Counter Rocket, Artillery, and Mortar, abbreviated C-RAM or Counter-RAM, is a system used to detect and/or destroy incoming artillery, rockets and mortar rounds in the air before they hit their ground targets, or simply provide early warning.
Existing C-RAM systems have a stated velocity ceiling that is set by the propellant powder load. The U.S. Army is looking forward into the future to a potential replacement for the C-RAM system that will permit a variable muzzle velocity, while maintaining the present velocity ceiling of existing C-RAM. Hybrid electric launchers are one technology that has been proposed as an enhancement or a replacement for conventional propellant powder driven guns. Electrothermal (ET) and Electrothermal-chemical (ETC) launchers use a high current arc to create sufficient temperatures and pressures necessary to accelerate a projectile. The use of a hybrid electric launcher means that velocity variability can be achieved by the next generation C-RAM (by providing a projectile cartridge with a certain designed velocity floor and the ability to “dial-in” additional velocity by increasing the electrical energy imparted into the launcher during firing) to control collateral damage in future urban/suburban conflict environments. Additionally, the use of such a projectile cartridge in a hybrid electric launcher has the potential to remove significant amounts of the mass/volume of hazardous propellant that must be transported, easing the demands on the supply chain.
There is a need for C-RAM systems that easily permit variable muzzle velocities. The proposal described herein does this using a unique projectile cartridge using hybridization technology.
This need can be met by the use of hybrid capillary electric launchers to replace conventional propellant powder driven guns. Hybrid capillary electric launchers that can do this comprise the launcher itself (breech/barrel assembly), as well as the optimum projectile cartridge and a pulsed power supply for supplying adjustable amounts of electric energy to permit variable velocity. The projectile cartridge described herein includes least an anode and cathode section, one or more fuse wires, a capillary liner, a hybridization medium, and a projectile, which may include both a slug and a sabot jacket.
In one embodiment the hybridization is achieved by the use of methanol, ethanol, or water as a hybridizing medium.
In another embodiment the hybridization medium is restrained within the capillary by use of sponges.
In another embodiment the sponges used for restraining the hybridization medium are cylindrical sponges deployed around the fuse wire.
In another embodiment the hybridization medium is restrained within the capillary by encapsulation.
In another embodiment the hybridization medium is further restrained by use of a burst diaphragm placed over the cathode.
In another embodiment the burst diaphragm may comprise a Mylar diaphragm.
In another embodiment the projectile slug may comprise a 6061-T6 aluminum alloy.
In another embodiment the projectile slug may comprise Macor ceramic.
In another embodiment the sabot jacket may comprise Nylon 6/6.
In another embodiment the fuse wire is may comprise Al, Cu, Co, or Ni.
In another embodiment the capillary material may comprise polycarbonate or high-density polyethylene.
In another embodiment the pulsed power supply is produced by an over-damped LRC circuit.
There are disclosed in the drawings and detailed description to follow various embodiments of the solution proposed herein. It should be understood, however, that the specific embodiments given in the drawings and entailed description do not limit the disclosure. On the contrary, they provide the foundation for discerning the alternative forms, equivalents, and modifications that will be encompassed in the scope of the eventual claims.
Described below will be a proposed projectile cartridge for a hybrid variable velocity electric gun or launcher system. The use of a hybrid variable electric launcher means that velocity variability can be achieved by increasing the electrical energy imparted into a launcher during firing. There are numerous potential advantages to the use of a hybrid electric launcher. These include the ability to reduce collateral damage from use of such a weapon. Additionally, the use of a hybrid variable velocity electric launcher has the potential to remove significant amounts of the mass/volume of the hazardous propellant that must be transported, easing the demands on the supply chain.
A typical hybrid capillary variable velocity electric gun system includes the launcher itself (breech/barrel assembly), as well as the projectile cartridge and a pulsed power supply for supplying the variable velocity. All of these will be described.
Projectiles
Two different scales of projectiles were used in the experimental work leading to the projectile cartridge development and proven effective in this application. They will be referred to as sub-scale and full-scale.
Two different full-scale electrically conductive projectiles were tested—Nylon 6/6 jackets with a 6061-T6 Al slug (for the half-mass projectiles—7.0 g) and Nylon 6/6 jackets with an AISI 1018 steel slug (for the full-mass projectiles—14.0 g). Electrically non-conductive slugs included Macor (for the half-mass projectiles) and zirconia (for the full-mass projectiles).
Variables for a Projectile Cartridge and ETC Gun
There are a number of considerations in achieving optimum performance for a projectile cartridge for a hybrid variable velocity electric gun. These include the fuse wire material, the electrode material, the capillary liner material, proper launcher sealing, launcher hybridization (which includes the sealing, type of media, the mass of media, and means of restraint in the capillary), and the pulsed power supply characteristics. Some of these will now be discussed.
The middle view is a cross section exhibiting some of the interior elements. A diaphragm 140 (to be discussed) is located at the front end of a capillary liner 160 that extends through the cartridge. At the far end, the anode 180 sits within the capillary liner 160 and extends out of the cartridge. Within the capillary liner is a hybridization restraint 150, which may be a sponge, for containing the hybridization medium.
Further details are shown in the bottom cross-section view in which the projectile is shown as a slug 210 and a covering sabot 220. The capillary liner lies within a metal armor 200 that is surrounded by an overwrap 230. The armor may be a steel armor and it may be stainless steel. Connecting the cathode 110 and anode 180 are one or more fuse wires 190 that pass through hybridization medium 150. Each of these elements will be discussed in more detail.
Launcher
Capillary Liner Material
Three different capillary materials were tested. A poly(methyl methacrylate) liner, a polycarbonate liner, and a high density polyethylene liner. It was found that the muzzle velocity was insensitive to liner material for both polycarbonate and polyethylene. The PMMA was attacked by methanol when methanol was used as the hybridization vehicle.
Hybridization Restraint
Hybridization refers to the use of substances other than air used to achieve higher muzzle velocities from the projectile cartridge. Most of the testing involved in this development was done with three substances—ethanol (C2H5OH), methanol (CH3OH), and water (H2O). Additionally, four different means were used to contain the hybridization media—encapsulation, rectangular strip sponges, cylindrical sponges, and direct injection of the substance into the capillary.
Many tests were conducted to examine the effects of hybridization. These included:
Testing revealed that hybridization liquids greatly enhance the energy available for potentially accelerating the projectile. For identical setups, the direct injection method accelerated a projectile to a muzzle velocity of 1,004 m/s (a 63.7% increase over the non-hybridized case). The encapsulated test produced a muzzle velocity of 1,013 m/s (a 64.4% increase over the non-hybridized case). The sponge-hybridized case produced a muzzle velocity of 1,289 m/s (a 109% increase over the non-hybridized case). The reasons for this are hypothesized to be that for the direct injection case, the liquid is pooled at the bottom of the capillary. When the current is discharged, the shock sprays the liquid throughout the capillary, shielding the liner walls from the heat flux and minimizing the amount of material ablated (shown by the small amount of mass lost from the liner and the strikingly clean condition of the liner post-test). For the encapsulated methanol, energy must be expended in destroying the capsule to access the liquid methanol inside, which then again sprays all over the capillary, similarly to the direct injection case. The sponge holds the methanol in its pores and permits the remaining air inside the pores to be superheated during the reaction, permitting a great deal more of energy to be available to react with the methanol and produce a higher bore pressure. For these reasons, one preferred containment scheme is determined to be cylindrical sponges surrounding the fuse wire. It should be noted that if an excess of sponges are used to hold the hybridizing media, a similar effect is seen to the direct injection tests—the sponges will shield the liner walls (to some extent) from ablation that would normally take place during the capillary discharge.
Hybridization Fluid
Of the three hybridization fluids tested (methanol, ethanol, water), methanol was found to be the optimum liquid in terms of yielding the greatest muzzle velocity. The muzzle velocities vs. mass test results are shown in
Fuse Wire Material
Various materials were investigated for the fuse wire material. Al, Cu, Zn, Co, and Ni were tested. Each was tested at constant input electrical energies to determine the effect on the muzzle velocity. Although some very modest differences were noted, it was determined that there was not a significant difference between using any wire material over the others.
Electrode Materials
Again, a number of electrode materials were tested. These included AISI 304S, UNS C182, Molybdenum, Graphite, and 10W3 Elkonite at constant input electrical energy. Although some differences were noted it was found that muzzle velocity is relatively insensitive to electrode material.
Capillary Liner Material
Three different capillary materials were tested. A poly(methyl-methacrylate) liner, a polycarbonate liner, and a high density polyethylene liner. It was found that the muzzle velocity was insensitive to liner material for both polycarbonate and polyethylene. The poly(methyl-methacrylate) was attacked by methanol when methanol was used as the hybridization vehicle.
Finally—
Although certain embodiments and their advantages have been described herein in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations could be made without departing from the coverage as defined by the appended claims. Moreover, the potential applications of the disclosed techniques is not intended to be limited to the particular embodiments of the processes, machines, manufactures, means, methods and steps described herein. As a person of ordinary skill in the art will readily appreciate from this disclosure, other processes, machines, manufactures, means, methods, or steps, presently existing or later to be developed that perform substantially the same function or achieve substantially the same result as the corresponding embodiments described herein may be utilized. Accordingly, the appended claims are intended to include within their scope such processes, machines, manufactures, means, methods or steps.
This invention was made with government support under the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Program, Topic Number A11-059 contract number W9113M-12-C-0027 awarded by the U.S. Army USASMDA/ARSTRAT. The government has certain rights in the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4352397 | Christopher | Oct 1982 | A |
4711154 | Chryssomallis | Dec 1987 | A |
4895062 | Chryssomallis | Jan 1990 | A |
5012719 | Goldstein | May 1991 | A |
5016518 | Kaplan | May 1991 | A |
5072647 | Goldstein | Dec 1991 | A |
5171932 | McElroy | Dec 1992 | A |
5183956 | Rosenberg | Feb 1993 | A |
5231242 | Chryssomallis | Jul 1993 | A |
5233903 | Saphier | Aug 1993 | A |
5235894 | Nitschke | Aug 1993 | A |
5355764 | Marinos | Oct 1994 | A |
5429030 | Tidman | Jul 1995 | A |
5444208 | Mortensen | Aug 1995 | A |
5546844 | Krumm | Aug 1996 | A |
5549046 | Widner | Aug 1996 | A |
5612506 | Goldstein | Mar 1997 | A |
5886290 | Lindblom | Mar 1999 | A |
5909001 | Goldstein | Jun 1999 | A |
5945623 | Goldstein | Aug 1999 | A |
5988070 | Krumm | Nov 1999 | A |
6119599 | Johnson | Sep 2000 | A |
6186040 | Weise | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6539874 | Weise | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6703580 | Brunet | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6759798 | Kim | Jul 2004 | B2 |
7905178 | Dryer | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8746120 | Nolting | Jun 2014 | B1 |
20020157559 | Brunet | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20060144214 | Goldstein | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20110061555 | Gustavsson | Mar 2011 | A1 |