2002, |
|||
6-1 |
System mass of five energy sources producing 2 W average power for 24- and 72-hr missions, |
|||
C-1 |
The capacity of a battery changes with the rate of discharge, |
|||
C-2 |
Ragone plot comparing the specific energy vs. specific power of various batteries and of an internal combustion engine, |
|||
C-3 |
Variation in efficiency parameters of a 20-W-rated DMFC with variations in the load (net power), |
|||
C-4 |
The maximum allowable system mass (excluding fuel) for two kinds of energy conversion systems, |
|||
C-5 |
The maximum allowable system specific energy for two kinds of energy conversion systems, |
D-1 |
Schematic cross section of a battery, |
|||
D-2 |
Schematic of proton exchange membrane fuel cell, |
|||
D-3 |
Mass flow block diagram of a Ball Aerospace PPS-50 50-W hydrogen fuel cell system, |
|||
D-4 |
Specific gravimetric hydrogen densities of select compounds, |
|||
D-5 |
Schematic of Ball Aerospace 20-W DMFC energy converter, |
|||
D-6 |
A DARPA/Ball Aerospace and Technologies operational DMFC-20, |
|||
D-7 |
Free piston Stirling engine showing component parts, |
|||
D-8 |
Conceptual layout for a 20-W Stirling power system for soldier applications, |
|||
D-9 |
1-kW Stirling engine recently purchased by Auburn University, |
TABLES
ES-1 |
Science and Technology Objectives for the Near Term, Mid-Term, and Far Term, in Three Power Regimes, |
|||
ES-2 |
Techniques for Mitigating Energy Issues in Key Land Warrior System Components and Improvements That Could Be Realized, |
|||
1-1 |
Consideration of Relevant Technologies in Previous Studies, the Workshop, and the Present Study, |
|||
2-1 |
Overview of All Power Source Alternatives, |
|||
2-2 |
Devices in 20-W Regime Planned for Objective Force Warrior (OFW)-Advanced Technology Demonstration, |
|||
2-3 |
Comparison of Soldier Power/Energy Sources for 20-W Average Power Missions of 24 and 72 Hours, |
|||
2-4 |
Comparison of Soldier Power/Energy Sources for 100-W Average Power Missions of 24 and 72 Hours, |
|||
2-5 |
Power Source Development Goals for Soldier Systems, |
|||
3-1 |
Comparison of Single Battery versus Hybrids for Attributes of Importance in Military Applications, |
|||
5-1 |
Comparison of Estimated Power Requirements of Land Warrior System, by Function (All Peak Power), |
|||
5-2 |
Comparison of Estimated Peak and Average Power and Their Ratios for Land Warrior Systems, |
|||
5-3 |
Description of Chips Used in the Analysis, |
|||
6-1 |
Techniques for Mitigating Energy Issues in Key Land Warrior System Components and Improvements That Could Be Realized, |
|||
6-2 |
Advantages and Disadvantages of Centralized and Distributed Power Distribution for Use by the Dismounted Soldier, |
|||
6-3 |
Subsystems in Objective Force Warrior with Estimated Duty Cycle of 0.98 W, |
|||
6-4 |
Subsystems in Stryker with Average/Peak Active Power Ration Greater Than 0.50 W, |
|||
6-5 |
Computational Requirements to Support Different Forms of User Interfaces, |
|||
6-6 |
Sample Attributes of User Interfaces, |
|||
6-7 |
Interactions Between User Interface and Data Types with Respect to Energy Required for Computing and Data Transmission, |
|||
6-8 |
Design-for-Wearability Attributes for Computers, |
7-1 |
Science and Technology Objectives for the Near Term, Mid-Term, and Far Term, in Three Power Regimes, |
|||
7-2 |
Techniques for Mitigating Energy Issues in Key Land Warrior System Components and Improvements That Could Be Realized, |
|||
C-1 |
Criteria for Technology Readiness Levels, |
|||
C-2 |
Energy and Total System Weights for 24-Hour Missions, |
|||
C-3 |
Energy and Total System Weights for 72-Hour Missions, |
|||
D-1 |
Overview of All Power Source Alternatives, |
|||
D-2 |
Attributes of Advanced Primary Batteries, |
|||
D-3 |
Attributes of Leading Secondary Batteries, |
|||
D-4 |
Attributes of Metal/Air and Carbon/Air Batteries, |
|||
D-5 |
Overall Comparison of Electrochemical Capacitor and Battery Characteristics, |
|||
D-6 |
Attributes of Electrochemical Capacitors, |
|||
D-7 |
Attributes of Fuel Cells for Portable Power, |
|||
D-8 |
Specific Energy and Energy Density of Various Fuels, |
|||
D-9 |
Dependence of Select Hydrogen Sources on Fuel Cell Resources, |
|||
D-10 |
Characteristics of Butane-Fueled 20-W Solid Oxide Fuel Cell System by Adaptive Materials, Inc.: Breadboard Versus Projected Attributes, |
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACRONYMS
AMTEC
alkali metal thermal to electrical conversion
ARL
Army Research Laboratory
ASB
Army Science Board
ASIC
application-specific integrated circuit
ATD
advanced technology demonstration
BOP
balance-of-plant
CECOM
Communications-Electronics Command
CMOS
complementary metal-oxide semiconductor
CO
carbon monoxide
COTS
commercial off-the-shelf
CPOX
catalytic partial oxidation
CPU
central processing unit
DARPA
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
DMFC
direct methanol fuel cell
DOD
U.S. Department of Defense
DOE
U.S. Department of Energy
DRAM
dynamic random access memory
DSP
digital signal processing
EC
electrochemical capacitor
EOD
end of discharge
FPGA
field programmable gate array
GPS
Global Positioning System
HHV
higher heating value
HIA
high integration actuator
HMMWV
high-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle
HPC
high performance computing
HUD
heads-up displays
IC
internal combustion
IEEE
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IP
Internet Protocol
JP
jet propellant
JTRS
Joint Tactical Radio System
LHV
lower heating value
LLNL
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
LTI
lead technology integrator
LW
Land Warrior
LW-AC
Land Warrior-Advanced Capability
LW-SI
Land Warrior-Stryker Interoperable
MBITR
multiband intra/inter team radio
MCC
microclimate cooling
MEA
membrane electrode assembly
MEMS
microelectromechanical systems
MIMO
multiple-input, multiple-output
MURI
Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative
NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NRC
National Research Council
NTRS
National Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors
OCV
open circuit voltage
OFW
Objective Force Warrior (aka Future Force Warrior)
PAN
primary area network
PC
personal computer
PEM
proton exchange membrane
PEMFC
proton exchange membrane fuel cell
PEO
Program Executive Office
PMMEP
Project Manager Mobile Electric Power
R&D
research and development
RF
radio frequency
S&T
science and technology
SI
Stryker Interoperable
SIA
Semiconductor Industry Association
SOA
state of the art
SoC
system-on-a-chip
SOF
special operations forces
SOFC
solid oxide fuel cell
SRAM
static random access memory
TE
thermoelectrics
TPV
thermophotovoltaics
TRADOC
Training and Doctrine Command
TRL
technology readiness level
UAW
universal access workstation
UWB
ultrawideband
VGA
video graphics array
VTB
virtual testbed
WLAN
wireless local area network
YSZ
yttria-stabilized zirconia
ABBREVIATIONS
μm
micrometer
A
ampere
Ah
ampere-hour
Al/air
aluminum/air
C
coulomb
C/air
carbon/air
cc
cubic centimeter
Cd/NiOOH
cadmium/nickel
(CF)x
carbon monofluoride
dB
decibel
g
gram
GHz
gigahertz
hp
horsepower
I
current
J
joule
kg
kilogram
kJ
kilojoule
kW
kilowatt
kWh
kilowatt-hour
L
liter
Li
lithium
Li/air
lithium/air
Li/(CF)x
lithium/carbon monofluoride cell
LiCoO2
lithium cobalt oxide
LiFePO4
lithium iron phosphate
Li/MnO2
lithium/manganese dioxide
LiMn2O4
lithium manganese oxide
LiNiO2
lithium nickel oxide
Li/S
lithium/sulfur
Li/SO2
lithium/sulfur dioxide
MeOH
methanol
Mg
magnesium
MH/NiOOH
nickel/metal hydride
MHz
megahertz
MIPS
million instructions per second
mJ
millijoule
MKS
meter-kilogram-second
mol
mole
MOPS
million operations per second
mW
milliwatt
NaBH4
sodium borohydride
nm
nanometer
ppm
parts per million
psi
pounds per square inch
PvdF
polyvinylidene fluoride
V
volt
W
watt
W/cc
watts per cubic centimeter
W/g
watts per gram
Wh
watt-hour
Wh/cc
watt hours per cubic centimeter
W/kg
watts per kilogram
W/L
watts per liter
Zn/air
zinc/air