Minewolf Flail and Tiller Machines: Testing the Differences Between Two Demining Technologies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction Volume 10 Issue 2 The Journal of Mine Action Article 48 November 2006 MineWolf Flail and Tiller Machines: Testing the Differences between two Demining Technologies Heinz Rath MineWolf Systems GmbH Dieter Schröder MineWolf Systems GmbH Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal Part of the Defense and Security Studies Commons, Emergency and Disaster Management Commons, Other Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, and the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons Recommended Citation Rath, Heinz and Schröder, Dieter (2006) "MineWolf Flail and Tiller Machines: Testing the Differences between two Demining Technologies," Journal of Mine Action : Vol. 10 : Iss. 2 , Article 48. Available at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol10/iss2/48 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for International Stabilization and Recovery at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction by an authorized editor of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rath and Schröder: MineWolf Flail and Tiller Machines: Testing the Differences between two Demining Technologies a small machine. Whether larger machines Soil type was the primary factor deter- could throw mines even greater distances mining throw patterns. Mine size and depth MineWolf Flail and Tiller Machines: than the maximum seen here of 65 metres were relatively unimportant. The depth set- remains to be tested, as throw distance is ting of the flail is likely to affect some val- Testing the Differences between a function of length of chain, design of ues in the data, but the overall trends found chain head, speed of rotation, and amount for mine size and depth should be similar. two Demining Technologies of protection around the flail head. Larger Clearly, more tests of this sort on dif- machines have longer chains but may use a ferent makes and sizes of flails are desir- slower rotation speed. able. The Geneva International Centre for Ian McLean worked for five years at MineWolf is the first demining concept, manufactured in Germany by Arthur Willibald Maschinenbau This flail tended to throw mines to the Humanitarian Demining plans to continue the Geneva International Centre for right. Given that it is impossible to prevent these tests, but the manufacturers can also Humanitarian Demining, conducting research on dog detection systems, GmbH (AHWI), that overcomes the limitations of flail and tiller machines by combining the advantages throw completely, it might be possible to ad- conduct tests so they can give advice to environmental effects on landmine just the action of the chains and design of purchasers on laterality of throw, propor- detection, and Remote Explosive Scent of both systems. Extensive tests with live anti-tank and fragmentation mines were carried out at the the deflector plate to force an even higher tion of mines thrown beyond the flail, and Tracing (REST) systems. Prior to that proportion of throw to one side. Whether likely maximum throw distance under dif- time, he was an academic biologist the laterality of throw is a characteristic of ferent operating conditions. Consideration specialising on conservation issues German Army proving ground to determine whether the MineWolf meets the operational requirements with endangered species. He now this individual flail or of the model generally should be given to including information works at the University of Otago in does not matter. What matters is that with about throw patterns in the Mechanical New Zealand, where he teaches wildlife for humanitarian demining. The aim was to discover the effects of detonations on the operator, laterality of throw known, the machine can Demining Equipment Catalogue, and even- management and is building a research be deployed to ensure that the main direc- tually to developing a standard test to be programme on biosecurity issues. MineWolf, clearing tools and cabin, and to work out instructions for reparability. tion of throw is into areas that are not yet incorporated into the International Mine processed. For example, this machine would Action Standards. Ian McLean be best deployed either in a clockwise direc- We thank the Swedish EOD and Department of Zoology by Heinz Rath and Dieter Schröder [ MineWolf Systems GmbH ] tion from the perimeter of the minefield, or Demining Centre for supplying equipment, University of Otago an anti-clockwise direction from the centre. resources and the field site to support the P.O. Box 56 Dunedin / New Zealand 9022 With respect to mine throw, working back study. Funding was provided by the govern- Tel: +643 479 7986 he MineWolf is a mine-clearing device developed especially for were laid one by one centrally and offset in front of the clearing device. and forth along parallel lines would not be a ments of Germany, Norway and Sweden. E-mail: [email protected]. Thumanitarian mine-clearance. It is used for area clearing and After a detonation, the vehicle was stopped immediately and the effects good way to use this machine. See Endnotes, page 112 ac.nz clears up to 2,800 square metres per hour (3,349 square yards/hour), were documented. If required, the clearing device was repaired prior to allowing for fast quality control on a demined area. The MineWolf the next test run. system consists of a fragment-proof AHWI crawler tractor, a protected Test schedule. The testing of the method and timing were con- driver’s cab and a mechanically driven mine-clearing device. Both a ducted in the following order: flail device and a tiller are available. 1. MineWolf remote-control tests with flail and tiller and a fully The flail is likely to initiate or destroy anti-tank mines. With instrumented test dummy (ATD) the tiller, the remains of AT mines, the fuzes and all AP mines left 2. AT mine tests (DM 21, TM 57 and TM 62) are crushed or initiated. Clearance depths of up to 30 centime- 3. Biomechanical tests with an ATD tres (11.8 inches) in the 4. MineWolf manned tests with flail and tiller using three soil are achieved with the different operators tiller. Live AT mines, in- 5. Fragmentation mine tests (DM 31) cluding DM 21, TM 57 6. Tests with three detonations without repair to investigate and TM 621 mines, have quality of demining operations Dr. Rebecca J. Sargisson com- LTC Johannes Dirscherl is the Havard Bach heads the Operational pleted a PhD in Psychology before desk officer in charge for mine Support Unit for the GICHD. Projects been cleared. joining the Geneva International action at the German Foreign under his responsibility currently The MineWolf was sub- Centre for Humanitarian Demining Office, overseeing projects in include studies on mine-detection ject to extensive tests with in April 2003. In her three years at almost 30 countries worldwide. dogs, mechanical mine clear- live anti-tank mines, under- the GICHD, Rebecca specialised in He was seconded to the U.N. Mine ance, manual mine clearance and research and operational support Action Coordination Centre in risk management. He also gives taken in Meppen, Lower Figure 1: The MineWolf in action. in the area of landmine detection by Kosovo in 2000/2001 and to the consultancy advice, often related Saxony, Germany, at the ALL PHOTOS COURTESY OF THE GERMAN ARMY/WTD 91 animals. Rebecca is now working as Geneva International Centre for to operational demining activities Army proving ground. The a Research Fellow at the University of Humanitarian Demining from 2002 and demining technology. Prior to tests were conducted with Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. to 2005. employment at the GICHD, Havard a fully operational MineWolf using both types of mine-clearing devices worked as a Norwegian military engineering officer before being (i.e., flail and tiller). The vehicle was operated by both remote- and Dr. Rebecca Sargisson Johannes Dirscherl employed by Norwegian People’s operator-control. During four tests an instrumented Anthropometric Department of Psychology German Federal Foreign Office Aid, managing several mine-action Test Device (fully instrumented test dummy) was placed on the driver’s University of Otago Task Force Humanitarian Aid programmes worldwide. seat. The measured values had to be evaluated to view possible risks to Tel: +643 479 5639 Mine Action E-mail: [email protected] Tel: +49 30 50000 3098 the operator during mine clearance. E-mail: [email protected] Havard Bach A total of six remote clearance tests were conducted against live Geneva International Centre for anti-tank mines. Four of these tests led to the detonation of the cleared Humanitarian Demining AT mines and thus to measurable results that could be used to analyze P.O. Box 1300 the damage to the demining tool and the MineWolf. Two tests each 1211-Geneva / Switzerland Tel: +41 22 906 1678 with the two mine-clearing devices (flail and tiller) were conducted E-mail: [email protected] against one DM 21 and TM 57 AT mine each. In order to be able to rule out uncontrolled movements of the MineWolf, it was secured to a Figure 2: A fully instrumented dummy. recovery tank during the tests by a steel rope. The mines to be cleared 10 | research and development | journal of mine action | winter 2006 | 10.2 Published by JMU Scholarly Commons, 2006 10.2 | winter 2006 | journal of mine action | research and development | 10 1 Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction, Vol. 10, Iss. 2 [2006], Art. 48 Figure 7: Damage after clearing a TM 62 P3 AT mine. are expected. Temporary light disturbances like headaches or muscular As the biomechanical measurements with the fully instrumented pain, however, cannot be excluded. dummy did not show any risk, manned tests were approved by the During the four tests, all human-related criteria were tested to the firing controller.