Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-01T23:26:09.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grain Boundary Engineering of Copper Shaped-Charge Liners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

Kerri J.M. Blobaum ,
James S. Stölken  and
Mukul Kumar
Kerri J.M. Blobaum
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550
James S. Stölken
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550
Mukul Kumar
Affiliation:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550
Get access

Summary

Grain boundary engineering technology has been successfully transferred from rolling and forging to back-extrusion, and back- extruded copper shaped-charge liners with engineered microstructures have been produced. The grain-boundary engineered SCLs have special boundary fractions of 0.60 and 0.66, compared to 0.48 in a conventionally processed SCL. It is hoped that these engineered SCLs will perform better through a combination of a delayed onset of plastic instability and an improved resistance to void nucleation and coalescence.

Previous work demonstrates that SCL performance is affected by microstructure, and there is significant evidence which shows that microstructure influences both the fracture and constitutive responses of a material. For SCLs, constitutive properties which affect both the strength and stability of a material are important to performance. In the work described here, the focus is on improving stability properties such as strain-hardening rate and strain-rate sensitivity through grain boundary engineering.

Initial mechanical tests of grain boundary engineered copper indicate that its yield strength is nearly the same as conventionally processed material, even though the engineered sample has a larger grain size. Yield strength certainly affects the strength of an SCL, but its effect on stability, in terms of delaying the onset of plastic instability in a jet, is still under investigation. Although we can measure constitutive properties such as yield strength and strain to failure in the laboratory, the true effects of grain boundary engineering on SCL performance can only be measured in actual tests of the liners. Therefore, conventionally processed and grain boundary engineered SCLs will be fielded in real shaped-charges.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 819: Symposia N/P – Interfacial Engineering for Optimized Properties III , 2004 , N3.27
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Duffy, M. L. and Golaski, S. K., U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory Technical Report, No. BRL-TR-2800 (1987).Google Scholar
2. Chan, D. K., Lassila, D. H., King, W. E., and Baker, E. L., in Fracture-instability dynamics, scaling and brittle/ductile behavior, ed. by Selinger, R. L. B. Blumberg, Mecholsky, J. J., Carlsson, A. E., and Fuller, E. R. Jr., (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 409, Pittsburgh, PA, 1996), p. 195.Google Scholar
3. Lassila, D. H., Baker, E. L., Chan, D. K., King, W. E., and Schwartz, A. J., Proc. 16th Int'l Ballistics Symposium, 1996, p. 31.Google Scholar
4. Winer, K., Shaw, L., Muelder, S., Breithaupt, D., and Baum, D., Propell. Explos. Pyrot. 18, 345 (1993).Google Scholar
5. Dave, V. R., Cola, M. J., Kumar, M., Schwartz, A. J., and Hussen, G. N. A., Weld. J. 83, 1S (2004).Google Scholar
6. Schwartz, A. J., Kumar, M., and Lassila, D. H., accepted for publication in Metall. Trans. A (2004).Google Scholar
7. Field, D. P. and Adams, B. L., Acta Metall. Mater. 40, 1145 (1992).Google Scholar
8. Don, J. and Majumdar, S., Acta Metall. 34, 961 (1986).Google Scholar
9. Watanabe, T. and Tsurekawa, S., Acta Mater. 47, 4171 (1999).Google Scholar
10. Palumbo, G., United States Patent 5702543 (1997).Google Scholar
11. Palumbo, G., United States Patent 5817193 (1998).Google Scholar
12. Schwartz, A. J., Kumar, M., and King, W. E., in Interfacial engineering for optimized properties II, ed. by Carter, C.B., Hall, E.L., Nutt, S.R., and Briant, C.L. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc., 586, Pittsburgh, PA, 2000) pp. 3–14.Google Scholar
13. Kumar, M., Schwartz, A. J., and King, W. E., Acta Mater. 50, 2599 (2002).Google Scholar
14. Washizu, K., Variational methods in elasticity and plasticity (Pergamon, New York, 1968).Google Scholar
15. ASTM Standards E 112 and E 1181.Google Scholar
16. Kumar, M., Blobaum, K.J.M., Stölken, J.S., unpublished research.Google Scholar