See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262329611

Interaction between projectile driving band and forcing cone of weapon barrel

Conference Paper · November 2011

CITATIONS READS

10 1,306

3 authors:

Jiri Balla Robert Jankovych

University of Defence Brno University of Technology
33 PUBLICATIONS   118 CITATIONS    33 PUBLICATIONS   59 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Van Yen Duong

University of Defence
12 PUBLICATIONS   242 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Research and Development of Mechatronic Fuzes for Artillery Projectile and Missiles. View project

Nonparametric Control Charts View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jiri Balla on 19 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Recent Researches in Mathematical Methods in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

Interaction between projectile driving band

and forcing cone of weapon barrel
JIRI BALLA, ROBERT JANKOVYCH and VAN YEN DUONG
Department of Weapon and Ammunition
University of Defense
Kounicova 65, 662 10 Brno
CZECH REPUBLIC
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract: - The paper deals with engraving process of the projectile into the barrel forcing cone in course of
ramming. Static model of interaction problem (contact problem) between the projectile driving band and
forcing cone are established and solved by using simulation software ANSYS Workbench ver.13.0 with Finite
Element Method. Research results as deformations and stress fields, and the reaction forces etc. are shown in
form of graphs and charts. Material model of the problem is performed with copper alloy (Cu)material,
containing 99.99% Cu. Calculations and simulations are performed on two types of weapons, self-propelled
howitzer 152 mm mod 77 (SPH 77) with high explosive projectile (HE), and 125 mm T72 tank cannon with
shaped charge penetration projectile (HEAT). Reaction forces of the interaction process have been verified by
experiments performing on two above-mentioned system of weapon. The calculation results are compatible
with the experimental results with reasonable deviations from 5% at SPH 77 and 7% at T72 tank cannon.
Research results are also background to upgrade the state of the art knowledge to the Czech Defense Standard
(COS) regarding to ramming device of artillery weapons and tank cannons.

Key-Words: - Driving band, Forcing cone, Loading simulation, Cartridge ramming, Contact problem,
Interaction problem, Finite element method, Projectile ramming

1 Introduction from the barrel is determined as one of the main

As it is known, combat efficiency of heavy guns, procedures. State of the projectile in the barrel at the
especially of self-propelled howitzers and tanks end of ramming is depicted in Fig. 1.
depend on many tactical and technical
characteristics. Two of them are the rapidity of fire
and the safety of projectile ramming in unstable
motion of combat vehicles on the battlefield. High FRam
rapidity of fire gives the self-propelled howitzers
and tanks abilities to increase chances to destroy
opposing forces weapons in the battlefield, see [1],
and [11].
After projectile feeding, see [2], the next 1 2 3 4 5
operation is projectile ramming. The ramming is the
Fig.1 Projectile position in the barrel after ramming
operation substantially limiting the rapidity of fire.
1- forcing cone; 2- driving band; 3- projectile; 4-
Very important factor is the safety of projectile
barrel; 5- guiding part; FRam - ramming force
ramming, when vehicles move in the battlefield with
high speed and in bad road conditions or the towed Firstly, the ramming force FRam ensures holding the
howitzer fires with the higher elevation angle. The projectile in the cartridge chamber when the driving
interface configuration between barrel and projectile band is engraved into the barrel forcing cone to
shall ensure that no projectile falls back out of its prevent fall back risk of the projectile from the
seating at any angle of elevation, see [3], [4]. To cartridge chamber. Secondly, ramming process
reduce the risk of fall back to a minimum, the creates deformation field between driving band and
quality of ramming device is established in course forcing cone to seal area between projectile and
of technical inspections according to the standard guiding part of barrel, to ensure that propellant
[7] where the force necessary to extract projectile gases do not overcome this space when firing.

ISBN: 978-1-61804-051-0 194

 Recent Researches in Mathematical Methods in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

Thirdly, accurate position of the projectile in d 2u  g du

cartridge chamber ensures to optimize movement of 2
  0; u (0)  0; 0. (1)
projectile in barrel when firing to decrease dx E dx x L

vibrations of projectile and the barrel wear.

However, the determination of ramming force is In order to solve the problem by using of the
very difficult by the standard calculation because it finite element method the Lagrange’s variation
is not only the complicated nonlinear plastic-elastic principle will be considered [8], and [9]. The
problem but it also depends on many factors whose principle is: between all of movement functions
identification is uneasy. The standard [7] deals with which conserve continuation of a body and satisfy
the determination of the force, which is necessary to its geometry boundary conditions so total potential
hold the projectile in the barrel after ramming. energy of the body is stationary value. It is possible
Nevertheless, this standard only defines the opposite to demonstrate that this total stationary energy exists
force determined in course of the projectile and is a minimal function. The principle is presented
extraction during technical inspections. as follows:
The force calculation by means of the simple   W  P  min, (2)
model was published in [6] but the results have not
been proved by measuring and not satisfy where
requirements in researching ramming process.  is total potential energy of the body (Lagrange’s
The ramming velocities at the end of the potential),
operation obtained from measuring in year 2009 P is tenseness energy of body,
achieved 0.77 m/s. The engraving force FENG is from W is potential of exterior load.
17 to 19 kN for 152 mm HE projectile according to Task of the finite element method is solved in [8]
the experiments published in [4], and [5]. whose roots u(x) is selected in form:
In the following section, we will simulate N
ramming process by using software ANSYS. u ( x)   ai w i ( x) ,
i 1

2 Overview of finite element method where the ai weight coefficients will be found so
they satisfy minimum conditions of expression (2),
Let us assume a static structural problem of plastic- which is also a function of u(x).
elastic theory consists of 15 unknowns, including Fig.2 presents principle of finite element method.
movements u, v, w , deformations  x ,  y ,  z ,  xy ,  yz ,  zx , The original geometry is divided on simple regions,
called “elements” which are connected continuously
stress of considered element in the model
by “nodes” which locate on the boundary between
 x ,  y ,  z , xy , yz , zx , see [8]. Let us consider the
elements. Using selected basic functions at nodes,
following simple problem in Fig. 2: for example, Ni(x) and Nj(x), will be established
1 u  unknown function, for example, deformation
1 u1 u
function u(x) at any element “e”.
1 2 x2,u2 u2
2 1
L 2 3 u2 Lp u3 Ni(x)
 ui i
L
g 2
u2 3 4 x3,u3 u2 u4 x
u4 3
x u2 ue(x)
x “e”
Fig.2 Scheme of simple problem
The beam in Fig.2 is loaded by individual mass uj j
Nj(x)
at the orientation of the beam axis. Its properties are
section S, length L, Young’s modulus E, beam Fig.3 Approximated root u(x) of any element “e”
material density  , and gravity acceleration g. Fig. 3 shows schema for establishing approx.
We get the simple equation from the equation root u(x) of any element “e”, basic functions can be
system of plastic-elastic theory applied on above selected so we have best approx. root with
problem and after expanding and considering the reasonable deviation. We receive function u(x)
boundary conditions: (deformation) of element “e” as follows:

ISBN: 978-1-61804-051-0 195

 Recent Researches in Mathematical Methods in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

u( x)e  Ni ( x)ui  N j ( x)u j . (3) copper alloy 99.99% Cu, see [9], [10], [11], [12],
and [13].
Similarly we can establish the approximated Finite element model (FEM- mesh) of the problem
deformation function for every element of the beam is shown in Fig. 4. In Fig. 4.a there is the model,
using of the basic function N (it also called shape especially meshing status of the model consisting of
function) and deformation u (unknown weighted the barrel, projectile, and driving band. Movement
coefficients) at nodes. After that the total orientation of the projectile is from the left to the
deformation of the beam is found as sum of the right when it is rammed and from right to left when
deformation functions of every element of the beam. the projectile is extracted from the barrels during
For example the deformations function of the beam technical inspections and tests see Fig.4.a, and
which consists of three elements: Fig.4b.

u ( x)  N11 ( x)u1  N 21 ( x)u2  N 22 ( x)u2  N32 ( x)u3

 N33 ( x)u3  N 43 ( x)u4 (4)
The total potential energy of any element “e” is
calculated as  e and the total potential energy of c
the beam is sum of all elements energy. Fig.4a FEM of SPH 77
  (u( x))    e (5) d

By substituting u(x) in (4) into (5) we get the

total potential energy as follows:
(u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 )  1 (u1 , u2 )   2 (u2 , u3 )
(6)
  3 (u3 , u4 ) Fig.4b FEM of T72
Function u(x) in (4) will be root of the problem 1
presented in (1) if it satisfies the minimal condition
of expression in (2). The minimal condition is 2
presented as follows:
3
(u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 )
 0; i  1, 2,3, 4 (7)
ui
By solving of the equation system (7) we get Fig.4c Detail of SPH 77 Fig.4d Detail of T72
roots which are deformation at every node, other Details in Fig.4c and Fig.4d are: 1 - forcing cone; 2
root such as deformation velocities, stress, reaction - driving band; 3 - projectile.
force etc. will be induced from this root.

4 Simulation results
3 Interaction between projectile The simulation results are presented onward. It is
driving band and forcing cone necessary to note that the calculations are made in
The geometry model of the interaction problem static model. The dynamics of the problem will be
between projectile driving band and forcing cone in follow next time.
form of 2D model has been worked out using of an Firstly, the equivalent stress (von Mises theory) for
axisymmetric type of element for barrel, projectile, both studied cases are depicted in Fig. 5a (SPH 77)
and driving band. This selection has advantages that and in Fig. 5b (T72).
number of elements and degrees of freedom will be The maximal equivalent stress during ramming and
small, and it is quite easy to solve this mathematical extraction processes are given in Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b.
model by personal computers. These stresses are calculated automatically by
Calculation of ramming process is performed for ANSYS software from the pressure fields of the
152 mm rifled barrel with HE projectile in SPH 77 contact among the projectile, its driving band and
and for 125 mm smooth bore barrel in T72 with the barrel forcing cone. In the engraving process of
HEAT projectile. Driving band has been assumed driving band into forcing cone, the stress field

ISBN: 978-1-61804-051-0 196

 Recent Researches in Mathematical Methods in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

changes continuously with time and the position 700

between driving band and forcing cone. 600

500

(MPa)
400

300

Eq

200

100

0
6 8 10 12 14 16
time (s)
Fig.6b Maximal equivalent stress in T72
system
The most deformed part of these three bodies is the
Fig.5a Equivalent stress in case of SPH 77 driving band. Its plastic deformations are
represented in Fig. 7a and Fig. 7b.

0.12

0.1

0.08
(mm)

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
18 20 22 24 26 28
time (s)

Fig.7a Equivalent plastic deformation of SPH 77

projectile driving band
Fig.5a Equivalent stress in case of T72 0.3
Due to the longer forcing cone with smaller angle
with respect to the barrel axis the stress is greater in 0.25
T72 barrel than in the SPH 77 barrel.
500 0.2
(mm)

400
0.15
 Eq (MPa)

300
0.1
200

0.05
100

0 0
15 20 25 30 6 8 10 12 14 16
time (s) time (s)

Fig.6a Maximal equivalent stress in SPH 77 system

Fig.7b Equivalent plastic deformation of 125 mm
projectile driving band

ISBN: 978-1-61804-051-0 197

 Recent Researches in Mathematical Methods in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

50

40
Driving E  Dx
band
material SPH 77 T72 SPH 77 T72
30 8 8 -4
Cu 4.8910 6.4210 1.2610 4.7210-4
force (kN)

20
Driving N E
10 band
material SPH 77 T72 T72 SPH 77
0 8 8
Cu 2.3110 4.1910 0.269 0.126

-10 Driving FRam FExt

band SPH 77 T72 SPH 77 T72
-20
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 material
time (s) Cu 42396 88159 17988 21730
Fig.8a Reaction force in SPH 77 barrel In the Table 1 there are the characteristics:
100  - density (kg.m-3); E - Young’s modulus (Pa),
 - Poisson’s ratio;  - Yield strength (Pa),
80
 - Tangent modulus (Pa); f - Friction coefficient,
60 D1 - Diameter of forcing cone end point (mm),
D2 - Diameter of driving band (mm),
 N ,  E - Max. normal and equivalent stress (Pa),
force (kN)

40

20  Dx - Max. directional deformation at x axis (m),

 E - Max. equivalent plastic strain (mm/mm),
0
FRam, FExt - Max. ramming and extraction force (N).
-20

-40
6 8 10 12 14 16
5 Evaluation and conclusion
time (s) Results of the ramming and extraction projectiles
problem from artillery barrels are very variable such
Fig.8b Reaction force in T72 barrel as are the equivalent stress field, directional stress
Reaction forces during of engraving and extracting field, the normal stress field, the directional
processes with copper alloy driving band are deformation field, the equivalent plastic strain of
presented in Fig. 8a and Fig. 8b. driving band, the reaction force of the ramming
Characteristics of projectile ramming process into process and the extracting process as well. These
the forcing cone and projectile extraction process results depend on input data remarkably, such as
from the forcing cone with different materials are dimensions of forcing cone and driving band,
presented in Table 1. The extraction forces have physical-mechanical characteristics of materials.
been calculated with deviations from 5% at SPH77 The calculations show that in case when
and 7% at T72 tank cannon, see [4], [5]. dimensions of forcing cone are minimal and
dimensions of the driving band are maximal the
Table 1 Characteristics of ramming and extracting ramming and extraction forces can reach to 81 kN.
processes SPH 77 barrel and 125 mm T72 barrel It is approximately 4.5 times bigger than in case
Driving when dimensions of the forcing cone and the driving
band  E    band belong to design tolerances in the technical
material drawings. With these cases, calculating results are
Cu 8940 1.121011 0.35 70106 1109 compatible with experiment results in [4], [5]. On
the other hand, ramming and extraction forces
Driving D1 D2 f depend on wearing degree of forcing cone diameter
band SPH T72 SPH T72 SPH T72 remarkably (at point between forcing cone and
material 77 77 77 leading part). Therefore the special measuring
Cu 155.6 125.2 155.9 128.6 0.04 0.1 arrangement has been designed, see Fig. 9.

ISBN: 978-1-61804-051-0 198

 Recent Researches in Mathematical Methods in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

[2] Balla J., Duong V. Y., Kinematic analysis of

howitzer feeding device, The Proceedings of
Recent Researches in Applied Mathematics,
Simulation and Modelling (ASM´11). Corfu
(Greece), July 2011, pp. 172 – 177, ISBN 978-
1-61804-016-9.
[3] Balla J., Twin motor drives in weapon systems,
WSEAS Transactions on Systems and Control,
vol. 5, Issue 9, pp. 755-765, Sept. 2010, ISSN:
1991-8763.
[4] Balla J., Duong V. Y., Jankovych. R.,
Fig.9 Measurement device of extraction force
Evaluation of 152 mm SPH M77 ramming
The example of the location on the weapon is device. In Proceedings from International
represented in Fig. 10. Conference on Military Technologies. Brno :
University of Defence, 2011, p. 1625-1634.
ISBN 978-80-7231-787-5.
[5] Balla J., Duong V. Y., Jankovych. R.,
Technical Inspection of 125 mm tank cannon
ramming device. The Proceedings from
International Conference on Military
Technologies. Brno : University of Defence,
2011, p. 1635-1644. ISBN 978-80-7231-787-5.
[6] Balla J., Kinematics and dynamics of ramming
devices, Advances in Military Technology,
2008, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 93-104. ISSN 1802-
2308.
[7] Large Calibre Ordnance/Munition
Compatibility, Design SafetyRequirements and
Safety and Suitability for Service Evaluation
Fig.9 Measurement device placed on the weapon COS 109002 Czech Defence Standard. Praha:
The measuring device enables to determine the MoD, 2005.
force/displacement and force/time history during [8] Zienkiewicz O, C., Taylor, R, L., The finite
extractions of the projectiles from the barrels. In the element method, Volume 1, Basic formulation
future, it will be necessary to measure some and linear problem. Singapore, MacGRAW-
characteristics of ramming and extracting process, HILL International Editions, 1989, 667 pages.
such as are ramming force, stress and deformation [9] Pullen, W, J., The use of nonmetalic material
of forcing cone and driving band. for projectile driving band. Research report.
London: Ministry of Aviation 1960, 31 pages.
Acknowledgment: [10] Cech, V., Kanak, J., Armaments of tank T72.
The work presented in this paper has been supported [Textbook]. Brno: Military academy in Brno,
by the research projects on University of 1984, 165 pages.
Defence, Brno, Czech Republic: POV [11] Ogorkiewitz, R., Technology of Tanks I, II. UK
“CANNON” 2011, Research project of Weapons Biddles Limited Guilford and King´s Lynn,
1991.
and ammunition department 2011, and Specific
[12] Peter, H., Armament Engineering a computer
research. aided approach. Trafford Publishing. Suite 6E.
2333 Government St, Victoria. B.C.V8T 4P4,
References: CANADA, ISBN 141200241-9, 282 pages.
[1] Balla J., Combat vehicle vibrations during fire [13] Textbook of Ballistics and Gunnery. Volume
in burst, Proceedings of the International One.Part I - Basic theory. Part II -
Conference on Mathematical Models for Applications and Design. London. Her
Engineering Science (MMES'10). Puerto De La Majesty’s Stationnary office, 1987.
Cruz (Spain), December 2010, pp. 207–212,
ISBN 978-960-474-252-3.

ISBN: 978-1-61804-051-0 199

View publication stats