Tenth International Conference on Computer Modeling and Simulation

Finite Element Modelling and Simulation of Gun Dynamics using ‘ANSYS’

Nadeem Ahmed R D Brown Amer Hameed

Cranfield University (DCMT) Cranfield University (DCMT) Cranfield University (DCMT)

Shrivenham, Swindon, Shrivenham, Swindon, Shrivenham, Swindon,
SN6 8LA, UK SN6 8LA, UK SN6 8LA, UK
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
[email protected]

PS Projectile base pressure

Abstract W Mass of projectile
C Mass of charge
The dynamic response of the gun during the firing FE Finite Element
cycle and the relative motion of the projectile with MRS Muzzle Reference Sight
respect to the barrel has a significant effect on the
accuracy and consistency of the gun as well as the shot 2. Introduction
launch conditions. Computer modelling techniques can
be used to simulate motion of the gun during the firing The firing cycle of the gun involves motion of the
cycle. A three dimensional finite element model of a barrel (recoil and runout to firing position), motion of
large calibre gun was developed using ANSYS the shot/projectile in the barrel till final exit, motion of
commercial software and its motion during the firing the recoiling mechanism and the motion of the
cycle was simulated to study and predict the effects of platform. All these motions are interactive and affect
various design factors on the dynamic response of the the shot launch conditions as well as the accuracy and
gun. Physical contact conditions of the gun system consistency of a gun. During recoiling motion of the
components have been modelled using contact gun the inertia force from the off-axis masses produce
technology in ANSYS. Results are compared with moments causing dynamic perturbations in the barrel.
general responses of the gun system obtained through These off-axis masses include breech, muzzle
available docummented sources. Effectiveness of the reference sight (MRS), non-symmetrical fume
software for accurate modelling of gun dynamics is extractor and recoiling parts of the buffer and
discussed. recuperator system. Figure 1 shows the response of a
gun barrel for off-axis masses [1].
1. Nomenclature
E Young’s Modulus.
ρ Material density.
A (x) X-sectional area of barrel, function of ‘x’.
I (x) Second moment of area of x-section, a
function of ‘x’.
F (x, t) Transverse force applied at position ‘x’ and Figure 1. Effect of off-axis masses on gun
time ‘t’.
y(x, t) Vertical displacement of the barrel at position Off-axis forces are exerted by the buffer and
‘x’ and time ‘t’. recuperator systems which act at a distance from the
η Axial extension of a point on the barrel barrel axis and produce a moment. This causes the
relative to its unstrained position. barrel to vibrate. Projectile loads are generated within
G External axial force. the system due to the motion of the projectile in the
Pm Mean pressure barrel, along the path determined by the profile of the
bore. They consist of a traveling load due to the
Pb Breech pressure.

978-0-7695-3114-4/08
0-7695-3114-8/08 $25.00
$25.00
© 2008
© 2008
IEEEIEEE 18
DOI 10.1109/UKSIM.2008.22
projectile weight, a transverse load due to projectile’s and SIMBAD[4], [5] have proved to be useful cost
motion in a curved path defined by shape of the barrel effective tools for studying the characteristics of the
and out of balance loads when the shot has its centre of motion and help to improve accuracy as well as assist
mass slightly displaced from its geometrical central in future designs of gun systems. Some commercially
axis and is spun by the rifling about its geometrical available CAD and Finite Element software packages
axis. The forces generated between the shot and barrel have also been used in conjunction with gun dynamics
can be very large. The moments cause transverse codes to investigate various gun system parameters.
bending waves which travel faster than the velocity of The CAD models are able to provide accurate mass
projectile. The barrel does not recoil as a rigid mass properties for components while the FE models are
instead it lengthens due to material flexibility, causing able to provide stiffness data for component to
a longitudinal wave to travel up the barrel. All the component interfaces [5]. Some of these software
above dynamic perturbations induce vibrations in the packages include SOLID EDGE, ADAMS, DYNA-
barrel. Transverse vibrations introduced in the barrel 3D, ALGOR, IDEAS, ANSYS and NASTRAN. With
and shot due to their interactive motion causes the the availability of more computational power, efforts
initial trajectory of the shot to differ from the pointing are in hand to use commercial finite element software
direction of the muzzle, a phenomenon called ‘Shot effectively for the simulation of gun dynamics.
Jump’. The factors affecting the initial trajectory of the Advanced modelling capabilities, powerful analyses
shot, as it leaves the muzzle, are known as shot launch tools, user friendly interface and the ability to model
conditions. These include the pointing direction of the physical contact conditions with reasonable accuracy
muzzle at the time of the shot exit, muzzle velocity, are some of the features of present day commercial
transverse velocity of the shot at the time of its exit finite element software which make them suitable for
from the barrel and angular velocity of the shot or yaw this purpose. One such finite element package,
values at the shot exit. Over the years gun system ANSYS, has been used to model the gun system. The
designers have made efforts to develop methods for recoil motion of the barrel and interaction of the shot
theoretically predicting the motion of the gun so that with the barrel during the firing cycle have been
suitable modifications can be made in the design to simulated with an aim to predict dynamic response of
optimize their performance in terms of accuracy and the barrel and shot launch conditions. The physical
consistency. This paper describes one such method in contact conditions, as a result of interactive motion of
which computer modelling and simulation of the gun system components, have been modeled and
dynamic response of the gun has been carried out using simulated using contact technology in ANSYS. The
finite element commercial software ‘ANSYS’. results throw light on the effectiveness of ANSYS for
modelling and simulation of gun dynamics.
3. Modelling and Simulation
4. Gun System Model
Based on the modes of vibration of the gun during
the firing cycle a number of mathematical models have For the model development the 120 mm L11 gun
been developed. These models are mainly based on barrel installed on the Challenger-1 tank was used.
Timoshenko beam equations for transverse vibrations: Efforts were made to develop a reasonably accurate
model by using available dimensions and material
∂2  ∂ 2 y ( x, t )  ∂ 2 y ( x, t )) specifications. In some cases a slight adjustment in the
 EI ( x )  + ρA( x ) = F (x, t ) (1) density was made to achieve an accurate mass of the
∂x 2  ∂x 2  ∂t 2
recoiling parts of the gun.
and wave equations for longitudinal vibrations:

∂ 2η ∂  ∂η  (2)
ρ A (x ) =  EA (x ) +G
∂t 2 ∂x  ∂x 

From formulating mathematical models of the

system to writing of computer codes, the research has Figure 2. Solid model of the gun
led to the development of gun dynamics computer
simulation codes specific to gun systems which are Keeping in view the fact that the shape of the
useful in predicting the launch conditions of a complete gun system is not symmetric and the
projectile. Codes such as RAMA [2], SHOCK-AID [3] deflection of the gun during recoil motion takes place

19
in all principal 3D planes the gun system was modeled an improved version of H.M.S.O [1], [6]. The internal
in 3D so that reasonably accurate responses could be ballistics code calculates the mean pressure-time load
simulated. The three-dimensional gun model is shown history in the propelling gas given the gun system,
in Figure 2. projectile and propellant specifications. The pressure-
time load history between the breech and projectile is
5. Finite Element Model obtained through following relationship:

The finite element model of the gun consist of a Pb Ps Pm (3)

= =
solid model of the gun (figure 2) meshed with the 3D
20-Node structural solid SOLID95 element (figure 3)
W + C ( 12
) W W + C ( 13
)
chosen from the ANSYS elements library. The
tetrahedron form of this element can tolerate irregular Figure 5 shows the Pressure-Time load history on
shapes without much loss of accuracy and midside breech and projectile base obtained from HMSOV and
nodes make it well suited to model curved boundaries. is similar to the typical one for 120mm gun.
Figure 4 shows meshed model of the gun.
Pressure-Time Load History
5.0E+08

4.5E+08
Mean Pressure [Pa]
4.0E+08 Breech Pressure [Pa]

.
Shot Base Pressure[Pa]
3.5E+08

Pressure (Pascal)
3.0E+08

2.5E+08

2.0E+08

1.5E+08

1.0E+08

5.0E+07

Figure 3. SOLID95 Element 0.0E+00

0.0E+00 1.5E-03 3.0E-03 4.5E-03 6.0E-03 7.5E-03 9.0E-03 1.1E-02
Time (sec)

Figure 5. Pressure-Time Load History.

This method is used in SIMBAD where the pressure

force is applied on breech to produce recoil. Bulman
[7] has used this approach while studying the effects of
barrel droop on gun barrel response using SIMBAD.
The same approach was adopted by Lodge [5] who
Figure 4. Meshed model of the gun used this conventional recoil force model in SIMBAD
analysis while modelling the in-bore dynamics of EM
Keeping in view the nature of contact conditions rail launchers.
between interacting components of the gun system,
flexible-flexible, surface to surface contact pairs have 7. Analyses and Results
been modeled between barrel and support bearing
liners in the cradle as well as between barrel and In transient dynamic analyses the gun model was
projectile driving bands. subjected to pressure loading as shown in figure 5. The
analyses were carried out to simulate the recoil motion
6. Pressure-Time Loading History of the gun with and without MRS in the absence of
projectile as well as with the projectile included. To
In a conventional gun the propellant gas pressure, analyze response of the gun barrel subjected to
resulting from combustion, acts on the breech face dynamic perturbations the shape of the barrel at
causing the barrel to recoil in a rearward direction different time intervals was plotted. Figures 6 and 7
while the pressure on the base of the projectile forces it show the barrel deflected shape during recoil with and
out of the barrel through the muzzle end. To simulate without MRS respectively. Each curve on the plots
these motions a pressure-time load history was applied represents the shape that the barrel takes up at 1
on the breech face and projectile base. The Pressure- millisecond intervals. As discussed earlier in figure 1
time load history was obtained through internal the moment produced by the inertia of MRS tends to
ballistics code HMSOV developed in Cranfield deflect the muzzle end of the barrel downwards, the
University, Royal Military College of Science and is same is evident from the comparison of figures 6 and

20
7. The max deflection of muzzle in the downward 8.0E-04
direction with MRS is 8.63x10-4 meters while without 6.0E-04 Muzzle Vert_Disp with MRS

MRS it is 6.94x10-5 meters which shows that the 4.0E-04

Muzzle Vert_Disp without MRS

.
inertia force due to MRS has caused an additional

Displacement(m)
2.0E-04
deflection of the barrel by 7.94x10-4 meters. The 0.0E+00
0.0000 0.0015 0.0030 0.0045 0.0060 0.0075 0.0090 0.0105
comparison of muzzle displacement verses time, with -2.0E-04
and without MRS in figure 8 represents the same -4.0E-04
effect. The dotted line represents the muzzle -6.0E-04
displacement without MRS. From figures 6 and 7 it is -8.0E-04
also evident that the deflection of the barrel at the -1.0E-03
breech end is much larger than at the muzzle end; this Time(Sec)

is because of the fact that the inertia force of the breech Figure 8. Muzzle deflection with & without MRS
is larger than the muzzle, both being off-axis masses
produce a moment proportional to their masses and 1.0E-02
Barrel Deflected Shape with Shot Interaction
affect the dynamic state of the gun. Figures 9 shows
the barrel deflected shape during recoil with the 8.0E-03

.
shot/projectile included. The results indicate that the 6.0E-03

Deflection (m)
shot-barrel interaction affect the dynamic state of the
4.0E-03
barrel as the downward displacement of the muzzle is
reduced by 4.61x10-4 meters. The same is represented 2.0E-03
in figure 10. 0.0E+00

Barrel Deflected Shape with MRS -2.0E-03

1.0E-02 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
Barrel Length (m)
8.0E-03
Figure 9. Barrel deflected shape with Shot
.

6.0E-03
Deflection (m)

4.0E-03
6.0E-04
2.0E-03 4.0E-04
Muzzle Vert_Disp with Shot
Muzzle Vert_Disp without Shot
.

0.0E+00 2.0E-04
Displacement(m)

-2.0E-03
0.0E+00
0.0000 0.0015 0.0030 0.0045 0.0060 0.0075 0.0090 0.0105
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 -2.0E-04
Barrel Length (m)
-4.0E-04
Figure 6. Barrel deflected shape with MRS -6.0E-04

-8.0E-04
Barrel Deflected Shape without MRS
1.0E-02 -1.0E-03
8.0E-03
Time(Sec)
.

6.0E-03
Figure 10. Barrel deflected shape with MRS and
Deflection (m)

Projectile included
4.0E-03

2.0E-03 The dynamic response of the gun barrel as shown

0.0E+00 by the plots in figures 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 agree with the
one obtained using SIMBAD [7] and [8]. The results
-2.0E-03
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
are subjected to gun model geometry and applied
Barrel Length (m) pressure-time load history.
Figure 7. Barrel deflected shape without
MRS 8. Conclusion
The finite element package, ANSYS, has been used
to model and simulate gun barrel dynamics with
reasonable accuracy. The contact technology in
ANSYS is useful in modelling the physical contact
conditions between interactive parts of the gun system.
Comparison of barrel dynamic response with and

21
without MRS as well as with the projectile is one of
the many analyses that can be performed to carry out
the parametric study on gun design. Accurate
modelling and simulation of barrel response subjected
to dynamic perturbations can help in making suitable
modifications to the design and hence optimize
performance of the guns in terms of accuracy and
consistency.

9. References
[1] “Text Book of and Ballistics Gunnery”, Part I, Basic
Theory, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, London.

[2] N.D. Manners, “A Theoretical Study into the Effect of

Sabot Stiffness on Projectile In-Bore Motion and Launch
Accuracy”, RMCS, School of Mechanical, Materials & Civil
Engineering, Land System group, Proceedings of 6th US
Army Symposium on Gun Dynamics, Tamiment,
Pennsylvania, 15-17 May 1990.

[3] K Vance and M J Seymour, “The Numerical Simulation

of the Dynamics of Real Gun Systems”, Hunting Engineering
Limited, Redding Wood, Ampthill, Bedford, UK.

[4] SIMBAD User manual – version 28, Danby Engineering

Ltd. May 2000.

[5] D W Lodge and A M Dilkes, “Use of SIMBAD Gun

Dynamics Code for Modelling the In-Bore Dynamics of EM
Launchers” Defence Evaluation and Research Agency
(DERA), Chobham Lane, Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 0EE, UK.
Proceedings of 10th US Army Gun Dynamics, Austin, Texas,
23-26 April, 2001.

[6] Hunt, F R W, Internal Ballistics, H.M.S.O, London,

1951.

[7] David N Bulman, “The Effects of Barrel droop on Gun

Barrel Response”, School of Mechanical, Materials and
Civil Engineering, RMCS, Shrivenham, Wiltshire, UK.

[8] D N Bulman, “Gun Dynamics, The Approach to

Accuracy and Consistency”, European Guns and Mortars
Symposium, Cranfield University, Royal Military College of
Science, Swindon, United Kingdom. 31 August and 01
September 1994

22