10/22/2012
Defence IQ Press
ABBS (Advanced Blast & Ballistic Systems), based in the UK, is developing active protection systems to counter the mine and IED threat. Roger Sloman, Managing Director of ABBS, is a
successful entrepreneur with years of experience in the development of novel and innovative armour systems. After establishing the Advanced Composites Group in 1975 it was sold to Umeco for £45
million in 2004. He recently sat down with Defence IQ to explain the new venture and what he expects the future to hold.
Thanks for joining us today. By way of introduction could you please tell us a little more about ABBS?
ABBS was founded in 2011 and was initially focused on developing the basic technology relating to Active Mine Protection Systems, which have been designed to directly counteract mine blast
forces. This technology eliminates both the Floor Deformation and Global Acceleration threats to the occupants. All the active system technology is protected by patent applications
which will be extended globally as required, and discussions regarding funding to fully exploit the IP globally are on-going.
However, we are also working on another interesting technology regarding the 3D moulding of composite ballistic materials and we’ve also started the evaluation of an innovative shaped charge
protection system. It’s only in the early stages of development but if it works it could revolutionise the way armour is designed to protect against shaped charges. So the company is not solely
involved in the Active Systems, although we are only just starting to introduce these other products to the market.
Congratulations on winning the ‘Best Product Innovation’ award at the International Armoured Vehicles conference earlier this year – could you please give an overview of how your
anti-blast technologies work?
ABBS is developing two Active Systems, both of which work by generating high levels of force almost instantly in response to the mine blast, ideally matching, or just over-matching the forces
generated by the mine. Essentially we create a downward force to counteract the mine’s upward force. Contrary to some perceptions which existed in 2008 (when the concept was first identified
by ABBS) it is perfectly possible to react fast enough, and with enough force to match the mine blast forces. However, it is not only a case of matching the total impulse generated, you also have
to consider the force/time curve generated by the mine. Since the shape and duration of the force/time curve can be very variable even for the same size of mine (dependent on depth of burial
and soil conditions) it is obvious that the active system should ideally be capable of generating a variable system response as dictated by a control system interpreting the vehicle response.
This is an important aspect of the systems as applied to vehicles such as APC’s and MRAP’s which may be hit by anything from an anti-personnel mine to a very large IED. Clearly, the response does
not need to be the same for both these extremes of threat.
Coming to the systems themselves, there is VGAM (Vehicle Global Acceleration Mitigation), which is designed purely to eliminate the rapid acceleration of the whole vehicle into the air. It is
this acceleration of the vehicle that can impose severe loads on the occupants and cause serious injuries or death, even if the vehicle floor is not penetrated or deformed significantly. Hence
even the heavy MRAP-type vehicles still suffer from this problem with large IED’s even though their belly plate/floor construction sustains the deformation loads adequately. The VGAM systems
are relatively simple, and easy to retrofit to current vehicles, with various different formats being available to suit different vehicle designs. As a result of their effectiveness in
dealing with the Global Acceleration problem, and their relative simplicity to design and retrofit, it is expected that a VGAM-type system will be the first active mine
protection technology to be applied to military vehicles.
The second system is VAFS (Vehicle Armoured Floor Stabilisation), whereby columns are passed through the vehicle cabin to the vehicle floor and/or belly plate to apply the force generated by the
motors directly to the floor/belly plate structure and oppose the mine blast forces acting on it. The motor systems required for the VAFS function are different from those used for the VGAM
function because a very fast and powerful response is required with only a short duration. Effectively the belly plate becomes like a membrane between opposing forces, so is offloaded, and can
potentially be made thinner and therefore lighter for the same mine blast performance level. This weight reduction can potentially offset the additional weight of the VAFS system. The system
offers major advantages if it is designed into the vehicle from the start, giving the potential to reduce ground clearances, use shallower V-angles, lower the overall vehicle height for reduced
profile and lower centre of gravity, as well as potentially reducing weight for the same mine blast performance spec.
Which vehicles can the technology be used on? Has it been designed primarily for the MRAP family of vehicles or can it be adapted for other vehicles?
The technology can be used on any vehicle, from civilian SUV’s to MBT’s. They are especially applicable to SUV-types and VIP vehicles, which being light are very susceptible to the Global
Acceleration threat. Often in these instances even if the belly plate is sufficient to withstand a significant mine blast, either the Global Acceleration or the eventual impact with the ground
from several metres in the air is likely to seriously injure the occupants anyway. As such current armoured SUV’s and VIP vehicles usually have relatively low resistance to mine blasts, only a
small mine will penetrate the belly plate and blow the vehicle apart. Therefore the first prerequisite is a belly plate designed to sustain the specified mine threat without being penetrated.
Since the potential floor deformation will also cause severe injuries or death it is then necessary to stiffen the floor pan, and this is also required in order to spread the loads from the VAFS
column/motor system, which is generally located on the vehicle centreline just behind the front seats. In this case the VAFS column also provides the VGAM function, so the motor system is
designed to provide both the high force/short duration element, and the longer duration lower level thrust required to deal with the longer–lasting blast forces.
What stage in the development process are you in now? Still in the concept phase or has it been successfully tested?
We have essentially finished the Proof-of-Concept stage in that it is now clear that the early fears about feasibility have been cleared. It is now simply a matter of physics and designing
the motor systems to roughly match the force/time curve generated by the mine. This work has been largely funded by DSTL through the CDE and A&P STC routes, which have proved invaluable in
supporting these developments. The different basic methods of generating the force required in an appropriate time profile are all identified and covered by patent applications, and the force and
total impulse levels required all look achievable, albeit that you need to take the principles about as far as the laws of physics allow. However, what is missing now is the specific requirements
in terms of the quantitative force/time curves from the armoured vehicle OEM’s and/or the end users so that we can design the systems to match the required specifications. The problem with this
is that it is not clear whether anyone actually knows what they want, which possibly goes back to the fact that it’s not clearly understood how the mine blast event interacts with the vehicle to
transfer momentum.
What’s the next step for ABBS? Is it refining the technology further and continuing to test its capabilities? Is it attracting investors to take the technology to market?
Yes, evaluating the different design options, generating performance data, and minimising the weight of the systems are all required, but we want to do this with specific vehicle applications and
specifications in mind. As a result we are just starting a round of visits to the main OEM’s in Europe and the USA to try to clarify what they perceive to be their requirements, and spread
the word as regards what is possible.
On the subject of investors, we are pursuing a whole range of options to get the full funding required to both develop and market the technology globally. There are several routes being
discussed.
Which type of customer are you targeting? Is it exclusively the military market or are you looking towards private industry too?
Currently I think that both the commercial (SUV/VIP vehicles) and the military (LAV’s/APC’s/MRAP’s) applications are good targets, although it is not clear which will move more quickly. We are
pursuing both at the moment.
With the drawdown in Afghanistan scheduled for 2014 and with the US pivoting to the Asia-Pacific region as its next strategic priority, do you think we will see the IED diminish as a key
threat to Western militaries and NATO forces? Or is it here to stay?
It is clear that the IED threat is here to stay, wherever the theatre of operation, so all new armoured vehicle designs will have to take the threat into account. As stated previously, the VAFS
active system offers major advantages if it is designed into the vehicle from the start, but it will take some time for the military specifiers and the vehicle designers to understand the issues
and develop optimised designs. But given the on-going IED threat and the major advantages of using active mine protection systems it is inevitable that the systems will be adopted in due course.
Design standards need to be defined and agreed by NATO so that the active system designs can be standardised as quickly as possible to meet particular performance levels.
Which regions are you targeting as key growth areas for ABBS? Established markets such as the US and UK? Or do you think you’ll get more traction in emerging economies in Asia and the
Middle East?
We are looking at the US, Europe, and the Middle East as equal opportunities at the moment, but would like to explore the Indian/Asian markets as well when we can. Having the right contacts
locally is important in these latter areas and we haven’t established those yet.
Is ABBS working on any other innovations in conjunction with its anti-blast technology? Will you expand into other market segments such as developing ballistic armour systems? What will
ABBS look like 10 years from now – what’s your vision for the future?
ABBS aims to always develop products which have a technical advantage compared to what is currently on the market, preferably with a commercial advantage as well, so with armour there’s the issue
of trying to break into an already very competitive market with a similar product. We do have a 3D mouldable composite ballistic system which we think has applications as a spall liner or
secondary ballistic system behind a steel or a steel/ceramic outer shell, or for a very simple upgrade applied to the inside of a vehicle shell. The system could also be used to mould
individually-tailored body armour so that a perfect fit is obtained. This material is still being optimised, but we have already had some very good ballistic results. There is also a novel
shaped charge protection system we are evaluating which would be very interesting if it works.
As regards the 10 year view this depends very much on how the VAFS and VGAM technology is adopted globally, which is impossible to predict. ABBS should become the global leader in Active Mine
Protection Systems based on the patented VGAM IP having priority over all competitors as far as we know. Although there is competition in the market our first patent with priority date of 10th
December 2008 covers the basic concept of putting down-force on the vehicle to counteract the lifting forces from the mine blast. We believe that this pre-dates any other similar patent, which
should mean that ABBS controls the market wherever we have converted the PCT application to national applications, which includes all the main market areas. There are also between 5 and 10 other
patent applications going through the system covering the VAFS concept and the various detailed methods of designing the systems. These patents can be used to extend the IP cover globally
wherever required.
So we see the IP as being the basis for the development of ABBS into an operation with a global reach, but whether that is mainly via internal resources, or working through one, or several
partners is not clear yet. Hopefully the next year will determine the path that we will take. We would very much like to work primarily with a UK-based operation with global reach, but
unfortunately the current economic climate appears to be limiting the UK entrepreneurial spirit, although we are still talking to some UK players. Time will tell, but we're confident our next
generation technologies will help define a new standard in the design of counter-IED systems in the future.
/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshallaerospace.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fpage-images%2Fmantis.jpg)
/http%3A%2F%2Fc69011.r11.cf3.rackcdn.com%2F87710be9d4614488bcc39582a05bba05-576x0.JPG)
/http%3A%2F%2Fc69011.r11.cf3.rackcdn.com%2F06db15f9300e4db69419673c15d6a806-576x0.JPG)
/fdata%2F4220908%2Favatar-blog-1207340840-tmpphpbvDubc.jpeg){kind=avatar}
