materials
Article
The Use of Geotechnical Methods to Determine the
Deformation Parameters of the Ground in Terms of Operation
and Safety of Mortar Use
Grzegorz Bartnik 1 , Kazimierz Józefiak 1 , Małgorzata Superczyńska 1 , Magdalena Czerwińska 2 ,
Witold Krajewski 2 , Józef Legieć 2 , Tadeusz Kuśnierz 2 and Mariusz Magier 3, *






Citation: Bartnik, G.; Józefiak, K.;
Superczyńska, M.; Czerwińska, M.;
Krajewski, W.; Legieć, J.; Kuśnierz, T.;
Magier, M. The Use of Geotechnical
Methods to Determine the
Deformation Parameters of the
Ground in Terms of Operation and
Safety of Mortar Use. Materials 2021,
14, 7237. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ma14237237
Academic Editors: Karim Benzarti
and Gabriele Milani
Received: 8 October 2021
Accepted: 25 November 2021
Published: 26 November 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Materials 2021, 14, 7237. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14237237
1 Institute of Roads and Bridges, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology,
16 Armii Ludowej Ave., 00-637 Warsaw, Poland; G.Bartnik@il.pw.edu.pl (G.B.); k.jozefiak@il.pw.edu.pl (K.J.);
M.Superczynska@il.pw.edu.pl (M.S.)
2 Military Institute of Armament Technology, Prym. S. Wyszyńskiego 7 Str., 05-220 Zielonka, Poland;
czerwinskam@witu.mil.pl (M.C.); krajewskiw@witu.mil.pl (W.K.); legiecj@witu.mil.pl (J.L.);
kusnierzt@witu.mil.pl (T.K.)
3 Institute of Mechanics and Printing, Faculty of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering,
Warsaw University of Technology, Narbutta 85 Str., 02-524 Warsaw, Poland
* Correspondence: mariusz.magier@pw.edu.pl
Abstract: During firing from a mortar, an important issue is the parameters of compressibility of the
ground on which the mortar is placed. This affects the operation of the mortar (including safety).
During the qualification tests of the mortar, the influence of different types of terrains on its strength
and work during shooting should be examined. Until now, in the Polish standardization documents
there was no clear description of the ground parameters used for these kinds of tests. Analysis
of the literature also did not allow to determine the dependence of the mortars displacement in
the function of the type of ground and its geotechnical parameters. In view of the above, it has
become important to draw up a research problem in the form of determining the types of soil with
parameters, enabling the mortar tests to be carried out in conditions as close as possible to combat
conditions. Therefore, the authors carried out the theoretical calculations and field tests with the
use of geotechnical methods such as static and dynamic load tests to determine the parameters of
the ground for mortar testing. Preliminary tests were conducted using the prescribed measurement
methods and a comparative mortar firing test. Subsequently, an analysis of the results was carried out
and the possibilities of using the tested methods of measuring the parameters of soil compressibility
were determined.
Keywords: mortar; operational safety; organic soils; weak soils; deformation modulus; dynamic
deformations
1. Introduction
Infantry mortar is an fundamental weapon of modern warfare. Across the history of
the weapon, it has enabled the infantry to have their own artillery support. The infantry
mortar as developed after World War I has remained basically the same. The requirements
of modern troops, including high mobility, significantly changed the weight of the mortar,
but did not change its general combat characteristics. The fire task of mortars from the
beginning of their existence has remained practically unchanged—firing from a high angle
of the trajectory at the target in order to support the infantry. In addition, mortars play an
important role in countering terrorist threats in the case of cover activities of operational
bases and convoys in enemy areas of operation. Modern mortars (due to increased range,
precision, and effectiveness) allow infantry units to effectively and precisely fight targets
even in urbanized areas. Compared with other types of artillery equipment, they are
characterized by the following characteristics:
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/materials
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 2 of 17

Materials 2021, 14, 7237 2 of 17

and precisely fight targets even in urbanized areas. Compared with other types of artillery
equipment, they are characterized by the following characteristics:
•• Shooting is
Shooting is carried
carried out
out at
at the
the angles
angles of
of the
the sight
sight cc ≥
≥ 45°;
45◦ ;
•• The recoil force created during the shot is transmitted viavia
The recoil force created during the shot is transmitted thethe base
base plate
plate directly
directly to
to the
the ground. The towed mortar does not have any devices
ground. The towed mortar does not have any devices that would absorb (decrease)that would absorb
(decrease)
the impact the impact
of the recoilofforce
the recoil
pulse force
on thepulse
baseon the base plate;
plate;
•• In the
In themajority,
majority, mortars
mortars havehave a smoothbore
a smoothbore tube (barrel).
tube (barrel). For thisthereason,
For this reason, the
projectiles
projectiles
fired fired from
from mortar mortar are fin-stabilized
are fin-stabilized [1–5]. [1–5].
mortars are moving
Since the mortars moving with
with the
the maneuver
maneuver element
element (infantry),
(infantry), they
they can
can see
see
friendly forces
friendly forces and
and are
are often
often within
within close
close distance
distance of
of the
the battlefield
battlefield leadership.
leadership. This
This allows
allows
them to
to shift
shiftfire
fireasasfriendly
friendlytroops advance
troops advance andand
hit changing target
hit changing priorities
target in real
priorities inshort
real
time. time.
short
A mortar with a typical designdesign for
for this
this type
type of weapon
weapon usedused by
by Polish
Polish Land
Land Forces
Forces is
is
a 98 mm M98 (Figure 1) mortar manufactured by Huta Stalowa Wola S.A (Stalowa Wola,
Poland) [6].

Figure 1.1.Mortar
MortarM98
M98(HSW
(HSW S.A.),
S.A.), 1—bipod
1—bipod unitunit
withwith elevation
elevation and direction
and direction mechanisms,
mechanisms, 2—
2—mortar
mortar tube, and 3—base
tube, and 3—base plate. plate.

The mortar tube is used used to to give

give the
the required
required velocity
velocity and and flight
flight direction
direction to to the
the
projectile. For the correct positioning of the tube, tube, the
the bipod
bipod assembly
assembly is is used.
used. The
The base
base
plate is used
used to to support
supportthe themortar
mortarduring
duringthe the shot
shot andand transmit
transmit thethe recoil
recoil impulse
impulse to
to the
the ground.
ground.
The
The mainmainproblem
problem with
withcurrent infantry
current mortars
infantry is that they
mortars do not
is that they have
doa not
mechanism
have a
to reduce thetorecoil
mechanism reduceforce
theorrecoil
energy-absorbing recoil of the mortar
force or energy-absorbing recoil of assembly
the mortar afterassembly
firing a
shot. It is not
after firing uncommon
a shot. It is notfor a mortar to
uncommon forjump close to
a mortar to jump
1 m above
close the
to 1ground
m above when placed
the ground
on a non-absorbing surface. This presents a significant risk to
when placed on a non-absorbing surface. This presents a significant risk to mortar mortar operators [7].
The issues
operators [7]. of interaction between the mortar base plate and the ground are not widely
described in world
The issues of literature.
interaction The main emphasis
between the mortar in research
base plateis onand
the analysis
the groundof thearestress
not
and
widelystrength of theinmortar
described worlditself (including
literature. The mainthe base plate). in
emphasis The paper [8]
research discusses
is on studies
the analysis of
of the effort in various elements of the mortar during shooting
the stress and strength of the mortar itself (including the base plate). The paper [8] from gravel ground. Tests
of this type
discusses allow of
studies to the
determine
effort inthe safety elements
various of use (strength) of the mortar.
of the mortar The paper
during shooting [9]
from
presents a shotless low-cost method of analyzing the strength of a
gravel ground. Tests of this type allow to determine the safety of use (strength) of the base plate. Such research
is the basis
mortar. Thefor optimizing
paper the design
[9] presents a shotless of the mortar.
low-cost The paper
method [10] shows
of analyzing an example
the strength of a
of optimizing
base plate. Such theresearch
construction
is the of a mortar’s
basis base plate
for optimizing in terms
the design ofof
thereducing
mortar. its
Theweight
paper
while maintaining
[10] shows an examplethe required strength
of optimizing the and rigidity. The
construction of a weight
mortar’sofbasethe mortar
plate inisterms
a very of
important parameter because it is supposed to be a light and mobile weapon.
Studies on mortar recoil have been presented for pyrotechnic mortars at work [11], but
they show the results of the much lower loads than military mortars. For the issues of the
 reducing its weight while maintaining the required strength and rigidity. The weight of
reducing its weight while maintaining the required strength and rigidity. The weight of
the mortar is a very important parameter because it is supposed to be a light and mobile
the mortar is a very important parameter because it is supposed to be a light and mobile
weapon.
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 weapon. 3 of 17
Studies on mortar recoil have been presented for pyrotechnic mortars at work [11],
Studies on mortar recoil have been presented for pyrotechnic mortars at work [11],
but they show the results of the much lower loads than military mortars. For the issues of
but they show the results of the much lower loads than military mortars. For the issues of
the relationships between the mortar and the substrate with different parameters, the
the relationships between the mortar and the substrate with different parameters, the
authors did not
relationships find any
between studies.and
the mortar According to thewith
the substrate authors, it isparameters,
different important to solve the
authors did not find any studies. According to the authors, it is important the authors
to solve the
research
did problem
not find consisting
any studies. in determining
According to the the types of soil
authors, that will to
be suitable
thefor testing
research problem consisting in determining the typesitofissoil
important
that will besolve
suitable research
for testing
mortars in
problem close combat
consisting conditions.
in determining theIt types
is particularly important
of soil that from the
will be suitable forpoint
testingofmortars
view of
mortars in close combat conditions. It is particularly important from the point of view of
conducting
in close combatfield tests ofIt the
conditions. new mortars
is particularly intended
important from theforpoint
the ofarmy. Additionally,
view of conducting
conducting field tests of the new mortars intended for the army. Additionally,
appropriately
field selected
tests of the research
new mortars methods
intended forand
thefield
army.tests will be provided
Additionally, to determine
appropriately the
selected
appropriately selected research methods and field tests will be provided to determine the
influence of the essential factors on the results obtained and to determine
research methods and field tests will be provided to determine the influence of the essential a correlation
influence of the essential factors on the results obtained and to determine a correlation
between
factors onthe
theresults
results obtained
obtained by andmeans of the presented
to determine research
a correlation between methods and obtained
the results shooting
between the results obtained by means of the presented research methods and shooting
by means of the presented research methods and shooting tests.
tests.
tests.
2.
2. Dynamics
Dynamics of of Mortar
Mortar Movement
Movement during
during the the Firing
Firing Process
Process
2. Dynamics of Mortar Movement during the Firing Process
In order to give the mortar projectile an initial velocity
In order to give the mortar projectile an initial velocity that would that provide
would the required
provide the
In order
distance, to givepropelling
appropriate the mortar projectile
charges shall anused.
be initialThese
velocity
charges thatduring
wouldthe provide
shot burnthe
required distance, appropriate propelling charges shall be used. These charges during the
required
create distance,
a high appropriate
pressure ofpressurepropelling
gunpowder charges
gases that affect shall be used. These charges during the
shot burn create a high of gunpowder gasesboth
that the
affectprojectile
both the and the bottom
projectile and
shot
of theburn create
barrel. a high pressure
Although the mass ofofgunpowder
the propellinggasescharge
that affect
is both the
variable projectile and
(depending on
the bottom of the barrel. Although the mass of the propelling charge is variable
the required
the bottom distance
of the barrel.
of the Although the
projectile), in mass
this of the
article the work
propelling
of the charge
mortar is variable
on the full
(depending on the required distance of the projectile), in this article the work of the mortar
(depending on thewill
propelling required distanceensuring
of the projectile), in this article theofwork of the mortar
on the full charge
propelling be described,
charge will be described, bothensuring
the highest
bothvelocity
the highest thevelocity
projectileofand
the
on the
the full propelling
highest pressure ofcharge will begases
gunpowder described,
inside ensuring
the tube both Figures
[12]. the highest 2 velocity
and 3 show ofthe
the
projectile and the highest pressure of gunpowder gases inside the tube [12]. Figures 2 and
projectilep(t)
pressure and the highest
diagrams pressure
inside the 60 of gunpowder
mm and 98 mm gases
mortar inside
barrel the tube
tube [12]. Figures
during firing 2 and
(which
3 show the pressure p(t) diagrams inside the 60 mm and 98 mm mortar barrel tube during
3 show
were the pressure
obtained duringp(t) diagrams inside
verification tests ofthe 60 mmconducted
mortars and 98 mminmortar barrel Institute
the Military tube during of
firing (which were obtained during verification tests of mortars conducted in the Military
firing (which were
Armament Technology). obtained during verification tests of mortars conducted in the Military
Institute of Armament Technology).
Institute of Armament Technology).

Figure 2.
2. Example of pressure
pressure p(t)
p(t) in
in the
the tube
tube of
of aa 60
60 mm
mm mortar
mortar during
during firing.
firing.
Figure 2. Example of pressure p(t) in the tube of a 60 mm mortar during firing.

Figure 3. Example of pressure p(t) in the tube of a 98 mm mortar during firing.

Figure3.3.Example
Figure Exampleof
ofpressure
pressurep(t)
p(t)ininthe
thetube
tubeof
ofaa98
98mm
mmmortar
mortarduring
duringfiring.
firing.

In the case of a 60 mm mortar, the maximum pressure shown in Figure 2 is about 47

In the
In the case
case of a 60
60 mm
mm mortar,
mortar, the
themaximum
maximumpressure
pressureshown
shownininFigure
Figure2 2is is
about 47
about
MPa which, after taking into account the surface of the bottom of the barrel of ≈0.002827 m222,
MPa
47 MPa which,
which,after
aftertaking
takinginto
intoaccount
accountthe
the surface the bottom
surface of the bottomofofthe
thebarrel
barrelofof≈≈0.002827
0.002827 m m ,,
generates a maximum force acting on the mortar ≈134.3 kN. For a 98 mm mortar, these are
generatesaamaximum
generates maximumforceforceacting
actingon
onthe
themortar
mortar≈≈134.3 kN. For
134.3 kN. For aa 98
98 mm
mm mortar,
mortar,these
theseare
are
about 127 MPa, ≈0.007543 m2 , and ≈958 kN, respectively. Because the pressure in the tube
and the associated forces acting on the mortar are quickly changing, most often the total
impulse of momentum force transmitted to the gun during the shot is used to describe
the recoil phenomenon. Table 1 presents various parameters related to the phenomenon
of recoil in mortars operated by the Polish Armed Forces when firing on full charges. An
 about 127 MPa, ≈0.007543 m2, and ≈958 kN, respectively. Because the pressure in the tube
and the associated forces acting on the mortar are quickly changing, most often the total
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 4 of 17
impulse of momentum force transmitted to the gun during the shot is used to describe the
recoil phenomenon. Table 1 presents various parameters related to the phenomenon of
recoil in mortars operated by the Polish Armed Forces when firing on full charges. An
impulseofofthe
impulse therecoil
recoilforce
force
is is understood
understood as the
as the momentum
momentum transmitted
transmitted to thetomortar
the mortar
elements
elementsparticipating
participatingininthethe
recoil. The
recoil. theoretical
The recoil
theoretical velocity
recoil is theisvalue
velocity that the
the value that the
mortar elements would reach during recoil if they were not affected by braking
mortar elements would reach during recoil if they were not affected by braking forces. forces.

Table1.1.The
Table Therecoil
recoilparameters in mortars
parameters operated
in mortars by the
operated by Polish Armed
the Polish Forces
Armed (obtained
Forces duringduring
(obtained
verification
verificationtests
testsofof
mortars conducted
mortars in the
conducted Military
in the Institute
Military of Armament
Institute Technology).
of Armament Technology).
Average Duration
Average Duration Weight of Theoretical
Caliberof
Caliber Recoil
RecoilForce
Force Weight of RejectedRecoil
Theoretical
L.L.p.
p. of
of the
the Shot
Shot Rejected Velocity Recoil
ofMortar
Mortar Pulse
Pulse(Ns)
(Ns) Elements (kg) Velocity (m/s)
(ms) Elements (kg) (m/s)
(ms)
11 60 mm
60 mm 320
320 88 18.3
18.3 ≈17.5≈17.5
22 98 mm
mm 3620
3620 10
10 120
120 ≈30.2≈30.2
33 120 mm
120 mm 4400
4400 14
14 207
207 ≈21.3≈21.3

To brake the barrel of the mortar and ensure its stability during the shot, a base plate
To brake the barrel of the mortar and ensure its stability during the shot, a base plate
is used,
is used,which
whichtransmits
transmits the
the recoil
recoil force
force to the
to the ground.
ground. DueDue tomuch
to the the much
largerlarger
diameterdiameter
of the base plate in relation to the diameter of the barrel, the pressures
of the base plate in relation to the diameter of the barrel, the pressures with which the with which the base
plateplate
base can can
affect thethe
affect ground
groundare are much smaller.Nevertheless,
much smaller. Nevertheless, forfor
a 60a mm
60 mm mortar,
mortar, the the
maximumpressure
maximum pressure with with which
which the base
the base plate plate can the
can affect affect the ground
ground is 1.57
is 1.57 MPa. MPa.
In the caseIn the
case
of a 98ofmm
a 98 mm mortar,
mortar, it is 1.9
it is 1.9 MPa. MPa.cases,
In most In most the cases, theisshooting
shooting carried outis by
carried out by the
the mortar
adapted to the deformable
mortar adapted substrate and
to the deformable it will delve
substrate and itinto
willthe ground
delve intotogether
the groundwith the
together
base
withplate during
the base the during
plate shot. Figure 4 shows
the shot. a sequence
Figure 4 showsofaframes
sequencefromofaframes
movie, from
recordeda movie,
with a highwith
recorded speed camera
a high during
speed a mortar
camera shot,a showing
during the sinking
mortar shot, showing of the
thebase plateofinto
sinking the base
the sandy soil. Figure 4 shows the frames recorded every 10
plate into the sandy soil. Figure 4 shows the frames recorded every 10 ms. ms.

Figure 4. Mortar’s recoil process on sandy soil.

Materials 2021, 14, 7237 5 of 17

For a terrain susceptible to deformation during firing, the resultant force, which is
the sum of the recoil force and the reaction force of the terrain on the base plate, creates
the mortar’s velocity in the opposite direction to the projectile velocity, which causes the
mortar to plunge into the ground. After the projectile leaves the tube and the pressure of
the gunpowder gases in the barrel decreases to the level of the atmospheric pressure, the
force of inertia of the mortar causes its further recess into the ground [13–16]. At this stage,
the only significant force acting on the mortar is the reaction force of the ground, which
inhibits its recoil speed. After stopping the mortar, as a result of the ground response, the
mortar may move in the opposite direction, which is called “jumping”.
The quality requirements for mortars stipulate the possibility of firing from them
after placing on grounds with a wide range of properties. Any proper interaction of the
mortar and the terrain is largely dependent on the latter’s deformation modulus [17,18].
For rigid substrates the “jumping” of the mortar and its displacement or sliding off the
base plate onto the ground may occur. With a terrain very responsive to deformation,
the mortar together with the base plate can sink into a significant (relative to the mortar)
depth or slip away. A large displacement of the mortar when delving into liable ground
or during its “jumping” on a non-liable and elastic ground significantly prolongs the
fulfillment of the fire mission because before each shot it is required to re-set the mortar. A
significant influence on the results of mortar shooting will also have its stability during the
shot (especially during the movement of the projectile inside the gun tube). Even a slight
deviation of the mortar barrel (by 1◦ ) in the direction will cause a deviation of the point
of hit of the projectile (at a firing distance of 2000 m)—by over 32 m, and with a shooting
distance of 5000 m—by over 80 m [19]. The impact of the mortar tube’s deflection in the
vertical plane is several times smaller. Therefore, artillery practice often requires (in the
case of placing the mortar on susceptible ground) firing a first shot (called the “setting
shot”) in order to place the mortar in the ground.
Another important aspect resulting from the interaction between the mortar and the
ground is the safety and reliability. Mortar firing on a low-susceptible ground significantly
increases the strain in the main mortar’s parts. This applies in particular to the base plate
and the connection between the base plate and the barrel. Therefore, the development of a
base plate resistant to multiple impulse loads, and at the same time ensuring stability of
the mortar when placed on various types of terrains, requires determining the relationship
between the base plate and the ground during the shot. When firing from a very susceptible
ground, a large displacement of the mortar may lead to damage of the barrel, the barrel
support, or both, or, in extreme cases, because of the slipping of the base plate, cause the
mortar to overturn. Thus, heavy (200 kg or more) mortars of larger calibers, may pose a
threat to the safety of the crew.

3. The Issue of Interaction between Mortar and the Ground from the Standardization
Point of View
The issue of interaction between mortar and the ground significantly affects the
problem of safety and reliability of the mortar use. It is regulated mainly by the Defense
Standards, which is a series of documents supervised by the Polish Military Center for
Quality Standardization and Codification for the normalization of issues related to weapons
equipment. The standard NO-10-A216:2012 [20] contains a set of requirements and tests
that must be fulfilled by mortars introduced into the Armed Forces.
Because operational safety is an overriding requirement for armament equipment,
the standard NO-10-A216:2012 [20] clearly requires the safety and correct use of mortars
placed on various types of ground. The mortar test procedure requires conducting research
shooting on “soft” and “hard” soils. The following types of soil are determined:
1. Hard soils (calcareous (2500 kg/m3 ), stony (2900–3200 kg/m3 ), compacted clay
(1770 kg/m3 ), and frozen soils (620–2000 kg/m3 ));
2. Medium soils (sandy (1620 kg/m3 ), clayey (1500–1800 kg/m3 ), and turf soils
(1500 kg/m3 ));
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 6 of 17

3. Soft soils (muddy (1840 kg/m3 ), “arable” soils (1300 kg/m3 ), and peat and “plump
sand” (1440 kg/m3 )).
Preliminary analysis of the issue showed that the greatest complication occurs in the
case of soft soils. Apart from the inconsistency in nomenclature, the above-mentioned
names of soft soil types do not appear in the geotechnical standards [21,22]. The soft soils
in the engineering practice should be treated as low, with insufficient bearing capacity.
“Weak soil” may be defined as a soil layer that does not fulfill the requirements concerning
compressibility, stability, or suitability for use for a particular object or element of struc-
ture. In engineering practice, the parameterization of weak soils is practically limited to
determining their depth of deposition in the active zone and usually they are not described
by the values of geotechnical parameters. They are reinforced in a way that depends on
the depth of deposition, the type of soil, and designed construction. Another aspect that
makes geotechnical investigation of the ground difficult is the limitations resulting from
the technical capabilities of the research equipment, which is not adapted to determine
the parameters of weak soils. Moreover, there are no appropriate standards to interpret
the obtained results of these types of soil tests. In addition, when choosing a test method,
the conditions of the proving ground should be taken into account as a place where test
shooting will take place and where it is necessary to prepare and examine the ground for
its use as the shooting position. Therefore, the ground should:
• Allow easy preparation without specialist geotechnical (geological) knowledge and
heavy equipment;
• Provide repeatability of obtained ground conditions;
• Be recognized by data that does not require the use of complicated or time-consuming
methods and can be determined under field conditions;
• Allow to prepare the ground in a short time;
• Be easily obtainable.

4. Soft Soil
4.1. Selection of a Model Substrate
The standard [20] introduces the following types of soft soils: muddy, arable soils,
peat, and plump sand. Taking into account the potential difficulties with the use of cohesive
soils as a weak layer during their preparation, formation, and compaction resulting from
the need to moisten them (to achieve at least a plastic state), the modeling of “muddy soil”
or “arable soil” was omitted. It was decided to use “peaty soil” (resigning from modeling
“plump sand” due to the possibility of obtaining a much weaker soil with a wider range of
“weaknesses”), which is widely available for gardening use. Peat is a demanding research
material; however, it maintains constant parameters in various weather conditions and
is widely available. The peat used in this study can be described as dry and fibrous (no
decomposed organic parts) with clearly recognizable plant remains with no solids.
Initially, it was assumed that the substrate model would be characterized by param-
eters describing deformability. The bearing capacity of soils increases with compaction,
then it is necessary to control the amount of peat to obtain the required values of deforma-
tion parameters. However, in engineering practice for peats there is no test procedure to
determine the values of the state of compaction parameters, i.e., relative density (density
index) ID or relative compaction (degree of compaction) IS .
The density index ID determines the condition of the cohesionless soils, which peat
is not. In accordance with the standard EN 13286-2:2010 [23], there is no test procedure
to determine the value of the maximum dry density of the peat ρds which is taken into
account in the calculation of IS . Determining the value of the ρd for peat is quite difficult
due to the need to take a sample with an undisturbed structure. It is also not possible to
use indirect methods for determining compaction parameters such as dynamic probing.
In the authors’ opinion, it is possible to determine the bulk density of the ground
model and control this parameter while preparing the shooting post. It should be noted
that the value of the density depends on the moisture, which in the case of peat can be
 that the value of the density depends on the moisture, which in the case of pea
within a wide range. The parameter that better describes the state of compaction i
density. This method requires the determination of the moisture value, which
conditions can be checked using, e.g., the electric method (presupposes determin
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 soil resistance, conductivity, inductance, as well as capacity) or the tensometric
7 of 17

(based on the difference in the voltage of water between the phase boundaries).

4.2. Research
within Methods
a wide range. The parameter that better describes the state of compaction is the
dry density. This method requires the determination of the moisture value, which in field
Thecan
conditions methods of assessing
be checked theelectric
using, e.g., the deformability of the ground
method (presupposes in situ include:
determination of t
plate
soil load test
resistance, and dynamic
conductivity, load plate
inductance, as welltest. These methods
as capacity) allow for
or the tensometric direct meas
method
of the soil response to an applied load described by the following parame
(based on the difference in the voltage of water between the phase boundaries).
deformation modulus E and the dynamic modulus of deformation Evd.
4.2. Research Methods
The static plate load test is commonly used in road construction in the form
The methods of assessing the deformability of the ground in situ include: the static
generated
plate load test andby dynamic
the VSS apparatus
load plate test. These (Verein
methods Schweizer
allow for directStrassenfachmänner,
measurement of
Switzerland).
the soil response toThe deformation
an applied modulus
load described by thein the VSS
following test is defined
parameters: as the ratio of
the deformation
modulus E and the dynamic modulus of deformation E .
load increment to the deformation incrementvdof the tested layer in a fixed rang
The static plate load test is commonly used in road construction in the form of loads
loads [24]. Double static loading of the test surface allows to calculate the primar
generated by the VSS apparatus (Verein Schweizer Strassenfachmänner, Zürich, Switzer-
secondary
land). E2 deformation
The deformation modulus modules
in the VSS(initial and
test is reload
defined as modulus,
the ratio ofgained
the unitfrom
load static p
test). In the case of assessment of the stiffness of the thick ground
increment to the deformation increment of the tested layer in a fixed range of unit loads [24].layers, large-scale l
are used
Double [25].
static loading of the test surface allows to calculate the primary E1 and secondary
E2 deformation
The dynamic modulesload(initial and test
plate reloadbymodulus,
lightweightgaineddeflectometer
from static plate was
load test). In
developed in
the case of assessment of the stiffness of the thick ground layers, large-scale load tests are
Germany [26–30] as a device for in situ testing of stiffness and compaction of the
used [25].
andThe road construction
dynamic load plate test layers, as welldeflectometer
by lightweight as an alternative to static
was developed testing.
initially in T
advantage
Germany of this
[26–30] method
as a device for is mobility
in situ testingand short and
of stiffness testcompaction
time. In the dynamic
of the ground load p
and road construction layers, as well as an alternative to static testing.
the amplitude of plate displacement caused by a single impact pulse is measured The main advantage
of this method is mobility and short test time. In the dynamic load plate test, the amplitude
of plate displacement caused by a single impact pulse is measured.
4.3. Test Stand
4.3. Test
ToStand
assess the possibility of using peat as a model ground of the shooting s
To assess the
preliminary possibility
research of using peat
program wasasplanned
a model ground of the shooting
and carried out. The station,
program
a preliminary research program was planned and carried out. The program includes
verification of the use of peat in the test stand and the validity of
verification of the use of peat in the test stand and the validity of the selected research
the selected
methods.
methods. For
For this
this purpose,
purpose, a test
a test stand stand was made
was made in the in theofform
form of a wooden
a wooden box withbox a with a
of 0.7 m
volume 3 in which
of 0.7 3 previously
m in which weighed
previously weighedpeat
peatwas
was placed. About
placed. About 197.4
197.4 kg ofkgpeat
of peat wa
was placed in the box, which allows to determine the bulk density at 282 kg/m 3 (Figure 5). 5).
in the box, which allows to determine the bulk density at 282 kg/m (Figure 3

Figure
Figure 5. 5. Test
Test stand.
stand.
Materials 2021,2021,
Materials 14, 7237
14, 7237 8 of 17
8 of 17

4.4. Static Load Method

4.4. Static Load Method
The static plate load tests were carried out using a standard rigid plate (diameter 30 cm)
The static plate load tests were carried out using a standard rigid plate (diameter
included in the VSS apparatus. In practice, due to the lack of space, the use of dial sensors
30 cm) included in the VSS apparatus. In practice, due to the lack of space, the use of dial
and the rack attached to the apparatus for settling measurements has been omitted.
sensors and the rack attached to the apparatus for settling measurements has been omitted.
The load of ~215 kg consisted of a stack of 7 steel plates (20 ÷ 30 kg each) and a VSS
The load of ~215 kg consisted of a stack of 7 steel plates (20 ÷ 30 kg each) and a VSS
plate. Applying the entire load was divided into 7 stages.
plate. Applying the entire load was divided into 7 stages.
The measurement of displacement was carried out using the geodetic method at four
The measurement of displacement was carried out using the geodetic method at four
points on the surface of the rigid plate. This allowed to eliminate possible stack tilts, and
points on the surface of the rigid plate. This allowed to eliminate possible stack tilts, and
the average value of settlements measured at individual points was taken as a result.
the average value of settlements measured at individual points was taken as a result.
The The
loadload
consisted of two
consisted of phases: the primary
two phases: loading
the primary and the
loading andsubsequent unloading.
the subsequent unloading.
EachEach
phase was carried out in stages, and the final load value was selected
phase was carried out in stages, and the final load value was selected to obtain
to obtain
pressures similar
pressures to those
similar generated
to those by humans
generated (approx.
by humans 30 kPa).
(approx. It wasItassumed
30 kPa). that inthat
was assumed
fieldinconditions, human-induced
field conditions, subsidence
human-induced could could
subsidence be used as anasinitial
be used rating
an initial of the
rating of the
ground quality of the shooting position.
ground quality of the shooting position.

4.5. Dynamic LoadLoad

4.5. Dynamic Method
Method
The The
dynamic
dynamicloadload
plateplate
test test
consists of measuring
consists of measuring the deformation
the deformation of the
of ground
the ground
surface, caused
surface, by aby
caused short-term forceforce
a short-term impulse. The The
impulse. impulse loadload
impulse is generated by aby
is generated freely
a freely
falling massmass
falling and and
transmitted through
transmitted throughthe pressure plateplate
the pressure to the ground.
to the ThisThis
ground. methodmethodis is
treated as a as
treated short-term
a short-termquasistical loadload
quasistical of the
of plate on the
the plate ground.
on the The The
ground. free free
fall of
fallthe
of the
weight, falling
weight, along
falling alongthe the
guide rodrod
guide ononthethe
spring-damper
spring-damperelement,
element,generates
generatesan animpact-
impact-like
like load PPDD on the load
load plate
plate(Figure
(Figure6).6).The
Thepulse
pulseisistransmitted
transmittedthrough
through the load
the loadplate
plateto the
surface
to the surfaceof the ground,
of the generating
ground, generatinga contact stressstress
a contact σD =σ100D = kPa
100 and
kPa causing the substrate
and causing the
settlement
substrate equalequal
settlement to thetodisplacement uD of uthe
the displacement rigid
D of load plate
the rigid [29]. [29].
load plate

Figure
Figure 6. Variability
6. Variability in time
in time t of loading
t of loading forceforce PD displacement
PD and uD inuaDdynamic
and displacement in a dynamic test [30].
test [30].

In theIn research
the research schedule,
schedule, it was
it was assumed
assumed that that
the the determination
determination of the
of the dynamic
dynamic
modulus
modulus of deformation
of deformation Evd will
Evd will be carried
be carried out with
out with a lightweight
a lightweight deflectometer
deflectometer ZORNZORN
ZFG 2000 (Zorn Instruments GmbH & Co. KG, Hansestadt Stendal, Germany). During the the
ZFG 2000 (Zorn Instruments GmbH & Co. KG, Hansestadt Stendal, Germany). During
tests,tests, it turned
it turned out that
out that the magnitude
the magnitude of theofgenerated
the generated acceleration
acceleration exceeds
exceeds the measuring
the measuring
capacity of the accelerometer amounting to ± 100 g, which corresponds
capacity of the accelerometer amounting to ±100 g, which corresponds to a displacement to a displacement
of 0.2–30 mm ± 0.02 mm. Therefore, a Photron high-speed camera
of 0.2–30 mm ± 0.02 mm. Therefore, a Photron high-speed camera was used to determine was used to determine
the course of displacement during the dynamic test. The
the course of displacement during the dynamic test. The image was recordedimage was recorded at a frequency
at a
of 6000 frames per second, but the analysis of the dynamics of this phenomenon indicates
frequency of 6000 frames per second, but the analysis of the dynamics of this phenomenon
that 2000 frames per second is sufficient. The recordings from the camera were subjected to
indicates that 2000 frames per second is sufficient. The recordings from the camera were
imaging analysis in order to determine the changes in the position of the measuring points
subjected to imaging analysis in order to determine the changes in the position of the
during the test. During one study, three drops were performed. The analysis took into
measuring points during the test. During one study, three drops were performed. The
account three reference points (p0; p1; p2) marked on the device used (Figure 7).
analysis took into account three reference points (p0; p1; p2) marked on the device used
(Figure 7).
MaterialsMaterials
2021, 2021,
14, 7237
14, 7237 9 of 17

Figure
Figure 7. Displacement
7. Displacement of reference
of reference points
points during impact.during impact.
4.6. Results
4.6.Starting
Resultsfrom the analysis of settlement of the soil as isotropic and homogeneous
elastic half-space,
Starting the value
from of the
the substrateof
analysis deformation modulus
settlement E from
of the soilstatic
as plate load and
isotropic
tests and the dynamic modulus of deformation Evd from dynamic plate load tests can be
elastic half-space,
determined the value
from the Equation [31]: of the substrate deformation modulus E from s
tests and the dynamic modulus of deformation
 D ∆p Evd from dynamic plate lo
2
determined from the Equation
E, Evd = [31]:
1−ν ω
∆s
(1)

where: ν—Poisson’s ratio, ω—the shape factor, which for a circular rigid 𝐷 Δ𝑝plate takes the
value ω = 0.79, D—diameter of the loading plate 𝐸, 𝐸(S355J0
= steel, 𝜈 )𝜔 Modulus is 190 to
(1 −Young’s
210 GPa) (m), ∆p—the increase in load (Pa), and ∆s—the increase in settlement Δ𝑠 for given
increase in load (m).
where: ν—Poisson’s ratio, ω—the shape factor, which for a circular rigid
For a dynamic load plate test ∆p = 0.1 MPa, ∆s is the maximum displacement of the
value plate.
loading ω = 0.79, D—diameter of the loading plate (S355J0 steel, Young’s Mo
The
210 GPa) results
(m), of Δp—the
the static tests, calculated
increase using(Pa),
in load Equation Δs—the
and(1), are shown in Tablein
increase 2. settle
Figure 8 presents the dependence of the soil settlement on the used loads. The shape of this
increase in load (m).
graph suggests the linear soil response to the applied loads. In this case, in the calculation 10 of 1
Materials 2021, 14, 7237
For a dynamic
of the modules, load
the value of plate test
the Poisson’s Δpfor= peat
ratio ν = 0.2,Δs
0.1 MPa, isthe
and theplate
maximum
diameter displ
D = 30 cm plate.
loading were assumed.
The results of the static tests, calculated using Equation (1), are sho
Figure 8 presents the dependence of the soil settlement on the used loads
this graph suggests the linear soil response to the applied loads. In th
calculation of the modules, the value of the Poisson’s ratio for peat 𝜈 = 0.2
diameter 𝐷 = 30 cm were assumed.

Table 2. Static load test results.

Load Force Pressure Average Value

Phase of Test
(kg) (kN) (kPa) (cm
16.40 * 0.16 2.28 0.0
49.80 0.49 6.91 −0.
Figure8.8.Pressure-settlement
Figure Pressure-settlementrelationship for static
relationship load test.
for static load test.
73.80 0.72 10.24 −1.
Loading
The values of the primary97.40 static deformation
0.96 modulus13.51for each stage are listed
−1.i
Table 3. 124.90 1.22 17.33 −2.
156.40 1.53 21.70 −3.
Table 3. Primary static deformation modules.
186.50 1.83 25.87 −3.
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 10 of 17

Table 2. Static load test results.

Load Force Pressure Average Value of

Phase of Test
(kg) (kN) (kPa) Settlement (cm)
16.40 * 0.16 2.28 0.00
49.80 0.49 6.91 −0.73
73.80 0.72 10.24 −1.25
Loading 97.40 0.96 13.51 −1.83
124.90 1.22 17.33 −2.35
156.40 1.53 21.70 −3.10
186.50 1.83 25.87 −3.63
214.90 2.11 29.81 −4.33
186.50 1.83 25.87 −4.30
156.40 1.53 21.70 −4.10
124.90 1.22 17.33 −3.85
Unloading
97.40 0.96 13.51 −3.53
73.80 0.72 10.24 −3.23
49.80 0.49 6.91 −2.88
16.40 0.16 2.28 −1.90
* weight of rigid plate.

The values of the primary static deformation modulus for each stage are listed in
Table 3.

Table 3. Primary static deformation modules.

Increase in Increase in Primary Static Deformation

Pressure p Settlement
Pressure Settlement Modulus
(kPa) s (cm)
∆p (kPa) ∆s (cm) E1 (kPa)
2.28 0.00 −0.00 0.00 0.00
6.91 4.63 −0.73 0.73 144.3
10.24 3.33 −1.25 0.52 145.7
13.51 3.27 −1.83 0.58 128.3 144.6
(average)
17.33 3.82 −2.35 0.52 167.1
21.70 4.37 −3.10 0.75 132.6
25.87 4.17 −3.63 0.53 179.0
29.81 3.94 −4.33 0.7 128.1

The course of the impact was recorded in the dynamic plate test with the use of a
high-speed camera. On this basis, the values of the settlement of the loaded soil were
determined for the entire impact phase. Below are presented the diagrams (Figures 9–11)
of displacement during three consecutive drops for the p0 point. Positive displacement
values on the graphs are related to the detachment of the plate from the tested soil.
The values of the measured displacements at individual points during impacts to-
gether with the calculated values of the dynamic modulus of deformation Evd are shown in
Table 4. The rising average values of Evd from 775.29 kPa (Drop 1) to 832.51 kPa (Drop 3)
indicate a slight compaction of the test ground after each drop.
 The course of the impact was recorded in the dynamic plate test with the use
high-speed camera. On this basis, the values of the settlement of the loaded soil
determined for the entire impact phase. Below are presented the diagrams (Figures 9
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 11 of 17
of displacement during three consecutive drops for the p0 point. Positive displacem
values on the graphs are related to the detachment of the plate from the tested soil.

Materials 2021,
Materials 2021, 14,
14, 7237
7237 11
11
Figure9.9.Vertical
Figure Vertical displacement
displacement of theof
p0the p0during
point point drop
during
No.drop
1. No. 1.

Figure10.10.
Figure
Figure 10. Vertical
Vertical displacement
displacement
Vertical of
of the of
displacement the
p0 the p0during
point
p0 pointdrop
point during drop
No. drop
during 2. No. 2.
No. 2.

Figure11.11.
Figure
Figure 11. Vertical
Vertical
Vertical displacement
displacement
displacement of
of the of the
p0 the p0during
p0
point pointdrop
point during
during drop
No. drop
3. No. 3.
No. 3.

The values
The values of of the
the measured
measured displacements
displacements at at individual
individual points
points during
during im im
together with
together with the
the calculated
calculated values
values of
of the
the dynamic
dynamic modulus
modulus ofof deformation
deformation E Evd are sh
vd are sh
in Table 4. The rising average values of E from 775.29 kPa (Drop 1) to 832.51 kPa
in Table 4. The rising average values of Evd from 775.29 kPa (Drop 1) to 832.51 kPa (Dr
vd (Dr
indicate aa slight
indicate slight compaction
compaction of
of the
the test
test ground
ground after
after each
each drop.
drop.
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 12 of 17

Table 4. The values of measured displacements and dynamic modulus of deformation.

Point p0 Point p1 Point p2

Drop 1
Displacement [mm] 29.48 29.21 29.35

Dynamic modulus of 771.78 778.91 775.19

deformation Evd [kPa] 775.29 (average)
Drop 2
Displacement [mm] 27.94 28.14 28.30

Dynamic modulus of 814.31 808.52 803.96

deformation Evd [kPa] 808.93 (average)
Drop 3
Displacement [mm] 27.14 27.43 27.42

Dynamic modulus of 838.32 829.46 829.76

deformation Evd [kPa] 832.51 (average)

4.7. Minimum Values of the Weak Soil Parameters for Test Shooting
Taking into account the similar (dynamic) action of the mortar plate and the dynamic
load plate, the dynamic modulus of deformation can be adopted as a Evd parameter
characterizing the weak soil in terms of test shooting. Using Equation (1), it is possible to
estimate the minimum dynamic modulus of deformation of the weak soil, at which it will
be possible to safely fire a mortar. For this purpose, it was assumed the Poisson’s ratio of
peat ν = 0.2, the diameter of the mortar base plate dm = 33 cm, and ω = 0.79 for a circular
rigid plate [31]. In addition, a possible displacement of the mortar’s base plate should be
assumed, which will allow a safe shot to be fired ∆smax = 50 mm. The maximum pressure
under the base plate of a 60 mm mortar is ∆pmax = 1.57 MPa. Thus, we get:

min
  0.33 · 1.57 · 106
Evd = 1 − 0.22 · 0.79 · = 7.86 MPa (2)
0.050
The weak ground should therefore be prepared in such a way that the dynamic
modulus is larger than Evd min . Due to the fact that the dynamic plate is not adapted to study

the deformation modulus of the weak substrate, when determining the modulus Evd it is
necessary to use a high-speed camera. However, this procedure is difficult to carry out in
the field. A simpler test is to evaluate the static modulus on the basis of a static load test. In
the case of the proposed type of weak soil, the relationship between the static and dynamic
modulus can be determined. The dependency will apply only to the chosen type of soil. In
the presented case, the average primary static modulus is E = 144.6 kPa (see Table 2). The
average dynamic modulus after the third drop is Evd = 832.5 kPa (see Table 3). Thus, we
get a coefficient of proportionality:

Evd
a= = 5.8 (3)
E
In the case of the tested soil, it can be assumed that the minimum static modulus that
must be obtained in order for the substrate to meet the assumed conditions is:
min
Evd 7.86 MPa
Emin = = = 1.36 MPa (4)
a 5.8
At this stage, the coefficient a should be determined each time at the initial stage of
selection of the soil because it could be different for various types of organic soil.
 Materials 2021, 14, 7237 13 of 17

In the calculation of the static modulus, the coefficient for a rigid circular plate is
used (see Equation (1)). However, it is possible to carry out static test loads using a rigid
square-shaped plate. In this case, the shape factor ω in Equation (1) shall be 0.88 [31].
The determined values of the modules for the model soil are lower than the minimum
calculated values, however, in the opinion of the authors, verification of the suitability of
the proposed soil under the field conditions is required.

5. Medium Soil
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 To characterize the substrate by the dynamic deformation modulus, preliminary field 13
tests combined with shot tests with a 98 mm mortar were carried out in the field (Figure 12).
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 13 of 17

Figure
Figure12.12.
The mortars on the
onfiring position.
Figure 12. TheThe mortars
mortars on the the firing
firing position.
position.

According
According to
to the
the standard [19],
[19], the medium soils
soils are sandy, clayey, and
and turf
turf soils.
soils. As
As
According to standard
the standard the medium
[19], the medium are soils
sandy,are
clayey,
sandy, clayey, and turf soi
part
part of
of the
the assessment
assessment of of the
the value of the
value of the dynamic
dynamic sandy
sandy soil
soil deformation
deformation modulus
modulus (fine
(fine
part of the assessment
sands—FSa), of the value with
of the lightweight
dynamic sandy soil deformation modulus
sands—FSa), three
three tests
tests were
were conducted
conducted with aa lightweight deflectometer.
deflectometer. The research
The research
sands—FSa),
was
was carried
carried out three tests
out within
within the were conducted
the shooting
shooting position at aawith
position at deptha of
depth lightweight
of 0.5
0.5 m, deflectometer.
after removing
m, after removing the topThe res
the top
was
layers
layers carried
of sandy out
soil within
and the
humus. shooting
The position
determined at
average a depth
values of
of 0.5
soil m, after
settlement removing
are in th
the range of 0.527–0.399 mm, and the dynamic modulus in the range of
layers of sandy soil and humus. The determined average values of soil settlement a 42.69–56.39 MPa
with
the an average
range value of 48.17mm,
of 0.527–0.399 MPa.and the dynamic modulus in the range of 42.69–56.39
As part of the assessment of the density of sandy soil, dynamic probing using DPL
with an average value of 48.17 MPa.
was performed. The results of the test are shown in Figure 13.
As part of the assessment of the density of sandy soil, dynamic probing using
was performed. The results of the test are shown in Figure 13.

Figure
Figure 13.
13. Dynamic
Dynamic probe
probe profile.
profile.

The value of the density index ID and the degree of compaction IS are determined
respectively from the relationships:
Figure 13. Dynamic probe profile.
𝐼 = 0.429𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑁( ) + 0.071 [−] (5)
 Materials 2021, 14, 7237 14 of 17

The value of the density index ID and the degree of compaction IS are determined
respectively from the relationships:

ID = 0.429logN(k)10 + 0.071 [−] (5)

Materials 2021, 14, 7237 0.818 14

Is = [−] (6)
0.958 − 0.174ID
At the shooting place, four shots were fired. The first two shots were intended
to pre-adjust the plate to the ground. The recoil pulses were 2153.84 and 2828.7 (Ns),
The possible displacement of the base plate which will allow a safe shot to be
respectively. The next two shots were carried out on a maximum pressure propelling
for this type of mortar is equal to 100 mm (19). The measured maximum displaceme
charge (for mortar’s endurance tests) and the recoil pulse achieved 3704.07 (Ns). The
the mortar’s
maximum base plate
measured is closeoftothe
displacements the middle
base of theshots
plate during safeNo.
range (about
3 and 4 were40%
38.44of 100 m
and 38.67 mm, respectively. The displacement of the base plate during the third shotas
Thus, the soil with the parameters determined above can be assumed is a med
shown in Figure
subgrade 14.
for mortar testing.

Figure 14.Displacements
Figure14. Displacementsof the
ofbase plate during
the base the thirdthe
plate during shot.
third shot.

The possible displacement of the base plate which will allow a safe shot to be fired for
Using the results of the maximum displacements of the base plate and assumin
this type of mortar is equal to 100 mm (19). The measured maximum displacement of the
Equation
mortar’s base (2): 𝜈=
plate is 0.3
closefor sand,
to the 𝑑 of=the80safe
middle cm,range
the(about
value40%of ofthe
100dynamic
mm). Thus,deforma
modulus
the soil withEvd
thefrom the firing
parameters pulse load
determined above can
canbe
bedetermined. The maximum
assumed as a medium subgradepressure
for u
the base plate of the mortar caliber 98 mm is Δ𝑝
mortar testing. = 1.9 MPa, and the average maxim
Using the results
displacement from twoof the maximum
mortar Δ𝑠ś
shotsdisplacements = 38.55
of themm,
baseso:
plate and assuming
in Equation (2): ν = 0.3 for sand, dm = 80 cm, the value of the dynamic deformation
modulus Evd from the firing pulse load can be determined. 0.8 ⋅ 1.9
The⋅ 10
maximum pressure under
the base plate of the mortar = (198−mm
𝐸 caliber 0.3 is) ∆p
⋅ 0.79 ⋅ 1.9 MPa, and the
max = = average
28.3 MPa maximum
displacement from two mortar shots ∆ssrmax = 38.55 mm, so:
0.03855
The obtained value  of 28.3 MPa is0.8
lower than the value obtained from the dyna
2 · 1.9 · 106
plate test (48.17 MPa). 1 − above
Evd = The 0.3 · 0.79
can· be 0.03855
influenced by aMPa
= 28.3 number of factors,(7)of which
most important seem to be:
The obtained value of 28.3 MPa is lower than the value obtained from the dynamic
•
plate The(48.17
test tube MPa).
of theThe
mortar
aboveand theinfluenced
can be base plate
by during the
a number shot are
of factors, of not perpendicul
which the
each other,
most important which
seem to be:may cause slight lateral displacements of the plate;
•• Dependence
The tube of the of the deformation
mortar modulus
and the base plate duringonthethe stress
shot value;
are not perpendicular to
• Theother,
each shape factor
which mayωcause
wasslight
adopted
lateralfor a rigid circular
displacements plate, which can be a ce
of the plate;
• Dependence
approximationof thein
deformation
the case ofmodulus
a mortar on base
the stress value;
plate, which is not perfectly rigid and
• The shape factor
special ribbing; ω was adopted for a rigid circular plate, which can be a certain
approximation in the case of a mortar base plate, which is not perfectly rigid and has
• The soil inertia has higher influence on the speed of deformations during mo
special ribbing;
firing than at research tests.

6. Conclusions
Designing standardized test stands with mortar test sites is a complex issue. In o
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 15 of 17

• The soil inertia has higher influence on the speed of deformations during mortar firing
than at research tests.

6. Conclusions
Designing standardized test stands with mortar test sites is a complex issue. In order
to ensure the repeatability of the test conditions, the characteristics of the shooting process
and the interaction between the mortar and the soil should be taken into account. It is
also important in order to confirm that the mortar meets the requirements, including
the safety of its operation. The use of standardized soils (with a parametric description
of their geotechnical properties) and practical measurement methods will allow for an
unambiguous and correct implementation of the mortar certification process. Due to the
specificity of shooting tests, the development of stations and research methods that can
be used under the field conditions would be beneficial. At the moment, there are no such
stands or research methods.
The research and results presented in the paper constitute the first approach to the
development of standardized test stands (including soft soils). The requirements for the
stands require an innovative approach to the issue of the object’s impact on the ground
in terms of geotechnical engineering. This is caused by both a much wider range of soil
properties (including weak soil, not used in construction) and many times higher loads
generated by the mortar. In the next stage, experimental verification of methods and
calculations will be carried out by conducting a shooting test.
In order to characterize the soil conditions using geotechnical parameters and more
accurate methods, the soil moduli of deformation were chosen.
In the case of designing the mortar test stand for weak soils, peat was used as a
subgrade material. This kind of soil was chosen because it is widely available and allows
for easy preparation of weak soil conditions. However, the stiffness of organic soil is not
the subject of geotechnical testing as it is assumed that such soil has very little bearing
capacity and should be improved. In order to parametrize the weak soil for mortar testing,
the authors proposed the dynamic load test in conjunction with the static load test. The
static load test was introduced because the dynamic load test generated large settlements
of the plate which had to be determined using a high-speed camera, making the procedure
problematic. Thus, the idea was to carry out a much simpler test and determine the static
modulus of the peat. Then, the dynamic modulus can be calculated using a previously
established empirical Equation between static and dynamic moduli for the used weak soil.
In the case of medium soils, the sandy subsoil was parameterized in the field. The
deformation modulus from the lightweight dynamic plate test was determined, as well
as the compaction parameters based on DPL probing. In the opinion of the authors, the
abovementioned parameters can be used in order to standardize the medium subgrade
conditions for mortar testing.
The value of the dynamic modulus of deformation was also calculated based on the
displacement of the mortar base plate as a result of the shot impulse. The determined
values of this modulus and the dynamic load plate modulus do not coincide, which is due
to a number of factors related to the peculiarities of the mortar shot. However, it should
be emphasized that the main goal was to parameterize the soil conditions for weak and
medium subgrades in relation to mortar testing procedure. Further studies are required to
determine the influence of the various factors on the results obtained and to determine a
sufficiently accurate correlation between the results obtained by means of the presented
research methods and shooting tests.

7. Discussion
The carried out tests and their development will allow for more accurate modeling of
the process of cooperation of the mortar with the substrate during the shot. This is also
essential when designing mortars, including ensuring the correct strength of the base plate,
ensuring better stability and accuracy of the mortar, and reducing its weight.
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 16 of 17

The mortar has to be tested for three different conditions of subgrade: weak, medium,
and hard soil. These conditions correspond to the movement of the mortar base plate
after shot. When designing a test stand for the weak soil conditions, the movement of the
plate after shot must be close to the limiting value designed for the particular mortar type,
ensuring safety of its operation. If the settlement of the mortar plate exceeds the safe limit,
the mortar might be damaged. Therefore, the soil has to be prepared in such a way that
the mortar plate settlement is close to the limit value but does not exceed it. The static
or dynamic load modulus can be used in order to prepare such weak soil. The dynamic
load modulus for the weak soil test prepared for the preliminary study presented in the
paper was between 775.29 kPa and 832.51 kPa. However, based on theoretical calculations
(see Equation (2)) the dynamic modulus should be at least 7.86 MPa. Test shootings on
this soil will be carried out to verify the assumptions. If the value of the modulus is too
low, the peat can be compacted in layers and/or sand can be mixed with peat to decrease
its compressibility.
For the medium soil, the goal was to obtain the displacement of the mortar base plate
after shot close to the middle of the safe range. For the tested 98 mm mortar, the required
range is 0–100 mm. After shooting, the maximum average displacement of the base plate
was 38.55 mm. Thus, the soil with the average dynamic modulus close to 48.17 MPa can
be assumed as medium subgrade for mortar testing. Additionally, the dynamic modulus
based on mortar plate settlement was calculated. It must be admitted that the difference
between the value of 28.3 MPa (obtained from mortar shots) and the value of 48.17 MPa
(obtained from the dynamic plate test) is significant, which is probably influenced by
the factors mentioned previously in the article. In the current study for sandy ground
(“medium soil”) the dynamic plate modulus is equal to 1.7 times the mortar’s modulus.
The obtained dependence requires confirmation in subsequent planned tests.
Shooting tests using a 60 mm mortar on the proposed weak soil are planned. Addi-
tionally, geotechnical parameters of the hard soil will be determined, and shooting tests
will be carried out.
An important aspect of the research is the influence of stress level and dynamics of
deformations on the soils properties. It should be emphasized that this kind of research
has not been reported in the available literature so far.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, G.B. and K.J.; methodology, M.S.; software, K.J.; valida-
tion, T.K., J.L. and G.B.; formal analysis, M.M.; investigation, M.C.; resources, M.S.; data curation, M.S.,
W.K.; writing—original draft preparation, T.K. and K.J.; writing—review and editing, M.M.; visualiza-
tion, M.C.; supervision, G.B. and K.J.; project administration, W.K., G.B., K.J. and M.M.; and funding
acquisition, M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Christopher, F. Foss, Jane’s Armour and Artillery 2005–2006, 26th ed.; Janes Information Group: Bishop Auckland, UK, 15 Au-
gust 2005.
2. Chant, C. Artillery of World War II; MBI Publishing: Hong Kong, China, 2001.
3. Evans, N. Artillery Indirect Fire and Its Weapons. In Military Technology; MILTECH: Bonn, Germany, 1995; pp. 47–60.
4. Hogg, I.V. The Encyclopedia of Infantry Weapons of World War II; Bison Books: Hong Kong, China, 1987.
5. Pengelly, R. Towed Artillery Designers Wage Weight Wars; Jane’s International Defence Review: Surrey, UK, 1996; pp. 16–25.
6. Magier, M.; Ruliński, P. The reliability firing tests of the special ammunition for 98 MM mortar M-98. J. KONBiN 2014, 29, 81–92.
[CrossRef]
7. Headquarters United States Marine Corps. Military Operations on Urbanized Terrain (MOUT); MCWP: Washington, DC, USA,
26 April 1998; pp. 3–35.
Materials 2021, 14, 7237 17 of 17

8. Toivola, J.; Moilanen, S.; Jussila, H.-R. Force, pressure and strain measurements for traditional heavy launch cycle; Rakenteiden
Mekaniikka. J. Struct. Mech. 2012, 44, 309–329.
9. Littlefield, A.; Sibilla, J. Simulated Proof Testing of Mortar Baseplates. Technical Report ARAEW-TR-08017; U.S. Army ARDEC Benet
Laboratories: Watervliet, NY, USA, 2008.
10. Wang, F.; Yang, G. Topological Design of a Mortar Base Plate under Impact Loads. Shock. Vib. 2021, 2021, 8845019. [CrossRef]
11. Kosanke, K.; Weinman, L. Typical Mortar Recoil Forces for Spherical Aerial Shell Firings; Fireworks Buisness: Dingmans Ferry, PA,
USA, 2004; Volume 242.
12. Merda, T.; Magier, M. Experimental and numerical analysis of supersonic mortar projectiles. In Proceedings of the 30th
International Symposium on Ballistics, Long Beach, CA, USA, September 11–15 2017; pp. 92–98. [CrossRef]
13. Headquarters Department of the Army, Headquarters United States Marine Corps. Tactical Employment of Mortars. In ATP
3-21.90, MCTP 3-01d; Headquarters Department of the Army, Headquarters United States Marine Corps: Washington, DC, USA,
9 October 2019.
14. Headquarters Department of the Army, Mortars. Field Manual FM 3-22.90; Army Knowledge Online: Washington, DC, USA,
7 December 2007. Available online: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-22-90/fm3-22-90.pdf
(accessed on 24 November 2021).
15. Merda, T.; Magier, M. The Estimation of the Drag Shape for Supersonic Mortar Projectiles. Mach. Dyn. Res. 2017, 41, 45–52.
16. US Army Test and Evaluation Command Test Operations Procedure; Mortar Ammunition. In DRSTE-RP-702-103, Test Operations
Procedure 4-2-012; Aberdeen Proving Ground: Aberdeen, Ma, USA, 7 April 1983.
17. Headquarters Departments of the Army and the Air Force. Mortars-Field Manual 23–90. In Technical Order 11W2-5-13-21;
Departments of the Army and the Air Force: Washington, DC, USA, 1 March 2000.
18. Headquarters Departments of the Army. Mortar gunnery-Field Manual 23-91; Departments of the Army: Washington, DC, USA,
1 March 2000.
19. Firing Tables to 98 Mm Mortar, High-Explosive Projectile, Command of the Land Forces; DWLad ˛ Wewn.102/2007: Warsaw, Poland,
2007. (In Polish)
20. NO-10-A216:2012. Artillery Guns-Towed and Portable Mortars. Requirements and Tests; PKN: Warsaw, Poland, 2012. (In Polish)
21. CEN EN ISO 14688-1: 2018. Geotechnical Investigation and Testing-Identification and Classification of Soil. Part 1: Identification and
Description; CENELEC Management Centre: Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
22. CEN EN ISO 14688-2: 2018. Geotechnical Investigation and Testing-Identification and Classification of Soil. Part 2: Principles for a
Classification; CENELEC Management Centre: Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
23. EN 13286-2: 2010. Unbound and Hydraulically Bound Mixtures. Part 2: Test Methods for Laboratory Reference Density and Water Content.
Proctor Compaction; CENELEC Management Centre: Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
24. DIN 18134 (E) Soil. Testing Procedures and Testing Equipment. Plate Load Test; Deutsches Institut fur Normung E.V.: Berlin,
Germany, 2012.
25. Dev, N.; Babbar, S.K. Bearing Capacity Determination Using Plate Load Test-A Case Study; Geotechnics Conference; Central Soil and
Materials Research Station: New Delhi, India, 2007; pp. 1–6.
26. Mooney, M.A.; Miller, P.K. Analysis of Lightweight Deflectometer test based on in situ stress and strain response. J. Geotech.
Geoenvironmental Eng. 2009, 135, 199–208. [CrossRef]
27. Weingart, W. Problems of Dynamic Load Capacity Testing with Drop Devices; Die Strasse: Berlin, Germany, 1981; pp. 369–373.
(In German)
28. Fleming, P.R. Small-scale dynamic devices for the measurement of elastic stiffness modulus on pavement foundations. In Nonde-
structive Testing of Pavements and Backcalculation of Moduli, Volume 3, ASTM STP 1375; ASTM International: West Conshohocken,
PA, USA, 2000; pp. 41–58.
29. Sulewska, M.J.; Bartnik, G. Application of the Light Falling Weight Deflectometer (LFWD) to Test Aggregate Layers on Geosyn-
thetic Base. Procedia Eng. 2017, 189, 221–226. [CrossRef]
30. Fleming, P.R.; Frost, M.W.; Lambert, J.P. A review of light weight deflectometer for routine in situ assessment of pavement
material stiffness. Transportation Research Record. J. Transp. Res. Board 2007, 2004, 80–87, Transportation Research Board of the
National Academies, Washington. [CrossRef]
31. Das, B.M. Advanced Soil Mechanics, 4th ed.; CRC Press: London, UK, 2013.