The U.S. Army uses several types of tests to increase the reliability of gun-fired munitions. Systems, subsystems, and components are gun fired to assess reliability. When failures are found, root-cause investigations are completed and parts may be redesigned. For instance, the 155 mm projectile Excalibur uses several types of tests to find failures and build reliability. Components are tested in a rail gun, a new soft-catch gun, and in soft recovery vehicles. With the rail gun, test projectiles are fired from a worn gun tube into a trough of water. The soft-catch gun, a hybrid system using both air and water, has a standard cannon tube and a series of catch tubes to stop a projectile. The third type of test, a soft recovery vehicle, uses a modified tactical Excalibur with a parachute for a soft landing. All three types of tests have on-board recorders to capture ballistic accelerations. Accelerometer data are used in failure investigations, redesign parts, and to design new projectiles. The purpose of this paper is to compare accelerations from different types of ballistic tests. Comparisons were done to determine if the tests were in the same statistical family. Comparisons are made for a United States MACS 5 charge. The maximum axial forces were the same for the soft-catch gun and the soft recovery vehicle. In the balloting directions, the rail gun and soft recovery vehicle had similar forces. The set forward forces differed in all three cases, reflecting the different catch mechanisms for the projectiles. Comparisons of -forces were also made using shock response spectra. The shock response indicated that the damage potential is greatest for the rail gun tests, consistent with an increase rate of failures for some electronics.
Skip Nav Destination
e-mail: jennifer.cordes@us.army.mil
Article navigation
September 2010
Research Papers
Statistical Comparisons Between Qualification Tests for Gun-Fired Projectiles
J. A. Cordes,
e-mail: jennifer.cordes@us.army.mil
J. A. Cordes
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
J. Lee,
J. Lee
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
T. L. Myers,
T. L. Myers
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
G. Hader,
G. Hader
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
L. Reinhardt,
L. Reinhardt
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
C. Kessler,
C. Kessler
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
N. Gray,
N. Gray
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
M. A. Guevara
M. A. Guevara
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Search for other works by this author on:
J. A. Cordes
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000e-mail: jennifer.cordes@us.army.mil
J. Lee
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
T. L. Myers
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
G. Hader
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
L. Reinhardt
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
C. Kessler
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
N. Gray
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
M. A. Guevara
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center
, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000J. Appl. Mech. Sep 2010, 77(5): 051602 (6 pages)
Published Online: July 1, 2010
Article history
Received:
August 12, 2009
Revised:
April 27, 2010
Posted:
May 4, 2010
Published:
July 1, 2010
Online:
July 1, 2010
Citation
Cordes, J. A., Lee, J., Myers, T. L., Hader, G., Reinhardt, L., Kessler, C., Gray, N., and Guevara, M. A. (July 1, 2010). "Statistical Comparisons Between Qualification Tests for Gun-Fired Projectiles." ASME. J. Appl. Mech. September 2010; 77(5): 051602. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4001697
Download citation file:
Get Email Alerts
Hamiltonian System-Based Symplectic Framework for Analytical Vibration Analysis of Microplates
J. Appl. Mech (December 2024)
Related Articles
Experimental Study and Numerical Simulation of Propellant Ignition and Combustion for Cased Telescoped Ammunition in Chamber
J. Appl. Mech (September,2010)
Experimental and Numerical Investigations on Traveling Charge Gun Using Liquid Fuels
J. Appl. Mech (September,2011)
Energy Release Protection for Pressurized Systems. Part II: Review of Studies Into Impact/Terminal Ballistics
Appl. Mech. Rev (February,1986)
Mechanism of Interior Ballistic Peak Phenomenon of Guns and Its Effects
J. Appl. Mech (September,2010)
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Chapters
Cavitation Induction by Projectile Impacting on a Water Jet
Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Cavitation (CAV2018)
A PSA Update to Reflect Procedural Changes (PSAM-0217)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)
Optimal Shape Design Approach and Influence on the Projectile Vertices with Respect to Some Objective Function
International Conference on Mechanical and Electrical Technology, 3rd, (ICMET-China 2011), Volumes 1–3