Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Failure Analysis

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engfailanal

Review

A concise review on degradation of gun barrels and its health

monitoring techniques
Deepak Kumar a , Sahil Kalra a ,∗, Mayank Shekhar Jha b ,∗
a Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Jammu, India
b Centre de Recherche en Automatique de Nancy, CRAN, Université de Lorraine, France

ABSTRACT

Unpredicted failure of barrels is a common problem for cannons, artilleries, and other ballistic missiles. The major cause of the barrels’ failure is
high pressure, which generates large residual stresses in the inner layers of the barrel. To reduce the stresses, autofrettage of the barrels is carried
out in which the core material is allowed to deform plastically and the upper layers produce a continuous elastic force over the inner layers.
Autofrettage is a common engineering practice which is carried out while manufacturing of barrels to increase the operational life significantly.
The other reason for barrel failure is material degradation which occurs due to thermal fluctuations, fatigue, wear, erosion, corrosion, etc. In order
to correlate them with the life of the gun barrels, various tools such as borescope, variety of gauges, optical bore-mapping, ultrasonic sensors,
and diamond indenter-based instruments are used. The measured data is then used to formulate the empirical mathematical relation which is
further used to calculate the remaining useful life of the barrels. The other mathematical models are the prognostics models which are generally
Probabilistic models or Data-driven models (such as machine learning) or Hybrid models. By using these models, we estimate the remaining life
of barrels by using any of the techniques such as heat emission method, dimension increment method, muzzle velocity method, and strain-based
methods. The paper concisely summarize various techniques used for diagnostic and prognostic of barrels to estimate the degradation profile
and to calculate the remaining useful life (RUL).

1. Introduction

Ammunition is a defense material projected against a predefined target. These materials are covered with a casing made up of
metals or alloys that are launched using a mechanical system. The launch system consists of two prime components- (i) combustion
chamber, and (ii) barrel. The geometry of the combustion chamber and barrel is calculated depending on the range of a target. For
example, large-caliber cannons are used to launch explosives to a long distance and may fire hundreds of rounds per minute. The
performance, reliability, and service life of each of these components depend on mechanical properties, the strength of materials,
design, and manufacturing processes.
In weaponry systems, barrels play a vital role by guiding the ammunition through a long and narrow cylindrical tube. The
inner section of the tube is branched into three distinct regions starting from the breech face- combustion chamber, bore, and the
muzzle. A typical design of a gun barrel with components like breech, bore, muzzle, etc. is illustrated in Fig. 1. The Fig. 1 shows
the cut-section view of a gun barrel along with the cross-section view where the grooves are shown in the inner surface of the bore.
The outer diameter of the projectile (ammunition) is designed slightly smaller than the inner diameter of the cylindrical tube
(barrel). During trigger, the propellant which is generally the chemical substance burns out and produces a large amount of gases.
The gases consequently build a high pressure which adds up with the mechanical force and increases the kinetic energy of the
ammunition. This force pushes the ammunition towards the bore and muzzle of the barrel. The conversion of chemical to mechanical
energy builds up high pressure and high temperature conditions inside the chamber. This causes erosion and wear of material after
every subsequent firing (blast cycle), resulting into plastic deformation followed by permanent failure of the barrels [1]. The overall

∗ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Kalra), [email protected] (M.S. Jha).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106791
Received 7 July 2022; Received in revised form 29 August 2022; Accepted 8 September 2022
Available online 13 September 2022
1350-6307/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Nomenclature

A, B, C Material constants
𝐷1 , 𝐷2 , 𝐷3 , 𝐷4 , 𝐷5 Material failure constants
L Length of travel
M Central ballistic parameter
m, n Material constants
𝑚𝑐 Charge mass
𝑚𝑝 Projectile mass
P Maximum pressure
𝑝𝑖 Internal pressure
𝑝0 External pressure
𝑟𝑖 Inner radius
𝑟0 Outer radius
𝑇 Actual temperature
𝑇r Room temperature
𝑇m Melting temperature
V, 𝑣𝑚𝑧 Muzzle velocity
W,w Erosion rate
PF Propellant Factor
CF Coolant Factor
𝛥 Loading density
𝜀 Effective plastic strain
𝜀̇ Effective plastic strain rate
𝜀̇ 0 Reference strain rate
𝛬 Specific force
𝛷 Volume fraction
𝜎∗ Stress triaxiality
𝜎𝑟 Radial stress
𝜎𝜃 Circumferential (hoop) stress
𝜎𝑦 Yield stress

Fig. 1. Typical design and components of a gun barrel.

rate of wear and erosion depends upon the type of gases released, temperature, pressure, flow rate and the number of ballistic cycles
that occurred through it [2,3]. The effects of individual factors on the overall life of a barrel are explained in the following sections.

2. Reasons for life degradation in the gun barrels

The life degradation of barrels occurs due to the following reasons: (i) generation of reactive gases (Fig. 2), (ii) thermal fatigue,
and (iii) residual stresses.

2
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Fig. 2. Firing of a projectile through barrel.

Fig. 3. Schematic of pressure and heat transfer to the gun barrel after each firing.

• Reactive gases — During the combustion of chemicals, various gases are released inside the chamber (CO, CO2 , H2 , H2 O and
N2 ). These gases form a chemically-affected zone or layer (CAZ/CAL) with thickness of the order of one to ten microns [4,5].
The zone is also referred to as white-layer. The layer penetrates inside the cracks and increases the surface wear rate [6]. The
analysis of study done by J Kimura [7] shows that the relative contribution of these chemicals to erosion rate can be listed in
the following sequence:

CO2 > CO > H2 O > H2 > 0 > N2

where N2 has negative resistive influence i.e. it has chemically protective property.
• High pressure — During the combustion process, the maximum pressure inside the combustion chamber reaches the level of
600 MPa. The maximum pressure is reached within a millisecond in almost all guns as shown in Fig. 3(a). The Fig. 3(a) shows
pressure vs. time curve for a shotgun [8,9]. The curve is steeper at the beginning of the cycle as compared to the end which
denotes that the peak pressure is attained within a few milliseconds of combustion, and then decreases rapidly. Due to this
high pressure, the resultant stresses inside the chamber cross the yield limit of the barrel material. It causes permanent bore
expansion. In severe cases, the failure in the brittle gun barrel occurs due to sudden bursting. However, in the ductile barrels,
it occurs as crack propagation resulting in leakage of propellant gases. It should also be understood that the gun performance
varies with barrel length and the type of firing action.
• Thermal fatigue — As soon as the projectile is fired, the bore surface temperature reaches around 1100–1200 ◦ C. However,
at the end of the barrel (towards the muzzle) the temperature is almost half in magnitude which causes a temperature gradient
generated within the barrel body. Repeated cooling and heating cycles create a heat-affected zone which influences the overall
life of the gun barrel [10–12]. Fig. 3(b) shows the cross-section of a thick tube of a gun barrel in which heat is generated at the
inner surface and heat loss occurs at the outer surface through convection and radiation. During the process of combustion,
a very large amount of heat is transferred to the gun bore surface (at 𝑟𝑖 ) in a few milliseconds. Subsequently, heat penetrates

3
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

into the gun barrel material (by 𝑟) and requires some time to reach the outside surface (at 𝑟𝑜 ). 𝑞𝑜𝑢𝑡 is composed of convection
heat transfer (𝑞𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 ) and very small amount of radiation heat transfer (𝑞𝑟𝑎𝑑 ).
• Coupled thermal loading and mechanical stress — Temperature fluctuation causes thermal compressive stresses and
residual tensile stress during alternate heating and cooling cycles, respectively. Zheng et al. [13] mentioned three kinds of
stresses which are produced during firing- (i) mechanical stress which occurs due to the burning of chemical substances, (ii)
thermal stress which occurs due to the temperature fluctuation during the heating cycle, and (iii) residual tensile stress which
is caused after the firing. During the firing process, another couple of stresses exist- (a) shear stress caused by the combustion
gases, and (b) contact stress by friction between the rotating band of a projectile and the gun bore surface. These two stresses
cause thermo-mechanical fatigue (TMF) of the gun barrel. TMF causes fatigue cracks whose depth and size keep on increasing
with subsequent firings.

2.1. Defects — Cause and control

In addition to the reasons discussed above, bore surface wear is another major cause of failure of the gun barrels. The barrels wear
out because of two main causes- (i) erosion, and (ii) corrosion, which occurs at high temperature and pressure [14]. After repeated
cycles of usage, the inner bore diameter tends to increase due to surface wear. The permissible bore wear is about 0.5%–1% for
tank guns which need to be very accurate whereas it is about 5%–8% for indirect fire weapons like howitzers. Generally, the wear
rates vary between 0.1 to 200 μm per round which can be minimized by using additives.

• Erosion — Erosion in weapons is defined as the gradual damage or enlargement of the bore surface as a result of bullet–barrel
interaction after each firing. Research work on the barrel erosion mechanism dates back to the early decades of the 1900s
[15–17]. Based on different causes of erosion, it has been categorized as chemical, thermal and mechanical erosion which are
linked to each other [18,19]. Turley et al. [20] explained that the temperature of the inner chamber plays a significant role
in the erosion process. The propellant gas elements such as oxygen and carbon react with the bore wall material and form
oxide (FeO) and carbide (Fe3 C) layers on the barrel’s inner surface. Shelton et al. [21] have studied about erosion phenomenon
in gun barrels in reference to the heat transfer aspects. Bracuti [22] listed out a few effects of eroded bore surface: loss in
firing range and range accuracy, loss in directional stability, reduction in barrel fatigue life, etc. One of the earliest methods
used for the control of gun barrel wear is to increase the heat resistance of the bore surface by reducing the rate of heat
transfer to the bore [23]. Brosseau and Ward [24–26] suggested wear-reducing additives such as polyurethane foam, titanium
dioxide, and talc/wax which works on the phenomenon of reduction in heat transfer to the gun barrel. Fan and Gao [27] have
reviewed additive materials used for erosion reduction and extension of barrel life. In order to protect the gun barrel surface
from wearing off, Ahmad [28] suggested the use of erosion-resistant coating of the materials which have a high melting point,
high hardness, low coefficient of friction, and thermo-chemical inertness. In this regard, Hammond [29] and Ebihara [30] did
experiments with the chromium-plated gun barrels and reported a significant reduction in the erosion.
• Corrosion — Corrosion in metallic materials occur as a result of reaction among surrounding atmosphere with the temperature
fluctuation and static/dynamic mechanical processes [31–34]. Hot corrosion is the term used for accelerated corrosion which
increases the gun barrel wear at a faster rate and shortens its lifetime. In the early studies related to gun barrel wear, Zimmer
and Haukland [35] have discussed the chemical reaction of carbon monoxide (CO) with iron (Fe) and alloying components
such as chromium (Cr) or nickel (Ni). The reaction forms carbonyls like Fe(CO)4 which causes corrosion. To prevent such wear
action a mixture of wax and TiO2 based additive are used which oxidizes the CO and minimizes the corrosion-affected barrel
wear.

3TiO2 + CO ⇌ T3 O4 + CO2 (1)

Table 1 compiles various erosion reducing additive materials (ERAMs) which are experimentally suggested by researchers for
erosion control in gun barrels.
• Residual stresses — Due to the generation of gases at high pressure, the barrels have to undergo axial, radial, and hoop
stresses along the cross-section [43]. It has been observed that during the blast process, the high pressure creates tensile stress
at the bore region making the resultant stress to be greater than the yield stress. This causes a plastic deformation at the inner
layer, causing the upper layer to generate residual compressive stress on the inner layer.
In order to have a clear understanding of the stress distribution in a gun barrel, a simulation work for a cylindrical tube
subjected to an internal pressure is carried out in Abaqus software. The gun material is taken as steel which has yield strength
of 270 MPa. We have set inner radius of 0.002 m, and outer radius of 0.005 m. The value of applied internal pressure is 200
MPa, which is less than the yield strength. The results show that the radial stress is compressive, whereas the hoop stress is
tensile in nature. Also, magnitude of the hoop stress is much larger than that of the radial stress, which agrees with the study
of Harvey [44]. Further, the hoop stress is maximum at the bore, and it reduces to a minimum non-zero value at the outer
surface. On the other hand, the radial stress has a maximum value at the bore and is zero at outer surface (Figs. 4, 6).

To attain uniformly distributed stresses along the thickness of the gun barrels, they are subjected to the process of autofrettage
in which the gun barrels are pressurized internally such that the material near the bore starts to yield, while the outer material
remains in the elastic region. After release of internal pressure, the outer layers of material compress the inner layers thus generating
a compressive residual stress in the zone near the bore.

4
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Table 1
List of erosion reducing additive materials (ERAMs).
ERAMs Effect Reference
Polyurethane foam The lifespan of M68 105 mm tank gun barrels Joseph [36]
increased 4-folds (from 100 to 400 rounds)
TiO2 -paraffin (45% + 55%) It increased the total number of permissible rounds Katz [37], Lenchitz et al. [38]
from 100 to 900 rounds
Talc-paraffin (46% + 53.5%) Erosion reduction is better compared to the Picard and Trask [39], Picard [40]
TiO2 -paraffin, but, it formed residues on the bore
surface
Multifunctional ERAM composed of inorganic salts Erosion-reducing performance of the salts (from Bracuti et al. [41]
high to low):
KHCO3 > NH4 HCO3 > (NH4 )2 > CO3 > K2 CO3 >
K2 NO3 > K2 SO4
𝑊 𝑆2 nanoparticles Solid lubricants for wear protection Rezgui et al. [42]

Fig. 4. Stress distribution in a cylindrical gun tube before and after autofrettage.

In order to bring out the effect of this phenomenon, simulation results are obtained by finite element analysis on the same

Abaqus model of the cylindrical tube. Now, the tube is autofrettaged at pressure values varying from below the yield point to above

it. Here, the pressure range used for this purpose is 240–380 MPa. The von-Mises stress distribution shows that the stresses are more

equitably distributed along the thickness of the autofrettaged cylinder (Fig. 5).

5
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Fig. 5. Von-Mises stress distribution in gun barrel at various autofrettage pressure.

2.1.1. Mathematical comparison of stresses before and after autofrettage

Lame formulation gives the equation for relation of stress distribution in the direction of radial (𝜎𝑟 ) and hoop stress (𝜎𝜃 ) [45,46].
( )
𝑟2𝑖 𝑝𝑖 − 𝑟2𝑜 𝑝𝑜 𝑝𝑖 − 𝑝𝑜 𝑟2𝑖 𝑟2𝑜
𝜎𝑟 = −( )
𝑟2𝑜 − 𝑟2𝑖 𝑟2 𝑟2𝑜 − 𝑟2𝑖
( ) (2)
𝑟2 𝑝𝑖 − 𝑟2𝑜 𝑝𝑜 𝑝𝑖 − 𝑝𝑜 𝑟2𝑖 𝑟2𝑜
𝜎𝜃 = 𝑖 + ( )
𝑟2𝑜 − 𝑟2𝑖 𝑟2 𝑟2𝑜 − 𝑟2𝑖
Before autofrettage, for simplification, setting external pressure value equal to zero (𝑝𝑜 = 0) we get following equations for stress
distribution:
( )
𝑟2 𝑝𝑖 𝑟2
𝜎𝑟 = 𝑖 1− 𝑜
𝑟2𝑜 − 𝑟2𝑖 𝑟2𝑖
( ) (3)
𝑟2 𝑝𝑖 𝑟2
𝜎𝜃 = 𝑖 1+ 𝑜
𝑟2𝑜 − 𝑟2𝑖 𝑟2𝑖
In the above equations it can be observed that radial stress is always negative and hence compressive, and the hoop stress is
always positive and hence tensile. Numerically, the value of hoop stress is always greater than that of radial stress, and maximum
value of both the stresses are at inner surface of the cylinder.
After autofrettage, it is inferred that the material behaves as elastic-perfectly plastic (Fig. 7). Taking into consideration the Tresca
yield criterion, following relations are derived for radial (𝜎𝑟 ) and hoop stress (𝜎𝜃 ) components for the autofrettaged cylindrical
part [46]:
𝑎 𝜎𝑦 ( 2 )
𝜎𝑟 = −𝜎𝑦 ln − 𝑟 − 𝑎2
𝑟 2𝑟2𝑜 𝑜
( ) (4)
( ) 𝜎𝑦
𝑎 𝑎2
𝜎𝜃 = 𝜎𝑦 1 − ln − 1−
𝑟 2 𝑟2𝑜

6
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Fig. 6. Stress distribution in a cylindrical gun tube before and after autofrettage [47].

Fig. 7. Creation of elastic–plastic region after autofrettage.

2.1.2. Benefits of autofrettage

• Improvement in lifespan - By uniformly distributing the stresses along the radius, autoftrettage increases the overall number
of firing cycles as well as the value of maximum pressure holding capacity.
• Economical - As far as the engineering effects are concerned, in many instances the autofrettaged parts are cost-effective in
comparison to the higher cost material with similar strength.
• Negate the effect of poor machining of inner surface - Autofrettage reduces the machining defects by improving the surface
finish of inner bore which is otherwise costly and in some cases experimentally prohibitive.

7
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

• Elimination of the adverse influence of unavoidable cross-section features - Features like cross holes and other geometric
irregularities cause unwanted stress concentration which may be eliminated by using autofrettage process.

3. Gun barrel health monitoring techniques

Gun barrel life can be categorized as — wear life and fatigue life. It has been observed over several years of operations that
the fatigue failure is hazardous and can put the lives of gun operators in danger, whereas the barrel wear just reduces the firing
accuracy without being fatal to the operators. Hence, the gun designer opts for the barrel in which fatigue life exceeds its wear life.
Wear life can be approximated by the total number of rounds fired till denunciation of the barrel. For a large caliber gun, thousands
of rounds can be fired before discarding the service of barrel. Therefore, fatigue of gun barrel is low cycle fatigue (LCF).
Thereupon, methods for predicting the gun barrel wear life are basically derived form its wear mechanism. Available methods
can be segregated into following approaches and techniques:

3.1. Wear estimation using empirical approaches

Rauf Imam [48] proposed the following mathematical equations for the estimation of erosion with respect to the muzzle velocity:

( )1∕2 ( )3
𝛥2 𝑃2 𝐿2 ∕𝑉2 𝑉2
𝑊2 = 𝑊1 (PF)(CF) (5)
𝛥1 𝑃1 𝐿1 ∕𝑉1 𝑉1
( )1∕2 ( )
𝛥2 𝑃2 𝐿2 ∕𝑉2 e2𝑉2
𝑊2 = 𝑊1 (PF)(CF) (6)
𝛥1 𝑃1 𝐿1 ∕𝑉1 e2𝑉1
where, the subscript 1 refers to the standard cannon (155 mm Howitzer M185) and the subscript 2 refers to the unknown cannon.
The model discussed above does not consider one important factor which is muzzle velocity variation corresponding to the
cannon diameter. So, Chung and Oh [49] modified this equation to give:
𝑐𝑉2
𝑉2
𝑤2 = 𝑤1 𝐾 𝑐𝑉1
(7)
𝑉1
𝑐𝑉
𝑤2 ∕𝑤1 𝑉 2
= 2𝑐𝑉 (8)
𝐾 𝑉1 1
√
𝛥 𝑃2 𝐿2 ∕𝑉2
𝐾= 2 (PF)(CF) (9)
𝛥1 𝑃1 𝐿1 ∕𝑉1
where, c is an empirical constant that is specific to cannon tube size (e.g. 𝑐 = 0.6 for 155 mm and 0.7 for 203 mm cannons).
Robert Miner [50] has listed following empirical models to perform initial analytical solution for muzzle velocity:

• Corner’s Model
√
𝑚𝑐 𝜆(𝑀 + 𝛷)
𝑣𝑚𝑧 = 𝑚𝑐 (10)
𝑚𝑝 + 3

• Coppock’s Model
√ ( )
√
√ 𝜆𝑚𝑐 𝑀 + 𝑍𝑏 𝛷
𝑣𝑚𝑒 = √
√ ( ) (11)
𝑚
𝑤1 + 3𝑐

where, 𝑤1 is adjusted projectile mass, and 𝑍𝑏 is the ballistic parameter for form function.

Beer and Hajn [51] performed wear limit assessment based on decrease in muzzle velocity:
[ ]
𝛥𝑐0𝐿 = 𝑓𝑤−1 𝑣0 (1 − 𝑉 𝐷𝐿) (12)

where, 𝑐0𝐿 is the limit of change of initial combustion volume, 𝑣0 is muzzle (initial) velocity, and VDL is the velocity decrease limit.
This limiting value determines when the barrel should be deactivated from service.
Johnson and Cook [52] studied fracture characteristics of 4340 steel which is generally used as gun barrel material. They
introduced a cumulative-damage fracture model which demonstrate the strain to fracture as a function of the strain rate, temperature
and pressure.
Strength model for the von Mises tensile flow stress is referred to perform computations to evaluate the fracture model
[ ( ) ]
[ ( )] 𝑇 − 𝑇r m
𝜎 = (𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀𝑛 ) 1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀∕
̇ 𝜀̇ 0 1− (13)
𝑇m − 𝑇r

8
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Fig. 8. Side view of a rigid borescope (www.cryptomuseum.com).

The damage parameter is calculated from the expression of equivalent strain to fracture
[ ] [ ( )]
∗ [ ( )] 𝑇 − 𝑇r
𝜀𝑓 = 𝐷1 + 𝐷2 e𝐷3 𝜎 1 + 𝐷4 ln 𝜀∕̇ 𝜀̇ 0 × 1 + 𝐷5 (14)
𝑇m − 𝑇r
Here, the first term says that the strain to fracture decreases as the hydrostatic tension increases. The second term represents the
effect of strain rate, and the third represents the effect of temperature.

3.2. Wear measurement techniques in gun barrels

To determine the wear and erosion in large caliber gun barrels, the following equipment have been reported in literature:

• Borescope — It is a long, thin cylindrical instrument consisting of lights, lenses, and mirrors which allow any investigator to
look closely at the bore surface along its length (Fig. 8). This instrument has a drawback that it cannot be used to measure
the depth of erosion [53].
• Pullover gauge, star gauge and dial bore gauge — These devices are indicator type gauges which are used to inspect the
dimensional variation inside a barrel by measuring the bore diameter at any axial location. The measurement can be done by
inserting the gauges either from the breech side (pullover gauge) or from the muzzle side (star gauge and dial bore gauge) of
the barrel up to the desired position.
The dial bore gauges operate on the principle of two diametrically opposed measuring points, one fixed and one moving, plus
a spring-loaded centralizing shoe. Whereas, the star gauge examines by placing contact pins vertically (top-to-bottom) and
then horizontally (side-to-side) over the entire bore length. In both cases, the diameter is recorded at various axial positions
which is then used for the wear or erosion initial estimation.
Star gauges are mostly used in the gun barrel manufacturing unit for its acceptance after manufacturing, initial proof firing
tests and developmental tests. Dial bore gauge can be used at any time after gun firing to check for wear. The consistent
recordings after routinely checkup helps in getting information when the barrel wear occurs and accordingly calculating the
decisive time to consider replacing the barrel.
• Optical bore-mapping systems — Though, above mentioned all the instruments have been used for monitoring of barrel
health based on bore diameter, none of them gives complete readings in terms of both quality and quantity. For better
visualization of the bore’s condition, bore-mapping systems have been developed [53]. These are capable of making optical
(or laser) measurements of entire bore, then display the bore condition quantitatively using advanced imaging techniques
(Fig. 9). These techniques ‘unfold’ the cylindrical shape of the barrel into a plane structure which makes the observation
easier to comprehend.
• Wear estimation using ultrasonic waves — Asymmetric damage inside the barrels can be detected using ultrasonic waves.
Wang and Jin [54] used L(0,2) modes excited at 250 kHz, and showed the axial (z), radial (r) and circumferential (𝜙)
displacements. They also mentioned that the torsional mode is not frequently used in barrel inspection as it is challenging
to attain T(0,1) mode waveform excitation which requires piezoelectric sheet to be deployed all around the contour of the
barrel and to stimulate in the tangential direction, which is not always feasible.
• Wear estimation using diamond indenter — This device contains the diamond indenter which is used to measure the wear
inside the barrel. The modern indenters are equipped with pneumatic mechanism. The indents can be traced by using the
X–Y-stage of the measurement system. The wear depth is calculated by converting the variation in the diagonal of each indent
after the test. The method allows for the precise measurement of bore wear in a short period of time. It is successfully used
to predict the life expectancy of a rifle barrel.

9
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Fig. 9. Optical bore-mapping system.

3.3. Prognostic techniques for predicting RUL

3.3.1. Prognostics and health management

The functional or structural degradation of a system or component presents significant hurdles in assuring acceptable performance
levels along with efficient maintenance of such systems or components. Such problems are efficiently resolved when addressed under
the realm of so-called condition based maintenance (CBM) and prognostics and health management (PHM) [55–59].
In recent years, predictive maintenance of systems has come to rely heavily upon the prognostics of failure in critical
systems/components as failure prediction. It is helpful in providing a sufficient lead-time between detection of a fault (diagnostic
step) and occurrence of the system/component failure so that pro-active maintenance actions can be strategized in advance. The
Remaining Useful Life (RUL) serves as an efficient indicator of failure prognostics by presenting how long system can function
safely/reliably and within the prescribed limits of system functionalities. As such, derivation of RUL depends upon the prediction
of system behavior in future.
Prognostic techniques vary according to the assumptions associated with system operation. The prognostic models based on
different approaches are discussed below:

• Probabilistic life usage models based approach require large sets of historical failure database (failure time or failure rate) of the
components to develop life-usage models [60].
• Data-driven prognostics processes system data signals mainly using machine learning methods to understand the degradation
patterns and features that aid the prediction process [61]; time series forecasting techniques such as auto-regressive models,
exponential smoothing techniques, autoregressive moving average (ARMA) models have been exploited extensively [62]. While
ARMA and its variants lead to efficient short-term predictions, they prove less reliable for long term predictions mainly due
to inherent stochasticity of signals and inefficient uncertainty management.
Recently, deep neural networks have been extensively exploited as well as developed for efficient prediction of RUL in presence
of unknown time varying non-linear stochastic dynamics [59,63]. Various structures have been studied recently for their
suitability vis-ó -vis RUL prediction in presence of unknown features/representations often hidden underlaying the acquired
sensor measurements such as convolutional neural networks [64,65], Deep recurrent neural networks and their variants [66]
have proved particularly efficient in prediction of RUL under variable operational conditions. The efficiency of long term RUL
predictions is significantly dependent upon the diversity and richness of the training set and thus remains limited in face of
variable degradation trends, novel failure modes etc. [59,67].
• Model Based Prognostics typically uses mathematical behavioral models of systems to assess state of health and damage
progression. These mathematical models used are usually known as degradation models (DMs) that are typically derived
from the first principles of physics. Some examples include fatigue models for assessing propagation of cracks in structural
components [68], electrolytic overstress ageing [69], Arrhenius equation for prediction of resistance drift [70], physics inspired
power model [71] or log-linear model for degradation of current drain [72], physics-inspired exponential degradation model
for aluminum electrolytic capacitors [73]. The accuracy and feasibility of this approach relies directly on the accuracy of
mathematical model used to model the underlying degradation process.
• Hybrid prognostics combines the benefits of model-based approach and data driven approaches. This is done by employing
approximately correct DMs which are then improved over time as new observations arrive in order to obtain the exact
damage behavior. Generally, data driven techniques are employed in the early phase, plausibly offline, to capture and learn
the damage progression using machine learning techniques that lead to statistically derived mathematical models that fit the
given degradation database. Some notable works include: non-linear least square regression [69], relevance vector machine
regression [74], DM approximated by a linear part and logarithmic/exponential part [75], residual based statistical DM [76],
end of life (EOL) in lithium-ion batteries [77], battery health management [74], estimation–prediction of crack growth [78],
fuel cell prognostics [76], prognostics of pneumatic valves [79], mechatronic systems [80] and system level prognostics [81].

10
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

3.3.2. Prognostic techniques for predicting wear life of gun barrel

Prognostic techniques refer to the various practices focused on predicting the time at which the ammunition system will no
longer perform its expected function. In other words, it denotes the failure beyond which the gun barrel can no longer be used for
firing activities. The predicted time then becomes the remaining useful life (RUL). Prognostics of a gun barrel is done by assessing
the extent of degradation of the barrel from its expected normal operating conditions. For effective life prediction, prerequistes are
— having clear knowledge of the failure mechanism which cause degradation, the analysis of failure modes, detection of early signs
of wear, and fault conditions. Thus, focus should be on the initial information on the possible failures like wear rate (erosion or
corrosion).
In this section, we have discussed diverse methods used by researchers targeting the information regarding wear rate based upon
the heat, dimension, and strain condition of the barrel along with the muzzle velocity of the projectile. These methods for predicting
life are related to the wear mechanisms.

• Heat based method

Bin Wu et al. [82] have categorized the gun steel sub-surface into three layers based on the after-effects of thermal loading. The
outermost layer, being farthest from the surface, is unaffected by the thermal exposure. Whereas, the innermost layer gets easily
affected by the gases released due to the combustion of chemical propellants. Hence, this zone is known as chemically-affected
zone (CAZ). The CAZ surface is weak and brittle due to the formation of micro-cracks. These cracks partially or completely
detach during the subsequent firing which in turns lead to the formation of new layer of CAZ. Lastly, the intermediate layer,
between the inner and outer layers, is thermal affected layer, hence known as heat-affected zone (HAZ). This layer becomes
harder and more brittle with each round fired. Based upon the uncoated steel bore gun wear theory, Lawton et al. [83,84]
have mentioned that the wear per round of firing depends on the CAZ thickness. In this study, they have worked on a
155 mm AS90 gun with and without wear reducing additive. It is concluded that the addition of additive increases the barrel
life (approximately 10 times) by reducing the maximum temperature. In addition, Chung et al. [85] have also derived the
mathematical relation of the wear rate as a function of heat transfer into the surface of 40 mm gun tubes:

𝑤(𝑄) = 𝑎e𝑏𝑄 (15)

2
where, a & b are constants and 𝑄 (J∕mm ) is the heat input.
The above derived equation is applicable for the intermediate caliber guns (40–105 mm). As per them, this erosion equation
produces accurate cannon tube erosion rates.
• Dimension based method
In large caliber rifled gun, after a certain number of rounds have been fired, both the chamber length and the bore diameter
increase due to the bullet–barrel friction and the engraving process, which ultimately reduces the muzzle velocity. One of the
methods for predicting the remaining life is based on the increment in chamber dimensions i.e. length and diameter. When
the calculated increase in diameter and length reaches the critical value, the gun barrel is excluded from service. Bin Wu
et al. [82] have compared the empirical equations of the critical rounds fired with respect to the increase in chamber length
and increase in the bore diameter:
( ) ( )
𝑅 = 𝑓 𝛥𝑙𝑖 and 𝑅 = 𝑓 𝛥𝑑𝑖 (16)

where, 𝛥𝑙𝑖 and 𝛥𝑑𝑖 are increase in chamber length and bore diameter respectively, induced from the ith round.
They observed that the method based on the chamber length measurement is not feasible, whereas, the method based on the
relation between rounds fired and increase in bore diameter is reasonable to predict the critical number of rounds. The method
is restricted to normal wear of uncoated steel barrel. Neglecting the change in material property is one of the limitations of this
method. Another limitation arises due to the inability to correctly measure the bore diameter of a gun barrel with precision.
• Velocity based method
For a large caliber rifled gun, the muzzle velocity declines gradually as the wear develops. Consequently, Imam [48] anticipated
that the muzzle velocity is the most important parameter involved in the barrel wear. Based upon this hypothesis, mathematical
equations explaining the relationship between wear rate and muzzle velocity have been established. These relations are given
in Eqs. (5) and (6).
Additionally, LaVigna et al. [86] suggested certain equations to co-relate the muzzle velocity with the rounds fired:
( )
𝑅 = 𝑓 𝛥𝑣𝑖 (17)

where, 𝛥𝑣𝑖 is decrease in muzzle velocity induced from the ith round.
However, this empirical equation holds a major drawback of not predicting the efficient remaining useful life solely based
on the muzzle velocity [82]. It is due to the fact that the wear inside the barrel is not uniform along its length [87], and
accordingly it might affect the projectile speed, also the muzzle velocity might also decrease because of several other reasons
as well.
• Strain based method
The exterior strain of a gun barrel decreases with the growth of damage caused by rounds fired. Bin Wu et al. [82] proposed
a relation between the rounds fired and the decrease in exterior strain of barrel:
( )
𝑅 = 𝑓 𝛥𝜀𝑖 (18)

11
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of barrel failure mechanism due to the projectile’s rotating band, (considering barrel is diacarded after ‘N’ rounds).

where, 𝛥𝜀𝑖 is the strain difference between ith round and (i + 1)th rounds, and indicates the extent of damage to barrel by
firing (i + 1)th round.
They presumed that the gun barrel has to be discarded after firing 𝑁 rounds. Thus, when the exterior strain decreases from
𝜀𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝜀1 ) of the first round to 𝜀𝑚𝑖𝑛 (𝜀𝑁 ) of the last round, the gun barrel’s useful life ends.

3.4. Other noteworthy techniques

Apart from various methods discussed in previous section, there are few other techniques available in literature which addresses
the RUL by considering the effect of fatigue, temperature gradient, and thermo-chemical erosion. These techniques are discussed
individually in the following section.

3.4.1. Effect of fatigue on RUL of gun barrels

Multiple rounds of firing causes cyclic loading on the material which result into crack propagation followed by fatigue failure
of the barrels. Initial crack size is a dominant factor for life degradation. The probabilistic model demonstrate that the large cracks
reduces the RUL which may be mathematically be modeled with exponential or Weibull distribution [88].
Crack propagation is influenced by residual stresses developed due to the autofrettage. Its effect is studied by Perl and
Saley [89,90] for internal and external cracks [91,92]. Based on stress intensity factor (SIF) values it was concluded that the
autofrettage improves the fatigue life for internal cracks, whereas it causes adverse effect on external cracks. Additionally, numerical
simulations show that the autofrettage resist the propagation of cracks due to the residual compressive stress and hence these barrels
have high RUL than the non-autofrettaged barrels [93].
Along with the deteriorating effects of fatigue, the interaction between bullet and barrel also plays a crucial role on RUL of
barrels. Bullet–barrel interaction is affected by the bullet design which usually comprises of a driving band, casing, core, and
lining. Andrews [94] worked on 155 mm gun barrel and stated that the interference between the driving band and gun barrel
lead to cracking and wear of the barrel. The similar outcomes for the bullet structure is presented by Zelenko et al. [95] for the
sniper cartridge. It is also demonstrated that the wear of a barrel varies depending upon the bullet design. A schematic diagram in
Figs. 10(b) and 10(c) shows that the interference of bullet driving band with the barrel increases the bore diameter.
In the course of a firing cycle, the bullet (projectile) accelerates in addition to in-axis rotation. The acceleration and rotation of
bullet increases the wear of the bore surface with each cycle, causing a reduction in the muzzle velocity. This affects the projectile’s
trajectory, shooting intensity, and accuracy of the exterior ballistic performance. The ballistic performance of a 12.7 mm machine
gun barrel is simulated by Shen et al. [96]. It is shown that with the increase in bore diameter, the bullet’s initial disturbance
increases. This disturbance causes vibration at the muzzle which affects the bullet’s forward momentum and hence decreasing the
ballistic performance [97,98]. A few other noteworthy works which show the significance of fatigue analysis and crack propagation
on the gun barrel life are listed below in Table 2.

3.4.2. Effect of heat flux and temperature rise on RUL of gun barrels
After a shot is fired from gun, the heat from burning propellant gases is transferred to the bore surface through a thermal
convection phenomenon. If there is sufficient time between each shot fired, the hot barrel is cooled down by convection and radiation
to the outer surface. As the firing frequency is increased, i.e., the barrel temperature rises sharply and reach the cook-off temperature.
This may result in unfavorable effects like melting of bore surface material, premature self-ignition of charges, wear due to erosion,
cracks, etc. So, as a precaution to reduce the cook-off temperature, cooling methods are employed. These methods are classified
into passive (chrome plating and wear-reducing additives) and active (forced liquid cooling).
Apart from the aforementioned heat-based methods (in Section 3.3.2), which are empirical, there are few developments that
have been made for gun barrel RUL prediction. It includes modeling and simulation of heat flux estimation using inverse methods.
An inverse method with FE analysis is presented by Chen et al. [106] for estimating time-varying unknown surface heat flux. It is
found that the heat flux can melt/erode the bore surface material. Hence, it may be concluded that thermal factors are the most
critical contributors to barrel erosion. Another inverse algorithm-based conjugate gradient method is used by Lee et al. [107] to
determine the time-dependent heat flux and thermal stress distributions. A 3-D inverse heat transfer analysis model is developed by

12
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Table 2
Remaining useful life estimation of gun barrel based on wear and crack propagation.
Objective Methodology — principle Study output Observations/Remark
Underwood et al. [99–101] Used pulse-echo ultrasonic (a) Initial crack size has a vital Crack growth rate investigation is
performed a full-scale fatigue life non-destructive based inspection effect on fatigue life, not feasible for minor cracks
analysis to show the effect of (NDI) technique to monitor crack (b) crack from thermal damage is (<2 mm)
applied pressure, residual stress, growth crucial next to erosion for barrel
and initial crack size on the barrel fatigue life
life for a 120 mm tank cannon
Banks-Sills and Eliasi [102] Performed FE analyses and Deterministic value of the fatigue For 10% increment in the initial
conducted fatigue life analysis of a statistical Monte Carlo simulation life is found to be 25% lower than crack length, there is a 4.3%
steel cannon barrel that of the statistical analysis reduction in the fatigue lifetime
Precision wear rate measurement of The setup includes an indentation The predicted amount of wear as a The diamond indent after the firing
high friction and high pressurized apparatus and an optical measuring function of the number of rounds has the same shape but smaller
gun barrel (155 mm XM199) was system, along with the SEM to agrees with the result from a bore size, so, the change in size
done by Chung et al. [103] verify the accuracy of wear gauge and the empirical solution (decrease in the short diagonal of
measurement the indent) is converted to amount
of wear
2-D modeling of short crack (a) Introduced cracks of increasing (a) Small crack propagation is Autofrettage to a depth of the order
propagation kinetics during firings length in the model to calculate accelerated by thermo-mechanical of 20 mm increases the number of
of a 120 mm gun barrel was the stress intensity factor, stresses, critical firings by a factor of 10
studied by Petitpas and (b) Analyzed the effect of (b) Kinetics of large cracks (over
Campion [104] autofrettage on crack propagation 4 mm) propagation are governed
by the pressure effect
R Mahdavinejad [105] performed The fatigue with several (one, two, The stress intensity on the tip of When the number of the cracks is
stress analysis on crack tip is three, four, and twenty-five) cracks the crack is a function of its length more than two then, the interaction
carried out using ANSYS software is analyzed in the barrel according and increases with the number of between the cracks causes the
for 155 mm cannon barrel to the critical explosion pressure these cracks improvement of the cannon’s barrel
life

Noh et al. [108,109] for heat flux estimation of a multi-layered tube having varying cross-sections. It is ascertained that the heat
flux intensity increases with the increasing number of rounds fired, and it tends to decrease with respect to position towards the
muzzle. For the outer layer of the barrel, it is recognized that an increase in the number of rounds causes an increase in temperature.
Computing the barrel temperature history with accuracy is essential for the thermal management of the gun barrel. For
temperature prediction, there are various interior ballistic codes developed and revised by researchers. These codes consider
conduction, convection, and radiation-based heat transfer equations. XBR2D-V29 heat transfer code and one-dimensional radial
heat conduction code are used by Conroy et al. [110,111] for 120-mm cannon and 155-mm gun barrel, respectively. These codes
work very well for the initial temperature rise prediction in the barrel. Some of the other remarkable works in regard to the gun
barrel temperature estimation are listed in Table 3.

3.4.3. Effect of coatings and thermal erosion of RUL of gun barrels

Gun barrel erosion is referred to as thermochemical erosion. It is associated with the combined effect of both thermal erosion
(melting of bore surface) and chemical erosion (removal of surface material). The surface erosion rate mainly depends on the heat-
affected zone (HAZ), and it tends to accelerate depending on the chemically affected zone (CAZ). As discussed in Section 2.1, one
of the practical methods to avoid erosion is by using the standard ERAMs. The most commonly used additive material to protect
the bore surface against erosion wear is chromium. Chromium is applied as a galvanic layer of around 0.1 mm. The chrome layer
also provides high hardness and corrosion resistance to the bore surface. However, during an operation where numerous rounds are
fired continuously, the chromium layer as well as the inner steel surface may heat intensively. If the risen temperature exceeds a
limit it might change the gun metal’s phase. This phenomenon is accelerated in the presence of inherent cracks in chrome. It leads
the hot gases to the gun material surface beneath the chrome layer where they react and pits are formed. The hottest location is
the interface between the chromium layer and the gun steel at the bottom of the crack, which makes it the most reactive as well.
Fig. 11 describes a magnified schematic diagram of a microscopic image of a crack propagated through the chrome layer to the gun
steel layer and the occurrence of the erosion pit.
Various internal ballistics codes have also been developed for the erosion study of the gun barrels. The first known gun barrel
thermochemical erosion modeling code is presented by Sopok et al. [121] using the 155 mm M203 Unicannon system. The other
codes include 1-D NOVA codes for interior ballistic analysis, BLAKE codes for gas thermochemical equilibrium analysis, TDK/MABL
codes for boundary layer addition analysis, TDK/ODE codes for gas-wall thermochemical equilibrium analysis, and MACE codes for
ablation, erosion, and temperature profile analysis. Using these five module analyses temperature and heat flux profiles (time and
axial position) is plotted. It is noticed that at the axial position having maximum heat, the uncracked gun steel eroded much more
than the uncracked chromium material by single-shot. A few other related works is discussed in Table 4.

13
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Table 3
Gun barrel RUL prediction based on temperature rise and cook-off failure.
Objective Methodology — principle Study output Observations/Remark
Yang et al. [112] determined barrel Applied a hybrid numerical method Variation of hoop stress, radial stress, The maximum radial stress increases
life based on heat flux and thermal of the Laplace transformation with and axial stress in the steel region is as a function of time during the
stresses in a multilayered gun barrel the finite difference, and numerically found to be more radical than that heating periods, and it disappears at
(steel cylinder with chrome coating) calculated the transient temperature in the chrome region during the the inner and outer surfaces of the
by considering transient heat transfer distributions and thermal stresses heating periods gun barrel
and interlayer thermal contact
resistance
Mishra et al. [113,114] developed an Performed 1D transient thermal It accurately simulates gun barrel (a) Erosion of the gun barrel is
IB code and employed FEA method analysis with the FEA package temperature history, hence, better dependent on the maximum bore
to model gun barrel temperature ANSYS for single and series of cycles wear calculations and predictions can surface temperature,
variation over time for its wear on 155 mm, 52 caliber gun barrel, be made (b) Midwall and external cooling
calculation and validated experimentally technique can eliminate the
possibility of cook-off
Yuhas et al. [115] developed an Ultrasonic sensor was mounted on The first echo arises from grooves, The ultrasonic technique used here
ultrasonic-based sensor in order to the exterior surface of an MK45 whereas the second echo is from has adequate temporal response and
measure internal bore temperature at MOD 4 gun which is made up of lands having a separation of sensitivity and hence can be used
critical areas on large caliber gun fine-grained steel capable of approximately 440 nanoseconds. The where cook-off (auto-ignition) is of
barrels propagating high-frequency temperature localization relies on concern
ultrasound (>30 MHz) these echo doublet
Akcay and Yükselen [116] prepared Separately derived the temperature The calculated theoretical number of The proposed model can also be used
a 1D axially symmetrical unsteady distribution for internal points and firing rounds for cook-off (130 for similar small and large caliber
heat transfer model for the heat surface boundary points by means of rounds) is indeed very close to the gun barrels, and by following this
transfer calculation of 7.62 mm M60 internal ballistic theory, and solved it experimental result (120 rounds) technique the cook-off condition can
Machine gun barrel numerically by FDM also be predicted
Şentürk et al. [117] used a Used ANSYS for temperature The maximum von Mises stresses for To design a barrel for strength an
thermo-mechanically coupled theory distribution in radial and axial finite element (ANSYS) and insight to single shot stress state of
for experimental, numerical, and directions, and calculated pressure analytical solutions are found to be the barrel is sufficient, whereas to
analytical ballistics solution of a distribution, projectile velocity snd close to each other for both cases of design for safety against cook-off it
7.62 mm gun barrel position, and temperature of burnt a single shot and multiple shots needs a number of successive shots
gases along the barrel
Değirmenci et al. [118,119] Determined the convection heat Thermal stresses are most prominent With increase in initial temperature
developed a numerical and transfer coefficient and combustion on the inner surface at the first of the solid propellant or decrease in
thermo-mechanical FE model of a characteristics of propellants with shooting, but as the successive shots the grain size, the inner and outer
7.62 mm caliber gun barrel in various grain sizes by shooting tests, are fired thermal stresses on the wall temperatures, internal pressure
Abaqus to study thermal effects and and analyzed the inner and outer inner wall decreased while that on and bullet velocity increases
stresses on barrel behavior wall temperature the outer wall increased
Ding et al. [120] formulated Developed the modeling method The method adequately predicted the (a) The maximum pressure is more
parametric geometric modeling of using Python code & ABAQUS/CAE global responses (muzzle velocity & prone to the wear of gun bore than
the worn barrel with novel FE software, computed the plastic maximum chamber pressure) and the muzzle velocity,
meshing strategy, and accordingly deformation of rotating band and the local effects (localized thermal (b) In worn barrel, the friction
studied the worn barrel-projectile performance of interior ballistics distribution & plastic deformation of resistance of the rotating band
interaction analysis the band) decreases which degrades the IB
performance

Fig. 11. Magnified image of a microscopic crack due to thermochemical erosion.

14
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

Table 4
Remaining useful life improvement of Gun barrel by use of coatings.
Researcher with objective Methodology — principle Study output Observations/Remark
Cote and Rickard [122] studied the Examined the barrel specimens by Chemical charge is the originator Required coating features:
erosion initiation of steel under the optical microscopy, laser scanning to erosion damage into the steel, (a) chemically inert,
protective chromium coating in confocal microscopy (LSCM), and and with higher flame temperature, (b) high thermal shock resistance,
120 mm (M256) and 155 mm through the electron microprobe corrosion increment of chromium (c) resistance to coating cracking
(M199 & XM297) gun barrels analyses coating occurs from sliding wear
Sopok [123] performed an Used erosion prediction algorithms Erosive degradation thresholds are Cannon bore protection materials
optimization study of the gun bore such as CCET thermochemistry governed by oxidizing, carburizing, include pure chromium, high & low
protection materials using a cannon, XNOVAKTC interior or intermediate-reducing solid contraction chromium, tantalum,
thermal–chemical vented combustor ballistics, MABL, and MACE propellant combustion environment molybdenum, rhenium, and
erosion model niobium
Conroy et al. [124] studied NSRG codes are used for Down-bore erosion in the Under similar circumstances
non-equilibrium (finite-rate) and non-equilibrium chemical kinetics equilibrium is more than the tantalum may erode more than
equilibrium (infinite-rate) chemical non-equilibrium chromium due to its physical
kinetics of erosion for chromium properties
plated M256 120 mm tank canon
Underwood et al. [125] adapted Thermo-mechanical modeling is Higher interface temperature causes Three measures of thermal damage
concepts of Evans & extended to include time-varying more softening of the thin are described: peak near-bore
Hutchinson [126] for FE study of gas temperature and convection chromium and lower shear strength temperatures, the temperature
slip-zone coating failure for coefficient data as inputs, also at the interface which results in difference between the heated
chromium and silicon carbide bore extended to constant heat input more severe thermal damage surface and 0.1 mm below the
surface of 120 mm cannon conditions surface, and coating segment shear
stress
Sopok et al. [127,128] developed The devised models, predictions, Erosion life of low contraction Emphasized on location and
erosion models based on thermal, and mitigation efforts are used for chromium (LC-Cr) plated guns mechanisms of the erosion process
chemical, and mechanical gun bore estimating the erosion life for exceeds that of high contraction
erosion theories and mechanisms various coating types chromium (HC-Cr) by a factor of
more than 2
de Rosset and Montgomery [129] The bore diameters are measured Qualitatively (without modeling) Elimination of chemical and
examined the degree of wear and with a laser system i.e. bore explained that the cobalt-base alloy thermal effects produces unusual
erosion by multiple firing tests of a erosion measurement and is an excellent gun liner material wear pattern
small caliber gun barrel made of a inspection system (BEMIS)
cobalt-base alloy
Wang et al. [130] characterized the Failure of the gun barrel is The damage rate in both the tail 3D intelligent hyperfield
damage features of a machine gun correlated with the peeling and and the muzzle is higher than that microscopy (3DIHM) is introduced
barrel to explore its failure wearing of the Cr layer on the bore in the middle of the barrel for the first time into the study of
mechanism surface from gun tail to muzzle gun barrel damage
Li et al. [131] established an Barrel material erosion process is It is confirmed that the The impact of melting degradation
isothermal erosion model for a divided into three steps- thermal–chemical erosion is can be overlooked since
machine gun barrel and used a (a) slow erosion step, predominant failure mechanism at thermal–chemical erosion occurs
numerical simulation method to (b) thermal–chemical erosion step, the start of rifling, also the erosion primarily in the starting region of
study the bore erosion under and zone expands with the increase in barrel rifling
typical shooting conditions (c) melting erosion step firing frequency
Luo [132] used plasma quenching The inner wall is rapidly The surface hardness is increased After the plasma quenching, the
technology on the inner surface austenitized and then rapidly (from 320HV to the highest wear mechanism changes from
material of the gun barrel to cooled to form a fine martensite 750HV) and surface abrasion sticky wear to abrasive wear
improve resistance against wear structure resistance is enhanced (around 11
and corrosion times)

4. Discussion and conclusion

The paper at length discusses various causes of gun barrels’ failure which mainly occur due to large mechanical stresses (radial,
hoop stresses), and fatigue occurs at high pressure during firing. Presently, Autofrettage is the state-of-the-art technique that reduces
the radial stresses at the inner layers of the barrel. The other reasons for degradation of barrel failure include thermal, and chemical
reasons such as crack propagation, erosion, wear growth, etc. Various mathematical relations have been formulated by researchers to
estimate the degradation rate and hence predict the life of the barrel. The formulas determine the degradation profile by estimating
the wear rate and erosion in the barrels. The empirical relations derived by the researchers to calculate the wear and erosion
have their own assumptions and limitations which provide the wear information and the barrel degradation, hence predicting the
useful life of the barrels. It is also discussed that in order to reduce erosion and wear, additives and coating are the best solutions
respectively. However, their durability at high temperature, pressure, and cyclic loading e.g. at high-pressure conditions of the barrel
environment is not verified.
Furthermore, we have discussed various techniques for diagnosing the gun barrels such as wear estimation using Boroscope, star
gauge, optical technique, and ultrasonic methods. The measurement carried out by these instruments can be used to predict the

15
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

wear and erosion rates for different ranges of small and large size cannons. The methods include (1) Continuous heat monitoring
method which estimates the wear life as a function of heat release due to friction and the gun barrel (2) Dimension based method,
in which we measure the change in dimension of bore diameter and the chamber length, (3) Velocity based method in which the
muzzle velocity with respect to each shot and the remaining life is predicted as a function of change in velocity, (4) strain-based
methods which measure the strain based upon round fired and estimates the life as a function of change in strain. The measurement
data from these instruments may further be used to fit in data prediction models such as the Probabilistic model, data-driven model,
prognostics model, hybrid models, machine learning, etc.
Following points can be used for summarizing our review of various kinds of research in the field of gun barrel health monitoring
and prognostics:

• Addition of additives increases the barrel life, the additives used by the researchers TiO2 are considered to be the best due to
their ability of not producing the residues in the barrel.
• Decrease in muzzle velocity is one of the major observable effects caused by barrel wear. Thus, muzzle velocity is among the
best parameters to estimate wear calculation.
• Diamond indenter and optical bore-mapping systems are the best manually operated apparatus available for getting quantita-
tive and qualitative information on gun barrel wear. The ultrasonic waves are the non-destructive state-of-the-art technique
in the field of gun barrel wear calculation.
• Strain measurement is considered as the best technique for barrel life prediction approach based upon the wear.

5. Future scope

In the available literature, different diagnosis techniques and causes of degradation of gun barrels have been independently
discussed. However, till date, no research discuss their coupled effects as a function of time. Moreover, the research on microscopic
study of the Autofrettage gun barrels is not discussed. Based on the available state-of-the-art techniques, a few potential futuristic
aspect are discussed as follows:

• Study of microstructures of the cracks developed by the combined effect of thermochemical erosion as well as by fatigue,
• Study of cracks in autofrettaged and non-autofrettaged gun barrels apart from the effect of residual stress,
• Active health monitoring of the barrels is a challenge due to their sustainability of sensors at high temperature and various
weather conditions,
• Implementation of Machine learning or Deep learning concepts to predict to estimate the RUL of barrels.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

References

[1] I. Ahmad, The problem of gun barrel erosion: an overview, Gun Propuls. Technol. 109 (1988) 311–355.
[2] B. Lawton, Thermal and chemical effects on gun barrel wear, in: 8th International Symposium on Ballistics, Orlando, Florida, 1984.
[3] Y. Schneebaum, A. Gany, Theoretical and experimental investigation of Barrel steel erosion in hot reactive flows, in: 20th Internal Ballistics Symposium,
2004.
[4] F. Seiler, K. Zimeermann, V. Schlett, Erosion inside a 20 mm gun barrel for pressures up to 5000 bar, in: International Symposium on Ballistics, 1989.
[5] Z. Hou, S. Peng, Q. Yu, X. Shao, Interface crack behavior of thermal protection coating of gun bores under transient convective cooling, Eng. Fail. Anal.
137 (2022) 106411.
[6] B. Lawton, Simulation of gun barrel erosion in a vented vessel, in: International Symposium on Ballistics, 1989.
[7] J.I. Kimura, Hydrogen gas erosion of high-energy LOVA propellants, in: Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Ballistics, 1996, pp. 307–315.
[8] T.L. Davis, The Chemistry of Powder and Explosives, Pickle Partners Publishing, 2016.
[9] M. Akcay, Internal and transitional ballistic solution for spherical and perforated propellants and verification with experimental results, Therm. Sci.
Technol. 37 (1) (2017).
[10] Y.H. Shan, Z.G. Nie, S.Q. Shan, L.D. Tan, Correlations between gun-barrels temperature rising and shooting specifications, in: Applied Mechanics and
Materials, Vol. 775, Trans Tech Publ, 2015, pp. 115–118.
[11] J. Chen, W. Wang, P. Jin, C. Dou, C. Zhao, Q. Li, C. Zhang, J. Huang, Thermo-mechanical analysis of strength degradation of 30SiMn2MoVA gun barrel
material during continuous shooting, Eng. Fail. Anal. (2022) 106438.
[12] D. Ozmen, M. Kurt, B. Ekici, Y. Kaynak, Static, dynamic and fatigue analysis of a semi-automaticgun locking block, Eng. Fail. Anal. 16 (7) (2009)
2235–2244.
[13] J. Zheng, H. Li, B. Wu, Low cycle fatigue damage of gun barrel and its monitoring for prevention of fracture, in: 2021 4th International Conference on
Electron Device and Mechanical Engineering (ICEDME), 2021, pp. 292–295, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICEDME52809.2021.00068.
[14] G. Fushen, Q. Wenjian, L. Shichao, S. Le, Study on the gun tube life prediction, J. Nanjing Univ. Sci. Technol. 21 (1997) 229–232, Jun.
[15] M. Ôkôchi, On erosion of guns, J. Zosen Kiokai 1919 (24) (1919) 79–111.

16
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

[16] J.S. Burlew, The Erosion of Guns. Part One: Fundamentals of Ordnance Relating to Gun Erosion, NDRC Report No. A-90, Office of Scientific Research
and Development Washington DC, September 1942.
[17] J.S. Burlew, The Erosion of Guns. Part Two: The Characteristics of Gun Erosion, NDRC Report No. A-91, Carnegie Inst of Washington DC, October 1942.
[18] W.T. Ebihara, D.T. Rorabaugh, Mechanisms of gun-tube erosion and wear, Gun Propuls. Technol. 109 (1988) 357–376.
[19] I.A. Johnston, Understanding and Predicting Gun Barrel Erosion, DSTO–TR–1757, Defence Science and Technology Organisation Edinburgh (Australia)
Weapons, August 2005.
[20] D. Turley, G. Gumming, A. Gunner, I. McDermott, A metallurgical study of erosive wear in a 105 mm tank gun barrel, Wear 176 (1) (1994) 9–17.
[21] S. Shelton, A. Bergles, P. Saha, Study of Heat Transfer and Erosion in Gun Barrels, Technical Report AFATL-TR-73-69, Georgia Inst of Tech Atlanta School
of Mechanical Engineering, March 1973.
[22] A.J. Bracuti, R. Field, Wear Reducing Additives, Technical Report ARWEC-TR-02006, Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
Picatinny Arsenal NJ, December 2002.
[23] R.S. Montgomery, F.K. Sautter, Erosion and its Control, Technical Report ARLCB-TR-82040, Army Armament Research and Development Center Watervliet
NY Large Caliber Weapons Systems Lab, December 1982.
[24] T.L. Brosseau, J.R. Ward, Reduction of Heat Transfer to Gun Barrels by Wear-Reducing Additives, Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
1975.
[25] J.R. Ward, T.L. Brosseau, Reduction of Heat Transfer to High Velocity Gun Barrels by Wear-Reducing Additives, ASME Paper no. 77-HT, 1978.
[26] J.R. Ward, T.L. Brosseau, The reduction of barrel erosion by wear-reducing additives, Wear 60 (1) (1980) 149–155.
[27] W. Fan, P. Gao, A review on erosion-reducing additive materials to extend the lifespan of gun barrels, J. Mater. Sci. 56 (36) (2021) 19767–19790.
[28] I. Ahmad, Physicochemical Aspects of Gun Barrel Erosion and its Control, Technical Report AMNMS No. 501A.11.84400, Watervliet Arsenal NY Benet
Weapons Lab, September 1975.
[29] R. Hammond, The chromium plating of gun barrels, Trans. IMF 34 (1) (1956) 83–110.
[30] W.T. Ebihara, Erosion in 7.62 mm Machine Gun Barrels, Technical Report RE-70- 196, Army Weapons Command Rock Island IL Research Development
and Engineering Directorate, December 1970.
[31] H. So, D.S. Yu, C.Y. Chuang, Formation and wear mechanism of tribo-oxides and the regime of oxidational wear of steel, Wear 253 (9–10) (2002)
1004–1015.
[32] W.M. Rainforth, A.J. Leonard, C. Perrin, A. Bedolla-Jacuinde, Y. Wang, H. Jones, Q. Luo, High resolution observations of friction-induced oxide and its
interaction with the worn surface, Tribol. Int. 35 (11) (2002) 731–748.
[33] T.F.J. Quinn, Computational methods applied to oxidational wear, Wear 199 (2) (1996) 169–180.
[34] M.X. Wei, K.M. Chen, S.Q. Wang, X.H. Cui, Analysis for wear behaviors of oxidative wear, Tribol. Lett. 42 (1) (2011) 1–7.
[35] M.F. Zimmer, A.C. Haukland, Gun corrosion—its cause and prevention, Corros. Sci. 11 (7) (1971) 553–555.
[36] W.G. Joseph, Use of Foamed Polyurethane in Decreasing Erosion in Guns, Technical Report No.2520, Picatinny Arsenal, Diver, NJ, 1958.
[37] K. Daniel, Wear reduction additives, 1968, US Patent 3, 362, 328.
[38] C. Lenchitz, R.W. Velicky, L.A. Bottei, G. Silvestro, Some Aspects of the Erosion Reducing Characteristics of the Titanium Oxide-Wax Additive, Technology
Memorandum no. 1869, 1965.
[39] J.P. Picard, R.L. Trask, A new gun barrel erosion reducer, J. Spacecr. Rockets 5 (12) (1968) 1487–1488.
[40] J.P. Picard, Erosion reducer, 1968, US Patent 3, 392, 670.
[41] A.J. Bracuti, L.A. Bottei, R. Davis, Potential Multipurpose Additives: Flash-Erosion Suppressant, Technical Report ARLCD-TR-83028, Army Armament
Research and Development Center Dover NJ Large Caliber Weapon Systems Lab, June 1983.
[42] N. Rezgui, D. Simić, C. Boulahbal, D. Micković, Fullerene-like nanoparticles of WS2 as a promising protection from erosive wear of gun bore nozzles,
Curr. Nanosci. 16 (1) (2020) 62–70.
[43] A.P. Boresi, R.J. Schmidt, O.M. Sidebottom, Advanced Mechanics of Materials, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 1993.
[44] J.F. Harvey, Theory and Design of Pressure Vessels, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 115 Fifth Ave, New York, New York 10003, USA, 1985. 623, 1985.
[45] J. Harvey, J.H. Harvey, Theory and design of pressure vessels (third edition), J. Press. Vessel Technol. 108 (2) (1986) 244–245, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1115/1.3264775, arXiv:https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pressurevesseltech/article-pdf/108/2/244/5534969/244_1.pdf.
[46] P.P. Benham, R.J. Crawford, C.G. Armstrong, Mechanics of Engineering Materials, second ed., Longmans Green, UK, 1996.
[47] A. Partovi, S.S. Shamili, Analysis of autofrettaged high pressure components, 2012.
[48] A. Imam, An Empirical Approach to Predicting Cannon Tube Erosion Rate, WVT-TR-74033, Watervliet Arsenal NY, August 1974.
[49] D.Y. Chung, M. Oh, New empirical method to enhance the accuracy in the erosion prediction of cannon tube, Wear 255 (1–6) (2003) 98–101.
[50] R. Miner, Computational Interior Ballistics Modeling, University of New Mexico, New Mexico, 2013.
[51] S. Beer, M. Hajn, Assessment of the muzzle velocity decrease and the barrel bore lifetime, 2000.
[52] G.R. Johnson, W.H. Cook, Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures, Eng. Fract. Mech.
21 (1) (1985) 31–48.
[53] R.G. Hasenbein, Wear and Erosion in Large Caliber Gun Barrels, RTO-MP-AVT-109, Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
Watervliet NY, 2004.
[54] G. Wang, Z. Jin, Research on defects positioning method of barrel based on L (0, 2) mode, 2015.
[55] A.K. Jardine, D. Lin, D. Banjevic, A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing condition-based maintenance, Mech. Syst. Signal
Process. 20 (7) (2006) 1483–1510.
[56] D. Kumar, S. Kalra, M.S. Jha, Recent advancements on structural health monitoring using lamb waves, in: Computational and Experimental Methods in
Mechanical Engineering, Springer, 2022, pp. 131–142.
[57] S. Kalra, M. Meenu, D. Kumar, Damage detection in eggshell using lamb waves, in: Computational and Experimental Methods in Mechanical Engineering,
Springer, 2022, pp. 1–8.
[58] J.Z. Sikorska, M. Hodkiewicz, L. Ma, Prognostic modelling options for remaining useful life estimation by industry, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 25 (5)
(2011) 1803–1836.
[59] O. Fink, Q. Wang, M. Svensen, P. Dersin, W.-J. Lee, M. Ducoffe, Potential, challenges and future directions for deep learning in prognostics and health
management applications, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 92 (2020) 103678.
[60] X.-S. Si, W. Wang, C.-H. Hu, D.-H. Zhou, Remaining useful life estimation–a review on the statistical data driven approaches, European J. Oper. Res.
213 (1) (2011) 1–14.
[61] Y. Lei, N. Li, L. Guo, N. Li, T. Yan, J. Lin, Machinery health prognostics: A systematic review from data acquisition to RUL prediction, Mech. Syst. Signal
Process. 104 (2018) 799–834.
[62] W. Wu, J. Hu, J. Zhang, Prognostics of machine health condition using an improved ARIMA-based prediction method, in: 2007 2nd IEEE Conference on
Industrial Electronics and Applications, Ieee, 2007, pp. 1062–1067.
[63] B. Rezaeianjouybari, Y. Shang, Deep learning for prognostics and health management: State of the art, challenges, and opportunities, Measurement 163
(2020) 107929.
[64] X. Li, Q. Ding, J.-Q. Sun, Remaining useful life estimation in prognostics using deep convolution neural networks, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 172 (2018)
1–11.

17
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

[65] Q. Wang, B. Zhao, H. Ma, J. Chang, G. Mao, A method for rapidly evaluating reliability and predicting remaining useful life using two-dimensional
convolutional neural network with signal conversion, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 33 (6) (2019) 2561–2571.
[66] J. Wang, G. Wen, S. Yang, Y. Liu, Remaining useful life estimation in prognostics using deep bidirectional lstm neural network, in: 2018 Prognostics and
System Health Management Conference (PHM-Chongqing), IEEE, 2018, pp. 1037–1042.
[67] M. Längkvist, L. Karlsson, A. Loutfi, A review of unsupervised feature learning and deep learning for time-series modeling, Pattern Recognit. Lett. 42
(2014) 11–24.
[68] E. Zio, G. Peloni, Particle filtering prognostic estimation of the remaining useful life of nonlinear components, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96 (3) (2011)
403–409.
[69] C. Kulkarni, G. Biswas, S. Saha, K. Goebel, et al., A model-based prognostics methodology for electrolytic capacitors based on electrical overstress
accelerated aging, in: Annual Conference of the PHM Society, Vol. 3, 2011.
[70] R.W. Kuehl, Using the arrhenius equation to predict drift in thin film resistors, CARTS Eur. (2010) 121–133.
[71] E. Maricau, G. Gielen, A methodology for measuring transistor ageing effects towards accurate reliability simulation, in: 2009 15th IEEE International
on-Line Testing Symposium, IEEE, 2009, pp. 21–26.
[72] J.-C. Lu, J. Park, Q. Yang, Statistical inference of a time-to-failure distribution derived from linear degradation data, Technometrics 39 (4) (1997) 391–400.
[73] C.S. Kulkarni, J.R. Celaya, K. Goebel, G. Biswas, Physics based electrolytic capacitor degradation models for prognostic studies under thermal overstress,
in: PHM Society European Conference, Vol. 1, 2012.
[74] B. Saha, K. Goebel, S. Poll, J. Christophersen, Prognostics methods for battery health monitoring using a Bayesian framework, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas.
58 (2) (2008) 291–296.
[75] M. Jouin, R. Gouriveau, D. Hissel, M.-C. Péra, N. Zerhouni, Prognostics of PEM fuel cell in a particle filtering framework, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 39
(1) (2014) 481–494.
[76] M.S. Jha, G. Dauphin-Tanguy, B. Ould-Bouamama, Particle filter based hybrid prognostics for health monitoring of uncertain systems in bond graph
framework, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 75 (2016) 301–329.
[77] B. Saha, K. Goebel, Modeling li-ion battery capacity depletion in a particle filtering framework, in: Annual Conference of the PHM Society, Vol. 1, 2009.
[78] F. Cadini, E. Zio, D. Avram, Monte Carlo-based filtering for fatigue crack growth estimation, Probab. Eng. Mech. 24 (3) (2009) 367–373.
[79] M.J. Daigle, K. Goebel, A model-based prognostics approach applied to pneumatic valves, Int. J. Progn. Health Manage. 2 (2) (2011) 84–99.
[80] M.S. Jha, G. Dauphin-Tanguy, B. Ould-Bouamama, Particle filter based integrated health monitoring in bond graph framework, in: Bond Graphs for
Modelling, Control and Fault Diagnosis of Engineering Systems, Springer, 2017, pp. 233–270.
[81] H. Khorasgani, G. Biswas, S. Sankararaman, Methodologies for system-level remaining useful life prediction, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 154 (2016) 8–18.
[82] B. Wu, B.j. Liu, J. Zheng, T. Wang, R.G. Chen, X.L. Chen, K.S. Zhang, Z.Q. Zou, Strain-based health monitoring and remaining life prediction of large
caliber gun barrel, Measurement 122 (2018) 297–311.
[83] B. Lawton, Thermo-chemical erosion in gun barrels, Wear 251 (1–12) (2001) 827–838.
[84] B. Lawton, Temperature and heat transfer at the commencement of rifling of a 155 mm gun, in: 19th Internal Ballistics Symposium, Interlaken, Switzerland,
2001.
[85] D.Y. Chung, N. Shin, M. Oh, S.H. Yoo, S.H. Nam, Prediction of erosion from heat transfer measurements of 40 mm gun tubes, Wear 263 (1–6) (2007)
246–250.
[86] C. LaVigna, J. Bowlus, H. Kwatny, S. Chen, H. Zhang, S. Cytron, Performance enhancement and health monitoring of a medium caliber gun system
using optical fiber Bragg grating sensors, in: 10th U.S. Army Gun Dynamics Symposium Proceedings, Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command
Picatinny Arsenal NJ, 2001.
[87] R.S. Montgomery, Muzzle wear of cannon, Wear 33 (2) (1975) 359–368.
[88] F. Proschan, J. Sethuraman, A probability model for initial crack size and fatigue life of gun barrels, Nav. Res. Logist. Q. 25 (2) (1978) 273–277.
[89] M. Perl, T. Saley, Swage and hydraulic autofrettage impact on fracture endurance and fatigue life of an internally cracked smooth gun barrel Part I–The
effect of overstraining, Eng. Fract. Mech. 182 (2017) 372–385.
[90] M. Perl, T. Saley, Swage and hydraulic autofrettage impact on fracture endurance and fatigue life of an internally cracked smooth gun barrel part II–The
combined effect of pressure and overstraining, Eng. Fract. Mech. 182 (2017) 386–399.
[91] M. Perl, T. Saley, The cumulative detrimental impact of pressure and autofrettage on the fatigue life of an externally cracked modern tank gun barrel,
AIMS Mater. Sci. 6 (5) (2019) 833–851.
[92] M. Perl, T. Saley, The detrimental effect of autofrettage on externally cracked modern tank gun barrels, Def. Technol. 15 (2) (2019) 146–153.
[93] N. Hussain, F. Qayyum, R.A. Pasha, M. Shah, Development of multi-physics numerical simulation model to investigate thermo-mechanical fatigue crack
propagation in an autofrettaged gun barrel, Def. Technol. 17 (5) (2021) 1579–1591.
[94] T.D. Andrews, Projectile driving band interactions with gun barrels, 2006, pp. 273–278.
[95] V.K. Zelenko, V.M. Korolev, Y.N. Drozdov, Wear of the barrel channel in a sniper rifle, Russ. Eng. Res. 30 (8) (2010) 789–791.
[96] C. Shen, K.D. Zhou, Y. Lu, J.S. Li, Modeling and simulation of bullet-barrel interaction process for the damaged gun barrel, Def. Technol. 15 (6) (2019)
972–986.
[97] M. Štiavnickỳ, P. Lisỳ, Influence of barrel vibration on the barrel muzzle position at the moment when bullet exits barrel, Adv. Mil. Technol. 8 (1) (2013)
89–102.
[98] X. Li, L. Mu, Y. Zang, Q. Qin, Study on performance degradation and failure analysis of machine gun barrel, Def. Technol. 16 (2) (2020) 362–373.
[99] J.H. Underwood, M.J. Audino, Army Cannon Fatigue Life Evaluation: Crack Initiation, Fracture Mechanics, and NDI, ARCCB-TR-96008, Army Armament
Research Development and Engineering Center Watervliet NY, March 1996.
[100] A.P. Parker, J.H. Underwood, J.F. Throop, C.P. Andrasic, Stress intensity and fatigue crack growth in a pressurized, autofrettaged thick cylinder, in:
Fracture Mechanics: Fourteenth Symposium-Volume I: Theory and Analysis, ASTM International, 1983.
[101] H. Tada, P.C. Paris, G.R. Irwin, The stress analysis of cracks, in: Handbook, Vol. 34, Del Research Corporation, 1973.
[102] L. Banks-Sills, R. Eliasi, Fatigue life analysis of a cannon barrel, Eng. Fail. Anal. 6 (6) (1999) 371–385.
[103] D.Y. Chung, H. Kong, S.H. Nam, A study on the precision wear measurement for a high friction and high pressurized gun barrel by using a diamond
indenter, Wear 225 (1999) 1258–1263.
[104] E. Petitpas, B. Campion, Crack propagation in a gun barrel due to the firing thermo-mechanical stresses, J. Press. Vessel Technol. 125 (3) (2003) 293–298.
[105] R.A. Mahdavinejad, Prediction of cannon barrel life, J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 30 (1) (2008) 11–18.
[106] T.C. Chen, C.C. Liu, H.Y. Jang, P.C. Tuan, Inverse estimation of heat flux and temperature in multi-layer gun barrel, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 50 (11–12)
(2007) 2060–2068.
[107] H.L. Lee, Y.C. Yang, W.J. Chang, T.S. Wu, Estimation of heat flux and thermal stresses in multilayer gun barrel with thermal contact resistance, Appl.
Math. Comput. 209 (2) (2009) 211–221.
[108] J.H. Noh, K.U. Cha, S.J. Yook, Three-dimensional inverse heat conduction modeling of a multi-layered hollow cylindrical tube using input estimation
algorithm and thermal resistance network, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 106 (2017) 793–803.
[109] J.H. Noh, D.B. Kwak, K.B. Kim, K.U. Cha, S.J. Yook, Inverse heat conduction modeling to predict heat flux in a hollow cylindrical tube having irregular
cross-sections, Appl. Therm. Eng. 128 (2018) 1310–1321.

18
D. Kumar et al. Engineering Failure Analysis 142 (2022) 106791

[110] P.J. Conroy, M.L. Bundy, J.L. Kennedy, Simulated and Experimental In-Wall Temperatures for 120-mm Ammunition, ARL-TR-770, Army Research Lab
Aberdeen Proving Ground MD, June 1995.
[111] P.J. Conroy, Gun Tube Heating, Technical Report BRL-TR-3300, Army Ballistic Research Lab Aberdeen Proving Ground MD, December 1991.
[112] Y.C. Yang, H.L. Lee, J.C. Hsu, S.S. Chu, Thermal stresses in multilayer gun barrel with interlayer thermal contact resistance, J. Therm. Stress. 31 (7)
(2008) 624–637.
[113] A. Mishra, A. Hameed, B. Lawton, A novel scheme for computing gun barrel temperature history and its experimental validation, 2010.
[114] A. Mishra, A. Hameed, B. Lawton, Transient thermal analyses of midwall cooling and external cooling methods for a gun barrel, J. Heat Transfer 132
(9) (2010).
[115] D.E. Yuhas, M.J. Mutton, J.R. Remiasz, C.L. Vorres, Ultrasonic measurements of bore temperature in large caliber guns, in: AIP Conference Proceedings,
Vol. 1096, American Institute of Physics, 2009, pp. 1759–1766.
[116] M. Akcay, M.A. Yükselen, Unsteady thermal studies of gun barrels during the interior ballistic cycle with non-homogenous gun barrel material thermal
characteristics, J. Therm. Sci. Technol. 34 (2) (2014) 75–81.
[117] A. Şentürk, H. Işık, C. Evci, Thermo-mechanically coupled thermal and stress analysis of interior ballistics problem, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 104 (2016) 39–53.
[118] E. Değirmenci, M.H. Dirikolu, A thermochemical approach for the determination of convection heat transfer coefficients in a gun barrel, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 37 (2012) 275–279.
[119] E. Değirmenci, C. Evci, H. Işık, M. Macar, N. Yılmaz, M.H. Dirikolu, V. Çelik, Thermo-mechanical analysis of double base propellant combustion in a
barrel, Appl. Therm. Eng. 102 (2016) 1287–1299.
[120] C. Ding, N. Liu, X. Zhang, A mesh generation method for worn gun barrel and its application in projectile-barrel interaction analysis, Finite Elem. Anal.
Des. 124 (2017) 22–32.
[121] S. Sopok, P. O’Hara, G. Pflegl, S. Dunn, D. Coats, G. Nickerson, Unified computer model for predicting thermochemical erosion in gun barrels, J. Propul.
Power 15 (4) (1999) 601–612.
[122] P.J. Cote, C. Rickard, Gas–metal reaction products in the erosion of chromium-plated gun bores, Wear 241 (1) (2000) 17–25.
[123] S. Sopok, Erosion modeling of vented combustor cannon bore materials, in: 35th AIAA Thermophysics Conference, 2001, p. 2827.
[124] P.J. Conroy, M.J. Nusca, C. Chabalowski, W.R. Anderson, Initial Studies of Gun Tube Erosion Macroscopic Surface Kinetics, ARL-TR-2546, Army Research
Lab Aberdeen Proving Ground MD Weapons and Materials Research, July 2001.
[125] J.H. Underwood, M.D. Witherell, S. Sopok, J.C. McNeil, C.P. Mulligan, G.N. Vigilante, Thermomechanical modeling of transient thermal damage in cannon
bore materials, Wear 257 (9–10) (2004) 992–998.
[126] A.G. Evans, J.W. Hutchinson, The thermomechanical integrity of thin films and multilayers, Acta Metall. Mater. 43 (7) (1995) 2507–2530.
[127] S. Sopok, C. Rickard, S. Dunn, Thermal–chemical–mechanical gun bore erosion of an advanced artillery system part one: theories and mechanisms, Wear
258 (1–4) (2005) 659–670.
[128] S. Sopok, C. Rickard, S. Dunn, Thermal–chemical–mechanical gun bore erosion of an advanced artillery system part two: modeling and predictions, Wear
258 (1–4) (2005) 671–683.
[129] W.S. de Rosset, J.S. Montgomery, Cobalt-base alloy gun barrel study, Wear 316 (1–2) (2014) 119–123.
[130] Z.M. Wang, C.D. Hu, Y.X. Wang, H.C. Lu, J.S. Li, H. Dong, Failure mechanism of gun barrel caused by peeling of Cr layer and softening of bore matrix,
Metals 11 (2) (2021) 348.
[131] X. Li, Y. Zang, L. Mu, Y. Lian, Q. Qin, Erosion analysis of machine gun barrel and lifespan prediction under typical shooting conditions, Wear 444 (2020)
203177.
[132] T.F. Luo, A method of plasma quenching in the gun barrel, in: Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1748, IOP Publishing, 2021, 052008.

19