Combustion, Explosion, and Shock Waves, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 495–500, 2013.

Original Russian Text 

c I.F. Kobylkin, N.S. Dorokhov.

Interaction of a Shaped-Charge Jet

with Moving Reactive Armor Plates

I. F. Kobylkina and N. S. Dorokhovb UDC 623.483.3+623.562.7

Translated from Fizika Goreniya i Vzryva, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 125–130, July–August, 2013.
Original article submitted October 30, 2012.

Abstract: The mechanisms of the stationary and nonstationary interaction between a metal
shaped charge jet and the front reactive armor plate (moving toward the jet) and rear (moving
behind the jet) reactive armor plate. The range of interaction parameters in which these mech-
anisms take place was determined. The interaction of the shaped-charge jet with the front plate
is mainly stationary and leads to the wearing of the jet in the transverse direction (reduction in
the diameter of the jet) and its deflection by a small angle. The interaction of the shaped-charge
jet with the rear plate is mainly of a nonstationary discrete nature and forms unilateral transverse
perturbations in the jet, which, developing, lead to its bending and subsequent destruction.
Keywords: shaped-charge jet, reactive armor, continuous and discrete interactions, wearing and
deflection of jet, transverse wavelike perturbations of the jet.
DOI: 10.1134/S001050821304014X

INTRODUCTION Despite the simplicity of the design of most of these

The scientific history of reactive armor for pro-
tecting armored vehicles against shaped-charge war-
heads began over 50 years ago, when B. V. Voit-
sekhovskii, V. L. Istomin (Moscow Physicotechnical In-
stitute), A. I. Platov (Research Institute of Steel) and
other researchers headed by M. A. Lavrent’ev conducted
the first experiments to study reactive armor against
shaped-charge jets [1, 2]. Currently there is no alter-
native to the use of reactive armor to protect armored
vehicles from anti-armor and shaped-charge weapons.
The basis of the explosive reactive armor are flat
elements consisting of two metal plates and an explosive
layer located between them. The explosive layer deto-
nates under the action of a shaped-charge jet (SCJ).
The detonation products accelerate the plates, which
impacts at an angle the SCJ. This leads to deflection,
destruction or wearing of the SCJ, resulting in a signif-
icant reduction in the depth of penetration of the main
part of the target located behind the reactive armor.
a Motion of the plate at an angle to the SCJ head-on or
Bauman Moscow State Technical University, Moscow,
105005 Russia; kobylkin ivan@mail.ru.
b
Research Institute of Steel, Moscow, 127411 Russia.
0010-5082/13/4904-0495 
c 2013 by Pleiades Publishing, Ltd.
devices, the physics of operation of the armor is very
complicated and not all the processes that determine
its protective capability are fully understood. This pa-
per focuses on studying the dynamics of the collision of
a SCJ with the front reactive armor plate (flying toward
the SCJ) and the rear plate (flying behind the SCJ).
Voitsekhovskii [2] assumed stationary continuous
interaction of a SCJ with reactive armor plates within
the framework of the incompressible fluid model. De-
spite the fact that the computational model of the pro-
cess constructed in [2] adequately reflects the results
of experiments and the mechanism of interaction of the
SCJ with armor plates underlying this model is not fully
realistic. Currently, the nonstationary mechanism of in-
teraction involving periodic interaction of a SCJ with
relatively thin (a few millimeters thick) metal armor
plates [1–5] is considered to be the main mechanism.
The high-velocity head element of a SCJ punches a hole
into the plate, whose diameter exceeds the diameter of
the SCJ and is determined by the velocity of the SCJ,
the strength of the plate material, and its thickness.
co-directionally to the SCJ leads to impact contact of
495
496 Kobylkin, Dorokhov

Fig. 1. Flash radiograph of interaction of a copper SCJ with reactive armor elements: (a) the front plate is 2 mm
thick, and the rear plate is 1 mm thick; the bench mark is at a distance of 190 mm from the element; (b) the
front plate is 1 mm thick, and the rear plate is 2 mm thick, the bench mark is set at a distance of 220 mm from
the element; (c) the front and rear plates are 2 mm thick, and the bench mark is at a distance 180 mm from the
element; the thickness of the explosive layer is 3 mm; the angle between the SCJ and the armor element is 30◦ .

the edge of the hole in the plate with the side face of
the next elements of the SCJ. This leads to partial (or
entire) wearing of the SCJ element, which is subjected
to a lateral impulse and moved in the lateral direction,
again punching an elliptical hole in the plate with diam-
eter greater than that of the SCJ. Later on, the process
is repeated, resulting in the SCJ subjected to periodic
transverse perturbations increasing with time.
The described process is confirmed by flash ra-
diographs of SCJ interaction with reactive armor ele-
ments. Figure 1 shows the corresponding flash radio-
graphs. Two steel plates of mild steel were placed at
an angle of 30◦ to the direction of the impact of the
SCJ. Between them was placed a 3 mm thick layer of a
flexible explosive based on PETN. The thickness of the
plates was 1 and 2 mm in different experiments. Lab-
oratory shaped charges of phlegmatized RDX of den-
sity 1.65 g/cm3 , 56 mm in diameter, and with a copper
conical liner with a cone angle of 50◦ were used. The
depth of penetration of homogenous steel armor tar-
gets by these shaped charges placed at a distance of
150 mm from the target was 238 ± 13 mm, the velocity
of the head element of the SCJ was 8000 ± 250 m/s, and
the diameter of the head elements of the fully stretched
SCJ was 1.9 ± 0.1 mm. As seen from the radiographs,
the state of the SCJ after passage through the armor el-
ement depends on the thickness of the plates and their
arrangement and indicates periodic interaction of the
SCJ with the plates.
Because the reactive armor plates scatter in oppo-
site directions, one might expect that they will produce
transverse perturbations in the SCJ also in the oppo-
site direction. However, most radiographs of the process
show perturbations caused only by the action of the rear
plate (see Fig. 1).
In [6], this effect was explained by a kind of filter-
ing action of the rear plate. The explanation is obvious
from Fig. 2. The transverse perturbations of the SCJ
produced by interaction with the front plate are cut off
at the intersection of the rear plate and at the exit from
of the reactive armor device, there are only transverse
perturbations of one direction resulting from the inter-
action of the SCJ with the rear plate. If this is so, the
impact of the front plate on the SCJ partially reduces
the effectiveness of the rear plate, as it leads to addi-
tional consumption of its material for cutting the trans-
verse perturbations in the SCJ caused by the action of
the front plate.
Interaction of a Shaped-Charge Jet with Moving Reactive Armor Plates
Fig. 2. Passage of the shaped-charge jet through
scattering reactive armor plates, from [6]: 1 and 2 are
the front and rear armor plates, respectively, 3 is the
shaped-charge jet, 4 and 5 are the transverse pertur-
bations in the SCJ produced by the front and rear
plates, respectively, and 6 are the breaks of the SCJ
resulting from the rear plate cutting the SCJ pertur-
bations produced by the front plate.
However, a careful analysis of the radiographs does
not confirm the mechanism proposed in [6] to explain
the filtering action of the rear plate since in the passage
of the high-velocity part of the SCJ through the front
plate in CN, developed transverse perturbations were
found not only in our radiographs (Fig. 1), but also in
the radiograph of [6] and the proton radiograph of [7].
To understand this effect, it is necessary to analyze the
dynamics of SCJ interaction with the front and rear
armor plates. We assume that the SCJ is subjected only
to perpendicular (to it) constituents of the impulse of
the region of the plates have undergone interaction with
the SCJ.
Let a SCJ element of diameter dj , moving at ve-
locity Vj , be impacted by an armor plate of thickness δi
(i is the plate number, i = 1 refers to the front plate,
and i = 2 to the rear plate). We denote by θ the angle
between the SCJ and the normal to the surface of the
plate. We will also assume that the velocity of the plate
U is normal to the plate surface. A diagram of the pos-
sible interaction of the SCJ with the plate is shown in
Fig. 3.
Let the x axis be directed along and the y axis
perpendicular to the SCJ. Then, the plate velocity
component along the SCJ Ux and that perpendicular
to it Uy are equal in modulus to Ux = U cos θ and
Uy = U sin θ.
We denote by τ the characteristic time of interac-
tion of the SCJ element with the plate. As τ we can use,
for example, the time of double path of the compression
wave through the cross section of the SCJ τ = 2dj /cj
497
Fig. 3. Diagram of interaction of the SCJ element
with the front reactive armor plate.
(cj is the velocity of sound in the SCJ material) or the
time of contact between the SCJ element and the plate:
δ
τi = ,
Vji cos θ
where Vji = Vj − (−1)i U/cos θ is the phase velocity of
the SCJ–plate contact surface along the SCJ. In the
time τi , the jet will interact in the transverse direc-
tion with a region of the plate (see Fig. 3) of height
Uy τi , length δ/ cos θ, and width ædj , where æ is a co-
efficient that takes into account an increase in the SCJ
diameter during the interaction. The component of the
impulse Iyi of this plate regions which is perpendicular
to the SCJ can be defined as
δ
Iyi = ρpl ædj Uy τi Uy ,
cos θ
where ρpl is the density of the plate material. It should
be noted that for a symmetric element of reactive ar-
mor (U1 = U2 ), the transverse impulses transferred to
the SCJ from the front and rear plates are equal in
modus Iy1 = Iy2 and opposite in direction. However the
mass of the SCJ elements mji that receive this impulse
depend which of the plates (the front or rear) impacts
the SCJ. Indeed, we have
πd2j
mji = ρj Vji τi ,
4
where ρj is the density of the SCJ material. Since
Vj1 > Vj2 , then the SCJ element that interacts with
the front plate has a greater mass and, hence, a greater
length than the rear plate, i.e., mj1 > mj2 .
As a result of the absorption of the impulse,
the Iyi element of the SCJ acquires a transverse velocity
equal to
2
Iyi 4 ρpl æδi Uyi
Vjyi = = .
mji π ρj dj cos θ Vji
498 Kobylkin, Dorokhov

Since mj1 > mj2 , then in the interaction with the

symmetric reactive armor element Iy1 = Iy2 , the trans-
verse velocity Vjy1 acquired by the SCJ element during
interaction with the front plate will be lower than the
transverse velocity Vjy2 , caused by the interaction with
the rear plate. To elucidate the nature of the SCJ–plate
interaction, it is necessary to compare the transverse ve-
locities of the SCJ Vjyi elements with the velocity com-
ponents of the plates Uyi that are normal to the SCJ.
If Uyi  Vjyi , then continuous interaction of the plate
with the SCJ occurs. If the Vjyi > Uyi , then the SCJ
undergoes periodic transverse perturbations that lead
to loss of the SCJ–plate contact, so that the interaction
itself will also be periodic.
Such conclusions can be drawn by analyzing the
velocity ratio Fig. 4. Ranges of parameters for which the shaped-
charge jet penetration through reactive armor plates
Vjyi 4 ρpl æδ i Uyi is stationary and nonstationary.
ωi = =
Uyi π ρj dj cos θ Vji
4 ρpl æδ Ui
= tan θ.
π ρj dj Vji
If ωi > 1, the SCJ element bounces off the plate and
a characteristic transverse wavelike bend is formed in
the SCJ. For ωi  1, in contrast, continuous interac-
tion of the SCJ with the plate occurs, accompanied by
wearing and deflection of the SCJ. The equality ωi = 1
corresponds to the following relation between the SCJ
velocity Vj , the velocity of the plate Ui , the character-
istics of the SCJ element and the reactive armor, and
the angle θ:
Vj 4 ρpl æδi (−1)i
= tan θ + .
Ui π ρj dj cos θ
Fig. 5. Diagram of shaped-charge jet penetration
It is interesting to quantitatively analyze this re-
through scattering reactive armor plates: 1 and 2
lation for the following values of the constants: are the front and rear armor plates, respectively, 3 is
ρpl = 7.8 · 103 kg/m3 , ρj = 8.9·103 kg/m3 , θ = 60◦ , the shaped-charge jet, and 4 is the transverse per-
and æ = 1.2. In this case, the relation becomes the lin- turbations in the CJ resulting from the action of the
ear relationships rear plate.
Vj δi
= 2.32 ± 2,
Ui dj The interaction of most of the SCJ with the front plate
where the plus sign is taken for the rear plate and the has a continuous character and leads to some reduc-
negative sign for the front plate. The corresponding tion in its diameter (wearing in the transverse direc-
diagrams are shown in Fig. 4. The areas above the tion) and deflection by a small angle α. Interaction
straight lines correspond to stationary penetration of of the SCJ with the rear plate is of nonstationary dis-
the SCJ through the reactive armor plate, and the area crete nature and produces transverse perturbations in
under the straight lines to nonstationary penetration. the SCJ, which, develop and lead to its distortion and
It is easy to see that the SCJ penetrates through the subsequent destruction.
front plate of thickness δ1 = (1.5–2)dj in an almost Relations for determining the angle of deflection of
completely stationary regime, whereas the rear armor the SCJ α and reduction in the diameter of the SCJ can
plates of the same thickness are penetrated in a contin- be found in [1]. Assuming that during the SCJ interac-
uous regime only by the high-velocity part of the SCJ. tion with the front plate, only the transverse component
Thus, the passage of most of the SCJ through the of the impulse of the SCJ changes, the angle α can be
scattering armor plate is shown schematically in Fig. 5. estimated from the following relation:
Interaction of a Shaped-Charge Jet with Moving Reactive Armor Plates
Fig. 6. Angle of deflection of a copper SCJ by a
steel front reactive armor plate versus conditions of
interaction at θ = 60◦ .
Fig. 7. Angle of deflection of a copper SCJ by a steel
front reactive armor plate at δ/dj = 1 versus angle
θ of the plate to the SCJ.
  −1
Iy1 4 ρpl æδ 1 sin2 θ Vj Vj 1
tan α = = + . 3. In the interaction of the SCJ with the rear
mj1 Vj π ρj dj cos θ U1 U1 cos θ
Quantitative analysis of the relationship (Fig. 6) shows
that under typical conditions of interaction of the
SCJ with the front plate, the angle α varies in the
range of 1–6◦ .
It is interesting to note that the dependence of the
deflection angle α on the angle of the element of the
reactive armor θ is not monotonic (Fig. 7). With the
chosen interaction parameters, α reaches a maximum at
θ = 60–70◦ . Such behavior of the dependence α(θ) is
due to the fact that increasing θ increases not only the
impulse of the plate transferred to the SCJ element, but
also the mass of this SCJ element.
499
During nonstationary interaction of the SCJ with
the rear armor plate, transverse waves are formed in the
SCJ. To describe the evolution of these waves, it is nec-
essary to use a mechanical model of the SCJ. We assume
the SCJ to be a string in a plastic state, i.e., stretched by
a constant force T = σs, where σ is the dynamic yield
stress of the SCJ material and s is cross-sectional area
of the SCJ. In the SCJ, two types of wavescan propa-
1 dσ
gate: longitudinal waves with velocity c = and
ρj dε

σ
shear waves with velocity b = (ε is the lon-
ρj (1 + ε)
gitudinal deformation of the SCJ in front of the shear
wave) [8, 9]. With a well-defined yield plate dσ/dε → 0,
which is typical, for example, of copper, the velocity of
longitudinal waves in the SCJ may be small. The shear
wave velocity is estimated at b ≈ 100 m/s. Therefore,
the shear waves arising in the SCJ are localized, and
their development leads to rapid destruction of the de-
formed sections of the SCJ.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Based on the analysis of SCJ interaction with
moving reactive armor plates, the lateral impulse trans-
ferred to the SCJ by the plates moving at an angle was
estimated. The main feature of the interaction of the
SCJ with the reactive armor plates is that for the same
time interval, the SCJ element interacting with the front
plate is of greater length than that interacting with the
rear plate.
2. Since the transverse velocity imparted to the
SCJ during interaction with the front plate is lower than
the plate velocity component perpendicular to the SCJ,
the interaction of the main part of the SCJ with the
front plate has a continuous nature and leads to wear-
ing of SCJ in the transverse direction (reduction in the
SCJ diameter) and a small deflection by an angle α.
plate, the transverse velocity acquired by the SCJ ex-
ceeds the plate velocity component perpendicular to the
SCJ, so that the SCJ periodically bounces off the plate
and the interaction of the SCJ with the rear plate has
a nonstationary discrete nature and forms transverse
perturbations in the SCJ , which, developing, lead to
its distortion and subsequent destruction.
4. The transverse perturbations arising in the SCJ
can be considered as shear waves in a string in a plas-
tic state. Due to the low velocity of their propagation
(≈ 100 m/s), these waves are localized, and their devel-
opment leads to rapid destruction of the deformed parts
of the SCJ.
500
REFERENCES
1. Partial Issues of Finite Ballistics, Ed. by V. A. Grigoryan
et al. (Izd. Mosk. Gos. Tekh. Univ. Baumana, Moscow,
2006) [in Russian].
2. B. V. Voitsekhovskii and V. L. Istomin, “Dynamic
Antishaped-Charge Protection,” Fiz. Goreniya Vzryva
36 (6), 87–90 (2000) [Combust., Expl., Shock Waves 36
(6), 754–757 (2000)].
3. M. Mayseless, Y. Erlich, Y. Falcovitz, D. Weihs, and
G. Rosenberg, “Interaction of Shaped Charge Jets with
Reactive Armor,” in Proc. 8th Int. Symp. on Ballistics,
Orlando, Florida, 1984, pp. 5–20.
4. I. F. Kobylkin, V. A. Grigoryan, N. S. Dorokhov, and
D. A. Rototaev, “Penetration of Shaped-Charge Jets
through Explosive Reactive Armor,” Oboron. Tekh.,
No. 11, 35–45 (2002).
Kobylkin, Dorokhov
5. Physics of Explosion, Ed. by L. P. Orlenko (Fizmatlit,
Moscow, 2002), Vol. 2 [in Russian].
6. M. Held, “Defeating Mechanisms of Reactive Armour
Sandwiches,” in Proc. 22nd Int. Symp. on Ballistics,
Vancouver, Canada, 2005.
7. O. V. Svirskii et al., “Investigation of Shaped Charges
by Pulsed Protonography,” in An Extreme State of Mat-
ter. Detonation. Shock Waves, Proc. Int. Conf. XIII
Kharitonov Scientific Readings (VNIIEF, Sarov, 2011),
pp. 624–636.
8. A. Ya. Sagomonyan, Stress Waves in Continuous Media
(Izd. Mosk. Gos. Univ., Moscow, 1985) [in Russian].
9. Strength and Fracture under Short-Term Loads, Ed. by
Kh. A. Rahmatullin, E. I. Shemyakin, Yu. A. Dem’yanov,
and A. V. Zvyagin (Logos, Moscow, 2008) [in Russian].