Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Scramjet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Scram jet) Jump to: navigation, search
X-43A with scramjet attached to the underside at Mach 7 A scramjet (supersonic combustion ramjet) is a variation of a ramjet with the key difference being that the flow in the combustor is supersonic. At higher speeds it is necessary to combust supersonically to maximize the efficiency of the combustion process. Projections for the top speed of a scramjet engine (without additional oxidiser input) vary between Mach 12 and Mach 24 (orbital velocity), but the X-30 research gave Mach 17 due to combustion rate issues. By way of contrast, the fastest conventional air-breathing, manned vehicles, such as the U.S. Air Force SR-71, achieve slightly more than Mach 3.2 and rockets achieved Mach 30+ during Apollo. Like a ramjet, a scramjet essentially consists of a constricted tube through which inlet air is compressed by the high speed of the vehicle, fuel is combusted, and then the exhaust jet leaves at higher speed than the inlet air. Also like a ramjet, there are few or no moving parts. In particular there is no high speed turbine as in a turbofan or turbojet engine that can be a major point of failure. A scramjet requires supersonic airflow through the engine, thus, similar to a ramjet, scramjets have a minimum functional speed. This speed is uncertain due to the low number of working scramjets, relative youth of the field, and the largely classified nature of research using complete scramjet engines. However it is likely to be at least Mach 5 for a pure scramjet, with higher Mach numbers 7-9 more likely. Thus scramjets require acceleration to hypersonic speed via other means. A hybrid ramjet/scramjet would have a lower minimum functional Mach number, and some sources indicate the NASA X-43A research vehicle is a hybrid design. Recent tests of prototypes have used a booster rocket to obtain the necessary velocity. Air breathing engines should have significantly better specific impulse while within the atmosphere than rocket engines.
However scramjets have weight and complexity issues that must be considered. While very short suborbital scramjets test flights have been successfully performed, perhaps significantly no flown scramjet has ever been successfully designed to survive a flight test. The viability of scramjet vehicles is hotly contested in aerospace and space vehicle circles, in part because many of the parameters which would eventually define the efficiency of such a vehicle remain uncertain. This has led to grandiose claims from both sides, which have been intensified by the large amount of funding involved in any hypersonic testing. Some notable aerospace gurus such as Henry Spencer and Jim Oberg have gone so far as calling orbital scramjets 'the hardest way to reach orbit', or even 'scamjets' due to the extreme technical challenges involved. Major, well funded projects, like the X-30 were cancelled before producing any working hardware.
Contents
[hide] 1 History 2 Simple description 3 Theory 4 Advantages and disadvantages of scramjets o 4.1 Special cooling and materials o 4.2 Half an engine o 4.3 Simplicity of design o 4.4 Additional propulsion requirements o 4.5 Testing difficulties o 4.6 Lack of stealth 5 Advantages and disadvantages for orbital vehicles o 5.1 Lower thrust-weight ratio o 5.2 Need additional engine(s) to reach orbit o 5.3 Reentry o 5.4 Costs 6 Applications 7 Recent progress 8 Scramjet in the movies 9 Scramjets in other media 10 See also 11 References
12 External links
[edit] History
During and after World War II, tremendous amounts of time and effort were put into researching high-speed jet- and rocket-powered aircraft. The Bell X-1 attained
supersonic flight in 1947, and by the early 1960s, rapid progress towards faster aircraft suggested that operational aircraft would be flying at "hypersonic" speeds within a few years. Except for specialized rocket research vehicles like the North American X-15 and other rocket-powered spacecraft, aircraft top speeds have remained level, generally in the range of Mach 1 to Mach 2. In the realm of civilian air transport, the primary goal has been reducing operating cost, rather than increasing flight speeds. Because supersonic flight requires significant amounts of fuel, airlines have favored subsonic jumbo jets rather than supersonic transports. The production supersonic airliners, Concorde and the Tupolev Tu-144 operated with little profit for the French and Russian airlines but British Airways flew Concorde at a 60% profit margin over its commercial life.[1]. Military aircraft design focused on maneuverability and stealth, features thought to be incompatible with hypersonic aerodynamics. In the United States, from 1986-1993, a reasonably serious attempt to develop a single stage to orbit reusable spaceplane using scramjet engines was made, but the Rockwell X-30 (NASP) program failed. Hypersonic flight concepts haven't gone away, however, and low-level investigations have continued over the past few decades. Presently, the US military and NASA have formulated a "National Hypersonics Strategy" to investigate a range of options for hypersonic flight. Other nations such as Australia, France, Russia, and India have also progressed in hypersonic propulsion research. Different U.S. organizations have accepted hypersonic flight as a common goal. The U.S. Army desires hypersonic missiles that can attack mobile missile launchers quickly. NASA believes hypersonics could help develop economical, reusable launch vehicles. The Air Force is interested in a wide range of hypersonic systems, from airlaunched cruise missiles to orbital spaceplanes, that the service believes could bring about a true "aerospace force." There are several claims as to which group were the first to demonstrate a "working" scramjet, where "working" in this case can refer to: Demonstration of supersonic combustion in a ground test Demonstration of net thrust in a ground test Demonstration of supersonic combustion or net thrust in a ground test with realistic fuels and/or realistic wind tunnel flow conditions. Demonstration of supersonic combustion in a flight test Demonstration of net thrust in a flight test.
The problem is complicated by the release of previously classified material and by partial publication, where claims are made, but specific parts of an experiment are kept secret. Additionally experimental difficulties in verifying that supersonic combustion actually occurred, or that actual net thrust was produced mean that at least four consortiums have legitimate claims to "firsts", with several nations and institutions involved in each consortium (For a further listing see Scramjet_Programs). No scramjet powered vehicle has yet been produced outside an experimental program.
Diagram illustrating the principle of scramjet operation The scramjet is a proposed solution to both of these problems, by modifications of the ramjet design. The main change is that the blockage inside the engine is reduced, so that the air isn't slowed down as much. This means that the air is cooler, so that the fuel can burn properly. Unfortunately the higher speed of the air means that the fuel has to mix and burn in a very short time, which is difficult to achieve. To keep the combustion of the fuel going at the same rate, the pressure and temperature in the engine need to be kept constant. Unfortunately, the blockages which were removed from the ramjet were useful to control the air in the engine, and so the scramjet is forced to fly at a particular speed for each altitude. This is called a "constant dynamic pressure path" because the wind that the scramjet feels in its face is constant, making the scramjet fly faster at higher altitude and slower at lower altitude. The inside of a very simple scramjet would look like two kitchen funnels attached by their small ends. The first funnel is the intake, and the air is pushed through, becoming compressed and hot. In the small section, where the two funnels join, fuel is added, and the combustion makes the gas become even hotter and more compressed. Finally, the second funnel is a nozzle, like the nozzle of a rocket, and thrust is produced. Note that most artists' impressions of scramjet-powered vehicle designs depict waveriders where the underside of the vehicle forms the intake and nozzle of the engine. This means that the intake and nozzle of the engine are asymmetric and contribute directly to the lift of the aircraft. A waverider is the required form for a hypersonic lifting body.
[edit] Theory
All scramjet engines have fuel injectors, a combustion chamber, a thrust nozzle and an inlet, which compresses the incoming air. Sometimes engines also include a region
which acts as a flame holder, although the high stagnation temperatures mean that an area of focused waves may be used, rather than a discrete engine part as seen in turbine engines. Other engines use pyrophoric fuel additives, such as silane, to avoid such issues. An isolator between the inlet and combustion chamber is often included to improve the homogeneity of the flow in the combustor and to extend the operating range of the engine. A scramjet is reminiscent of a ramjet. In a typical ramjet, the supersonic inflow of the engine is decelerated at the inlet to subsonic speeds and then reaccelerated through a nozzle to supersonic speeds to produce thrust. This deceleration, which is produced by a normal shock, creates a total pressure loss which limits the upper operating point of a ramjet engine. For a scramjet, the kinetic energy of the freestream air entering the scramjet engine is large compared to the energy released by the reaction of the oxygen content of the air with a fuel (say hydrogen). Thus the heat released from combustion at Mach 25 is around 10% of the total enthalpy of the working fluid. Depending on the fuel, the kinetic energy of the air and the potential combustion heat release will be equal at around Mach 8. Thus the design of a scramjet engine is as much about minimizing drag as maximizing thrust. This high speed makes the control of the flow within the combustion chamber more difficult. Since the flow is supersonic, no upstream influence propagates within the freestream of the combustion chamber. Thus throttling of the entrance to the thrust nozzle is not a usable control technique. In effect, a block of gas entering the combustion chamber must mix with fuel and have sufficient time for initiation and reaction, all the while travelling supersonically through the combustion chamber, before the burned gas is expanded through the thrust nozzle. This places stringent requirements on the pressure and temperature of the flow, and requires that the fuel injection and mixing be extremely efficient. Usable dynamic pressures lie in the range 20 to 200 kPa (0.2-2 bar), where
where q is the dynamic pressure of the gas (rho) is the density of the gas v is the velocity of the gas Fuel injection and management is also potentially complex. One possibility would be that the fuel is pressurized to 100 bar by a turbo pump, heated by the fuselage, sent through the turbine and accelerated to higher speeds than the air by a nozzle. The air and fuel stream are crossed in a comb like structure, which generates a large interface. Turbulence due to the higher speed of the fuel lead to additional mixing. Complex fuels like kerosine need a long engine to complete combustion. The minimum Mach number at which a scramjet can operate is limited by the fact that the compressed flow must be hot enough to burn the fuel, and of high enough pressure
that the reaction is finished before the air moves out the back of the engine. Additionally, in order to be called a scramjet, the compressed flow must still be supersonic after combustion. Here two limits must be observed: Firstly, since when a supersonic flow is compressed it slows down, the level of compression must be low enough (or the initial speed high enough) not to slow down the gas below Mach 1. If the gas within a scramjet goes below Mach 1 the engine will "choke", transitioning to subsonic flow in the combustion chamber. This effect is well known amongst experimenters on scramjets since the waves caused by choking are easily observable. Additionally, the sudden increase in pressure and temperature in the engine can lead to an acceleration of the combustion, leading to the combustion chamber exploding. Secondly, the heating of the gas by combustion causes the speed of sound in the gas to increase (and the Mach number to decrease) even though the gas is still travelling at the same speed. Forcing the speed of air flow in the combustion chamber under Mach 1 in this way is called "thermal choking". It is clear that a pure scramjet can operate at Mach numbers of 6-8 (e.g 1), but in the lower limit, it depends on the definition of a scramjet. Certainly there are designs where a ramjet transforms into a scramjet over the Mach 3-6 range5 (Dual-mode scramjets). In this range however, the engine is still receiving significant thrust from subsonic combustion of "ramjet" type. The high cost of flight testing and the unavailability of ground facilities have hindered scramjet development. A large amount of the experimental work on scramjets has been undertaken in cryogenic facilities, direct-connect tests, or burners, each of which simulates one aspect of the engine operation. Further, vitiated facilities, storage heated facilities, arc facilities and the various types of shock tunnels each have limitations which have prevented perfect simulation of scramjet operation. The HyShot flight test showed the relevance of the 1:1 simulation of conditions in the T4 and HEG shock tunnels, despite having cold models and a short test time. The NASA-CIAM tests provided similar verification for CIAM's C-16 V/K facility and the Hyper-X project is expected to provide similar verification for the Langley AHSTF [1], CHSTF [2] and 8 ft HTT. Computational fluid dynamics has only recently reached a position to make reasonable computations in solving scramjet operation problems. Boundary layer modeling, turbulent mixing, two-phase flow, flow separation, and real-gas aerothermodynamics continue to be problems on the cutting edge of CFD. Additionally, the modeling of kinetic-limited combustion with very fast-reacting species such as hydrogen makes severe demands on computing resources. Reaction schemes are numerically stiff, having typical times as low as 10-19 seconds, requiring reduced reaction schemes. Much of scramjet experimentation remains classified. Several groups including the US Navy with the SCRAM engine between 1968-1974, and the Hyper-X program with the X-43A have claimed successful demonstrations of scramjet technology. Since these results have not been published openly, they remain unverified and a final design method of scramjet engines still does not exist. The final application of a scramjet engine is likely to be in conjunction with engines which can operate outside the scramjet's operating range. Dual-mode scramjets combine subsonic combustion with supersonic combustion for operation at lower
speeds, and rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) engines supplement a traditional rocket's propulsion with a scramjet, allowing for additional oxidizer to be added to the scramjet flow. RBCCs offer a possibility to extend a scramjet's operating range to higher speeds or lower intake dynamic pressures than would otherwise be possible.
fuel for those engines, plus all engine associated mounting structure and control systems. Turbofan engines are heavy and cannot easily exceed about Mach 2-3, so another propulsion method would be needed to reach scramjet operating speed. That could be ramjets or rockets. Those would also need their own separate fuel supply, structure, and systems. Many proposals instead call for a first stage of droppable solid rocket boosters, which greatly simplifies the design.
incapable of orbital speeds in airbreathing mode, and hence extra rocket engines are needed.
[edit] Reentry
The scramjet's heat-resistant underside potentially doubles as its reentry system, if a single-stage-to-orbit vehicle using non-ablative, non-active cooling is visualised. If an ablative shielding is used on the engine, it will probably not be usable after ascent to orbit. If active cooling is used, the loss of all fuel during the burn to orbit will also mean the loss of all cooling for the TPS.
[edit] Costs
Reducing the amount of fuel and oxidizer, as in scramjets, means that the vehicle itself becomes a much larger percentage of the costs (rocket fuels are already cheap). Indeed, the unit cost of the vehicle can be expected to end up far higher, since aerospace hardware cost is probably about two orders of magnitude higher than liquid oxygen and tankage. Still, if scramjets enable reusable vehicles, this could theoretically be a cost benefit. Whether equipment subject to the extreme conditions of a scramjet can be reused sufficiently many times is unclear; all flown scramjet tests are only designed to survive for short periods. The eventual cost of such a vehicle is the subject of intense debate since even the best estimates disagree whether a scramjet vehicle would be advantageous. It is likely that a scramjet vehicle would need to lift more load than a rocket of equal takeoff weight in order to be equally as cost efficient (if the scramjet is a non-reusable vehicle).
[edit] Applications
Seeing its potential, organizations around the world are researching scramjet technology. Scramjets will likely propel missiles first, since that application requires only cruise operation instead of net thrust production. Much of the money for the current research comes from governmental defense research contracts.
Space launch vehicles may or may not benefit from having a scramjet stage. A scramjet stage of a launch vehicle theoretically provides a specific impulse with 1000 to 4000 s whereas a rocket provides less than 600 s while in the atmosphere23, potentially permitting much cheaper access to space. However, a scramjet's specific impulse decreases rapidly with speed, as the vehicle exhibits increased drag. One issue is that scramjet engines are predicted to have exceptionally poor thrust to weight ratio- around 2 4. This compares very unfavorably with the 50-100 of a typical rocket engine. This is compensated for in scramjets partly because the weight of the vehicle would be carried by aerodynamic lift rather than pure rocket power (giving reduced 'gravity losses'), but scramjets would take much longer to get to orbit due to lower thrust which greatly offsets the advantage. The takeoff weight of a scramjet vehicle is significantly reduced over that of a rocket, due to the lack of onboard oxidiser, but increased by the structural requirements of the larger and heavier engines. Whether this vehicle would be reusable or not is still a subject of debate and research. An aircraft using this type of jet engine could dramatically reduce the time it takes to travel from one place to another, potentially putting any place on Earth within a 90 minute flight. However, there are questions about whether such a vehicle could carry enough fuel to make useful length trips, and there are obvious issues with sonic booms. There are also questions as to how realistic such a proposal is that revolve around costs (capital and maintenance) of technology that is yet to be developed.
Japan Russia South Korea Sweden United Kingdom United States of America
Rockwell X-30 Hyper-X Single-stage to orbit X-43A HyShot Liquid air cycle engine/SABRE Atmospheric reentry Busemann's Biplane
[edit] References
Note 1: Paull, A., Stalker, R.J., Mee, D.J. "Experiments on supersonic combustion ramjet propulsion in a shock tunnel", JFM 296: 156-183, 1995. Note 2: Kors, D.L. Design considerations for combined air breathingrocket propulsion systems., AIAA Paper No. 90-5216, 1990.
Note 3: Varvill, R., Bond, A. "A Comparison of Propulsion Concepts for SSTO Reuseable Launchers", JBIS, Vol 56, pp 108-117, 2003. Figure 8. Note 4: Varvill, R., Bond, A. "A Comparison of Propulsion Concepts for SSTO Reuseable Launchers", JBIS, Vol 56, pp 108-117, 2003. Figure 7. Note 5: Voland, R.T., Auslender, A.H., Smart, M.K., Roudakov, A.S., Semenov, V.L., Kopchenov, V. "CIAM/NASA Mach 6.5 scramjet flight and ground test", AIAA-99-4848. Note 6: Oldenborg R. et al "Hypersonic Combustion Kinetics: Status Report of the Rate Constant Committee, NASP High-Speed Propulsion Technology Team" NASP Technical Memorandum 1107, May 1990. Note 7: Billig, FS "SCRAM-A Supersonic Combustion Ramjet Missile", AIAA paper 93-2329, 1993. HyShot -University Of Queensland HyShot Leaders in Scramjet Technology Latest results from the 24 March 2006 QinetiQ HyShot launch. French Support Russian SCRAMJET Tests. A Burning Question. American Scientist. Hypersonic Scramjet Projectile Flys in Missile Test. SpaceDaily. NASA website for National Hypersonics Plan NASA's X-43A http://www.uq.edu.au/hypersonics/index.html?page=19501 University of Queensland Centre for Hypersonics]
Ramjet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Ram-Jet) Jump to: navigation, search For the hypothetical method of interstellar travel, see Bussard ramjet. For the Transformers character, see Ramjet (Transformers)
Schematic diagram showing simple ramjet operation, with Mach numbers of flow shown. A ramjet, sometimes referred to as a stovepipe jet, contains no major moving parts and can be particularly useful in applications requiring a small and simple engine for
high speed use; such as missiles. They have also been used successfully, though not efficiently, as tipjets on helicopter rotors.
Contents
[hide]
1 History 2 Design 3 Ramjet Types 4 Flight speed 5 Related engines o 5.1 Scramjets o 5.2 Precooled engines o 5.3 Nuclear powered ramjets o 5.4 J58 o 5.5 Ionospheric ramjet 6 References 7 Aircraft using ramjets 8 Missiles using ramjets 9 See also 10 External links
[edit] History
The idea of the ramjet (not to be confused with the Pulse jet engine of V-1 flying bomb fame, or with the Scramjet) was patented as early as 1908 by Ren Lorin. In the Soviet Union, the GIRD-08 ramjet engine was built by Yuri Pobedonostsev and test fired in 1933. In France the works of Ren Leduc was notable, as was that of William Avery in the United States. Leduc's Model 010 was the first-ever ramjet-powered aircraft to fly, in 1949.
[edit] Design
In its simplest form a turbojet consists of an air intake, compressor, combustor, turbine and nozzle. In a ramjet, owing to the high flight speed, the ram compression is sufficient to dispense with the need for a compressor and a turbine to drive it. So a ramjet is virtually a 'flying stovepipe', a very simple device comprising of an air intake, a combustor, and a nozzle. Normally the only moving parts are those within the turbopump, which pumps the fuel to the combustor, in a liquid fuel ramjet. Solid fuel ramjets are even simpler. Ramjets try to exploit the very high total pressure within the streamtube approaching the air intake lip. A reasonably efficient intake will recover much of the freestream stagnation pressure, to support the combustion and expansion processes. Most ramjets
operate at supersonic flight speeds and use one or more conical (or oblique) shock waves, terminated by a strong normal shock, to decelerate the airflow to a subsonic velocity at intake exit. Further diffusion is then required to get the air velocity down to level suitable for the combustor. Since there is no downstream turbine, a ramjet combustor can safely operate at stoichiometric fuel:air ratios, which implies a combustor exit stagnation temperature of the order of 2400 K for kerosene. Normally the combustor must be capable of operating over a wide range of throttle settings, for a range of flight speeds/altitudes. Usually a sheltered pilot region enables combustion to continue when the vehicle intake undergoes high yaw/pitch, during turns. Other flame stabilization techniques make use of flame holders, which vary in design from combustor cans to simple flat plates, to shelter the flame and improve fuel mixing. Overfuelling the combustor can cause the normal shock within a supersonic intake system to be pushed forward beyond the intake lip, resulting in a substantial drop in engine airflow and net thrust. Because nozzle pressure ratios are relatively high, ramjet engines are normally fitted with a convergent/divergent propelling nozzle. Given sufficient initial flight velocity, a ramjet will be self-sustaining. Indeed, unless the vehicle drag is extremely high, the engine/airframe combination will tend to accelerate to higher and higher flight speeds, substantially increasing the air intake temperature. As this could have a detrimental effect on the integrity of the engine and/or airframe, the fuel control system must reduce engine fuel flow to stabilize the flight Mach number and, thereby, air intake temperature to sensible levels. As a ramjet contains no (major) moving parts, it is lighter than a turbojet and can be particularly useful in applications requiring a small and simple engine for high speed use; such as missiles. They have also been used successfully, though not efficiently, as tipjets on helicopter rotors.
where the booster is mounted immediately aft of the ramjet, e.g. Sea Dart, or wraparound where multiple boosters are attached alongside the outside of the ramjet e.g. SA-4 Ganef. The choice of booster arrangement is usually driven by the size of the launch platform. A tandem booster increases the overall length of the system whereas wraparound boosters increase the overall diameter. Wraparound boosters will usually generate higher drag than a tandem arrangement. Integrated boosters provide a more efficient packaging option since the booster propellant is cast inside the otherwise empty combustor. This approach has been used on solid, for example SA-6 Gainful, liquid, for example ASMP, and ducted rocket, for example Meteor), designs. Integrated designs are complicated by the different nozzle requirements of the boost and ramjet phases of flight. Due to the higher thrust levels of the booster a different shaped nozzle is required for optimum thrust compared to that required for the lower thrust ramjet sustainer. This is usually achieved via a separate nozzle which is ejected after booster burnout. However, designs such as Meteor feature nozzleless boosters. This offers the advantages of elimination of the hazard to launch aircraft from the ejected boost nozzle debris, simplicity, reliability, and reduced mass and cost[4], although this must be traded against the reduction in performance compared with that provided by a dedicated booster nozzle. In a solid fuel integrated rocket ramjet (SFIRR) the solid propellant is cast along the outer wall of the ramcombustor. In this case fuel injection is through ablation of the propellant by the hot compressed air from the intake(s). An aft mixer may be used to improve combustion efficiency. SFIRRs are preferred over LFRJs for some applications because of the simplicity of the fuel supply but only when the throttling requirements are minimal i.e. when variations in altitude or Mach number are limited. In a ducted rocket a solid fuel gas generator produces a hot fuel-rich gas which is burnt in the ramcombustor with the compressed air supplied by the intake(s). The flow of gas improves the mixing of the fuel and air and increases total pressure recovery. In a Throttleable Ducted Rocket (TDR), also known as a Variable Flow Ducted Rocket (VFDR), a valve allows the gas generator exhaust to be throttled allowing control of the thrust. Unlike a LFRJ solid propellant ramjets cannot flameout. The ducted rocket sits somewhere between the simplicity of the SFRJ and the unlimited throttleability of the LFRJ. The Franco-German company Bayern-Chemie/PROTAC are world leaders in TDR technology and have been developing this form of ramjet propulsion since the 1970s. The first demonstration firing of a ducted rocket with a high energy boron-loaded gas generator was conducted in 1981 while a lightweight TDR suitable for use on the planned Franco-German Anti Navire Supersonique (ANS) supersonic anti-ship missile was tested in 1986. Research and development for BVRAAM applications began in 1990, exploring the problems of asymmetric intake configurations. A lightweight BVRAAM motor demonstrated the critical boost-to-sustain transition in 1998. VFDR technology has been under development in the US by an Atlantic Research (ARC)/Alliant Techsystems (ATK) team since the mid-1980s. In 1997 the ARC/ATK team completed ground tests of a flight weight 180mm diameter VFDR as part of the USAF Air Superiority Missile Technology programme which started in 1996.[5]
[edit] J58
The SR-71's Pratt & Whitney J58 engines act as turbojet-assisted ramjets at highspeeds (Mach 3.2).
[edit] References
1. ^ "A Century of Ramjet Propulsion Technology Evolution", AIAA Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol.20, No.1, January - February 2004 2. ^ "Aerospatiale studies low-cost ramjet", Flight International, 13 - 19 December 1995 3. ^ "Hughes homes in on missile pact", Flight International, 11 - 17 September 1996 4. ^ Procinsky, I.M., McHale, C.A., "Nozzleless Boosters for IntegralRocket-Ramjet Missile Systems, Paper 80-1277, AIAA/SAE/ASME 16th Joint Propulsion Conference, 30th June to 2nd July 1980 5. ^ "Rocket/ramjet power studied for air-launched weapons", Flight International, 10 - 16 February 2004 6. ^ PRELIMINARY SURVEY OF PROPULSION USING CHEMICAL ENERGY STORED IN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE By Lionel V, Baldwin and Perry L. Blackshear
Bendix RIM-8 Talos Hiller Hornet (a ramjet powered helicopter) Leduc experimental aircraft Lockheed D-21 Lockheed X-7 Nord 1500 Griffon Republic XF-103
Ram accelerator Aircraft engines Scramjet Jet Engine Performance Jet aircraft Jetboat Turbofan Turbojet Turboprop Turboshaft Jet engine Spacecraft propulsion Supercharger Turbocharger Gas turbine Bussard ramjet Kurt Schreckling who built practical jet engines for model aircraft Wikibooks: Jet propulsion
Ram accelerator
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search A ram accelerator is a gun that utilizes ramjet or scramjet combustion modes to accelerate a projectile to extremely high speeds. In a normal ramjet, air is compressed for combustion between a spike-shaped ram and an outer casing. In a ram accelerator, a similar shaped ram is fired (often from a conventional gun) into the accelerator barrel, causing compression between the projectile and the barrel's walls. The barrel contains a fuel-air mixture. As the ram compresses the mixture, it is ignited behind it. In a typical ram accelerator design, thin membranes designed to be easily punctured by the ram wall off sections of the barrel. Each section is filled with a different fuelair mixture chosen so that later sections have higher speeds of sound. As such, the ram can be maintained at optimal speeds of mach 35 (relative to the mixture that it
travels through) during its entire acceleration period. Ram accelerators optimized to use supersonic combustion modes can generate even higher velocities due to the ability to combust fuel that is still moving at supersonic speed. The chief advantage of a ram accelerator over a conventional gun is its scalability. In a normal gun, maximum pressure is exerted at the time of the initial charge detonation. The gun must be capable of withstanding the pressure of all of the gas from the reaction, compressed into a small location. As the projectile moves further down the barrel, the amount of acceleration upon the projectile decreases, eventually reaching amounts trivial enough that a longer barrel is no longer justified (see internal ballistics). With a ram accelerator, the projectile is propelled primarily by the reaction of the propellant gasses burning, not the pressure in the barrel behind it. This leads to constant pressure being put both on the gun and the projectile itself. Consequently, far longer barrels are possible, while still delivering a strong constant acceleration to the projectile. Ram accelerators have been proposed as a cheap method to get payloads into space. Due to wind resistance, the projectile still may need to utilize embedded rockets, such as those designed in Project HARP, to achieve orbit. Its main competitors are railguns and coilguns. Ram accelerators are currently used primarily for research into supersonic combustion. The scram cannon science fiction weapon was inspired by ram accelerators.
Internal ballistics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Internal ballistics, a subfield of ballistics, is the study of a projectile's behavior from the time its propellant's igniter is initiated until it exits the gun barrel. The study of internal ballistics is important to designers and users of firearms of all types, from small-bore Olympic rifles and pistols, to high-tech artillery.
Contents
[hide]
1 Ignition o 1.1 Priming methods 1.1.1 External priming 1.1.2 Internal priming o 1.2 Electrical 2 Propellant o 2.1 Black powder o 2.2 Nitrocellulose o 2.3 Double base propellants o 2.4 Solid propellants o 2.5 Load density and consistency 3 Chamber o 3.1 Straight vs bottleneck o 3.2 Aspect ratio and consistency 4 Friction and inertia o 4.1 Static friction and ignition o 4.2 Kinetic friction o 4.3 The role of inertia 5 Pressure o 5.1 Pressure vs distance traveled o 5.2 Peak vs area o 5.3 Propellant burnout o 5.4 Muzzle pressure concerns 6 General concerns o 6.1 Bore diameter and energy transfer o 6.2 Ratio of propellant to projectile mass o 6.3 Accuracy and bore characteristics o 6.4 Autoloading firearms 6.4.1 Blowback firearms 6.4.2 Gas-operated firearms 6.4.3 Recoil-operated firearms 7 References 8 See also
[edit] Ignition
[edit] Priming methods
The first step to firing a firearm of any sort is igniting the propellant. The earliest firearms were cannons, which were simple closed tubes. There was a small aperture, the "touchhole", drilled in the closed end of the tube, leading down to the main powder charge. This hole was filled with finely ground powder, which was then ignited with a hot ember or torch. With the advent of hand-held firearms, this became an undesirable way of firing a gun. Holding a burning stick, while trying to carefully pour a charge of black powder down a barrel, is dangerous, and trying to hold the gun with one hand while simultaneously aiming at the target and looking for the touchhole was not conducive to any degree of accuracy.
"cock". The cock rotated through about a 90 degree arc, and was held in the tensioned, or "cocked" position by a trigger. Usually, flintlocks would lock the cock in two positions. The "half-cock" position held the cock halfway back, and used a deep notch, so that pulling the trigger would not release the cock. This was a safety position, used when loading, and when storing or carrying a loaded flintlock. The "full-cock" position held the cock all the way back, and was the position from which the gun was fired. The "frizzen" was the other half of the flintlock ignition system. It served as both a flashpan cover, and a steel striking surface for the flint. The frizzen was hinged, and spring-loaded, so that it would lock in the open or closed position. When closed, the striking surface was positioned so that the flint would strike at the proper angle to generate a spark. The striking flint would also open the frizzen, exposing the flashpan to the spark. The flintlock mechanism was simpler, and stronger than the wheel-lock, and the flint and steel provided a good, reliable source of ignition. The flintlock remained in military service for over 200 years, and flintlocks are still made today for historical re-enactments, and for hunters who enjoy the additional challenge that the flintlock provides. Caplock: The next major leap in ignition technology was the invention of the chemical primer, or "cap", and the mechanism which used it, called the "caplock". The caplock appeared just before the American Civil War, and was quickly adopted by both sides as it was even simpler and more reliable than the flintlock. The main reason the caplock was so quickly adopted was its similarity to the flintlock. The flashpan and frizzen were removed, and replaced by a "nipple" which the cap fit onto. The cock was replaced by a "hammer", which also had half-cock and full-cock positions for the same reasons. When fired, the hammer would hit the cap, crushing it onto the nipple. The percussion cap was a thin metal cup that had in it, a small quantity of pressure-sensitive explosive. When crushed, the explosive would detonate, sending a stream of hot gas down a hole in the nipple, and into the touchhole of the gun. In the process of firing, the cap generally split open, and would fall off, when the hammer was moved to half-cock position for loading. The caplock system worked well, and is still the preferred method of ignition for hunters and recreational shooters who use muzzle-loading arms.
one set of chemical compounds that have been used successfully, see U.S. Patent 1880235 , a 1932 Remington Arms patent by James E. Burns.) In the dry state, the primer within the rim becomes impact-sensitive. When the rim is then crushed by the hammer or firing pin, the primer detonates and ignites the powder charge. Rimfire cartridges are single-use after firing, they cannot practically be reloaded. Also, since the rim must be thin enough to be easily crushed, the pressures generated in the case are limited by the strength of this thin rim. Rimfire cartridges were previously available in calibers up to .44, but all except the small .22 caliber rounds died out. The .22 Long Rifle (which is also fired in pistols) is the most popular recreational caliber, because it is inexpensive, quiet, and has very low recoil. The most inexpensive brands can be bought for less than US$0.02 per round in boxes of 500, and even Olympic class ammunition is around US$0.20 per round. While the rimfire priming method is limited due to the thin cases required, it has enjoyed a few resurgences in the recent past. First was Winchester's .22 Magnum Rimfire, or .22 WMR, in the 1950s, followed in 1970 Remington's short lived 5 mm Magnum Rimfire, based on Winchester's magnum case. In 2002 Hornady introduced a new .17 caliber cartridge based on the .22 WMR, the .17 HMR. The .17 HMR is essentially a .22 WMR cartridge necked down to accept a .17 caliber bullet, and is used as a flat-shooting, light duty varmint round. The .17 HMR was followed a year later by the Hornady's .17 Mach 2, or .17 HM2, which is based on a slightly lengthened and necked down .22 Long Rifle cartridge. Both of the .17 caliber rimfires have had widespread support from firearms makers, and while the high-tech, high velocity .17 caliber jacketed bullets make the .17 Rimfire cartridges quite a bit more expensive than the .22 caliber versions, they are still far less expensive than comparable centerfire cartridges. Berdan Primer: The remaining types of priming, Berdan and Boxer, are both considered "centerfire", to differentiate them from the rimfire rounds. Centerfire priming methods are interchangeable; the same firearm can fire both Berdan- and Boxer-primed rounds. Berdan primers are named after their American inventor, Hiram Berdan of New York who invented his first variation of the Berdan primer and patented it on March 20, 1866, in U.S. Patent 53388 . A small copper cylinder formed the shell of the cartridge, and the primer cap was pressed into the outside end of the cartridge opposite the bullet from the outside. In the end of the cartridge beneath the primer cap was a single vent-hole, as well as a small "teat-like projection" or point fashioned from the case, later to be known as an anvil, upon which to provide a hard surface behind the primer cap such that the firing pin would have a hard surface against which to crush the primer and ignite the propellant. This system worked well, allowing the option of installing a cap just before use of the propellant-loaded cartridge, as well as permitting re-loading the cartridge for re-use. Difficulties arose in practice because pressing in the cap from the outside tended to cause a swelling of the copper cartridge shell, preventing the reliable seating of the cartridge in the chamber of the firearm. Berdan's solution was to change to brass shells, and to further modify the process of installing the primer cap into the cartridge, as noted in his second Berdan Primer patent of September 29, 1869, in U.S. Patent 82587 . Berdan primers have remained essentially the same functionally to the present day.
Berdan primers are similar to the caps used in the caplock system being small metal cups, with pressure-sensitive explosive in them. Modern-day Berdan primers are pressed into the primer "pocket" of a Berdan-type cartridge case, where they fit slightly below, flush with the base of the case. Inside the primer pocket is a small bump, the "anvil", that rests against the center of the cup, and two small holes that allow flash from the primer to reach the interior of the case. Berdan cases are reusable, although the process is rather involved. The used primer must be removed, usually by hydraulic pressure, or a lever that pulls the primer out of the bottom. A new primer is carefully seated against the anvil, and then gunpowder and a bullet are added. Berdan priming is used by nearly all militaries and most civilian manufacturers, with the exception of those in the USA. Boxer Primers: Meanwhile, Edward M. Boxer, of the Royal Arsenal in Woolwich, England was working on a similar primer cap design for cartridges, patenting it in England on October 13, 1866, and subsequently receiving a U.S. patent for his design on June 29, 1869, in U.S. Patent 91,818 . Boxer primers are similar to Berdan primers with one major change the location of the anvil. In a Boxer primer, the anvil is a separate piece that sits in the primer cup. Because of this, the primer pocket has the flash-hole, centered. This makes little or no difference to the performance of the round, but it makes fired primers vastly easier to remove for re-loading. A thin metal rod is pushed through the mouth of the case, and it pushes the primer out. A new primer, anvil included, is then pressed into the case. Since the primer and anvil are sold as one part, the anvil depth must be correct for the primer that is being inserted, so that the primer does not ignite during loading (although priming is done as the first step, before the powder is added). This is the main reason why Boxer priming is still popular in the USA, as there are a large number of shooters who reload their ammunition. Boxer-primed ammunition is slightly more complex to manufacture, since the primer is in two parts, but the slight increase in initial cost is often more than equalized by the decreased cost of firing reloaded rounds, at least for users intending to reload rounds. However, in much military-surplus ammunition, Berdan-primed ammunition is often found to be more common, having been both cheaper and faster to produce for filling very-large orders intended for military use. Military-surplus Berdan-primed ammunition is also often corrosive or slightly-corrosive, whereas Boxer-primed ammunition is often non-corrosive, although assuming corrosive or non-corrosive characteristics on the basis of whether Berdan or Boxer primed is never fool-proof. Sizes Of Primers: Primers come in different sizes, based on the application. The types/sizes of primers are: For both pistol and rifle: Small and Large, in Standard and Magnum versions. .209 primers for shotgun shells and modern inline muzzleloaders. .50 BMG primers, used for the .50 Browning Machine Gun cartridge and derivatives Specialty primers for extremely small centerfire cases, or for large cannon cartridges
Examples of uses:
.38 Special, small pistol standard .357 Magnum, small pistol magnum .45 ACP, large pistol standard .223 Remington, small rifle standard .308 Winchester, large rifle standard .270 WSM, large rifle magnum
The primer size is based on the primer pocket of the cartridge, with standard types available in large or small diameters. The primer explosive charge is based on the amount of ignition required by the cartridge design; a standard primer would be use for smaller charges or faster burning powders, while a magnum primer would be used for larger charges or slower burning powders. The magnum primers increase the impulse power of powder, by supplying a hotter and stronger spark. The main differences between pistol and rifle primers are the amount of force required to ignite the primer and the amount of spark produced. The primary difference between pistol and rifle primers is the thickness of the primer's case; pistol primers are thinner, softer, and easier to ignite, while rifle primers are thicker, stronger, and require a harder hit from the firing pin. Despite the names pistol and rifle, the primer used depends on the cartridge, not the firearm; high pressure pistol cartridges like the .221 Fireball and .454 Casull use rifle primers, while low pressure cartridges like traditional revolver cartridges commonly used in lever action rifles would still be loaded with pistol primers.
[edit] Electrical
A growing number of civilian arms are switching to electrical triggers. These use an electrical charge, powered by a battery, to detonate the primer and decrease the time between pulling the trigger and ignition of the charge. The control circuitry attendant with electrical triggers also offers opportunities for biometric safety locks, remote trigger mountings, and tele-operation of the weapon.
[edit] Propellant
[edit] Black powder
Black powder is a mix of sulphur, charcoal, and potassium nitrate or sodium nitrate. Unlike smokeless propellants, it acts more like an explosive since its burn rate is not affected by pressure. However, it is a very poor explosive because it has a very slow decomposition rate, and therefore a very low brisance.
[edit] Nitrocellulose
Nitrocellulose is formed by the action of nitric acid on cellulose fibers. It is a highly combustible plastic that deflagrates rapidly, when heat is applied. It also burns very cleanly, burning almost entirely to gaseous components at high temperatures. The burning rate of nitrocellulose is dependent upon the pressure a pile of uncontained nitrocellulose will burn slowly, with a high, bright flame, but when placed in a high
strength, sealed container, the same material will burn very quickly, bursting the container. Since nitrocellulose is a plastic, it can be formed into many shapes of gunpowder, such as cylinders, tubes, balls, and flakes. The size and shape of the powder grains can increase or decrease the relative surface area, and change the burn rate significantly. Additives and coatings can be added to the powder to further modify the burn rate. Normally, very fast powders are used for low-velocity pistols and shotguns, medium-rate powders for magnum pistols and light rifle rounds, and slow powders for large-bore heavy rifle rounds.[1]
Cased ammunition serves as a heat sink to both carry heat away from the chamber after firing, and to cool the chamber when chambered, reducing the risk of cook off.
containing the hot high pressure gas. That reduces its temperature and holds down the burn rate which is the generator of pressure. This acts as a kind of control as the propellant keeps burning down two thirds or more of the barrel. With a low, non packed charge, the explosion of the primer swirls the propellant particles around in its hot gasses and ignites all of them simultaneously rather than progressively. Because the mass of propellant is so low, the same heat input from the primer heats them to a higher initial temperature and so their first stage burn is at a higher rate. Because there is only a small amount of propellant the pressure is not at first high enough to start the bullet moving quickly and so there is time for the propellant to burn completely at high temperature and pressure while it is still in a small space. It is easy to see that this could create the circumstances for detonation as the increase of volume fights to control the temperature and burn rate.
[edit] Chamber
[edit] Straight vs bottleneck
Straight walled cases were the standard from the beginnings of cartridge arms. With the low burning speed of black powder, the best efficiency was achieved with large, heavy bullets, so the bullet was the largest practical diameter. The large diameter allowed a short, stable bullet with high weight, and the maximum practical bore volume to extract the most energy possible in a given length barrel. There were a few cartridges that had long, shallow tapers, but these were generally an attempt to use an existing cartridge to fire a smaller bullet with a higher velocity and lower recoil. With the advent of smokeless powders, it was possible to generate far higher velocities by using a slow smokeless powder in a large volume case, pushing a small, light bullet. The .30-30 Winchester was one of the first rounds to be designed to use smokeless powder, and it has a distinct shoulder that closely resembles modern cartridges, even though it dates back to the 1890s. Modern cases have shorter necks, sharper shoulder angles, and a rimless design which give better efficiency and feeding, but the .30-30 cartridge and the Winchester model 1894 rifle still account for more game in North America than any other rifle and cartridge combination.
fatter cases. The current 7.62 x 51 mm NATO case replacing the longer .30-06 Springfield is a good example, as is the new 6.5 Grendel cartridge designed to increase the performance of the AR-15 family of rifles and carbines.
[edit] Pressure
This is a graph of a simulation of the 5.56 mm NATO round, being fired from a 20inch barrel. The horizontal axis represents time, the vertical axis represents pressure (green line), bullet travel (red line), and bullet velocity (light blue line). The values shown at top are peak values Energy is imparted to the bullet in a firearm by the pressure of the gases produced by the burning gunpowder. While it seems to casual observers that a higher peak pressures should produce higher velocities, that is not always the case, since measures of peak pressure capture only a small fraction of the time the bullet is accelerating. To achieve maximum performance, the entire duration of the bullet's travel through the barrel must be considered. There are hundreds of powders in existence because powders must be carefully matched to the case volume, case dimensions, bullet dimensions, bullet weight, barrel length, and special bullet features such as moly coating or driving bands. For example, long, heavy bullets are required to be seated so deep in the case that they displace powder, while at the same time requiring a slower powder which gives their greater mass more time to move down the barrel. If the bullet is banded or coated with a lubricant like moly, faster powders can be used as the bullet moves faster due to decreased friction with the barrel. All of these variables must be accommodated within the maximum pressure levels set for the platform. Finding the optimum combination is largely a trial and error process, and may take years to complete. New cartridges with significantly new internal ballistics often bring forth new powders engineered to maximize performance; examples of this are Accurate Arms 2230, designed for use in the .223 Remington, and #9, designed for use in magnum pistol cartridges[1][2].
This graph shows different pressure curves for powders with different burn rates. The leftmost graph is the same as the large graph above. The middle graph shows a powder with a 25% faster burn rate, and the rightmost graph shows a powder with a 20% slower burn rate. Using powder that is too fast creates a destructive pressure spike that usually has a very short duration. Using powder that is too slow produces poor energy and leaves a lot of unburned powder.
To some degree, this can be negated by the use of retardant coatings on the surface of the powder, which slows the initial burn rate further, and flattens out the rate of change. Ball powders are generally formulated as slow pistol powders, or fast rifle powders. Flake powders are in the form of flat, round flakes which have a very high surface-area-to-volume ratio. Flake powders have a nearly constant rate of burn, and are usually formulated as fast pistol or shotgun powders. The last common shape is an extruded powder, which is in the form of a cylinder, sometimes hollow. Extruded powders generally have a lower ratio of nitroglycerin to nitrocellulose, and are often progressive burning that is, they burn at a faster rate as they burn. Extruded powders are generally medium to slow rifle powders.
diameter bullets for greater efficiency in short barrels, and tolerate the long-range velocity loss, since handguns are seldom used for long-range shooting. Handguns that are used for long-range shooting are generally closer to shortened rifles than other handguns.
Another system, polygonal rifling, gives the bore a polygonal cross section. Polygonal rifling is not very common, used by only a few European manufacturers. The companies that use polygonal rifling claim greater accuracy, lower friction, and less lead and/or copper buildup in the barrel. Traditional land and groove rifling is used in most competition firearms, however, so the advantages of polygonal rifling are unproven. There are three common ways of rifling a barrel: The most basic is to use a single point cutter, drawn down the bore by a machine that carefully controls the rotation of the cutting head relative to the barrel. This is the slowest process, but as it requires the simplest equipment, it is often used by custom gunsmiths, and can result in superbly accurate barrels. The next method is button rifling. This method uses a die with a negative image of the rifling cut on it. This die is drawn down the barrel while carefully rotated, and it swages the inside of the barrel. This "cuts" all the grooves at once (it does not really cut metal), and so is faster than cut rifling. Detractors claim that the process leaves considerable residual stress in the barrel, but world records have been set with button-rifled barrels, so again there is no clear advantage. The last method used is hammer forging. In this process, a slightly undersized, bored barrel is placed around a mandrel that contains a negative image of the entire length of the rifled barrel. The barrel and mandrel are rotated and hammered by power hammers, which forms the inside of the barrel all at once. This is the fastest (and in the long run, cheapest) method of making a barrel, but the equipment is prohibitively expensive for all, but the largest, gun makers. Hammer-forged barrels are strictly mass-produced, so they are generally not capable of top accuracy as produced, but with some careful hand work, they can be made to shoot far better than most shooters are capable of.
The purpose of the barrel is to provide a consistent seal, allowing the bullet to accelerate to a consistent velocity. It must also impart the right spin, and release the bullet consistently, perfectly concentric to the bore. The residual pressure in the bore must be released symmetrically, so that no side of the bullet receives any more or less push than the rest. The muzzle of the barrel is the most critical part, since that is the part that controls the release of the bullet. Some rimfires and airguns actually have a slight constriction, called a choke, in the barrel at the muzzle. This guarantees that the bullet is held securely just before release. To keep a good seal, the bore must be a very precise, constant diameter, or have a slight decrease in diameter from breech to muzzle. Any increase in bore diameter will allow the bullet to shift. This can cause gas to leak past the bullet, affecting the velocity, or cause the bullet to tip, so that it is no longer perfectly coaxial with the bore. High quality barrels are lapped to remove any constrictions in the bore which will cause a change in diameter. The lapping process uses a lead "slug" that is slightly larger than the bore and covered in fine abrasive compound to cut out the constrictions. The slug is passed from breech
to muzzle, so that as it encounters constrictions, it cuts them away, and does no cutting on areas that are larger than the constriction. Many passes are made, and as the bore becomes more uniform, finer grades of abrasive compound are used. The final result is a barrel that is mirror-smooth, and with a consistent or slightly-tapering bore. The hand-lapping technique uses a wooden or soft metal rod to pull or push the slug through the bore, while the newer fire-lapping technique uses specially-loaded, lowpower cartridges to push abrasive-covered soft-lead bullets down the barrel. Another issue that has an effect on the barrel's hold on the bullet is the rifling. When the bullet is fired, it is forced into the rifling, which cuts or "engraves" the surface of the bullet. If the rifling is a constant twist, then the rifling rides in the grooves engraved in the bullet, and everything is secure and sealed. If the rifling has a decreasing twist, then the changing angle of the rifling in the engraved grooves of the bullet causes the rifling to become narrower than the grooves. This allows gas to blow by, and loosens the hold of the bullet on the barrel. An increasing twist, however, will make the rifling become wider than the grooves in the bullet, maintaining the seal. When a rifled-barrel blank is selected for a gun, careful measurement of the inevitable variations in manufacture can determine if the rifling twist varies, and put the highertwist end at the muzzle. The muzzle of the barrel is the last thing to touch the bullet before it goes into ballistic flight, and as such has the greatest potential to disrupt the bullet's flight. The muzzle must allow the gas to escape the barrel symmetrically; any asymmetry will cause an uneven pressure on the base of the bullet, which will disrupt its flight. The muzzle end of the barrel is called the "crown", and it is usually either beveled or recessed to protect it from bumps or scratches that might affect accuracy. A sign of a good crown will be a symmetric, star-shaped pattern on the muzzle end of the barrel, formed by soot deposited, as the powder gases escape the barrel. If the star is uneven, then it is a sign of an uneven crown, and an inaccurate barrel. Before the barrel can release the bullet in a consistent manner, it must grip the bullet in a consistent manner. The part of the barrel between where the bullet exits the cartridge, and engages the rifling, is called the "throat", and the length of the throat is the "freebore". In some firearms, the freebore is all but nonexistent the act of chambering the cartridge forces the bullet into the rifling. This is common in lowpowered rimfire target rifles. The placement of the bullet in the rifling ensures that the transition between cartridge, and rifling, is quick and stable. The downside is that the cartridge is firmly held in place, and attempting to extract the unfired round can be difficult, to the point of even pulling the bullet from the cartridge in extreme cases. With high-powered cartridges, there is an additional disadvantage to a short freebore. A significant amount of force is required to engrave the bullet, and this additional resistance can raise the pressure in the chamber by quite a bit. To mitigate this effect, higher-powered rifles tend to have more freebore, so that the bullet is allowed to gain some momentum, and the chamber pressure is allowed to drop slightly, before the bullet engages the rifling. The downside is that the bullet hits the rifling when already moving, and any slight misalignment can cause the bullet to tip, as it engages the rifling. This will, in turn, mean that the bullet does not exit the barrel coaxially. The amount of freebore is a function of both the barrel and the cartridge. The manufacturer or gunsmith who cuts the chamber will determine the amount of space
between the cartridge case mouth and the rifling. Setting the bullet further forward or back in the cartridge can decrease or increase the amount of freebore, but only within a small range. Careful testing by the ammunition loader can optimize the amount of freebore to maximize accuracy, while keeping the peak pressure within limits.
Automatic firearms will, if the trigger remains depressed, also fire the new round, upon finishing the cycle. There are a number of different mechanisms to harness the energy required, and they vary in complexity and suitability for different purposes. One issue that applies to all autoloading mechanisms is the mass of the reciprocating components. In all cases, the firing energy is harnessed to open the mechanism, and a spring or springs are used to close the mechanism. The spring must have sufficient energy to close the action, and perform all tasks that are involved in that, but the spring itself does very little to keep the action closed. The energy that powers the action is only available for the time it takes for the projectile to leave the barrel, or less. This energy is converted to kinetic energy in the reciprocating parts, and the amount of energy required to propel those parts to the required velocity, is what is needed for reliable operation with a given powder, bullet, and cartridge combination. Since changing the mass of the firearm parts is out of the scope of the average user (this amounts to a redesign of the firearm in most cases), it is up to the user to select ammunition that will allow the firearm to function.
to be one of the more delicate parts of most firearms designs, this helps increase reliability under extreme conditions. Blowback actions are very simple, and inexpensive to build. They are also generally very reliable. Most semi-automatic rimfires, and many submachine guns, are blowback actions. The disadvantage of the blowback action is the requirement that the bolt be so much heavier than the bullet. This is why its use is generally restricted to handguns in calibers of 9 mm Parabellum or smaller, and in carbines and submachine guns to calibers of .45 ACP and smaller. There are a number of actions that are, in essence, blowback designs, but use a variety of approaches to reduce the velocity of the bolt, so that a combination of heavier bullets and lighter bolts may be used. These are called "delayed blowback actions". Techniques involve using: a separate Blish lock mechanism; a piston that fills with powder gas to push the bolt closed; and a two-part cammed-bolt that uses the first bit of the cartridges movement to move the main body of the bolt back a large distance. See roller-delayed blowback.
These designs allow slightly higher-powered cartridges to be used with no additional modifications. The cammed-bolt design has been used with high-powered rifle cartridges with some success. However, it also requires the addition of a fluted chamber to reduce the Blish-lock effect, which would otherwise blow the back out of the cartridge.
area, and cause malfunctions. The gas tap is also subject to fouling from lead-buildup in guns that can fire non-jacketed bullets. A case in point is the original M-16 rifle, which is a gas operated firearm. It was designed to use an IMR-type powder, which had certain burn characteristics. The U.S. military, against the advice of the designer, switched to a ball-type powder, with a different burn rate which yielded higher velocities. This also altered the pressure at the gas tap enough to increase the bolt velocity enough to tear apart cartridges, cause misfeeds, and generally turn what was a reliable rifle into a nightmare situation. Gas action firearms require fairly high pressures to operate, and so are generally found in high-powered hunting or military rifles, and magnum pistols.
powder and a much higher peak pressure, which is usually not possible given the pressure constraints of the cartridge. Because of this it is rare to find a short recoil gun that can handle a minimum bullet mass that is less than half the maximum mass, and most have a much smaller range of weights.
[edit] References
1. ^ Powder Burnrate Chart 2. ^ http://www.cabelas.com/story123/boddington_short_mag/10201/The+Short+Mag+Revolution.shtml The Short Mag Revolution 3. ^ Barrett semi-automatic .50 caliber short-action sniper rifle