The purpose of this paper is to verify the applicability of innovative technologies for manufacturing controlled fragmentation warheads, with particular attention paid to guided ammunition. Several studies were conducted by the authors during the warhead development of DART and Vulcano family munitions. The lethality of the guided munitions can be considerably increased with controlled fragmentation warheads. This increase can compensate a lower payload of the guided munitions. After introducing the concept of warhead and its natural fragmentation, the paper describes both the elements of fracture mechanics related to the fragmentation and the state of the art of controlled fragmentation. A preliminary evaluation of controlled fragmentation technologies is illustrated along with the numerical models developed for predicting the natural and controlled fragmentations. The most promising technologies are presented in detail and the features of the warheads used for the experiments are defined. A description of the entire experimental phase is provided, including results of arena tests, data analysis and revision of numerical models. The applicability of some innovative technologies for controlled fragmentation warheads is fully demonstrated. Two technologies in particular, the laser microdrilling and the double casing solution, provide a high increase of the reference warhead lethality.

Issue Section:
Explosion Mechanics
Topics:
Computer simulation, Lasers, Melting, Warheads, Nitriding, Simulation

References

1.
Carleone
,
J.
,
1993
, “
Tactical Missile Warheads
,”
Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics
, Vol.
155
,
A. R.
Seebass
, ed.,
AIAA
,
Washington, DC
.
2.
Hoggart
,
C. R.
, and
Recht
,
R. F.
,
1968
, “
Fracture Behavior of Tubular Bombs
,”
J. Appl. Phys.
,
39
(
3
), pp.
1856
–
1862
.10.1063/1.1656442
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
3.
Al-Hassani
,
S. T. S.
,
Hopkins
,
H. G.
, and
Johnson
,
W.
,
1969
, “
A Note on the Fragmentation of Tubular Bombs
,”
Int. J. Mech. Sci.
,
11
(
6
), pp.
545
–
549
.10.1016/0020-7403(69)90055-1
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
4.
Predebon
,
W. W.
,
Smothers
,
W. G.
, and
Anderson
,
C. E.
, Jr.,
1977
, “
Missile Warhead Modeling: Computations and Experiments
,” Ballistic Research Laboratory, Report No. BRL-MR-2796.
5.
Anderson
,
C. E.
, Jr.,
Predebon
,
W. W.
, and
Karpp
,
R. R.
,
1985
, “
Computational Modeling of Explosive-Filled Cylinders
,”
Int. J. Eng. Sci.
,
23
(
12
), pp.
1317
–
1330
.10.1016/0020-7225(85)90110-7
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
6.
Karpp
,
R. R.
, and
Predebon
,
W. W.
,
1975
, “
Calculations of Fragment Velocities From Naturally Fragmenting Munitions
,” Ballistic Research Laboratory, Report No. BRL-MR-2509.
7.
Anderson
,
C. E.
, Jr.,
1987
, “
An Overview of the Theory of Hydrocodes
,”
Int. J. Impact Eng.
,
5
(
1–4
), pp.
33
–
59
.10.1016/0734-743X(87)90029-7
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
8.
Beetle
,
J. C.
, and
Schwartz
,
M.
,
1976
, “
Survey and Assessment of Fragmentation Materials/Concepts
,” U. S. Army Armament Command, Tech. Report No. FA-TR-76029.
9.
Hirvonen
,
J. C.
,
Snoha
,
D. J.
,
Montgomery
,
J. S.
,
Kecskes
,
L. J.
,
Gray
,
D. M.
, and
de Rosset
,
W. S.
,
2009
, “
Use of Liquid Metal Embrittlement (LME) for Controlled Fracture
,” Army Research Laboratory, Tech. Report No. ARL-TR-4976.
10.
O'Donoghue
,
P. E.
,
Predebon
,
W. W.
, and
Anderson
,
C. E.
, Jr.,
1988
, “
Dynamic Launch Process of Preformed Fragments
,”
J. Appl. Phys.
,
63
(
2
), pp.
337
–
348
.10.1063/1.341150
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
11.
Gurney
,
R. W.
,
1943
, “
The Initial Velocities of Fragments From Bombs, Shells and Grenades
,” Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, Report No. BRL 405.
12.
Elek
,
P.
, and
Jaramaz
,
S.
,
2007
, “
Size Distribution of Fragments Generated by Detonation of Fragmenting Warheads
,”
Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on Ballistics
,
Tarragona
,
Spain
, April 16–20.
13.
Pearson
,
J.
,
1990
, “
A Fragmentation Model for Cylindrical Warheads
,” Naval Weapons Center, Report No. NWC-TP-7124.
14.
Pearson
,
J.
,
1978
, “
The Shear Control Method of Warhead Fragmentation
,”
Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Ballistics
,
Monterey, CA
, October 17–19.
15.
Numerics GmbH, 2012, Split-X®, Numerics, Fernhag, Germany.
16.
Ansys, Inc., 2009, Autodyn® release 12.1, Ansys, Ann Arbor, MI.
17.
Gold
,
V. M.
,
Baker
,
E. L.
, and
Poulos
,
W. J.
,
2007
, “
Modeling Fragmentation Performance of Natural and Controlled Fragmentation Munitions
,”
Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on Ballistics
,
Terragona
,
Spain
, April 16–20.
18.
Ballistics Analysis Laboratory
,
1961
, “
Project THOR: The Resistance of Various Metallic Materials to Perforation by Steel Fragments; Empirical Relationships for Fragment Residual Velocity and Residual Weight
,” John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, Technical Report No. 47.
19.
Arnold
,
W.
,
2001
, “
Controlled Fragmentation
,” Proceedings of the
Shock Compression of Condensed Matter Conference
2001, Atlanta, Georgia, June 24–29, pp.
527
–
530
.10.1063/1.1483593
20.
NIMI
C,
2002
, “
Fragment Impact Testing: NIMIC's Review and Proposal
,”
NATO Insensitive Munitions
Information Center, L-86
,
Brussels
,
Belgium
.
21.
Mott
,
N. F.
,
1943
, “
Fragmentation of High Explosive Shells, A Theoretical Formula for the Distribution of Weights of Fragments
,” Army Operations Group Research.
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.