42nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit AIAA 2006-4955

9 - 12 July 2006, Sacramento, California

Numerical Simulation of Solid Propellant Combustion

in a Gun Chamber

Hiroaki Miura * and Akiko Matsuo †

Keio University, Yokohama, Kanagawa, 223-8522 JAPAN

The interior ballistics simulations in the single-stage gun and the AGARD gun are
carried out, using solid/gas two-phase fluid dynamics code of two-dimensional axisymmetric
calculation method. The calculation method is validated by the comparison of the results of
the simulations in the single-stage gun with the experimental data and by the comparison of
the calculations in the AGARD gun with the predicted data by the codes of some countries.
In the present study, the effects of the placement of the igniter, the bore resistance and the
projectile mass on the performance of the propulsion system are numerically investigated in
the AGARD gun. Shortened and condensed igniter causes the formation of large pressure
gradients in the propellant chamber at the ignition stage and strong negative pressure
difference. From the simulations varying the bore resistance to the projectile, it is shown
that there is the optimum value of bore resistance for bringing out the maximum
acceleration performance in the gun system. The relations of the projectile mass to the
projectile kinetic energy converted from the chemical energy of propellant and the
maximum pressure in the chamber are also examined.

Nomenclature
ΑBA = the area of the projectile base
b = covolume of gas
C = the mass of propellant
Cig = the mass of igniter
Cv = the specific heat at constant volume
Dp = the diameter of a cylindrical grain
e = total energy of gas
F = the impetus of propellant
fi = intergranular force
fs = interphase drag
h = thermal transfer coefficient
Lp = the length of a cylindrical grain
!
m˙ = the rate of mass decomposition of propellant
! m˙ ig = the rate of mass decomposition of igniter
Mp = the mass of a projectile
! np = the grain number density
p = pressure
! PBA = the projectile base pressure
PBR = the breech pressure
Pr = rupture pressure of diaphragm
Pres = bore resistance between the projectile and launch-tube
qe = the combustion heat of propellant
qig = the combustion heat of igniter
qp = heat transfer
R = gas constant

*
Graduate Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, AIAA student member.
†
Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, AIAA member.

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Copyright © 2006 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
 r = the linear burning rate
Sp = particle surface
t = time
tc = the time at the completion of propellant combustion
T0 = adiabatic flame temperature
Tg = temperature of gas phase
Tp = temperature of solid particle
u = gas phase velocity vector
up = solid phase velocity vector
Vp = particle volume
xp = the position vector of particle
!
Ypr = the mass fraction of propellant combustion gas
! Yig = the mass fraction of igniter combustion gas
Ya = the mass fraction of air
! z˙ p = the velocity of projectile base wall
α = volume fraction of gas phase or porosity
αp = volume fraction of solid phase
ε = internal energy of gas
!
ρ = gas density
ρp = solid propellant density

I. Introduction

S OLID propellant energy is used for propulsion systems such as the gun systems and the rocket motors. These
propulsion systems have remarkable capacity to accelerate the projectile or fuselage to supersonic velocity
rapidly. Since solid propellant combustion releases large amount of energy instantaneously, the conversion of this
energy into valuable power of propulsion with complete control is an important task in its design stage of the
propulsion systems.
The aim of promoting design of gun system is to make the projectile velocity at muzzle higher and the internal
pressure lower, as possible. Naturally, using large amount of solid propellant leads the projectile to reach high
muzzle velocity, but it may cause a risk of damage on the gun system by the pressure rise in the chamber. The
pressure in the chamber rises by propellant combustion while the pressure drops by the movement of the projectile.
This interaction between the propellant combustion and the projectile movement has to be estimated quantitatively
in the design stage.
Additionally, the igniting operation for propellant should be performed well, considering the pressure difference
between the breech and the projectile base. Because of the modern transformation of the projectile base from flat
form to complicated form and the extension of the base tail length, the length of primer that contains the igniter in
the propellant chamber tends to be shortened. The effects of this shortening on the interior ballistics events need to
be predicted in the design stage. Especially, there is a concern about the relation of this shortening to the negative
pressure difference, in which the projectile base pressure is higher than the breech pressure. In the desirable design
condition of gun systems, the pressure difference shows positive value throughout the shot (the breech pressure is
always higher than the base pressure). The appearance of the negative pressure differences indicates that undesirable
pressure waves propagate in the propellant chamber. In order to protect the chamber wall and the projectile base
from destructive pressure wave, the developmental mechanism of negative pressure difference should be found out
and the igniter system must be designed not to form the negative pressure difference in the firing process.
The interior ballistics events in gun system contain multiphase flow dynamics, chemical reaction, heat transfer
between the phases, the projectile kinetics and mechanics of materials. Therefore, the accurate prediction of the
interior ballistic events in the firing process and the performance of such propulsion systems are difficult. For this, it
is usable to apply numerical analysis based on interior ballistics to the prediction of performance and design of the
propulsion systems. The primary purpose of interior ballistics for gun system is to predict the muzzle velocity of the
projectile and pressure history in the system until the ejection of the projectile. It is important in the numerical
simulation based on interior ballistics to reproduce the interaction between propellant combustion in the chamber
and the projectile movement in order to predict the accelerator performance exactly. Recently, the simulations of
interior ballistics using CFD code have developed in many countries. The current interests are shifting on to the

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
simulation of multi-dimensional and multi-phase flow in order to analyze the complicated flow field in the chamber
of gun system.
The single-stage gun1 is a ballistic range which has been used to accelerate the projectile used for such
researches as analysis of supersonic flow, examination of ram-accelerator, simulation of space debris impact and
evaluation test of material strength. The single-stage gun utilizes solid propellant combustion energy to accelerate
the projectile. Its propulsion system is very similar to the gun system which has traditionally been used for firearms.
The AGARD (Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development) gun2 has been used as a standard test
case to aid the development of UK internal ballistics codes for many years3.
In this study, the interior ballistics simulations in the single-stage gun and the AGARD gun are carried out using
the two-dimensional axisymmetric two-phase fluid dynamics code. To reproduce the ignition process of solid
propellant accurately, the multi-components in the gas phase are considered in the code. The simulation results are
compared for validation with the experimental data for the single-stage gun and the results by the codes of some
countries for the AGARD gun. After that, the effects of design conditions in the gun system such as the igniter
length, the bore resistance to the projectile and the projectile mass on the firing performances are examined using the
code.

II. Computational setup

2.1 Governing equations and constitutive laws
It is assumed that there are gas phase and solid phase flows in the propellant chamber of the gun system. The
volume of solid phase decreases with propellant combustion, and the mass of the gas phase increases. The gas phase
is composed of propellant combustion gas, igniter combustion gas and air. The solid phase is composed of solid
propellant. In the computational domain, the given macroscopic volume is divided into the volume of gas and solid,
and the volume fraction for each phase is used in the Eulerian governing equations. Porosity α represents the
fraction of a unit macroscopic volume occupied by the gas phase. On the other hand, αp=1-α is the volume fraction
of the solid phase.
Gas phase is considered as compressible inviscid flow, and its governing equations contain the term of mass and
energy generation by the solid decomposition. The balance equations for mass, momentum, energy and masses of
components are given by,

"
(#$) + % & (#$u) = m˙ + m˙ ig (1)
"t
"
(#$u) + % & (#$uu) = '#%p ' f s + m˙ u p (2)
"t
" ' u %u *
(#e) +!$ % {# ( e + p) u} = &f s % u p + m˙ ) qe + p p , + m˙ ig qig & q p (3)
"t ( 2 +
! ' "
( ) (
) "t #$Y pr + % & #$Y pr u = m˙ )
)) "
! ( ) ( )
( #$Yig + % & #$Yig u = m˙ ig (4)
) "t
) " (#$Y ) + % & (#$Y u) = 0
)* "t a a

where ρ is the gas density, u is the gas phase velocity vector, p is the pressure and e is the total energy. The relation
between the mass fractions of three components in gas phase is given by Y pr + Yig + Ya = 1 in which subscript pr
!
stands for the propellant combustion gas, subscript ig stands for the igniter combustion gas and subscript a stands
for the air. The right hand side in Eq. (1) contains the rate of mass decomposition m˙ . The vector fs represents the
!
interphase drag and u p is the solid phase velocity vector in which! subscript p stands for the propellant. The right
hand side in Eq. (3) contains the combustion heat qe and qig, and the heat transfer term qp. !
The solid phase is considered as incompressible flow, and in its governing
! equation the solid propellants are
regarded to have constant density. The balance equation of the solid phase for momentum!is given by,
!

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 "
"t
( ) ( )
# p $ p u p + % & # p $ p u p u p = '# p %p ' f i + f s ' m˙ u p (5)

where ρp is the solid propellant density and f i represents the intergranular force. The right hand side in Eq. (5)
contains the terms which
! reflect the effects of right hand side terms in Eq. (2) of the gas phase.
The gas satisfies the covolume equation of state,
! RT
p= , " = CvT (6)
(1 " # b)
where p is the pressure, T is the temperature, ρ is the gas density, R is the gas constant, ε is the internal energy of gas
and Cv is the specific heat at constant volume. !
!
The volume of the solid phase decreases by propellant combustion. The rate of mass decomposition and the
linear burning rate on each grain surfaces are respectively given by,

Sp
m˙ = (1 " # ) $ p r, r = a " pn (7)
Vp

where Sp is the particle surface, Vp is the particle volume and p is the ambient pressure. The interphase drag in the
chamber is given in the following form4,5, !
!
1" #
fs =
D pe
( )
$ u " u p u " u p f sc (8)

The contained values in this formulation are given by,

! 2.17 " u # uP D pe
2.5" 0.5+ LP /DP
f sc = f , "=
0.081 s0 2
, Re =
Re µ
(1.5LP /DP ) 3
where Lp is the length of a cylindrical grain and Dp is its diameter. The interphase heat transfer is represented by,
! !
! Sp
q p = n p S p q = (1" # ) q (9)
Vp
q = h(Tg " Tp ) (10)

where h is the thermal transfer coefficient.

! Tg is the temperature of gas phase and Tp is the temperature of a solid
particle.
!
2.2 Two-dimensional axisymmetric calculation method
In 2D axisymmetric calculation method, the direction of flow is assumed to be restricted to the axial direction x
and the radial direction y. The governing system equation for gas and solid phase formed from Eqs. (1) to (5) is
given by,

"Q "E "F

+ + +H =S (11)
"t "x "y

where the conservative vector, the convective fluxes and the source terms are
!

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 $ "# ' $ "#u ' $ "#v '
& ) & 2 ) & )
& "#u ) &"#u + "p ) & "#vu )
& "#v ) & "#uv ) & "#v 2 + "p )
& ) & ) & )
& "e ) & " ( e + p) u ) & " ( e + p) v )
Q = & "#Y pr ), E = & "#Y pr u ), F = & "#Y pr v ),
& ) & ) & )
& "#Yig ) & "#Yig u ) & "#Yig v )
& "#Ya ) & "#Ya u ) & "#Ya v )
&" # u ) &" # u 2 ) &" # v u )
& p p p) & p p p ) & p p p p)
&%" p # p v p )( &%" p # p u p v p )( &% " p # p v p 2 )(
$ m˙ + m˙ ig '
& ) (12)
$ "#v ' & * f sx + mu p˙
)
& )
& "#uv )
& * f sy + m˙ v p )
2 & + . )
& "#v ) 2 2
&* f u * f v + m˙ - q + u p + v p 0 + m˙ q * q )
& ) & sx p sy p - e ig ig p)
& " ( e + p) v ) 2 0
1 & , / )
H = & "#Y pr v ), S = & m˙ )
y& )
& "# Y ig v )
& m ˙ ig
)
& )
& "#Ya v ) & 0 )
&" # u v ) 1p
& p p p p )
& * " p * f ix + f sx * m
˙ u p
)
2 & 1x )
&% " p # p v p )( & 1p )
*" p * f iy + f sy * m˙ v p
&% 1y )(

2.3 Solid propellant grain tracing method

In!the simulations, the distribution of solid propellant grain is represented by the volume fraction of solid phase
αp, which is determined from the distribution of representative particles6. These particles have the information of the
extent of burning progress, the volume of solid grains, their surface temperature and solid phase velocity. In the
calculations, the solid propellants are simulated by using representative particles, and they are traced using the solid
phase velocity in order to calculate the interphase properties such as the rate of mass decomposition and interphase
drag. The position of the particle is calculated by,

t
xp = " u dt + x
0
p p0 (13)

The field interphase properties are determined by mapping the interphase data of the representative particles and
porosity distribution onto the computational grid for the Eulerian flow solver, considering the assigned volume of
each particle varying with time according!to the extent of burning progress.

2.4 Calculation method

The discretization method of convection term is the simple high-resolution upwind scheme (SHUS)7. Third-order
space accuracy is obtained using monotonic upwind scheme for conservation laws for the primitive variable
interpolation. The time integral method is the 2-step Runge-Kutta method.
For the boundary condition, the chamber wall and the projectile base are assumed to be an adiabatic slip wall, in
which no passage of gas and heat through the space between the projectile and the launch-tube inner wall takes place.

2.5 Grid system for the expansion of computational domain

The computational domain is restricted between the breech and the projectile base. For expression of the
projectile moving forward in a launch-tube, the computational domain is expanded according to the movement of
the projectile base wall. The velocity of projectile base wall is equal to the projectile velocity calculated by,

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 t ABA
z˙ p = # 0 Mp
(PBA " Pres ) dt (14)

where ABA is the area of the flat projectile base, PBA is the projectile base pressure, Pres is the bore resistance and Mp
is the mass of the projectile.
! points is constant, and the computational grid spacing in the axial direction is
In this process, the number of grid
kept equal during the computation.

III. Numerical targets

At first, the simulations of acceleration process in the single-stage gun1 utilizing solid smokeless propellant are
carried out and the results of the calculation are compared with the experimental data for validation of the present
calculation code. For the second validation, the results of the calculation by the present calculation code in the
AGARD gun2,3 are compared with the results by the codes of some countries. After that, the effects of the design
parameters in the gun system on the firing performances are examined using the present calculation code.

3.1 Simulation of the single-stage gun shot

Figure 1 shows the schematic illustration of the single-stage gun used by Sasoh et al. In the calculation, the inner
configuration of the accelerator is assumed to be axisymmetric. Solid propellant is charged at the breech in the
accelerator. The launch-tube is evacuated to a pressure lower than 100 Pa before the shot. There is a diaphragm
between the breech and the projectile base. The diaphragm is ruptured at the determinate pressure. After ignition of
the propellant, the diaphragm is ruptured by the pressure rise in the chamber, and combustion gas flows to the
projectile base. Then, the projectile starts moving forward because of the pressure rise at the projectile base. The
breech pressure is measured at point p1 in Fig. 1. The primary input data for the simulation are listed in Table 1, and
the characteristics of solid propellant are listed in Table 2.
The calculation is started when the solid propellant at the breech is ignited, and the end of calculation is the time
when the projectile reaches the muzzle. For the initial condition, the temperature is uniformly 294K in the chamber.
The pressure between the breech and the diaphragm is 101 kPa, while the pressure between the diaphragm and the
projectile base is 100 Pa. The solid propellant is charged at the region x=0 mm (breech) to x=20 mm, and y=0 mm
(center axis) to y=17.5 mm in which the porosity is 0.513. The combustion gas of the black powder of 1.3 g flows
from the breech for 50 ms as the igniter in the simulation. Until the diaphragm rupture, the computational domain is
restricted between the breech and the diaphragm. After that, the domain immediately extends from the breech to the
projectile base, and gradually expands with the movement of the projectile. According to the experimental report1
says that the determinate rupture pressure of diaphragm Pr is 20 MPa and 10 MPa, and the scatter of the rupture
pressure is ± 15 %. The calculations are carried out for the cases of Pr =20 MPa and Pr=10 MPa. The diaphragm is
deleted from the chamber and the computational domain expands at 0.35 ms after reaching the determinate pressure
Pr in the calculation, considering the time-lag of the diaphragm rupture. Additionally, no resistant force at the
interface between the inner wall of launch-tube and the projectile is assumed. In the calculation, the number of the
computational grid points is 341x31, and that of the representative particles is 40x20.

Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the single-stage gun.

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Table 1. Input data for the single-stage gun. Table 2. Characteristics of solid propellant.
Term Data Term Data

Bore diameter (mm) 25 Adiabatic flame temperature T0 (K) 3020

Length of tube (mm) 2000 Impetus F (J/g) 1037
Projectile mass Mp (g) 16.2 Specific heat ratio γ 1.24
3
Propellant mass C (g) 15.0 Density ρp (kg/m ) 1600
Propellant type Single base (NY-500) Covolume b (cm3/kg) 1036
Propellant geometry Cylindrical one-hole Ignition temperature (K) 503
Size of grain (mm) φ0.83x1.80

Diameter of grain hole (mm) 0.14

3.2 Calculation of the AGARD gun

The configuration of the AGARD gun is shown in Fig. 2. The input data for the calculation is shown in Table 3.
The igniter position is set on the center axis of the chamber near the breech, as shown in Fig. 2. The igniting
operation by the primer that contains the igniter is expressed injecting the igniter mass uniformly throughout the
region x=0 mm (breech) to x=127 mm, and y=0 mm (center axis) to y=22 mm over a 10 ms time frame. For the
initial condition, the pressure is 101 kPa, the temperature is 294K and the initial porosity is 0.421 uniformly in the
propellant chamber. In the calculation, the number of the computational grid points is 382x34, and that of the
representative particles is 76x7.

Table 3. Input data for the AGARD gun3.

Term Data Term Data
Bore diameter (mm) 132 (constant) Propellant mass C (kg) 9.5255
Travel of projectile (mm) 4318 Propellant solid density ρp (kg/m3) 1578
Initial position of projectile from breech Cylindrical
762 Propellant geometry
(mm) 7-hole
Bore resistance Pres (MPa) 13.8 (constant) Size of propellant grain (mm) φ11.43x25.4
Diameter of propellant
Heat loss to the barrel is neglected 1.143
grain hole (mm)
Propellant burn rate cofficient
Projectile mass Mp (kg) – flat base 45.359 0.078385
a (cm/s/MPan)
Igniter mass Cig (kg) 0.2268 Propellant burn rate pressure index n 0.9
3 Propellant adiabatic flame temperature
Igniter density ρig (kg/m ) 1799 2585
T0 (K)
Igniter adiabatic flame temperature
1706 Propellant impetus F (J/g) 1009
T0ig (K)
Propellant covolume
Igniter impetus Fig (J/g) 392.6 1083.8
b (cm3/kg)
Igniter molecular weight (g/mol) 36.13 Propellant ignition temperature (K) 444
Propellant thermal conductivity
Igniter specific heat ratio 1.25 0.2218
(W/s/K)
Initial temperature of air and propellant
294 Propellant thermal diffusivity (mm2/s) 0.08677
in chamber (K)
Initial pressure atmospheric Propellant molecular weight (g/mol) 21.3
Molecular weight of ambient air
29 Propellant specific heat ratio 1.27
(g/mol)
Propellant intergranular
Specific heat ratio of ambient air 1.4 254
wave speed (m/s)
For 1D simulations the igniter mass is injected uniformly throughout the region x=0mm (breech) to x=127mm, and
y=0mm to y=66mm over a 10ms time frame.
For 2D simulations the igniter is vented uniformly throughout the region x=0mm (breech) to x=127mm, and y=0mm to
y=22mm over a 10ms time frame.

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Figure 2. Schematic illustration of the AGARD gun.

3.3 Examination of design conditions in the gun system

The simulations are carried out varying some conditions of the AGARD gun which is regarded as the standard
condition of the gun system design in this study, as following:

(1) The length of igniter form the breech in the axial direction is changed from the original length Lig=127 mm
keeping igniter mass constant to examine the effect of igniter placement, as shown in Fig. 3. The igniter mass is
injected over a 10 ms time frame. The cases for Lig=63.5, 127, 381, and 762 mm are simulated. At the case of
Lig=762 mm the length of igniter is same as that of the chamber in the initial condition.
In the real gun system, it is likely that the shortening of igniter tube length is carried out keeping igniter linear
density. Therefore, the length of igniter in the axial direction is changed from the original length Lig=127 mm at
constant igniter linear density. Therefore, the igniter masses are Cig=0.1134, 0.2268, 0.4536, 0.6804, 0.9072,
1.134, and 1.3608 kg in the cases of Lig=63.5, 127, 254, 381, 508, 635, and 762 mm respectively for the original
igniter density condition. The igniter mass is injected over a 10 ms time frame.

(2) The bore resistance Pres on the projectile, which corresponds to the start-up pressure for the projectile, is changed
from Pres=13.8 MPa to examine the effects of the projectile movement on the maximum pressure in the chamber
and the acceleration performance. The calculation is carried out at Pres=0, 13.8, 27.6, and 69.0 MPa (constant in
the launch-tube).

(3) The projectile mass is one of the valuable design parameter in the propulsion system. In the design of the gun
systems, it is desirable for the heavier projectile to be accelerated to higher velocity in the launch-tube by smaller
amount of the combustion energy. The effects of the projectile mass on the pressure profile and the acceleration
performance are examined using the model of the AGARD gun. The projectile mass is varied from Mp=4.54 kg
to Mp=90.72 kg as the original value Mp=45.36 kg.

Figure 3. The placement of igniter in the propellant chamber.

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 IV. Results and Discussions
4.1 Simulation of the single-stage gun shot
Figure 4a shows the time histories of pressure measured at p1 in the case of Pr=20 MPa by the calculation and
the experiment1, and the horizontal axis indicates the time since the pressure drop start. Figure 4b shows the
acceleration versus the travel distance of the projectile in the case of Pr=20 MPa by the calculation and the
experiment1.
The experimental profile in Fig. 4a shows that the breech pressure increases gradually in the early stage and rises
rapidly to 30 MPa just before the diaphragm rupture. The diaphragm is ruptured when the combustion gas is
compressed and has reached the determinate pressure. The pressure drop starts around t=0 ms, and the pressure
decreases to 23 MPa, as shown in Fig. 4a. Then, the pressure rise starts again around t=0.2 ms and reaches up to 33
MPa. Since the projectile starts moving forward in the launch-tube after the diaphragm rupture, the breech pressure
decreases with time. In the experiment in Fig. 4b, the acceleration of the projectile decreases gradually with the
forward movement of the projectile and has small oscillations throughout the travel distance of the projectile in the
launch-tube.
As shown in Fig. 4a, the first pressure peak and its approaching profile are reproduced well in the calculation.
The pressure decrease after the second pressure peak is in good agreement with the experiment, but there is a
difference in the value of the second pressure peak between them. This is because the diaphragm is instantaneously
deleted from the chamber after reaching the determinate rupture pressure in the calculation whereas the diaphragm
takes finite-time to blow up in the experiment. This causes sudden chamber volume increase and stronger expansion
wave generation in the calculation, diminishing the propellant combustion. Figure 5 shows the time history of the
pressure distribution on the center axis in the chamber at Pr=20 MPa by the x-t diagram of the pressure contour plots.
The horizontal axis indicates the distance from the breech and the vertical axis indicates the time since the pressure
drop start. After the diaphragm rupture expansion waves propagate toward the breech and generated shock wave
propagates toward the projectile base. The arrival of the expansion waves at the breech causes the breech pressure
drop at t=0 ms, as shown in Fig. 4a. In Fig. 4b, the calculated acceleration profiles are close to that of the experiment
throughout the simulations. The calculated accelerations in the early stage take higher value than that of the
experiment because the stronger shock wave is generated at the time of diaphragm rupture, propagates through the
chamber and impacts the projectile base in the calculation. As for the muzzle velocity of the projectile, the result of
the simulation is closest to the experimental data.
Figure 6 shows the acceleration versus the travel distance of the projectile in case of Pr=10 MPa. The
acceleration and the muzzle velocity of the projectile are also in good agreement with those of the experiment.

Calculation 8
30 Calculation
Experiment
V = 939 m/s
2

0
Acceleration, 10 m/s
Pressure at p1, MPa

6 Experiment
5

20 V = 971 m/s
0

10
2

0 0
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Time since pressure drop, ms Travel distance of the projectile, m
(a) (b)

Figure 4. (a) The breech pressure history in the single-stage gun at Pr=20 MPa by the calculation
and the experiment1. (b) The acceleration versus the travel distance of the projectile at Pr=20
MPa. The muzzle velocity V0 is 939 m/s in calculation and 971 m/s in the experiment1.

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 4
0.8
Calculation
Time since pressure drop, ms

0.6 V = 663 m/s

3 0

2
Acceleration, 10 m/s
Experiment
0.4 V = 635 m/s

5
0
2
0.2 The locus of
the projectile base
0.0
1
-0.2 p (MPa)
0 30
0
0.1 0.2 0.0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0
1.0 1.5 2.0
Distance from the breech, m Travel distance of the projectile, m
Figure 5. The x-t diagram of pressure Figure 6. The acceleration versus the travel
distribution on the center axis in the single-stage distance of the projectile in the single-stage
gun at Pr=20 MPa. The vertical axis indicates the gun at Pr=10 MPa. The muzzle velocity V0 is
time since the pressure at p1 drop start. 663 m/s in calculation and 635 m/s in the
experiment1.

4.2 Calculation of the AGARD gun

Figures 7 show the time history of (a) gas temperature, (b) pressure and (c) porosity distribution on the center
axis by the x-t diagram of the contour plots. After the ignition start, combustion wave propagates in the chamber
from the breech to the projectile base, as shown in Fig. 7a. Pressure in the chamber increases by propellant
combustion and then the projectile starts moving forward in the launch-tube around t=4 ms as shown in Fig. 7b. The
temperature and pressure decrease gradually with the forward movement of the projectile. As for the solid phase, its
volume concentrates at the projectile base around t=3 ms because the solid phase is induced by combustion gas flow
to move forward, and the volume decreases gradually with time by the solid propellant combustion as shown in Fig.
7c.
Figure 8 shows the histories of (a) the breech pressure and (b) the pressure difference (breech pressure – base
pressure) in the interior ballistics simulations of the AGARD gun. There are the calculated profiles by the present
code and the codes of some countries. The codes contain IBHVG2 (0D, USA), XKTC (1D, USA), CTA1 (1D, UK)
and MOBIDIC-NG 1D/2D (France). The breech pressure profile of the present code is in good agreement with those
codes, as for the value of maximum breech pressure and the time at its peak. As for the pressure difference, the first
positive peak and the following negative peak appear in the present code, as well as those codes except for the 0D
code. Table 4 shows the maximum breech and base pressures, and the muzzle velocities of the projectile by the
present code and the compared codes. All codes predict the similar values of the muzzle velocity.
From the above, it is concluded that the interior ballistics code in this study has an ability to predict the pressure
history in the gun chamber and the projectile velocity at muzzle as well as the codes of those countries.

Table 4. Predicted results of performances for the AGARD gun.

Max breech pressure Max base pressure Muzzle velocity
Code
(MPa) (MPa) (m/s)
Present code 413 374 689
IBHVG2 (0D) 395 358 689
XKTC (1D) 357 330 695
CTA1 (1D) 373 343 681
Mobidic-NG 1D 355 325 685
Mobidic-NG 2D 360 328 687

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 14
12
10
Time, ms

8
6 The locus of The locus of The locus of
the projectile base the projectile base the projectile base
4
2 Tg (K) p (MPa) α
294 3000 0.1 413 0.3 1.0
0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 5
Distance from breech, m
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 7. The x-t diagram of (a) gas temperature, (b) pressure and (c) porosity distributions on the center
axis in the AGARD gun.
IBHVG2 (0D)
IBHVG2 (0D)
XKTC (1D)
XKTC (1D)
CTA1 (1D)
CTA1 (1D)
Mobidic-NG 1D Mobidic-NG 1D
Present code Mobidic-NG 2D
Present code Mobidic-NG 2D
100
400 80
Pressure difference, MPa

60
Breech pressure, MPa

300 40
20
200
0
-20
100
-40
0 -60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time, ms Time, ms
(a) (b)

Figure 8. The histories of (a) the breech pressure and (b) the pressure difference in the AGARD gun by the
present code and the codes of some countries3.

4.3 Examination of design conditions in gun system

4.3.1 Effects of the length of igniter tube
Figure 9 shows the histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure, (c) the pressure difference (breech
pressure – base pressure) and (d) the projectile velocity for the length of igniter (shown in Fig. 3) varying at constant
igniter mass Cig=0.2268 kg. The maximum breech pressures, the maximum base pressures and the muzzle velocities
of the projectile are almost equivalent between the different lengths of igniter, from Figs. 9a, 9b and 9d. However,
the vibration amplitude of the pressure difference gets larger with the shortening of the length of the igniter, as
shown in Fig. 9c. In the longest igniter case Lig=762 mm, the pressure difference has no negative part. On the other
hand, in the shortest igniter case Lig=63.5 mm, the pressure difference has large absolute value in negative part at the
early stage. The occurrence of negative pressure difference means that the base pressure becomes higher than the
breech pressure at the time. Figures 10, 11 and 12 show the distributions of (a) pressure and (b) porosity on the

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
center axis for the case of Lig=63.5, 127, 762 mm respectively. Pressure in the chamber of Lig=762 mm increases
uniformly with time in Fig. 10a, and the porosity distribution is also uniform in Fig. 10b. It is observed in Figs. 11a
and 12a that the high pressure part is generated by the ignition and moves through the propellant chamber, and then
the pressure gradient, which makes the base pressure higher than the breech pressure, is generated around t=3 ms.
The position of this high pressure part corresponds with that of the concentration part of the solid phase volume
(small porosity part), as shown in Figs. 11b and 12b. The reason for the formation of higher base pressure is the
compression of gas by the solid phase volume moving toward the projectile base and the production of large
combustion energy at the projectile base by the concentration of the solid phase volume.
Figure 13 shows the histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure, (c) the pressure difference and (d)
the projectile velocity for the length of igniter varying at constant igniter density. This density is set to be the
original value of igniter density at Cig=0.2268 kg in φ44 mm x 127 mm of the igniter. The larger amount of igniter
mass causes the higher breech and base pressures and muzzle velocities of the projectile as shown in Figs. 13a, 13b
and 13d. In the case Lig=762 mm there is no large absolute value of the negative pressure difference in Fig. 13c,
since the ignition for the propellant is performed uniformly in the axial direction of the chamber. The absolute value
of the negative pressure difference is largest in the case Lig=381 mm, but the minimum pressure difference is
suppressed in the cases of shorter and longer igniter. Fig. 14 shows the minimum pressure difference versus the
igniter length at constant igniter density picked out from Fig. 13c. The minimum pressure difference has minimum
value around Lig=300 mm. This is because when the igniter is around this length, larger pressure gradients are
formed in the ignition stage and the movement of fluid and solid propellant toward the projectile base is promoted.
From the comparison between Figs. 9c and 13c, it is noted that the time when the first positive and negative peaks of
pressure difference appear is depends on the igniter mass.
Figure 15 represents the relation between the igniter mass and the minimum pressure difference for each length
of igniter. The shorter igniter causes larger absolute value of the negative pressure difference at a certain igniter
mass, because the higher pressure part is formed nonuniformly by higher igniter density. Figure 16 represents the

400 400
Breech pressure, MPa

Base pressure, MPa

300 300

200 200
Lig=762 mm Lig=762 mm
Lig=381 mm Lig=381 mm
100 100
Lig=127 mm Lig=127 mm
Lig=63.5 mm Lig=63.5 mm
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(a) (b)
100
700
80
600
Pressure difference, MPa

Projectile velocity, m/s

60
500
40
20 400

0 Lig=762 mm 300 Lig=762 mm

Lig=381 mm 200 Lig=381 mm
-20
Lig=127 mm Lig=127 mm
-40 100 Lig=63.5 mm
Lig=63.5 mm
-60 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(c) (d)

Figure 9. The time histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure, (c) the pressure difference
(breech pressure – base pressure) and (d) the projectile velocity for the length of igniter varying at constant
igniter mass Cig=0.2268 kg.

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Igniter (762 mm) Igniter (762 mm)
100 1.0
t=4 ms
t=3 ms
80 t=2 ms
t=1 ms 0.8 t=4 ms
t=0 ms t=3 ms
Pressure, MPa

60
t=2 ms

Porosity
0.6
t=1 ms
40
t=0 ms
0.4
20

0 0.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Distance from breech, m Distance from breech, m
(a) (b)

Figure 10. The distributions of (a) pressure and (b) porosity on the center axis in the chamber at each time
for the case of Lig=762 mm at Cig=0.2268 kg.
Igniter (127 mm) Igniter (127 mm)
100 1.0
t=4 ms
80 t=3 ms
t=4 ms 0.8
t=2 ms
t=3 ms
Pressure, MPa

60 t=1 ms
t=2 ms
Porosity

t=0 ms
t=1 ms 0.6
40 t=0 ms

0.4
20

0 0.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Distance from breech, m Distance from breech, m
(a) (b)

Figure 11. The distributions of (a) pressure and (b) porosity on the center axis in the chamber at each time
for the case of Lig=127 mm at Cig=0.2268 kg.
Igniter (63.5 mm) Igniter (63.5 mm)
100 1.0
t=4 ms
80 t=4 ms t=3 ms
t=3 ms 0.8
t=2 ms
t=2 ms
Pressure, MPa

60 t=1 ms
t=1 ms
Porosity

t=0 ms
t=0 ms 0.6
40

0.4
20

0 0.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Distance from breech, m Distance from breech, m
(a) (b)

Figure 12. The distributions of (a) pressure and (b) porosity on the center axis in the chamber at each time
for the case of Lig=63.5 mm at Cig=0.2268 kg.
13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
relation between the ratio of igniter density to the original igniter density and the minimum pressure difference for
each length of the igniter. The igniter length for the largest absolute value of the negative pressure difference at a
certain igniter density is not simply decided by the igniter mass. As mentioned above, the formation of large
pressure gradients in the chamber by the localization of igniter energy causes solid propellant movement and then
the concentration of the solid phase volume at the projectile base. As a result, the combustion energy is concentrated
and high pressure part is formed there. Therefore, both the amount of igniter energy and its distribution decide the
magnitude of the negative pressure difference. This is the reason for the appearance of the strongest negative

500 Lig=762 mm 500 Lig=762 mm

Lig=635 mm Lig=635 mm
Lig=508 mm
Breech pressure, MPa

Lig=508 mm

Base pressure, MPa

400 Lig=381 mm
400
Lig=381 mm
Lig=127 mm Lig=127 mm
300 Lig=63.5 mm 300 Lig=63.5 mm

200 200

100 100

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(a) (b)
100
700
80
600
Pressure difference, MPa

Projectile velocity, m/s

60
500
40
20 400
Lig=762 mm Lig=762 mm
0 300 Lig=635 mm
Lig=635 mm
Lig=508 mm 200 Lig=508 mm
-20 Lig=381 mm
Lig=381 mm
-40 Lig=127 mm 100 Lig=127 mm
Lig=63.5 mm Lig=63.5 mm
-60 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(c) (d)

Figure 13. The time histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure, (c) the pressure difference
(breech pressure – base pressure) and (d) the projectile velocity for the length of igniter varying at constant
igniter density, which is set to be the original value of igniter density at Cig=0.2268 kg in φ 44x127 of igniter.
0
Minimum pressure difference, MPa

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25
0
300 400 500 600 700 100 200
Igniter length, mm
Figure 14. The minimum pressure difference versus the igniter
length at constant igniter density, which is set to be the original
value of igniter density at Cig=0.2268 kg in φ 44x127 of igniter.
14
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 0 0
Minimum pressure difference, MPa

Minimum pressure difference, MPa

-10 -10
-20 -20
-30 -30
-40 -40
-50 Lig=635 mm Lig=635 mm
Lig=508 mm -50
Lig=508 mm
-60 Lig=381 mm -60 Lig=381 mm
Lig=127 mm Lig=127 mm
-70 Lig=63.5 mm -70 Lig=63.5 mm
-80 -80
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 1 2 3 4
Igniter mass, kg Igniter density ratio
Figure 15. The relation between the igniter mass Figure 16. The relation between the igniter
and the minimum pressure difference for the length density ratio to the original igniter density and the
of igniter. minimum pressure difference for the length of
igniter tube. The original igniter density is obtained
at Cig=0.2268 kg in φ 44x127 of igniter.

600 200
Lig=127 mm, Cig=0.6804 kg Lig=127 mm, Cig=0.6804 kg
500 Brech Base 150 Lig=127 mm, Cig=0.2268 kg
Pressure difference, MPa

Lig=127 mm, Cig=0.2268 kg

Brech Base
Pressure, MPa

400 100

300 50

200 0

100 -50

0 -100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(a) (b)
Igniter (127 mm) Igniter (127 mm)
240 1.0
t=4 ms
t=3 ms t=4 ms
200
t=2 ms t=3 ms
0.8 t=2 ms
160 t=1 ms
t=1 ms
Pressure, MPa

t=0 ms
t=0 ms
Porosity

120 0.6

80
0.4
40

0 0.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Distance from breech, m Distance from breech, m
(c) (d)

Figure 17. The time histories of (a) the breech and base pressure, (b) the pressure difference (breech
pressure – base pressure), and the distributions of (c) pressure and (d) porosity on the center axis for the case
of Lig=127 mm and Cig=0.6804 kg. The results of the original case (Lig=127 mm and Cig=0.2268 kg) are
represented in the figures (a) and (b).

15
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
pressure difference after the ignition at the middle-range length of the igniter.
The smallest minimum pressure difference in Figs. 15 and 16 is the case of Lig=127 mm and Cig=0.6804 kg.
Figure 17 shows the time histories of (a) the breech and base pressure, (b) the pressure difference (breech pressure –
base pressure), and the distributions of (c) pressure and (d) porosity on the center axis for the case of Lig=127 mm
and Cig=0.6804 kg. The breech and base pressures increase with large vibrations in the early stage in Fig. 17a, and as
a result the pressure difference has thumping vibrations in Fig. 17b. The distributions of pressure and porosity in the
chamber shown in Figs. 17c and 17d represent much larger pressure gradients and concentration of the solid phase
volume around the projectile base compared to Figs. 11a and 11b. It can be described that this igniter condition is
dangerous and undesirable for the system safety because the breech pressure projections shown in Fig. 17a are
formed around t=6 ms by the generated pressure waves.

4.3.2 Effects of the bore resistance to the projectile

The original bore resistance to the projectile is Pres=13.8 MPa constantly in the launch-tube of the AGARD gun.
Figure 18 shows the time histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure, (c) the projectile velocity, and
(d) the acceleration versus the travel distance of projectile for the bore resistance varying Pres=0, 13.8, 27.6, and 69.0
MPa (constant in the launch-tube). The larger bore resistance makes the forward movement of the projectile
suppressed and the increase rate of the chamber volume lower in the early stage, as shown in Fig. 18c. Therefore, as
shown in Figs. 18a and 18b the maximum breech and base pressures get higher with larger bore resistance since the
lower increase rate of the chamber volume causes the limiting on the pressure drop and encourages the propellant
combustion. As a result, the higher acceleration of the projectile is achieved with larger bore resistance in the early
stage in Fig. 18d. On the other hand, in the latter stage, the acceleration decreases by the large bore resistance in the
largest bore resistance case of Pres=69.0 MPa. As shown in Fig. 18c, the muzzle velocity of the projectile at

700 700
Pres=69.0 MPa Pres=69.0 MPa
600 600
Pres=27.6 MPa Pres=27.6 MPa
Base pressure, MPa
Breech pressure, MPa

500 Pres=13.8 MPa 500 Pres=13.8 MPa

Pres= 0 MPa Pres= 0 MPa
400 400

300 300

200 200

100 100

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(a) (b)
700 16 Pres=69.0 MPa
2
Projectile acceleration, 10 m/s

600 Pres=27.6 MPa

4
Projectile velocity, m/s

12 Pres=13.8 MPa
500
Pres= 0 MPa
400
8
300
Pres=69.0 MPa
200 Pres=27.6 MPa 4
100 Pres=13.8 MPa
Pres= 0 MPa
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 1 2 3 4
Time, ms Travel distance, m
(c) (d)

Figure 18. The time histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure and (c) the projectile
velocity, and (d) the acceleration versus the travel distance of the projectile for the bore resistance to the
projectile varying Pres=0, 13.8, 27.6, and 69.0 MPa (constant in the launch-tube).

16
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Pres=69.0 MPa is almost equivalent to those of Pres=13.8 and 27.6 MPa cases in spite of the much higher pressure in
the chamber. It can be concluded that there is the optimum value of bore resistance for bringing out the maximum
acceleration performance. Although the increase of the projectile acceleration by the pressure rise in the chamber
can be possible by setting the bore resistance high, it should be considered in the design stage that the pressure could
exceed the maximum permissible pressure for the accelerator system in the condition of high bore resistance to the
projectile.

4.3.3 Performance dependency on the projectile mass

The projectile mass is an important design condition as it is considered as the payload for the propulsion system.
The chamber volume increase by the forward movement of the projectile causes the pressure decrease. On the other
hand, the propellant combustion causes the pressure increase. At the same time, the projectile movement and the
propellant combustion speed depend on the pressure in the chamber. Therefore, the change of the projectile mass
causes the change of the projectile movement and then affects this balance. From the above reasons, although it is
not easy to predict the effects of the projectile mass on the acceleration performance, the projectile mass variation is
an important factor that can change the system performance.
Figure 19 shows the histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure, (c) the projectile velocity and (d)
the acceleration versus the travel distance of the projectile for the varying projectile masses. Both breech and base
pressures increase with the increase of the projectile mass in Figs. 19a and 19b, because the forward movement of
the heavier projectile delays at the start of forward movement as shown in Fig. 19c and then the speed of the
propellant combustion is accelerated by the higher pressure in the chamber. It is noted from Fig. 19d that the
projectile acceleration is almost equivalent in spite of the projectile mass although the base pressure vary largely
with the projectile mass. As a result, the muzzle velocity of the projectile does not vary largely within these cases.
This means that the deceleration of the projectile by the increase of the projectile mass is compensated with the
acceleration by the increase of the base pressure or the promotion of propellant combustion.

700 700
Mp=68.04 kg Mp=68.04 kg
600 600
Mp=45.36 kg Mp=45.36 kg
Base pressure, MPa
Breech pressure, MPa

500 Mp=22.68 kg 500 Mp=22.68 kg

Mp= 9.07 kg Mp= 9.07 kg
400 400

300 300

200 200

100 100

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time, ms Time, ms
(a) (b)
700
2
Projectile acceleration, 10 m/s

Mp=68.04 kg 12 Mp=68.04 kg
600
Mp=45.36 kg Mp=45.36 kg
4
Projectile velocity, m/s

500 Mp=22.68 kg Mp=22.68 kg

400 Mp= 9.07 kg 8 Mp= 9.07 kg

300
200 4

100
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 1 2 3 4
Time, ms Travel distance, m
(c) (d)

Figure 19. The time histories of (a) the breech pressure, (b) the base pressure and (c) the projectile
velocity, and (d) the acceleration versus the travel distance of the projectile for the varying projectile masses.
17
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 The study of interaction between released combustion energy and converted work energy is useful for the design
of the projectile accelerator. Figure 20 shows the relation between the projectile mass and the energy converted from
the chemical energy of propellant and igniter into the fluid internal and kinetic energies in the chamber and the
projectile kinetic energy at the ejection of the projectile. The time at the completion of propellant combustion tc is
also represented for each projectile mass. The total chemical energy in Fig. 20 corresponds to the energy released
completely from propellant and igniter in the chamber. The projectile mass is 45.36 kg at the originally designed
case. In the cases with small projectile mass, the energy released in propellant combustion is smaller than the
originally designed case and the amount of unused propellant is too large. The propellant combustion has been
completed when the projectile mass is lager than or equal to the original projectile mass. As projectile mass gets
larger, the energy released in propellant combustion in the system increases as shown in Fig. 20 and the projectile
kinetic energy increases as shown in Fig. 21, but the muzzle velocity of the projectile decreases as shown in Fig. 22.
Therefore, in order to convert the more chemical energy of the propellant into the kinetic energy of the projectile or
external work, a heavy weight projectile is required so that the time between the ignition and the projectile arrival at
the muzzle is longer than the burning time of the propellant. However, heavier projectile makes the maximum
breech pressure higher and diverging as shown in Fig. 21 and then can cause risk of damage on the chamber wall
and repercussion to the accelerator systems. From the above reason, the projectile mass should be decided in the
design stage considering the maximum permissible pressure for the accelerator and required acceleration ability.

Fluid kinetic energy

Fluid internal energy
Projectile kinetic energy
40 1000 20

Projectile kinetic energy at muzzle, MJ

Total Chemical Energy
Maximum breech pressure, MPa

35
tc=13 ms tc=11 ms tc=9 ms
800 16
30
Incompletely burned
25
Energy, MJ

600 12
20
15 400 8

10
200 4
5
0 0 0
4.5
9.1 22.7 45.4 68.0 90.7 40 60 80 0
100 20
Projectile mass, kg Projectile mass, kg
Figure 20. The breakdown of energy with Figure 21. The projectile mass versus the
the time at the completion of propellant maximum breech pressure and the projectile
combustion tc at each projectile mass at the kinetic energy.
ejection of the projectile.

18
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 1000 1000

Maximum breech pressure, MPa

800 800

Muzzle velocity, m/s

600 600

400 400

200 200

0 0
40 60 80 010020
Projectile mass, kg
Figure 22. The projectile mass versus the maximum
breech pressure and the muzzle velocity of the projectile.

V. Conclusion
The interior ballistics simulations in gun chamber were carried out, using solid/gas two-phase fluid dynamics
code of two-dimensional axisymmetric calculation method. To reproduce the ignition process of solid propellant
accurately, the multi-components in the gas phase were considered in the code. The calculation method was
validated by the comparison of the results of the simulations in the single-stage gun with the experimental data and
by the comparison of the calculations in the AGARD gun with the predicted data by the codes of some countries.
The simulations predicted the experimental data of the pressure history, the projectile acceleration profile and the
muzzle velocity. Also, for the AGARD gun the simulated results by the present code were in good agreement with
the results by the compared codes. Based on the condition of the AGARD gun, the effects of design parameters in
the gun system on the performances were numerically investigated. The larger igniter density placed nonuniformly
in the axial direction of the propellant chamber caused the formation of large pressure gradients at the ignition stage,
and the stronger negative pressure difference was formed by the concentration of accelerated solid propellant grains
at the projectile base. Therefore, the shortening of primer length containing the igniter can cause nonuniform
pressure distribution and the generation of destructive pressure waves in the chamber at the igniting operation for
solid propellant. Since the bore resistance to the projectile affected the increase rate of the chamber volume, the
pressure profile and the projectile acceleration varied with the bore resistance. From the results, it was shown that
there is the optimum value of bore resistance for bringing out the maximum acceleration performance in the gun
system. The projectile mass also affected the pressure profile and the propellant combustion speed largely. In order
to convert the more chemical energy of the propellant into the kinetic energy of the projectile, a heavy weight
projectile is required so that the time between the ignition and the projectile arrival at the muzzle is longer than the
burning time of the propellant.

References
1
Sasoh, A., Ohba, S., and Takayama, K., “Projectile acceleration in a single-stage gun at breech pressure below 50 MPa,”
Shock Waves, 10, 2000, pp.235-240.
2
“Fluid Dynamics Aspects of Internal Ballistics,” AGARD Advisory Report No.172, 1982
3
Woodley, C. et al. “Comparisons of Internal Ballistics Simulations of The AGARD GUN,” 22nd International Symposium
on Ballistics, 2005
4
Nusca, M. J., and Gough, P. S., “Numerical Model of Multiphase Flow Applied to Solid Propellant Combustion in Gun
Systems,” AIAA Paper, 1998, 98-3695.
5
Nusca, M. J., and Conroy, P. J., “Multiphase CFD Simulations of Solid Propellant Combustion in Gun systems,”
Department of Defense High Performance Computing Modernization Program users group conference, 2001.
6
Miura, H., and Matsuo, A., “Numerical Simulation of Projectile Accelerator Using Solid Propellant,” AIAA Paper, 2006,
2006-1439.

19
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 7
Shima, E., and Jounouchi, T., “Role of Computational Fluid Dynamics in Aeronautical Engineering (No.12), Formulation
and Verification of Uni-Particle Upwind Schemes for the Euler Equations,” Proceedings of the 12th NAL Symposium on Aircraft
Computational Aerodynamics, Japan, 1995, pp.255-260.

20
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics