2021
DOI: 10.1002/prep.202100154
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Modelling Approach for the Analysis of Underwater Explosive Performance Trials

Abstract: We present here a coupled experimental and numerical modelling study to compare the underwater performance of different explosive charge types in simple geometries with a view to having confidence in the use of these models in the design of more complex warheads. Numerical modelling is used to predict the shock and bubble performance of underwater detonated charges and is intended to be used for comparison of the performance of different charge compositions. Model predictions are compared to experimental data … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Eight voltage mode tourmaline pressure sensors type PCB 138A05 were placed at the same depth (D), respectively at 1 m, 1.50 m, 2 m and 2.5 m range (R) for 100 g charges and 2 m, 3 m and 4 m for 1 kg charges. According to recommendations in [22], pressure sensors were positioned at the depth of the centre of the charge and respectively outside the calculated maximum bubble radii of 0.75 m for a 100 g C4 explosive charge and 1.5 m for a 1 kg [23], considered as maximum dimensioning charges for the design of our experimental setup.…”
Section: Underwater Firingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eight voltage mode tourmaline pressure sensors type PCB 138A05 were placed at the same depth (D), respectively at 1 m, 1.50 m, 2 m and 2.5 m range (R) for 100 g charges and 2 m, 3 m and 4 m for 1 kg charges. According to recommendations in [22], pressure sensors were positioned at the depth of the centre of the charge and respectively outside the calculated maximum bubble radii of 0.75 m for a 100 g C4 explosive charge and 1.5 m for a 1 kg [23], considered as maximum dimensioning charges for the design of our experimental setup.…”
Section: Underwater Firingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As an engineering approximation, the JWL EOS above is used for the products of ideal detonation of aluminized charge. It is beyond the scope of this work to consider the non-ideal behavior [39,40]. Then, according to Eq.…”
Section: Motion Of Explosion Bubble Boundarymentioning
confidence: 99%