Hardening and Testing the Video Transmitter and 

Camera for the Shoulder-Fired Video Imager 

by Michael L. Nair 

ARL-TR-3353 November 2004 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 
NOTICES 

Disclaimers 

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position 

unless so designated by other authorized documents. 

Citation of manufacturer’s or trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or 

approval of the use thereof. 

DESTRUCTION NOTICEDestroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return it to 

the originator. 
Army Research Laboratory 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5069 

ARL-TR-3353 November 2004 

Hardening and Testing the Video Transmitter and 

Camera for the Shoulder-Fired Video Imager 

Michael L. Nair 

Weapons and Materials Research Directorate, ARL 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
ii 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and 

Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 

person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

 November 2004 

2. REPORT TYPE 

Final 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 

 August 2003 to August 2004 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 

5b. GRANT NUMBER 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

 Hardening and Testing the Video Transmitter and Camera for the Shoulder- 

 Fired Video Imager 

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

5d. PROJECT NUMBER 

 1L162318H80 

5e. TASK NUMBER 

6. AUTHOR(S) 

 Michael L. Nair (ARL) 

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

 U.S. Army Research Laboratory 

 Weapons and Materials Research Directorate 

 Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5069 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

 REPORT NUMBER 

 ARL-TR-3353 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT 

 NUMBER(S) 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

 

 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

14. ABSTRACT 

In support of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory’s effort to develop and test a shoulder-fired video imager, the Southern 

California Microwave video nano-transmitter (VNTX) and Supercircuits PC182XS and PC72XS cameras were hardened (i.e., 

made to withstand shocks as great as 8000 g’s) and shock tested. The components were tested at an acceleration that exceeds 

the maximum acceleration to be seen during the video imager tests on a bunker defeat munition. 

Shock testing revealed that filling the case of the transmitter with glass beads enabled it to sufficiently support the electronic 

components and allow a shock level of 8085 g’s with no adverse effects. The PC182XS camera survived an equal shock level 

in a dedicated shock fixture but failed at a similar shock level when mounted in the imager round. The PC72XS survived shock 

at 7347 g’s after replacement of the standard crystal oscillator with a surface-mounted crystal. 

Both the VNTX transmitter and PC72XS camera have been sufficiently prepared and tested to allow for use on the shoulderfired video imager project. Further work can be done to qualify these two components for higher acceleration gun launches if 

desired. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS

 camera; hardening; shock testing; shoulder-fired video imager; transmitter 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

 Michael L. Nair 

a. REPORT 

 UNCLASSIFIED 

b. ABSTRACT 

UNCLASSIFIED

c. THIS PAGE 

UNCLASSIFIED

17. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT 

UL 

18. NUMBER 

OF PAGES 

40 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 

 410-306-1051 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
iii 

Contents 

List of Figures iv

List of Tables iv

Acknowledgments v

1. Introduction 1

2. Components 2

3. Fixture and Part Design 4

4. Test Criteria 7

5. Experimental Procedures 8

6. Conclusion 18

7. References 19

Appendix A. Mechanical Drawings 21 

Distribution List 32 
iv 

List of Figures 

Figure 1. VNTX transmitter............................................................................................................2 

Figure 2. PC182XS camera.............................................................................................................3 

Figure 3. PC72XS camera...............................................................................................................3 

Figure 4. Camera shock figure, bottom plate..................................................................................4

Figure 5. Camera mounted in shock fixture....................................................................................5

Figure 6. Transmitter shock mount.................................................................................................5 

Figure 7. The PC182XS camera mounted in the camera mounting plate and mounting box........6 

Figure 8. Solid model showing the camera installed in the imager warhead. ...............................6 

Figure 9. BDM nominal acceleration..............................................................................................7 

Figure 10. Southern California Microwave VNTX transmitter......................................................9 

Figure 11. Encapsulated camera showing the RTC sealant around the CCD..............................10 

Figure 12. Camera fixture mounted to MTS shock table..............................................................10 

Figure 13. Imager round mounted to shock table. ........................................................................11 

Figure 14. Recorded shock pulse during test of video imager......................................................12 

Figure 15. Displacement graph of the camera mounting plate from FEA....................................13 

Figure 16. Displacement graph of the mounting box from FEA. .................................................14 

Figure 17. PC72XS camera circuit board with Statek crystal. .....................................................15 

Figure 18. Displacement of revised mounting box.......................................................................16 

Figure 19. Displacement of the camera mounting box in dynamic analysis. ...............................17 

Figure 20. Pre-shock video image. ...............................................................................................18 

Figure 21. Post-shock video image...............................................................................................18 

List of Tables 

Table 1. VNTX series transmitter specifications............................................................................2 

Table 2. Supercircuits PC182XS specifications. ............................................................................3 

Table 3. Supercircuits PC72XS specifications. ..............................................................................4 
v 

Acknowledgments 

The author would like to thank Jamie King of Dynamic Science, Inc. (DSI), for his invaluable 

assistance with soldering and help with the spectrum analyzer and Robert Wert of the Oak Ridge 

Institute for Science and Education, Tennessee, for his help in evaluating the performance of the 

transmitter. Special thanks to Keith Dougherty of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) 

machine shop and Ron Wayne of DSI for machining the parts and fixtures used in these 

experiments. John Condon of ARL is especially appreciated for sharing his experience with the 

hardening of cameras and transmitters from previous projects. John Connor of Talley Defense 

Systems is thanked for providing needed information about the performance of the bunkerdefeating munition. 
vi 

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1 

1. Introduction 

The U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) has begun a mission program to build and test a 

shoulder-fired munition that carries a video camera and transmitter to test the feasibility of such 

a system for real-time reconnaissance imagery for use by Soldiers deployed in the field. The 

bunker-defeating munition (BDM), manufactured by Talley Defense Systems1, was selected as 

the baseline weapon to be modified for use with the test because of its flight characteristics and 

availability. The BDM is a shoulder-fired recoilless rifle that is currently fielded by the 

U.S. Army. At launch, the BDM round experiences a maximum acceleration of approximately 

6800 g’s. To survive the acceleration, a transmitter and camera must be shock-hardened and 

tested to ensure that the imager round will function as desired during live fire testing. 

The transmitter selected for the shoulder-fired video imager is the Southern California 

Microwave2

 video nano-transmitter (VNTX) series, which is used in ARL’s silent operating 

aerial reconnaissance (SOAR) program. Despite its use in the SOAR program, this transmitter 

has not been tested for shock survivability. This report details the process of “hardening” the 

transmitter (i.e., making it to withstand shocks as great as 8000 g’s), shock testing the transmitter 

to various levels, and then testing the transmitter to ensure that it was still functional. Testing 

showed that the hardened transmitter is able to withstand shock loads as great as 8085 g’s 

without failure. Two cameras, both from Supercircuits3, were also tested during this work. Also 

detailed here is the hardening, shock testing, and evaluation of the two cameras. The PC182XS 

camera was filled with encapsulation material and shock tested. When mounted in the video 

imaging round, the camera failed at a shock level of 7532 g’s. Because of this failure, finite 

element analysis (FEA) tools were used to try to determine the cause of the failure and ways to 

redesign the associated parts to ensure survivability of the camera. A second camera, the 

PC72XS, was hardened by replacement of the can-type crystal oscillator with a surface mount 

crystal and encapsulation of the camera. With the redesigned camera mounts, the hardened 

PC72XS camera in the imager round survived shock testing to 7347 g’s. 

Testing indicates that the efforts to harden the camera and transmitter were successful and that 

the components will function properly following launch with the BDM rocket motor. The 

hardening and testing of the transmitter can also be applied to the SOAR program. Current work 

on the SOAR vehicle includes launch testing in a variety of manners in which the transmitter can 

be used without failure. 

 1

Talley Defense Systems, P.O. Box 34299, Mesa, AZ 85277-4299. 

2Southern California Microwave, 2732 Via Orange Way, Suite E, Spring Valley, CA 91978. 

3

Supercircuits, Inc., One Supercircuits Plaza, Liberty Hill, TX 78642. 
2 

2. Components 

The transmitter selected for the imager is the VNTX series, shown in figure 1, manufactured by 

Southern California Microwave for use in law enforcement. This transmitter is used by 

Aerovironment4

 in ARL’s SOAR unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The transmitter was built to 

the specifications given by Aerovironment for the SOAR UAV. See table 1 for the specifications 

of the transmitter. 

Figure 1. VNTX transmitter. 

Table 1. VNTX series transmitter specifications. 

VNTX Transmitter Specifications 

Frequency 1710 to 1850 MHz 

Output Power 250 mW 

Input Voltage +9 to +16 volts direct current (VDC) 

Typical Current Draw 110 mA 

Subcarrier Frequency 7.5 MHz, transistor-transistor logic modulation 

Subcarrier frequency Response DC – 20 KHz 

Temperature (Operating) -20 to +70 °C base plate 

Size 0.880 in. x 1.260 in. x 0.37 in. (0.41 cu in.) 

Weight 1.27 ounces 

RF Connector Subminiature version A (SMA) female 

Power Connector Flying Leads 

Video Connector BNC* male on 12 inches of RG178 

Audio Connector Microtech 3-pin DR-3S-3 

*BNC, which is not an acronym, is a connector (usually on a hub) that accommodates thin coaxial cable. 

 4

Aerovironment, Inc., 825 S. Myrtle Dr., Monrovia, CA 91016. 
3 

The camera intended for use is the Supercircuits PC182XS. This camera uses Sony’s new ExView charged-coupled device (CCD) chip set which allows for low light visibility and high 

resolution. The camera uses a 3.6-mm lens and includes an electronic shutter that can vary the 

exposure from 1/60 to 1/100,000 second. The camera and its specifications are shown in figure 2 

and table 2. 

Figure 2. PC182XS camera. 

Table 2. Supercircuits PC182XS specifications. 

Light Rating 0.0003 lux 

Pixels 411,988 

Resolution 600 lines 

Input Voltage 12 VDC 

Current Draw 100 mA 

Size 0.98 x 0.98 x 1.2 inches 

Video Format National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) 

Because of the failure of the camera during shock tests, as detailed in the following sections, a 

second camera was selected and tested. The Supercircuits PC72XS camera, shown in figure 3, 

was successfully used by John Condon of ARL in a separate gun-launched application (Condon, 

McLaughlin, & Mitchell, 2001). For this application, the 4.5-mm micro-lens model was used. 

The PC72XS camera specifications are listed in table 3. 

Figure 3. PC72XS camera. 
4 

Table 3. Supercircuits PC72XS specifications. 

Light Rating 0.05 lux 

Resolution 420 lines 

Input Voltage 9 to 15 VDC 

Current Draw 100 mA 

Size 0.984 x 0.984 x 1.112 inches 

Video Format NTSC 

3. Fixture and Part Design 

Two fixtures were produced for testing the camera and transmitter. The fixtures were made from 

AL 7075-T6. The first fixture is made of two parts that clamp the camera between them. The 

bottom plate, shown in figure 4, has a pocket cut to hold the camera in the vertical position so that 

the shock axis is along the axis of the camera lens. A deep groove, which acts as a wire tray for 

the camera leads, extends from the pocket to the edge of the base. The four holes immediately 

around the pocket are 10-245 tapped holes used to secure the top piece to the bottom plate. A 

10-24 tapped hole permits mounting of an accelerometer for measuring the shock pulse during 

testing. The other four holes are for mounting the fixture to the shock table. 

Figure 4. Camera shock figure, bottom plate. 

The top piece is a plate with a clearance hole for the lens and four holes for mounting the top 

piece to the bottom plate. The two parts were held together with four 10-32 cap screws, as 

shown in figure 5. 

The second fixture, shown in figure 6, is an L-shaped piece used for shock testing the transmitter. 

Two separate hole patterns permit mounting the transmitter so that the long axis of the transmitter 

is either horizontal or vertical. The transmitter is mounted to the fixture with four 2-56 machine 

screws. The bottom side of the fixture has a 10-24 threaded hole for the accelerometer as well as 

 5

10-24 indicates a gauge size of 10 with 24 threads per inch. 
5 

four clearance holes for mounting the fixture to the shock table. The extra holes in the upright 

part of the fixture are for shock testing an antenna splitter used in the imager. 

Figure 5. Camera mounted in shock fixture. 

Figure 6. Transmitter shock mount. 

During the evaluation of the transmitter and camera, four of the imager round bodies were 

manufactured at the ARL machine shop. Five camera mounting plates and five camera 

mounting boxes designed for the PC182XS camera were completed at approximately the same 

time. After completion of these parts, they were used to test the camera while installed in the 

imager round. When mounted in the round, the camera is held by clamps between the camera 

mounting plate and the mounting box, much like it is in the shock fixture. The clamping force is 
6 

applied to the camera immediately around the protrusion for the lens. The PC182XS camera 

mounted to the camera mounting plate and mounting box are shown in figure 7. 

Figure 7. The PC182XS camera mounted in the camera mounting 

plate and mounting box. 

After we decided to use the PC72XS camera, the camera mounting plate and mounting box were 

redesigned to accommodate the geometrical differences in cameras. Instead of having a 

clearance hole in the mounting box, a pocket was milled through the mounting box to secure the 

camera around the exterior of the small step exterior to the lens protrusion. Only two sets of the 

revised parts were produced because two of the rounds are mass simulators and do not require 

functioning cameras. Figure 8 shows the solid model of the round with the PC72XS camera, 

revised camera mounting plate, and mounting box installed. 

Figure 8. Solid model showing the camera installed in the 

imager warhead. 
7 

4. Test Criteria 

The acceleration data for the BDM were provided by their manufacturer, Talley Defense 

Systems. Figure 9 shows the time history of the acceleration of the standard BDM. 

Figure 9. BDM nominal acceleration. 

Since the imager warhead is heavier than the standard BDM warhead, the peak acceleration 

experienced by the components should be lower than the 6800 g’s shown in figure 9. With the 

basic formula for force 

F = ma 

in which F is the force, m is the mass, and a is the acceleration, an estimate of the acceleration 

load can be calculated. The mass of the standard BDM mock warhead is 1745 grams. The 

replacement warhead is approximately 2050 grams, according to the solid model. By using the 

peak acceleration shown in the graph, we calculated the maximum force to be approximately 

12,040 newtons. With that same force, the maximum acceleration experienced by the imager 

warhead should be approximately 5870 g’s. Based on these numbers, it can be assumed that the 

7000-g shock test will be sufficient to demonstrate survivability of the components in the launch 

environment. 
8 

5. Experimental Procedures 

To harden the VNTX transmitter, it was planned to fill the interior of the transmitter with 

STYCAST6 encapsulation in order to provide the structural support needed for the components to 

survive launch. Before proceeding with this plan, we contacted the manufacturer of the transmitter, Southern California Microwave, and they reported that the use of encapsulation would 

have a high likelihood of de-tuning some of the components, thus resulting in a malfunction of the 

transmitter. This effect has been seen in unsealed inductors and capacitors during other projects 

at ARL. Since the encapsulation surrounds the components, the dielectric constant can be altered 

and the broadcast frequency of the transmitter potentially altered. To prevent this problem, glass 

beads were chosen to fill the transmitter case instead of the STYCAST encapsulation material. 

Experience has shown that glass beads can help electronic components survive lower acceleration 

environments without negative effects on the functionality of the components. 

To verify that the transmitter was built to the specifications required, the transmitter was taken to 

California where it was tested with the Aerovironment ground control unit (GCU) to ensure that 

the unit was able to transmit the video image to the GCU. After the transmitter was returned to 

ARL, it was tested on a spectrum analyzer. The transmitter power at the center frequency of 

1787 MHz was measured at 24.57 dBm with a 12-volt DC input. During testing, the transmitter 

output was attached to the spectrum analyzer with a 50-ohm load. At steady state, the transmitter 

draws 92 mA. Before the transmitter was filled with glass beads, several openings in the 

transmitter case were sealed with Dow Corning7 Silastic8

 734 room temperature vulcanizing 

(RTV) self-leveling adhesive sealant. The end of the transmitter case opposite the SMA 

connector was un-soldered to unfold the flaps. The glass beads available for use were No. 8 

class 5A Microbeads9. The Microbeads measure 270 microns in diameter and are composed of 

soda lime glass. The glass beads were poured in the transmitter and as the case was filled, it was 

shaken to ensure that the glass was filling all open voids. After the case was entirely filled and 

soldered closed, the transmitter was tested again on the spectrum analyzer and the power 

transmitted was 24.58 dBm at 1787 MHz with the same power input. 

The transmitter was mounted to the transmitter shock fixture oriented with the long axis of the 

transmitter in the vertical direction. The fixture was mounted to an MTS10 shock test system and 

subjected to an 8085-g acceleration as measured by an accelerometer mounted to the shock 

fixture. The transmitter was un-powered during the shock test. To ensure that the transmitter 

 6STYCAST, which is not an acronym, is a trademark of Emerson & Cuming. 

7Dow Corning is a registered trademark of Dow Corning Corporation, Midland MI 48606-0994. 

8

Silastic is a registered trademark of Dow Corning Corporation, Midland MI 48606-0994. 

9Microbeads is a registered trademark of Cataphote, Inc., P.O. Box 2369, Jackson, MS 39225-2369. 

10Not an acronym; MTS Systems Corporation, 1400 Technology Dr., Eden Prairie, MN 55344-2290. 
9 

was functional, it was again taken to Aerovironment’s facility where it was successfully tested 

with the GCU. The test showed that the transmitter survived the expected launch acceleration 

without failure. The second transmitter was filled with glass beads according to the same 

process just described; however, it malfunctioned after the glass beads were inserted and the case 

was soldered. Testing showed that the center frequency was now at approximately 1550 MHz. 

After the transmitter case was opened (see figure 10), no obvious causes of the problem were 

seen and the unit was returned to Southern California Microwave for investigation. Southern 

California Microwave reported that several components were disconnected from the circuit 

board, which was likely caused by the heat from the case being un-soldered. Southern California 

Microwave repaired the unit and returned it with the transmitter case open, which allowed for 

easy filling of the case with the glass beads. After we re-soldered the case, the unit was retested 

on the spectrum analyzer and the center frequency was measured at 1787 MHz. 

Figure 10. Southern California Microwave VNTX transmitter. 

To survive the acceleration of gun launch, the camera was modified to prevent failure. To 

harden the camera, the PC182XS camera was disassembled. The camera is composed of four 

sections: the lens assembly, the camera body, the rear cover, and the circuit board. A bead of 

Dow Corning Silastic 734 RTV self-leveling adhesive sealant was laid around the edge of the 

CCD on the circuit board to form a seal with the camera body and prevent the CCD from being 

covered by the encapsulation material. Four holes were drilled in both the camera body and the 

rear cover with a No. 45 drill bit to allow for filling the case with encapsulation. The camera 

was re-assembled and then filled with Emerson & Cuming11 STYCAST 1090SI encapsulation 

 11Emerson & Cuming, 46 Manning Rd., Billerica, MA 01821-3916. 
10 

mixed with LV23 catalyst in a 100:25.4 ratio. The encapsulated camera is shown in figure 11 

without the lens assembly; note the bead of sealant around the CCD. 

Figure 11. Encapsulated camera showing the RTV sealant 

around the CCD. 

The camera was mounted to the shock table in its shock fixture, shown in figure 12, and shock 

tested to a peak acceleration of 8085 g’s, as measured by an accelerometer mounted to the 

fixture. The video output of the camera was observed on a black-and-white monitor during the 

shock event. The camera survived the shock event, as noted by the clear video image on the 

monitor after the test. 

Figure 12. Camera fixture mounted to MTS shock table. 
11 

After both the transmitter and camera successfully passed the survivability tests, the components 

were installed in the imager round and the round was mounted to the shock table, as seen in 

figure 13. The transmitter signal was received by a GCU which includes a small screen 

displaying the video signal. 

Figure 13. Imager round mounted to shock table. 

The imager round was subjected to a shock test in which the peak acceleration was measured at 

7532 g’s. During the shock event, the video stopped and the video output of the GCU turned 

black. The GCU controller showed some type of white streaks but no intelligible images. The 

imager round was disassembled to determine the cause of failure. We removed the camera from 

the round and tested it by connecting it to a 12-volt power supply and a small black-and-white 

monitor. Testing of the individual components revealed that the camera was no longer functional and had failed during the shock test. To ensure that the transmitter was not damaged, a 

new camera was connected to the transmitter and a normal video signal was received by the 

GCU. To ensure that the camera failure was not an anomaly, another test of the imager at a 

similar shock level was conducted; the recorded shock is shown in figure 14. This camera was 

also slightly modified in that the connector for the video and power leads was removed and leads 
12 

were soldered directly to the through-holes on the circuit board before encapsulation. Again, the 

camera failed in exactly the same way; replacement of the camera indicated that the transmitter 

was undamaged. 

Figure 14. Recorded shock pulse during test of video imager. 

To eliminate any possibility that other components contributed to the camera failure, a third 

shock test was conducted. In this test, the camera was attached to the shock table frame with 

wire leads running into the video imager round where the power supply and transmitter were 

connected. The round was shock tested at a maximum shock of approximately 7500 g’s. During 

this test, all the components functioned during shock, which indicated that the camera failure was 

probably attributable to the physical mounting in the modified round. 

In an attempt to determine the cause of failure, FEA was performed on both the camera mounting 

plate and the camera mounting box with ALGOR12. A static analysis was conducted on the 

camera mounting plate. The plate was constrained from movement in the axial direction of the 

round by the screw holes. A force of 525 newtons was applied to the pocket where the camera 

sits. The analysis, shown in figure 15, predicts that the maximum deflection of the plate in the 

axial direction occurs at the center of the pocket and is equal to 1.228 x 10-5m. 

Several different analyses of the mounting box were conducted. To simplify the calculations, a 

static analysis was used. The force applied to the piece is equal to 1/3 the launch acceleration 

multiplied by the mass of the camera. This analysis assumes that the force applied to the 

mounting box will be at a maximum as the round leaves the barrel. This acceleration can be 

assumed to be approximately an order of magnitude less than the launch acceleration (Barrett, 

2004). To ensure that sufficient loading is applied, the set-forward acceleration is assumed to be 

1/3 the launch acceleration. The analysis indicates that a deflection of 2.57 x 10-5m is possible, 

 12 ALGOR, which is not an acronym, is a registered trademark of ALGOR, Inc., 150 Beta Dr., Pittsburgh, PA, 15238-2932. 
13 

given the specified acceleration. A graph showing the displacements in the axial direction is 

presented in figure 16. 

Figure 15. Displacement graph of the camera mounting plate from FEA. 

The top piece of the camera shock fixture was analyzed and ALGOR predicted a displacement of 

9.9 x 10-7m. The difference in displacement is apparently the cause for the camera failure. While 

the deflection of the camera mounting plate and mounting box is small, a component of the 

acceleration present in these parts, which was not present in the more rigid shock fixture, likely 

caused a failure of one or more of the camera components. 

The author was then referred to an ARL report (Condon et al., 2001), which detailed a similar 

problem that was encountered during the shock testing of a Polaris Industries camera. To harden 

the camera for gun launch, the authors replaced a can-type crystal oscillator with a surface mount 

crystal before encapsulating the camera. This change allowed the camera to survive much higher 

accelerations than possible with the original component. Originally, the intention was to procure 

surface mount crystals for the PC182XS camera and try the same approach to harden the cameras. 

Dove Electronics was contacted about the possibility of acquiring new crystals but the clock 

frequency of 28.563 Mhz for the camera is a non-standard frequency. In order to acquire crystals 
14 

at that frequency, approximately four months would be required for development and testing. To 

avoid the delay, a faster path was chosen. During further work by one of the authors of ARLMR-510 (John Condon of ARL), it was discovered that a second camera, the Supercircuits PC72, 

uses the same clock frequency as the Polaris Industries camera. The PC72 camera is slightly 

larger than the PC182 but shares a similar form factor. To determine if the PC72 camera would 

meet the requirements for the concept, several copies of the PC72XS camera were obtained and 

tested. To harden the camera, the procedure described in ARL-MR-510 was followed. The cantype crystal in the camera was replaced with the Statek13 surface mount crystal (part I.D. 4AT4520-ASXI; description: CX4HGSM1-18.869-MHz crystal oscillator) which was available from 

parts from work done by John Condon (see figure 17). 

Figure 16. Displacement graph of the mounting box from FEA. 

 13Statek is a trademark of Statek Corporation, 512 North Main Street Orange, CA 92868. 
15 

Figure 17. PC72XS camera circuit board with Statek crystal. 

As with the previous test, the power and video connector was replaced with wires directly 

soldered to the circuit board. The CCD was sealed to the lens housing with Dow Corning RTV 

and the camera was encapsulated with STYCAST 1090SI with an LV23 catalyst. To allow for 

the installation of the PC72XS camera in the imager round, the camera mounting plate and 

mounting box designs were modified to fit the new camera (see appendix A). The only change 

in the camera mounting plate was the shape of the pocket, which was assumed to have a 

negligible effect on the stress in the plate under load. The mounting box (mounting box rev1) 

was redesigned to better distribute the clamping force on the camera (see appendix A). Several 

analyses of the revised mounting box were conducted to ensure that the displacement of the 

mounting box is smaller than the original version. Figure 18 shows the nodal displacement in 

the axial direction of the revised mounting box under the same loading conditions in figure 16. 

The maximum displacement in the axial direction of the revised part is approximately half the 

displacement of the original. 

A second analysis was conducted to simulate the dynamic effects of the actual situation. This 

analysis was a quarter symmetry model which used a square block to simulate the mass of the 

camera. The starting position of the mass was 0.004 inch from the mounting box and the mass 

was driven toward the mounting box with an acceleration equal to that experienced by the BDM 

at launch. This analysis simulates an acceleration that is significantly more than what should be 

experienced. The maximum acceleration of the camera toward the mounting box occurs as the 

round leaves the barrel. Again, the acceleration was assumed to be 1/3 the launch acceleration. 

Any results from this analysis can be assumed to be significantly higher than that experienced. 
16 

The dynamic analysis predicts that the maximum displacement of the mounting box is 2.22 x 10-

6

m. Figure 19 shows the graph of the displacement of the mounting box. 

Figure 18. Displacement of revised mounting box. 

After manufacture of the revised mounting box and camera mounting plate, the camera was 

mounted in the round. The camera was supplied with power from a DC power source, and the 

video leads were connected to an analog-to-digital (A/D) converter and laptop to record the 

image. The round was shock tested at a maximum acceleration of 8071 g’s. The camera 

functioned successfully through the entire shock event. 

The rest of the components including the transmitter were installed in the round and the entire 

unit was shock tested. The maximum acceleration reached in this test was approximately 

8600 g’s. The GCU was connected to the A/D converter and the laptop as before. The camera 

and transmitter both survived the shock event, but two problems were encountered. The camera 

lens assembly failed in two locations; the outer lens and the lens closest to the CCD both 

cracked. This was probably because of the unexpectedly high acceleration that was greater than 

intended. For this reason, no action was taken to solve this problem. The second failure was the 

transmitter case. The case separated from the base plate and the glass beads fell out. Despite 

this, the transmitter was fully functional. To solve the two problems, a new lens assembly was 

mounted in the camera and the transmitter case was soldered together and refilled with glass 
17 

beads. After assembly, the transmitter holes and openings were sealed with J-B weld14 instead of 

RTV. This was done because previous tests have shown that the RTV can separate from the case 

and allow small amounts of the glass beads to fall out of the case. 

Figure 19. Displacement of the camera mounting box in dynamic analysis. 

Another shock test was conducted of the entire unit after assembly. The maximum acceleration 

of this test was 7347 g’s. As before, the video output was recorded and the pre-shock and postshock images are shown in figures 20 and 21. 

These images are seemingly identical, indicating that the camera and transmitters survived shock 

without failure. The second video imager unit was similarly assembled and tested and the 

transmitter and camera survived the shock without incident. 

 14J-B Weld Company, P.O. Box 483, Sulphur Springs, TX 75483. 
18 

 

Figure 20. Pre-shock video image. Figure 21. Post-shock video image. 

6. Conclusion 

The preparation and testing detailed in this report have allowed for reliable use of the PC72XS 

camera and VNTX transmitter in gun-launched applications with launch accelerations as great as 

7347 g’s. With some effort to find a suitable lens able to withstand the acceleration, the camera 

electronics are able to survive loads at least as great as 8600 g’s. The transmitter has demonstrated an ability to withstand accelerations as great as 8600 g’s as long as some work is done to 

ensure that the case is reliably soldered so that it will not separate at shock. 

Based on this testing, the two components here are suitably hardened for use in the shoulderfired video imager project. Further work could be done to test the maximum survivability of 

these two items if need be. It is also suggested that the same approach to replacing the crystal be 

attempted with the PC182XS camera to determine its ability to withstand shock since this camera 

has a unique low light and high resolution capability that may be of use in future projects. 
19 

7. References 

Barrett, R. Design and Testing of Piezoelectric Flight Control Actuators for Hard-Launched 

Munitions; Technical University Delft: Netherlands, March 2004. 

Condon, J.A.; McLaughlin, J.T.; Mitchell, C.E. Shock Hardening and Testing of MunitionDeployed Video Imager Subassembly Components; ARL-MR-510; U.S. Army Research 

Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 2001. 
20 

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
21 

Appendix A. Mechanical Drawings 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 

NO. OF 

COPIES ORGANIZATION

 * ADMINISTRATOR 

 DEFENSE TECHNICAL INFO CTR 

 ATTN DTIC OCA 

 8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD STE 0944 

 FT BELVOIR VA 22060-6218 

 *pdf file only 

 1 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RSCH LABORATORY 

 ATTN IMNE AD IM DR MAIL & REC MGMT 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 1 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RSCH LABORATORY 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL CI OK TECH LIB 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 2 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RSCH LABORATORY 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL SE RL M DUBEY 

 B PIEKARSKI 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 2 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RSCH LABORATORY 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL SE RM 

 AMSRD ARL SE SS LADAS 

 2800 POWDER MILL RD 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

 1 PROGRAM MGR ITTS 

 STRICOM 

 ATTN AMFTI EL D SCHNEIDER 

 12350 RESEARCH PKWY 

 ORLANDO FL 32826-3276 

 1 US ARMY CECOM RDEC 

 ATTN AMSEL RD NV AS UEA 

 G KLAUBER 

 10221 BURBECK ROAD 

 FORT BELVOIR VA 22060-5806 

 2 AEROVIRONMENT INC 

 ATTN C MIRALLES 

 4685 3H INDUSTRIAL ST 

 SIMI VALLEY CA 93063 

 1 CDR USARDECOM ARDEC 

 ATTN AMSRD AAR AEM L M FRANZ 

 BLDG 65S 

 PICATINNY ARSENAL NJ 07806-5000 

NO. OF 

COPIES ORGANIZATION

 ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND

 1 DIRECTOR 

 US ARMY RSCH LABORATORY 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL CI OK (TECH LIB) 

 BLDG 4600 

 2 CDR USA AMSAA 

 ATTN AMXSY EF 

 AMXSY EV 

 BLDG 392 

 1 US ARMY EVALUATION CMD 

 ATTN USA CSTE EAC AZ R MIRABELLE 

 BLDG 4120 

 2 CDR US ARMAMENT RD&E CTR 

 ATTN AMSTA AR FST T J MATTS 

 J WHITESIDE 

 BLDG 120 

 1 CDR USA DTC 

 ATTN CSTE DTC TTM J SCHNELL 

 RYAN BLDG 

 3 DIR USARL 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM J SMITH 

 AMSRD ARL WM SG T ROSENBERGER 

 H WALLACE 

 BLDG 4600 

 2 DIR USARL 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM B D LYON 

 W CIEPIELLA 

 BLDG 4600 

 10 DIR USARL 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM BA T BROWN 

 F BRANDON J CONDON 

 M CHILDERS R MCGEE 

 M NAIR (5 CYS) 

 BLDG 4600 

 1 DIR USARL 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM BC P PLOSTINS 

 BLDG 390 

 2 DIR USARL 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM BF H EDGE T HAUG 

 BLDG 390 

 2 DIR USARL 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM RP J BORNSTEIN 

 C SHOEMAKER 

 BLDG 1121