The RuBee Wireless Weapon Tag Firearms Calibration Protocol, Firearms Healthcare Program, and Firearms Diagnostics Laboratory

RuBee wireless weapons tags with shot counting, Mean Kinetic Shots (MKS) and advanced Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) can improve small arms maintenance and healthcare, with process free, automatic weapon diagnostics and weapon visibility.Visible Assets, Inc. December 6th, 2009 Version 1-20 Copyright 2009 Visible Assets Contacts: John Stevens john@rubee.com, 617-395-7601 Craig Weich craig@rubee.com, 617-264-0101 Visible Assets, Inc. 195 Bunker Hill Ave Stratham, NH 03885

Confidential

1

Table of ContentsOVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................3 1.1. THE IMPULSE RESPONSE FUNCTION OF A WEAPON ............................................................4 THE VISIBLE ASSETS RUBEE WIRELESS WEAPON TAG ..................................6 1.2. BACKGROUND: VISIBLE CUSTOM WAVEFORM ENGINE MICRO-CHIP.....................................6 1.3. WHATS UNIQUE ABOUT VISIBLE ASSETS WEAPON TAG? .................................................7 THE STANDARD FIREARM CALIBRATION PROTOCOL ................................10 1.4. THE IMPULSE RESPONSE FUNCTION AND KPI WORKFLOW................................................11 1.5. THE 20/20 WAVEFORM MANAGER, 20/20 WAVEFORM ENGINE.......................................13 FIVE IMPULSE RESPONSE FUNCTION TO TAG KPIS CASE STUDIES .....13 1.6. MEAN KINETIC SHOTS (MKS) AND BARREL TEMPERATURE ............................................13 1.6.1. KPI Conclusions..............................................................................................16 1.7. I1 INTERVAL AS A RATE OF FIRE KPI. ......................................................................16 1.7.1. KPI Conclusions .............................................................................................18 1.8. UNEXPECTED CARBINE FIRE RATE REDUCTION...............................................................18 1.8.1. KPI Conclusions..............................................................................................19 1.9. AMMUNITION KPIS AND AMMUNITION QUALIFICATION....................................................20 1.9.1. KPI Conclusions..............................................................................................21 1.10. ANOMALOUS WAVEFORMS LEADING TO LOW RATE OF FIRE ..........................................21 1.10.1. KPI Conclusion..............................................................................................23 1.11. WHAT ELSE HAVE WE LEARNED ..............................................................................23 ADVANCED DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY AND PROGRAMS..........................24 1.12. FIREARM WEAR PROTOCOL .......................................................................................24 1.13. FIREARM CATASTROPHIC FAILURE PREVENTION PROTOCOL.............................................25 1.14. FIREARM REPAIR PREDICTOR PROTOCOL ......................................................................26 HOW WILL THIS ENHANCE SAFETY AND REDUCE COSTS...........................26

Confidential

2

Overview Reliable and accurate firearms have been the keystone of national security for many hundreds of years. New small arms designs have focused on reduced need for maintenance and enhanced accuracy and reliability, yet few truly dramatic changes have been introduced since 1860 when Christopher Spencer filed the US patent on the first magazine fed, automatic carbine. In contrast, over the last five decades the automobile has seen dramatic and disruptive changes that produced lower cost, highly reliable automobiles. This has been done through the use of microchips both to control and manage complex mechanical functions, and to diagnose and warn the driver of problems before they occur. Yet, after over 650 years of firearms use, common hand carried weapons used for security or protection do not even have a simple mileage indicator (number rounds fired), let alone any advanced analysis or control of complex mechanical events. Examples of failed weapons in the battle field as recently as a few months ago (see Guns Failed US Troops in Afghan Battle) have led to tragic losses of life, and military setbacks. This leads to a question, where is the small arms micro-chip and how can it prevent failure, or at least anticipate failure, before it occurs? The US government has made it clear that a microchip capable of shot counting will be a requirement for the next major purchase of army carbines (see M4 Revamp) Visible has designed a wireless weapons micro-chip, based on advanced patented signal processing methods and a new low power wireless communication standard (IEEE 1902.1) known as RuBee. RuBee, unlike RFID, works on steel and is not stopped by water or people. The chip as a result can be embedded in most small arms, as an ultrathin wireless tag. The tag has a ten-to-fifteen year battery life on Lithium coin cell batteries, provides critical performance data, and advanced diagnostic data, over the wireless data link. The RuBee weapons tag provides five key functions: 1. Weapons Visibility: Full weapons visibility within an area or armory physical inventory, ATF audits, as well as wireless check-in/ check-out of weapons, and wireless weapon exit/ entry detection and management. The armory visibility systems and the diagnostic data are integrated into an Oracle based weapons management application that manages a RuBee network of weapons tags known as armory 20/20 (see armory 20/20). 2. Rounds Counting: Simple Rounds management functions consisting of several registers that provide tabulated total rounds fired from a weapon using an accelerometer sensor embedded in the RuBee tag. 3. Mean Kinetic Shots: An optional second set of registers that tracks an advanced wear factor known as Mean Kinetic Shots (MKS) based on calculated barrel temperature, and first order and second interval statistics on total rounds fired. 4. Advanced Key Performance Indicators: Real-time advanced weapon preventive diagnostics using weapon specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) specific and custom to the weapon. KPIs derived from the calibration described 3

Confidential

below. These KPIs are read via the low power RuBee data link. Many optional advanced interval statistics, including simple rounds per minute vs. time, histograms, waveform widths, and waveform interval statistics, all tied to failure based on parts and maintenance of the specific weapon model. 5. Impulse Response Functions: High quality Impulse Response Functions (IRF) waveforms of acceleration vs. time based on a standardized calibrated accelerometer. Provided through a special mil specification connector, digital scope. Used to discover and calibrate the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) necessary for real-time weapons diagnostics in the field. Also used as an objective engineering tool in firearm design laboratory to collect detailed performance data. In this white paper we describe the detailed calibration protocols necessary so that a RuBee weapons tag can provide accurate real-time Shot Counting, MKS functions, and KPIs as field diagnostics for in-use active weapons. We also describe how to establish an advanced diagnostic maintenance diagnostic laboratory program for any weapons platform. 1.1. The Impulse Response Function of a Weapon The Impulse Response Function (IRF) is key to any metric tied to performance of a weapon. The IRF is a waveform that plots acceleration vs. time when the weapon is fired, and may be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1 The IRF provides an objective map of all the mechanical events that occur when a Confidential 4

round is fired. A typical IRF is illustrated in Figure 1, with key mechanical events identified. It is important to emphasize that since the mechanics and mechanical events for different model weapons are different, we would also expect to see changes in IRF from one weapons platform to another. The IRF is unique for new weapon designs or models, but it is reassuring that it is typically the same for any given model or similar design (see Figure 2 below). For example, the IRF waveforms for a piston based SCAR and Sig AR 556 are quite different from those of a direct impingement M4. However, The Colt and Bushmaster M4 (same weapon different manufactures are near identical.

Figure 2

Figure 3 The IRF is conceptually similar to the routine diagnostic Electrocardiogram Confidential 5

(ECG) used in hospitals, but for a firearm. We must carry out clinical protocols to understand the IRF for each new weapon to see what it looks like in both health and sickness. The KPIs are metrics that are calculated within the RuBee weapons tag, providing reproducible and reliable diagnostic measurements anywhere using a simple, low cost field reader or an in armory smart rack.

The Visible Assets RuBee Wireless Weapon Tag Advanced diagnostic equipment is available to weapons designers: high speed video cameras, acoustic shot counters to establish firing rate, and calibrated accelerometers to quantify performance. However, these instruments are large and complex, and therefore not usable on a routine basis in the field. The RuBee Weapons Tag is the first fully integrated signal processor designed for use on any weapon, including small arms such as carbines and handguns. The RuBee Weapon Tag provides a range of functions, from simpler things like number of shots fired, as well as advanced predictive diagnostics based on shape and timing of complex waveforms found in the IFR. 1.2. Background: Visible Custom Waveform Engine Micro-Chip Visible Assets, Inc., a US based New Hampshire company, has developed a very low power wireless communication technology, known as RuBee. RuBee became an international standard, IEEE 1902.1, in 2009. RuBee is not RFID, and is unique as a wireless communication system in that does not use radio signals. RuBee uses magnetic signals, and as a result is not affected by water or people, and can actually have enhanced range on steel. Visible has worked closely with many of the leading small arms companies, leading software companies (Oracle), and the DOE over the last two years to create a weapons visibility network based on RuBee. Visible worked closely with Mr. Brad Stinson at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to establish the first fully automated weapons visibility systems for armories that provides real-time inventory, as well as check in/ check out and User ID (see Oak Ridge White Paper). The weapons visibility network armory 20/20 is currently in use and being installed at many additional DOE sites (see armory 20/20 Video). Armory 20/20 places RuBee weapons tags in each weapon, either on the grip or some other standard location. These weapons tags each have a low power microcontroller, with memory, options for sensors, and on-board signal processing. The key is that weapons tags can be small, reasonable priced, use very low power, and can be placed at a standard, reproducible location on any weapon model. They run on a coin sized battery for up to 15 years and require zero maintenance. Many armory 20/20 weapons visibility customers requested the ability to count rounds fired as a mileage and maintenance indicator as a tag feature. In other words, in addition to reading the ID, serial number, date of manufacture etc. of the weapon when it placed on a rack, they wanted armory 20/20 to also read the current number of cumulative shots fired on each weapon and include that data in its inventory report. Visible Assets, Inc. addressed the problem by adding an accelerometer to the Confidential 6

circuit, with a simple threshold level detection on the output. The company has extensive signal and image processing experience, with several Ph.D. physicists and engineers, with many papers and one book on the topic (see J. K. Stevens, Volume Investigation of Biological Specimens). Visible quickly discovered that the output of accelerometer attached to any weapon at a standard location produced waveforms far more complex than anyone had anticipated. It was possible, for example, to get a waveform where the weapons bolt hitting the rear stop produced a larger impulse than that of the actual round leaving the barrel. The data clearly indicate that any weapon is a very complex mechanical system. Over the course of the next 18 months, the company developed a new low power, high speed signal processing chip (waveform micro-engine) specifically designed for both shot counting and capture of Impulse Response Functions (the acceleration vs. time waveform) for the M4, M16, M249, Sig P226, Sig P250, Sig 556, Glock pistols, and a variety of other weapons. It became clear over the course of developing the shot counter and as we examined many thousands of waveforms from variety of handguns and carbines that other valuable diagnostic information was contained in the IRF waveforms produced by the accelerometer. Analysis of these IRF waveforms made it clear that we could also detect defective parts, lubrication status, weapon wear, ammunition inconsistencies, and other key kinetic parameters predictive of the weapons health. 1.3. Whats Unique about Visible Assets Weapon Tag? Several companies make shot counter tags, however all other shot counters use standard off the shelf packaged parts, not full custom integrated chips. As a result they do not include advanced diagnostics, have limited counting accuracy, do not meet MILSTD-810G (see Figure 4), and all are far too are too large for handguns. No other shot counters have a secure wireless link that can also provide full weapons visibility, and no process reading of the tags registers. No other companies provide fully integrated weapons visibility products similar to armory 20/20. Summary is provided in the table below, and an example handgun RuBee tag is illustrated in Figure 2.

Tag Brand A Brand B Brand C Visible

Shot Count Y Y Y Y

M4 Accuracy 80% 80% TBD 99.3%

Interval Counts N N Y Y

Hand Guns N N N Y

Advanced Diagnostics N N N Y

Waveform Analysis N N N Y

Mil Spec 810G N N N Y

Weapons Visibility N N N Y

Confidential

7

Figure 4

Confidential

8

Figure 5

Figure 6

Confidential

9

The Standard Firearm Calibration Protocol This is the standard protocol developed in collaboration with Mr. Brad Claridge at the US Department of Energy, National Training Center in Albuquerque NM. A more detailed whitepaper and videos are available at http://www.rubee.com/NTC. Four test weapons are required (in this case M4s were used). One is new and unused, the other three have from 2,000 to 5,000 rounds fired and have been used for routine training. The standard test protocol was followed for each weapon consisting of 10 single rounds, with delays of several seconds between rounds, followed by two 28 round magazines in full auto mode. Waveforms are recorded and stored in the 20/20 Waveform Manger.

Figure 7

Confidential

10

1.4. The Impulse Response Function and KPI Workflow The Impulse Response Function and data flow that lead to Key Performance Indicators is shown below in Figure 7 Figure 8 illustrates use of small portable readers. A p-Rap may be used to capture IRF waveforms for any weapon, or a digital scope. A pRap can capture and hold about 8 hours of IRF data. The same p-Rap or Smart Shelf may be used to harvest KPIs from a weapon.

Figure 8

Confidential

11

Figure 9

Figure 10

Confidential

12

1.5. The 20/20 Waveform Manager, 20/20 Waveform Engine The waveforms and data are stored in the 20/20 Waveform Manager database that includes digitized IRF data, the date and time of data collection, firearm model, serial number, and all other details that might be important for IRF analysis. We can go through hundreds of stored IRFs quickly and select those we want to analyze. Figure 2 shows above typical weapon Impulse Response Function collected by a high speed oscilloscope and stored in 20/20 Waveform Manager. The 20/20 Manager can manage hundreds of thousands of waveforms as well as provides detailed statistics analysis of these IRF. The 20/20 Waveform Engine makes objective and quantitative measurements of intervals, pulse heights, and widths on all IRFs and exports those to a form that can be imported to any standard statistics or data analysis package (Mat Lab or DataDesk for example). These tools make it possible to quickly find differences or relationships between waveforms as well as changes within a set of waveforms from a single weapon and statistics on groups of waveforms. The basic ten IRF metrics we use, and quantify are illustrated below in Figure 9. These 20/20 tools are used to discover new fundamental Key Performance Indicators for a given weapon. These KPIs are incorporated into the Weapons Chip so it has ability to manage and detect health of the weapon in field operation without complex equipment. Finally, if Mean Kinetic Shots is to be included as a tag KPI, the temperature time constant for the weapons barrel model must be measured, and a wear factor based on actual wear must also be measured (see Section 4.1 below). Five Impulse Response Function to Tag KPIs Case Studies We provide five simple example case studies how analysis of IRF has produced new KPIs or provided important information about performance beyond simple visibility functions, and shot counting. 1.6. Mean Kinetic Shots (MKS) and Barrel Temperature Mean Kinetic Shots (MKS) is the first and most important KPI beyond just rounds fired. MKS is calculated in the RuBee Tag as an optional KPI. Basic shot counting (number of rounds fired) is important and useful, however a weapon that has fired 400 rounds one shot at a time will not show same wear as 400 shots in full automatic mode. Barrel temperature may be calculated based on the rate of shots fired, once we know the temperature time constants for a weapon. Each time a round leaves the weapon it transfers some of its kinetic energy to the weapon via friction. This increments the temperature by a fixed, known amount. The weapon over time dissipates the kinetic energy by cooling down, and that loss is based on the time constant of the weapon (see details M4 Thermal Model). A simple thermal model can be used to predict Confidential 13

barrel temperature and that in turn may be used to calculate a more precise wear factor we call MKS. Figure 11

Figure 12

Confidential

14

Figure 13

Figure 14 Confidential 15

1.6.1. KPI Conclusions MKS may be used as a second order shot counter as predictor of barrel wear based on interval statistics and calculated barrel temperature (see Figures 12 and 13). It must be calibrated to specific weapons platforms and will be based on time constants for loss of barrel heat.

1.7. I1 Interval as a Rate of Fire KPI. Detailed waveform analysis was performed as seen in Figure 7-9 using 20/20 Waveform Engine signal processing tools on all captured IRF waveforms (266 total). Figure 6 above shows basic protocol, and Figure 14 (below) shows rate of fire histograms for each of the four weapons tested. These graphs show a distribution of rates from a high of 800 rounds per second to a low of 650 rounds per second. The second set of histograms in Figure 15 shows the distribution of I1 intervals - the interval between the first pulse and the second pulse. It is clear that these two sets of data are inversely related.

Figure 15

Confidential

16

Figure 16

Confidential

Figure 17

17

Figure 16 shows the cross-correlation values between I1 (Interval 1) and the rate of fire in auto mode. Each weapon is color-coded. This graph shows a very high correlation between these two metrics (over .91 for all weapons). 1.7.1. KPI Conclusions These results seen in Figures 14,15 and 16 clearly show that we can measure interval I1 in a weapon that has been shot in single shot mode and predict the fully automatic mode rate of fire. Rate of fire is probably one the best indicators of general health of a weapon, and is one of the leading QC tests used to ensure a weapon functions correctly when manufactured. This means we can simply collect the I1 interval statistics in the Weapon Chip as a histogram similar to that seen in Figure 15, store it in memory for the last 30 rounds fired, and provide diagnostic information by simply reporting the value of that interval, even if the weapon is only shot a few times in single shot mode. That means that when the weapon is placed back on a rack after use we can predict its rate of fire no mater how the weapon has been used. If that predicted number is below 650 rounds per minute, the weapon likely needs to be cleaned or serviced. 1.8. Unexpected Carbine Fire Rate Reduction This is a simple example how changes to a weapon can lead to unexpected performance changes. A M4 variant used by NATO (C7) was tested and calibrated using the RuBee Weapons Chip.

Confidential

Figure 18

18

A M203 grenade launcher was added to the weapon and calibration was repeated. It became clear that the addition of the grenade launcher added enough weight that the time required for the bolt carrier to hit the rear stop was increased by about 30% and the next round chambered event was also delayed by 30%. The net effect is that the firing rate of this weapon went from 750 rounds per second to 680 rounds per second as a result of the grenade launcher addition. 1.8.1. KPI Conclusions These data illustrate that changes in timing may occur when accessories are added to a weapon. The addition of mass to an existing weapon may reduce the rate-of fire and make the weapon appear to be malfunctioning. In fact, the weapon performance may be compromised by this additional mass, but it does not necessarily mean the weapon requires any maintenance. However, based on data below it may also be possible to modify the spring tension in the rear bolt stop to overcome the reduced firing rate and increased mass.

Confidential

19

1.9. Ammunition KPIs and Ammunition Qualification The I1 interval (time for Slide or Bolt to hit rear stop) is also a good indicator of the ammunition quality and caliber used in the shot. The timing and strength of the pulse seem to be highly correlated to selection and round type. In this case, the weapon is essentially being used as an analytic tool to qualify ammunition, but it also demonstrates that the IRF can be used as a KPI for ammunition used in a weapon. Figure 18 is from the 20/20 Waveform Engine and shows the IRF graphs from a Sig Sauer P226, after some processing with a correlation of the average waveform (IFR filter). It shows a data set of 10 empty chambers, 10 empty cartridges, 10 @ 100 grains and 10 shots of 124 grain high performance (4 sets of 10 traces from front to back). A 1 msec window was used top graph is 3D and lower graph is top graph in to top 2D view.

Figure 19

Confidential

20

1.9.1. KPI Conclusions Ammunition type and characteristics may be detectable via the IRF. It is possible to use the IRF for ammunition tests and acceptance QC metrics. In effect the weapon becomes a test bed however, variability and other important munitions characteristics may be reliably detected and reported. 1.10. Anomalous Waveforms Leading to Low Rate of Fire

Figure 19 below illustrates Rate of Fire from two different Sig Sauer AR556s. The first weapon (A) has a normal rate of fire (over 700) and consistent over 30 round magazine. The second weapon (B) has an inconsistent rate of fire and is below 600 rounds per second.

Figure 20

Confidential

21

Figure 21 Figure 20 shows normal IRF from weapon A, and compares the three rounds that were selected in Figure 19 for weapon B. The top weapon B IRF is round 9 in the burst. It is relatively normal, although there is no second pulse that would be present if the bolt carrier firmly impacted the rear stop. The bolt carrier rear stop pulse would be expected to be about 20-25 milliseconds after the shot pulse. A small second pulse is present after the second shot pulse in the trace of round 23. The middle IRF for weapon B is round 17. It has the slowest reload of all the rounds in this burst. Both it and round 23, which is the bottom trace, have an unidentified event pulse (labeled UID) that occurs about two thirds of the way to the following shot pulse. At this point the bolt carrier has passed it rear most position, reversed its direction and the bolt has not yet closed before firing the next round. The unidentified event pulse is most likely the bolt impacting a new round from the magazine and accelerating it into the chamber. It is possible that this collision, which is not normally significant enough to show up in a shot trace, is actually the cause of the low rate of fire for that round. Instantaneous rate of fire plots and shot acceleration traces from Visible Weapon Tags, as well as plots and traces from the Visible Shot Library web site, are useful diagnostics in the determining the health and nominal operation of weapons. These data show several events during bursts fired from a Sig 556 carbine that may well be incipient jamming events. The location of the UID events in round 17 and 23 are very similar, yet cycle times for both rounds were significantly slower (10% and 20% respectively) than a nominal round in the same burst, suggesting that the slow down occurred during the UID Confidential 22

event. It appears that the UID events involve extraction of kinetic energy from the bolt and bolt carrier, thus causing the slower cycle, and possibly indicating a less positive chambering of the subsequent round.

1.10.1. KPI Conclusion The weapons tag should optionally maintain registers for the last 30-40 I1 intervals as well as last 30-40 rate-of-fire intervals. Histograms similar to those seen in Figures 14 and 15 may be calculated from this data, however the same data makes it possible to provide time series graphs similar to those at the top of Figure 19. These make it possible to also calculate the variability of that rate-of-fire, and that may be may be an important KPI and predictor of jamming. 1.11. What Else Have We Learned

In addition to the I1 interval histogram and ammunition result above we have noticed or seen many other relationships in the data collected to date. For example we have seen changes in width of the first impulse in the new M4 in very short period of time (200 rounds), and we have noticed similar changes in Sig Sauer 556. There appear to be many interesting relationships between I1 and I2, and the ratio of I1 and I2 may change with use. The size or height of the pulse 2 seems to be related to a weapon jamming in certain situations.

Confidential

23

Advanced Diagnostic Laboratory and Programs These results make it clear that after the initial firearm calibration many new KPIs will continue to appear from IRF data. It is also clear that programs should be established within a formal diagnostic weapons healthcare laboratory that examine long term wear as well as carry-out programs that detect specific defect signatures for a part or common problem found in a specific model weapon. A variety of test protocols are possible, but we focus on three initial test protocols that will create a full waveform library of IRF waveforms for any the test weapon and will guarantee the in-use weapons will be the best maintained weapons in the world. The first protocol examines routine long-term weapons wear during normal use and document changes seen in both waveforms and performance over a period of six months. Each test weapon is equipped with a RuBee tag with waveform connector option. Each weapon will be stored and maintained in RuBee Smart Racks at test site location. Students, trained users and armorers will use these weapons for routine training. The shot counting data will be captured on a regular basis (several times a day) and data logged, as well as visibility data documenting who used a weapon, time used, and rounds fired. Waveform data will be collected periodically in these weapons over the course of six months, and analyzed as described above. The second protocol provides maximum stress firing in auto mode to catastrophic failure. The weapon maybe programmed to create a warning in advance of that failure. The third protocol is based on current records showing what typically has to be routinely repaired and replaced the weapon. The typical list for a carbine includes about 20 parts that either break or wear out and must be replaced on a regular basis. We propose to take a set of new test weapons, characterize individual waveforms, and systematically replace working parts with broken parts. This provides a signature, or change in the Waveform, that might allow advanced notice of a problem. 1.12. Firearm Wear Protocol

We equip one site (typically a training site) with a RuBee enabled Smart Rack. The rack holds 24 weapons and data may be harvested on a daily basis. We do three initial standard tests on each weapon: 1. Standard Protocol outlined in Figure 6 with all IRF waveform data stored. 2. Weapon is placed in fixed stand (range space will be needed with electricity) and use 6 test rounds to a 100 yard target to show cluster repeatability and accuracy. Factory weapons specification on most carbines is normally cluster within 1.5 inch. 3. Micrometer barrel analysis and confirmation that all normal replaceable parts are in proper working order. Confidential 24

All but four control weapons (total 20) on each rack will be placed in normal training use, with selected weapons used by staff to ensure high round counts. The goal will be to have an average round count of 3,000 over that six month period, with a minimum of 4 weapons at over 6,000 rounds. All visibility data and shout counting data will be tabulated using standard armory 20/20 Waveform software systems. Twenty weapons placed in normal use and once a month all 24 weapons will repeat tests outlined in 1-3 above. In addition, we will not clean four weapons until they reach a failure point, and clean/inspect another four after each monthly test. By this process, we will collect data on four weapons that are essentially unused over six months, four that are used until failure occurs, four that are well maintained, 12 that are typical in use weapons, with the ability to confirm at the Visible test site. This study will show what natural wear and required parts replacement does to a weapon over time and how that is reflected in the IRF waveform. Additional standard metrics similar to the I1 interval may be found with this data. As these metrics are discovered, they can be added to the fixed functions in the Weapon Chip as standard output for early diagnostic and detection of any problem without the requirement to do full IRF waveform analysis. 1.13. Firearm Catastrophic Failure Prevention Protocol

As a weapon is stressed because of rapid fire, combat any weapon can jam, mechanically fail, and in some cases actually melt (see M4 Revamp, Guns Failed US Troops in Afghan Battle). At the same time any weapon will always be put to its limits in the field, it is simply important to provide an indicator when those limits have been reached before damage can not be reversed. One of the most critical tests is to stress the weapon into catastrophic short-term failure. This protocol is simple: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Four total weapons used for test. 15 x 30 round magazines (450 rounds). Full auto mode for all 450 rounds in fewer than 3 minutes. Impulse Response Function captured for all 450 rounds. Temperature of Barrel monitored as per Section 1.6. Interval Statistics collected and compared to 5 as per Section 1.6.

The single most important outcome will be ability to predict with IFR and a KPI imminent non-reversible, catastrophic failure before it occurs. This can be converted to real time warning to the user via the RuBee link and a visual indicator or audio indicator in users headset.

Confidential

25

1.14.

Firearm Repair Predictor Protocol

The second focused project will take four new weapons and introduce malfunctions to them, based on known standard problems. For example, the standard list of carbine malfunctions is listed below: 1. Dirty or foreign matter 2. Broken or missing gas rings 3. Weak or broken hammer spring 4. Weak or broken Extractor spring 5. Weak or broken piston spring 6. Defective piston 7. Loose carrier key 8. Weak or broken trigger spring 9. Broken bolt catch 10. Weak or broken ejector spring 11. Weak or dirty action spring 12. Worn firing pin Again the standard waveform test protocol described in Section 1.3 will be used as an initial standard test. We will systematically re-create each of these 12 common problems or other items that are typical maintenance items on each of the four test weapons and repeat the standard protocol. The key is to see if we can find any consistent changes in the IRF waveform that might predict similar problems in field-based weapons. Again the plan is to incorporate these waveform changes that are discovered into the firmware contained in the Weapons Chip so that diagnostic can be made in real-time and harvested by any RuBee system without the need for IRF waveform collection.

How Will This Enhance Safety and Reduce Costs We think this healthcare program can be justified both as a cost reduction basis as well as provide enhanced safety throughout the organization. The weapon waveform library and the program may also contribute to objective, rapid selection of best new weapons modifications as well as individual weapon QC and selection upon receipt of new weapons from manufacturing. Finally, the IRF waveform may also be a powerful method for objective selection and testing and selection of ammunition suppliers and all accessories. Objective criteria may now be developed for abnormal variability as well as optimal performance based on IRF criteria within a specific model for specified ammunition. The safety issue is simple and clear. With many weapons now owned and managed by most organizations, and many different users, it is virtually impossible to guarantee that each user has a weapon that is in action ready service and maintained.

Confidential

26

Some current maintenance programs typically require that a weapon is rebuilt twice a year. It should be clear that rebuilding a weapon as a preventive maintenance measure has many hidden costs beyond the labor. For example, it may often be the case that a problem exists in any weapon before the six month inspection and rebuild takes place.

Example economic savings: Only stocking necessary replacement parts that would be needed for maintenance, thus reducing the stock of unneeded parts. Reducing lost or wasted training time due to weapon malfunctions. Reducing additional wear by possibly excluding some scheduled maintenance or limiting it to annual inspections. Reduced possibility of accidents related to cleaning or training. Improved quality control of ammunition and ammunition selection.

Confidential

27