Defence Technology 16 (2020) 348e353

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Defence Technology
journal homepage: www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/defence-technology

Numerical simulation of dynamic large deformation and fracture

damage for solid armature in electromagnetic railgun
Qing-hua Lin*, Bao-ming Li
National Key Laboratory of Transient Physics, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, P. O. Box, 210094, Nanjing, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The design of solid armature of railgun should take full account of its operating conditions and material
Received 31 March 2019 properties because the armature is subjected to dynamic loading conditions and experiences a
Received in revised form complicated electrical, thermal and mechanical process in the interior ballistic cycle. In this paper pre-
6 May 2019
sent, we first introduced a multi-physical field model of railgun, followed by several examples to
Accepted 28 May 2019
investigate the launching process. Especially, we used the explicit finite element method, in which
Available online 29 May 2019
material nonlinearity and geometric nonlinearity were accounted, to investigate the deform behaviors of
solid armature. The results show that the dynamic mechanical process of armature is dependent on the
Keywords:
Electromagnetic railgun
armature geometry, material and exciting electric current. By the numerical simulation, the under-
Solid armature standing of the fracture mechanism of solid armature was deepened.
Fracture © 2020 China Ordnance Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi
Explicit finite element Communications Co. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
Numerical simulation creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction
The electromagnetic railgun technology utilizes a high electric
current of several mega-amperes to produce the Lorentz force and
propel the projectile. Over the past few decades, researches have
been focused mainly on the solid armature railgun that achieves
the conversion from electric energy to kinetic energy by a sliding
solid conductor [1].
Although the solid armature serves as a key component during
the interior ballistic cycle, it is only a parasitic mass for the launch
package. The solid armature should be as light as possible. How-
ever, over-light armature often has insufficient structural strength
and is prone to large deformation or even fracture. Broken arma-
tures were often seen in the high-speed videos of launching ex-
periments. Moreover, the recovered armatures present severe
distortion or fracture sometimes, as shown in Fig. 1. These phe-
nomena suggest that the structure design was inappropriate, or
that launching parameters exceed the armature's carrying capacity.
The large deformation and fracture inside the bore may lead to
the failure of launching, even damage the bore materials and
reduce the bore life. Moreover, the large deformation and fracture
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tsh_lin@sina.com (Q.-h. Lin).
Peer review under responsibility of China Ordnance Society
of the solid armature after it leaves the muzzle and before it is
completely separated with the projectile, may disturb the flight of
the projectile and increase its dispersion. Therefore, it is necessary
to understand the deformation and fracture mechanisms of solid
armature.
During the launching process of a railgun, the rail damage and
armature damage are always associated. The mechanisms of rail
damage including the gouging, grooving and arc transition have
been researched extensively [2‒5]. In the armature aspect, the
melting and wear are the two major kinds of damage. F. Stefani [6‒
7] investigated the current melt-wave erosion of the solid armature
and found that the armature contact surface experienced a fast
heating and melting process. R. Merrill [8] proposed a turbulent
melt-lubrication model to describe the surface wear of the arma-
ture. In addition, T. J. Watt [9‒11] conducted experimental and
computational investigations on the melting and cracking in the
throat region of C-Shaped solid armatures. He attributed the
armature damage to the magnetic saw effect.
Generally, it is thought that the armature damage is related to
the material behaviors at the condition of rapid heating, high-speed
impact and excessive force. In order to describe these details during
the launching cycle, some computation software for railgun's
multi-physical field were developed. D. Rodger [12] used the gen-
eral 2D and 3D electromagnetic and heat transfer program (called
MEGA) in some railgun simulations. Kuo-Ta Hsieh [13‒14] analyzed
the startup behavior in a “C-Shaped” armature using linked

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2019.05.020
2214-9147/© 2020 China Ordnance Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-
ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 Q.-h. Lin, B.-m. Li / Defence Technology 16 (2020) 348e353 349

2.2.1. Constitutive equation

The yield stress is written as


  h  m i
sy ¼ A þ Bðεp Þn , 1 þ c ln ε_ * , 1  T * (1)

where A, B, c, n and m are material constants, εp is the effective

plastic strain, ε_ * is the non-dimensional strain rate, and T* is the
homologous temperature.

Fig. 1. Photos of damaged armature. 2.2.2. Damage model

The strain at fracture εf is given by
EMAP3D/DYNA3D finite element codes. H. Shatoff [15] developed a
 
 

εf ¼ D1 þ D2 exp D3 s* 1 þ D4 ln ε_ * 1 þ D5 T * (2)
moving armature railgun code (called HERB) for coupled electro-
magnetic, thermal and structural fields using the general purpose
where, s* is the ratio of pressure divided by effective stress, D1~D5
code ANSYS as the underlying computational engine. Similar multi-
are the damage parameters.
physical field programs also included RGUN3D, EFFE, and others
Fracture occurs when the damage parameter D exceeds the
[16‒19]. At present, LS-DYNA [20] is one of the few commercial
value of 1. The evolution of the damage parameter is given by
software that have the capability to solve the railgun's coupled
multi-physical field problem. X Dεp
Over the years we have been committed to develop the 3D D¼ (3)
εf
transient multi-physical field model for railgun [21]. In order to
make calculation more flexible in dealing with some key issues where the summation is performed over all time steps in the
such as data exchange between fields, mesh deformation, element analysis.
failure, contact and impact, we wrote a FORTRAN source code
program for the coupled electromagnetic, thermal and structural
fields. In this paper present, we utilized this multi-physical field 2.2.3. Equation of state
solver to simulate the launching process, investigate the dynamic The equation of state (EOS) is used to describe the relations of
deformation behaviors, and explore the fracture damage mecha- pressure, volume and internal energy. There are two EOS model in
nism of solid armature. our computing program, which are linear polynomial model and
Gruneisen model.
The linear polynomial EOS is linear in internal energy, the
2. Models
pressure is expressed as
The computation model is composed of three parts, which are  
the electromagnetic field model, thermal field model and structural p ¼ C0 þ C1 m þ C2 m2 þ C3 m3 þ C4 þ C5 m þ C6 m2 E (4)
field model. The computational regions of rails and armature are
discretized by hexahedral elements, and each physical field shares where E is the internal energy, m is the excess compression, and m is
the same mesh. The electromagnetic field is solved by the finite- the tension-limited excess compression. In our simulation, Eq. (4)
element/boundary-element coupling scheme, the thermal field is served as the EOS for aluminum alloy 6061-T6, and the co-
solved by the implicit finite element scheme, and the structural efficients are: C0 ¼ 0, C1 ¼ 74.2 GPa, C2 ¼ 60.5 GPa, C3 ¼ 36.5 GPa,
field is solved by the explicit finite element scheme. Furthermore, C4 ¼ 1.97, C5¼ C6¼0.
material nonlinearity is considered to model the complex me- The Gruneisen EOS with cubic shock velocity-particle velocity
chanical behavior of solid armature. defines pressure for compressed materials (m > 0) as

  
2.1. Multi-physical field model
r0 C 2 m 1 þ 1  g20 m  2am2
p¼ 2
þ ðg0 þ amÞE (5)
1  ðS1  1Þm  S2 mmþ1  S3 m 2
2 3

The electromagnetic field is described by the magnetic diffusion ðmþ1Þ

equations. With the assumptions that the thermal conductivity is
isotropic and the railgun boundary is adiabatic, the thermal field
model is simplified as a three-dimensional unsteady heat conduc-
tion problem. The ohmic heating source of thermal field is a func-
tion of the electric current density and electrical conductivity. The
model of structural field is described by three equations, that is the
mass conservation, momentum conservation and energy conser-
vation, respectively. The Lorentz force density from the results of
electromagnetic field is added to the structural field as body force.
Detailed governing equations of the multi-physical field can be
found in Ref. [21].
where C is the intercept of the shock velocity vs. particle velocity
(vs-vp) curve, S1, S2, and S3 are the coefficients of the slope of the vs-
vp curve, g0 is the Gruneisen coefficient, and a is the first order
volume correction to g0.
In our simulation, Gruneisen model was used to aluminum alloy
7075-T6, and the parameters are: r0 ¼ 2700 kg/m3, C ¼ 5386 m/s,
S1 ¼1.339, S2¼ S3¼0, g0 ¼ 1.97, a ¼ 0.
The other material parameters of aluminum alloy 6061 and
7075 are listed in Tables 1 and 2 [23‒25].

Table 1
2.2. Material model Parameters of Johnson-cook strength model for Al 6061-T6 and 7075-T6.

A/MPa B/MPa n c m Tm/K

We chose the Johnson-cook material model [22] because it can
not only account for the effects of elastic-plastic, temperature and 6061-T6 324 114 0.42 0.002 1.34 925
7075-T6 520 477 0.52 0.001 1.0 893
strain rate, but also contains a damage model.
350 Q.-h. Lin, B.-m. Li / Defence Technology 16 (2020) 348e353

Table 2
Parameters of Johnson-cook damage model for Al 6061-T6 and 7075-T6.

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5

6061-T6 0.77 1.45 0.47 0.0 1.6

7075-T6 0.096 0.049 3.465 0.016 1.099

3. Results and discussion

We conducted numerical simulations for the multi-physical

fields of railgun. This section starts with a comparison of two ex-
amples with the same geometry and different material models.
Then, the effects of exciting electric current, armature material, and
railgun geometry on the deformation and fracture of armature
were investigated.

3.1. Mechanical behaviors of armature with linear and nonlinear

material model
Fig. 3. Stress histories of element H1.

The in-bore processes of a solid armature were calculated with

the same model geometry, exciting electric current, as well as the
different material models. The armature material is Al 6061, and the
material models are elastic and Johnson-cook elastic-plastic
respectively. In the elastic model, the Young's modulus is 68.9 GPa
and the Poisson ratio is 0.33. The waveform of exciting electric
current is the one labeled as “1.0” in Fig. 7.
We selected an element to plot its stress histories and a node to
plot its displacements. As shown in Fig. 2, the element is marked as
H1, which is located at the throat of the C-shape armature. The node
is located at the outer surface of the armature arm. The armature is
of a length of 50 mm, a width of 50 mm, and a thickness of 30 mm.
The rail is of a length of 3 m, a width of 56 mm, and a thickness of
20 mm.
Fig. 3 shows the stress histories of element H1. In the elastic
example, the element stress reaches about 700 MPa at the time of
1.10 ms. Such high a stress is obviously impossible for real
aluminum material. Moreover, the stress of elastic example pre-
sents an attenuated oscillation. The stress history of the elastic-
plastic example is quite different from that of the elastic one after
Fig. 4. Comparison of x-directional displacements of node N1.
0.90 ms, and the magnitude of the elastic-plastic example before
0.90 ms is also lower than that of the elastic example.
The x-directional displacements of node N1 are plotted in Fig. 4.
This node experiences different dynamic processes after 0.90 ms.
These two examples indicate that the material model plays a key
role in the numerical simulation of dynamic launching process of
railgun.
Besides the local mechanical behaviors, the material models also
affect the motion behaviors of armature as a whole. Fig. 5 shows the
x-directional displacements of the armature's mass center. It is
found that the armatures swing at the x direction, and their am-
plitudes present an increasing trend.

Fig. 5. Comparison of x-directional displacements of the armature's mass center.

It is well known that the dynamic response of the rails is

induced by a moving magnetic pressure during launch of
Fig. 2. Model of railgun and mesh of armature.
 Q.-h. Lin, B.-m. Li / Defence Technology 16 (2020) 348e353 351

projectiles [26]. The deformation of rails acts directly on the

armature through the rail-armature contact surface. Therefore, the
local and global displacement fluctuations of armature are most
likely caused by the rail deformation. Despite the different material
models of armature, we found that the dynamic responses of rails
were similar. Fig. 6 only shows the results of nonlinear material
model case. The x-directional displacements of nodes at the
centerline of the rail surface fluctuate during the launching cycle.
Their amplitudes are smaller than that of the armature.

3.2. Deformation and fracture of armature at different exciting

electric currents

Using the same model as Fig. 2, we calculated the launching

processes with different electric current curves. Taken the bottom
curve as the benchmark, the numbers in Fig. 7 represent the fold of
the magnitude of the electric current curve.
The armature is made of Al 6061-T6, and the material model is Fig. 7. Element failure time of Al 6061 armature at different electric currents.
Johnson-cook. We carried out the calculation for two stages, which
were the in-bore process and the free flight process of armature.
With the increase of electric current, we found that some ele-
ments successively failed outside the bore and inside the bore. In
Fig. 7, the muzzle time is marked by dotted line, the time of element
failure inside the bore is labeled by the symbol “+”, and the time of
element failure outside the bore is labeled by “”. Fig. 7 indicates
that the higher the electric current, the earlier the element failure
occurs.

3.2.1. Deformation and fracture of armature outside bore

The motion of the armature was tracked after it was shot out the
muzzle. For the example of 1.2-fold electric current, the time se-
quences of the armature shape are plotted in Fig. 8. It can be seen
that the armature arms are experiencing an expanding and con-
tracting process. The swings of arms may be related to the release of
elastic strain energy at the situation that the constraint of the rails
to the solid armature is abruptly removed.
In the example of 1.4-fold electric current, it was found that the
armature fractured outside the bore. Fig. 9 shows the process of the
armature's deformation and fracture. The armature keeps normal
shape when it just leaves the muzzle at 1.76 ms. Then, the armature
arms expand outward and the armature is severely deformed. High
stress region appears in the armature throat at 2.36 ms. Element
failure occurs at 2.46 ms, and the armature fractures from the
throat. Fig. 8. Geometries of the armature after leaving the muzzle.

In reality, a high tensile stress at the throat of the armature due

to the large deformation should cause cracks first, and then leads to
fracture. Although the detailed generation and evolution of cracks
can not be simulated by the finite element method, the fracture
model based on the element failure can predict the location and
condition of the damage. This is enough for armature design.

3.2.2. Deformation and element failure of armature inside the bore

Fig. 6. X-directional displacement histories of nodes at the centerline of the rail
surface.
When the armature was drove by the 1.8-fold electric current in
Fig. 7, element failure occurred inside the bore. Stress contours of
the armature are shown in Fig. 10. At 0.70 ms, the current curve
reaches peak value. Although the maximum stress of the armature
is 340 MPa and has exceeded the 6061's yield strength, there is no
obvious deformation. At 0.95 ms, the stress at the armature throat
reaches 420 MPa, large deformation appears and element failure
occurs. The element fails latter than the peak-value time of the
electric current curve, which suggests that the occurrence of
armature damage has time effect. It is likely to be related to the
352 Q.-h. Lin, B.-m. Li / Defence Technology 16 (2020) 348e353

Fig. 9. Process of armature deformation and fracture.

stress is higher than the yield strength. This suggests that the
armature can also work well within a certain range of plastic
deformation. If the deformation of armature is only designed in the

Fig. 10. Stress contours of armature driven by the 1.8-fold electric current.

histories of temperature rise and plastic deformation.

In addition, it is found that when the armature is damaged, the
Fig. 12. Element failure time of Al 7075 armature at different electric currents.

Fig. 11. Temperature contours of armature driven by the 1.8-fold electric current.
 Q.-h. Lin, B.-m. Li / Defence Technology 16 (2020) 348e353
Fig. 13. Stress contours of railgun with a different armature geometry.
elastic range, the current carrying capacity of armature may be
underestimated.
Fig. 11 shows the temperature contours at 0.70 ms and 0.96 ms.
The temperature rises rapidly under the action of high electric
current. The temperature of the armature throat at 0.96 ms has
reached about 900 K, and is very close to the melting point listed in
Table 1. At such a high temperature, occurrences of strength
reduction and element failure are inevitable.
3.3. Effect of armature material
For the Al 7075, similar calculations as Fig. 7 were conducted.
The time of element failure are shown in Fig. 12. It is found that
7075 is of higher current carrying capacity than 6061. This is due to
the higher yield strength of Al 7075.
3.4. Effect of armature geometry
In above examples, all of the fractures occur at the throat of
armature. Actually, the location of the fracture is also dependent on
the armature geometry. As shown in Fig. 13 in which the armature
geometry is different, the element failure occurs at the root of the
armature arm.
4. Conclusion
Some issues about the armature's deformation and fracture
were investigated in this paper. The major conclusions were sum-
marized as following:
(1) The large plastic deformation inside the bore and the release
of elastic strain energy outside the bore are the two major
mechanisms of armature fracture.
(2) The deformation and fracture of armature are affected by the
material, geometry and exciting electric current.
(3) It is permissible for the armature to undergo a certain range
of plastic deformation during the launching cycle.
The multi-physical fields modeling and simulation provided a
deeper understanding on the armature's mechanical behavior.
References
[1] McNab IR, Crawford MT, Satapathy SS. IAT armature development. IEEE Trans
Plasma Sci 2011;39(1):442e51.
[2] Watt TJ, Stefani F, Crawford M, et al. Investigation of damage to solid-
armature railguns at startup. IEEE Trans Magn 2007;43(1):214e7.
[3] Watt TJ, Clay CE, Bassett PM, et al. The effect of surface indentations on
gouging in railguns. Wear 2014;310(1e2):41e50.
353
[4] Barber JP, Bauer DP, Jamison K, et al. A survey of armature transition mech-
anisms. IEEE Trans Magn 2003;39(1):47e51.
[5] Wu JG, Tang B, Lin QH, Li HY, Li BM. 3D numerical simulation and analysis of
railgun gouging mechanism. Def Technol 2016;12:92e5.
[6] Stefani F, Merrill R. Experiments to measure melt-wave erosion in railgun
armatures. IEEE Trans Magn 2003;39(1):188e92.
[7] Benton T, Stefani F, Satapathy S, et al. Numerical modeling of melt-wave
erosion in conductors. IEEE Trans Magn 2003;39(1):129e33.
[8] Merrill R, Stefani F. A turbulent melt-lubrication model of surface wear in
railgun armatures. IEEE Trans Magn 2005;41(1):414e9.
[9] Watt TJ, Stefani F. Experimental and computational investigation of root-
radius melting in C-shaped solid armatures. IEEE Trans Magn 2005;41(1):
442e7.
[10] Kumar P, Mishra A, Watt T, Dutta I, Bourell DL, Sahaym U. Electromagnetic
jigsaw: metal-cutting by combining electromagnetic and mechanical forces.
Procedia CIRP 2013;6:600e4.
[11] Watt TJ, Bryant MD. Cracking and dominant stresses in the throat region of C-
Shaped solid armatures. IEEE Trans Magn 2007;43(1):18e421.
[12] Rodger D, Leonard PJ. Modeling the electromagnetic performance of moving
rail gun launchers using finite elements. IEEE Trans Magn 1993;29(1):496e8.
[13] Hsieh KT. A Lagrangian formulation for mechanically, thermally coupled
electromagnetic diffusive processes with moving conductors. IEEE Trans
Magn 1995;31(1):604e9.
[14] Hopkins DA, Stefani F, Hsieh KT, et al. Analysis of startup behavior in a “C-
shaped” armature using linked EMAP3D/DYNA3D finite element codes. IEEE
Trans Magn 1999;35(1):59e64.
[15] Shatoff H, Pearson DA, Kull AE. Simulation of dynamic armature motion in a
railgun with coupling of electromagnetic, thermal and structural effects using
shifted finite element fields. In: Presented at the 15th international pulsed
power conference, May 25-28; 2005.
[16] Wang GH, Xie L, He Y, Song SY, Gao JJ. Moving mesh FE/BE hybrid simulation
of electromagnetic field evolution for railgun. IEEE Trans Magn 2016;44(8):
1424e8.
[17] An S, Lee B, Bae Y, Lee Y h, Kim SH. Numerical analysis of the transient
inductance gradient of electromagnetic launcher using 2-D and 3-D finite
element methods. IEEE Trans Magn 2017;45(7):1635e8.
[18] Tan S, Lu JY, Li B, Zhang YS, Jiang YZ. A new finite-element method to deal
with motion problem of electromagnetic rail launcher. IEEE Trans Magn
2017;45(7):1374e9.
[19] Yin Q, Zhang H, Li HJ, Yang YX. Analysis of in-bore magnetic field in C-shaped
armature railguns. Def Technol 2019;15:83e8.
[20] caldichoury I, L'Eplattnier P. Simulation of a railgun: a contribution to the
validation of the electromagnetism module in LS-DYNA ®v980. In: Pro-
ceedings of the 12th international LS-DYNA users conference, Detroit; 2012.
[21] Lin QH, Li BM. Numerical simulation of interior ballistic process of railgun
based on the multi-field coupled model. Def Technol 2016;12(2):101e5.
[22] Johnson G, Cook W. Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to
various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech
1985;21(1):31e48.
[23] Senthil K, Iqbal MA, Chandel PS, et al. Study of the constitutive behavior of
7075-T651 aluminum alloy. Int J Impact Eng 2017;108:171e90.
[24] Kim H, Gould J, Shang J, Yadav A, Meyer R, L'Eplattenier Pierre. Numerical
simulations to investigate the efficiency of joint designs for the electro-
magnetic welding (EMW) of the ring-shaft assembly. In: Proceedings of the
13th international LS-DYNA users conference, Detroit; 2014.
[25] Vahedi K, Khazraiyan N. Numerical modeling of ballistic penetration of long
rods into ceramic/metal armors. In: Proceedings of the 8th international LS-
DYNA users conference, Michigan; 2004.
[26] Rodrigues C, Simo ~ es FMF, Pinto dCA, et al. Finite element dynamic analysis of
beams on nonlinear elastic foundations under a moving oscillator. Eur J Mech/
A Solids 2018;68:9e24.