MIAO Guanghong, LI Liang, JIANG Xiangyang, LIU Wenzhen, LI Xuejiao, WANG Quan, YU Yong, SHEN Zhaowu. Numerical Simulation of Double-Sided Explosive Welding[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2018, 32(4): 045202. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20180513
Citation: YANG Hui, WANG Kehui, WANG Weiguang, LI Yang, SHEN Zikai, DUAN Jian, DAI Xianghui. Tests and Sensitive Factors Analysis on Detonation Reliability of Charge for Kinetic Energy Penetrator Warhead[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2024, 38(4): 045101. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20240729

Tests and Sensitive Factors Analysis on Detonation Reliability of Charge for Kinetic Energy Penetrator Warhead

doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20240729
  • Received Date: 26 Feb 2024
  • Rev Recd Date: 15 Mar 2024
  • Accepted Date: 20 May 2024
  • Available Online: 16 Jul 2024
  • Issue Publish Date: 25 Jul 2024
  • In order to investigate the influence of projectile structure design on the detonation reliability, a low-cost and portable static test device for fuze-warhead coordination is designed in this paper to carry out the tests of detonation transfer margin under different conditions. Based on the moving least square method, the multivariable response function is constructed to evaluate the detonation reliability and quantitatively analyze influence of the sensitive factors and coupled effects. The results indicate that the gap distance and the thickness of inert buffer layer have more significant impact on the detonation of the warhead charge while the influence of the interlayer thickness is relatively small within the preset range of 3–5 mm. To ensure the reliability of kinetic energy penetrators under ambient temperature, the relative position of fuze, the interlayer thickness, the gap distance and the thickness of inert buffer layer should not exceed 25, 3.5, 25, and 22 mm, respectively. The test device, analysis method and research results will provide a good reference and guideline for structural design and reliability verification of kinetic energy penetrators.

     

  • 光滑粒子流体动力学(Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics, SPH)方法中的搜索算法较耗时,即每个时间步都要对领域粒子进行搜索,粒子越多,耗时情况越突出,与有限元法相比,SPH方法的计算效率要低得多。为了解决SPH方法计算效率低的问题,Johnson等[1-2]和Attaway等[3]将有限元与SPH方法相结合,提出了SPH-FEM耦合的算法,即:在小变形区域使用有限元法,大变形区域仍使用SPH方法。该方法不仅提高了计算效率,而且适应性较强。

    目前,采用SPH方法对爆炸焊接进行数值模拟的相关报道较少,而且多采用二维SPH方法。Tanaka[4]采用SPH方法对爆炸焊接的斜碰撞过程进行了数值模拟,成功地模拟出射流、波形和涡旋,波长的模拟结果相对实验结果偏大。李晓杰等[5]采用SPH方法及热塑性流体力学模型对爆炸复合板的斜碰撞过程中出现的界面波进行了数值模拟,模拟结果与张登霞等[6-7]实验结果的一致性较好。刘江等[8]利用AUTODYN软件中的SPH方法模拟了爆炸复合的斜碰撞,结合模拟中有效塑性变形、温度及剪切应力呈现的变化规律发现,爆炸复合的结合机理集塑性变形、熔化和扩散为一体。本研究将采用三维SPH方法对双面爆炸焊接过程进行模拟,将其结果与实验及理论结果进行对比,分析SPH-FEM耦合方法对爆炸焊接模拟的有效性。

    以前期45钢/Q235钢双面爆炸焊接实验[9]为基础,考虑到计算效率,利用LS-DYNA建立如图 1图 2所示的两组双面爆炸焊接SPH-FEM耦合的三维真实计算模型,选用的炸药为乳化炸药(玻璃微球的质量分数为5%),计算模型中基板和复板的材料、尺寸、间隙(δ)及药厚如表 1所示。起爆方式为点起爆。

    图  1  计算模型Ⅰ(10 mm药厚)
    Figure  1.  Calculation model Ⅰ with explosive thickness of 10 mm
    图  2  计算模型Ⅱ(5 mm药厚)
    Figure  2.  Calculation model Ⅱ with explosive thickness of 5 mm
    表  1  计算模型中材料的相关参数
    Table  1.  Related parameters of materials in calculation models
    Calculationmodel Flyer plate Base plate Gap
    δ/mm
    Size of explosive/(mm×mm×mm)
    Material Size/(mm×mm×mm) Material Size/(mm×mm×mm)
    45 steel 300×150×2 Q235 300×150×16 6 300×150×10
    45 steel 300×150×2 Q235 300×150×16 6 300×150×5
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    基、复板采用3D Solid 164实体单元,单元边长为0.1 cm;炸药划分为光滑粒子,粒子的大小Δr取为0.1 cm。考虑到模型的对称性,为了提高计算效率,采用1/2模型进行计算。单位制为cm-g-μs。

    数值计算中乳化炸药采用高能燃烧模型[10-11]及JWL状态方程[12]。JWL状态方程表达式为

    p=AJWL(1ωR1v)eR1v+BJWL(1ωR2v)eR2v+ωE0v
    (1)

    式中:AJWLBJWLR1R2ω为材料参数;p为爆轰产物压力,GPa;E0为初始比内能,kJ/cm3v为爆轰气体产物的相对比容,为无量纲量。炸药的相关参数见表 2,其中:ρ为密度,D为炸药爆速。

    表  2  乳化炸药的JWL状态参数[13]
    Table  2.  JWL equation-of-state parameters of emulsion explosives[13]
    ρ/(g·cm-3) D/(m·s-1) AJWL/GPa BJWL/GPa R1 R2 ω E0/(kJ·cm-3)
    1.12 4 510 326.42 5.808 9 5.80 1.56 0.57 3.323
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    数值计算中,基、复板均采用Mie-Grüneisen状态方程[14]和Johnson-Cook材料模型[15]。Johnson-Cook材料模型的形式如下

    σ=(A+Bεnp)(1+Cln˙εp)(1Tm)
    (2)

    式中:εp为有效塑性应变;˙εp=˙εp/˙ε0p为有效塑性应变率,其中˙ε0p为参考应变率;ABCmn为与材料相关的常数;无量纲温度T*表示为T*=(T-Tr)/(Tm-Tr),其中Tr为室温, Tm为熔点。45钢选用与Q235钢相同的Johnson-Cook材料模型参数,具体参数如表 3所示。

    表  3  Q235钢的Johnson-Cook模型参数[16]
    Table  3.  Johnson-Cook parameters of Q235 steel[16]
    ρ/(g·cm-3) G/GPa A/GPa B/GPa C n m Tm/K Tr/K
    7.83 77 0.792 0.51 0.014 0.26 1.03 1 793 294
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    2.1.1   碰撞点位移

    图 3所示是爆炸焊接结束时复板的竖向位移云图。由图 3可看出,复板的位移大致均为6 mm,表明基、复板已完全复合。为了更直观地观察复板单元位移的变化情况,在复板上选择3个特征单元(431 806、437 359、444 788),输出其位移-时间曲线,如图 4所示。由图 4可看出,特征单元的竖向位移均略大于间隙(6 mm),这是由于在爆炸载荷作用下复板有一定程度的减薄率所致。

    图  3  10 mm药厚下爆炸焊接结束时复板的z向位移云图
    Figure  3.  z-direction displacement contour of flyer plate with explosive thickness of 10 mm at the end of explosive welding
    图  4  10 mm药厚下复板上3个特征单元的z向位移-时间历程
    Figure  4.  z-direction displacement histories of 3 characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 10 mm
    2.1.2   复板碰撞速度

    图 5所示是一对分别取自基板与复板结合界面处的特征单元(基板单元:798 751;复板单元:416 251),特征单元的选取与前期实验[9]中金相试样的取样位置一致。

    图  5  10 mm药厚下的一对特征单元
    Figure  5.  A pair of characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 10 mm

    图 6所示是这对特征单元的速度-时间曲线。可以看出,基板在碰撞前有一个正的速度峰;该现象的产生如文献[17]所述,是由于爆轰产物不断堆积以及前碰撞点在待复合区产生的振动能所致。复板上所取单元的最大碰撞速度为897 m/s。

    图  6  一对特征单元(见图 5)的速度-时间曲线
    Figure  6.  Velocity-time curves of the pair of characteristic elements (see Fig. 5)

    图 7所示是在复板结合界面处所选取的3个特征单元(410 476、416 251、420 976)。图 8所示是这3个特征单元的速度-时间曲线。

    图  7  10 mm药厚下复板结合界面处的3个特征单元
    Figure  7.  3 characteristic elements at the bonding interface of flyer plate with explosive thickness of 10 mm
    图  8  10 mm药厚下3个特征单元的速度-时间曲线
    Figure  8.  Velocity-time curves of 3 characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 10 mm

    图 8可以看出,随着距起爆端距离的增加,复板的碰撞速度增大。由文献[17]的结论可知,该现象是由于基板与复板的碰撞在金属板的待复合区产生了强烈振动引起的。

    2.1.3   碰撞点压力分布

    图 9所示是在结合界面处选取的3个特征单元(415 576、418 051、419 776),单元415 576取在复板中心处,与前期实验[7]中取样做金相观察的位置一致。图 10所示是3个特征单元的压力历程。

    图  9  10 mm药厚下复板结合界面处的3个特征单元
    Figure  9.  3 characteristic elements at the bonding interface of flyer plate with explosive thickness of 10 mm
    图  10  10 mm药厚下3个特征单元的压力-时间曲线
    Figure  10.  Pressure-time curves of 3 characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 10 mm

    图 10可以看出,随着距起爆端距离的增加,复板的碰撞压力增大。由文献[17]的结论可知,该现象是爆轰产物不断堆积以及前碰撞点在金属板待复合区振动能不断增加的共同作用结果。

    2.2.1   碰撞点位移

    图 11所示是爆炸焊接结束时复板的竖向位移云图。由图 11可看出,复板的位移大致均为6 mm,表明基、复板已完全复合。为了更加直观地观察复板单元位移的变化情况,在复板上选择3个特征单元(432 182、438 034、443 960),输出其位移-时间曲线,如图 12所示。由图 12可看出,特征单元的竖向位移均略大于6 mm,但较10 mm药厚下的竖向位移小。这是由于5 mm药厚下的爆炸载荷作用比10 mm药厚下小,导致5 mm药厚下的复板减薄率比10 mm药厚下低。

    图  11  5 mm药厚下爆炸复合结束时复板的z向位移云图
    Figure  11.  z-displacement contour of flyer plate with explosive thickness of 5 mm at the end of explosive welding
    图  12  5 mm药厚下复板上特征单元的z向位移-时间历程
    Figure  12.  z-displacement histories of 3 characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 5 mm
    2.2.2   复板碰撞速度

    图 13所示是一对分别取自基板与复板结合界面处的特征单元(基板单元:799 201;复板单元:416 701),特征单元的选取与前期实验[9]中金相试样的取样位置一致。

    图  13  5 mm药厚下的一对特征单元
    Figure  13.  A pair of characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 5 mm

    图 14所示是这对特征单元的速度-时间曲线, 可以看出,基板在碰撞前也有一个正的速度峰。复板上所取单元的最大碰撞速度为565 m/s。

    图  14  一对特征单元(见图 13)的速度-时间曲线
    Figure  14.  Velocity-time curves of the pair of characteristic elements (see Fig. 13)

    图 15所示是在复板结合界面处所选取的3个特征单元(411 976、417 001、423 826)。图 16所示是这3个特征单元的速度-时间曲线。由图 16可以看出,随着距起爆端距离的增加,复板的碰撞速度增大。

    图  15  5 mm药厚下复板结合界面处的3个特征单元
    Figure  15.  3 characteristic elements at the bonding interface of flyer plate with explosive thickness of 5 mm
    图  16  5 mm药厚下3个特征单元的速度-时间曲线
    Figure  16.  Velocity-time curves of 3 characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 5 mm
    2.2.3   碰撞点压力分布

    图 17所示是在结合界面处选取的3个特征单元(416 326、418 801、422 776),单元416 326取在复板中心处,与前期实验[7]中取样做金相观察的位置一致。图 18所示是这3个特征单元的压力历程。由图 18可以看出,随着距起爆端距离的增加,复板的碰撞压力增大。

    图  17  5 mm药厚下复板结合界面处的3个特征单元
    Figure  17.  3 characteristic elements at the bonding interface of flyer plate with explosive thickness of 5 mm
    图  18  5 mm药厚下3个特征单元的压力历程
    Figure  18.  Pressure histories of 3 characteristic elements with explosive thickness of 5 mm

    图 6可以看出,10 mm药厚下复板的最大碰撞速度为897 m/s。由图 14可以看出,5 mm药厚下复板的最大碰撞速度为565 m/s。利用前期工作[18]中提到的3种理论公式(Gurney公式、Aziz公式、Deribas公式)计算了复板的碰撞速度,如表 4表 5所示,并与数值模拟结果进行了比较。由表 4表 5可以看出:Gurney公式和Aziz公式的计算结果均存在较大的偏差;而由Deribas公式计算的两组结果与数值模拟结果较接近,误差均未超过5%,且与前期实验结果较吻合,证明了SPH-FEM耦合算法的可靠性。

    表  4  10 mm药厚下碰撞速度理论计算结果与数值模拟结果的比较
    Table  4.  Comparison of collision velocity between theoretical calculation and numerical simulation with explosive thickness of 10 mm
    Theoreticalformula Massfraction Collision velocity/(m·s-1) Error/%
    Theoretical calculation[18] Simulation
    Gurney 0.75 1 089 897 -21.0
    Aziz 0.75 711 897 20.0
    Deribas 0.75 853 897 4.9
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    表  5  5 mm药厚下碰撞速度理论计算结果与数值模拟结果的比较
    Table  5.  Comparison of collision velocity between theoretical calculation and numerical simulation with explosive thickness of 5 mm
    Theoreticalformula Massfraction Collision velocity/(m·s-1) Error/%
    Theoretical calculation[18] Simulation
    Gurney 0.45 863 565 -52.7
    Aziz 0.45 480 565 15.0
    Deribas 0.45 576 565 -1.9
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    图 10可以看出,10 mm药厚下复板单元415 576处的碰撞压力为17.08 GPa。由图 18可以看出,5 mm药厚下复板单元416 326处的碰撞压力为11.25 GPa。

    Ezra等提出的碰撞压力的计算公式为[16]

    p=ρ1vs,1vp1+ρ1vs,1ρ2vs, 2
    (3)

    式中:vs, 1vs, 2分别表示复板、基板的声速,m·s-1ρ1ρ2分别表示复板、基板的密度,g·cm-3vp表示复板的碰撞速度,m·s-1

    结合表 4表 5中3种理论公式计算得到的碰撞速度,通过(3)式可得到复板的碰撞压力,表 6表 7为其理论计算值与数值模拟结果的比较。可见:Gurney公式和Aziz公式的计算结果均存在较大的偏差;而由Deribas公式计算的两组结果与数值模拟结果较接近,误差均未超过5%,说明Deribas公式和SPH-FEM耦合方法对双面爆炸焊接具有较好的指导意义。

    表  6  10 mm药厚下碰撞压力理论计算结果与数值模拟结果的比较
    Table  6.  Comparison of collision pressure betweentheoretical calculation and numerical simulationwith explosive thickness of 10 mm
    Theoreticalformula Collision pressure/GPa Error/%
    Calculation Simulation
    Gurney 22.08 17.08 -29.3
    Aziz 14.42 17.08 15.6
    Deribas 17.30 17.08 -1.3
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    表  7  5 mm药厚下碰撞压力理论计算结果与数值模拟结果的比较
    Table  7.  Comparison of collision pressure betweentheoretical calculation and numerical simulationwith explosive thickness of 5 mm
    Theoreticalformula Collision pressure/GPa Error/%
    Calculation Simulation
    Gurney 17.50 11.25 -55.6
    Aziz 9.73 11.25 13.5
    Deribas 11.68 11.25 -3.8
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    利用LS-DYNA软件和SPH-FEM耦合方法对前期双面爆炸焊接实验进行了三维数值模拟,并将模拟结果与实验及理论计算结果进行了对比,得到如下结论。

    (1) 10 mm药厚和5 mm药厚下复板位移均略大于间隙值6 mm,这是由于爆轰载荷作用下复板有一定的减薄率所致。

    (2) 10 mm药厚下,复板中部的最大碰撞速度为897 m/s,碰撞压力为17.08 GPa;5 mm药厚下,复板中部的最大碰撞速度为565 m/s,碰撞压力为11.25 GPa。通过与3种理论公式(Gurney公式、Aziz公式、Deribas公式)计算得到的碰撞速度进行比较发现,数值模拟结果与Deribas公式的计算结果较接近,误差较小,且与实验结果较吻合,证明了SPH-FEM耦合方法用于双面爆炸复合模拟的有效性,同时Deribas公式和SPH-FEM耦合方法对双面爆炸复合具有较好的指导意义。

    (3) 10 mm药厚和5 mm药厚下复板的碰撞速度及碰撞压力均随着距起爆端距离的增加而增大,该现象是由于爆轰产物的不断堆积和前碰撞点在金属板待复合区振动能的不断增加共同作用的结果。

  • [1]
    高伟亮, 孙桂娟, 杨建超, 等. 国外钻地武器侵彻试验用弹等效模拟技术研究 [J]. 防护工程, 2022, 44(5): 21–25.

    GAO W L, SUN G J, YANG J C, et al. Research on equivalent simulation technology of a foreign Earth-penetrating weapon trial projectile [J]. Protective Engineering, 2022, 44(5): 21–25.
    [2]
    党爱国, 李晓军. 国外钻地武器发展回顾及展望 [J]. 飞航导弹, 2014(6): 35–39.

    DANG A G, LI X J. Review and prospect of the development of foreign Earth-penetrating weapons [J]. Aerodynamic Missile Journal, 2014(6): 35–39.
    [3]
    黄亨建, 路中华, 刘晓波, 等. 欧美钝感弹药技术发展现状与趋势 [J]. 含能材料, 2017, 25(8): 618–621. doi: 10.11943/j.issn.1006-9941.2017.08.00X

    HUANG H J, LU Z H, LIU X B, et al. Present situation and development trend of insensitive munition technologies from Europe and America [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2017, 25(8): 618–621. doi: 10.11943/j.issn.1006-9941.2017.08.00X
    [4]
    杨舒棋, 张旭, 彭文杨, 等. 钝感炸药冲击起爆反应过程的PDV技术 [J]. 高压物理学报, 2020, 34(2): 023402. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20190856

    YANG S Q, ZHANG X, PENG W Y, et al. PDV technology of shock initiation reaction process of insensitive explosive [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2020, 34(2): 023402. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20190856
    [5]
    文雯, 王淑娟, 代晓淦, 等. TATB基PBX及其与HNS复合装药的高速破片撞击安全性 [J]. 含能材料, 2021, 29(5): 399–405. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2020163

    WEN W, WANG S J, DAI X G, et al. High-speed impact safety properties the TATB-based plastic-bonded explosive and its HNS compound charge influence [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2021, 29(5): 399–405. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2020163
    [6]
    黄瑨. CL-20、TATB基复合装药结构的3D打印成型及安全性研究 [D]. 绵阳: 中国工程物理研究院, 2019.

    HUANG J. A kind of CL-20 and TATB-based composite charge structure by 3D printing technology and its safety study [D]. Mianyang: China Academy of Engineering Physics, 2019.
    [7]
    张百磊, 常双君, 欧亚鹏. 浇注钝感PBX的研究进展及发展趋势 [J]. 化学推进剂与高分子材料, 2015, 13(1): 42–45, 64.

    ZHANG B L, CHANG S J, OU Y P. Research progress and development trend of casting desensitized PBX [J]. Chemical Propellants & Polymeric Materials, 2015, 13(1): 42–45, 64.
    [8]
    李媛媛, 高立龙, 李巍, 等. 抗过载炸药装药侵彻安全性试验研究 [J]. 含能材料, 2010, 18(6): 702–705. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2010.06.021

    LI Y Y, GAO L L, LI W, et al. Experiment research on security of insensitive explosive charge during penetration [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2010, 18(6): 702–705. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2010.06.021
    [9]
    马田, 李鹏飞, 周涛, 等. 钻地弹动能侵彻战斗部技术研究综述 [J]. 飞航导弹, 2018(4): 83–86, 92.

    MA T, LI P F, ZHOU T, et al. A review on technology of Earth penetrator warhead [J]. Aerodynamic Missile Journal, 2018(4): 83–86, 92.
    [10]
    常龙. 某弹的多功能引信传火及传爆序列结构优化设计 [D]. 沈阳: 沈阳理工大学, 2020.

    CHANG L. Optimization design of multifunctional fuze fire transmission and explosive transmission sequence structure of a projectile [D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Ligong University, 2020.
    [11]
    尚雅玲, 彭艳垒, 梁捷. 引信抗大过载技术研究及方案设计 [J]. 舰船电子工程, 2012, 32(6): 121–124. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1627-9730.2012.06.044

    SHANG Y L, PENG Y L, LIANG J. Research of fuze resisting high g-load technology and scheme design [J]. Ship Electronic Engineering, 2012, 32(6): 121–124. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1627-9730.2012.06.044
    [12]
    李晓峰, 王亚斌, 吴碧. 侵彻弹药引信技术 [M]. 北京: 国防工业出版社, 2016: 31–37.

    LI X F, WANG Y B, WU B. Fuze of penetration ammunition [M]. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 2016: 31–37.
    [13]
    张波. 空面导弹系统设计 [M]. 北京: 航空工业出版社, 2013: 435–436.

    ZHANG B. Air-to-surface missile system design [M]. Beijing: Aviation Industry Press, 2013: 435–436.
    [14]
    陈鹏, 屈可朋, 李亮亮, 等. PBX炸药剪切流动点火性能的实验研究 [J]. 火炸药学报, 2020, 43(1): 69–73, 80.

    CHEN P, QU K P, LI L L, et al. Experimental study on shear-flow ignition performance of PBX explosive [J]. Chinese Journal of Explosives and Propellants, 2020, 43(1): 69–73, 80.
    [15]
    崔银锋, 周伟江, 康乐. 引信传爆序列能量匹配性设计与试验 [J]. 水下无人系统学报, 2020, 28(3): 337–344. doi: 10.11993/j.issn.2096-3920.2020.03.015

    CUI Y F, ZHOU W J, KANG L. Design and test of energy matching for detonation train of fuze [J]. Journal of Unmanned Undersea Systems, 2020, 28(3): 337–344. doi: 10.11993/j.issn.2096-3920.2020.03.015
    [16]
    肖向东, 肖有才, 蒋海燕, 等. 冲击波作用下引信传爆序列殉爆的数值模拟 [J]. 高压物理学报, 2021, 35(5): 054202. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20210706

    XIAO X D, XIAO Y C, JIANG H Y, et al. Numerical simulation and analysis of fuze explosive trains under shock waves [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2021, 35(5): 054202. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20210706
    [17]
    姚奎光, 王淑娟, 樊星, 等. 不同机械约束下压装PBX炸药反应演化行为 [J]. 兵工学报, 2022, 43(8): 1772–1778. doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2021.0445

    YAO K G, WANG S J, FAN X, et al. Reaction evolution behaviors of pressed plastic-bonded explosive (PBX) under different mechanical confinement conditions [J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2022, 43(8): 1772–1778. doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2021.0445
    [18]
    白志玲, 段卓平, 李治, 等. 热刺激约束DNAN基不敏感熔铸炸药装药点火后反应演化调控模型 [J]. 含能材料, 2023, 31(10): 1004–1012. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2023160

    BAI Z L, DUAN Z P, LI Z, et al. Regulation model for reaction evolution of confined DNAN-based cast explosives after ignition under thermal stimulation [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2023, 31(10): 1004–1012. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2023160
    [19]
    楼建锋, 张树道. 不同点火方式下HMX基PBX炸药反应演化过程的特征分析 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2024, 44(2): 022301. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2023-0300

    LOU J F, ZHANG S D. Characteristic analysis of reaction evolution process of HMX-based PBX explosive under different ignition modes [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2024, 44(2): 022301. doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2023-0300
    [20]
    张世林, 黎殿来, 黄德雨. 某型深弹引信传爆序列设计与仿真 [J]. 弹箭与制导学报, 2015, 35(3): 58–62.

    ZHANG S L, LI D L, HUANG D Y. Design and simulation on explosive trains in fuze of a certain type of depth charge bombs [J]. Journal of Projectiles, Rockets, Missiles and Guidance, 2015, 35(3): 58–62.
    [21]
    梁争峰, 石震, 徐茜萍, 等. 限制性模块化传爆装置可靠性试验 [J]. 火工品, 2012(1): 7–10. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1480.2012.01.005

    LIANG Z F, SHI Z, XU Q P, et al. Reliability test of confined modular detonation transmission device [J]. Initiators & Pyrotechnics, 2012(1): 7–10. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1480.2012.01.005
    [22]
    高金霞, 赵卫刚, 郑腾. 侵彻战斗部装药抗过载技术研究 [J]. 火工品, 2008(4): 4–7. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1480.2008.04.002

    GAO J X, ZHAO W G, ZHENG T. Study on the anti-overloading technique for penetrating warhead charge [J]. Initiators & Pyrotechnics, 2008(4): 4–7. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-1480.2008.04.002
    [23]
    黄辉, 黄亨建, 王杰, 等. 安全弹药的发展思路与技术途径 [J]. 含能材料, 2023, 31(10): 1079–1087. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2023165

    HUANG H, HUANG H J, WANG J, et al. Development ideas and technical approaches for safety ammunition [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2023, 31(10): 1079–1087. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2023165
    [24]
    彭文杨, 钟斌, 谷岩, 等. 金属隔层和空气间隙对钝感炸药冲击起爆的影响 [J]. 高压物理学报, 2020, 34(3): 033402. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20190816

    PENG W Y, ZHONG B, GU Y, et al. Effects of metal interlayer and air gap on the shock initiation of insensitive explosives [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2020, 34(3): 033402. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20190816
    [25]
    徐恒威, 梁斌, 刘俊新, 等. 起爆偏心对聚能装药射流成型过程及威力参量的影响 [J]. 高压物理学报, 2023, 37(1): 015102.

    XU H W, LIANG B, LIU J X, et al. Effect of initiation eccentricity on shaped charge jet forming process and power parameters [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2023, 37(1): 015102.
    [26]
    董理赢. 引信传爆序列殉爆反应特性研究 [D]. 太原: 中北大学, 2020.

    DONG L Y. Study on the characteristics of the sympathetic detonation reaction in fuze explosive trains [D]. Taiyuan: North University of China, 2020.
    [27]
    田秀琦. 不同环境温度下JO-9C传爆药冲击起爆特性研究 [D]. 太原: 中北大学, 2020.

    TIAN X Q. Study on shock initiation characteristics of JO-9C booster at different ambient temperatures [D]. Taiyuan: North University of China, 2020.
    [28]
    金丽, 杨振英, 张玉若, 等. 一种直列式传爆序列的装药传爆性能试验研究 [J]. 含能材料, 2012, 20(1): 105–108. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2012.01.025

    JIN L, YANG Z Y, ZHANG Y R, et al. Performance of an in-line explosive trains [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2012, 20(1): 105–108. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2012.01.025
    [29]
    梁斌, 石啸海, 余春祥, 等. 装药驱动飞片引爆炸药性能影响参数分析 [J]. 应用数学和力学, 2019, 40(8): 893–909.

    LIANG B, SHI X H, YU C X, et al. Analysis of effects on shock initiation performances for booster charge structure parameters [J]. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 2019, 40(8): 893–909.
    [30]
    欧阳昌明, 段卓平, 孙宝平, 等. 冲击波和破片复合作用下装药起爆实验研究 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2013, 33(Suppl 1): 63–66.

    OUYANG C M, DUAN Z P, SUN B P, et al. Experimental study on initiation of charge under combined shock wave and fragment impact [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2013, 33(Suppl 1): 63–66.
    [31]
    COCHRAN K R, FAN L, DEVOE D L. Moving reflector type micro optical switch for high-power transfer in a MEMS-based safety and arming system [J]. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2004, 14(1): 138–146. doi: 10.1088/0960-1317/14/1/019
    [32]
    刘卫, 褚恩义, 刘兰, 等. 基于飞片冲击起爆原理的微起爆序列技术研究进展 [J]. 含能材料, 2023, 31(6): 606–634. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2023043

    LIU W, CHU E Y, LIU L, et al. Review on micro fire-train based on flyer impact initiation [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2023, 31(6): 606–634. doi: 10.11943/CJEM2023043
    [33]
    LANCASTER P, SALKAUSKAS K. Surfaces generated by moving least squares methods [J]. Mathematics of Computation, 1981, 37(155): 141–158. doi: 10.1090/S0025-5718-1981-0616367-1
    [34]
    QI W C, QIU Z P. A collocation interval analysis method for interval structural parameters and stochastic excitation [J]. Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, 2012, 55(1): 66–77. doi: 10.1007/s11433-011-4570-z
  • Relative Articles

    [1]WANG Xiao-Wei, DONG Lian-Ke, LONG Qi-Wei. The Computer Simulation of Fractal Dimension-Ality with Perimeter-Area Relation[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1991, 5(2): 124-129 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1991.02.007
    [2]SU Fang, CHE Rong-Zheng, XU Wei, YAN Fei-Na. Measurement and Analysis of Strain and Calibration of Pressure in Piston-Cylinder Type Apparatus with 4.5 GPa Hydrostatic Pressure[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1990, 4(1): 63-71 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1990.01.010
    [3]PENG Jian, ZHAO Yi-Jun, ZHANG Zheng-Wen, YUAN Jian-Min. Calculation for the Thermal Stress Damage in the Thin Plate of Al Irradiated by CW Laser Beam[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1990, 4(2): 130-136 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1990.02.009
    [4]YUAN Yong-Hua, LIU Chang-Ling, HAN Li-Shi, GUI Yuan-Zhen, LI Qi-Min. Measurement of the Vaporization Pressure on Aluminum Target Irradiated by Laser Beam[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1990, 4(2): 114-117 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1990.02.006
    [5]ZHOU Zhi-Kui, CHEN Qiu-Hua. Numerical Simulation of the Performance of Electromagnetic Railguns[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1989, 3(4): 308-314 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1989.04.008
    [6]DONG Yu-Bin, SU Lin-Xiang, CHEN Da-Nian, JING Fu-Qian, HAN Jun-Wan, FENG Jia-Bo. Numerical Simulation on the Spallation of a Steel Cylindrical Shell Imploded under Slipping Detonation[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1989, 3(1): 1-10 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1989.01.001
    [7]WANG Yi-Feng, SU Wen-Hui, QIAN Zheng-Nan, MA Xian-Feng, YAN Xue-Wei. A Study on the High Temperature-High Pressure Stability and the X-Ray Phase Analysis for Compounds R2Fe4/3W2/3O7 with Pyrochlore Structure[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1988, 2(4): 296-304 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1988.04.002
    [8]SHEN Zhu-Tong, DAI Shou-Yu, CHEN Li-Quan, CHI Yong-Qian. Some Investigations on the High Pressure Synthesis of Niobium Trisulfide and XPS Analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1988, 2(1): 10-16 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1988.01.002
    [9]DONG Yu-Bin, ZAHNG Wan-Jia, JING Fu-Qian, HAN Jun-Wan, CHEN Da-Nian, SU Lin-Xiang, FENG Jia-Bo. Numerical Analysis for Dynamic Damage Processes and LY-12 Aluminum Spallations[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1988, 2(4): 305-312 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1988.04.003
    [10]CHEN Dong-Quan, XIE Guo-Qiang. Molecular Dynamics Simulation of Polymorphous Transitions[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 1987, 1(1): 50-57 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.1987.01.007
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(10)  / Tables(1)

    Article Metrics

    Article views(222) PDF downloads(32) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return