Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 82

OAK RIDGE

NATIONAL
LAB0RAT0RY

Effects of
Directed and Kinetic Energy Weapons
on Spacecraft
A. P. Fraas

OPERATED BY
MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC.
FOR THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Printed in the United States of America. Available from


National Technical Information Service
U S . Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161
NTlS price codes-Printed Copy: A05 Microfiche A01

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the


United StatesGovernrnent. Neither theU nited StatesGovernrnent nor any agency
thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express o r implied, or
assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or
represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein
to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or
any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not
necessarily state or reflect those of the United StatesGovernment or any agency
thereof.

E n g i n e e r i n g Technology Division

EFFECTS OF DIKECTED AND K I N E T I C ENERGY WEAPONS


ON SPACECRAFT
A. P.

Fraas

Consultant

Manuscript Completed - A p r l l 1986


Date Published - December 1986

NOTICE This document contains information of a preliminary nature.


It is subject to revision or correction and therefore does not represent a

final report,

P r e p a r e d by the

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LA30RATORY

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831


MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC.
for the

3 445b 014b454 5

CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT

........................................................
................................................
....................................
.....................
..........................................
E l e c t r o n Beams .........................................
Laser
............................................
x
.................................................
................................................
Heating ........................................
...............
.................................
.......................................
Overall View
Modes ..........................
................................
Duration.
....
.....................................
...............
......................................................
.
WITH

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND OF EXPERIENCE

TYPES OF ENERGY BEAMS AND T H E I R E F F E C T S

.
.

3.1

3.2
3.3

3.4

Rays

7
9

12
21

4.1

Surface

21

Temperature D i s t r i b u t i o n i n Short B u r s t s

29

Explosive V a p o r i z a t i o n

35

T h e r m a l Stresses

46

4.3
4.4

Beams

DAMAGE MODES
4.2

N e u t r a l Beams

of F a i l u r e

47

SURVEY OF SOME TYPICAL CASES

53

4.5
5.1
5.2

5.3

R e l a t i o n s B e t w e e n Pulse E n e r g y .

and P o w e r

53

S w a r m s of B i r d s h o t

57

S h i e l d i n g Spacecraft f r o m H o s t i l e A c t t o n

62

REFERENCES

Appendix A

Appendix B

67

TEWERATURJI D I S T R I B U T I O N S I N PLATES
SURFACES HEATED BY SHORT BURSTS OF
RAT)IA.NT ENERGY

71

BLAST EFFECTS FROM RAPID VAPORIZATION FROM A


SURFACE

73

.....................................
............................................

iii

1
EFFECTS OF DIRECTED AND KINETIC ENERGY WEAPONS
ON SPACECRAFT
A. P.

Fraas

ABSTRACT

Tihe c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e v a r i o u s d i r e c t e d energy beams


are reviewed, and t h e i r damaging e f f e c t s on t y p i c a l materials
a r e examined f o r a wide range of energy p u l s e i n t e n s i t i e s and
durations.
R e p r e s e n t a t i v e cases are surveyed, and c h a r t s a r e
p r e s e n t e d t o i n d i c a t e r e g i o n s i n which damage t o s p a c e c r a f t
s t r u c t u r e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y r a d i a t o r s f o r power p l a n t s , would be
likely.
The e f f e c t s o f k i n e t i c energy weapons, such as b i r d The c h a r t s are t h e n a p p l i e d t o
s h o t , are s i m i l a r l y examined.
evaluate. t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of v a r i o u s measures d e s i g n e d t o reduce the v u l n e r a b i l i t y of s p a c e c r a f t components, p a r t i c u l a r l y
n u c l e a r electric power p l a n t s .

1.
A major y e t

s u b t l e set of

INTRODUCTION

c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n t h e d e s i g n of power

p l a n t s f o r m i l i t a r y s p a c e c r a f t is concerned with t h e r e d u c t i o n of t h e i r
vulnerability

to weapons

such

as

lasers

and

particle

beams.

This

memorandum was prepared t o g i v e p e r s p e c t i v e t o t h e s e problems and prov i d e d a t a and c h a r t s t h a t will h e l p i n e s t i m a t i n g t h e v u l n e r a b i l i t y t o


t y p i c a l weapons
tion.

of

the

various

c o a c e p t s and d e s i g n s under

considera-

The p r e s e n t a t i o n was designed f o r u s e by e n g i n e e r s having rela-

t i v e l y l i t t l e background i n t h e many s p e c i a l i z e d d i s c i p l i n e s i n v o l v e d ;
hence, rough approximations are employed t o simpljify t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n .

BACKGROUND OF EXPERIENCE

2.

In a t t e m p t i n g t o v i s u a l i z e t h e e f f e c t s of i n t e n s e beams of r a d i a i t i s h e l p f u l t o look f i r s t a t some of

t i o n on s p a c e c r a f t structures,

e x p e r i e n c e t h a t is a v a i l a b l e .

t h e background of

About 200 B.C.

n o t as new as i t may seem.

The b a s i c concept i s

c a t a s t r o p h i c damage t o m i l i -

t a r y equipment by r a d i a n t energy w a s e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e Romans when t h e

Greeks a t Syracuse followed Archimedes'

s u g g e s t i o n and used t h e i r pol-

i s h e d s h i e l d s eo form a m u l t i f a c e t e d m i r r o r to c o n c e n t r a t e t h e r a y s of
t h e sun on t h e s a i l s
Leonardo da V i n c i

of

tried

a t t a c k i n g Roman s h i p s and s e t them on f i r e .


to

build

a large parabolic

f a c e t s of s i l v e r e d g l a s s f o r t h e d e f e n s e of Milan.

m i r r o r wfth many

Apparently, however,

he was f r u s t r a t e d by d i f f i c u l t i e s i n g e t t i n g a s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h d e g r e e

of s t i f f n e s s and d i m e n s i o n a l s t a b i l i t y i n t h e s u p p o r t s t r u c t u r e t o g i v e
a p a r a b o l i c s u r f a c e t h a t would y i e l d and m a i n t a i n a s h a r p focus.

These

same problems have plagued e f f o r t s t o g e t l a r g e , l i g h t w e i g h t , p a r a b o l i c


m i r r o r s f o r f o c u s i n g s u n l i g h t on s m a l l b o f l e r s f a r Rankine c y c l e power
t e n s of m i l l i o n s of d o l l a r s s p e n t by

p l a n t s f o r s p a c e c r a f t i n s p i t e of
both t h e U.S.

A i r Force and t h e N a t i o n a l A e r o n a u t i c s and Space AdmPnis-

Although p r o g r e s s h a s been slow,

t r s t i o n (NASA) between 1958 and 1975.


r e c e n t U.S.

developments on m i r r o r s f o r c o n c e n t r a t i n g s o l a r energy o r

s p a c e power p l a n t s look proinFsinge1

4 weapons

system employing l a r g e

m i r r o r s t o c o n c e n t r a t e s o l a r energy i n t o beams for use a g a i n s t spacec r a f t is n o t ' l l i k e l y ,

of 1/2'

however,

because t h e s o l a r d i s c s u b t e n d s an a n g l e

so t h a t o p t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s y f e l d a d i v e r g e n c e a n g l e of a t

l e a s t 1 / 2 O f o r any beam c o n c e n t r a t e d by a concave m i r r o r .


The advent of

t h e n u c l e a r age i n t r o d u c e d a new s e t of p r o b l e m i n -

volving severe radiation heating.


such a5 c y c l o t r o n s ,

The t a r g e t s i n p a r t i c l e a c c e l e r a t o r s ,

w e r e melted by t h e i n t e n s e energy i n p u t from t h e

beams; t h i s l e d t o water c o o l i n g of t h e t a r g e t s .

face h e a t i n g

problems

thermonuclear r e a c t o r s .

have

been

experienced

Even more-severe
in

the

sur-

development

of

F i g u r e 1 shows t h e s u r f ace m e l t i n g e x p e r i e n c e d

w i t h a water-cooled

copper

t a r g e t used i n t h e development of n e u t r a l

beams

ignite

the

designed

to

plasma

in

thermonuclear

experimental

Note t h a t t h e bulk of t h e energy i n t h e beam used on t h e tar-

machines.

hydrogen i o n s whose energy was

1 was i n t h e om of 30-keV

g e t i n Fig.

absorbed e s s e n t i a l l y a t t h e s u r f a c e , t h e i r p e n e t r a t i o n being only a t i n y


f r a c t i o n of a m i l l i m e t e r .

- still

very p e n e t r a t i n g
discussed

a small E r a c r i o n o f a m i l l i m e t e r .

As w i l l be

a t h i g h e r e n e r g i e s e l e c t r o n s are more p e n e t r a t i n g s o

later,

t h a t only a p o r t i o n of
t o the surface.

a r e used

A t t h i s energy l e v e l even e l e c t r o n s are n o t

t h e energy i n a beam may be absorbed very c l o s e

Small, i n t e n s e beams of r e l a t i v e l y low-energy e l e c t r o n s

i n welding and f o r

c u t t i n g complex

shapes

i n difficult-to-

machine m e t a l s and ceramics by t h e f a i r l y widely used E l o x i n g p r o c e s s .


s o u r c e of

Runaway e l e c t r o n s have been a major


n u c l e a r experiments with Tokamaks,
the w a l l

of

the toroidal

damage i n thermo-

i n some cases m e l t i n g h o l e s through

s h e l l surrounding

t h e plasma

[e.%.,

i n the

French TFR and t h e M a s s a c h u s e t t s I n s t i t u t e of Technology (MIT) A l c a t o r ] ;


i n o t h e r s they have melted l i m i t e r s made of t u n g s t e n o r molybdenum ( s e e
Fig.

(A

2).

1iiniter i s a sharp-edged

o r i f i c e having a n a p e r t u r e a b i t

smaller in d i a m e t e r t h a n t h e minor d i a m e t e r of
that

electrons

or

ions

orbiring

out

of

the

t h e t o r o i d a l s h e l l so

plasma

will

strike

L i m i t e r b e f o r e r e a c h i n g and m e l t i n g a h o l e i n t h e vacuum w a l l . )
d e t a i l s on t h e s e problems are p r e s e n t e d i n R e f .
High-energy

nuclear

More

2.

laser beams have been used f o r welding metals and f o r

machining metal and ceramic p a r t s . 4 , 5


ience,

the

laser-fusion,
r e a c t i o n by

Another p e r t i n e n t area of exper-

has been d i r e c t e d toward t h e i g n i t i o n o f a thermoconcentrating

l a s e r beam on a f r o z e n p e l l e t of

a very s h o r t b u r s t of
deuterium and tritium,

energy i n a
To i g n i t e a

p e l l e t roughly 2 mm i n d i a m e t e r w i l l r e q u i r e t h a t t h e Laser beam e n e r g y


be

-lo5

J in a b u r s t t i m e of -10-10

s.

h e a t t h e c o r e of t h e p e l l e t d i r e c t l y b u t ,

The l a s e r beam energy does n o t


rather, vaporizes the surface

l a y e r of t h e p e l l e t so r a p i d l y t h a t t h e r e a c t i o n f o r c e f r o m t h e explodi n g o u t e r l a y e r s implodes,
of

the p e l l e t .

a c t i n g t o compress and,

T h i s compression-ignition

t h u s , h e a t t h e core

process i s analogous t o t h a t

i n a d i e s e l e n g i n e , but t h e p r e s s u r e and t e m p e r a t u r e regime r e q u i r e d for


deuterium-tritium
and l o 8 K.6

i g n i t i o n is v a s t l y higher

- on

t h e o r d e r of 2000 Mbar

F i g . 2. Photograph of damage t o an ORMAK limiter made of tungsten


laminations, each 3 mu t h i c k . sOUPO6: A. P. Fraas and A. S. Thompson,
ORNL Rtsion Pacrer Dsmonstrntion Study: Ftuid Floo, Heat Tmnafer, and
StP888
A M t y 8 i 8 C0?28id@ZWtiUn8 in t h e -8ip
Of
B b l k 8 t 8 fOP
Z'Ize2wtorumZear R m O t O p s , ORNL/l!M-S960, Union Carbide Corp. Nuclear Mv.,
O a k Ridge N a t l . Lab., February 1978, p. 42.

7
3.

TYPES OF ENEKGY BEAMS AND THEIR EFFECTS

3.1

Neutral Beams

I n t e n s e i o n bealms were f i r s t developed f o r u s e i n c y c l o t r o n s , an


a p p l i c a t i o n t h a t r e q u i r e d a r e l a t i v e l y l o w beam c u r r e n t .

Vastly higher

c u r r e n t beams were developed f o r t h e C a l u t r o n s employed f o r t h e separat i o n of

235U and 238U d u r i n g t h e Manhattan P r o j e c t .

F u r t h e r develop-

ments r e q u i r i n g even h i g h e r c u r r e n t s have i n c l u d e d i o n j e t s f o r spacecraft

p r o p u l s i o n and beams designed t o i g n i t e t h e plasma i n thermonu-

c l e a r r e a c t o r experiments.

High-current

beams tend t o d i v e r g e r a p i d l y

because t h e i o n s have the same e l e c t r i c a l charge and,


each other.

therefore, repel

This e f f e c t can be l a r g e l y e l i m i n a t e d by n e u t r a l i z i n g t h e

charge on t h e i o n s a f t e r t h e y have been a c c e l e r a t e d and c o l l i m a t e d w i t h


electrostatic
yielded

and

neutral

e f f i c i e n c y of

mgnetic

fields;

beams with

some

neutralization

systems

remarkably l i t t l e d i v e r g e n c e .

have

The e n e r g y

t h e systems f o r producing t h e s e n e u t r a l beams f a l l s o f f

w i t h both t h e energy oE t h e i o n s produced and with t h e d e g r e e O F


l i m a t i o n of t h e f i n a l beam.

col-

E s s e n t i a l l y a l l of t h e energy i n beams of

t h i s type a c t s t o h e a t any s u r f a c e they s t r i k e with v i r t u a l l y no l o s s e s


a s a Consequence of r e f l e c t i o n by e i t h e r t h e s u r f a c e o r t h e vapor l a y e r

evolved by h e a t i n g t h e s u r f a c e .

3.2

E l e c t r o n Beams

E l e c t r o n beans are t h e b a s i s f o r t h e c a t h o d e ray t u b e s t h a t have

As mentioned p r e v i o u s l y , they are a l s o

made modern t e l e v i s i o n p o s s i b l e .

employed Eor machining and welding, as w e l l as f o r o t h e r less widespread


applications.

A s shown i n Fig.

3, t h e p e n e t r a t i o n of e l e c t r o n beams in-

creases r a p i d l y w i t h t h e i r energy.

Although

they a r e not s u b j e c t t o

a p p r e c i a b l e r e f l e c t i o n from a s u r f a c e , they are not w e l l s u i t e d f o r u s e


as weapons a g a i n s t s p a c e c r a f t because t h e r e i s no way t o e l i m i n a t e t h e

e l e c t r L c a 1 charge

effects

cited

above

for

i o n beams;

d e g r e e of c o l l i m a t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r a long-range

thus,

the high

space weapon cannot be

10

-E

u1

z
Q

! T a

0
01

02

05

10

50

20

10 0

ENERGY (MeV)

3* b n g e of e l e c t r o n p e n e t r a t i o n i n t y p i c a l strtictural.
as a f u n c t i o n of t h e energy of thg i n c i d e n t alrc?lron.
Encrgy Losses m d RCZTLCJGS
Source: M. Berger and S. M. s e l t z e r , Tables
Of lT1ecbP0i-1~
Positroris, NASA SP-7012 N a t i o n a l Aeronautics and Space
Adiiiinistration, Washington, D.C.,
1964, p. 37.

Fig.
inaterials

I$

9
achieved.

Long-range

exoatmospheric beams

of

electrons

and ions are

a l s o bent by t h e e a r t h s magnetic f i e l d .

3.3
The broad spectrum of

Laser Beams

e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c r a d i a t i o n shown diagrammat-

4 o f f e r s p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r long-range,

i c a l l y i n Fig.

directed-energy

weapons, p a r t i c u l a r l y lasers o p e r a t i n g i n the region from s o f t X rays t o


the

i n f r a r e d with wavelengths from 4.001

wavelengths

to

prodwe

Tcaicrowave h e a t i n g

are less s u i t a b l e f o r long-range

beam

to

10 urn.

might

weapons

be

Although l o n g e r
considered,

these

because t h e i r a n g u l a r

d i v e r g e n c e i n c r e a s e s approximately Bn p r o p o r t i o n t o the wavelength.


t h e o t h e r end of

At

t h e spectrum, r a d i a t i o n i n t h e wavelength r e g i o n below

does not appear s u i t a b l e for a weapon because of t h e p h y s i c a l d i f -

rnm

ficulties

of

creating

coherent

be-

at

progressively

s h o r t e r wave-

lengths.

The
widely,

laser.

energy

efficiency

ranging from (1%

f o r t h e g e n e r a t i o n of

laser beams

varies

t o as much as 30%, depending on t h e t y p e of

Some lasers are s u i t e d t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n of a continuous beam;

o t h e r s o p e r a t e i n a pulsed mode with p u l s e s as s h o r t as 10 ps.


h e d i s c u s s e d i n Sect.

As w i l l

4 , t h e r e are i m p o r t a n t advantages t o t h e use of

very s h o r t pulses ( e . g e ,

<lo0 n s ) ,

but t h e e f f i c i e n c y of lasers g i v i n g

t h e s e s h o r t p u l s e s tends t o be low.
\

The energy of a l a s e r beam may be absorbed i n t h e material t h a t i t

s t r i k e s , o r much of it may be r e f l e c t e d ,

of t h e s u r f a c e .

depending on t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y

F i g u r e 5 shows t h a t t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y f o r some t y p i c a l

s u r f a c e s v a r i e s widely both with the wavelength and from one material t o


another.

Thus, a f l a s h p l a t i n g of p o l i s h e d s i l v e r would r e f l e c t most of

t h e energy i n an i n c i d e n t laser beam over a wide range of wavelengths.


The s u r f a c e need not n e c e s s a r i l y be p o l i s h e d ; a white s u r f a c e might a l s o
r e f l e c t t h e bulk of t h e i n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n by d i f f u s e r e f l e c t i o n even i f

i t s s p e c u l a r r e f l e c t i v i t y is poor.
t h e f u s e l a g e of

passenger

For example,

t h e upper s u r f a c e of

a i r c r a f t i s commonly p a i n t e d w h i t e because

t h i s g i v e s m c h less h e a t a b s o r p t i a n t h a n b a r e p o l i s h e d aluminum on a

a
lLU

v)

I
I
I

0"-

n-

C?
7

0-

.'

p-

0
--

I---

u-

LD
P
d

-*
,..

-9-

10

11

ORNL-DWG

a5--48i3 ETO

100

ao

--".
D
.

60
ALUMINUM (AI)
a =POLISHED
b = ANODIZED
PLATINUM (Pt)
SILVER (Agi

!0

w
n

40

20

0
0.5

WAVELENGTH, ( p )

Fig. 5. Variatlon of reflectivity


metals.
S o u ~ c e : Handbook of Ch&stry
Press, Cleveland, 1959, p. 2948.

with

wavelength

for

typical
GXG

and Physics, 414th ed.,

12

summer

bright

and,

thus,

greatly

reduces

the

air-conditioning

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , niost handbook d a t a on r e f l - e c t i v i t y are f o r specii-

load.
lar

day

r e f l e c t i o n only

wou1.d

be r e f l e c t e d

t h e t o t a l . f r a c t i o n of

might

be

much h i g h e r .

the incident light

For example,

that

although t h e

s p e c u l a r r e f l e c t i v i - t y of p a i n t e d s u r f a c e s is poor, a gl.ossy w h i t e eo;~meI

85% of

may r e f l c c t

Incident

sunlight via diffuse reflection,

Data f o r the r e f l e c t i v i t y

i.farii-ie corps g r e e n may r e f l e c t only 4X.7

t y p i c a l materials f o r t h e f u l l range of wa.velengths of


t i m e s hard t o f i n d .

whereas
0%

l i g h t a r e some-

Table 1 g i v e s a r e p r e s e n l i r i t i v e s e t .

Absorbed energy may be r-e.-emitted as t h i - r i n d r a d i a t i o n .

Figure 6

g i v e s a comprehensive c h a r t f o r t h e rad;-ation f l u x from an i d e a l h l a c k


body having XI e m i s s i v i t y of 1.0;

Table 2 g i v e s data f o r thp r i n i s s i u b L y

of s u r f a c e s l i k e l y t o be of i n t e r e s t for- s p a c e c r a f t .
3.4
A1 though l o w - ~ n e r g y photons hav-lng wavelengths i n t h e vCs Lble l i g h t

range p e n e t r a t e a l i t t l e i n t o t h e crystal. l a t t i c e of inet-als, i k e d i s - tance

i s very

short.

For example,

o n l y about 10 l a t t i c e s p a c i n g s

the a t t e n u a t i o n l e n g t h i n i r o n is

.* However,

f o r much s h o r t e r wavelengths

(i.e.,

in t h e X-ray

tial.

Because s o i t X r a y s a r e n o t r e f l e c t e d ( e x c e p t a t l o w a n g l e s of

incidence)

region)

the

a t t e n u a t i o n l e n g t h becomes substan-

and p e n e t r a t e an a p p r e c i a b l e d i s t a n c e beneath t h e s u r f a c e ,

they pose a q u l t e d i f f e r e n t set of problems from e i t h e r p a r t i c l e beams


o r lasers.

The d e p t h of p e n e t r a t i o n deper,ds on both t h e wavelength and

t h e material of t h e s u r f a c e , t h e mass a h s o r p t i o n coefE-Lcient i n c r e a s i n g


with

t h e atomic weight

( s e e d a t a i n Table 3 from Ref. 9 ) .

Data from

Table 3 were used i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s of T a b l e 4 t o determine t h e f r a c t i o n of

t h e energy absorbed i n t h e f i r s t millimeter of

f u n c t i o n of

t h e wavelength f o r s e v e r a l t y p i c a l metals.

have been p l o t t e d i n Fig.

7.

a t a r g e t as a

These r e s u l t s

Very l i t t l e energy from a 0.005-prn

X-ray

beam would be absorbed i n t h e w a l l of a s p a c e c r a f t i f i t were made of a


1-mm-thick
however,

s h e e t of

beryllium;

most of

t h e energy from t h e same beam,

would be absorbed i n a 1-mm-thick

instantaneous

temperature

J / c m * i s shown i n Fig. 8.

rise

i n the w a l l

steel wall.

The r e s u l t t n g

from a s h o r t p u l s e of

50

T a b l e 1.

R e f l e c t i o n of l i g h t by metalsa

Wavelength

Material

(urn>

0.251
Aluminum
Antimony
Bronze ( 6 8 Cu, 32 Sn)
Cadmium
Cobalt
Copper ( c o m m e r c i a l )
Gold ( e l e c t r o l y t i c )
Graphite
Iridium
Iron
Magnalium ( M a c h ' s )
Magnesium
Plercury-backed g l a s s
Molybdenum
Nickel ( e l e c t r o l y t i c )
Palladium
Platinum ( e l e c t r o l y t i c )
Rhodium
Silicon
S i l v e r (chemically deposited)
Silver-backed g l a s s
Speculum m e t a1
Steel
Stellite
Tan t a 1um
Tellurium
Tin
Tungs t e n
V a n ad i um
Zinc

0.357

30 e 0
25.9
38.8

67 .0

0.500

8.000

6 3 .O
27.3
27 - 9

8 1 e2

37.8

48.8

33.8

43.4

34.1

74.5

29.9
32.9

51.0
45 .0

43.7
47 .o
22.0
55.0
83.3
72.0
70.9
46.0
60.8

88.6
94.9
25.0
84.3

52.0
69.6

58 e 4
76.0
34 .0
91.3
86.6
63.2
54.8

7 0 a3
81.0
29 .0
96.8

38 .o

64 .O
48.0

49.0
57 .0

58 .O

60 .O

1.000

2.000

4.000

27.0
7 8 .O
65.0
84.1
74.0

82 .O
60.0
80.0
87.0
72.0
95.5
96.8
35.0
87 .0
78.0
86.7
77.0

92.0
68.0
88 .0
96.0
a 1 .o
95.3
96.9
48.0
94 e o
89.0
88.7
83.0

58.0
72.0
72.0
12.9
84.0
28 .O
97.0

82.0
83.5
81.0
80.6
91.0
28.0
97.8

90.0
91 .I
88.0
91.5
92.0
28 .O
98.5

70.5
63.1
68.9
78 .O
50.0
54 .O
62.0
6 1 .o
80.0

80.4
76.7
74 .?
90 .o
52.0
61.0
85.0
49 .O
92.0

88.5
87 .R
82.5
93 .o
57.0
7 2 .O
93.0
7 9 .o
97.0

11.0
55.0
70.0
72.0
67 .O
90.1

~~~~~~~

9.000

12.000
98.0

72.0
93 .o
98.4
98.0

99.0
97 .o

96.0
94.0
90.6
93.0

P
w

95.0
95.6
97.0
95.4
98.7
92.2
92.9
88.0
95.0
85 .O
95.0
99 .0

~~~~~~~~~

aThe t a b l e g i v e s t h e p e r c e n t a g e of n o r m a l l y i n c i d e n t l i g h t t h a t i s r e f l e c t e d by t h e p o l i s h e d s u r f a c e of
v a r i o u s metals as a f u n c t i o n of t h e w a v e l e n g t h of t h e l i g h t .

1.4

O R N L - D W G 85-4312 E T D

100
50
20
10

E
.
3
-

z
a

1.0

0.5

I-

0.2

-4

a
a
to

aw

0.1

0.05

0 02
0.01

0.005

0.002
0.001
0.1

0.2

0.3 0.4

0.6 0.8 1

Fig. 5 . Black-body
between 273 and 2600 K .

2
3
4
6 8 1 0
WAVELENGTH (pm)

20

30 40

50

s p e c t r a l . i n t e n s i t i e s f o r source temperatures
SOuPCe:
R. E. Holz and G. L. Tuve, e d s . ,
Handbook of Tables for Applied Engingering Science, 2d ea., LXC Press,
Cleveland, 1973, p. 208.

15

T a b l e 2.

E m i s s i v i t i e s for t y p i c a l s u r f a c e s

__.______._I

E m i s s i v l t y a t v a r i o u s t e m p e r a t u r e s in

Surf a c e
-250

I00

125

300

500

(a

750

1000

1500

O F

2000

2500

5000

Metal6
Aluminum, p o l t s h e d , 98% p u r e
Aluminum, ox t d i zed
Copper, p o l i s h e d
Copper, black o x i d e
Chromium, p o l i s h e d s h e e t
Gold, e l e c t r o l y t l c , p l t s h e d
Iron and s t e e l , p u r e p o l i s h e d iron
Iron and s t e e l , c a s t iron, p o l i s h e d
Iron and s t e e l , p o l t s h e d s t e e l
I r o n and s t e e l , rough s t e e l p l a t e
Iron dnd s t e e l , c a s t i r o n , o x i d i z e d
Iron and s t e e l , m a t t wrought i r o n ,
o x i d i zed
I r o n and s t e e l , o x i d i z e d s t e e l ,
after long heaLing a t d u l l red
Lead, pure, p o l t s h e d
Magnesium, p o l t s h e d
?lo1jihderi um , p o l t s h e d
Nickel, e l e c t r o l y t i c
P l a t t n u m , pura p o l i s h e d
Platinum, black
Rhodium, p o l i s h e d
Silicon, polished
S i l v e r , p o l i s h e d or d e p o s i t e d
'Tantalum, po 11s h e d
T e l lurtuni, p o l i s h e d
Tungsten, polished
Vanadium, p o l i s h e d
Zinc, pure polfshed
Zinc, matt z i n c
A l l o y s , brass, p o l i s h e d
Alloys, brass, oxidized
A l l o y s , nictirome wire, b r i g h t
A l l o y s , nichrotne w i r e , o x i d i z e d
A l l o y s , s t e l l i t e (Cr, No, Co)

4
20

4
21

92

90
14
2
6
21
8
95
62

8
2

6
21
7
94
58
95

95

85

90

6
10
6
5
5
94
7
72
2

7
6
4

4
93
5
12
1
6
22
2

7
3;
2.5

8
2
21
10

12
2
21
10
50

46

65

66

95
12

96

13

5
23
2
83
17
2
8
21

8
33

11

77
27
3
12

10

31

66

95

.43

62
22

14
98
75

97

26

35

23

37

23
18
16
19
91
9
72

26
43
28
27
9T
16
72
4
25
51
35
39
SO

96

93
8

13
8
6
6
96
7
12
2
7
39
3.5
17

18
11

10
10
97
8
12
3

9
48
15
31

45
1 -5
23
4

3
21
10
56
61
97
14

75
71
98
18

19

24

28

Pigments
91
94
91
92
94

96

9s
98

99
86
70
67
79

95

95

77

99
87

99
97

59
38

46

46

55
12

16

Table 3.

C a l c u l a L r d mass a b s o r p t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s (crn2/g)
f o r X-ray a t t e n u a t i o n i n t y p i c a ; etementsa
Energy

< e'V)

1000

600

400

200

0.012

0.020

0.033

0.060

0.12

0.20

0.3

0.6

0.1240

0.1577

0.1870

0.2407

0.2926

0.3263

0.3498

5.3736

0.4069

0.4927

0.7375

Li

0.0540

0.0687

0.0814

0.1049

0.1277

0.1433

02563

0.1939

0.4258

1.362

4.181

100

60

40

Element

20

10

I .2

2 .u

3 .O

Be

0.0554

0.0705

0.0835

0.1076

0. i 3 i 4

0.1487

0.1560

0.2443

0.7978

3.0>M

0.0624

0.0794

0.0941

0.1215

0.1494

0.1741

0.2089

0.449L

2.280

9.765

0.0625

0.0795

C.G943

0.1220

0.1529

0.1897

0.2614

0 .a649

&!

0.06 16

0.0784

0.0933

0.1222

0.1654

0.2541

3.4822

2.615

19.05

Al

0.0602

0.0767

0.0910

0.1201

0.1672

0.2740

0.557;

3.226

23.68

si
<

0.0623

0.0794

0.9945

0.1250

0.1788

0.3;00

0.6652

4.028

29.74

0.0607

0.0776

0.0929

3.1285

0.2267

0.5420

I .445

9.998

72.68

298.5

851.4

Ca

0.0624

0.0798

0.0956

0.1338

0.2450

0.626;

i.713

I I .98

348.3

964.4

Ti

0.0575

0.0736

0.0685

3.1273

0.2612

v .7 2 5:

2.008

14.65

5.550

86.38

0.6

0.4

6.0

12

20

33

0.0741

0.0896

0.1330

0.3025

0.9100

2.669

18.98

110.7

0.0750

0.0911

0.1403

0.3533

I . 134

3.395

24.10

160.8

Ni

0.0599

0.0771

0.0943

0.1512

0.4198

1.420

4.311

30.41

195.4

cu

0.0573

0.0739

0.0907

0.i486

0.4323

1.495

4.56!

72.02

23; .4

I10

0.3556

0.074.9

0.0972

0.2221

1.020

4.045

12.;7

0.0558

0.0755

3.103'1

0.2695

1.353

5.500

16.51

D.

18.61

Sn

0.0542

0.0743

0.1040

0.2942

1.571

Ta

0.0552

0.0858

0.1475

0.6326

3.797

0.0552

0.0865

0.1504

0.6538

3.923

Pt

0.0558

0.0903

0.1635

0.7484

4.461,

At!

0.0562

0.0917

0.1677

0.7770

4.623

Hg

9.0562

(1.0925

0.1709

0.8008

4.75;

Pb

0.0563

0.0944

0.1778

0.5507

5.010

s e l e c t e d froin t a b l e s i n J . W. V i c t o r e e n ,

324

80.7!

22.32

101 - 6

249.0

i,120

586.1

340.7
3,649

2,576

8,118

246.2

1,82;

7,522

21,544

601.9

4,135

14,957

76.19

t ,715

103.6

326.7

2,072

129.6

406.2

2,507

481.7

0.0578
0.0584

9.851
32.10

5 . t42
31.92

267 .6

131.4

Cr

Q
'

24.57

83.93

103.5

Fe

1949).

Wavelength [ A ( A ) ]

%ata

75.17

"The C n l c i i l a t i o n of X-ray ?lass A b s u r p t i o n C o e f F i c z e n t s in p r a c t i c e , " ,I.

A p p l . p1Iy.S. 2 8 , 1141-47 (December

17

~
0

o o o o o m c o ~ h u ~

......... .

......... .

4 d v - 4 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o O o c o I - m a u h m *
0 0 0 c n c o e N d O q 0

...........

4 ~ d Q O O O O O O O

...........

m m - I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

...........

c o O O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 U

h
M n

k 3

e m m ~ m ~ o o o o o
?-l4N(.r)d-acoN

aJQ

...........
c v N v - 4 . - - 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

18

24

12
8
PHOTON ENERGY (ev)

Fig. 7.
X-ray energy absorbed in t h e f i r s t 1.0 ma. as a function of
wavelength f o r f o u r metals (data from Table 4 ) .

19

ORNL-DWG 86-4350

ETD

250

200
V

0,

2
W

150

50

0.5

24

1.o

1.5

WAVELENGTH

12

(A)

2.0

2.5

PHOTON ENERGY (ev)

Fig. 8. Temperature r i s e i n a 1.0-mm s h e e t f o r a 50-J/cm2 burst of


X rays as a function of wavelength f o r four d i f f e r e n t metals (data from
Table 4 ) . (The temperature r i s e is independent of the time required f o r
the burst f o r t i m e s (1.0 s . )

21
DAMAGE MODES

4.

The preceding overview i n d i c a t e s t h a t a v a r i e t y of r a d i a n t energy


beams o p e r a t i n g w i t h a wide range of

p u l s e energy d e n s i t i e s and p u l s e

d u r a t i o n s might damage s p a c e c r a f t s t r u c t u r e s .

Types of damage i n c l u d e

t h e o v e r h e a t i n g of t e m p e r a t u r e - s e n s i t i v e materials, such as t h e semicond u c t o r s i n solar c e l l s ; the h e a t i n g of s t r u c t u r a l components u n t i l t h e y


weaken or melt;

t h e e x p l o s i v e v a p o r i z a t i o n of

s u b j e c t i n g i t t o a very s h o r t ,

a t h i n s u r f a c e l a y e r by

i n t e n s e b u r s t o f energy; and h e a t i n g t o

impose s e v e r e thermal stress.

4.1

Surfzce Heating

The damage mode most e a s i l y v i s u a l i z e d and a s s e s s e d i s t h e s u r f a c e

h e a t i n g produced by a continuous beam of r e l a t i v e l y law i n t e n s i t y .

Such

a beam may h e a t an exposed surface until i t m e l t s o r v a p o r i z e s u n l e s s i t

is sufficiently refractory

t h a t it can o p e r a t e a t a temperature h i g h

SO

enough t o dissipate h e a t by thermal

r a d i a t i o n a t t h e same r a t e as i t i s

A f i r s t s t e p i n a s s e s s i n g t h e damaging

absorbing energy from t h e beam.

e f f e c t s of a beam weapon i s t o est-imate t h e t e m p e r a t u r e r i s e i n t y p i c a l


m a t e r i a l s as a f u n c t i o n of t h e amount of h e a t absorbed.

Thus, t h e n e l t -

i n g and b o i l i n g p o i n t s , t h e l a t e n t h e a t s of f u s i o n a n d v a p o r i z a t i o n , and
the

s p e c i f i c heat

v a l u e s of

of

the

target

material

a r e key parameters.

Mean

t h e s p e c i f i c heat between 0 C and t h e m e l t i n g p o i n t and be-

tween t h e m e l t i n g p o i n t and t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t were used i n c a l c u l a t i n g


t h e h e a t i n p u t as a f u n c t i o n of t h e t e m p e r a t u r e reached f o r s h o r t b u r s t s
of

The d a t a used f o r 22 d i f f e r e n t metals ranging from

energy i n p u t .

magnesium t o t u n g s t e n are shown i n Table 5 w i t h t h e r e s u l t s of t h e calculations

presented

in

Table

and

Figs.

and

p r o p e r t y d a t a i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e d i f f e r somewhat;

were s e l e c t e d from Refs.

10.

The

physical

t h e v a l u e s i n Table 5

2 , 7, 10, and 11.

An e f f o r t w a s made t o make a similar s e t of

c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r some

t y p i c a l ceramic materials.

The problem i s complicated because many of

the

o r example,

compounds

of

interest,

begin t o decompose as they v a p o r i z e .

AL2O3,

Thus,

SiOp,

Sic,

not only may

and Z r 0 2 ,

t h e r e be no

Table 5.

Atomic

'ieral

Melting
poirlt
("C)

Nagnesium
L i t h i un
Re ryl 1:um
Aluminum
Titanium
Chromium
Cadmium
I ran
Cobalt
Nickel
Copper
Zinc
Niobium
Molybdenum
Silver
Tungs t e n
Tin
U h e n i um
P1 a t t num
Cold
Bismuth
Lead

24.3
6.5
9.91
27 .0
47.9
52.0
112.4
55.8
58.9
58.7
63.5
65.4
93
96

Ion

184
IlR.7
186
195
197
2fl9
207

650
179
i,278
660
1.675
,890
32 1
,535
,492
,453
,083
420
2,468
2,610
96;
3,410
232
3,180
1,769
1,063
271
327

Boiling
point
("C)

Neat of
fusion
(kcallg nil)

1,090
1,317
2,970
2,467
3.260
21482
765
3,000
2,900
2,732
2,595
906
4,927
5,560
2,212
5,927
2,270
5,627
3,827
2,966
1,477
1,737

2. i 4
1.10
2.34
2.55
4.50
3.50
1.46
3.30
3.70
4.21
3.12
1.60
6.40
6.60
2.65
R.42
1.72
R.00
4.70
3.05
2.51
1.22

Physyca: p r o p e r t i e s OF some t y p i c a l metals t h a t mtght


3e used as armor o r humpcrs For spacecraft'

Heat of

vaporization
(kcalig 001)
31.5
32.5
68.0
6 1 .O
!02.5
71.0
32.2
84.6
93.0
89.6
72.8
27.L

166.5
142.0
61.6
197.0
68.0
178.0
112.1

82.0
42.6
42.4

i)"Cc!o
mp
( c a l / g mol)
5.80
6.9
4.05
6.74
7.3
8 .8
7.1
7 .?
10. I
7.47
5.:i
7.AI
1.;

9.1
5.5
7.;
6.9
7.8
6.Y6
6.28
7. i

8.:

:!

mp
bp
( c a l l a mol)
3.02
5.9
7.0:
7 .00
8.9
il.6
7. I
11.1
9.7
10.1
7.5
7.01
7.7
8.5
7.4
7.4
9.0
8.2
8.4
7.1
8 7
7.7

E n t h a l p y above 0 C
(.J/g)
To m e l c i n g
point
752

149
2,435
690
1 .a69
1,139
ti5
88:
1,071
774
440
2i0
789
i ,325
2L2
551
56
558
254
142
39
54

To liquid
1,131
1 ,417
3,493
1,365
1.462
1,621
140
1,133
1,334
i ,074
64 1
312
1,071
i ,324
345
743
1 ::
738
365
237
89
78

Sound
velocity

To b o l l l n g
point

To gas

(ds)

1,739
6,182
5,305
2,602
2.695
2,174
257
2,355
2,305
1,996
1,793

7,166
25,903
40,605
12,065
11.655
8,052
1,457
8,703
9,916
5,387
6,194
2,285
9,426
8,611
3,092
5,649
3,163
5,197
3,143
2,237
1,152
1,155

5,910

571

1,929
2,417
704
1,166
764
1,190
736
404
299
298

12,890
6,890
6.560
6,400
6,221)
5,910
5,250
2,580
6,250
3,940
5,750
2,950
2,950
1 ,800
1,250

a O a t a s e l e c t e d from K. E. 8012 and G. L. Tuve, e d s . , !{andbo& 0F Tables f o r A p p l i e d E n c i n e e r i n g Science, 2nd e d . , CRC P r e s s , C l e v e l a n d , 1971; G. P.
?hrnWell, ppinciplas of F l e e t p i c i t y and Ele,-tromgnetim, McCraw-Hi11 Wok C o . , l n c . , New Yor4, 1949; .I. W. V l c c o r e e n , "The C a l c u l a t i o n of X-ray Mass
Absorption C o e f f i c i e n t s i n P r a c t i c e ,
.I. Appl. Phys. 2 0 , 1 1 4 1 4 7 (December 1 9 4 9 ) ; Handbook of C h e m i s t r y and pfiysics, 4 0 t h e d . , CKC Press, C l e v e l a n d , 1959;
a n d 2980 Calendar and Reference Book, W e s t i n g h o u s e F u s i o n l o w e r S y s t e m s , P i c t s h u r g h , 1960.

23

600C

0
-

I/

ORNL-DWG

85-4868

ETD

/TZM

II
I
N

4000

t-

,#TI

a
a

O F e 81 Co

Q.

EI-

I NI

/A

dCr

2000

0
0

10

12

14

HEAT INPUT (kJ/g)

Fig. 9. Temperature r i s e from 0 C as a function of heat input f o r


t y p i c a l metals (data from Table 5 ) .

24

O R N L - - D W G 85-5329

6000

4000

ET0

Pt

0
0
-

3
I-

K
IU
Q.

3
W

I-

2000

Zn

I
2

A@+@-

10

12

H E A T INPUT (kJ/g)

Fig. 10. Temperature rise above OC


far t y p i c a l metals (data f r o m Table 5 ) .

as

a f u n c t i o n of heat i n p u t

25

t r u e b o i l i n g p o i n t , b u t a l s o t h e energy absorbed as a f u n c t i o n of tempe r a t u r e i n t h e r e g i o n where t h e compounds v a p o r i z e probably v a r i e s w i t h


t h e h e a t i n g r a t e f a r t h e s h o r t energy p u l s e s of prime interest h e r e .

In

an e f f o r t t o g a i n some i n s i g h t i n t o t h e problem, e x p e r i m e n t a l d a t a for

laser machining of ceramics were examined, but t h e s e d a t a are d i f f i c u l t


t h e material e j e c t e d from t h e l a s e r - h e a t e d

t o i n t e r p r e t because much of

r e g i o n a t t h e bottom of a h o l e b e i n g d r i l l e d comes o f f

4 and 5).

d r o p l e t s suspended i n t h e vapor (see Refs.

e v i d e n t i n Table 6 , c a l c r i l a t e d from d a t a i n Ref, 4 .


heat

a6

tiny liquid

This e f f e c t is
In t h i s case, t h e

i n p u t p e r gram of material removed from l a s e r - d r i l l e d

o n l y 30 t o 50% of

h o l e s was

t h e h e a t r e q u i r e d f o r complete v a p o r i z a t i o n .

s i d e r i n g p o s s i b l e damage t o s p a c e c r a f t ,

I n con-

l i q u i d d r o p l e t s probably would

n o t be e n t r a i n e d and c a r r i e d away by t h e vapor, but, r a t h e r , t h e e n t i r e


s u r f a c e i n t h e beam would be h e a t e d f a i r l y uniformly.
d a t a f o r laser machining were n o t used, b u t v a l u e s

b a s i c thermodynamic
i n Table 7 and Fig.

d a t a in Refs.

12-15.

Therefore,

Were

the

c a l c u l a t e d from

The r e s u l t i n g v a l u e s g i v e n

11 f o r t h e h e a t r e q u i r e d t o v a p o r i z e ceramics are,

e x c e p t f o r t h o s e for carbon, probably low because a d d i t i o n a l h e a t would


be r e q u i r e d f o r d i s s o c i a t i o n .

estimates,

Thus,

they should be regarded as rough

and b e t t e r v a l u e s should be o b t a l n e d from experiments with

laser beams.
Figures
c h o i c e on
almost

9-11

are h e l p f u l

i n visualizing

t h e e f f e c t s of

of

the

damage t o be expected.

twice as much h e a t

per

gram

the severity

of

For

material is r e q u i r e d

magnesium as t h a t r e q u i r e d t o m e l t t u n g s t e n ;

therefore,

material
example,
to melt

less energy in

t h e form of a s h o r t p u l s e is r e q u i r e d t o m e l t a t h i n t u n g s t e n w a l l t h a n

a magnesium w a l l with t h e same mass.


heats

of

f u s i o n are r e l a t i v e l y

g r e a t e r t h a n t h e amount of h e a t

Also n o t e t h a t while the l a t e n t

small, t h e h e a t s of
required

v a p o r i z a t i o n are

t o raise the temperature a l l

t h e way from 0C t o t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t .

*The

R.

writer is g r e a t l y i n d e b t e d t o T.

Lindemer,

R.

Strehlow,

and

P. Wichner of Oak Ridge N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y f o r t h e i r k i n d a s s i s t a n c e

i n t h i s work.

LI

QJ

a!

r-4

nl

rl

QJ

(d

z!

$4

rl

a!

Fi
$4

26

-?

Table 7.

Energy required t o h e a t and m e l t o r h e a t and vaporize t y p i c a l ceramics


~~~

Mater 1a1

A1203

Be0

Mg0

Si02
Zr02
Graphite

'An

Molecular
weight

102
25
40.3
60.1
123.2
12

Melting
point

("C)
2,051
2,580
2,825
1,722
2,680
sublimes

Boiling
point"
("C)

4,000
4,260
3,260
3,460
4,100
3,600

Heat of

fusion
( k c a l / g mol)

25.7
19.3
18.5
2.6
20.8

Heat of
vapori z a t i03
.
(kcal/g mol)

340
173
154
137
167
170

e x p l i c i t value f o r t h e b o i l i n g point was found only f o r MgO and C.

~~

Enthalpy above OC
(J/d
To melting
point

2,500
5,426
3,688
2,020
1,679
5,452

To l i q u i d

To b o i l i n g
point

To gas

3,555
8,659
5,610
2,201
2,386
5,652

5,936
12,176
6,078
4,222
3,283
16.2

19,892
41,150
22,286
13,766
8,959
64,968

~~

Values f o r t h e o t h e r s were estimated.

'The h e a t of v a p o r i z a t i o n was taken as t h e d i f f e r e n c e in t h e e n t h a l p i e s of t h e i d e a l gas and t h e l i q u i d o r the c r y s t a l l i n e s o l i d , There no value w a s given f o r the liquid. For alumina It w s assumed t h a t the bulk of t h e vapor would be i n t h e
form of A120 and 02.

lu

-4

28

ORNL -D'NG 86-4353 TO

F i g . 11. Temperature rise as a function of heat input f o r t y p i c a l


ceramics (data f r o m Table 7 ) .

4.2
When

the

Temperature D i s t r i b u t i o n i n S h o r t B u r s t s

d u r a t i o n of

an energy

pulse

is short,

h e a t e d much more r a p i d l y than t h e s u b s u r f a c e material.

the

surface

is

Equations f o r

t h e t r a n s i e n t t e m p e r a t u r e s of p l a t e s t h a t are exposed t o s h o r t d u r a t i o n
C

heat: on one s u r f a c e have been p r e s e n t e d by Jakob.16

p u l s e s of
Jakob's

relations,

FFg.

12 was prepared

i n the c o u r s e of

Using

an earlier

s t u d y on damage t o t h e vacuum w a l l s of thermonuclear r e a c t o r s 2 t o show


t h e t e m p e r a t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n i n a n i n f i n i t e l y t h i c k p l a t e w i t h uniform,
temperature-independent

p r o p e r t i e s f o l l o w i n g t h e sudden i n i t i a t i o n of a n
(Computational methods are d e s c r i b e d i n a n

energy i n p u t t o t h e s u r f a c e .

The r e s u l t s are p r e s e n t e d i n terms of: dimension-

2.)

appendix of R e f .

less parameters f o r t h e temperature,

t h e d i s t a n c e from t h e h e a t e d sur-

f a c e , and t h e t i m e from i n i t i a t i o n of t h e energy p u l s e .


a t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s are p r e s e n t e d i n Fig.

S i m i l a r temper-

13 for more-complex

which allowances were made f o r m e l t i n g and v a p o r i z a t i o n .

cases i n

I n Fig.

13 t h e

a b s c i s s a i s t h e d i s t a n c e from t h e h e a t e d f a c e with allowance f o r t h e


f a c t t h a t i t begins t o recede a f t e r v a p o r l z a t i o n b e g i n s .

For any g i v e n p u l s e energy i n p u t and d u r a t i o n , t h e temperature d i s t r d b u t i o n v a r i e s widely from one material t o a n o t h e r as a consequence of
d i f erenc.es i n the thermal c o n d u c t i v k t y and h e a t c a p a c i t y f a c t o r s .

TO

show t h e s e e f f e c t s f o r a set of t y p i c a l c a s e s , a series of c a l c u l a t i o n s

w a s c a r r i e d o u t f o r s i x d t f f e r e n t a l l o y s , assuming no phase change.

The

r e s u l t s are summarized i n Table 8 and shown g r a p h i c a l l y i n F i g .

The

effects

of

pulse

time

on

the

temperature d i s t r i b u t i o n

p u l s e energy are shown f o r aluminum f n F i g , 15.

14.

for a typical

The c a l c u l a t i o n a l pro-

c e d u r e i s p r e s e n t e d i n Appendix A,

It is e v i d e n t from Fig.
for

1-ms

some of

the

14 and Table 8 t h a t f o r a 50-.J/cmz

t i t a n i u m would be v a p o r i z e d ,

burst

and t R e s t a i n l e s s

s t e e l s u r f a c e t e m p e r a t u r e would be c l o s e t o the b o i l i n g p o i n t of chromium.


should

Thus, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o c a l c u l a t e how s h o r t t h e p u l s e d u r a t i o n
be

t o bring

boiling point.

t h e s u r f a c e of

t h e s i x a l l o y s of

Fig.

14 t o t h e

T h i s was done f o r s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t p u l s e e n e r g i e s , and

30

OAPJL--DWG 77-12030A

DIMENSIONLESS DISTANCE ($1

Pig.
12. Transient. temperature d i s t r i b u t i o n in a thick s l a b
( l a t e n t heat of fusion n e g l e c t e d ) .
Sourca:
Ac P. Fraas and A. S.
%orrapson, ORNL Fusion P m e ~ Demons-bration Study:
Fluid n o u , Heab

Transfer, and Stress Analysis Considerations in the Design of Btankets


fop !l'hsmonuetsGr Reactors, ORNL/m-5950, Union Carbide Corp. Nuclear
Div., Oak Ridge N a t l . Lab., February 1978, p. 5 3 .

31

2 .o

- - -1-

--

0 R N L-DWG

77---12032A

-r----r--

---1----r---

VAPORIZATION

1.8

1.6

--3

1.4

5
n:

1.2

w
n

5t-

Lo
Lo

-1

z
0
z
w
v)

IQ

ME LTI NG

1.0

0.8

VAPORIZATION AND MELTING

0.6

0.4

-\

DISTANCE FROM

RECEDING FACE

0.2

10

12

14

DIMENSION LESS DISTANCE ({I

Fig. 13. Temperature d i s t r i b u t i o n i n a t h i c k s l a b with s t e a d y


m e l t i n g and vaporization.
SOUPCe:
A. P. Fraas and A. S.
Thompson, ORNL Fusion Power Demonstration Sudy:
FZuid Ezm, Heat
Transfer, and Stress Analysis Considerations in ths Design of BZankets
for T h s ~ c l R U G ~ e a R
P W C t Q P 8 , ORNL/TM-S960, Union Carbide Corp. Nuclear
D i v . , Oak Ridge N a t l . Lab., February 1978, p. 5 5 .
state

m
m

F-

F"

,-.
J
M

.+

32

..........

ch m r. a m u 1 9
c a2 m 0 0
m r.
m m cr) r- m m a 03 w rC c - 4 - 4 - 4 N N m m u * r . -

.............

1-4

2 2 ...

N O N O

....

m a .
a
mmr.m

r.0

P
N -3 \C m
c7 m m
\o N m u
z
N c1 if c
, r. 4, c N -3 cc -3 a
c c O e ~ O O - ~ - - ~ "
0 c c c 0 c c c c c 0 c
'0
c c c 0 c o c c c 0 c 0 :c

o. c
o c o c c c o o q ~ ~
. . . .
>cococococOo0o

00

............

a -3 cc c; c1 m o\ .r In u u m 'T
c a - a w u 7 o ~ ~ r . m u - c

m -4 r. u m -3 r- o
chu).DmumNN"

.............

o 0 o c o c o o o c o C o c

.............

c c

9'

O C O C G O O C O O C C O C

0 0 0

m ar.

. . c. . . . .c.h-o. y ?
dc1Im.Y

0 0 0

ul
4

33

,I
3000
L

0
-

a
5

2
U
w
a

2000

5I1000

0
0

0.04

0.08

0.12
0.16
DEPTH FROM SURFACE (cm)

0,20

0.24

Fig. 14. Temperature d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t y p i c a l alloys after a 1-IUS


p u l s e of 50-J/cm2 energy input to t h e surface ( d a t a from Table 8 ) .

O R N L - D W G 85 -4809 E T 0

0.04

0.08

0.12

0.16

0.20

0.24

DEPTH FROM SURFACE (cm)

Fig. 15. E f f e c t s o f 0.01-, 0.001-, and 0.0001-s p u l s e d u r a t i o n s on


the t e m p e r a t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n i n aluminum a f t e r a 50-J/cm2 energy i n p u t
to the s u r f ace.

35
are p r e s e n t e d i n Table 9 and Fig.

the results

16.

The procedure f o r

t h e s e c a l c u l a t i o n s is i n c l u d e d i n Appendix A.
4.3

Explosive V a p o r i z a t i o n

Probably the most s i g n i f i c a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e p r e c e d i n g temperature

<O.l

are

distributions

those

associated

with

pulse

durations

of

R e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e beam energy i s r e q u l r e d t o r a i s e t h e s u r f a c e

ms.

temperature t o t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t f o r these s h o r t p u l s e s ; t h u s , any addi-

t i o n a l beam energy w i l l be u t i l i z e d t o form vapor.


because

abrupt

produce

an

vaporization

explosive

of

blast

This i s important

a s u b s t a n t i a l amount of

In

effecc.

fact,

if

material w i l l

the

pulse

time

i s 4 . 1 ps, t h e v a p o r i z a t i o n t a k e s p l a c e i n a t i m e s h o r t e r than t h a t re-

q u i r e d f o r a p r e s s u r e wave to move a t t h e speed of

metal;

thus,

the

a p o t e n t i a l l y extremely d e s t r u c t i v e d e t o n a t i o n wave res , Fig. 16 shows t h a t

F u r t h e r , f o r a p u l s e d u r a t i o n of only

sults.

sound through

only 0.5 J/cm* i s r e q u i r e d t o raise the s u r f a c e t e m p e r a t u r e of s t a i n l e s s

steel t o t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t .

To put t h e matter i n more f a m i l i a r terms,

the

detonation

release

energy

in

the

of

a gram

of

high

explosive

i s -4000 J/g; t h u s , p u t t i n g 50 J/g i n t o metal vapor would g i v e an explosive


sive.

g of

f o r c e roughly

t o d e t o n a t i n g 10 mg/cm2

equivalent

of

high explo-

An energy b u r s t of 50 J / c d w i l l s e r v e t o h e a t and v a p o r i z e 0,006

The e f f e c t would be comparable t o d e t o n a t i n g 0.01 g / m 2 of

iron.

high e x p l o s i v e p l a s t e r e d over t h e i r r a d i a t e d s u r f ace.

This would amount

t o -100 g / m 2 of h i g h e x p l o s i v e and rmuld have roughly t h e same d e s t r u r t i v e e f f e c t as one s t i c k of dynamite.

( A c t u a l l y , f o r a g i v e n energy re-

lease, t h e f o r c e of an e x p l o s i o n i n c r e a s e s with t h e s q u a r e r o o t of t h e
m o l e c u l a r weight of

the vapor,

f o r a high explosive.)
the light

s t r u c t u r e s of

and t h i s would be h i g h e r f o r i r o n than

Such an e x p l o s i o n would be q u i t e d e s t r u c t i v e t o
spacecraft.

Thus,

t o t a l energy i n p u t i s an important f a c t o r ,
to

employ

(10-7

beams

with

pulse

durations

of

f o r a system i n which t h e
t h e r e is a s t r o n g i n c e n t i v e
(0.01

and,

preferably,

6.

In a t t e m p t i n g t o a p p r a i s e the p o s s i b l e b l a s t damage from e x p l o s i v e


vaporization,

the

first

s t e p w a s t o estimate t h e i n s t a n t a n e o u s b l a s t

N d N d

e...

E-?

t-'

36

...

0 0 0

37

ORNL-DWG 86-4358 ETD

10-~

10--6

10-5

PULSE DURATION ($1

10-4

10-3

F i g . 16. Amount of energy An short pulses required t o i n i t i a t e


vaporization in t y p i c a l metals (data from Table 9 ) .

38
A f i r s t rough approximation w a s c a l c u l a t e d froin t h e impulse

pressure.

imparted t o t h e damaged s u r f a c e by t h e momentum of t h e vapor-ized matei t l e f t the s u r f a c e a t t h e v e l o c i t y of

r i a l , l 7 assuming t h a t

Table 10 summarizes t h e

t h e vapor a t t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t of t h e m e t a l .
calculations,

17 shows estimates of

and Fig.

the blast

p r e s s u r e gen-

10, 20, and 50 J / c m Z t o an aluminnm s u r -

e r a t e d by t h e d e p o s i t i o n of

F i g u r e 18 compares t h e e f f e c t s cf 50-J/cm*

face.

sound i n

t i t a n i u m , and s t e e l s u r f a c e s .

b u r s t s on magnesium,

The c a l c u l a t i o n a l procedure is summarized

i n Appendix B.

17 and 18 are based on t h e auncsiint of energy

10 and Figs.

Table

deposited i n the s u r f a c e ( t - e . ,

t h e energy i n t h e irxcident beam minus

However, s p e c u l a r a n d d i f f u s e r a d i a t i o n s are n o t

t h e eiiergy r e f l e c t e d ) .

the only mechanisms reducing t h e beam energy i n p u t t o t h e t a r g e t ;

for

t h e relatively high r a t e s of energy i n p u t of i n t e r e s t here, t h e material


vaporized from t h e s u r f a c e may be i o n i z e d , and t h e I o n i z e d vapor i t s e l f
absorbs
Refs.

light

18-21)

from

the

show t h a t

beam.

Both

analyses

and

experiments

(see

t h e s e e f f e c t s can be so l a r g e that t h e i o n i z e d

vapor from t h e i n i t t a l p o r t i o n of

t h e b u r s t may be s u r p r i s i n g l y e f f e c -

t i v e i n p r o t e c t i n g t h e s u r f a c e from f u r t h e r damage.
The r a t i o oE t h e energy absorbed i n t h e s u r f a c e t o t h e energy i n
the i n c i d e n t beam i s c a l l e d t h e "coupling c o e f f i c i e n t .

Some t y p i c a l

"

v a l u e s determined f o r t h i s parameter, as o b t a i n e d by Nichols and Ball,19

a r e shown inhPlg.

19 f o r cases i n which 2.8 prn r a d i a t i o n from a hydrogen

f l u o r i d e laser w a s d i r e c t e d a t an aluminum t a r g e e i n p u l s e s of from 3 t o

4 us.

The diameter of t h e beam a t whi.ch t h e i n t e n s i t y was one-half

maximum was -0.47

cm.

the

F i g u r e 19 shows t h a t f o r low beat11 e n e r g i e s , -94%

of the i n c i d e n t energy i n t h e beam is r e f l e c t e d ( a s one would expect).


When t h e beam energy i n t e n s i t y exceeds -100 J/cm*, a surEace plasma i s
i g n i t e d t h a t enhances thermal
increases

coupling t o t h e t a r g e t .

I n beam energy i n t e n s i t y beyond -200 J/cm* iriduce a laser-

s u p p o r t e d d e t o n a t i o n (LSD) wave I n t h e plasma.


from t h e t a r g e t

and,

This moves r a p t d l y away

by a b s o r b i n g energy from t h e beam,

f r a c t i o n o t h e beam energy r e a c h i n g t h e t a r g e t .
the

S t i l l further

beam energy d e p o s i t e d

reduces

the

Thus, t h e f r a c t i o n of

i n t h e t a r g e t s u r f a c e per pulse f a l l s o f f

39
Table 10.

Blast p r e s s u r e s from aluminum


surface vaporization

Vapor t e m p e r a t u r e
2740 K
At omi c weight
27
Vapor v e l o c i t y
- 11 km/s
Heat t o v a p o r i z e
13,471 J / g
Pulse t i m e
(SI
~

10-7

10-6

10-5

~____

10-4

1.93

6.1

19.3

61

0.0036
3975

0.0033
363

0.0023
25

0
0

P u l s e energy = 20 J / c m 2
Mass vaporized, g/cm2
Blast p r e s s u r e , b a r

0.0013
1494

0.0010
115

0.0001
<1

P u l s e energy = 10 J / c m 2
Mass v a p o r i z e d , q/cm2
B l a s t pressure, bar

0
0

0.0006
667

0.0003
32

0
0

Energy t o p r e h e a t , J / c m 2

Pulse energy = 50 J / c m *
Mass vaporized, g/cm*
Blast p r e s s u r e , bar

40

PULSE TIME

(5)

Pig. 17.
Blast p r e s s u r e s g e n e r a t e d by short burst of energy i n p u t
t o an aluminum s u r f a c e ( d a t a from Table 10).

41

ORNL.-OWG 86-4359

1o4

ETD

--z I O ~
XI

03
03

5
1Q2

10

lo-?

F i g . 18.
last pressures generated
magnesium, titanium, and steel surf aces.

10-5

5 0 - ~ / c m 2 energy inputs to

42

O R N L - - D W G 86-4360 E T U

0.30

-+
d

0.20

U
LL

w
0
0

,"
3

0.10

E
0

100
ENERGY ON 'TARGET (J)

200

1 .o

0.5

1.5

F LIJ ENCE [ kJ/cm7 )

100

200

300

PEAK IRRADIANCE (M\N/crn*)

400

1 J

600

Fig.
19. Coupling c o e f f i c i e n t as a f u r l e t t o n sf beam energy
i n t e n s i t y fox! pulse d u r a t i o n s of 3 t o 4 1.s from a 2.8-pn
IIF laser.
Source: D. B. Nichols and R. 18. Hall, "Thermal Coupling of 2.8 w L a s e r
Radiat-ion t o Metal Targets," A I A A J . 1 8 ( 4 ) , 476-78 ( A p r i l 1 9 8 0 1 , D e 477.

43
rapidly

with f u r t h e r

increases

energy d e p o s i t e d i n t h e t a r g e t ,
lower rate.

i n p u l s e energy;
however,

Note t h a t an arrow in Fig.

the

t o t a l amount

of

at a progressively

increases

19 marks t h e p o i n t a t which t h e

product of t h e c o u p l i n g c o e f f i c i e n t and t h e energy in t h e i n c i d e n t beam


gave

10.4 J ( - 6 6 J/cm2) d e p o s i t e d i n t h e t i t a n i u m s u r f a c e ;

a similar

arruw marks t h e p o i n t where 6.1 J were d e p o s i t e d i n t h e aluminum s u r S i m i l a r tests run with n i c k e l and s t a i n l e s s s t e e l y i e l d e d roughly

face.

similar r e s u l t s ,

t h e coupling c o e f f i c i e n t f o r s t a i n l e s s steel a

with

l i t t l e h i g h e r than t h a t f o r t i t a n i u m and t h e c o e f f i c i e n t f o r n i c k e l a

l i t t l e h i g h e r t h a n t h a t f o r a2wminurn.

Note t h a t t h e t e s t s of Fig.

19

were run i n a i r so t h a t i o n i z a t i o n of t h e a i r o c c u r r e d , b u t t h e a u t h o r s
a l s o r e p o r t e d o t h e r tests with aluminum and t i t a n i u m i n which t h e d a t a
f o r both

a i r arid vacuum c o n d i t i o n s

f e l l w i t h i n t h e same s c a t t e r h a n d .

This is n o t s u r p r i s i n g because t h e atomic weight of aluminum i s 2 7 , that:


of t i t a n i u m is 4 8 , and t h e molecular weight of a i r t s 28.97.
The b l a s t p r e s s u r e induced in t h e t a r g e t by t h e T,SD wave w a s m a s u r e d n an i n t e r e s t i n g

series of

tests.20

F i g u r e 20 shows t h e peak

p r e s s u r e a t t h e t a r g e t s u r f a c e as a f u n c t i o n of t h e peak I n t e n s i t y of a

1.06-pm

beam from a

neodymium g l a s s

125 J, i r r e s p e c t i v e of p u l s e t i m e .
w i t h i n a 0.25-cm-diam

circle.

laser with a maximum o u t p u t


About 75% of

of

t h e beam energy f e l l

Note t h a t i n c r e a s i n g t h e peak beam i n t e n -

s i t y beyond -3 x l o 8 W/cm2 (a 1-uspulse of -300 J/cmP) a c t u a l l y l e d t o a

d e c r e a s e i n t h e p r e s s u r e of t h e d e t o n a t f o n wave.
From t h e s t a n d p o i n t of damage t o s p a c e c r a f t s t r u c t u r e s , t h e impulse
i m p a r t e d t o t h e t a r g e t is a more i m p o r t a n t parameter t h a n t h e i n s t a n t a -

neous b l a s t p r e s s u r e .

of

Thus,

t h e tests of Ref. 20 i n c l u d e d measurements

t h i s impulse; t y p i c a l d a t a are p r e s e n t e d i n Fig.

impulse i n dyne-seconds

p e r j o u l e of' energy i n p u t .

21 i n terms of t h e
Note t h a t t h e m a x i -

mum impulse per u n i t of beam energy w a s o b t a i n e d w i t h a beam energy -25%


o f t h a t f o r t h e maximum b l a s t p r e s s u r e i n d i c a t e d by Fig.

Although t h e b l a s t p r e s s u r e s of F i g s .
high,
the

20.

17, 18, and 20 are e x t r e m e l y

they are of such s h o r t d u r a t i o n t h a t t h e i r e f f e c t s are l i m i t e d by


i n e r t i a of

characteristics.

the surface,

as w e l l as by its s t r e n g t h

The c o n t r o l l i n g parameter

- the

and e l a s t i c

impulse, or momentum,

44

600

C
n

.m
o

w
LT

g
v)

100

(r
CL

20

1o7

108

1o9

AVERAGE PEAK INTENSITY (VW/crn)

Fig. 20.
Peak p r e s s u r e induced i n aluminum and t i t a n i u m targets by
l a s e r - s u p p o r t e d d e t o n a t f o n (LSD) waves, p l o t t e d as a f u n c t i o n of peak
i n t e n s t t y of a beam from a 1.06-pm neodymium glass l a s e r .
Soupee:
L. R. Hettele e t al.,
Mechanical Response and I h e m l Coupling of
Metallic T a r g e t s t o H i g h - I n t e n s i t y 1.06
Laser R a d i a t i o n , J. A p p t .
P h y S . 4 7 ( 4 ) , 1415-21 ( A p r i l 19761, p. 1419.

45

O R N L - 5 W G 56-4766 E 7 0

20

0 AI TARGETS (5 a n ) ; 1.06

prn,

l-,us BEAM (Fig. 6 )

.
7

10

>

-0
_c

THRESHOLD

I '

lo7

I, I
1

1 o8

5 x loR

AVERAGE LASER INTENSITY (Wicrn')

Fig, 21. Impulse imparted t o an alumilium target per j o u l e of


energy i n the incident beam as a function of the energy i n a 1.06-um
beam with p u l s e duration of 1 uss Nate discontinllity a t threshold f a r
laser-supported detonation (LSD).
Source:
L. R. Hettele e t a l . ,
"Mechanical Response and Thermal Coupling of Metallic Targets to HIghI n t e n s i t y 1.06 urn Laser Radiation," J - A p p l . PhYS. 4 7 ( 4 ) , 1415-21 (April
19761, p. 1418.

46

imparted

to the s t r u c t u r e

and

vapor

the

velocity

t h e mass vaporized

e q u a l s t h e product of

leaving

the

surface.

of

The d e f l e c t i o n

the

s t r u c t u r e r e q u i r e d t o a b s o r b t h i s fmmpulse w i l l depend on t h e r a t i o of
the p u l s e t i m e t o t h e p e r i o d f o r t h e n a t u r a l frequency of v i b r a t i o n o f
t h e s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e induced d e f l e c t i o n mode,

i s e v i d e n t from t h i s b r i e f

It

discussion

t h a t whether

the s t r u c t u r e ,

i t s strength,

imparted t o t h e s u r f a c e ,
and the c h a r a c t e r of

blast

'fie key parameters

c a u s e s damage depends on t h e p a r t i c u l a r s t r u c t u r e .
are the momentum ( o r impulse)

the

t h e i n e r t i a of

i t s e l a s t i c deforrma-

t i o n under l o a d ,

t h a t i s , i t s a b i l i t y t o a b s o r b t h e irnpulse load elas-

tically

excessive

without

A thin-walled

ti.0n.s-

stresses

in

regions

of

stress

concentra-

v e s s e l Inight deform e l a s t i c a l l y from a c i r c u l a r t o

a n o v a l c r o s s s e c t i o n f r o m which i t mni.ght snap back without buckling.


Although

vessel

f i l l i n g the

i n e r t i a of i t s w a l l ,

l i q u i d would

wi.th

increase

the e f f e c t i v e

i t W J U J . ~ a l s o i n c r e a s e i t s r i g i d i t y , and t h e pres-

s u r e p u l s e i n the confined l i q u i d might l e a d t o r u p t u r e a t a s t r e s s con-

If made of a b r i t t l e ma-

c e n t r a t i o n i n a r i v e t e d seam i n hoop t e n s i o n .
terial,

the

s t r u c t u r e would be

subject

shock waves g e n e r a t e d by p u l s e s of
ined

by

elegant

and

somewhat

to

the

shattering

s.

These e f f e c t s c a n he exam-

tricky calculations f o r

any

e f f e c t s of
particular

s t r u c t u r e , but i t i s not p o s s i b l e t o g i v e any e a s i l y a p p l i c a b l e g e n e r a l i-zations.

I n any case, i t would be w i s e t o confirm a n a l y s e s by t e s t s

with e x p l o s i v e s u s i n g p r o p e r l y s c a l e d mock-ups
\

of t h e s t r u c t u r e s and a n

a p p r o p r i a t e explosive.

4.4

Thermal S t r e s s e s

_
l
l
_
_
_
l

I t h a s been s u g g e s t e d t h a t a r a p i d l y pulsed beam of moderate energy

d e n s i t y might be employed t o induce damaging thermal stresses.

A rela-

tively

thermal

stresses

thin,

brittle

induced i n a

structure

might

s i n g l e pulse,

( s u c h as a nose cone f o r r e e n t r y )

be

but

shattpred

by

the

i n a more massive s t r u c t u r e

a s i n g l e p u l s e would probably j u s t

cause s p a l l i n g of f l a k e s from t h e s u r f a c e .

P u l s e r e p e t i t i o n a t a slow

r a t e could c a u s e s e r i o u s e r o s i o n , but i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t t h e beam could

47
be h e l d d i r e c t l y on t h e t a r g e t o r long enough to make t h i s approach
effective.
I n d u c t i l e metals s e v e r e thermal stresses are a l l e v i a t e d by p l a s t i c
flow so t h a t c r a c k i n g rarely o c c u r s i n a s i n g l e c y c l e .

Repeated s u r f a c e

h e a t i n g p u l s e s producing t r a n s i e n t t e m p e r a t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s obviously
These can cause* a t y p e

induce b i a x i a l t e n s i l e stresses i n t h e s u r f a c e .

of f a i l u r e (known as "thermal s t r a i n c y c l i n g " ) i n a material. as tough as


Inconeh.

I n a t y p i c a l example t h e f a i l u r e took t h e form of a network of

surface cracks,

as shown i n Fig.

22

(from R e f .

22).

The number

of

c y c l e s to produce f a i l u r e depends on t h e s e v e r i t y of t h e thermal straln,


t h a t is, (1) t h e temperature range through which t h e s u r f a c e t e m p e r a t u r e
f l u c t u a t e s per c y c l e and ( 2 )

t h e p r o p e r t i e s of t h e metal.23

i s included here

to facilitate

thermal stresses,

a l t h o u g h i t appears

t h e a p p r a i s a l of

r e q u i r e d t o cause s e r l o u s damage.

that

Figure 23

p o s s i b l e damage

from

10 t o 100 c y c l e s would be

This f a i l u r e mode, t h e r e f o r e , is n o t

l i k e l y t o be of much i n t e r e s t .

4.5

Overall V i e w of F a i l u r e Modes

A good p e r s p e c t i v e on tlic e f f e c t s of p u l s e t h e on t h e c h a r a c t e r of
t h e damage from energy p u l s e i n p u t s t o s u r f a c e s is given I n Fig.
Fhg.

25 shows t h e energy d e n s i t y and p u l s e t i m e f o r some a c t u a l cases.

(These c h a r t s are from Ref.


study

24;

of

these charts,

2,

which g i v e s f u r t h e r d e t a i l s . )

particularly

Fig.

24,

Serfous

should s e r v e t o t i e t h e

p r e v i o u s d i s c u s s i o n t o g e t h e r and should prove more i n s t r u c t i v e than f u r t h e r discussion.

48

F i g . 22. Photo of i n t e r i o r surface of Inconel tube subjected to


thermal-strain c y c l i n g at 60O0C by temperature v a r i a t i o n of 6OoC i n
stream of molten salt. Number of c y c l e s t o f a i l u r e was -10% Source:
J . J. JCeyes and A. I. Krakoviac, High Frequency Surface Thermal Fatigue
Cycling of Inconel at 1406OF, Nucz. Sci. Bag. 9 ( 4 ) , 462-66 (April
1961), p. 463.

4.9

Fig. 23. Equivalent temperature range as a function OS number of


cycles to failure as calculated fort typical alloys.
S u u ~ c e : A. P.
Praas Engineer-hzg EQaZud%ion of Energy Systems, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
Inc., New York, 1982, p. 163.

50

ORNL--DWG

TYPICAL

CON D I Ti ON$

FULI--SCALE TOKAMAK HEACTORS

8.5-4810ET[)

-rYPEs OF DAMAGE

lo-'

TOKAMAK PLASMA EXPERIMENTS


NEUTRAL BEAM TESTS
TH ETA--PI NC W F U 1- L. -SCALE )

10

VI

s:
L'

I-

10-6

SHOCK W A V E S

10--8

10-'0

- LASER FUSION

Fig. 24. Relation between types of surface damage and pulse t i m e s


for t y p i c a l c a s e s . Source: A. P. Fraas and A. S. Thompson, ORNL Fusion
Poaer Demonstration Study:
n u i d Flow, Heat Transfer, u d Stress
A m Z y s i s Considerations in tha Design of BZankets for 97temonuclear
Reactors, ORNL/TN-5960, Union Carbide Corp. Nuclear Div., Oak Ridge
Natl. Lab., February 1978, p. 48.

51

ORNL-DWG

1oo

85-481 1 E T D

FULL-SCALE TOKAMAK
FULL--SCALE THETA PINCH

NEUTRAL BEAM INJECTOR

TFR
RUNAWAY ELECTRONS

LOS ALAMOS PLASMA GUN

o.--7

lo-$

.
,

10-0

I
10
\

LASER PELLET FLSlON


1o2

o3

I AC

1 o4

ENERGY INPUT (J/crn2)

Fig. 25. Energy input per pulse f o r t y p i c a l cases, Source:


Fraas and A. S. Thompson, ORNL Fusirm Power Demonstration Study:

A. P.

Hhid

Flou, Heat Transfer, and Stress A m t y s i s Considerations in the Design of


Blunkets for Themnonuclear Reactorss, ORNL/TM-5960, Union Carbide Corp

Nuclear Div.,

Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., February 1978, p, 50.

53
SURVEY OF SOME TYPICAL CASES

5.
5.1

R e l a t i o n s Between P u l s e Energy, Duration, and Power

F i g u r e 26 shows t h e r e l a t i o n s between t h e energy i n p u t p e r p u l s e ,


the pulse t i m e (or d u r a t i o n ) ,

and t h e rate of energy i n p u t ( o r power)

The d i a g o n a l l i n e s f o r a series of c o n s t a n t power in-

d u r i n g t h e pulse.

put rates a l s o i n d i c a t e t h e e q u i l i b r i u m black-body

r a t e of energy d i s s i p a t t o n .

temperature f o r t h a t

The scales a t t h e r i g h t i n d i c a t e t h e aver-

age temperature rise in I-mm-thick

plates of t w o t y p i c a l materials, i r o n

and aluminum, t h a t m u l d be produced by a b u r s t of energy d e f i n e d by t h e

scale at t h e l e f t .

This c h a r t i s u s e f u l f o r a p p r a f s i n g a wide v a r i e t y

of cases, but i t must be remembered t h a t i t i s or the a c t u a l energy input

to the surface"

Thus, when e s t i m a t i n g t h e temperature

rise in a

s u r f a c e h e a t e d by a l a s e r beam, allowaoce must be macle f o r t h e f a c t t h a t


a p o r t i o n of t h e l i g h t i n t h e beam w i l l be r e f l e c t e d from t h e s u r f a c e .

For a r a d i a t o r s u r f a c e t r e a t e d t o g i v e it a high e m i s s i v i t y , s a y 0.90,

10% will be

just

reflected,

and 9c)X of

the beam energy w i l l be ab-

To a f i r s t approximation t h e s u r f a c e e m i t t a n c e w i l l be t h e same

sorbed,

as the a b s o r p t t v i t y , and If t h e becum i s c o n t i n u o u s , t h e e q u i l i b r i m t e m -

p e r a t u r e w t B 1 be t h e same as would be the case for a black body for

which 100% o f t h e beam energy would be absorbed and then re-emttted

Far b u r s t s of energy i n p u t , however, t h e s l t u a t i o n

a n e m i t t a n c e of 1.0.

is q u i t e d i f f e r e n t ,
f a i r l y high.

especially if

Consider,

r e f l e c t i v i t y of

with

0.85

the

r e f l e c t i v i t y of

the surface is

f o r example, a pollshed aluminum s u r f a c e w i t h a

f o r which o n l y 15% of

t h e i n c i d e n t l i g h t energy

The consequent t e m p e r a t u r e rise caused by t h e b u r s t

would be absorbed.

would be only 15% as g r e a t as f o r a b l a c k body.

Of course, t h e r a t e of

h e a t d i s s f p a t i o n f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r s t would a l s o be only 15% as g r e a t , so


the

time

or

the

temperature t o r e t u r n

t o e q u i l i b r i u m from a g i v e n

energy p u l s e i n p u t would be t h e same as f o r a b l a c k body.

The time t o

r e t u r n t o e q u i l i b r i u m from a given temperature e x c u r s i o n would he about


s i x t i m e s as g r e a t .
'In u s i n g F i g .

26 i t must be remembered t h a t both t h e r e f l e c t i v i t y

and the e m i t t a n c e of t h e surface must be c o n s i d e r e d .


larly

Important

for

This i s p a r t i c u -

s p e c i a l c o a t i n g s whose e m i t t a n c e a t t h e e m i t t i n g

.
0
0

0
0
0

m
.

8
m

IV
0

54

55
t e m p e r a t u r e m y be q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from t h e a b s o r p t i v i t y a t t h e wavel e n g t h of

the incident

For example,

radiation.

aluminum o x i d e has a

h i g h t o t a l r e f l e c t i v i t y i n t h e v i s i b l e l i g h t range,

i n t h e i n f r a r e d i s a l s o high (see Pig.

yet its emissivity

27, taken from Ref. 2 4 ) .

Simi-

l a r l y , a l t h o u g h t h e writer h a s been unable t o l o c a t e a r e f e r e n c e t h a t he


saw

i n t h e l a t t e r 19606, i t is h i s r e c o l l e c t i o n t h a t a plasma-sprayed

c o a t i n g of z i r c o n i a (which i s white) has b o t h a h i g h d i f f u s e r e f l e e t i v i t y for

s o l a r spectrum r a d i a t i o n and a high

emlssivity

for

infrared

r a d i a t i o n a t -800 K, probably i n p a r t because of c a v i t y e f f e c t s .


One h i g h l y p e r t i n e n t case t o c o n s i d e r I s t h a t of a s o l a r c e l l array
i n which t h e semiconductor material o r t h e s o l d e r e d c o n n e c t i o n s would be
permanently damaged i f

t h e temperature were t o r e a c h 375C.

The l-ight

It can be

a b s o r p t i v i t y i s i n h e r e n t l y high f o r e f f i c i e n t s o l a r cells.
s e e n from Fig.

26 t h a t a continuous energy i n p u t of 1 W/cm2 would hear

t h e c e l l s t o an e q u i l i b r i u m temperature of 375"C, t h u s p u t t i n g them out

of a c t i o n .
i t y of

It can also be deduced from Pig.

26 t h a t i f t h e h e a t capac-

t h e c e l l s p e r s q u a r e c e n t i m e t e r w e r e one-half

t h a t of

a 1-mm

t h i c k n e s s of i r o n , a s h o r t b u r s t O E -50 J/cm2 would accomplish t h e same


purpose w l t h a smaller t o t a l energy

Input.

On t h e o t h e r hand,

If a

space power plant having a ni.obium r a d i a t o r with a t u b e w a l l t h i c k n e s s


of 2 m w e r e s u b j e c t e d t o t h e same i n t e n s i t i e s of r a d i a t t o n ,
a t o r would have i t s temperature i n c r e a s e d by -30C
a t i n g v a l u e of

800C i f exposed

tc;.

a l-W/cm2

the radi-

from t h e normal oper-

continuous beam,

temperature would rise b r i e f l y by .~400OCi f exposed t o a 50-Y/cm*


burst.

or t h e
short

Thus, niobium r a d i a t o r s are f a r less v u l n e r a b l e t o beam weapons

than are s o l a r c e l l s .
A host

8-18.

of

other

For example,

conditions

can be e s t i m a t e d q u i c k l y from Figs.

t h e p o l i s h e d aluminum s k i n of

melted by a s h o r t b u r s t

of 50 W / c m 2

a missile might be

i n a p a r t i c l e beam;

however,

at

l e a s t 300 J f c m 2 would be r e q u i r e d i n a laser beam because t h e aluminurn


would r e f l e c t over 85% of

the incident light.

F u r t h e r , i f the s k i n of

t h e missile were p l a t e d w i t h a t h i n film of s i l v e r o r g o l d t o g i v e a re-

f l e c t i v i t y of 98 to 99%, the energy d e n s i t y r e q u i r e d i n t h e laser beam

might be i n c r e a s e d t o as much as 3000 J/em*.

56

O A N L - - - D W G 86-4768

1 .o

0.8

ETD

0.6

0.5
0.4

0.3
0.2

0.1

x,u,

0.08

0.06

rn

0.04

SAMPLE SPEClFlCATlONS

0.03

SAMPLE
1

0.02

0.2

1.o

2.0

3.5

0.06

0.32

0.32

0.25

5.4

5.4

10.8

24.5

FRACTION SOLID

0.07

0.07

0.14

0.31

SUBSTRATE TEMPERATURE, K

1022

1000

1000

SURFACE TEMPERATURE, K

833

639

667

NONE

NONE

LIGHT

COMPACT I ON

THICKNESS, cm
DENSITY X 10l2
part,c~es/cm3

WEIGHT, g

983
722
HEAVY

10

h (pm)

Fig.
of A 1 2 0 3
Radiation
94, 36-40

27. Experimental values of apparent emittance of four samples


powder.
Source: J . B. Bergquam and R. A. Seban, "Spectral
from Alumina Pawder on a Metallic Substrate," J. Heat Transfer
(February 1972), p. 3 7 .

57
A number of

p a r t i c u l a r cases were examined i n t h e above p r e s e n t a -

t i o n t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h e s e t a b l e s and c h a r t s .
many o t h e r cases of i n t e r e s t , a few d e s e r v e inention here.

OF t h e

One of t h e s e

i s concerned with s u r f a c e h e a t i n g from s h o r t b u r s t s i n which t h e e n e r g y

absorbed would n o t be s u f f i c i e n t even t o melt a s u r f a c e l a y e r , but t h e


temperature g r a d i e n t through t h e s k i n of an a s c e n d i n g m i s s i l e , f o r exam-

p l e , n i g h t cause s u f f i c i e n t d i s t o r t i o n t h a t a t h i n , c y l i n d r i c a l s h e l l i n
compression

would

spacecraft.

buckle

Similarly,

and

lead

to a

catastrophk

failure

of

the

e x p l o s i v e v a p o r i z a t i o n from a small area near

one end of a missile might cause it t o tumble so t h a t i t would r e e n t e r


i n an u n f a v o r a b l e o r i e n t a t i o n and burn up.

Examples of

t h i s s o r t are

too dependent on t h e p a r t i c u l a r d e s i g n t o t r e a t here, brit this sort of

v u l n e r a b i l i t y should n o t be overlooked.
A p l a s t i c f t l i n can be vaporized

than

ti

metal.

with a much s m a l l e r energy p u l s e

Thus, any p a i n t e d s u r f a c e , a s wel.1 as any p l a s t i c compo-

n e n t , w m l d be very v u l n e r a b l e t o even low-energy


Mot

only i s

the eaergy p e r gram r e q u i r e d

b u r s t s of

radiation.

for vaporization s m a l l ,

but

a l s o t h e thermal c o ~ i d u c t i v i t y of p l a s t i c s i s Lower t h a n For metals by a


f a c t o r of 10 t o 100, and the v e l o c i t y of soiiiid i n p l a s t i c s i s about onet h i r d of t h a t i n metals.
S p a c e c r a f t may be damaged by r a d i a t i o n from n u c l e a r e x p l o s i o n s over
100 km away.

The. c h a r t s and t a b l e s p r e s e n t e d h e r e should be h e l p f u l i n

assessing ttaese e f f e c t s .

5.2

Swarms of B i r d s h o t

H o s t i l e a c t i o n could t a k e t h e form of swarms of b i r d s h o t r e l e a s e d


i n t h e same o r b i t but i n a r e t r o g r a d e d i r e c t i o n t o maximize t h e e n e r g y
r e l e a s e d on impact.

The w r i t e r has t r e a t e d t h e b a s i c problem i n a com-

panion r e p o r t on damage t o s p a c e c r a f t from meteoroids;*

only the spe-

c i a l problems posed by t h e t h r e a t of enemy a c t i o n a r e t r e a t e d here.


The

c r u x oE

the

threat

lies i n

t h e enormous

amount

of

kinetic

energy p e r gram of p r o j e c t i l e i m p l i c t i n t h e r e l a t i v e v e l o c i t y of such


missiles:

-100,000 J/g, o r n e a r l y 30 t i m e s t h e energy c o n t e n t of a h i g h

explosivee

Further,

t h e impact v e l o c i t y i s w e l l above t h e v e l o c f t y of

sound i n s t r u c t u r a l metals so t h a t p o t e n t i a l l y d e s t r u c t i v e shock waves


In t h i s h y p e r v e l o c i t y regime ( i . e e 9 where

a r e produced by an i m p a c t .

t h e impact v e l o c i t y exceeds t h e v e l o c i t y of

sound i n t h e t a r g e t ) , t h e

from t h a t c o n v e n t i o n a l l y ex-

p e n e t r a t i o n mechanism is qulte d i f f e r e n t

p e r l e n c e d ; a h e m i s p h e r i c a l c r a t e r i s formed t h a t has a diameter s e v e r a l


t i m e s t h a t of t h e p r o j e c t i l e , i n s t e a d of t h e u s u a l c y l i n d r l c a l h o l e t h a t

i s e s s e n t i a l l y t h e diameter of the p r o j e c t i l e .

Furthermore, u n l e s s t h e

t a r g e t t h i c k n e s s i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y g r e a t e r t h a n t h e d e p t h of t h e crates,
the shock wave r e f l e c t e d

from the rear f a c e of

the target plate w i l l

induce such high t e n s i l e s t r e s s e s in t h e v i c i n i t y of t h e rear f a c e t h a t


a chunk w i l l

spall

ragged, r e l a t i v e l y

from t h e

back

of

the

This will

plate.

leave a

shallow c r a t e r commonly l a r g e r i n diameter than t h e

smooth, h e m i s p h e r i c a l crater on t h e f r o n t f a c e .

w a l l will not be p e n e t r a t e d ,

Thus, t o ensure t h a t a

t h e w a l l t h i c k n e s s must be substantially

g r e a t e r than t h e depth of t h e i m p a c t crater i n a t h l c k t a r g e t .

A widely

used e m p i r i c a l e q u a t i o n glvtng t h e w a l l t h i c k n e s s f o r i n c i p i e n t penetrat i o n has been evolved from e x t e n s i v e h y p e r v e l o c i t y t e s t work:25,*6


t = K 1 m

0.352

0.167 v0.875

where
t

= w a l l t h i c k n e s s , cm;

K1 = a c o n s t a n t dependent on t h e t a r g e t m a t e r i a l ;
mass of p r o j e c t i l e , g ;

= d e n s i t y of

= impact v e l o c i t y , m/s.

Values given i n Ref.


AIS1

316

stainless

a l l o y LA 141-A
w a s used

t h e p r o j e c t i l e , g/cm3;

26 f o r K1 are 0.57

s t e e l , 0.34

( s e e Refs.

t o p r e p a r e Fig.

for 2024-T3 aluminum, 0.32 f o r

or Nb-1W

Zr, and 0.80

f o r t h e Mg-Li

27 and 28 for f u r t h e r d e t a i l s ) .

This equation

28 t o f a c i l i t a t e estimates of

t h e armor re-

q u i r e d f o r p r o t e c t i n g s p a c e c r a f t a g a i n s t s w a r m s of b i r d s h o t .

The c h a r t

was drawn f o r aluminum t a r g e t s s t r u c k by steel p r o j e c t i l e s ;

relatively

s m a l l c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r s t a b u l a t e d on t h e c h a r t e q u a t i o n can be a p p l i e d
e a s i l y t o g i v e e s t f m a t e s f o r o t h e r t a r g e t and p r o j e c t i l e materials.

59
O R N L - - D W G 85-4865 E T 0

10

5 -0

-5

2.0

0
IQ

a:

+W
2

tu
Q

f: 1.0
0
I
v)
w

I
t-

R A T I O OF T H E THRESHOLD PENETRATION THICKNESS FOR


VARIOUS TARGET A N D PROJECTiLE M A T E R I A L S TO
T H A T FOR A N A L U M I N U M TARGET A N D A
PROJECTILE DENSITY OF 0.5 g/crn3

2In

z
iL
2

0.5

A L U M 1N U M
(K1 = 0.57)

TAHGE-T M A T E R l A L
1g/cm3)

i-

STAIN LESS

STEEL
(K1

0.32)

NlOB I U M
(K1 = 0.34)

PROJECTILE M A r E H l A L

1 00
112

0 56

0 60

PLASTIC ( 1 0 )

0 63

0 67

A L U M I N U M ( 2 77)

1 33

0 75

0 19

STAIN1 ESS STEEL 18 0)

1 59

0 89

METEOROID 10 5 )

0.2

NIOBIUM 18 58)

161

1 84

TUNGSTEN (19 2)

0.1

10

20

30

40

0 90

1 03

0 95
0 96

110

50

R E L A T I V E VELOCITY (krnis)

Fig. 28. Effect of relative impact velocity on thickness of


aluminum 2024-T3 required for threshold penetration by meteoroids with
density of 0.5 g / c m 3 .
Source: R. Madden, BUZZi6$&! Limit of DoubZsWalled Meteoroid Bumper S ~ 6 NASA
~ ~Technical
~ ,
Note D-3916, National
A p r i l 1947.
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C.,

60
It has been found t h a t a bumper mounted a t a s u b s t a n t i a l stand-off

d i s t a n c e provides

an a t t r a c t i v e method f o r p r o t e c t i n g a s u r f a c e from
The energy release a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the tin-

hypervelocity projectiles,

pact of a p r o j e c t i l e on even a t h i n sheet- i s so g r e a t t h a t i t serves t o

s h a t t e r o r v a p o r i z e both t h e s l u g punched from t h e s h e e t and t h e projectile.

The f a i r l y d e t a i l e d t r e a t m e n t OF t h i s problem i n R e f .

n o t be r e p e a t e d h e r e ,

but Fig.

25 w i l l

29 has been taken from Ref. 25 t o show

t h e e f f e c t s of t h e p r i n c i p a l . parameters, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e k i n e t i c energy
i n t h e p r o j e c t i l e t h a t is converted i n t o h e a t by such an i n e l a s t i c collision.

T h e network of l i n e s a t the l e f t shows t h e r e s u l t i n g tempera-

t u r e rise i n the projectile;

t h a t a t t h e r i g h t shows t h e corresponding

temperature r-lse f o r t h e s l u g punched from t h e bumper.

It m u s t be em-

phasized t h a t t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h i s c h a r t were r i d e by assuniLng an


i n e l a s t i c c o l l i s i o n i n whtch one-half

of the k i n e t i c energy converted t o

h e a t appears i n t h e p r o j e c t i l e and one-half


bumper.

Unfortunately,

some d i f f e r e n c e s of

i n t h e s l u g punched from t h e

a v a i l a b l e test d a t a a r e l i m i t e d , and t h e r e arc

opinion on t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ;

however,

P-Ig.

29

scem t o be reasonably c o n s i s t e n t with t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a t hand.


A number of

f i r s t place,

p o i n t s m i s t be kept i n mind i n u s i n g Fig.

i n t h e lower

o n l y be fragmented,

of

impact v e l o c i t y region

29.

In the

the p r o j e c t i l e w i l l

not melted o r v a p o r i z e d , and t h e p e n e t r a t i n g power

t h e fragments w i l l be independent of

t h e stand-off

d i s t a n c e of t h e

bumper -from t h e s u r f a c e i t p r o t e c t s .

A t h i g h e r v e l o c i t i e s where t h e

p r o j e c t i l e would be v a p o r i z e d , however,

t h e cloud of vapor w i l l expand

as it t r a v e l s beyond t h e bumper, and t h e p r e s s u r e developed when i t h i t s


t h e t a r g e t w i l l f a l l o f f with an i n c r e a s e i n t h e s e p a r a t i o n d i s t a n c e between t h e bumper and t h e t a r g e t .

Another important i m p l i c a t i o n of Fig.

29 is t h a t a p l a s t i c bumper should be s u p e r i o r t o a m e t a l l i c bumper i n


t h e low-impact

v e l o c i t y regime because much less energy i s r e q u i r e d t o

v a p o r i z e t h e p l a s t i c and provide a r a p i d l y expanding cloud of vapor t o


d i s p e r s e t h e cloud of fragments from t h e p r o j e c t i l e .

Perhaps even more

i m p o r t a n t , t h e use of a p l a s t i c bumper w i l l avoid t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t


l a r g e fragments t o r n from t h e edges of t h e h o l e i n t h e bumper i t s e l f may

be a more s e r i o u s t h r e a t
tile.

t o t h e target

than fragments of

t h e projec-

Note t h a t f o r p r o j e c t i l e v e l o c i t i e s j u s t below t h e h y p e r v e l o c i t y

61

w 0 85 -4867

5000

ETD

80,000

60,000 .-.
cI1

2000

40,000

t20.000 >-

2 1000

(3

1U

I-

500

300

1 0,000

APORIZE IRON

VAPORIZE PLASTIC AND


HEAT TO 2450'C

VAPOR
IZE ALUMINUM
ALUM INUM
APORIZE

>-

2
3
m

3000

200

100

0
5

10

20

I,, I

30

'

'

5
10
PROJECTILE VELOCITY (krnls)

1
20

I 1

30

Fig. 29. E f f e c t of i m p a c t v e l o c i t y on r e s i d u a l energy a p p e a r i n g as


heat in projectile and dehri-s from bumper, assuming i n e l a s t i c c o l l i s i o n
and e q u a l d i v i s i o n of heat between the two. Parameter i s r a t i o of mass
e j e c t e d from bumper t o that of i n c i d e n t pro.jeeti.Le.
Source: A. I?.
Fraas
ProtectP:cm of Spacecraft from Mefieoroids a d O d % t a Z Debris,
ORNIJTM-9904,
m r t i n Marietta Energy Systems, Inc, , Oak H d g e Natl.
Lah., February 1986, p. 30.

62
regime

the

penetration

is

actually

v e l o c i t i e s above t h e v e l o c i t y of

substantially

greater

than

sound i n t h e t a r g e t because of

at

di.f-

f e r e n c e s i n t h e mechanics of material deformation i n t h e c o u r s e of t h e


impact.

Thus,

i n f u r t h e r test programs p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n should he

g i v e n t o t h e use of p l a s t i c bumpers t o p r o v i d e a more comprehensive set


Also, more d a t a must be o b t a i n e d a t i m p a c t

of d a t a f o r d e s i g n purposes.
velocities

around

15 km/s (most o f t h e experiments t o d a t e have been

with v e l o c i t i e s below 10 km/s)

Such experiments w i l l be d i f f i c u l t

.25927

t o rim because of t h e t r u l y formidable problems i n v o l v e d i n g e t t i n g proj e c t i l e v e l o c i t i e s above 12 km/s i n c o n t r o l l e d experiments.

This has

the s i z e and shape r e q u i r e d

y e t t o be accomplished wllth p r o j e c t i l e s of

f o r tine region of i n t e r e s t h e r e .
One of t h e most convincing experiments designed t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e
e f f i c a c y of bumpers was carr-led out by NASA i n space u s i n g Explorer 4 6 .

The r e s u l t s of t h i s experiment with a bumper des-hgned t o p r o t e c t a g a i n s t

meteoroids showed t h a t f o r a given l e v e l of p r o t e c t i o n ,

t h e weight re-

q u i r e d f o r tbe bumper s y s t e m w a s lower by a f a c t o r of 6.9 t h a n t h e armor


r e q u i r e d without a bumper. 28
An even g r e a t e r weight s a v i n g s a p p e a r s p o s s i b l e by u s l n g a somewhat

dffferent

d e s i g n approach

Aberdeen,

Maryland.

worked

A set

of

out a t

t h e B a l l i s t i c s Research Lab,

charts from t h a t work i s p r e s e n t e d i n

Ref. 29 and has been reproduced i n Ref.

25.

One c h a r t of t h i s set t h a t

i s p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e l y t o prove u s e f u l t o r e a d e r s o f t h i s r e p o r t i s in-

30.

cluded h e r e as Fig.

5.3
An

S h i e l d i n g S p a c e c r a f t from F b s t i l e Action
-

interesting possibi-lity for

protecting

spacecraft

from enemy

weapons is t h e use of a l a r g e d i s k of t h i n , p l a s t i c s h e e t faced wtth a


h i g h l y r e f l e c t i v e f i l m of
wavelength of
Fig. 5).

aluminum,

silver,

or gold,

depending on t h e

t h e laser beams wPth which i t might be t h r e a t e n e d

(see

T h i s d i s k woi.ild normally be deployed between t h e spacecraft

and t h e e a r t h t o p r o t e c t

t h e s a t e l l i t e from a s u r p r i s e a t t a c k by beam

weapons

earth's

fired

from

the

surface.

In t h e

event

that

radar

63

lo-'

ORN L-DWG 85-5296

FRAGMENT:
I, = 57,000m/s
lo

ETD

SHIELDED AREA:
A = 1.23 rn2

-800 kg/m3

l o 3 rn (AI) + T

ALUMINUM

SECOND ELEMEN

1o

-~

20

1O4

1 I 1 1 1

1o-2

5X

T2 (m)

Fig. 38. Estimated mass M of comet fragment required for threshold


penetration ~ d various
:
s h i e l d materials as function of s h i e l d t h k k n e s s
T for apesation with a 1 e(B-m-thFek bumper of aluminum. SOu?.c?e: J. H.
Kfaeke, Jr e, '"Probe Protectlon Against Cometary Meteorotd A t t a c k * ' @pp.
77-83 in Prclce!adings of The? Comet Hal l e y rYkicrometeoroid Hazupld Workshop,
etherlands, April 18-19, 1979, ESA-SP-153, European Space
Agency.

64
scanning i n d i c a t e d t h a t a s w a r m of
spacecraft's

orbit

in

the

b i r d s h o t was being launched i n t h e

retrograde direction,

the shield

could

be

moved t o a p o s i t i o n i n f r o n t of t h e s p a c e c r a f t ,
Another p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t would provide simultaneous p r o t e c t i o n from

laser beams and s w a r m s of b i r d s h o t i s t h e use of

b o t h ground-based

l a r g e p l a s t i c bubble surrounding t h e s p a c e c r a f t .

The s i d e toward t h e

ground could be f a c e d w i t h a r e f l e c t i v e c o a t i n g while t h e b a l a n c e o f t h e


bubble

could be

left

clear t o permit

t h e i n f r a r e d emission from t h e
A m a l l f r a c t i o n of

r a d i a t o r of t h e power p l a n t t o escape i n t o space.

t h e h e a t energy e m i t t e d from t h e r a d i a t o r would be absorbed as i t passed


through

the p l a s t i c film;

therefore,

t h e r a d i u s of

t h e bubble must be

l a r g e enough and i t s e m i s s i v i t y high enough t o keep t h e e q u i l i b r l u m teinp e r a t u r e of

t h e p l a s t i c f i l m t o an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l .

As shown i n t h e

experimental d a t a p r e s e n t e d i n Ref. 30, t h e a b s o r p t i o n , r e f l e c t a n c e , and

p l a s t i c f i l m s vary i n a h i g h l y complex f a s h i o n w i t h t h e

e m l t t a n c e of

wavelength i n t h e i n f r a r e d r e g i o n ( s e e a l s o Refs. 3 1 and 32).


sequence,

con-

t h e d e s i g n of a bubble of t h i s t y p e w i l l be h i g h l y dependent

on the r a d i a t o r geometry and temperature of

t h e p a r t i c u l a r power p l a n t

under c o n s i d e r a t i o n ; t h u s , an attempt t o p r e p a r e such a d e s i g n was f e l t


t o be beyond t h e scope of

t h i s report.

Note t h a t t h I s approach would

a l s o r e q u i r e s u f f i c i e n t s h i e l d i n g on t h e s i d e s of

t h e r e a c t o r t o avoid

s e r i o u s damage t o t h e p l a s t i c f i l m from gamma and n e u t r a n r a d i a t i - o n .


To keepbthe e q u i l i b r i u m temperature of t h e p l a s t i c a t an a c c e p t a b l e

l e v e l may r e q u i r e such a l a r g e bubble r a d h s t h a t t h e weight w i l l be excessive.


be used

A somewhat s i m i l a r but p o s s i b l y l i g h t e r arrangement t h a t mlght

-a

v a r i a t i o n on t h e aluminum r e f l e c t o r t r o u g h s employed behind

t h e r a d i a t o r t u b e s i n t h e ORNL d e s i g n s of t h e 1960s

Fig. 31 ( s e e Refs.

33 and 34).

is indicated i n

I n t h i s case, t h e r e f l e c t o r would be a

deep bowl of p l a s t i c f i l m coated on both s i d e s with a r e f l e c t i v e l a y e r


of

aluminum.

that

The bowl contour would be an i n v o l u t e of

revolution so

i n f r a r e d r a y s from t h e r a d i a t o r t h a t s t r i k e I t s s u r f a c e would be

r e f l e c t e d out t h e open t a p and o f f


h a s t h e advantage t h a t
nesium-lithium

i n t o space.

Note t h a t t h i s s y s t e m

t h e base material could be aluminum o r a mag-

a l l o y r a t h e r than a t r a n s p a r e n t p l a s t i c so t h a t i t would

n o t be s u b j e c t t o r a d i a t i o n damage.

65

O R N L - - D W G 86-4767

ET0

I
I

R E F LECTORJ
I

Pig, 31. Section through space power plant s h i e l d e d from attack hy


lasers and buckshot w i t h large r e f l e c t o r in form of surface of
r e v o l u t i o n about vertical a x i s ,
Energy e m i t t e d from power p l a n t
radiator in d o ~ ~ a rord lateral directions wou1.d be reflected o u t i n t o
space,

66
I\my bumper

system will be v u l n e r a b l e

t h o s e f o r which i t w a s designed.

to projectiles

larger t h a n

Thus, t h e weight increment

f o r the

a t t a c k i n g system a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i n c r e a s i n g t h e p r o j e c t l l e s i z e may be
less than t h e weight inereinenst involved in i n c r e a s h g t h e t h i c k n e s s of

t h e bumper t o c o u n t e r t h e more s e v e r e threat.

T%e s i t u a t l o n

will depend

heavl'hy on both the p r e c i s i o n w i t h w l ~ l d i t h e swam o f b i r d s h o t can be


aimed and

the

l e n g t h of

time

that

t h e enemy may be w i l l i n g t o w a i t

b e f o r e a damagttig c o l l i s i o n i s l i k e l y t o occur.

In view o f t h i s , for a

s p a c e c r a f t w i t h a n u c l e a r e l e c t r i c power s u p p l y , a much l i g h t e r approach


t o Lhe b l r d s h o t
action,

problem may be t h e use of

an i o n j e t t o t a k e e v a s i v e

p o s s i b l y by p r o p e l l i n g t h e s p a c e c r a f t on a random walk.

approach moves t h e problem of def ensive-system


of power-plant

e v a l u a t i o n from t h e area

d e s i g n to s p a c e c r a f t m i s s i o n planning,

scope of t h i s r e p o r t .

This

agajin beyond t h e

67

REFERENCES
1.

Proceedings an the Workshop on Dynamic Pomp System for Space Stat i o n s , NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Jan. 31 t o Feb. 2,

1984.
2.

A. P. Fraas and A. S. Thompson, ORNL Fusion Power Demonstration


Study: Fluid Flow, Heat Transfer, a d Stress Analysis Considemtions in the Design of Blankets for Themonucleap Reactors,

ORNL/TM-5960, Union Carbide Corp.


Lab., February 1978.

Nuclear

Div.,

Oak Ridge Natl,

3.

8. A. Nyenhuis, " P r a c t i c a l A p p l i c a t i o n s of E l e c t r o n &am Welding


and Milling," pp. 124-143
i n Proceedings of nectpon Beam Symposium, 6th Annual Meeting, A l l i e d General Corp., Medford, Mass.
A p r i l 1964, pa 124.

4.

N. Rykalin e t al., k 8 e P MehiXing and Welding, tr.


Pergamon P r e s s , New York, 1978.

5.

P. Y. Wang, Laser k t e r i a l s @ocessing,


kteryia2.s Bocassilclg
Theow and P r a c t k W , v o l e 3, North Holland PubIZshing Co., Amterdam, 2983.

6,

X.

0. Glebov,

P,

A. Bsueckner, pp.155-236
in Some d s p c t s af Compression am?
Hea-tring, Course on Pulsed h s h n Reactors, Internationai: Sehool of
Reactor TechnoZogy, rice, ~ i c i l y , s e p t . 9-15,
1974, Pergamon

P r e s s , New York, 1975.


7.

R.

E.

BOIZ

pp. 207-17.
8.

9.
10.

and G, L.

~
Scisnce,

=ve,
2d

e&.,

~
ea.,

Handbook of TabZes f o r Applied


@
CRC ~ P r e s s ,
C l e v e l a n d , ~1973 ,

6 . P. FIarnwell , Principles of Electricity arsd Electromgneti-sm,


McGraw-Hill ook Co., Inc., Mew York, 1949, p. 585.

J. W. V i e t o r e e n , "The C a l c u l a t i o n of X-ray Mass Absorption C o e f f i cients i n Practice," J. Appt, P h p . 20, 1141-47 (December 1949).

Handbook of Che&st~y a d Physics, 40th ed.,


1959.

(=RC Press, Cleveland,

11.

1980 Calendar a d Reference &)ok, Westinghouse F u s i o n Power Systems, P i t t s b u r g h , 1980.

12.

Y.

S.

MUttGP,

13.

Touloukian and E. H. Buyco,


IFI/Plenum, New York, 1970.

Themophysica~hnopert&a? of

L. B. P a n k r a t z , Thermodynamic Properties of Etmertts a d Oxides,


Bureau of Mines B u l l e t i n 672, Washington, D.C.,
1982.

68

14.
15.

16.

0.

Kubaschewski and C. B. Alcock, M@-f;atluryiealThemrat f i e h s * m J ,


Pergarnon Press, New York, 1979.

5th ed.,

U t t e l ' l e Memorial I n s t i t u t e , comp. , R e f ~ a c t o q Ceriurrlcs fop Aerospace, A M a t m i a l s Selection Handbook, Tne h e r i c a n Ceramics
S o c i e t y , Columbus, Ohio, 1964.

M. Jakob,
p. 256.

Heat

T P U % 6 f W , John Wiipey & Sans,

Tnc.,

New York,

1950,

17.

M.

18.

A. N. P i r r i , "Theory of MOinentwi~T r a n s f e r t o a S u r f a c e with a HighPower Laser," Phys. Flu?&


1 6 , 1 4 3 5 4 6 (September 1 9 7 3 ) .

19.

Gross, Explosive Zinpulse Calculations, ~ e p o r l : A P W L - ~ ~ K - ~ P - ~


C o n t r a c t No. F 04611-69-C-0062,
A i s Force Rocket P r o p u l s i o n Laborat o r y , Edwards Air Force Wse, Calif., November 1970.

D. B. Nichols and R. B. H a l l , "Thermal Coupling of 2.8 pin Laser


R a d i a t i o n t o Metal Targets," A I A A J . 1 8 ( 4 ) , 476-78 ( A p r i l 1980).

20.

L. R. Hettele e t al., '"Mechanical Response and Thermal CoupJ.ing of


Metallic T a r g e t s t o H i g h - I n t e n s i t y
1.06 p m T,aser R a d i a t i o n , "
J. A p p t . Phys. 4 7 ( 4 ) , 1415-21 ( A p r i l 1976).

21.

N. F e r r i t e r e t a l . ,

by Laser-Supported
(November 1977).

"Laser Beam O p t i m i z a t i o n f o r Momentum T r a n s f e r


Detonation Waves
A I A A J. 15( 11) , 1 5 9 7 4 0 3
,*I

22.

J. J. Keyes and A. I. Krakoviac, "High Frequency S u r f a c e Thermal


F a t i g u e Cycling of I n c o n e l a t 1406F," Nuc.1. Sei. Eng. 9 ( 4 ) , 462-66
( A p r i l 1961).

23.

A. P. F r a a s , Engineering Evaluation of Energy @stems, P f c G r a w - H i l l


Book Co., Inc., New York, 1982, pp. 1 6 1 4 4 .

24.

J. B. Bergquam and R. A. Seban, "'Spectral R a d i a t i o n from Alumina


Powder on a Metallic S u b s t r a t e , " American S o c i e t y of Mechanical
Engineers Transactions,
J. f h X 2 t Transfer 94, 3 6 4 0 (February
1972).

25.

A.

P. Fraas, Protection of Spacecraft f r m Meteoroids a d &bitat


DebKe, ORNL/TM-9904
Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Oak

Ridge N a t l . Lab.,

February 1986.

26.

Meteoroid Danage AsSessment, NASA SP-$042,

27.

R. Madden, BaZlistic L i m i t of Double-WaZted Mcrteoroid AAmper q s -

Space A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Washington, D.C.,

N a t i o n a l Aeronautics and
May 1970.

*ems, NASA T e c h n i c a l Note D-3916, N a t i o n a l Aeronautics and Space


A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Washington, D.C., A p r i l 1967.

69
28.

D. H. Humes, Meteoroid Bumper Experiment on Explorer 46, NASA Techn i c a l Paper 1879, N a t i o n a l A e r o n a u t i c s and Space A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
Washington, D.C.,
July 1981 *

29.

J. H. Kineke, Jr.,
"Probe P r o t e c t i o n Against Cometary Meteoroid
A t t a c k , " pp- 77-43 in Proceedbzgs of t h e Comt HaZley Micrometeoro&l Hazard Workshop, Noordwijk, N e t h e r l a n d s , A p r i l 18-19,
1979,
ESA-SP-153, European Space Agency.

30.

C. L.

31.

H. R. C a r l a n , " R e f r a c t i v e I n d i c e s of I n f r a r e d - T r a n s m i t t i n g Subs t r a t e Materials C a l c u l a t e d Using Standard Spectrophotometer Transm i t t a n c e C i i r ~ e s , 'AppZ.


~
Opt. 8 ( 6 ) , 1 1 7 9 4 2 (June 1969).

32.

0. M.
Sorokln e t a l . ,
"Semi-Transparent,
Va.cuum-Tight P l a s t l c
Windows f o r the Vacuum U l t r a v i o l e t , " Sov. J. O p t . Technol. (USA)
3 7 ( 7 ) , 14-4
(February 1970).

33.

A. P. Fraas, "Design and Development Tests of Direct-Condensing


P o t a s s F m R a d a t o r ~ , ~ i' n AIM Specialists Conference an R u d & w
Spuce Pmer Systems, vol. I , USAEC Report CONF-65102h, 1J.S. Atomic
Energy Commission, Washington, D . C . , October 1965

34.

S I Holcsmb and F. E. Lynch, Thermal Rad-iation P m f o ~ m n c sof a


Q RG?fk?GtOP, ORNL/TM-1613,
UnPon Carbide Corp.
Nuclear Div., Oak Ridge N a t l . Lab., A p r i l 1967,

T1en e t a l . , " I n f r a r e d R a d i a t i o n of Thin P l a s t i c Films,"


American S o c i e t y of Mechanical E n g i n e e r s T r a n s a c t i o n s , J . Heat
Transfer 9 4 , 4 1 4 5 (February 1972)

R.

Finned Tube wi&h

71
Appendix A
TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTIONS IN PLATES W I T H SURFACES
HEATED BY SHORT BURSTS OF RADIANT ENEKGY

J a k o b l h a s p r e s e n t e d t h e s o l u t i o n t o the problem of t h e t e m p e r a t u r e
distribution

in

an

infinitely

thick

o r i g i n a l l y a t a uniform temperature,

plate

of

uniform

properties,

whose s u r f a c e i s s u b j e c t e d t o t h e

sudden s t a r t of h e a t i n g a t a uniform rate, t h a t i s ,

where
T,

= i n i t i a l t e m p e r a t u r e of t h e p l a t e ,

= temperature

a t a d i s t a n c e x from the s u r f a c e of

the p l a t e a t

tfme t ,

= energy i n p u t p e r u n i t of area i n t i m e T,

= p e r i o d of energy b u r s t ,

= d i s t a n c e from t h e s u r f ace,

= thermal d i f f u s i v i t y = k/Cpp

WhcrTE?

k
c

thermal c o n d u c t i v i t y ,

= heat capacity (constant pressure),


=

density.

The s o l u t i o n of t h l s equation a t the end of the i n p u t p e r i o d ( t = r) is

with t h e f o l l o w i n g t a b u l a t e d v a l u e s of g(u)

72

0 eo0
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.90
1.00
1.20
1.50
2 000
3.00

I n t h i s r e p o r t Eq.

(A.2)

0.5642
0 4698
0.3866
0.3142
0.2522
0.1996
0 e 1.5.59
0.1201
0 -0682
0.0503
0.0261
0.0086
0.0009
0.0001

has been used t o esktrnate t h e temperature

d i s t r i b u t i o n i n a p l a t e at t h e elid of a s h o r t b u r s t of r a d i a n t energy.
The der-lvation assumes t h a t t h e p l a t e i s r e l a t i v e l y t h i c k < > 2 J r f i

and

t h a t t h e c o n s t a n t s k, cp, and p may be averaged over t h e temperature


range a t a g i v e n d i s t a n c e from t h e s u r f a c e ,

Calculations f o r estimating

the t o t a l energy i n p u t f o r i n c i p i e n t v a p o r i z a t i o n use an e f f e c t i v e h e a t

c a p a c i t y that i s t h e q u o t i e n t of the e n t h a l p y d i f f e r e n c e and t h e temper-

ature d i f f e r e n c e between

t h e i n i t i a l c o n d i t i o n s and the point

of

c i p i e n t vaporization.

RE FEKENCE
1.

M. Jakob, Heae Transfer, John Wiley

& Sons, Inc.,

New York, 1950.

in-

73
Appendix B

BLAST EFFECTS FROM RAPID VAPORIZATION FROM A SURFACE


The b l a s t e f f e c t s were e s t i m a t e d roughly by making a number of s i m p l i f y i n g assumptions:
1.

Evaporation from t h e s u r f a c e occiirs a t a r a t e e q u a l t o t h e r a t e h e a t


i n p u t d i v i d e d by t h e h e a t of v a p o r i z a t i o n a t t h e b o i l i n g p o i n t f o r

1 atm,
2.

The energy i n p u t r e q u i r e d t o h e a t t h e s u r f a c e t o t h e b o i l i n g p o l n t

i s e s t i m a t e d using t h e methods of Appendix A with an e f f e c t i v e v a l u e


of

capacity

heat

from

the

initial

temperature

through

incipient

vaporization.

3.

The v e l o c i t y oE t h e vapar leaving t h e s u r f a c e was t a k e n as t h e s o n i c


v e l o c i t y f o r t h e vapor a t t h e nominal b o i l t n g p o i n t a t 1 a t m .

"]chis

was calculated by assuming t h a t t h e vapor would be monatomic and by


ushg the r e l a t i o n

where V,

i s In m ~ t e r s per second, T w a s t a k e n as t h e atmospheric

bcailing p o i n t in d e g r e e s Kelvin, and M as t h e atomic weight.

4.

The b l a s t pressure from r a p i d v a p o r i z a t i o n i s t h e r e a c t i o n f o r c e p e r

u n i t of area imparted by t h e momentinn of t h e vapor l e a v i n g t h e s u r \

face.

Thus,

F/A =

vs

dm/dt = Vs

(mass vaporized/crn 2 )
( p u l s e time)

For t h e p r e s s u r e i n b a r s ,

P =

(mass vaporized/cm2) ( s o n i c v e l o c i t y , cm/s)


( p u l s e t i m e , s ) 980 x lo5

75
ORNL/TM-98 14
Internal Distribution

1.
2.
3.
4.

5-6.

D.
H.
R.
C.
R.

8-17.
18.
19 e
20.
21 *
22.

A.
F.
C.
8.
R.
D.

7.

23
24

.
9

25-29 *
30.

W.

D.

S.
J.
F.

E. B a r t i n e
I. Bowers
8. B u r d i t t
V. Chester
H. Cooper
G. Craddick
P. F r a a s
P. G r i f f i n
M. Haaland
W. Hoffman
S . Holcomb
T. I n g e r s o l l
B. Lloyd
R. McNeany
C. Moyers
R. Mynatt

3 1-40

41

42.
43.
44.
45.
46
47.
48
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55-56.

57.

J.
D.
M.
H.
H.
R.
M.

P. Nichols
U. O'Kain
Olszewski
Postma
L. Roberts
T. Santoro
Siman-Tov
D. G - Thomas
H. E. T r a m m e l 1
K. A. W i l l i a m s
G. L. Yoder
ORNL P a t e n t Off ice
C e n t r a l Research S e c t i o n
Document Reference S e c t i o n
Laboratory Records Department
Laboratory Records (RC)

External DFstribution

58.

59

60
41.

62 e

63.
64*
65

66.
67.

68.
69

70.

S. K. Bhattacharyya, Argonne N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y , 9700 S. Cass


Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439
R. Bohl, MS 560, Los Alamos N a t i o n a l Laboratory, P.O. Box 1663,
LOS A l a i n o s , NM 87545
R. G . Brerngle, Rocketdyne D i v i s i o n , Rockwell I n t e r n a t i o n a l Corp o r a t i o n , 6633 Canoga Avenue, Canoga Park, CA 91303
B.
G. Cour-Palais,
NASA Johnson Space C e n t e r , Code SN3,
Houston, TX 77058
C. M. Cox, Wanford Engineering Development L a b o r a t o r y , P.O. Box
1970, Richland, WA 99352
L.
Cropp,
Sandia N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r i e s ,
P,O.
Box 5800,
Albuquerque, J
W 87185
P. Dirkmaat, DOE-ID, 550 Second S t r e e t , Idaho F a l l s , I D 83274
R. E. English, NASA L e w i s Research C e n t e r , MS 501-15, 21000
Brookpark Road, Cleveland, OH 44135
D. H. Humes, NASA Langley Research C e n t e r , MS 160, Hampton, VA
23665-5225
D. J. Kessler, NASA Johnson. S p a c e Center, Code SN3, Houston, TX
77058
E.
U.
Khan,
U.S.
Dept.
of
Energy,
raE-54,
Germantown,
Washington, D.C. 20545
J. H. Kineke, Jr., Ballistics Research L a b o r a t o r y , SLCBR-TB/W,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD 21005-5066.
J. H. L e e , Jr., Sandia N a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y , Dept. 6430A, P.O.
Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM 87185

76

71.
72.
73.

74.
75.
36.

77.
78.
79.

80
81.
82.

83
84
85

86- 115.

J.
Loria,
NASA
Headquarters,
400
Maryland Avenue
SW,
Washington, D.C. 20546
E. .'L'
Piahefkey, Jr., Aero Propialsion Laboracoay (POOC-.S), U . S .
A i r Force Wright A e r o n a u t i c a l L a b o r a t o r i e s , Wright-Patterson
A i r Force Base, OH 45433
J.
R.
Powell
Brookhaven N a t i o n a l L a h o r a t o r y , A s s o c i a t e d
U n i v e r s i t i e s , T.xIc.,
Upton, NY 12973
It. E. Rice, EGdG Idaho, 1955 Preemont, Idaho F a l l s , I D 83401
J. M. Smith, NASA Lewis Research Center, MS 500-202, Ruilding
4013, 21000 Brookpark Road, Cleveland, OH 44135
R. J. Sovie, NASA Lewis Research C e n t e r , PIS 500-202, B u i l d i n g
4013, 21000 Brookpark Road, Cleveland, OH 44135
R. Verga, S t r a t e g i c Defense I n i t i a t i v e / D i r e c t o r of E n e r g y , The
Pentagon, Vashingtoo, B.C. 20301-7 100
E.
J. Wahlquist, U.S.
Dept, of Energy, NE-54, Germantown,
Washington, D.C. 20545
C. E. Walter, Lawrence Livermore N a t i o n a l Laboratory, Univ e r s i - t y of C a l i f o r n i a , P.O. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94550
J. Wetch, Space Power I n c . , 253 Humboldt Court, Sunnyvale, CA
94089
R. D. Widrig, P a c i f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r y , h t t e l l e Boulevard,
Rich1 and, WA 995 32
G. R. Woodcock, Boeing Aerospace Company, Post O f f i c e Box 2470,
Huntsville, AL 35807
R. Wylle, S t r a t e g i c k f e n s e I n i t i a t i v e / D i r e c t o r of Energy, The
Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 20301-7100
H. K. Zwefg, Energy Technology E n g i n e e r i n g Center, Rocketdyne
D i v i s i o n , Rockwell. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Corp., P.O.
Box 1449, Canoga
P a r k , CA 91304
O f f i c e of A s s i s t a n t Manager f o r Energy, Research and Development, DOE-Oak Ridge O p e r a t i o n s , Oak Ridge, TN 37831
O f f i c e o f S c i e n t i f i c and T e c h n i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n , P.O. Box 62,
Oak Ridge, TN 37831

bU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1987-748-168/40101

Вам также может понравиться