EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL STUDY OF THE SHAPED CHARGE JET

PERFORATION AGAINST CONCRETE TARGET

A.D. Resnyansky1, G. Katselis1 and A.E. Wildegger-Gaissmaier2
1
Weapons Systems Division, Defence Science and Technology Organisation,
Edinburgh SA 5111, Australia
2
Science Policy Division, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Canberra
ACT 2600, Australia
This paper presents experiments and LS-DYNA hydrocode analysis of
the Shaped Charge jet penetration of concrete targets. The effect of liner
angle, charge height and charge stand-off distance are considered. Afterimpact damage characteristics from experiments on concrete targets are
compared with LS-DYNA simulations. The simulation demonstrates the
importance of the liner angle and the stand-off charge-target distance to
the shape and velocity parameters of the jet, and in turn, to the damage
parameters of the target.
INTRODUCTION
The majority of man-portable direct fire guided hard target defeat weapons are
optimised for armour penetration. Most of the weapons utilise shaped charge (SC)
technology employing tandem shaped charge warheads. It is expected that the use of these
weapons against other targets like concrete structures (bunkers, buildings, and field
fortification) is less effective. To defeat armour the hypervelocity SC jet penetrates even
reactive armour and creates behind armour debris, which can ignite and penetrate
materials/components inside the vehicles and contribute to crew incapacitation and injuries.
SC jet penetration of brittle building materials such as concrete is governed by different
mechanisms. SC weapons optimised for building targets often use a SC jet as a precursor
projectile with a follow-up grenade. Therefore, an important factor for this case, in contrast
to the ductile armour targets, is the borehole diameter in a concrete target in order to allow
the follow-up grenade to pass through the concrete wall. One potential way to increase the
diameter is to increase the charge mass as reported in [1]. However, the weight penalty
associated with this method may not be an option for man-portable weapons.

This paper presents experiments and numerical analysis of the SC jet penetration in
concrete targets. Flash X-ray photography is used for observation of the SC liner collapse.
In the previous paper [2] we reported calculations of the liner collapse using a
hydrodynamic elasto-plastic model that resulted in a significant deviation of the liner shape
from that observed in the experiment. The present paper employs a rate sensitive model
providing better agreement with the experiment. In the present study the shaped charges
utilised aluminium liners. Besides the liner angle, the influence of the charge height and
charge-target stand-off distance on the jet parameters is also considered.
Hydrocode analysis of the target response employs a model, which has been
published elsewhere [3]. This model has previously been used for simulation of damage to
glass [3] and concrete [2] targets. The model is implemented in a commercial version of
LS-DYNA3D and is being employed with the Eulerian option. Modelling results have been
compared with the experimental data, when varying parameters of the problem. The
analysis demonstrates that the important factors affecting the resulting borehole diameter
achieved in the target are the liner angle and the stand-off distance between the SC charge
and target.
EXPERIMENT
The experiments using concrete targets were aimed at a study of the influence of the
SC parameters and the stand-off distance between the charge and target on target damage.

FIGURE 1. Schematic of the experimental set-up (axial cross-section).

The experimental set-up includes: 1) a SC conical liner of thickness , made of aluminium

with the internal liner angle (liner L in the schematic in Fig. 1); 2) a cylindrical profiled
charge of high explosive HE (Composition B) with the maximum height h (see Fig. 1); 3) a
booster with detonator B; 4) an aluminium casing C of 3mm-thickness, containing the
charge and the liner; and 5) a target T of thickness (300mm in the experiments), located

at the stand-off distance D from the shaped charge. The charge diameter is 76mm; the
target is approximately 70cm in diameter and it is encased in a steel shell S.
Several tests have been conducted without targets in order to obtain the Flash X-Ray
images of the SC jet for observation of the liner collapse and validation of the modelling
results. The experiments using concrete targets varied the following parameters: i) charge
height (h); ii) liner angle (); iii) liner thickness (); and iv) stand-off distance (D). Results
of the tests are summarised below in Table 1.
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF THE SC PENETRATION TESTS AGAINST CONCRETE TARGETS
Ntest h(mm) () (mm) D(mm) Fd(mm) Fs(mm)
1
46
90
3
127
44
280
2
46
90
4
127
45
270
3
46
90
4
80
51
420
4
36
100
4
128
47
270
5
36
100
3
153
49
270
6
36
110
3
93
22
455
7
36
110
3
153
26
450
8
36
110
4
153
24
350

Damage of the targets appeared as an extensive front scabbing, a localised borehole,

and a rear scabbing, which can be extensive as well. The most relevant characteristic to the
current study is the minimal borehole diameter, denoted by Fd, and shown in Table 1 for
each of the tests. General damage was assessed by measuring the maximum visible area of
front scabbing. This was approximated by an average diameter of the affected zone at the
front surface of the target; denoted by Fs and shown in Table 1.

FIGURE 2. After-impact photographs of residual damage of the concrete targets in tests 1 ((a) and (b))
and 3 ((c) and (d)). Views of the front surfaces ((a) and (c)) and the rear surfaces ((b) and (d)).

Photographs in Fig. 2 demonstrate typical patterns of the damage for tests 1 and 3
(Ntest is the test number in Table 1). Traces of burning are noticeable on the front surfaces

of the targets (Figs. 2(a) and (c)). As it is seen in Figs. 2(b) and (d) the scabbing at the rear
of the targets is significant. A narrow borehole is the principal damage in the middle of the
target. This damage classification is typical for the majority of the tests listed in Table 1.
Exemptions are tests 6 and 7 where the localised borehole diameter changed stepwise with
penetration depth. In those cases Table 1 states the minimum borehole diameter.
Results in Table 1 indicate that in general lower liner angles (90 and 100), as seen
in tests 3 and 5 respectively, achieve larger borehole diameters. For the 90 cases (tests 1-3)
a decreasing stand-off distance and increasing liner thickness result in an increase in the
borehole diameter. The opposite trend is observed in the 100 liner angle tests (4, 5) where
decreasing liner thickness and increasing stand-off distance result in an increase in the
borehole diameter. The differences in results are small however for cases 4 and 5. It is
thought that the damage to the target is dependent on the shape and velocity of the jet at
impact, which are dependent on the liner angle, liner thickness and stand-off distance. It is
expected that there is an optimum jet diameter and jet velocity, which results in the
maximum achievable borehole diameter. The results would indicate that for higher liner
angles a longer stand-off distance is required to develop the optimum jet diameter/velocity.
The results also show that the stand-off distance influences the general damage area (Fs) of
the target. To analyse the trends in detail we conducted numerical simulation for a number
of cases in following sections.
PROBLEM DEFINITION AND MODEL IMPLEMENTATION
For the numerical modelling we considered a set-up, which is similar to that in Fig. 1.
Detonation starts at point I (see in Fig. 1). We ignore the steel shell S around the target
imposing the boundary condition of ambient material of the same type outside the target
area (a soft boundary condition in the Eulerian calculation). In a previous publication [2]
we split the problem into three steps, considering separately the SC jet formation, the
loading of a concrete target by the SC jet projectile, and damage growth due to the impact
load. In that study we introduced inaccuracies by 1) approximating the SC projectile with
cylindrical blocks; 2) interpolating the pre-impact velocity of the blocks from the first stage
of the calculation (the SC liner collapse); 3) extrapolating the load obtained from the impact
calculation throughout the target axis; and finally 4) the borehole diameter was
approximated by a maximum damage zone, when calculating the damage due to the
extrapolated load. Therefore, there were a significant number of intermediate
approximations introducing inaccuracies into the final result. In the present paper we

consider the process within a single Eulerian calculation. The problem employs 4 materials
within a multi-material set-up: 1) void material (the Null-material from the DYNA material
database). This is used to represent the air adjacent to the liner and casing at the freesurface sides and surrounds the target at the front and rear sides; 2) HE for the explosive
charge simulated by the High-Explosive-Burn material from the DYNA material database
with the JWL equation of state. The parameters of HE correspond to the Composition B;. 3)
a material for simulation of the aluminium liner and the casing. A user-defined material
model is used for the simulation represented by a viscoelastic rate-sensitive model [4]. Its
implementation in DYNA was described previously in [5]; and 4) a material representing
concrete. A user-defined material model of this target material [3] was implemented in LSDYNA3D as described in [6].
The space resolution chosen for the simulation was of the order of millimetres,
similar to the liner thickness dimensions. This was necessary to obtain a reasonable
resolution of the liner as well as the space of the stand-off distance and target thickness and
to minimise the computational resources required. This however results in significant
numerical erosion of the millimetre-range projectile when travelling through the stand-off
region and target. Because of this we had to limit ourself to a more modest set-up than the
experimental test: we considered usually thicker liners (5mm) and thinner targets (150 mm)
to be able to complete the calculation. The problems considered are shown in Table 2. This
table also lists the closest corresponding experimental set-ups from those listed in Table 1
(Ntest) and corresponding borehole/damage characteristics Fd and Fs in Table 1.
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF NUMERCAL SET-UPS

Ntest
h(mm) () (mm) D(mm) Fd(mm) Fs(mm)
36
90
3
N/A
FXR
46
90
5
80
51
420
3
46
90
5
127
45
270
2
36
90
5
127
45
270
2
36
90
3
127
44
280
1
36
100
5
127
47
270
4
36
100
5
153
49
270
5
36
110
3
93
22
455
6
36
110
5
127
24/26 350/450 7 & 8

Due to the restrictions on computational resources, the present calculations cannot

provide predictive capacity but they can be used for qualitative comparative analysis to
study influence of the varying parameters on the target damage.

MODELLING AND COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENT

Development of the SC projectile for the first simulation (N=1 in Table 2) is shown
in Fig. 3(c). This figure shows the modelling results at the different stages (36, 40, 44, 48
and 52sec) of SC jet development. Fig. 3(a) shows the Flash-X-Ray (FXR) photograph
taken at time 39.3sec after the detonation initiation. The modelling result at 40sec is
overlayed on the FXR photograph in Fig. 3(b). As can be seen good agreement between the
modelled and experimental collapsed liners was obtained. As mentioned above a very
coarse computational grid was used for the simulation. This resulted in a numerical erosion
of the jet tip and slug.

FIGURE 3. Flash X-Ray photograph (a) and comparison with the simulation 1 (b) at t=40sec. (c)
Simulation 1: jet development at five moments of time from 36 up to 52sec (5 frames).

The following discussions refer to the simulation number N in Table 2 to specify the
numerical set-up. In simulations 2-9, illustrated below in Figs. 4-11, we usually draw the
first frame at t=40sec in order to give an image of the liner shape for each simulation
before impact. Then we use the moment of the SC jet impact on target as a starting point
for the follow-up frames. It is given in every figure as ti. The majority of the figures are
calibrated to this instant and the interframe time is set to be 40sec. This allows the frames
to be compared with each other for most simulations. The numerical set-up number is
referred to in Table 2 and shown on every figure followed by the letter N. Every frame in
the figures also indicates the physical time t from the time of detonation initiation. The
initial SC location is shown in each figure along with the Eulerian frame surrounding the
SC and target, that contains the air (void) material. At initial SC jet penetration, the figures

show one or two frames with damage concentration contours on the target (e.g., frames 1
and 2 in Fig. 4 show the damage contours). These are drawn at three levels of the damage
concentration (see [3]).

FIGURE 4. Simulation 2: h=46mm, =90, =5mm, and D=80mm.

FIGURE 5. Simulation 4: h=36mm, =90, =5mm, and D=127mm.

Figs. 4 and 5 show results of simulations 2 and 4 for a 90 SC with a 5mm liner
thickness at two different stand-off distances. As one would expect, the shorter stand-off
distance (Fig. 4) results in a larger diameter jet impacting on the target. This results in a
larger borehole diameter and qualitatively confirms the results obtained in the experiments.
The front damage is larger as well for the shorter stand-off distance (frames 2 in Figs 4 and
5). It is seen that with larger stand-off distance the jet particulation increases which reduces
the penetration efficiency. This tendency also develops with decreasing liner thickness,
which is noticeable in Fig. 6. Thus, the increase of stand-off distance and decrease of the
liner thickness are somewhat in correlation at this liner angle. This is also confirmed by the

comparison of tests 1 and 2. Both the general damage and the tendency to increase borehole
diameter are in agreement with tests 2 and 3 for a liner angle of 90 degrees.

FIGURE 6. Simulation 5: h=36mm, =90, =3mm, and D=127mm.

FIGURE 7. Comparisons for the study of influence of (a) the charge length (simulations 3 with h=46mm and
4 with h=36mm) and (b) the stand-off distance (simulations 6 with D=153mm and 7 with D=127mm).

We did not notice a significant charge length effect as can be seen from comparison
of the results from simulations 3 and 4 (the pair (a) in Fig. 7). In the range of lengths
studied, the longer charge provided slightly higher jet velocity that resulted in a small
increase of damage and borehole diameter which is in agreement with study [1]. Increasing
the liner angle to 100 still preserves the cumulation regime. This can be seen from the
observed liner shape in available experiments and from simulations 6 and 7 in Figs. 8 and
9. Figs. 8 and 9 show simulations for the 100 liners for 2 different stand-off distances,

127mm and 153mm. The results indicate that there is no significant difference between the
borehole diameters in these cases. It appears that for a given liner angle and thickness, the
borehole diameter is less sensitive to stand-off distances above a certain height. This is
confirmed by comparing the simulations near the final stage of penetration, as shown in
Fig. 7(b). Experiments confirm this statement as well, however, it should be kept in mind
that the experiments (tests 4 and 5) are for different liner thicknesses. Because the thinner
liner induced greater damage effects in the experiments, it appears that the jet particulation
fragmentation at this liner angle has less effect on the reduction of the damage than does the
jet erosion. At this angle, therefore, the easier jet formation for a thinner liner is more
beneficial than the overall jet mass.

FIGURE 8. Simulation 6: h=36mm, =100, =5mm, and D=127mm.

FIGURE 9. Simulation 7: h=36mm, =100, =5mm, and D=153mm.

The last two simulations were conducted at a liner angle of 110. Simulations with
different liner thicknesses and stand-off distances (Figs. 10 and 11) demonstrate that jet
erosion is dominant at this angle because this regime of the liner collapse essentially
diverges from the cumulation regime. This results in a larger impact area (insufficient
compactness) of the SC projectile and low velocity characteristic.

FIGURE 10. Simulation 8: h=36mm, =110, =3mm, and D=93mm.

FIGURE 11. Simulation 9: h=36mm, =110, =5mm, and D=127mm.

The increase in the stand-off distance reduces the velocity, whereas reduction of the
distance reduces the liner compactness. It is seen from the calculations that the general
damage is extensive but the localised damage (borehole diameter) is stepwise and poor.
This is confirmed very well with tests 6-8.

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

An experimental and theoretical study was conducted to investigate the parameters
influencing the borehole diameter due to a SC jet penetration of a concrete target.
Turning to the calculation results in Fig. 3, it can be seen that the SC jet with a 90
liner angle is within an optimal range from the jet shape/velocity point of view at 3040sec after the initiation. Shortly thereafter, the jet significantly elongates and starts
fragmenting. Therefore, the stand-off distance in 70-100mm is reasonably optimal at the
given thickness range; collapse of essentially thicker liners might move away from the
regime of cumulation. The liner angle of 100 still preserves the liner in the cumulation
regime at the thickness range, however, the jet formation takes longer and, therefore, larger
stand-off distances are required for the jet to take nearly optimal shape characteristics.
However, the velocity might be not high enough when increasing the stand-off distance.
Projectile erosion (lack of mass for penetration) on the other hand is a prevailing factor if
the liner thickness is reduced in order to increase the jet velocity. The 110 liner regime
show the most deviation from cumulation among those considered; the velocity
characteristic does not reach the required value for optimal penetration.
Summarising, we can conclude that the mathematical model predicted the trends well
and can be used to optimise the SC design and to select the stand-off distance.
It seems the present SC configuration for the 90 liner is nearly optimal. To
essentially increase the damage characteristics of the targets will require novel methods of
initiation, advanced liner materials, or enhanced high explosives.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The studies conducted in the paper have been supported by a DSTO task managed by Phil
Winter. The authors also acknowledge assistance in conducting the flash X-Ray
photography by Dave Fraser, preparation of shaped charges by Max Joyner, and conducting
the firings by Dave Harris.
REFERENCES
1.

Murphy, M.J., D.W. Baum, R.M. Kuklo, and S.C. Simonson, "Effect of Multiple and Delayed Jet
Impact and Penetration on Concrete Target Borehole Diameter", Proc. 19th Int. Symp. on Ballistics, v.
3, pp. 1553-1559, 2001

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Resnyansky, A.D. and A.E. Wildegger-Gaissmaier, "Study of the Borehole Diameter In Concrete due
to the Shaped Charge Jet Penetration", Proc. 20th Int. Symp. on Ballistics, v. II, pp. 957-963, 2002
Resnyansky, A.D., E.I. Romensky, and N.K. Bourne, "Constitutive Modelling of Fracture Waves,"
Journal of Applied Physics 93(3), 1537-1545, 2003
Godunov, S.K. and E.I. Romenskii, "Elements of Continuum Mechanics and Conservation Laws",
Kluwer Academic Publ., 2003
Resnyansky, A.D., "DYNA-Modelling of The High-Velocity Impact Problems With a Split-Element
Algorithm", Int. J of Impact Eng. 27, 709-727, 2002
Resnyansky, A.D. and N.K. Bourne, "Ballistic Impact of a Hard Projectile Against a Block of Glass",
Present Proceedings, 2004