Full Paper
DOI: 10.1002/prep.201400106
Mach Wave Control in Explosively Formed Projectile
Warhead
Chuan-Sheng Zhu,[a] Zheng-Xiang Huang,*[a] Xu-Dong Zu,[a] and Qiang-Qiang Xiao[a]
Abstract: A Mach wave emerges at the top of the liner
when a wave shaper is embedded in charge, and thus seri-
ously breaks the explosively formed projectile (EFP) nose.
Thus, to avoid breakage at the EFP nose, the pressure
behind the Mach wave should be controlled. An analytical
model for calculating Mach wave parameters is presented
based on three-shock theory. The parameters of Mach
waves, such as their growth angles and radii, their velocity
along the plane of symmetry, and the pressure behind
them, can be determined. Calculation results show that
Keywords: Explosion mechanism · Explosively formed projectile (EFP) · Wave shaper · Mach wave
1 Introduction
Explosively formed projectiles (EFPs) are used in numerous
modern ammunition systems because of their many advan-
tages, such as their effective stand-off and strong secon-
dary effects after penetration. However, designers often en-
counter the problem where the wave shaper should be
embedded passively in charge. For example, sensing ele-
ments have to be embedded in charge to decrease the
length of the warhead in many smart ammunition systems.
Thus, the wave shaper has to be embedded in charge to
cover these sensing elements [1]. In addition, the wave
shaper can be actively embedded in charge such that the
velocity of the penetrator can increase because the wave
shaper can adjust detonation wave shape [2–5]. However,
a Mach wave emerges at the top of the liner when a wave
shaper is embedded in charge, and thus significantly affects
the formation of an EFP. When the relationship between
the Mach wave and liner fails to match, the nose of the EFP
may be seriously broken [6–8]. Thus, the pressure behind
the Mach wave should be controlled to achieve a matched
relationship. David Bender et al. [6] found that optimizing
the configuration of the liner can avoid breakage at the
nose of the EFP because the location of the ring initiator is
fixed. Miao Qin-shu et al. [9] carried out numerical studies
of the effect of annular initiation position on EFP formation
and found that increasing the diameter of annular initiation
can significantly increase the velocity and length-diameter
ratio of the EFP and that reducing the distance between
the annular initiation and liner can reduce the velocity and
length-diameter ratio of the EFP. However, these studies
did not investigate how to avoid breakage at the nose of
Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
when the diameter of the wave shaper is reduced or the
distance between the wave shaper and liner increases, the
incident angle of the detonation wave at the top of the
liner increases and thereby lowers the pressure behind the
Mach wave. Avoiding the occurrence of Mach waves by re-
ducing the incident angle fails to avoid breakage at the
nose of the EFP, but lowering the pressure behind the
Mach wave by increasing the incident angle avoids break-
age at the nose of the EFP. Calculation and simulation re-
sults are validated through X-ray imaging experimentation.
the EFP by matching the relationship between the Mach
wave and liner. When a wave shaper is embedded in
charge, detonation waves collide at the axis of the charge
after climbing the wave shaper. When the incident angle of
the detonation wave is below the critical angle for Mach re-
flection, regular reflection occurs, and the pressure at the
colliding point is 2.4 times the Chapman-Jouguet (CJ) pres-
sure. Meanwhile, when the incident angle is above the criti-
cal angle, Mach reflection occurs, and the pressure behind
the Mach wave decreases from four times the CJ pressure
to normal CJ pressure with increasing incident angle
[10, 11]. Therefore, overdriven detonation is produced when
a wave shaper is embedded in charge; the pressure behind
the overdriven detonation wave is related to the incident
angle of the detonation wave. The pressure behind the
overdriven detonation wave can be controlled by varying
the incident angle at the top of the liner.
An analytical model for Mach wave parameter calculation
is presented in this study based on three-shock theory. The
parameters of Mach waves, such as the growth angle, their
radius, their velocity along the plane of symmetry, and the
pressure behind them, can be determined. Calculation re-
sults show that the pressure behind the Mach wave and
[a] C.-S. Zhu, Z.-X. Huang, X.-D. Zu, Q.-Q. Xiao
School of Mechanical Engineering
Nanjing University of Science and Technology
Xiaolingwei 200
Nanjing 210094, P. R. China
*e-mail: huangyu@mail.njust.edu.cn
&1&
These are not the final page numbers! ÞÞ
Full Paper
the Mach wave radius can be controlled by varying the
wave shaper diameter and the distance between the wave
shaper and liner, which determine the incident angle at the
top of liner. The relationship between the Mach wave and
the configuration of the liner can then be matched well. In
this way, breakage at the nose of the EFP can be avoided.
2 Analytical Model for Mach Wave Parameter
Calculation
Figure 1 presents the geometry of classical Mach reflection.
As Figure 1 shows, OI is the wave front of the incident
detonation, OR is the wave front of the reflected shock, O
is the triple point, and T is the collision point. The image
can be separated into four regions by the detonation and
shock waves: zone (0) is the unreacted explosive, zone (1)
Figure 1. Flow setup used to describe Mach reflection.
is the region behind the detonation wave, zone (2) is the
region behind the reflection wave, and zone (3) is the
region behind the Mach wave. The parameters in every
zone are shown with the corresponding subscript. Based
on descriptions of detonation reflection in the explosive
[12], the parameters of each region are described as fol-
lows:
The Mach number M1 and deflection angle q in region
(1) are defined by
where g is the exponent in the polytropic equation of state
for the explosive and yI is the incident angle of the detona-
tion wave.
Based on the equations of mass, momentum, and energy
conservation in region (2), the following equation is ob-
tained:
&2& www.pep.wiley-vch.de  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ÝÝ These are not the final page numbers!
C.-S. Zhu, Z.-X. Huang, X.-D. Zu, Q.-Q. Xiao
where PCJ and 1CJ are the CJ detonation pressure and densi-
ty, respectively, of the explosive and e is the deflection
angle.
Based on the equations of mass, momentum, and energy
conservation in region (3), the following equation is de-
rived:
where DM and DCJ are the velocity of the Mach wave and
detonation wave, respectively; 10 is the initial density of
the explosive, b is the angle of the tangent line at the
Mach wave to the symmetry axis, h is the ratio of the spe-
cific chemical energy release of the explosive material that
passes through the Mach wave to that of the material that
goes through the CJ detonation front, and a is the deflec-
tion angle.
The medium in regions (2) and (3) can meet the condi-
tions that the flow velocity is parallel and the pressures are
equal; that is:
We can obtain the parameters of P3, b, and a near the
triple point by solving Eqs. (1) to (4). The growth angle of
the Mach wave c can be obtained as follows [13]:
c ¼ p=2b ð5Þ
The steps for calculating c are as follows: For every value
when b decreases from p/2 to yI, a is calculated using
Equation (3), and e is calculated according to P2 = P3. The
Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8
Mach Wave Control in Explosively Formed Projectile Warhead

Table 1. Experimental and theoretical values of c. detonation wave is 418 [14], such that L can be calculated
YI/[8] 60 65 70 75 80 geometrically.
According to the mathematical description of the sche-
Experimental values 2.4 2.75 3.2 4.15 4.8
matic in Figure 2, the radius of the Mach wave, RM, can be
Theoretical values 9.85 11.62 12.15 11.2 8.71
calculated as follows:

calculation stops when e + a is approximately equal to q,

and b at this time is the required value. The growth angle
of the Mach wave c can be obtained by substituting b into
Equation (5).
According to Lambourn [14] and Hull [15], the values of
3 Theoretical Results and Analysis
c obtained from Equation (5) are significantly greater than
the experimental values because the straight Mach wave As shown in Figure 2, the incident angle of the detonation
assumption is used. Based on the experimental values re- wave yI is determined by the wave shaper radius RWS and
ported by Lambourn [14], the theoretical value of c can be the distance S between the wave shaper and liner. To ex-
modified. The experimental values and the values obtained plore the effect of RWS and S on the Mach wave parameters,
from Equation (5) are shown in Table 1. such as the pressure behind the Mach wave and the Mach
Based on the data shown in Table 1, the theoretical value wave radius, many incident angles of the detonation wave
of c can be modified as on the top of the liner can be obtained by keeping RWS
constant and changing S (way I) or by keeping S constant
and changing RWS (way II). Five angles can be obtained in
both ways: 558, 608, 658, 708, and 758. In way I, the radius
of the wave shaper, RWS, is 32 mm, and in way II, the dis-
tance between the wave shaper and liner S is 45.7 mm. The
pressure behind the Mach wave and the Mach wave radius
where cM, c, and YI are the degree values.
are calculated for the five incident angles (Figure 3).
When a wave shaper is embedded in charge, detonation
waves collide at the axis of the charge after climbing over
the wave shaper. When the incident angle of the detona-
tion wave is above the critical angle, Mach reflection
occurs. An analytical model for Mach wave radius calcula-
tion can be proposed when the growth angle of the Mach
wave cM is obtained.
As schematically shown in Figure 2, O is the triple point,
T is the collision point, RWS is the radius of the wave shaper,
and S is the distance between the liner and wave shaper.
yI, RM, cM, and L represent the incident angle of the detona-
tion wave, the radius of the Mach wave, the growth angle
of the Mach wave, and the distance from the starting point
of the Mach wave to the liner, respectively. The Mach wave
usually starts at the point where the incident angle of the

Figure 3. Pressure behind Mach wave and Mach wave radius for
Figure 2. Schematic used to calculate the Mach wave radius. five incident angles.

Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.pep.wiley-vch.de &3&
These are not the final page numbers! ÞÞ
Full Paper C.-S. Zhu, Z.-X. Huang, X.-D. Zu, Q.-Q. Xiao

As shown in Figure 3, every angle has two points. The

left point is the pressure at the colliding point T, whereas
the right point is the pressure at the triple point O. The
horizontal distance between the two points represent the
radius of the Mach wave. When the incident angle of the
detonation wave at the top of the liner is small, the hori-
zontal distance is short, but the pressures are high, indicat-
ing that the impact range is small but the impact strength
is high (Figure 3). The horizontal distance increases whereas
the pressures decrease with the increasing incident angle
of the detonation wave, indicating that increasing the inci-
dent angle increases the impact range and decreases
impact strength. When the incident angle of the detona-
tion wave is large, the pressures approximate the CJ pres-
sure, indicating that the impact strength of the Mach wave
approximates that of the detonation wave.
In terms of the formation of EFP, when the impact range
is small but the impact strength is high, the axial collapse
Figure 4. Configuration of EFP warhead for avoiding a Mach wave.
velocity of the element at the roof of the liner is significant-
ly higher than that of other elements, thus breaking the
nose of the EFP. When the impact strength of the Mach
wave approximates the impact strength of the detonation
wave, the axial collapse velocity of the element at the roof
of the liner approximates that of the other elements, which
is favorable for keeping the nose of the EFP integrated but
unfavorable for increasing EFP length. Only when the
impact strength by the Mach wave is suitable is it desirable
to both avoid breakage at the nose of the EFP and increase Figure 5. Simulation result of avoiding a Mach wave.
EFP length.
Therefore, reducing the wave shaper radius or increasing
the distance between the wave shaper and liner increases is below the critical angle, Mach reflection is avoided. To
the incident angle of the detonation wave at the top of the verify whether breakage at the nose of the EFP can be
liner and lowers the impact strength of the Mach wave, avoided when no Mach wave is found in the charge, a simu-
thereby avoiding breakage at the nose of the EFP. lation was carried out for a warhead by using LS-DYNA
software. The configuration of this warhead is shown in
Figure 4, where the diameter and length of the charge are
80 mm, the diameter of the wave shaper is 64 mm, the dis-
4 Simulation Research and Experiment
tance between the wave shaper and liner is 23.74 mm, and
Validation
the incident angle of the detonation wave at the top of the
EFP penetration capability can be enhanced when a wave liner is 36.578. The 8701 explosive is used in the calculation,
shaper is placed in charge. However, a Mach wave emerges and the liner material is copper. The parameters of all mate-
at the top of the liner when a wave shaper is embedded in rial models used in the calculations are found in the litera-
charge, significantly affecting the formation of EFP. When ture [16, 17]. The simulation result is shown in Figure 5.
the relationship between the Mach wave and liner fails to Figure 5 shows that the nose of the EFP is broken, indi-
match, the nose of the EFP may be seriously broken. Thus, cating that breakage emerges even when no Mach wave
the pressure behind the Mach wave should be controlled occurs in the charge. This phenomenon is attributed to the
to match the relationship well. fact that when regular reflection occurs in the charge, the
pressure at the colliding point is 2.4 times the CJ pressure,
which is high enough to split the nose of the EFP. Thus,
4.1 Avoid Mach Wave
breakage at the nose of the EFP cannot be avoided by
Given that the Mach wave adversely affects the formation avoiding the occurrence of a Mach wave.
of EFP, one way to avoid this effect is to avoid the occur-
rence of a Mach wave. According to the theory of the re-
4.2 Increase of Incident Angle of Detonation Wave
flection of detonation waves in a condensed explosive, the
critical angle for Mach reflection is approximately equal to Avoiding the occurrence of Mach waves cannot prevent
458 [10]. When the incident angle of the detonation wave the breaking of the nose of the EFP. However, calculation

&4& www.pep.wiley-vch.de  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8
ÝÝ These are not the final page numbers!
Mach Wave Control in Explosively Formed Projectile Warhead

Table 2. Parameters of three warheads.

Type DWS/[mm] S/[mm] YI/[8]
I 64.00 48.13 56.38
II 40.00 28.13 54.58
III 40.00 48.13 67.43

To verify the reliability of the calculation results, simulation

research is carried out for three warheads by using the LS-
DYNA software. The configurations of these warheads are
shown in Figure 6; the diameter and length of all the
charges are 80 mm. The parameters of these warheads,
such as the diameter of the wave shaper DWS, the distance
between the wave shaper and liner S, and the incident
angle of the detonation wave at the top of the liner YI, are
shown in Table 2.
The simulation results are shown in Figure 7. The calcula-
tion time is 350 ms, at which moment EFPs form.
As shown in Figure 7, the noses of the EFP in both
types I and II are broken, but the nose in type III is integrat-
ed. This result is attributed to the fact that the incident
angles in both types I and II are so small that the pressures
behind the Mach waves are high, thus breaking the nose of
the EFPs. Owing to the large incident angle in type III, the
pressure is weaker than that in types I and II; the weaker
pressure fails to split the nose of the EFP. Compared with
the nose of the EFP in type II, that in type I is broken more
seriously because the large diameter of the wave shaper in
type I increases the radius of the Mach wave and thus ag-
gravates breakage at the nose of the EFP although the
pressures in the two warheads are approximately equal.

Figure 6. Configuration of three warheads.

results show that the pressure behind the Mach wave and
the Mach wave radius can be controlled by varying the
wave shaper diameter and the distance between the wave
shaper and liner to avoid breakage at the nose of the EFP. Figure 7. Simulation results for three warheads.

Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.pep.wiley-vch.de &5&
These are not the final page numbers! ÞÞ
Full Paper
4.3 Experiment Validation
To verify the reliability of the simulation results, X-ray ex-
periments on the two warheads in types I and II are carried
out. The charge configurations used in the X-ray experi-
ments are the same as those used in the simulation. The
layout of the X-ray experiment is shown in Figure 8, and X-
ray images of the EFPs are shown in Figure 9. These images
are taken at 350 ms after the explosive is initiated, at which
time EFPs form.
Figure 9 shows that the nose of the EFP in type I frac-
tures into two pieces, whereas that in type II slightly splits.
The shapes of the EFPs in Figure 7 and Figure 9 are in
good agreement, indicating that the simulation can recon-
Figure 8. Layout of X-ray imaging experiment.
Figure 9. X-ray images of EFP formation.
&6& www.pep.wiley-vch.de  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
ÝÝ These are not the final page numbers!
C.-S. Zhu, Z.-X. Huang, X.-D. Zu, Q.-Q. Xiao
struct the experimentally generated projectile forms suc-
cessfully and the simulation results are believable.
5 Conclusions
Overdriven detonation is produced when a wave shaper is
embedded in charge, and the pressure behind the over-
driven detonation wave can be controlled by varying the
wave shaper diameter and the distance between the wave
shaper and liner. Avoiding the occurrence of a Mach wave
by reducing the incident angle fails to prevent breakage at
the nose of the EFP, but lowering the pressure behind the
Mach wave by increasing the incident angle avoids break-
age at the nose of the EFP. The incident angle of the deto-
nation wave at the top of liner can be increased in two
ways: by reducing the wave shaper diameter and by in-
creasing the distance between the wave shaper and liner.
Reducing the wave shaper diameter is an effective strategy
because it not only lowers the pressure behind the Mach
wave but also reduces the Mach wave radius. Given that
system constraints generally limit the increase of warhead
length, increasing the distance between the wave shaper
and liner is also an effective strategy until the wave shaper
diameter is small enough.
References
[1] J. Men, J. Jiang, L. Jian, Numerical Simulation Research on the
Influence of Sensing Elements on EFP Forming (in Chinese), J.
Ballistics 2005, 17, 67 – 71.
[2] K. Weimann, Research and Development in the Area of Explo-
sively Formed Projectiles Charge Technology, Propellants
Explos. Pyrotech. 1993, 18, 294 – 298.
[3] Z.-X. Huang, Mechanism Study on Jetting Projectile Charge For-
mation, PhD Thesis, Nanjing University of Science & Technolo-
gy, Nanjing, P.R. China, 2003 (in Chinese).
[4] X. Zhang, H. Chen, Y. Zhao, Study on Shaped Charge Tech-
nique of Small Diameter Which Have High Velocity EFP (in
Chinese), J. Projectiles Rockets Missiles Guidance 2003, 23, 107 –
109.
[5] Y. Zhang, X. Zhang, Y. He, L. Qiao, Detonation Wave Propaga-
tion in Shaped Charges With Large Wave-Shaper, 27th Interna-
tional Symposium on Ballistics, Freiburg, Germany, April 22–26,
2013, p. 770–782.
[6] D. Bender, R. Fong, W. Ng, B. Rice, Dual Mode Warhead Tech-
nology for Future Smart Munitions, 19th International Symposi-
um on Ballistics, Interlaken, Switzerland, May 7–11, 2001,
p. 679–684.
[7] R. Fong, W. Ng, K. Weimann, Nonaxisymmetric Waveshaped
EFP Warheads, 20th International Symposium on Ballistics, Or-
lando, FL, USA, September 23–27, 2002, p. 582–588.
[8] M. Murphy, K. Weimann, K. Doeringsfeld, J. Speck, The Effect
of Explosive Detonation Wave Shaping on EFP Shape and Per-
formance, 13th International Symposium on Ballistics, Stock-
holm, Sweden, June 1–3, 1992, p. 449–456.
[9] Q. Miao, W. Li, X. Wang, Effect of Annular Initiation Position on
Formation of EFP (in Chinese), J. Ballistics 2012, 24, 58–62.
Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8
Mach Wave Control in Explosively Formed Projectile Warhead
[10] B. Dunne, Mach Reflection of Detonation Waves in Condensed
High Explosives II, Phys. Fluids 1964, 7, 1707 – 1711.
[11] X. Zhang, Z. Huang, L. Qiao, Detonation Wave Propagation in
Double-layer Cylindrical High Explosive Charges, Propellants
Explos. Pyrotech. 2011, 36, 210 – 218.
[12] C. Bing, Study on the Phenomenon of Charge Detonation and
EFP Formation Under the Condition of Multi-Point Ignition at
the Upper End of the Charge, PhD Thesis, Nanjing University of
Science and Technology, Nanjing, P.R. China 1998 (in Chinese).
[13] J. Wang, Two-Dimensional Nonsteady Flow and Shock Waves,
Science Press, Beijing 1994, p. 91 (in Chinese).
[14] B. D. Lambourn, P. W. Wright, Mach Interaction of Two Plane
Detonation Waves, 4th International Detonation Symposium,
Arlington, VA, USA, 1965, p. 142–152.
Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
[15] L. M. Hull, Mach Reflection of Spherical Detonation Waves,
10th International Detonation Symposium, Boston, MA, USA,
July 12–16, 1993, p. 11–18.
[16] M. J. Murphy, E. L. Lee, Modeling Shock Initiation Composition
B, 10th International Detonation Symposium, Boston, MA, USA,
July 12–16, 1993, p. 963–970.
[17] J. Wu, J. Liu, Y. Du, Experimental and Numerical Study on the
Flight and Penetration Properties of Explosively-Formed Pro-
jectile, Int. J. Impact. Eng. 2007, 34, 1147 – 1162.
Received: May 4, 2014
Published online: && &&, 0000
www.pep.wiley-vch.de &7&
These are not the final page numbers! ÞÞ
Full Paper C.-S. Zhu, Z.-X. Huang, X.-D. Zu, Q.-Q. Xiao

FULL PAPERS
C.-S. Zhu, Z.-X. Huang,* X.-D. Zu,
Q.-Q. Xiao
&& – &&
Mach Wave Control in Explosively
Formed Projectile Warhead

&8& www.pep.wiley-vch.de  2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2010, 35, 1 – 8
ÝÝ These are not the final page numbers!