SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
SURF is an acronym for Scaled-Unified-Reactive-Front, invented by R. Menikoff and S. Shaw. What follows is a brief synopsis of this model as used for the validation study discussed here. For more details see the xrage user manual and the references cited there.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
PAGOSA1 has several different burn models used to model high explosive detonation. Two of these, Multi-Shock Forest Fire and Surf, are capable of modeling shock initiation. Accurately calculating shock initiation of a high explosive is important because it is a mechanism for detonation in many accident scenarios (i.e. fragment impact). Comparing the models to pop-plot data give confidence that the models are accurately calculating detonation or lack thereof. To compare the performance of these models, pop-plots2 were created from simulations where one two cm block of PBX 9502 collides with another block of PBX 9502.
High explosives are energetic materials that release their chemical energy in a short interval of time. They are able to generate extreme heat and pressure by a shock driven chemical decomposition reaction, which makes them valuable tools that must be understood. This study investigated the accuracy and performance of two Los Alamos National Laboratory hydrodynamic codes, which are used to determine the behavior of explosives within a variety of systems: xRAGE which utilizes an Eulerian mesh, and FLAG with utilizes a Lagrangian mesh. Various programmed and reactive burn models within both codes were tested using a copper cylinder expansion test. The test was based on a recent experimental setup which contained the plastic bonded explosive PBX 9404. Detonation velocity versus time curves for this explosive were obtained using Photon Doppler Velocimetry (PDV). The modeled results from each of the burn models tested were then compared to one another and to the experimental results. This study validate
ABSTRACT The results of an Arrhenius–Wescott–Stewart–Davis (AWSD) reactive flow calibration for the HMX‐based high explosive LX‐14 are presented. The parameters in the AWSD model are calibrated to experimental thermodynamic and gas gun data and to computational results from thermochemical calculations. There is no experimental rate stick data available for LX‐14; therefore, scaled experimental results from other PBX‐based high explosives are used in the calibration to fill this gap in data. Strong agreement is observed between the calibrated AWSD model and experimental data for LX‐14, including validation data that were not used in the calibration procedure. The developed model more accurately describes experimental shock‐to‐detonation results compared to several other reactive flow models for LX‐14 from the literature. The presented results illustrate that the AWSD model is capable of quantitatively describing the reactive burn of LX‐14.
A velocity spectrum of neutral sputtered particles as well as a low resolution mass spectrum of sputtered molecular ions was measured for 4.74 MeV F-19(+2) incident of UF4. The velocity spectrum is dramatically different from spectra taken with low energy (keV) bombarding ions, and is shown to be consistent with a hot plasma of atoms in thermal equilibrium inside the target. A thermalized ion explosion model is proposed for high energy sputtering which is expected to describe track formation in dielectric materials. The model is shown to be consistent with the observed total sputtering yield and the dependence of the yield on the primary ionization rate of the incident ion.
Not Available
Equations of state (EOSs) are a key component in running hydrodynamic simulations as they relate the thermodynamic states for the material. The Davis reactants EOS is commonly used for modeling high explosives (HEs), and the EOS model parameters are calibrated using material specific data. The calibrations are often performed with uncertainty quantification via Bayesian inference to account for uncertainty in the data and generate ensembles of likely parameters. However, there are relatively few HE data sets to use for calibration and many are historical and lack error information. In this work, we simultaneously calibrate the Davis reactants EOS model parameters and unknown data error terms for the high explosive PBX 9501. To quantify the uncertainty in the models and the data, we use a Bayesian framework for the calibration and compute the hierarchical Bayesian posterior distribution with both a posteriori maximization approach and Markov Chain Monte Carlo. In general, we find that, given our assumptions, the two approaches result in similar calibrated parameters, posterior covariance matrices, and insights about the parameters but that the posterior maximization requires far less computational resources.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Reactive burn models represent a significant leap in high explosive (HE) modeling capability. The first generation of engineering models of HE detonation are called programmed burn models and they are largely based on the distance between a prescribed detonation point and each zone in a simulation. There have been many advancements to programmed burn models over the years and when the assumptions upon which they are based are met, a properly tuned programmed burn model can be highly accurate but if any of their assumptions is not met, as is the case for corner turning or weakly initiated HE burn, they will give the wrong answer. Reactive burn models represent an entirely new way of modeling HE burn. They use the local conditions of a zone – e.g. temperature, pressure or density – as calculated by a hydrocode to determine if and when the zone is going to detonate and if so, how rapidly. This difference opens up an entirely new set of capabilities for HE modeling. It makes it possible to accurately and predictively model phenomena like the effect of confinement and the formation of dead zones. Reactive burn models have seen sustained development effort at LANL for at least the last decade but several recent developments make it timely to transition reactive burn models from a research topic to a production tool. The main goal of this milestone is to facilitate and accelerate the adoption of reactive burn as a commonly available modeling option, with recommendations on the resolution that will be required and uncertainties associated with their modeling choices. To achieve this, we have performed verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification (UQ) assessments of AWSD and SURF/SURFplus in xRage and FLAG on a variety of different problems.
A specialized hydrodynamic simulation code has been developed and verified for the simulation of one-dimensional unsteady problems involving the detonation and deflagration of high explosives. To model all the relevant physical processes in these problems, a code is required to simulate compressible hydrodynamics, unsteady thermal conduction, and chemical reactions with complex rate laws. Several verification exercises are presented which test the implementation of these capabilities. The code also requires models for physics processes such as equations of state and conductivity for pure materials and mixtures as well as rate laws for chemical reactions. Additional verification tests are required to ensure that these models are implemented correctly. Though this code is limited in the types of problems it can simulate, its computationally efficient formulation allows it to be used in calibration studies for reactive burn models for high explosives. Furthermore, this study demonstrates how a series of verification tests can be used to ensure that the various physics processes needed to simulate complex phenomenon can be tested to ensure that they are correctly implemented.
At the most elementary level, the high explosive model in xRage (or many other hydro codes) computes the amount of material that changes from a high explosive reactant to a high explosive product during a time step and accounts for the energy added to the flow by this reaction. The actual chemical reactions that occur during this conversion are not modeled. These processes are very complicated and involve levels of spatial and temporal resolution that are generally not practical for an application code. They would also require a state variable representation that includes all of the chemical species that are produced by the reaction and account for multiple stage chemical reactions. Instead the explosive models we generally use are phenomenological and try to represent the most important physics that drive the explosive wave in a very simplified way. These models generally have a number of tunable parameters that must be calibrated to experiment.
Fragmentation modeling showing: development of critical modeling capability for safety; demonstration of crack opening of high explosives; modeling of fragmentation of brittle material; and emphasis on the important of modeling fragments for safety.
Several reactive flow modeling capabilities are studied and applied to physics problems of interest in the PAGOSA hydrocode with an emphasis on validation. The Davis equation of state and the Arrhenius shock temperature dependent WSD (AWSD) reactive flow model have been implemented by the author in PAGOSA over the last year. These high-explosive modeling options along with the previously existing HE-JWL equation of state and the SURF/SURFplus reactive flow models are discussed, exercised and compared. Validation of the models analyze numerical results against experimental data from cylinder tests, two-stage gas gun experiments and proton radiography (pRad) experiments. Applications of the modeling options are explored involving both HMX based PBX 9501 and TATB based PBX 9502. The effect of mesh size is considered for prediction of phenomena such as corner turning and dead zones, and the relative code performance of the modeling options is discussed.
The CTH multiphysics hydrocode, which is used for a wide range of important calculations, has undertaken in recent years to overhaul its software quality and testing processes. A key part of this effort entailed building a new, robust V&V test suite made up of traditional hydrocode verification problems, such as those listed in the ASC Tri-Lab Test Suite and the Enhanced Tri-Lab Test Suite, as well as validation problems for some of CTHs most frequently used equations of state, materials models, and other key capabilities. Substantial progress towards this goal was made in FY19. In FY20, this test suite has been expanded to include verification and validation tests of the Sesame and JWL equation of state models as well as the Mader verification problem from the Tri-Lab Test Suite and the Blake verification problem - a linear elastic analog to the Hunter problem from the Enhanced Tri-Lab Test Suite. This report documents CTH performance on the new test suite problems. Verification test results are compared to analytic solutions and, for most tests, convergence results are presented. Validation test results are compared to experimental data and mesh refinement studies are included. CTH performs well overall on the new test problems. Convergence rates for the Blake and Mader problems are comparable to those for similar ASC codes. The JWL and Sesame verification tests show good agreement with analytic solutions. Likewise, CTH simulation results show good agreement with experimental validation data for the Sesame and JWL equations of state for the materials tested. Future V&V work will focus on adding tests for other key capabilities like fracture and high explosive models.
This series of experiments is exploring new frontiers in explosives science, technology, and engineering. The extensive list of experiment shots is necessary to sort out what works and what does not work in searching for an environment that supports anisotropic detonation properties in explosives. These experiments have been designed to serve as an economical and efficient first-cut determination as to whether there is any validity to an explosive analog to a series circuit of electrical diodes. That is, the detonation moves more easily in the “forward” direction than the “backward” direction. The basic data gleaned from these experiments will be used to design experiments that will be shot in the 10 kg tank at the High Explosives Application Facility (HEAF) at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. In turn, those shots that will be heavy in diagostics and instrumentation, providing basic data that will be used by simulation code developers in creating high explosive models that account for air gap and oblique explosive surfaces undergoing sympathetic detonation.
Experiments involving the coupling of metal and high explosives (HE) are of notable defense-related interest, and we seek to refine the uncertainty quantification associated with models of such experiments. In particular, our focus is on how uncertainty related to the metal constitutive model challenges our ability to infer high explosive model parameters when analyzing focused science experiments. We consider three focused experiments involving an HE accelerating metal: small plate tests with tantalum/LX-14 and tantalum/LX-17 pairings as well as a tantalum/LX-17 cylinder test. For all three models, we perform sensitivity analysis to ascertain the influence of metal strength on the coupled experimental response. Moreover, we calibrate each model in a Bayesian setting and study the quantification of metal strength on the inference of the HE parameters. Based on our results, we offer guidance for future metal/HE experiments.