TECHNICAL REPORT, ,RB RL-TR-02277

CHARGE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND THEIRR

EFFECT ON PRESSURE WAVES IN GUNSL

Ingo W./May
• Ab•w'"°'"DTIC
Albert W.'Horsti
SELECTE

.1/. DecemI'r. 1980 S FEB 2 3 1981

D
D

US ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND

BALLISTIC RESEARCH LABORATORY
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, MARYLAND

Approved fcor public release; distribution unlimited.

-- .8i 2 05 009
 Destroy this report when it is no longer needed.
Do not return it to the originator.

Secondary distribution of this report by originating

or sponsoring activity is prohibited.

Additional copies of this report may be obtained

from the NationalofTechnical
Commerce, Information
U.S. Department Springfield,Service,
Virginia 1'
221 51. •,

t, The findings in this report are not to be construed as

'•. ~an official Department of the Army position, unless •

, I ~so designated by other authorized documents'. •
S•~~he use of tmde namsa or menaufact;urers' n~es in thisa report"

--7
 UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE ("o9n note Frntered)

CAL
REPORT
REPORT DOCUETATION PAGEREAD
DOCUMENTATION PAGE INSTRUCTIONS_"
BEIORE COMPLETING FORM
REPORT NUMBER j2. GOVT ACCESSION NO., 3
1/ RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

TIINICAL ARBIGL-TR-02277 IRE1PORT .,,

4 TITLE (and Subtitle) 5 TYPE OF REPORT 4 PERIOD COVERED

CHARGE
• DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
ONPRESUREWAVE IN UNSBRL AND THEIR EFFECT TECHNICAL REPORT
ON IiRFSSURE WAVES IN GUNS 6 PFRFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(&) S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(-)' (

Ingo W. May and Albert W. Ilorst

9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10 PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASK

S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory AREA & WORK UNIT NUMSEPS
. ~ If~ATrTN
: DRDAR-BLP 1I ,2 818
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005
SIt •-ONTROLLIJG OFFICE N ME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE
Army Armament Research & Development Command December 1980
UI.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory 11 NUMBEROFPAGES
flTN DRYAR-1BL
ere roving Ground, NID 21005 04
14 MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(If different from Controlling Ofi#( e) IS SECURITY CLASSý (of this report)

UNCLASSIFIED

1Sa. OECLASSIFICATION'OOWNGRADING
SCHEDULE

16 DIST RIBIJTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the obstract entered In Block 20, If different from Report)

18 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

19 EEYWORDS
Interior (Continue on
Ballistics... reverse side It necessary and identify by block number)

!Charge lDesign...
Guns
Pressure Waves

20 ABSTRACT (Continue
... revre side It necý*eary and Identify by block number) jmk
Combustion instability, usually manifested as longitudinal pressure waves,
has long been a serious problem in the design of high-performance, conventional
guns. The source of this phenomenon was identified correctly to lie in the
ignition phase of the interior ballistic cycle. Only recently, however, has it -,l
been understood that the ignition phase not only involves functioning of the
igniter train components themselves but also depends on such factors as
distribution of ullage, flow restrictions, and propellant bed mobility. The
R)DOR
I A 7 43 EDITION OF I NOV 6S IS OBSOLETE UCASFE
SECURI: Y CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Wllfen Date Fntrerd)
WIT "7"
 UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wheni Dat. Enter.d)

concepts of local as well as macroscopic gas permeability have been shown to I)e
important factors governing the formation, growth, and dissipation of pressure
waves. High gas generation rates during the ignition and flamespreading phase,
as defined by both burning surface and linear burning rates, also lead to in-
creased levels of traveling pressure waves. The integration of these concepts
into two-phase-flow interior ballistic codes now is beginning to allow a more
precise unraveling of the interaction among these complex processes.

Accession For
ITIS
DTIC TAB
GRA&I

Unannounced 0
Justification S-. flAC
I.... _-

Distribution/
J-LET.
Availability Codes 1981
Dist Special
DitAvail and/or

II

IINC IASS IF I EF)

-i,(.AIRITY C1 A-,ýI"F ATION I F 1 IP-.I
1 .it. P-. . I1*' - a
 II

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... .................. . . .. S

LIST OF TABLES ................ ...................... 7

I. INTRODUCTION .................. ........................ 9

11I. PRESSURE-WAVE PHENOMENOLOGY . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. 11

111II.EXPERIMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS . I7

IV. CHARGE-DESIGN FACTORS INFLUENCING PRESSURE WAVES .......... 20

A. Ignition Stimulus ......... ................... ... 20

B. Mass Burning Rate ......... ................... ... 29
C. Permeability .......... ...................... ... 34
D. Chamber and Charge Geometry ...... .............. ... 40

V. RELIABLE GUN IGNITION ................ •........... 47

VI. CONCLUSIONS ................. ........................ Sl

REFERENCES ............ ........................... 5S

DISTRIBUTION LIST ............... ..................... 61

I3

41'
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. Pressure vs time Data from an Ignition Study in a 155-mmmiii

Gun 2 2 . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ..
14

2. Pressure-Time Records for a Navy 5-In./38-Caliber Blowout

. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. ..
Gun 2 5 . . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .
1I

3. Pressure-Space-Time Profiles 2 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

4. Typical Location of Pressure Transducers in Chamber. 18

5. Typical Centercore-Ignited Artillery P, pellin, Charge . 18

6. Pressure-Time and Pressure Difference Profiles for a

Properly Ignited, High-performance Charge .. .. .. ......... 19
7. Pressure-Time and Pressure Difference Profiles for a i
Properly Ignited, Localized Base Ignition ..... ......... 19

8. Catastrophic Pressure-Wave Behavior Observed in a

175-mm Gun Firing ....... ...................... 21

9. Comparison of Pressure-Time Curves for NACO Propellant

Firings with Primers MK 48 Mod 2 and MK 48 Mod 435 .. 23

10. Ignition Study Test Results 4 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

11. 40
Velocity vs Maximum Pressure for Test Configuration0. . 26

12. Predicted Effect of Ignition in the 8-In., MlIOE2 Howitzer

8. . .
S(M188E1, Zone 9 Propelling Charge) . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..
27

13. Pressure Difference Simulation for 5-In./54-Caliber 28

14. Burning Rate Descriptions Selected to Achieve Equivalent

. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. ..
Rates at 25 kpsi 4 4 . . . . .. . 30

15. Influence of Burning Rate Description on Predicted Initial

Reverse Pressure Difference (Coefficients Selected to
Achieve Equivalent Burning Rate at 25 kpsi) 4 4 . . .. . . .. . . .
31

16. Effect of Charge Configuration on Chamber Pressure 49 34

17. Pressure-Time and Differential Pressure-Time Traces for
. . . . .. . .. .. . . . .
7- and 19-Perforated Grains 4 6 . . . . . .. . 35

SPropellant 18a. Pressure-Time

andTrace
PrimerforMK 5-In./38-Caliber
48 Mod 235..... Gun with Pyro 36
3S

~41IEjG PAGE BIAWKgOT ?LiAED

 I A

- I

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (continued)

Figure Page

18b. Pressure-Time Trace for 5-In./38-Caliber Gun with NACO

Propellant and Primer MK 48 Mod 235 ................ .. 36

19a. Pressure-Time Curves for Oto Melara 76-mm Gun with Potassium
Sulfate Confined in a Polyethylene BagSl.. .............. 37

19b. Pressure-Time Curves for Oto Melara 76-mm Gun with Granular
Potassium Sulfate Dispersed in Propellant Bed 51 . . . . . . . . . .
38

20. Propelling Carge Assembly for 76-mm Oto Melara Gun ..... .40

21. Comparison of TheoreLical Predictions of Pressure Difference

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
with Experimental Results 5 7 . . . .. .

22. Special Experimental Propelling Charges for 5-In./54-Caliber

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ...
Gun 5 7 . . . . . .. .. .. . 42

23. Pressure-Time Profiles for the 8-In., Mll0E2 Howitzer

. . . .. .
Breechblow (M188EI, Zone 9 Propelling Charge) 8 .. . . . 44

24. Air Gun Impact Test Results for M6 Propellant.51 ....... .. 45

63
25. Igniter Simulator Apparatus ...... ................ .. 48
65 . . . . . . . .. . .
26. Effect of Standoff on the Amplitude of -APi 49

27. Pressure Wave Sensitivity for the 175-mm, M107 Gun

8 S2
(M86A2, Zone 3 Propelling Charge)

28. Distribution of Pressure Wave Amplitudes for the 175-mm,

.. . . . . .. . . .
M107 Gun (M86A2, Zone 3 Propelling Charge) 8 . . 52

29. Probability of High-Amplitude Pressure Waves for the

8. . . . .. .
175-rm, M107 Gun (M86A2, Zone 3 Propelling Charge) 53

I6

'I

fh '
 LIST OF TAP-ES

Table Page

1. Effect of Loading Density on Pressure Waves..... .. 5.33

2. Summary of Predictions and Results for Rum Point Firings

of June 19, 197556 .............................. 43

........... 54
3. Concepts for Pressure-Wave Reduction ......

I7
I

I *:

I
K'
1.
 I. INTRODUCfION

Combustion instability in conventional guns as manifested by long-

itudinal pressure waves has been a phenomenon largely ignored by propell-
ing charge designers unless accompanied by catastrophic failures. A
similar situation existed for many years within the rocket motor design
community. Today, however, the principle that combustion instability
design considerations must be integrated into the overall propulsion
design approach is well accepted1 . The problem in both communities, how-
ever, has been the intrinsic difficulty of specifying acceptable levels
of instability and integrating into the overall propulsion package
development process the techniques and approaches known to minimize
combustion instability.

From a pragmatic viewpoint, combustion instability in guns as exhib-

ited by pressure waves is of concern only because of its causal connection
with high chamber pressures, which, in turn, may lead to breechblows, bal-
listic variability, projectile prematures, and fuze malfunctions. The
relationship, however, is not necessarily a simple one. Low-performance
propelling charge and gun combinations seem to be able to tolerate a fairly
substantial level of pressure waves without any apparent effect on maximum
chamber pressures. Maximizing some performance parameter, such as muzzle
velocity, usually leads to increased pressure wave problems. This problem
has been discussed recently in the context of current development efforts 2 .
Typically, the charge designer is asked to launch a specified projectile
at a muzzle velocity necessary to achieve a given range, target penetration,
or time of flight. This projectile launch velocity must be achieved out
of a gun with an interior ballistic envelope usually designed to meet dif-
ferent performance requirements. It is indeed rare for a gun charge de-
signer to dictate those gun envelope parameters important to him (e.g.,
loading density, maximum operating pressures, projectile travel, propel-
lant type, etc.). Normally one rather quickly determines if a specified
launch velocity is attainable using the simpler interior ballistic models 3 .
When additional, stringent design requirements for velocity precision,
ballistic temperature coefficient, useful wear life, muzzle flash and
blast, propellant availability, chamber residue, packaging geometry, and
compatibility with other, similar weapon systems and projectiles are
added, the design easily can become a challenge. These more or less

1
""Combustion Instability in Solid Rocket Motors", Chemical Propulsion
Information Agency, Laurel, MD. Pubi. 290, Nov. 1977.

T. W. May, "The Role of Ignition and Combustion in Gun Propulsion: A

Survey of Developmental Efforts", Thirteenth JANNAF Combustion Meeting,
Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD, Publ. 281, Sept. 1976.
3P. G. Baer, "PracticalInterior Ballistic Analysis of Guns", "Interior
Ballistics of Guns Ed, M. Summerfield and H. Krier, Progress in Astro-
nautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 66, 1979.

-- A
 firm and clear requirements need to be validated during the development
cycle of the charge. Hence potentially serious but less well-defined
pressure-wave problems often are ignored. Only when pressure waves have,
or are suspected to have, impacted directly on a well-defined performance
requirement has the available, though meager, technology been applied
in the past. Indeed it only recently has become accepted practice to
determine if nominal pressure wave characteristics of a propelling charge,
as measured during limited test programs, are likely to reach high
amplitudes. If this is possible, then interior ballistic system
sensitivity to pressure waves is determined.

This recent emphasis on pressure waves is the result of many diverse

problems encountered in both Army and Navy gun development programs. In
the past five years these have resulted in experimental 4 - 8 and theoreti-

4
J. H. Wiegand, J. H. Smith and A. W. Horst, "Ignition Studies at Indian
Head", Proceeding o` the Tri-Service Gun Propellant Symposium, Picatinny
Arsenal, Dover, NJ, Oct. 1972.

5
A. W. Horst, T. C. Smith, and S. E. Mitchell, "Experimental Evaluation
of Three Concepts for ?educing Pressure Wave Phenomena in Navy 5-inch,
54-Caliber Guns: Summajy of Firing Data", NaVal Ordnance Station, Indian
Head, MD. MR 76-258, Aug 1976.
6
W. G. Soper, "Ignition Waves in PYRO Propellant", Combustion and Flame,
Vol. 22(2), 4pril 1974, pp. 273-276.

7
J. J. Rocchio, K. J. White, C. R. Ruth, and I. W. May, "PropellantGrain
Tailoring to Reduce Pressure Wave Generation in Guns", 12th JANNAF Com-
bustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD,
Publ. 273, December 1975.
8
A. W. Horst, I. W. May, and E. V. Clarke, Jr., "The Missing Link Between
Pressure Waves and Breechblows", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen
"ProvingGround, MD., ARBRL-MR-02849, July 1978. (AD #A058354)

ci
41

"i1

i'I
- ,-
 I' T

j I

cal 9-14efforts to understand and model the phenomenology of pressure

waves in guns.

It is the aim of this paper to illustrate some of the historical

aspects of gun pressure-wave phenomena, to present some current diagnostic
information on pressure-wave measurements, and to discuss, in the context
of current experimental and theoretical understanding, the basic charge
design factors influencing the creation and growth of pressure waves.
Finally, a new procedure for assessing safety aspects due to pressure
waves will be outlined.

I!. PRESURE-WAVE PHENOMENOLOGY

A brief historical background oit gun pressure-wave phenomenology

has been presented previously1 S. More recently, a survey on pressure-
wave generation in gun systems has been reported by Budka and Knapton 1 6 .
9
K. K. Kuo, R. Vicktevetsky,
and M. Summerfield, "Generation of an
Accelerated Flame Front in a Porous Propellant", AIAA Paper 71-210, New
York, Jan. 1971.

1l P. S. Gough, "Numerical Analysis of a Two-Phase Flow with Explicit

Internal Boundaries", Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD.,
CR 77-5, April 1977.
11
" E. B. Fisher and K. W. Graves, "PropellantIgnition and Combustion in
the 155-im Howitzer", Calspan Corp., Buffalo, N.Y., VQ-5524-D-2, Jan. 1975.

12K. K. Kuo, J, H. Koo, T. R. Davis, and G. R. Coates, "Transient

Combustion Ln Mobile Gas Permeable Propellants", Acta Astronautica,
Vol. 3, 1976, pp. 573-591.
-:• ~~~~13H.Kir Pe""
H. Krier, "Predictions of Flamespreading and Pressure Wave Propagation
in Propellant Beds", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground,
MD., CR 275, Nov. 1975. (AD #B009170L)

1 4 A. W. Horst, C. W. Nelson and I. W. May, "Flame Spreading in Granular

Propellant Beds: A Diagnostic Comparison of Theory to Experiment",
AIAA Paper 77-586, Orlando, Flz., July 1977.

151. W. May and E. V. Clarke, Jr., "A Case History: Gun Ignition Related
1 Problems and Solutions for the XM-198 Howitzer", Ballistic Research
Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., IMR 150, Oct. 1973.
16 D. Knapton, "Pressure Wave Generation in Gun Systems:
. A. J. Budka and J.
"ASurvey", Ballisvic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., MR I
2567, Dec. 1975. (AD #BOO8893L)
11
SIi.

.... 7__.__,_,
_______,•1_________•____-__•__

~v"Žý
 17
Goode and Weald attempted to classify different categories of pressure-
wave irregularities. The classic interior ballistics textbooks by
Corner 1 8 and Hunt and Hinds 1 9 also briefly mention the existence and the
perverse nature of pressure waves.

The first observation of pressure waves in a gun chamber was made

by Vielle 2 0 (circa 1880) with his invention, the recording crusher gage.
The significance of pressure waves, their origin and connection with
high pressure and catastrophic failure was, however, not appreciated
fully until the 1930's, with the advent of reliable piezoelectric gages
capable of withstanding the rifors of a gun environment. Kent, in early
work with piezoelectric gages2 22, correctly identified the cause of
pressure waves in the 155-mm Gun, Hodel 1918, Ml, as being due to
vigorous base ignition of the chare. He also reasoned 2 3 , 2 4 that some

J. B. Goode and D. E. Weald, "Survey-Fluid Dynamic Aspects of the

Internal Baltistics of Guns", Advisory Group for Aerospace Research
and Development (NATO), AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 40, Sept.
1966, pp. 1-12.

18 J. Corner, Theory of the Interior Ballistics of Guns, Wiley, New

York,
1950.

19F. R. W. Hunt and G. H. Hinds, Internal Ballistics, Philosophical

Library, New York, 1951, p. 80.

20
S p. Vielle, quoted by C. Cranz in Lehrbuch der Ballistik, Vol. II,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1926, p. 151.
21
R. H. Kent, "Study of Ignition of 155-mm Gun in Connection with Project
KW 250-Study of the Factors In)olved in the Design of Propelling Charges",
Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., MR 4, Feb. 1935.
(AD #493405)
22
R. H. Kent, "Study of Ignition of 155-rm Gun", Ballistic Research Lab.,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R22, Oct. 1935. (AD #494703)

3R H. Kent, "Velocity Dispersion Obtained with Charles of Slender Base

3ection in the 155-mm Gun G.P.F.," Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD., R45, March 1936.
24
R. H. Kent, "Study of the Ignition and Velocity Dispersion of FNH
Powder in the 155-,m Gun G.P.F.," Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD., R91, Dec. 1937. (AD #491768)

, -12
 of the velocity dispersion accompanying this particular charge/gun
combination resulted from pressure cscillations traversing the chamber,
leading to slightly higher pressures and velocities. In his attempt to
reduce the velocity dispersion, he employed various ignition train con-
figurations to achieve smooth pressure-time curves. Some of his results
are shown in Figure 1. His basic concepts of annular space around the
charge to allow flamespreading and pressure equilibration throughout the
chamber are still useful, as are the results of his experiments with
central and centercore ignition. He recognized the benefits of the
natural convective channels found in strip and stacked charges. He also
commented on the additional safety factor required in the gun design
when large-amplitude pressure-waves are present.
¶ The work by Hedden and Nance25 represents one of the most comprehensive
experimental studies of pressure-waves resulting from variations in the
location of the ignition source in a propellant bed and the effects of
free space or ullage on wave generation and propagation. Hedden and
Nance used a blowout gun made by cutting off a Navy S-In./38-Caliber
Gun approximately 9.5 in. (24.1 cm) forward of the origin-of-rifling
and modified by installing an orifice at a point representing the location
- of the projectile base. Three pressure gages were installed: at mid-
chamber, 3 in. (7.6 cm) forward of the breech, and 3 in. (7.6 cm) rear
ward from the orifice. In properly controlled experiments, the pressure-
time histories could be made to duplicate actual gun performance. By
adjusting the free space behind and in front of the charge and by adjusting
the location of a point-type, localized ignition source, these experiments
were able to determine how pressure-waves could be induced and avoided.

They concluded that placing the ullage completely toward either end
of the chamber dnd igniting the charge adjacent to the ullage produced
the largest-amplitude waves. Moving the point of ignition away from the
ullage reduced wave amplitude. Distributing the free space at both ends
of the charge and igniting the charge in the center gave smooth pressure-
time records. Some representative results showing the space/ignition
relationship and resulting pressure-time histories from the different
gage locations are illustrated in Figures 2 and 3.
26 27
Other studies, by Bauman and Bird and Gowen and Elzufon
confirmed the importance of geometric effects such as location of the
V ignition source and the distribution of free space in the chamber.
'S. E. Heddon and G. A. Nance, "An Experimental Study of Pressure-Waves
in Gun Chambers," Naval Proving Ground, Dahlaren, VA., R 1534, April 1957.
N. Bauman and E. Bird, "Ignition Problems in Separate-Loading Ammunition,"
Joint Army-Navy-Air Force Seoond Symposium on Propellant Ignition, Vol.
II, Solid Propellant Information Agency, Silver Spring, MD., October 1956.

L Gowen and E. Eizufon, "A Review of Igniter Studies and Their

Application to Igniter Design," Joint Army-Nav,-Air Force Second
7yrSyposiurn o0 Sold ProneLZ
H,:to, Vol. TI, Solid Prorellant Information
Agency, Silver Spring, 1M1., Oct. 1956.
13

e
 BREECH END MUZZLE END

4 oz IGNITER"

FRONT IGNITION 4o IGNITER

5.5"

r- ir I[N(1. FUZE TRAIN

2oz)
MIDDLE IGNITION
4oz IGNITER

4.811

LONGER FUZE TRAIN

MIDDLE IGNITION

•8oz A-1 IGNITER

BASE IGNITION
0.8oz FUZE TRAIN WRAPPED
IN ASBESTOS CLOTH
191 b - b
3"ASBESTOS CLOTH CAP

IGNITION .6oz FUZE TRAIN

0MIDDLE
AiIGNITER

4 3"ASBESTOS CLOTH CAP

MIDDLE IGNITION

= - -TIME
22
an Ignition Study in a 155-mm Gun
From
Figure I. Pressure vs. Time Data

14

I
 16-
S14

18

---3"l -24 --
16-
1ins TIM 10 1

"•12
0l1
112 - i"
4-

18
2 0 1
W0

18

'I0 2 4 6 8 10 12

m_
6-
I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
i TIME (ms)
, _ _..__//_•

rj.
Si" Figure 2. Pressure-Time Records for a Navy 5-In./38 Caliber Blowout Gun2
 16 - 16 _ 6

14- 514

1----- 12 5
"--

SSPACE (in
SPACE (in)

S~Figure
3. Pressure-Space-Time Profiles 2 5
, • L ck et 2 8 ,
Locet ,in a brief review of some British work on propellant ignition,
I ~explicitly st'ites that failure to achieve simultaneous ignition in
;' granular prop~ellant charges can lead to axial pressure waves of sufficient
• ~magnitude to reach gun-damaging pressures. He further states,
13
0 ~"It may be pertinent tco point out at this juncture that there
%i is always some uncertainty in the internretation of what might
• ,,,•be dismissed as minor irregularities in the pressure-time curve.
• • We have, by bitter experience, learned to regard such irregularities
i with a degree of suspicion which has delayed in some cases the
•! finalization of a suitable ignition system for a particular weapon,
because of the apparent ease with which such minor flaws can turn
, over to major irregularities by some mechanism not yet understood".
S"•. 28
N. Locke tt, "British Work on Solid Propellant Iqnition", Bulletin of
• i the First Symposium on Solid Propellant Ignition, Solid Propellant
S~Information Aqency, Silver Spring, MD., September 2953.

r_ 016
 r7
An intereresting difficulty is referred to by Gowen and Elzufon27
In an attempt to reduce hangfires, they increased the amount of igniter
material. When that problem was solved for a particular coo:-burning,
single-base propellant at the low temperatures, pressure waves developed
at the high temperatures. Apparently they could not solve both the hang-
fire and pressure-wave problem simultaneously. Another conclusion from
this work, since confirmed by mary other investigators, is that pressure
waves are less likely to develop or are of lower amplitude at lower
temperatures. For the case of brittle propellant grains, however,
mechanical failure of the grain at the lower temperatures can lead to
a different phenomenon, as evidenced by our catastrophic experience with
M17 triple-base propellant in the 76-mm tank guns in Korea 2 . This 30
propellant exhibited breakup even in closed-bomb burning rate experiments
In an earlier report, Lane 3 1 had speculated that low-temperature propellant
brittleness contributed to excess velocity dispersion. He also conjectured
that peak pressure increases were the result of higher-amplitude pressure-
waves. A more recent, further development of the impact of propellant
mechanical properties on pressure waves will be discussed in a following
section.

III. EXPERIMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

Pressure waves often have been confused with what euphemistically

has been called "erratic" propellant burning. In fact, for multigranu-
lated, zoned propelling charges, the characteristic "steps" seen in
pressure vs time curves obtained in one location sometimes have been
ascribed erroneously to the burning of different increments of a charge.
Only the more recent practice of multiple-location pressure measurements
has allowed unambiguous tracking of pressure waves. Of particular
usefulness is the technique of differential chamber pressure measure-
mentsl7,32. Pressure gages are installed in separated, longitudinal
positions along the gun chamber, typically as shown in Figure 4. The
signals from these gages then are subtracted from one another, resulting
in a sensitive indicator of pressure waves. An example of a rather
typical high-performance bag charge design is shown in Figure 5. When
29
"lanition Study of Gun, 76-,na, T91", Aberdeen Proving Ground, Firing
Record P-52014, Project TA11302, Feb. 1952.

3OK. H. Russell and H. Al. Goldstein, "Investigation and Screening of M17

Propellant ProdUction for Lots Subject to Poor Low Temperature
Performance", Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, NJ., DB-TR-7-61, June 1961.

31J. F. Lane, "Sub-Zero Firings in the 76-m•, Gun", Ballistic Research

Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., MR 215, Sept. 1943. (AD -493524)

7. #JuOI~s, "Product Tr'provemcnt T st of Char, e, Pro-elling M86A1,

G2.
f".' 175--rn Gun, M113", BzlListic Resc,-rh Lab., Aberdeen Proving
rD.o.i
(rn, , DPS-:_551, A.4rii 1967.

9 •17

II
 I ,-

P3 P4 P5
I1711 8
PI

k 33"3
3
Figure 4. Typical Location of Pressure Transducers in Chamber

CENTERCORE TUBE\ FLASH REDUCER7

SPl THOLE-- /;_,

,SNAKE :

OFFSET- "PROPELLING CHARGE•

BASE PAD
STANDOFF ROTATING BAND

Figure 5. Typical Centercore-Ignited Artillery Propelling Charge

the centercore ignition train functions rapidly and uniformly throughout

the entire propelling charge, near ideal ignition is achieved. This type
of ignition results in a pressure-time trace, as shown in Figure 6.
There is no evidence of any pressure waves in the basic pressure-time
traces. More importantly, the difference of breech pressure minus chamber-
mouth pressure shows only the expected "Lagrangian" pressure gradient '
resulting from the gas velocity gradient between breech and projectile
base. A severe case of pressure waves due to a malfunctioning centercore
,Z is shown in Figure 7. In this case, the pressure-difference curve shows
clearly the initial gas pressurization occurring near the breech region.
"Then rapid pressurization is seen by the forward gage. After the stag-
4
ination or flow reversal point, the wave returns to the breech and again
4 is reflected. One notes many flow reversals before complete damping
occurs late in the interior ballistic cycle. The first negative minimum
on the pressure-difference curve, - APi, currently is used as an index
4 of how well an ignition train has performed. It also is being used in
a failure analysis procedure to be discussed later. The pressure-differ- I
ence curve also is used as a powerful
14
tool in comparing theoretical and
experimental pressure-time curves .

18
 U. RD20-2

"_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 f"
"4- -30

6-Cu J375
wn40 I \
. -- 600 25o
"20
"O 125-

U C,'
0 412 16 820 24
TIME (ms)
Figure 6. Pressure-Time and Pressure-Difference Profiles for a Properly
Ignited, High-Performance Charge

I 160
20-
wu RD. NO.127 120
U
Z
LU 12- - 80
uj

L- 40
w w

0 -Ai - - 40
12 - - 80

UC , 0
400
S•Lux- 45 -.
.- ;V ME
= 200:E

0 4 8 12 16 20 24
TIME (ms)
Figure 7. Pressure-Time and Pressure-Difference Profiles, Localized
'• Base Ignition

' • 19

I;
 IV. CHARGE DESIGN FACTORS INFLUENCING PRESSURE WAVES

The quantitative description of the generation, growth, and dovelop-

ment of pressure-waves is reviewed by Cough 3 3 and Krier 3 4 . The essential
qualitative physics is summarized 8 in the following manner. The propellant
bed is ignited in a localized region of the chamber. This occurs typically
in the breech region, although cases of accidental and deliberate forward
ignition have been observed, with a mirror-image development of the
wave phenomenon. The propellant and igniter gases penetrate into the
bed, convectively heating grains to ignition and resulting in flamespread.
The pressure gradient and drag move the granular propellant forward,
compacting in against the projectile base. The combustion-driven pressure
wave reaches the projectile, stagnates, and is reflected toward the breech.
Wave growth or dissipation is determined by the local gas generation rate,
available free volume, bed permeability, and projectile motion. The
pressure waves continue to reflect between the breech and projectile
until dissipated. In extreme cases, when the pressure generated exceeds
the yield stress of the gun, a catastrophic breechblow is the result.
An example is shown in Figure 8. This breechblow was the result of
removing the normal centercore ignition train from a 175-mm gun propelling
charge. It is a classic example of severe, breech-localized ignition,
with chamber pressures in excess of twice what is seen with a normally
functioning centercore ignition train.

The aforementioned qualitative description has buried in it the

dominant factors that affect the dynamic behavior of pressure waves. They
are ignition stimulus, gas generation rate, initial bed permeability to
gas flow, and initial ullage distribution. The influence of these
factors now will be discussed in the light of some of the more recent
experimental and analytical results.

A. Ignition Stimulus

This factor was the first to be recognized as having a dominant

influence on pressure-wave generation. The basic work by Kent 2 l, Heddon
25 illustrates the importance of the location
and Nance , and others clearly
of ignition stimulus in the gun chamber. The realization of axially
distributed ignition as the ideal has lead to the routine application,
at least for high-performance systems, of bayonet metal primers in cased
rounds and combustible centercore ignition systems in bag charge systems.

33p, Gough, "Modeling of Two-Phase Flow in Guns, "Intevior Ballistics of

Guns, Ed. M. Summerfield and H. Krier, Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, Vol. 66, 1979.

H. Krier and M. J. Adams, "An Introduction to Gun Interior Ballistics

and a Simplified Ballistic Code," Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, Vol. 66, 1979.

20

-- -
 300
40

-200

, 20
Ow
U a
a_
oZ

100
0. < - 200

4. ac 0
u~m -600
0 10 20
,, -2600
LU0
; -400-

175-m F
;; " 50i- -4 400-

:21
4,,

I~ ,0 10 TI ME (s 20

'• Figure 8. Catastrophic Pressure-Wave Dynamic Behavior Observed in a

S~175-mm Gun Firing

i2
 Other parameters, however, play an equally important role, especially
for "nonideal" ignition systems. These are the rate at which both energy
and gas pressure are delivered by the ignition train, as well as the
tot energy delivered to the propellant bed and the total "ignition"
pressure. In practice, even centercore igniters for both cased and
bag charge systems rarely function in the ideal manner. A typical example
of the nonideal behavior of a bayonet primer has been described 3 5.
Figure 9 shows the firing results obtained using two versions of the
MK 48 Primer tested in the Navy 5-In./38-Caliber Gun. The MK 48 Mod 2
Primer, venting largely in the first half of the chamber, results in
strong pre' ,ure-wave symptoms. The longer MK 48 Mod 4 Primer, with
venting more central'y located, leads to much improved pressure-time
curves. It should be noted that the mere act of placing vent holes
distributed over a full chamber length bayonet primer does not insure
uniform venting. The studies by Vest
36
, and more recently by Smith 3 7
and East and McClure38, quite clearly indicate that pressure-wave
phenomena inside bayonet primers can readily produce spatially and tem-
porally uneven ignition gas venting. With our current knowledge and
diagnostic capabilities, the design of new bayonet primers with near-
ideal functioning is relatively straightforwptcd. The recent work by
Smith 3 9 supports this view. The unique problems of low-pressure combust-
ible ignition systems for bag charges will be discussed separately.

Another recent, extensive study on the effects of igniter location40

shows clearly the benefits of rapid, distributed ignition in reducing
pressure waves. For this study, charges with nine different ignition
system configurations with the same amount of black powder were fired
out of a 5-In./54-Caliber Gun. The results are shown schematically in
35192Ana
A. W. Horst and A. C. Haukiand, "Gun Interior Ballistics: 1972 Annual
* Report," Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD., TR 386, April 1973.
36D. C. Vest, "On the Performance of Primers for Artillery Weapons",
Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R852, March 1953.
(AD #13294)
T. C. Smith, "Development of Electric Primer Mark 48 Mods 3 and 4 for
the 5-inch, 38-Caliber Gun", Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD.,
TR 396, Feb. 1974.
.38. L. East and D. R. McClure, "Experimental Studies of Ignition and
Combustion in Naval Guns", Twelfth JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical
Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 273, Aug. 1975.

S x39
39
T. C. Smith, "Rapid Ignition of Granular Propellant Beds with a 'Hotline'
Igniter", 1978 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Informat-
ion Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 293, Feb. 1978.
40A. W. Horst, "Navy Gun Interior Ballistics Modeling Efforts: An
Overview", 1973 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Informa-
tion Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 242, Sept. 1973.
22
 P1.

P2-i

4 56 7 8 9 10

TIME (ins)

>1 CONFIGURATION
MOD 4

Figure 9. Comparison of Pressure-Time Curves for NACO Propellant Firings

witn Primers MK 48 Mod 2 and MK 48 Mod 435
23

d- - -
I'~%__ f
 Figure 10. The black powder in configuration I was ignited with a low-
velocity detonation cord. Figures 10 and 11 clearly show the strong
influence that pressure waves have on chamber pressure and muzzle
velocity. One conclusion that can be drawn from these data is that,
unless an ignition system functions with good reproducibility, ballistic
variability can be increased. Another example of the effect of ignition
variability on ballistic uniformity has been reported by Clarke and May 4 1
for a 155-mm howitzer bag charge. For base-ignited propelling charges,
as the average pressure-wave level increased for a particular ignition
system, the variability in the pressure-wave content increased, with
accompanying increased muzzle velocity dispersion. During the develop-
ment of this base-ignited charge, it uIso was noted that the faster base-
pad igniter tested resulted in a higher level of pressure-waves, as might

I
be expected.

Although several parametric,

calculations concentrating on the two-phase-flow,
ignition stimulusinterior ballistic
have been performedl 1 42

8 10
of particular note are the results by Horst et al. using the NOVA code
to simulate an 8-in. howitzer breechblow induced by a deliberate blockage
of the centercore ignition train. The effect of distributed ignition vs
severe, localized ignition on pressure-wave generation is seen clearly
in the computed pressure-time traces of Figure 12. It appears that
current onc-dimensional two-phase-flow interior ballistic codes that
incorporate ignition and flamespread predict the appropriate trends as
igniter location and delivery rate are varied. More impressive, perhaps,
is the good agreement obtained between theory and experiment14 in the
simulation of the 76-mm Oto Melara and the S-In.i54-Caliber Gun. The
latter is shown in Figure 13. For this cased gun simulation, experimen-
tally measured primer output data were used as input to the NOVA calcula-
tion. Simulations for bag charge pressure-wave dynamics are, at pres-nt,
not quite so successful.

a 41
E.V. Clarke and I. W. May, "Subtle Effects of Low Amplitude Pressure
Wave Dynamwics on the Ballistic Performance of Guns", Eleventh JANNAF
Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel,
MD., Publ. 261, Sepvember 1974.
S•42 E. F~sher, K. Graves and A. Trippe, "Application of a Flamespread Model
to Design Problems on the 155-mm Propelling Charge", Twelfth JANNAF

"CombustionMeeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD.,

2 1975.

24
 IA
IW

ig

BREECH

U-)

A B C
lOres
MOUTH

D E F

LEE -ýIz

G H

.I
.1

Figure 10. Ignition Study Test Results

1'. 25

14i-! ~ ~m ~
 2520-

C
'248o E

0 A
L 2440
1- "F
G H

S, 2400 -I I , I
36 38 40
4' MAXIMUM PRESSURE (kpsi)

i• ~Figure 11. Velocity vs. Maximum Pressure for Test Configuration0

44

-2-
 -'4

280
' '-BREECH

240

CL200
'"160

w 120
120 CHAMBER
MOUTH
80

40

0 4 8 12 16 20
,I I ME (ins)
"SOFT" BASE

240 -

200-

616O-

ou 120 ,
CHAMBER
Si I
v MOUTH

0e 80

I 40

0 16 20
0 4 8 12
TIME (ms)
"HARSH" BASE
SFigure IZ. Predicted Effect of Ignition in the 8-In., MlIOE2
8
Howitzer (M1I8E1, Zone 9 Propelling Charge)

27

t I
 I I I I I I I I

120 EXPERIMENTAL
PREDICTED

80-
a
a-
U40
u 40-

(z

a-- 4 0

-80

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
,.. -414 TIME (ins)

Gun
Figure 13. Pressure Difference Simulation for 5-In./54-Caliber

28
 From the arguments presented by Hicks 4 3 and based on the analysis
of some of the experimental results, the following conclusion can be
drawn. The more localized the ignition stimulus is in the chamber and
the higher its energy delivery rate to the propellant, the more severe
a case of local propellant ignition, burning, and gas pressure buildup
can be expected. In addition, the ignition stimulus is, of course,
coupled strongly to the initial gas generation rate, propellant bed
permeability, and charge/chamber geometry factors important in determin-
ing charge motion.

B. Mass Burning Rate

The contribution of the initial gas generation rate to the growth

of pressure waves is well illustrated in a parametric study 4 4 on the
influence of the burning rate description on the predicted initial reverse
pressure difference. This NOVA study considers a propelling charge for
the 5-In./54-Caliber Gun with =ombinations of propellant burning rate
coefficients and exponents chosen such that the maximum chamber pressures
L and muzzle velocities remained roughly constant. The burning rate
exponents varied significantly, as shown in Figure 14. The important
point to note is that, in the low-pressure region, the extreme burning
r: rate descriptions varied by a factor of two. In other words, the high
exponent burning rate is substantially lower in the ignition regime.
This results in a lower propellant gas production rate. Hence any
localized pressures generated will have more time to be dissipated
* throughout the chamber and thus should lead to a reduction of pressure-
waves. Indeed the computed results in Figure 15 show nearly a factor of
two reduction in the reverse pressure difference. There are several
important deductions that can be drawn from this analysis. Since burning
rates increase with initial temperatures, one would expect, in general,
a lower level of pressure waves at low temperatures than at high temper-
atures. In fact, such a trend has been observed routinely in recent
charge development efforts for a 155-mm howitzer 1 S. Although, in the
realm of speculation 4 5 , we should expect that deterred or inhibited
propellants will also be less likely to support the growth of pressure
waves. An analysis of the initial surface area of multiperforated grain
geometries indicates that ballistically equivalent 19- and 37-perforated
i•43 B. L. Hicks, "Some Characteristicsof the PracticalIgnition of

Propellants", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.,

"MR 640, Dec. 1952. (AD #3342)

44
A. W. Horst, "Influence of Propellant Burning Rate Representation of
Gun Environment Flamespread and Pressure-Wave Predictions", Naval
Ordnance Station, Indian Head, A.,MR 76-255, Narch 1976.
iv.May, C. W. Nelson, J. J. Rocchio and K. J. White, "The Role of

Initzon in Artillery Propulsion", Proceedings of the Third Internat-

* • a Symposiw2 on Ballistics, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Wehrtechnik,
Kar'Lsru•ee, Germany, M.larch 1977.

29
 'S

- I

8.0-

6.0

4.0o

0
z
:51.0

0.8

a6 n=0.9 WHERE r=uPn

S/ n =1.0J
0.4F

4 6 8 10 20 40 60
PRESSURE (kpsi)

Figure 14. Burning Rate Descriptions Selected to Achieve Equivalent

:1Rates at 25 kpsi 4 4
30

4
--
 '
I'

• 8-9

-8
ID
I • . LU -7

~LU

LUj
> U- _
<uJ
DU-

EBURNING RATE EXPONENT

• ~Figure 15. Influence of Burning Rate Description on Predicted Initial •

•,•, Reverse Pressure-Difference (Coefficients Selected to Achieve
LL

i Equivalent Burning Rate at Z5 kpsi) 4 4

f,07Q .

Ix. UI'

) -4
 grains have reduced initial surface areas over 7-perforated grains and
hence should offer a reduction in pressure-wave tendencies 4 6, A more
subtle effect also might be of importance. It has long been postulated 1 9
that ignition of the inner perforations is delayed until some critical
pressure or flow condition is reached, This factor, admittedly not well
documented, also would enhance the pressure-wave reduction of multi-
perforated propellants. Since the more unusual 19- and 37- perforated
grain geometries also improve gas flow permeability, discussion of
experimental results will be deferred to the next section.

Because the low-pressure mass burning rate now is known to be an im-

portant factor in pressure-wave phenomenology, it is somewhat disappointing
to discover that good, low-pressure burning rate data for gun propellants
are almost nonexistent. Another study by Horst et al. 1 4 points out this
dilemma. In attempting to achieve a reasonable simulation of experimental
results for base-ignited charges, the low-pressure burning rate had to
be increased artificially by the addition of a small constant value to
the closed-bomb aPl'fit. On a relative basis, this has a substantial
effect on the low-pressure burning rate and improves substantially the
agreement between simulation apd experiment. It is tempting to conjecture
that a transient burning rate contribution is the likely explanation. The
observation that this effect appears to be associated more with base
ignition is puzzling. Kooker and Nelson 4 7 have examined the responses
of three different transient burning models under typical gun pressuriz-
ation envelopes, Their main conclusions are that the effect is usually
important only in the low-pressure region, and burning rate enhancement
factors on the order of 10 are plausible. Experimental verification is
lacking, however. Of a more practizal nature is the inference that a
* charge operating at a higher pressure is more likely to have pressure-
wave problems than a lower pressure charge. This is the result of the
enhamiced, low-pressure mass burning rate required to obtain the higher
pressures. Because of the effect of available volume on the generated
[ 4 pressure and its feedback on the burning rate, one also should expect
increased pressure-wave generation as the loading density and the maxi-
mum chamber pressure increase, An example of this effect is shown in
Table 148. It should be noted, however, that this effect also is
complicated by both charge geometry and bed-permeability effects.

46
j. J. Rocchio, C. R. Ruth and I. W. May, "Grain Geometry Effects on
Wave Dynamics in Large Caliber Guns", Thirteenth JANNAF Combustion
"Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Informavion Agency. Laurel, MD., Publ.
'281, Dec. 1976.
47
D. E. Kooker and C. W. Nelson, "Numerical Solution of Three Solid
Propellant 'Combustion Models During a Gun Pressure Transient", Ballistic
Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R 1953, January 1977.
(AD #A035250)
8 4
to- "Aberdeen Proving Ground, Firing Record P-82415, March 1974.

I32
 A rather more unusual effect, demonstrating the importance of high
local mass burning rates in the generation of pressure waves, is reported
by Minor and DiLorenzo 4 9 . Their work is concerned largely with the
design and evaluation of a low-zone, 155-mm charge that minimizes the
occurrence of stuck projectiles. For this particular howitzer, the task
is a nontrivial problem. The thrust produced by a nominal low-zone
charge can, under some marginal conditions, be less than projectile
friction. However, by increasing the jerk (da/dt) imparted to the pro-
jectile through very high pressurization rates, the frictional force
appears to be reduced, whereas the thrust is increased. With very high
r pressurization rates, some early charge configurations resulted in
[ severe pressure waves wich very low loading densities, on the order of
0.1 g/cm3 . Only when the propellant charge was stretched over the length
of the chamber, as shown in Figure 16, were the pressure waves eliminated.
Apparently, even for low loading density charges, it is possible to reach
a point where the local mass burning rate is so large that pressure
dissipation through the nearly empty chamber is limited effectively by
choked flow conditions. The full-length charge distributes the gas
pressurization over the whole chamber; hence, pressure gradients are
effectively minimized.
t ;-
TABLE 1. EFFECT OF LOADING DENSITY ON PRESSURE WAVES

Observed peak Ideal peak pressure

Density pressure, -APi (no waves),
Rd. number g/cm3 MPa MPa MPa

121 0.54 225 27 226

126 0.60 307 51 286
127 0.64 439 84 341

There is another, perhaps more insidious, factor to be considered

under the topic of mass burning rates. Propellant grain breakup,
especially at low temperatures, results in increased surface area,
hence increased mass burning. This effect will be discussed in the
section on charge and chamber geometry factois likely to contribute to
grain fracture. It should be obvious so far that the impact of high
mass generation rates on pressure waves may be mitigated or aggravated
"by chamber and charge permeability considerations that influence pressure
dissipation characteristics.

49T. C. Minor and J. Delorenzo, "Charge Design Approaches to the

Reduction of Low Zone Stickers", 1976 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting,
SChemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 280, Dec.
1976.

S33
*I
 PAA

LIL~
SHORT L/Dr
P

__

LONG L/D T

Figure 16. Effect of Charge Configuration on Chamber Pressure 49

C. Permeability

The importance of gas flow permeability as a factor in pressure-

wave formation was recognized by Kent 2 0 in his studies of charge-design
approaches for pressure-wave reduction. From rather limited data, he
concluded that the natural flow channels of strip and stick or stacked
granular propellant dissipated any local pressure buildup. His studies
on tapered charges also led him to the conclusion that free space over
a subchamber diameter charge helped mitigate any initial pressure-wave
, buildup.

•,. The charge-design practice of the United Kingdom has been to use,
almost exclusively, stick propellant for bag charge guns. This practice
is the result of great difficulties encountered in eliminating pressure-
"wave problems with granular propellants and traditional ignition-train
Sdesigns. For cased guns, because of the relative ease of obtaining good
centercore ignition through the use of high-pressure bayonet primers 4
granular propellants generally are used. A recent attempt by Fisher 2
"tomodel ignition and flamespread of stick propellant indeed has confirmed
the great effect of the increased permeability on pressure-wave reduction.

A more formal analysis by Hicks 4 3 developed approximate characteristic

times for pressure-dissipation throughout a chamber based on the critical
chamber dimensions, ullage distribution, and grain size. The analysis,
although limited in scope, was based on the premise that, if the
*- characteristic pressure-dissipation time were short compared to a charac-
teristic convective heating-to-ignitiun time, then wave formation is
unlikely. This intuitively pleasing and useful analysis later led Rocchio

34
 et al. 4 6 to propose the use of the 19-perforated grain geometry as a means
of reducing pressure-waves. Simple flow-through-packed-bed analysis had
shown that the gas permeability of packed beds increases with grain
dimension. In order to maintain interior ballistic equivalency, however,
the total initial surface area cannot change drastically. With the 19-
perforated geometry, one can obtain a significant increase in grain size
over a 7-perforated grain and maintain ballistic equivalency, i.e.,
operate at the same maximum chamber pressure, muzzle velocity, and almost
the same charge weight. Other geometries, such as 37-perforation grains,
also are being explored currently for pressure-wave reduction potential.
Since the equivalent web for a 19-perforated grain also reduces the
initial surface area, as previously mentioned, a sympathetic effort is
obtained. Early exgerimental results 4 6 are illustrated in Figure 17.
Later, Horst et al. confirmed that a major reduction in pressure-wave
amplitude is observed. Theoretical calculations using the NOVA code 5 0
confirmed that indeed a two-fold reduction in measured -APi, can be
expected. This is in excellent agreement with experiment. Another
analysis by Fisher 4 2 resulted in similar results. Of further interest
is the speculation 4 6 that the ignition of the available surface area in
the perforation is delayed until some critical pressure is obtained.
This would, of course, further enhance the pressure-wave reduction
possibilities via the low-pressure mass burning rate effect.
a SPINDLE
7-PERF 10.9kg 19- PERF 11.8kg
400400
O-320-30

240 240
, 160 160
S80 80
LU
c 0
"C 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
TIME (ms) AP TIME (is)
S0 _ _+150 +150

•'' 0 0
I..U

0 20 30 40 50
10 0 10 20 30 40 50
TIME (ms) TIME (ms)
PROPELLANT: M30 CANNON: M185(MOD),155-mm
IGNITER: BASE PAD
Figure 17. Pressure-Time and Differential Pressure-Time Traces for 7-
46
and 19-Perforated Grains
50 A. W. Horst, T. C. Smith and S. E. Mitchell, "Key Design Parameters
"in Controlling Gun Environment Pressure Wave Phenomena-Theory Versus
Experiment", Thirteenth JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion
Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Pub1. 281, December 1976.
35
 Another, not so pleasant, example of the impact of permeability on
pressure-wave formation is the Navy experience3 5 that accompanied the
[I switch from Pyro to NACO propellant for the 5-In.,/38-Caliber Gun. In
I this instance, a very low flame temperature propellant, NACO, replaced
a more typical single-base propellant, Pyro, to increase the wear life
of naval guns. Since the burning rate of NACO propellant is much lower
than for Pyro, a smaller web size propellant has to be used to maintain
ballistic equivalency. These smaller grains resulted in a substantial
decrease in permeability and a significant increase in pressure-wave
formation, as illustrated in Figures 18. A marginal situation suddenly
had become catastrophic. The impact of the combustion-driven gas and
solid waves compressed the closure plug and accelerated it into the
projectile base. This resulted in an unacceptably high projectile
explosive premature initiation rate.

[ P
1,P2= CARTRIDGE BASE

for
Tracpe
Pesure-Tieant the
38Caibc Gun wemaiithAon
18b.
Figurer
r 48the 235n/8-a e Gun.
swich romPyr oNC anfPim
ropellant
avey owfam tmpraue roelanNAOrela6
ths nsane

PII

Figure 18a. Pressure-Time Trace for 5-In./38-Caliber Gun with NACo

15 Propellant and Primer MK 48 Mod 23

P36
fW

to Another example involving the effects of propellant bed resistance

to gas flow on the formation of catastrophic pressure-waves has been
reported by olenick5 l in his summary of the 76-mm Oto Melara malfunction
investigation. An exhaustive study clearly identified the source of a
breechblow to be accidentally loose, granular, flash reducer salt filling
the normal propellant grain interstices. This led to a significant
reduction in permeability and allowed the formation of steep pressure
gradients, as shown in Figures 19. Although some chemical flamespread
inhibition effect cannot be ruled out, the current permeability inter-
pretation is considered the more likely one.

PI =CASE BASE
P 3 =13.91 in FROM BREECH FACE
50kpsi P4 =22.00in FROM BREECH FACE
IP6
=25.13 in FROM BREECHF

50 kpsi

S~P6

, -0-1 MS so

P37

;, Figure 19a. Pressure-Time Curves for Oto Melara 76-mm Gun with
Potassium Sulfate Confined in a Polyethylene Bag~l

P4 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ...
. .........

"•,• 51P. J. Olenick., "Investigatio't of the 76-=1/62 Caliber Mark 75 Gun

• i Mount Malfunction",. Naval Surface Weapons Center, DahZgren, VA.,
i TR 3144, October 1975.

F• 37
 GAGE DESTROYED

P4P 4 22.00in FROM BREECH FACE

P6 =25.13 in FROM BREECH FACE

rn S

"Figure 19b. Pressure-Time Curves for Oto Melara 76-mm Gun with
Granular Potassium Sulfate Dispersed in Propellant Bed 5 1

i.• 38

Il
 i --
- S

The concept of flow channels around a charge, as opposed to through

the propellant bed, has been exploited recently in the development of a
base-ignited, intermediate-zone propelling charge for a 155-mm Army
howitzer 3 2 . For a variety of reasons, general practice has been to
design virtually full chamber diameter charges. For less than full
performance charges, this may allow a substantial amount of free, forward
ullage. In the loading density region of approximately 0.45 g/cm3 ,
stretching the charge to full chamber length has been found to allow the
use of a simple, low-cost, iase ignition system. The full-bore diameter
charge, however, virtually demands a reasonably well-functioning center-
core ignition train. The reduced-diameter, chamber-length charge with
some breech standoff reduces the normally expected, localized, ignition-
induced, pressure-wave potential by allowing rapid pressure equilibration
throughout the chamber. As long as rigidity is maintained during the
early ignition phase, charge fluidization and grain pileup will not
result in loss of this powerful design approach for increasing permeability.
A preliminary, pseudo-two-dimensional analysis by Gough 5 3 has confirmed
that a flow channel over a charge offers a significant pressure-wave
reduction potential.

A special topic to be considered is the importance of permeability

in the design of conventional bayonet primers. The observed deficiencies
of standard primers led Vest et al. 5 4 , 5 to consider the use of special
primer formulations extruded as strands. The natural flow channel typical
with stick propellants also resulted in improved uniform gas venting over
the entire primer length. Extension of this work resulted in the use
of Benite (Black Powder Extruded Nitrocellulose) strands 5 6 instead of
granular black powder in Army bayonet primers.
52I. W. May and E. V. Clarke Jr., "The Reverse Chamber Pressure Gradient:
A Tool for Assessing the Effects of Wave Dynamics on the Ballistic
Performance of Guns", Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium
on Ballistics, American Defense PreparednessAssoc., Daytona Beach,
Fla., March 1976.

53
P. S. Gough, "The Influence of Annular Ullage and Bag Rupture on the
Ballistic Predictions of the NOVA Code", Paul Gough Associates, Inc.,
Portsmouth, N.J., TR 77-4, September 1977.
54
D. C. Vest, E. V. Clarke, Jr., W. W. Shoemaker and W. F. Baker, "On

the Performance of Primers for Artillery Weapons", Ballistic Research

Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R852, March 1953. (AD #13294)

55D C. Vest, "A General Discussion of Extruded Igniter Compositions",

Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, MR 894, June 1955.
4,• (AD #74459)
H. H. Hassmann, "Evaluation of Benite, An Extruded Form of Black Powder
"in
Separate Loaded Ammunition", Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, N.J., R 1,
SSeparate Loaded Ammunition", Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, N.J., R 1,
SAugust 1958.
39
 ~:FW

D. Chamber and Charge Geometry

The importance of charge configuration on pressure-wave formation

has been discussed previously in terms of its effect on permeability and
ignition stimulus. As pointed out by Horst and Gough 5 7 , an additional
factor mus: be kept in mind. That factor is the tendency of a charge
to allow motion of the propellant bed and subsequent pileup and compact-
ion at an internal boundary such as the projectile base, the breech,
or a closure plug is encountered. Compaction of a granular bed reduces
porosity, decreases gas permeability, and increases the steepness of a
combustion-driven pressure front. The reduced free volume caused by bed
compaction leads to enhanced reverse pressure gradients. Moreover, the
impact of the moving propellant and other solids such as closure plugs
may add significant additional stress to the projectile, besides the
normal gas pressure. A further undesirable consequence of propellant
motion and compaction is the possibility of grain fracture, leading to
enhanced mass burning rate via the increased exposed surface area.

F The early work by Hedden and Nance25 clearly had shown the undesirable
pressure-wave effects of ullage in the front or rear of a charge.
unambiguous interpretation in terms of enhanced charge motion was,
ever, not made. The experimental results and theoretical analysis of
An
how-

Horst and Gough 5 7 are quite convincing on the importance of the boundary
conditions. Their conclusion is that "increasing wave amplitudes are
predicted when the propelling charge is weakly confined and when ullage
is present between the bed and the base of the projectile". Their
theoretical analysis of the 76-nm Oto Melara propelling charge assembly
depicted in Figure 20 concentrated on the effects of using three
different representations of the wad and spacer boundary adjacent to the
projectile. Eliminating the filler and stretching the bed to the
projectile base virtually eliminated pressure waves, as shown in Figure
21. In the second representation, the inertia of the boundary was taken

PRIMER PROPELLANT SPACER

WAD PROJECTILE

4 Figure 20. Propelling Charge Assembly for 76-mm Oto Melara Gun

57
A. W. Horst and P. S. Gcugh, "Influence of Propellant Packaging and
Performance of Navy Case Gun Ammunition", Journal of Ballistics, Vol.
1, pp. 229-257, March 1977,.

40

.. . . . . . .... - __.
 !I
-•EXPERIMENT
"FILLER INERTIA AND STRENGTH
FILLER INERTIA
0 ... ..... NO REPRESENTATION OF FILLER
u-
V I
Ii \ ,
Uz 10-

LU

LU TIME 3(ms) \1 - 4
•-10 "•

i - Vu

II
Figure 21. Comparison of Theoretical Predictions of Pressure
57
Difference with Experimental Results

to be that of the inert compactibles until the base of the projectile

was reached. Compactibility of the wad and spacer was neglected. With
this representation, the magnitude of the reverse pressure gradient was
substantially overpredicted, presumably because the neglect of the strength
of the inert elements overestimates the rate of deceleration of the
boundary. In the third calculation, an explicit tepresentatioa of the
compactibility of the wad and space was included using experimental
compressive stress vs strain data for these filler components. This
more realistic treatment of the boundary resulted in good agreement with
experiment, as shown in Figure 21.

In a related exercise, the effect of reducing the nominal, allowed

propellant motion due to incomplete packing of S-In./S4-Caliber propelling
charges was examined. Two experimental configurations, shown in Figure
22, were tested. In the first one, a wraparound foam spacer was used
to eliminate any residual ullage and thus reduce initial bed motion. In
the second configuration, foam nodules were dispersed in the bed to
2 •expand it fully to the closure plug. The experimental results shown
in Table 2 dramatically illustrate the effect of reduced charge motion.
NOVA simulations predict similar lev-'s of pressure-wave redution.
41 1
 CARTRIDGE WRAPAROUND
BARREL CASE FOAM SPACER PROJECTILE

PRIMER PROPELLANT BED CORK OR POLYURETHANE

"FOAM CLOSURE PLUG

I,
C.ARTRIDGE
BARREL CASE PROJECTILE

PRIMER PROPELLANT BED CORK OR POLYURETHANE

WITH POLYSTYRENE FOAM CLOSURE PLUG
NODULES

Figure 22. Special Experimental Propelling Charges for 5-In./54-Caliber

7
f Gun 5

42

.wo
7 i An analysis of data
58
for two different-length, base-ignited,
intermediate-zone charges for a new 155-mm howitzer shows the combined
effect of reduced charge motion and increased permeability. Major
reductions in pressure-wave amplitudes are achieved. An important
consideration in obtaining the reduced motion inherent in a full chamber
length charge is the requirement that charge integrity be maintained
during the early portion of the ignition phase. Hence, packaging strength
must be considered. This agrees with the general observation that lacing
jackets improve the pressure-wave characteristics of a charge. Premature
rupture of a bag charge will, of course, result in a complete rearrange-
ment of the assumed initial charge configuration.
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF PREDICTIONS AND RESULTS FOR RUM POINT FIRINGS OF
JUNE 19, 197556

Initial reverse
Muzzle Maximum pressure
Velocity, pressure, difference,
Parameters ft/f psi psi

NOVA Code predictions a

Nominal configuration 2 , 8 20a 49,497 -11,162
Expanded bed 2,783 47,587 -4,455
Average difference -37 -1,910 6,707
Experimental resultsb
SNominal configuration 2,670 47,250 -5,110
Wraparound spacer 2,632 47,208 2?9
configuration
Polystyrene nodule 2,634 45,958 -847
configuration
Average difference -37 -2,667 4,857
aPrediction included no downbore resistance or heat loss to the barrel.
bMean values for six-round samples.

Grain fracture has been mentioned previously as a concern in any

charge configuration likely to lead to substantial propellant bed motion.
Some early NOVA simulations 4 5 had resulted in the observation that maxi-
mum chamber pressure increases did not accompany an increase in ignition-
induced pressure-waves. A later, more systematic study8 quite conclusively
showed that an additional increased mass burning rate process such as
transient burning or grain fracture had to be included. An example of
the effect of mild and strong base ignition without an enhanced mass
burning rate contribution is shown in Figure 12. No increase in chamber
pressure is seen for this simulation of an 8-In. Howitzer propelling
charge despite widely different levels of pressure waves. Experimentally,
this level of increase in pressure-waves is accompanied by a major increase
58
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Firing Record P-82446, September 20, 1974.

Z 43

4
 in maximum chamber pressure for a low-temperature-conditioned charge;

a lesser increase can be expected for an ambient temperature-conditioned

charge. In the attempt to simulate a breechblow induced by a deliberate
ignition train malfunction 8 , the effects of a pseudo-transient burning
rate contribution as well as grain fracture were evaluated. Figure 23
shows the actual pressure vs time traces for this breechblow, obtained
with a low-temperature-conditioned charge. The results of the analysis,
admittedly somewhat lacking in rigor because of simplifying assumptions,
indicated that grain fracture may be the more likely phenomenon to explain
the large increases in peak pressure observed. The apparent strong
temperature dependence of the chamber pressure sensitivity to pressure-
waves is consistent with brittleness characteristics of gun propellants.
Triple-base propellants commonly used for the higher performance pro-
pelling charges have a history of low-temperature anomalous behavior.
The newer triple-base formulations, however, do not exhibit the dramatic
grain fracturioevidence seen in the closed-bomb burning results by Russel
and Goldstein* for the older formulations. Nevertheless, Schubert and
Schmidt 5 9 have shown that even modern triple-base propellants become
more brittle at lower temperatures and at higher strain rates than do
single-and double-base propellants.
1000 BREECH

---- FORWARD

_75O-

w 500

Lo

250-1.

0 - j

TIME (ms)

Figure 23. Pressure-Time Profiles for the 8-1n., MIIOE2 Howitzer

Breechblow (MIB8EI, Zone 9 Propelling Charge)8

-59

H. Schubert and D. Schmidt, "Embrittlement of Gun Powder", Proceedings

of the international Symposium on Gun Propellants, Picatinny Arsenaz,
Dover, N.J., October 1973.
 The possible involvement of grain fracture in the 76-mm Oto Melara
breechblow5 1 incident was investigated experimentally at the Naval Weapons
Laboratory in 1972. Air gun tests were performed in which single grains
of M6 propellant were impacted on a steel plate to determine breakup
characteristics at different temperatures. Predictably, typical results
shown in Figure 24 indicated that the velocity threshold decreases with
temperature.

10 -
/ /

/0 /
:E -! /6
0 I

U I
U

i 00-12 0 TO-70C
S / / V 21°T0 27°C

0! 1 - I I
0 50 100 150
GRAIN VELOCITY (m/s)

51
Figure 24. Air Gun Impact Test Results for M6 Propellant

The NOVA simulation for the 8-In. Howitzer breechblow predicted

velocities of at least 60 m/s for grains striking the projectile base
under base ignition conditions. This should be substantially above the
threshold velocities for triple-base propellants at -45 0 C, considering
the MS data of Figure 24, and given that the triple-base propellant is
inherently more brittle and at an even lower temperature.

From a pragmatic standpoint this suggests several approaches toward

minimizing peak chamber pressure enhancement due to grain fracture. The
most obvious one is, of course, to minimize the creation of pressure-
waves by increasing the availability of centercore ignition trains, a
topic to be discussed next. Another approach is to minimize the contri-
bution from charge configurational aspects such as ullage. Eliminating
ullage near the projectile base may reduce the velocity of grains impact-
ing the projectile, perhaps below the critical threshold velocity for
grain fracture. Finally, raising this threshold velocity by improved
C" processing or formulation changes ought not to be neglected.

45

-! - .
 In addition to contributing to propellant grain fracture, charge
motion and compaction introduce a related safety concern for the survival
of the projectile. The response of a projectile and its components to
the impact of a closure plug or the propellant bed itself is a complex
subject of great concern during the past few years. A classic example
of the importance of the charge/projectile interface is found in the
5-In./38-Caliber Gun premature study by Culbertson et al. 6 0 and the
8-In./SS-Caliber Gun close-aboard malfunction investigation by Sbamblen
and O'Brasky 6 1 . In both instances, the causes of projectile malfunctions
were shown to be related directly to shock excitation of the projectile
resulting fiom charge component impact induced by high-amplitude pressure
waves.

The origin of the pressure-wave problem causing the 5-In./38-Caliber

Gun malfunctions has been discussed in the previous section on permea-
bility. Data reported by Soper 6 2 from flash radiograph-instrumented
experiments performed with fiberglass chambers indicated that the forward
boundary of the NACO propellant bed accelerated to a velocity of about
250 m/s at closure plug impact onto the projectile base. The shock ex-
citation produced by this impact was sufficient to initiate the high-
explosive fill. The analysis by Soper also indicates that the peak stress
level on the projectile base due to impact was about 35 kpsi, whereas the
measured gas pressure in a sidewall gage was only about 1/5 of this
value. Although quantitative measurements in such an environment may be
open to question, the point to be made is that normal gas pressure
measurements in a high-amplitude pressure-wave environment do not allow
an adequate assessment of the interior ballistic forcing function acting
on a projectile. Instrumented projectile measurements are necessary.

Shamblen and O'Brasky61 attributed fuze malfunctions observed with

the 8-In./55-Caliber reduced charge to shock excitation of the projectile
by propelling charge component impact. Interestingly, the reduced charge
with much increased forward ullage provided a more severe shock acceler-
ation environment than did the higher-performance full service charge.
The change to a larger granulation propellant with increased permeability
and reduced initial mass burning rate eventually provided a more accept-
able shock loading environment similar to tl~at of the full service charge.

6 0 D. W. Culbertson, M. C. Shamblen and J. S. O'Brasky, "Investigation

of 5"/38 Gun In-Bore Ammunition Malfunctions", Naval Weapons Lab.,
Dahlgren, VA., TR-2624, December 1971.

61M. C. Shamblen and J. S. O'Brasky, "Investigation of 8"/55 Close Aboard

Malfunctions", Naval Weapons Lab., Dahlgren VA., TR-2753, April 1973.

W. G. Soper, "Ignition Waves in Gun Chambers", Combustion and Flame,

Vol. 20(2), April 1973, pp. 157-162.
46'46
 IMP

A recent concern has been the influence of certain chamber-geometry

factors on the development of pressure waves. These include the effects
of area reduction due to chambrage, forcing cones, normal projectile
boattails, breech details, and, perhaps most importantly, area reduction
associated with long, fin-stabilized projectiles with tapered bodies
penetrating deeply into the propellant bed. Given some initial pressure-
wave formation from an ignition stimulus, pressure-wave focusing and
growth are to be expected with, perhaps, enhanced bed compaction and
grain fracture. An unusually high sensitivity of peak chamber pressure
to rather modest levels of pressure waves recently has been observed for
such a fin-stabilized projectile. This observation has been rationalized
on the basis of pressure-wave focusing. A theoretical analysis is in
progress.

V. RELIABLE GUN IGNITION

The primary concern over pressure wa'es during the past half dozen
F
F-
years has been with safety hazards such as breechblows and prematures.
Failure rates for such catastrophic events normally are required to be
lower than one per million. This safety reliability requirement places
i,
a difficult burden on the propulsion system designer, as well as on the
ttest and evaluation agency that has to safety-certify a munitions item
on the basis of minimal testing.

This problem is particularly acute for high-performance bag charge

designs using granular propellant. Typically such charges require complex,
low-pressure, centercore ignition trains as shown in Figure 5. The high-
pressure, bayonet primers commonly used in cased ammunition generally
are designed more easily to function with great reliability as far as
timing and spatial distribution of output are concerned. The experimental
techniques and approaches used by Smith 3 9 and earlier by Vest et al. 5 4
have shown the proper methodology to be used in the design and testing

K of reliable, high-pressure bayonet primers. The fact that far from ideal,
high-pressure primers are found in many fielded gun systems is not due
to a lack of basic understanding.

1
i For low-pressure, combustible, centercore ignition trains, the
current understanding and practice do not appear to be nearly as well in
hand. The reasons for this situation include the following: the
intrinsic geometry variability of bag charge systems; the sensitivity
of the several ignition transfer events occurring at low pressures to

: variability of cloth barriers; the intrinsic flamespread variability of

black powder, the most commonly used material; and, finally, the lack of
a well-developed, simple diagnostic technique that allows an unambiguous
functional evaluation of centercore ignition tra .as. The recent work by

47
 White et al. 6 3 and Shulman et al. 6 4 only confirms that currently used
ignition train simulators such as that shown in Figure 25, although
capable of telling much about the timing sequence of the primer, basepad
and centercore functioning events, do not, however, reveal the critical
parameters of how much energy is released to the propellant bed as a
function of position and time. Experimental efforts are currently underway
to obtain precisely this information. The complexity of the undertaking
casts some doubt, however, as to whether the technique can be used as a

I routine method for evaluating the functional reliability of such an

ignition train.

LUCITE CENTER CORE

130rm DIA VIEWING PORT GAGE4
PRIMRC VENT OPTION
ADAPTER I- LUCITE OR NCUB

•,: ~~~~GAGE 31-- '/GAE

'~~ L (152m 2..

BASE PAD LUCITE OR STEEL TUBE

NOTES 813mm
1-GAGES ARE PRESSURE TRANSDUCERS
2-LUCITE CENTER CORE VIEWING PORT(38mmx603mm)
,LOCK EXTENDING RADIALLY INTOTHE CENTER CORE

Figure 25. Igniter Simulator Apparatus 6 3

63
K. J. White, C. F. Price, H. E. Homes and I. W. May, "Black Powder and
Clean Burning Igniter Train Studies", Thirteenth JANNAF Combustion
Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ.
281, December 1976.
64
" L. Shulman, C. Lenchitz and L. Bottei, "Laboratory Studies to Develop
Reduced Ignition Delays in the 155-mm Howitzer", 1974 JANNAF Propulsion
Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ.
260, December 1974.
. 48

I ~'
 Basically, a typical centercore ignition train should function in
the following manner. A primer jet of hot gases and particles impinges
on the base pad and ignites it. With perfect alignment between the
primer vent and the centercore, the jet may puncture through the base
pad into the centercore and ignite the cloth-covered, black-powder-filled
snake. With some offset in the alignment, the basepad's function is
to burn through the cloth layers and ignite the snake, which then ignites
the propellant bed.
63
White et al. have discussed the effects of primer total energy
output and rate of delivery, the effect of primer vent exit configuration,
charge standoff, the effect of cloth barriers, alignment, and black
powder distribution in the snake. Shulman et al.6& have discussed the
effects of black powder quickness on centercore functioning. Recent
data suggest that manufacturing tolerances for the same class of black
powder are so wide that a factor of two difference in quickness is possible.
Such differences could have disastrous results in shifting the delicate
balance of centercore flamespread times toward earlier propellant bed
ignition. It also has been shown that the cloth characteristics of the
basepad and snake can have a significant effect on the ignition transfer
from the base pad to the snake. In fact, a cloth change made to improve
sturdiness at one point in the development of a charge for a new 155-mm
howitzer resulted in a low-temperature hangfire in which the propellant
finally was ignited before the centercore. A breechblow resulted!

An example of the effect of charge standoff on centercore function-

ing is shown in Figure 26 for an intermediate-performance, 155-mm
propelling charge 6 5. The highest level of pressure waves was obtained

1600 /155F
7
S1200

< 800 ,' .+-65°F

400 -

0 2 4 6 8 10
STANDOFF (in)

Figure 26. Effect of Standoff on the Amplitude of -APi65

6 5 E. V. Clarke, I. W. May and J. R. Kelso, "Effects of Pressure-Wave

Dynamics on The 3allistic Performance of Guns", Ballistic Research Lab.,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., I14R 311, November 1974.

49

SI
 with the charge contacting the breech face (zero standoff) and when
contacting the projectile base (20-cm standoff). At 2- to 5-cm standoff,
a minimum appears to exist. In addition, the pressure-wave level tends
to decrease with temperature. The most pllusible explanation for these
observations is that, at zero standoff, the effects of primer-jet center-
core misalignment should be most pronounced, the local breech pressuriz-
ation is greatest, and the impact of charge motion should be more severe.
At the intermediate standoffs, the primc jet plume has a chance to
expand, thus reducing the effects of primer-centercore offset. The
additional free volume in the breech region also will reduce the
pressurization effects, as well as initial charge motion. At maximum
standoff, the primer jet is thought to be too weak to penetrate through
the centercore efficiently. Because of the large free volume, the
pressurization rate is low, ignition delays are long, and heating of
ignition materials (such as Benite or black powder) and propellant
generally favors propellant ignition. During a 153-mm howitzer malfunct-
ion investigation, the effect of primer-centercore misalignment was
examined. Results reported by Hassmann and Yerma1 6 6 , at least in this
inztance, clearly showed that reduced and more reproducible ignition
Sdelays aczompanied those charges fired with the improved alignment.
The difficulties encountered in the design of an extremely low-
pressure reliable centercore ignition system lead to the following
conclusion: a breakthrough in design is clearly desirable. The cloth
barriers m~ust be eliminated. The geometry variabilities of bag charge
diameter, length, and relative chamber location must be reduced. A more
reproducible, predictable igniter material with superior ignition and
flamespread characteristics is clearly desirable. At the same time, all
of the design approaches previously discussed should be implemented to
minimize the effects of a malfunctioning centercore ignition train. A
more detailed discussion of implementing these conclusions has been
presented recently by Rocchio et al. 6 7 in the context of combustible
case artillery charges.

If As indicated before, a real problem exists in evaluating the safety

reliability of a propelling charge. Largely on the basis of an observed
sensitivity of peak chamber pressure to initial reverse pressure differ-
ence sensitivity curve developed by Clarke et al. 6 5 for a 155-mm howitzer,
a new failure rate estimation technique currently is being tested in
the U.S. Army. Essentially, it can be summarized as follows 8 :

66H. Hassma,.n and A. Yermal, "Controlled Ballistic Firing at Aberdeen

Proving Ground Relating to Malfunction Investigation of 155-mm Propelling
S• Charge, XM123E1, in 155-mm Towed Howitzer, XM198", Picatinny Arsenal,
Dover, N.J., July 1973.

J. Rocchio, C. R. Ruth, I. W. May and K. J. White, "A Consumable Case

for Artillery Systems", 1978 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Chemical
Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 293, February 1978.

Is
 1) Charge design sensitivity firings are conducted to determine
1the relationship between -APi and maximum chamber pressure for that
charge/temperature/weapon combination. Intentionally defeated centercore
charges may be included in this series to assure that data from a local-
ized-ignition/high-pressure-wave firing can be obtained with a reasonable
number of tests.
2) A failure criterion is identified, usually in terms of some
maximum permissible chamber pressure, dictated most often by breech or
payload failure levels.

3) This failure level is reinterpreted in terms of a -APi level,

determined from the sensitivity curve developed in step 1.

4) A firing data base then is obtained which is believed to be

representative of "real world" propelling charges, typical of those to
be fielded for use.

5) The probability of failure (as defined in step 3) then can be

determined statistically with res,,ect to the distribution of -APi values
from step 4.

Thus, a -APi failure level tailored to the sensitivity of the

particular system of interest is employed. Application of this procedure
can be described briefly with respect to the 175-mm, M107 Gun. The
relationship between -APi and maximum chamber pressure for M86A2 (Zone
3) Charges fired in the M107 Gun, based on charge design sensitivity
firings, is presented in Figure 27. A -APi failure criterion also can
be identified on this curve, corresponding to known breech failure
pressure levels. Figure 28 then presents the cumulative distribution of
-APi levels for a data base considered to represent a typical sample of
real-world changes. The probability of achieving the -APi failure level,
as determined using Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistics for two different
population distribution functions, is presented in Figure 29. Although
confidence levels associated with this statistical procedure are quite
low, the prediction of one failure in about half a million firings
compares quite favorably with historical data of half a dozen breechblows
in some two and one-half million firings to date. This agreement,
- - although satisfying, must be considered somewhat fortuitous.

V VI. CONCLUSION
The preceding sections have attempted to summarize the salient
features of pressure-wave phenomenology in guns. The progress in our
experimental and theoretical understanding of the physics of pressure
waves has indeed been satisfying. The two old, opposing attitudes of
"all pressure-waves are unacceptable" and "we haven't blown a gun yet
with this charge, so why should we worry" are being replaced slowly
with a more thorough understanding of the complex interactions of the
' .critical parameters, allowing a more reasoned analysis for each system
I51

-7t.
 800-

-BREECH FAILURE---

, 600
,n

a_

F 400

200.
0 100 200
-APi (MPa)

Figure 27. Pressure-Wave Sensitivity for the 175-mm, M107 Gun

(M86A2, Zone 3 Propelling Charge) 8

-API (MPa)
0 10 20 30 40

z
0 1.0-

i.: ' • ca~

- -O.8 -

" Fx• 0.48

S0.2
U

G 00 2-APi
4_ . (kpsi)4 6

Figure 28. Distribution of Pressure-Wave Amplitudes f r the 175-mm,

M107 Gun (M86A2, Zone 3 Propelling Charge)•

52
 |N

i0

-2. 3-P EBL

o -
0-4

1 /T
>_ EXPONENTIAL +-

"ca BREECH FAILURE

<-8
0

-12L I
0 40 80 120 160
-APi (MPo)

Figure 29. Probability of High-Amplitude Pressure-Waves for the

175-mm, M107 Gun (M86A2, Zone 3 Propelling Charge)8

under consideration. For new propelling charges, it is clearly desirable

to design for minimum pressure-wave tendencies. The design approaches
in Table 3 can be powerful tools for achieving that goal. When combined
with the knowledge of a given system peak pressure sensitivity to
pressure waves, a much clearer picture is obtained of how much care must
.= be exercised in the quest for minimum pressure waves. The problem of
st.ock excitation of projectiles accompanying charge motion induccd by
pressure waves still requires hard experimental data to assess the
"impact" on projectile safety. Designing for minimum pressure waves
will, of course, eliminate or at least reduce this factor and, hence,
should be the preferred course of action. With the advent of ever
more complex and sophisticated projectiles, this design philosophy
"should be adopted as the norm.

-I,

53
 TABLE 3. CONCEPTS FOR PRESSURE-WAVE REDUCTION4

1) Improved igniter design

Speed
Venting uniformity
2) Reduced initial gas generation rate
19- or 37-perforated grain geometry
Delayed ignition of grain perforations
IHigh exponent
Deterred burning rate
propellants
5) Increased bed permeability
Stick propellant
19- or 37-perforated -rain geometry
4) Reduced initial charg( motion :
Spacers
Full-length charges
Stick propellant

JI
j

54
 . , !,

REFERENCES

1. "Combuszion Instability in Solid Rocket Motors", Chemical Propulsion

Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 290, Nov. 1977.

2. 1. W. May, "The Role of Ignition and Combustion in Gun Propulsion:

A Survey of Developmental Efforts", Thirteenth JANNAF Combustion
Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Lau-el, MD., Publ.
281, September 1976.

3. P. G. Baer, "Practical Interior Ballistic Analysis of Guns", Interior

Ballistics of Guns, Ed. M. Summerfield and li. Krier, Progress in
Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. bb, 1979.

4. J. H. Wiegand, J. H1.Smith and A. IV. llorst, "Ignition Studies at

Indian Head", Proceeding of the 'lri-Service Gun Propellant Symposium,
Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, NJ, October 1972.

5. A. W. Horst, T. C. Smith, and S. E. Mitchell, "Experimental Evaluation

of Three Concepts for Reducing Pressur:e Wave Phenomena in Navy 5-
inch, 54-Caliber Guns: Summary of Firing Data:, Naval Ordnance
Station, Indian Head, MD. MR 76-258, August 1976.

6. W. G. Soper, "Ignition Waves in PYRO Propellant", Combustion and

Flame, Vol. 22(2), April 1974, pp. 273-276.

7. J. J. Rocchio, K. J. White, C. R. Ruth, and I. W. May, "Propc''ant

Grain Tailoring to Reduce Pressure Wave Generation in Guns",
12th JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency,
Laurel, MD, Publ. 273, D)ecember 1975.

8. A. W. Horst, I. W. May, and h. V. Clarke, Jr., "The Missing Link

Between Pressure Waves and Breechblows", Ballistic Research Lab.,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, M., ARBRL-MR-02849, July 1978. (AD #A058354)

9. K. K. Kuo, R. Vichnevetsky, and M. Suminerfield, "Generation of an

Accelerated Flame Front in a Porous Propellant", AIAA Paper 71-210,
New York, Jan. 1971.

10. P. S. Gough, "Numerical Analysis of a Two-Phase Flow with Explicit

Internal Boundarie3", Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD.,
CR 77-5, April 1977.

"11, E. B. Fisher and K. W. Graves, "Propellant Ignition and Combustion

in the 155-mm Howitzer", Calspan Corp., Buffalo, N.Y., VQ-5521-P-2,
Jan. 1975.
S12. K. K. Kuo, J. H!. Koo, T. R. Dav;is, and G. R. Coates, "Transient
Combustion in Mobile Gas Permeable Propellants", Acta Astronautica,

Vol. 3, 1976, pp. 573-591.

Ir -- 5
 i% S -

REFERENCES (continued)

13. II. Krier, "Predictions of Flamespreading and Pressure Wave Propaga-

tion in Propellant Beds", Ballistic Research Lab., Abeideen Proving
Ground, MD'., CR 275, November 1975. (AD ftBO0917OL)

14. A. W. IHorst, C. W. Nelson and I. W. May, "Flame Spreading in Granular

Propellant Beds: A Diagnostic Comparison of Theory to Experiment",
AIA:\ Paper 77-586, Orlando, Fla., July 1977.

iS. i. W. May and E. V. Clarke, Jr., "A Case History: Gun Ignition
Related Problems and Solutions for the XM-198 Howitzer", Ballistic
Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.. IMR 150, October 1973.

lb. A. J. Budka and J. D. Knapton, "Pressure Wave Generation in Gun

Systems: A Survey", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving
Ground, MD., MR 2567, December 1975. (AD #B008893L)

17. J. B. Goode and D. E. Weald, "Survey-Fluid Dynamic Aspects of the

Internal Ballistics of Guns", Advisory Group for Aerospace Research
and Development (NATO), AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 40,
September 1966, pp. 1-12.

18. J. Corner, Theory of the Interior Ballistics of Guns, Wiley, New

York, 1950.

19. F. R. W. Hunt and G. H. Hinds, Internal Ballistics, Philosophical

Library, New York, 1951, p. 80.

20. P. Vielle, quoted by.C. Cranz in Lehrbuch der Ballistik, Vol. II,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1926, p. 151.

21. R. H. Kent, "Study of Ignition of 155-mm Gun in Connection with

Project KW 250-Study of the Factors Involved in the Design of
Propelling Charges", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving
Ground, MD., MR 4, Febvuary 1935. (AD #493405)

22. R. H. Kent, "Study of Ignition of 155-mm Gun", Ballistic Research

Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R22, October 1935. (AD #494703)

23.R. H1.Kent, "Velocity Dispersion Obtained with Charles of Slender

Base Section in the 155-mm Gun G.P.F.," Ballistic Research Lab.,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R45, March 1936.

24. R. It.Kent, "Study of the Ignition and Veloci.ty Dispersion of FNH

I
' Powder in the 155-mm Gun G.P.F.," Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD., R91, December 1937. (AD #491768)
)i2S. S. E. Hleddon and G. A. Nance, "An Experimental Study of Pressure
Waves in Gun Chambers", Naval Proving Ground, Dahlgren, VA., R 1534,

April 1957.
56
 REFERENCES (continued)

26. N. Bauman and E'.Bird, "Ignition Problems in Separate-Loading

Ammunition", Joint Army-Navy-Air Force Second Symposium on Propellant
Ignition, Vol. II, Solid Propellant Information Agency, Silver
Spring, MD., October 1956.

27. L. Gowen and E. Elzufon, "A Reveiw of Igniter Studies and Their
Application to Igniter Design", Joint Army-Navy-Air Force Second
Symposium on Solid Propellants, Vol. II, Solid Propellant Information
Agency, Silver Spring, MD., October 1956.

28. N. Lockett, "British Work on Solid Propellant Ignition", Bulletin

of the First Symposium on Solid Propellant Ignition, Solid Propellant

f
LRecord
29.
Information Agency, Silver Spring, MD., September 1953.

"Ignition Study of Gun, 76-mm, T91", Aberdeen Proving Ground, Firing

P-52014, Project TA1l302. February 1952.

30. K. H. Russel and H. N, Goldstein, "Investigation and Screening of

I M17 Propellant Production for Lots Subject to Poor Low Temperature
Performance", Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, NJ., DB-TR-7-61, June 1961.

31. J. R. Lane, "Sub-Zero Firings in the 76-mm Gun", Ballistic Research

Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., MR 215, September 1943.
i (AD #493524)
32. T. G. Hughes, "Product Improvement Test of Charge, Propelling M86AI,
for 175-mm Gun, MIt3", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving
Ground, MD., DPS-2351, April 1967.

33. P. Gough, "Modeling of Two-Phase Flow in Guns", "Interior Ballistics

of Guns", Ed. M. Summerfield and H. Krier, Progress in Astronautics
and Aeronautics, Vol. 66, 1979.

34. H. Krier and M. J. Adams, "An Introduction to Gun Interior Ballistics

and a Simplified Ballistic Code", Progress in Astronautics and
Aeronautics, Vol. 66, 1979.

35. A. W. Horst and A. C. Haukland, "Gun Interior Ballistics: 1972

Annual Report", Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD., TR 386,
"April 1973.
J 36. P. C. V>st, "un the Performance of Primerb for Artillery Weapons",
Bal'istic Research Lab.. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R 852,
March 1953. (AD #13294)

.,7. T. C. Smith, "Development of Electric Primer Mark 48 Mods 3 and

4 for the S-inch, 38-Caliber Gun", Naval Ordnance Station, Indian
Head, MD., TR 396, February 1974.

57

'I
 i4

REFERENCES (continued)

38. J. L. Fast and D. R. McClure, "Experimental Studies of Ignition and

Combustion in Naval Guns", Twelfth JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical
Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 273, August 1975.

39. T. C. Smith, "Rapid Ignition of Granular Propellant Beds with a

'Hotline" Igniter", 1978 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Chemical Propul-
sion Information Agency, Laurel, MiD., Publ. 293, February 1978.

40. A. W. Htorst, "Navy Gun Interior Ballistics Modeling Efforts: An

Overview", 1973 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion
Information Agency, Laurel, MD.,, Publ. 242, September 1973.

41. E. V. Clarke and I. W. May, "Subtle Effects of Low Amplitude Pressure

Wave Dynamics on the Ballistic Performance of Guns", Eleventh
JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency,
Laurel, MD., Pub]. 261, September 1974.

42. E. Fisher, K. Graves and A. Trippe, "Application of a Flamespread

Model to Design Problems on the 155-mm Propelling Charge", Twelfth
JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency,
Laurel, MD., Publ. 273, December 1975.

43. B. L. Hicks, "Some Characteristics of the Practical Ignition of

Propellants", Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.,
MR 640, December 1952. (AD #3342)

44. A. W. Horst, "Influence of Propellant Burning Rate Representation

of Gun Environment Flamespread and Pressure Wave Predictions",
Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD., MR 76-255, March 1976.
45. I. W. May, C. W. Nelson, J. J. Rocchio and K. J. White, "The Role
of Ignition in Artillery Propulsion", Proceedings of the Third

International Symposium on Ballistics, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur

• Wehrtechnik, Karlsruhe, Germany, March 1977.

46. J. J. Rocchio, C. R. Ruth and I. W. May, "Grain Geometry Effects

on Wave Dynamics in Large Caliber Guns", Thirteenth JANNAF
Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel,
] MD., Publ. 281, December 1976.
47. D. E. Kooker and C. W. Nelson, "Numerical Solution of Three Solid
Propellant Combustion Models During a Gun Pressure Transient",
Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R 1953,
January 1977. (AD #A035250)

48. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Firing Record P-82415, March 1974.

58

-I'
 REFERENCES (continued)

49. T. C. Minor and J. DeLorenzo, "Charge Design Approaches to the

Reduction of Low Zone Stickers", 1976 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting,
Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 280,
December 1976.

50. A. W. llorst, T. C. Smith and S. E. Mitchell, "Key Design Parameters

in Controlling Gun Environment Pressure Wave Phenomena-Theory Versus
Experiment", Thirteenth JANNAF Combustion Meeting, Chemical Propulsion
Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 281, December 1976.

51. P. J. Olenick, "Investigation of the 76-mm/62 Caliber Mark 75 Gun

Mount Malfunction", Naval Surface Weapons Center, Dahlgren, VA.,
TR 3144, October i975.

52. 1., W. May and E. V. Clarke Jr., "The Reve-se Chamber Pressure
Gradient: A Tool for Assessing the Effects of Wave Dynamics on the
Ballistic Performance of Guns", Proceedings of the 2nd International
Symposium on Ballistics, American Defense preparedness Assoc.,
Daytona Beach, Fla., March 1976.

53. P. S. Gough, "The Influence of Annular Ullage and Bag Rupture on the
Ballistic Predictions of the NOVA Code", Paul Gough Associates, Inc.,
Portsmouth, N.J., TR 774-4, September 1977.

54. D. C. Vest, H. V. Clarke. .Jr., W. W. Shoemaker and W. F. Baker,

"On the Performance of Primers for Artillery Weapons", Ballistic
Research Lab,., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., R852, March 1953.
(AD #13294)
55. D. C. Vest, "A General Discussion of Extruded Igniter Compositions",
Ballistic Research Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, MR 894, June
1955. (AD #74459)

56. H. H. Hassmann, "Evaluation of Benite, An Extruded Form of Black

Powder in Separate Loaded Ammunition", Picatinny Arsenal, Dover,
', N.J. R 1, August 1958.

57. A. W. Horst and P. S. Gough, "Influence of Propellant Packaging and

Performance of Navy Case Gun Ammunition", Journal of Ballistics,
Vol. 1, March 1977, pp. 229-257.

58. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Firing Record P-82446, September 20, 1974.

59. IL, Schubert and D. Schmidt, "Embrittlement of Gun Powder", Proceedings

•. . of the International Symposium on Gun Propellants, Picatinny Arsenal,
"1 Dover, N.J., October 1973.

IL
 REFERENCES (continued)

60. 1).W. Culbertson, M. C. Shamblen and J. S. O'Brasky, "Investigation

of 5"/38 Gun In-Bore Ammunition Malfunctions", Naval Weapons Lab.,
l)ahlgren, VA., TR-2624, December 1971.

61. M. C. Shamblen and J. S. O'Brasky, "Investigation of 8"/55 Close

Aboard Malfunctions", Naval Weapons Lab., Dahlgren, VA., TR-2753,
April 1973.

62. W. G. Soper, "Ignition Waves in Gun Chambers", Combustion and Flame,

Vol. 20(2), April 1973, pp. 157-162.

63. K. J. White, C. F. Price, H. E. Homes and 1. W. May, "Black Powder

and Clean Burning Igniter Train Studies", Thirteenth JANNAF Combu3tion
Meeting, Chemical Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ.
281, December 1976.
64. L. Shulman, C. Lenchitz and L. Bot.ei, "Laboratory Studies to
Develop Reduced ignition Delays - the 15S-mm Howitzer", 1974 JANNAF
Propulsion Meeting, Chemical Prorulsion Information Agency, Laurol,
MD., Publ. 260, December 1974.

65. E. V. Clarke, I. W. May and J. R. Kelso, "Effects of Pressure Wave

Dynamics on the Ballistic Performance of Guns", Ballistic Research
Lab., Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD., IMR 311, November 1974.

66. H. Hassmann and A. Yermal, "Controlled Ballistic Firing at Aberdeen

Proving Ground Relating to Malfunction Investigation of 155-mm
Propelling Charge, XMl23EI. in i55-mm Towed Howitzer, XM198",
Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, N.J., July 1973.

67. J. Rocchio, C. R. Ruth, I. W. May and K. J. White, "A Consumable

Case for Artillery Systez,,s", 1978 JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Chemical
Propulsion Information Agency, Laurel, MD., Publ. 293, February 1978.

]0
.

4
 DISTRIBUTION LIST

No. of No. of
Copies Organization Copes Organization

12 Commander 1 Commander
Defense Technical Info Center US Army Armament Research
ATTN: DDC-DDA and '"evelopment Command
Cameron Station ATTN: DRDAR-SCA-T, L. Stiefel
Alexandria, VA 22314 Dover, NJ 07801

1 Director 1 Commander
Defense Advanced Research US Army Armament Materiel
Projects Agency Readiness Command
ATTN: E. F. Blase ATTN: DRSAR-LEP-L, Tech Lib
1400 Wilson Boulevard Rock Island, 11 61299
Arlington, VA 22209
1 Director
1 Director US Army ARRADCOM
Institute for Defense Analyses Benet Weapons Laboratory
ATTN: R. C. Oliver ATTN: DRDAR-LCB-TL
400 Army-Navy Drive Watervliet, NY 12189
Arlington, VA 22202
1 Commander
1 Commander US Army Watervliet Arsenal
US Army Materiel Develtment ATTN: SARWV-RD, R. Thierry
and Readiness Command Watervliet, NY 12189
ATTN: DRCDMD-ST
5001 Eisenhower Avenue 1 Commander
Alexandria, VA 22333 US Army Aviation Research
and Development Command
1 Commander ATTN: DRSAV-E
US Army Materiel Development P. 0. Box 209
and Readiness Command St. Louis, MO 63166
*, ATTN: DRCDE-DW, S.R. Matos
500i Eisenhower Avenue 1 Director
Alexandria, VA 22333 US Army Air Mobility Research
"and Development Laboratory
2 Commander Amczb Reszzroh Centcr
US Army Armament Research Moffett Field, CA 94035
and Development Command
ATTN: DRDAR-TSS 1 Commander
Dover, NJ 07801 US Army Communications Rsch
and Development Command
1 Commander ATTN: DRDCO-PPA-SA
US Army Armament Research Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703
and Development Command
ATTN: DRDAR- LCE
Dover, NJ 07801
I-

• ° 61

1'
 4 A7

DISTRIBUTION LIST

No. of No. of
Copies Organization Copies Organization

I Commander 1 Commander
US Army F-lctronics Research Naval Surface Weapons Center
and Development Command ATTN: Code 633, J.L. East
Technical Support Activity Dahigren, VA 22448
ATTN: DELSD-L
Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703 1 Commander
Naval Surface Weapons Center
2 Commander ATTN: G. B. Wilmot
US Army Missile Command Silver Sprirng, MD 20910
\T•\ DRSMI - R
DRSMI-TK, R.G. Rhoades 1 Commander
Redstone Arsenal, AL 35809 Naval Underwater Systems Ctr
Energy Conversion Dept.
1 Commander ATTN: Code 5B331, R.S. Lazar
US Army Missile Command Newport, RI 02840
ATTN : DRSMI-YD'L
Redstone Arsenal, AL 35809 1 Commander
Naval Weapons Center
1 Commander ATTN: Code 388, R.L. Derr
US Army Tank Automotive China Lake, CA 93555
Research & Development Cmd
ATTN- DRDTA-UL 1 Superintendent
Warren, MI 48090 Naval Postgraduate School
Dept of Mechanical Engineering
1 Director ATTN: A.E. Fuhs
US Army TRADOC Systems Monterey, CA 93940
Analysis Activit,
ATTN: ATAA-SL, Tech Lib 1 Commander
White Sands Missile Range Naval Ordnance Station
NM 88002 ATTN: P. L. Stang
Indian Head, MD 20640
I Chief of Naval Research
ATTN: Code 473, R.S. Miller 1 Program Manager, AFOSR
800 N. Quincy Street Directorate of Aerospace
Arlington, VA 22217 Sciences
ATTN: Dr. L. It. Caveny
1 Comwander Bolling AFB, DC 20332
Naval Sea Systems Command
ATTN: 62R2, J.W. Murrin 1 AFATL/DLDL (O.K. Heiney)
National Ctr, Bldg. 2, Rm 6E08 Eglin AFB, FL 32542
Washington, DC 20362

'I• 6
62
 DISTRIBUTION LIST

No. of No. of
Copies Organization Copies Organization

I Atlantic Research Corporation i Hercules, Inc.

ATTN: M. K. King Eglin Operations
5390 Cherokee Avenue AFATL/DLDL
Alexandria. VA 22314 ATTN: R.L. Simmons
1o
1 aEglin
AVCO Corporation AFB, FL 32542

AVCO Everett Rsch Lab Di, IITRI

ATTN: D Stickler ATTN: M.J. Klein
2385 Revere Beach Parkway 10 W. 35th Street
Everett, MA 02149 Chicago, IL 60615

1 Calspan Corporation 1 Olin Corporation

ATTN: L. B. Fisher Badger Army Ammunition Plant
P. 0. Box 400 ATTN: R.J. Thiede
Buffalo, NY 14221 Bababoo, WI 53913

1 Foster Miller Associates, Inc. 1 Olin Corporation

ATTN: A.J. Erickson Smokeless Powder Operations
135 Second Avenue ATTN: R.L. Cook
Waltham, MA 02154 P.O. Box 222
St. Marks, FL 32355
1 General Applied Sciences Labs
ATTN: J. Erdos 1 Pulsepower Systems, Inc.
Merrick & Stewart Avenues ATTN, L.C. Elmore
Westbury Long Island, NY 11590 815 American Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
1 General Electric Company
Armament Systems Dept. 1 Rockwell International Corp.
ATTN: M.J. Bulman, Rm. 1311 Rocketdyne Division
Lakeside Avenue ATTN: BA08, J.E. Flanagan
Burlington, VT 05402 6633 Canoga Avenue
Canoga Park, CA 91304
1 Hercules, Inc.
Allegany Ballistics Laboratory 1 Science Applications, Inc.
ATTN: R.B. Miller ATTN: R.B. Edelman, Suite 423
"P.O. Box 210 23146 Cumorah Crest
Cumberland, MD 21502 Woodland Hills, CA 91364

1 Hercules, Inc. 1 Thiokol Corporation

""BacchusWorks Wasatch Division
ATTN: K.P. McCarty ATTN: J.A. Peterson
P.O. Box 98 P.O. Box 524
Magna, UT 84044 Brigham City, UT 84302

63
 DISTRIBUTION LIST

No. of No. of
Copies Organization Copies Organization

1 Universal Propulsion Company 1 University of Southern

ATTN: H.J. McSpadden California
1800 1%. Deer Valley Rd. Mechanical Engineering Dept.
I'hocnix, A: 85027 ATTN: OHE200, M. Gerstein
Los Angeles, CA 90007
1 Brigham Young University
ATTN: M.W. Beckstead 1 University of California,
Provo, UT 84601 San Diego
AMES Dept.
1 California Institute of ATTN. F.A. Williams
Technology P.O. Box 109
Jet Propulsion Laboratory LaJolla, CA 92037
ATTN: L.D. Strand
4800 Oak Grove Drive University of Illinois
Pasadena, CA 91103 AAE Dept.
ATTN: H. Krier
1 Johns Hopkins University/APL Transportation Bldg. Rm. 105
Chemical Propulsion Infor- Urbana, IL 61801
mation Agency
.ATTN: T.W. Christian 1 University of Massachusetts
Johns Hopkins Road Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Laurel, MD 20810 ATTN:. K. Jakus
Amherst, MA 01002
1 Pennsylvania State University
ATTN: G.M. Faeth 1 University of Waterloo.
214 M.E. Building Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
University Park, PA 16802 ATTN: C.E. Hermance
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
1 Purdue University
School'of Mechanical Aberdeen Proving Ground
Engineering
ATTN: J.R. Osborn Dir, USAMSAA
TSPC Chaffee Hall ATTN: DRXS\ -1)
West Lafayette, IN 47906 D!XSY-.lP, II Cohen
Cdr, USATECOMl
1 Southwest Research Institute ATTN: DRSTIE-TO-F
Institute Scientists Dir, (ISACSL, Bldg. E3516
ATTN: W.11. McLain ATTN: DRDAR-CLB- PA
P.O. Drawer 28510
San Antonio, TX 78228

1 Universitv of California
Los Alamos Scientific Lab.
ATTN: T3, D. Butler
Los Alamos, NM 87554

AI
64