NWC TP 6402

i~c i

(J" Effect of LogtdnlGovsonSuviailt of Cyindrial u

-~~~ prjcile FiAOgantSiuaeConcret Target

0. orc EL DmdpwvrimD J~-sumC

DNAVAL WEAPONS CENTER

CHINA LAKE. CALIFORNIA 93555

AAUO

211 29 06

PAW ~ ~***~--

Nav Weapon CenteAN ACTIVITY OF THE NAVAL MATERIAL COMMAND

Th resemrch descrid l this report wa cmditd in support of th cow-troled fragnentation studies for Mad tafset peatato warmed This effort wassupported by the Naval Air System Comman (NAVAIR) mad wecated by the NavalWeapons Center (NWC) under the Stike Warfar Weepoury Techmokoy Block Proamunder Work Request 21104, AIRTASK A03W403 lMS/2F32-300400 (appIop'lalm1721319.41AJ). This artak pmvides for counduu explutry development in the aTrsuperiority and air4osuace mimi am. Mr. H. Be=die, AIR-350, was the cogurant NAVAIR Technolog d.

This report has ben review for techni accuracy by John Pearson, Deton-atlon Physics Division, Research Department.

Approved by Under authority ofE. B. ROYCE, Head J. J. LAHRResearch Department Capt., US. Navy29 October 1982 Commmde

Released for publication byB. W. HAYSTechnical Director

NWC Technil Publication 6402

Published by .......................... Tchnlcal Information DepartmmtCollation .......................................... Cove, 16 bmFirst printing ....................................... lSS numbrd copie

UNCLASSI FIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (115,. Data Ent@, o41 _.___ _

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEORE CNTMCTINORsBEFORE COMPLETING FOINI

1. REPORT NUMBER CESSION 140. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

NWC TP 6402 -,44. TITLE (and Subtitle) S. TYPE OF REPORT A PERIOD COVERED .; -.

EFFECT OF LONGITUDINAL GROOVES ON SURVIVABILITY Research ReportOF CYLINDRICAL STEEL PROJECTILES FIRED AGAINST Fiscal Year 1982 ,.SIMULATED COCRETE TARGETS S. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMDER

7. AUTHOR() 0. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBE,-a)

0. E. R. HeimdanJ. C. Schulz

S. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 16. PROGRAM ELEMENT PROJECT. TA",CAA XO UNITNUMEN a 8

Naval Weapons Ce'nterChina Lake, Calif-nia 93555 AIRTASK A03W-O3P2/008B/2F32.

3006000 .I. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATENaval Weapons Center November 1982

NavalWeapos Ceier 3. "UNGER OF PAGESChina Lake, Calif c'nia 93555 30 ,A..-.~~~30,' --"14. MONITORING AGENCY NAMES AODRESS(if dfifrennt hu Conwtolhld Offlie) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of this "port)

UNC LASS IF I ED

IS..UOEC&.ASSI ICATION/DOWNGRADING

IS. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for put release; distribution unlimited. . , ,.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the a stract entered In Biok 20. It diffeent oM Report.)

. : .. , ,,

I. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ; -.

.- ,

is. KEY WORDS (Continue an reveree aide it nooesi ad tds1tr by wok number)

Cylinders Small-Scale FiringsPenetrators SurvivabilityShear-Control Warheads

,-. '..- .20. ABSTRACT (Conte on m reves oide iooaestjymE dntifp by Weoek Numbe) ~-

See beck of form.

Do a, 1473 EDITION OF I NOV 1 o5 OtO.ETE UNLAAN. S/ 010-0-114"0 UNCLASSIFIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAll fbft M-4WO"-"

.... . .. . . . .. • o .. .... -,.. .-. o-.- ,.* = ° , .-. = • **'. ' "

UNCJLAMIFIEDTuVty CL*PMbAT OP TnS PAGE 18 DO* JMW*

(U) 7I d of Lomqolnsel Grooves on Survihbty of O'lCry cSteel Pfteciles Fred Aibuw Si&kted Conrete Targets, by 0. E. R.

"eil and L. C. Schulz. China Lake, Calif., Naval Weapons Center,Novemb 1982. 30 pp. (NWC TP 6402, publication UNCLASSIFIED.)

M "hallww, cylindrical steel Projectiles containing longitu-dinal grooves on the inner surface were fired against sunulated concretetargets. These firings complement earlier firings of projectiles containingcircumferential grooves. The grooves in both cases were intended to sim-ulate the strem-asig effects of warhead shear-conrol gri Some pro-jectiles were filled with an explosive simulant, while others were leftunfilled. .

(U)LAl projectiles tested developed a bulge near the front of theinternal cavity. This can be termed the primary failure zone. Thepresence of longitudinal grooves in this region reduced the survival veloc-ity, while grooves located a short distance to the rear had no effect. Thereduction in survival velocity for projectiles with longitMinal grooves wasless than for projectiles with circumferential grooves of the same depth.Significant differences between the deformation and failure behavior ofthe filed and unfiled projectiles were observed. -

(Inrom the poMt of warh uen, the conclusion to bedrawn from this work is that a shear-control grid can be machined intothe case of a penetrator warhead without affecting its survivabilityproviding that the grid is not allowed to extend into the primary failurezone.

UNCLASSIFIED5eCVUI? OASSPIOR W TimW PAMMM gUo Odi

NWC TP 6402

CONTENTS

Introduction .......................................................... 3

Description of Experiments .............................................. 6Projectiles ........................... ; ............................ 6Filler ............................................................ 6Targets ........................................................... 6Test Procedure .................................................... 6

Experimental Results ................................................... 8Case Deformation .................................................. 8Case Failure .................................................. * .... 11Survival Velocity ................................................... 14

Conclusions ........................................................... 14

Appendix A. Results of Test Firings ....................................... 17

20 ;0

3(3

HAllabilty Codes (biatwlbtlon/

JAvall ed/ore

S

,peolal

NWC TP 6402

INTRODUCTION

A variety of methods are available for fragmentation control in warhead cases.These include potted fragments, notched wire wraps, textured insert liners, and shear-control grids. All of these methods have been used successfully in airburst warheaddesigns to produce fragments of prescribed sizes and shapes. Not all, however, aresuitable for use in penetrator warheads intended to defeat hard or moderately hardtargets. Cases with potted fragments or notched wire wraps are too weak to survivethe severe loads present during target impact. Textured insert liners, while they do notweaken the case, may not provide sufficient precision for some applications.

Pearson's shear-control method,' consisting of a shallow grid system machinedonto the inner surface of the warhead case (Figure 1), appears to offer a desirablecombination of precise control and reasonable structural strength. There is concern,however, that these stress-raising grooves may act to degrade warhead survivability. Thisconcern led the authors to investigate, through small projectile firings and finiteelement computer modeling, the possible deleterious effects of shear-control grooves onwarhead survivability.

In the previously reported studies,2 ,3 a single circumferential groove in thecavity wall was used to approximate the stress-raising effects of a shear-control grid.Test firings of flat-fronted steel cylinders with a hemispherically-fronted internal cavitycontaining such a groove were made at normal incidence against simulated concreteand steel plate targets. The location and depth of the groove were varied. Finiteelement analyses of the response of circumferentially grooved projectile cases subjected

I John Person. "The Shear-Control Method of Warheed Fragnenttion," in A'oceedbrl of the FourthIWwOmIoO SYNvrpom on &MIMk Monterey, Calf. 17.29 Oct 1978. Monterey, Calif., Navy PostgaduateSchoo, 1978. (Pubilcation UNCLASSIFIED.)2 Navm Weapon Cener. Spurtbft, of Penetiworr Wtk Crcumftfmrtk Shdwr#Cnrol Grooa, by j. C.Sdubu and 0. L R. eIoendahL China IAke, Calif., NW, April 1981. 28 pp. (N 1 6275, publication

-.) Swwdmh~lbty Arlyda Aor Impecthg Wrhwsi Nth Sar-Cntrof GriSd, by Olaf E. R.* HUsndihl and John eaMon. China Lake, Calif., NWC, Februwy 1932. 40 pp. (NWC 1 6288, pubilcatioaUMASSIFIED.)

3

NWC TV 6402

FIGURE 1. ShrmsWM O Modubud kabhum tI% of Wh~msd OM

to impact loads were wued to help interpret lt.n reas. Tm Ales diowed that the4 ~effects of circumnferential grooves on survtMa Veloity depehi an t bur. Mode of

the ungrooved projectile, on the placement of the gpmv, and an the 910ove depth.

Differences in behavior between projeties fired tg 1, 1 hombed concrete andsteel plte tar~gets were observed. For penetration Ito- deWd wacsm, die pirimaryfailure zone occurred near the front of the hital cavity wir.f a bule developed(Figure 2). A circumferential groove in this region had a detimental effect on projec-tile survivability, an effect which increased with increaft gpoor. dt. A groove tothe rear of the primary failure zone, although i t resulted in a chuactewlstic ringdeformation patm at the groove location, had a negible ef~c on tuvival velocity.For perforation of steel plates, damaige was confined kmply to the front end of theprojectile, and a circumferential groove did not affect the survival velocity. The ringdeformation pgttmn at the groove was again present (Figuire 3).

Shear-control grids usually contain longitudinal as well as circumferentialcomponents. Indeed, grids designed to produce rod-shaped fragments consist predomin-ately of loitodinal or nearly longitudinal grooves. Just as a circumferential grooveact to enhance circumferential fracturing, longitudinal grooves Might be expected toenhance longitudinal fracturing. Such enhancement should be especially evident in riliedprojectiles, where the hydrostatic pressure exerted by the ffiler on the case results inhigher hoop strems. It is natural, therefore, to investigate the effects of longitudinal as

wda .irmftmWta rooves on survivablty.

4

7' - .xi *:*~.~'~%~

NWC TP 64029

PRIMARY FAILURE ZONE

FIGURE 2. Primry Failure Zone for Projacilo with CircumferentalGroove Located at Point of Mmximm Bulging Fired Against ThoriiSTargt

RING DEFORMATION%

FIGURE 3 Ring Deformation Caused by Circumfeent GrooveLocated to he Rew of Cavity Bulg In Projtile Fired AgainstSte PIlate Tare

In the present study, firings were made of both filled and unfilled projectilesagainst simulated concrete targets at normal incidence. Finite element modeling ofprojectiles with longitudinal grooves is not possible using a two-dimensional codebecause of the lack of axisymmetry. Thus, while reference will be made to finiteelement results for ungrooved projectiles, the current study is primarily experimental.

S

,m , r ! ] '! F ' .) '.; *: .; . ... ' '' '7 '':. "'." ." " . .' ' .""." . : " " ! '. '" . ' ".'' -' . ": " ' " " "

NWC TP 6402

DESCRIPTION OF EXINERIMENTS

PROJECTILES

The projectiles were flat-fronted steel cylinders, 2 inches long and 0.5 inch indiameter, with a hemispherically-fronted- internal cavity. The front of the cavity was0.25 inch from the front end of.the projectile, and the cavity wall thickness was 0.04inch. Eight longitudinal groqvs, equally spaced around the circumference, weremachined into the surface of the cavity. The grooves were 0.008-inch deep and startedeither 0.46 or 0.71 inch from the front end of the projectile. Except for differences inthe grooves, the projectiles were the same as those used for circumferential groovefirings. Counting ungrooved projectiles, there were three different configurations *asshown in Figure 4. The projectiles were machined from 4340 steel rods and were heat-treated to a 38-40 Rockwell "C" hardness, an acceptable hardness for a warhead casewith a shear-control grid.

FILLER

The internal cavities of some of the projectiles were filled with plasticine (awax-based modeling material), while the remainder were left unfilled. Plasticine ismechanically similar to some explosives and thus makes good explosive simulant. Itwas anticipated that the presence of filler in the internal cavity would result in higherhoop stresses in the cavity wall which, in turn, would lead to fracturing of the longitu-dinal grooves. Comparisons could then be made not only between longitudinal andcircumferential grooves, but also between filled and unfilled projectiles.

TARGETS

The simulated concrete targets were made of Thorite (trademark of StandardDry Wall Products), a fast-setting, high-strength (3,950 psi compressive strength)concrete patching compound consisting of sand, cement, and additives to promoterapid curing. Consistency in target preparation is critical for assuring high strength anduniformity among targets. The procedure used is described in Appendix A of thereference cited as footnote 2.

TEST PROCEDURE

The projectiles were fired from a smooth-bore, 50-caliber powder gun andimpacted the targets at normal incidence. The targets were placed 18 inches from theend -of the barrel. Impact velocities were measured in the gun barrel with a photo

6

6

.-

N4W 1? 6402

Wa No WOOVO.

(b) Grw us.,. OAnS 0.46 5mro front #nd.

FIGURE 4. Crn4mlosu View of Louglh"Ihy Grooved Taot Projoodm.

7

NWC TP 6402

diode system coupled to an interval counter. "he apparatus is described more fully bySchulz, et al. 4

'4

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Thirty-two projectiles were fired. Of these, 19 were filled and 13 were unfilled.

Impact velocities ranged from 2,090 to 2,770 ft/s. The results are summarized inTable I. Photographs of the projectiles after test are shown in Appendix A.

CASE DEFORMATION

Although both filled and unfilled projectiles bulged near the front of theinternal cavity, the bulge profiles clearly differ (Figures A-la versus A-4b, forexample). Bulges in the filled projectiles are more rotund and extend for a greaterdistance axially along the wall. The more localized bulges in the unfilled projectilestend to produce a hinge-like collapse near the failure limit. No axial ridges at thelongitudinal groeve locations analogous to the ring deformations associated with thecircumferential grooves were observed. (While. the case is compressed axially, it isexpanded radially; thus circumferential rings were formed while longitudinal ridges werenot.)

The increase in case diameter at the bulge and the decrease in projectile lengthare plotted as functions of impact velocity in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. Alsoshown are theoretical curves obtained for unfilled, ungrooved projectiles by finite

-.1 element analysis using the method described by Stronge and Schulz.5 The experimentalpoints for the unfilled projectiles generally fall on or slightly below the theoreticalcurves, while the points for the filled projectiles lie above the curves. The higher valuesfor the filled projectiles reflect the greater impact energies and the hydrostatic pressuredue to the presence of a cavity material. The increase in diameter at the nose isplotted versus impact velocity in Figure 7. This increase does not appear to depend onthe presence or absence of filler or on whether or not the projectile survived.

4 j. C. Schulz, J. Pearson, 0. E. R. Hekadahi, and S. FInasa. "Effect of Shw-Control Grids on theSurvivability of Penetrator WarheWs," in Proceedings of the Sixth Interwtiud $vmpodm on hlltks, Orksdo,Fk. 27-29 Oct 1981. Columbus, Ohio, Dattefle Columbus Laboratofiu 1911. (Publication UNCLASSIFIED.)

5 $W. J. Strong and J. C. Schulz. "Ptoctie Impact Demale Analysis." in Proceeding of the Sympoahimon Computational Methods In Nonlinear Structural and Soad Mechans, Arlington. V&. 6-8 Oct 1980. Published asspecial lse of . Computers and Structures, Vol. 13, No. 1-2 (1911). pp. 287-294.

8

; ',,, -.,. ',,,,. - .,.. ,. ,....-. .- o.- ., ,Z -. .- ,-.-.: . . .-.- .. .•. ,... . -..- - - - - . . • .. . -..%.

NWC TP 6402

.~ .u

C

-- 0 0 0

0) 0~ 00

r, 0l OCO 0 0n _( 000 to -- 0

a) 4m C.1 00 a

U) 0 00 U) V) 0 0

S fco c00 000- 0(00e0 co ~ 0OQ

IVo v- 00.0O N to t U..........D.....0 C C.0 ( .4iO *0V 1 41 4 r QL QL q q L iL QI

if EQ q00t Q . .. . .C -P . Ui

66C0 00 00000 0 a 0 00000000 000000 00000

CU)J U)~~e4~ C)1)C~ U ) C

0)0

V EEO N E 0 30 N T 00jn U 0Q -:q n L v i n t

C-110C' 0~80 0O01(0 0 00 'TC wm 00 (000 wQ

0 -------------- N an~ro --------- arn

zz e z 0

9

NWC TP 6402

0.14

00.12 •o A

- 0.10

I-

o £°

z 0.06

0.014FILLED EMPTY

NO GROOVES 0 00.46 IN. a 0

0.02 0.71 IN. A A

FINITE ELEMENT

0 . I , I , I • I , .

1,800 2,000 2,200 2.400 2.600 2,00IMPACT VELOCITY, FT/S

FIGURE 5. Increse in Case Diareter at Bulge vs. Impact Velocity forProjectiles Fired Against Simulated Concrete. Projectiles had either nogrooves or longitudinal rooves starting 0.46 or 0.71 inch from nose.

10

I"

* b. * .- . .- *... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .S. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

NWC TP 6402

0.14

0.12 -

AA

0.10 0

"0.08w,,z S

4 I0.06 U

0.04FILLED EMPTY

/ NO GROOVES 5 0

S 0.46 IN. U 0n

0.02 0.71 IN. A A

FINITE ELEMENT

0 a . . I

1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2.600 2,800IMPACT VELOCITY. FT/S

FIGURE 6. Decrease in Length vs. Impact Velocity for Projectiles Fired

Against Simulated Concrete. Projectiles had either no grooves or longltu-

dinal grooves starting 0.46 or 0.71 inch from nose.

bI

NWC TP 6402

FILLED EMPTY

0.035 NO GROOVES 0 0

0.4 ON. 0 00.71 ON. A A

FAILED PROJECTILES FLAGGED

0.030FINITE ELEMENT

z

w0.02D

I-

Z 0.016

" 0.010 Uz

0 .005 -

1.800 2.000 2210 2.400 2.680 2.IMPACT VELOCITY, FT/S

FIGURE 7. Increm in Ne Dinmew v. Imact Vdstty fo Pro.jectils Fired Against Simuatn d Conass. Proeacs had sod a.ngroovs or longitudinal groove starting 0.46 or 0.71 ish from nose.

CASE FAILURE

All unfilled projectiles that failed fractured circumferentially at the cavity bulge(Figure A-Ic, for example). Subsequent gross deformation of the case occurred as theseparated nose section was forced into the remaining portion of the case. In contrast,all of the filled projectiles that failed fractured longitudinally such that the case wassplit open down the side (Figure A-4e, for example). Some circumferential fracturingat the bulge was also present. In filled projectiles with longitudinal grooves, the splitin the case usually followed one of the grooves. The longitudinal fractures appear tobe tensile in character. Near the rearward end of the fracture edges tend to becomenon-normal to the surface, perhaps reflecting some tearing action.

12

Z

NWC TP 6402

rlI.

Ma=

us

2! UA

d d d U.d d

d U

13

NWC 1 6402

SURVIVAL VELOCITY

The survival behavior of the various projectile configurations over the range offiring velocities is shown in Figure 8. Results from previous firings of unfilled,ungrooved projectiles are included. 2 The solid vertical lines denote projectiles thatsurvived, while the dashed vertical lines denote projectiles that broke up. The greyedareas indicate intervals of uncertainty in estimating the survival velocity (the velocitybelow which projectiles survive and above which they fail).

Filled projectiles failed at lower velocities than unfilled projectiles of the sameconfiguration. The reduction in survival velocity due to filler was 5.4% for ungroovedprojectiles and 8.6 and 8.9% for projectiles with longitudinal grooves beginning 0.46and 0.71 inch from the nose, respectively.

In previous firings a circumferential groove in the primary failure zone of anunfilled projectile lowered the survival velocity by 14.7%. Eight longitudinal groovesstarting at the same point were less detrimental, lowering the survival velocitycompared to the ungrooved configuration 3.6 and 6.9%. for unfilled and filled projec-tiles, respectively. The greater reduction for the filled projectiles is probably associatedwith the increased hoop stresses in the filled projectiles and the tendency of theseprojectiles to fracture longitudinally rather than circumferentially.

The survival velocity for unfilled projectiles with longitudinal grooves starting0.71 inch from the nose was essentially unchanged from the ungrooved value.However, the survival velocity for filled projectiles with longitudinal grooves starting atthis same location was reduced by 3.8%. For the filled projectiles the primary bulgeregion is wider than for the unfilled projectiles and extends past the 0.71 inch loca-tion. It is likely that grooves starting slightly more to the rear of the projectile (andoutside of the primary failure zone) would not affect survivability.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is a continuation of previous investigations into the effects of shear-control grids on the survivability of impacting warheads. In the previous work shear-control grids were represented by a single circumferential groove. This report isconcerned with the effects of longitudinal grooves. For this purpose, small projectilescontaining longitudinal grooves were fired against simulated concrete targets. The mainconclusions are

I. The influence of longitudinal or circumferential grooves on survival velocityare essentially the same. Grooves in the primary failure zone significantly reduced thesurvival velocity (although the reduction may be less for longitudinal grooves). Groovesa short distance to the rear of the primary failure zone have little effect on survivalvelocity.

14

NWC 1? 6402

2. The presence of filler was found to alter the shape of the cavity bulge andalso the mode of failure of the projectile. This underscores the importance of includ-ing explosive (filler) in finite element analyses of impacting warheads.

3. With regard to warhead design, this work indicates that any detrimentaleffects of shear-control grids on warhead survivability can be reduced or eliminatedcompletely by keeping the grid out of the primary zone of failure. For penetratorswhere this zone is relatively small compared to the length of the case, elimination ofthe grid assures no reduction in survivability while maintaining effective fragmentation

control in the major portion of the case.

15

• - - - 4- -5 .. .. -•

t = ° • ° .- . • - . ° " w o

. %.. * . , , o,,- -, .':,-,- ."_,"aw".

. * •' .. . -. -, ' * ' " * - " """'" - "o "-"."" " "" "" s" - -" :" "'" "

NWC TP 6402

Appendix ARESULTS OF TEST FIRINGS

17

. ... ;.: , .:. ." ".z'' ; .':.-';-.-....... .' ...- ..-. . .. .. .......... -.

NW M6402

riom X1. Una" poeb~u a& as ON

At

(a) 2.370 fl/s

(b) 2.400 ft/s

FIGURE A.2. Ulied Pvo*lu Wkm Logkuisl 001

19

Mc 1? 640

16) 2A10 ft/s

Is) 2AO4f~Is

FWSJR A&. lCost).

20

* ~ Ab

NWC 1? 6402

is) 2.420 ft/s

* (b). 2.490 ft/s

to) 2.510 ft/s

FIGURE A-& UMNfifd Probe"~k With Longitmans Owns,.0Strtlne 0.71-had. From Nose.

21

PJWC 76402

oil __

22

L.Tzrr-

NWC TP 6402

(a) 2.275 ft/u

(b) 2,37 f t/

(s) 2,380 No/

FIGURE AA. Filled Probas With No Gramm.

23

NWC TP 6402

Id) 2,360 ft/s

, 4

(a) 2,390 ft/s

If) 2.466 ft/s

FIGURE A-4. (Coald.)

24

NWC 1? 6402

4 g) 2,600 ft/s

(h) 2,770 ft/s

FIGURE A-4. (Contd.)

25

-~ ~ ~~~~~~~ 7.- _ 7---- - . --- - -

* NWC 1? 6402

(a) 206 ft/s

-, (b) 2.160 ft/s

(a) 2,M6 ft/s

FIG3URE A4. Miod Pndman~s With Laoiudina Oros

Startng 0A.4nch Fron Nose.

- 26

A NVC Ii' 6402

k4.

Wd 2,2110 ft/s

If) 2,36 ft/s

FIGURE 4. (Coald.)

27

* NWC 1? 6402

(4 RANS *A

fb) 2.22 No,

* FIGURE ML FOWe Pow Wkb Leisgomilmi Gms

28

NWC 1? 6402

(d) 2,320 ft/s

(e) 2,M0 s

FIGURE A. (Contd.}

29

NWC TP 6402

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION

9 Naval Air Systems CommandAIR-00D4 (2)AIR-30212 (2)AIR-.350 (1)AIR-350D (I)AIR-.533 (1)AIR-541 (2)

5 Chief of Naval OperationsOP-03 (2)OP-os (1)OP-098 (1)OP-55 (1)

2 Chief of Naval MaterialMAT-05 (1)MAT-08 (1)

I Chief of Naval Research, Arlington (ONR-102)7 Naval Sea Systems Command

SEA-62R (5)SEA-99612 (2)

I Commander in Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet (Code 325)1 Commander, Third Fleet, Pearl HarborI Commander, Seventh Fleet, San FranciscoI Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 8I David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research and Deveopment Center Detachment, BethesdaI Naval Air Engineering Center, Laheharst1 Naval Air Force, Atlantic Fleet2 Naval Air Forwe, Pacific FleetI Naval Air Station, North Island2 Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent liver (CT-252, Bldg. 405 (Aeronautical Publications

Library))I Naval Avionics Center, Indianapolis (Technical iUbrary)I Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Center, Indian HeadI Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego (Code 1311)I Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head (Technical Library)1 Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey3 Naval Ship Weapon Systems Engineering Station, Port Hueneme

Code 5711, Reposltory (2)Code 5712 (1)

5 Naval Surface Weapons Center. White Oak Laboratory, Silver SpringWR-13. R. Llddlard (1)J. Erkman (1)Dr. S. Jacobs (1)Guided Missile Warhead Section (1)Technical Library (1)

I Naval War College. Newport1 Office of Naval Research. Pasadena Branch OfficeI Office of Naval Technology. Arlington (MAT-07)I Operational Test and Evaluation Fore, Atlantic

30

-r." ~ % * ** *.** ~ ~ **

, ', ', s ;?." :, ;".

,:: ' y ,,.,,, .-.. '. ,....'..' .' , ', . .. ",. ,. - .. .,. : - .. A.... .. .,7__-,.-v- .-, -,.

I Pacific Missile Test Center, Point Mugu (Technical Library)I Marine Airsm Squadron 32, Beaufort

I Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort1 Army Armament Materiel Readines Command, flock Island (DRSAWLEIP-L, Technical

Library)4Army Armament ReerhadDeveoment Command, oe

DRDA1R-LCU-SS, J. Pentel (1)Technical Library (3)

I Aberdeen Provng Ground (Development and Proo Service)3 Army Bal~tk Research Laboratory, Aberdeeni Proving Ground

DRDAR-SEI-B (1)DRDAII.T. Detonation Branch (1)DRDAR-TSB-6S (STINFO) (1)

1 Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity, Aberdeen Proving Ground U.Sperra)I Army Research Office, Research Triangle Park1 Harry Diamond Laboratories, Adeiphi (Technical LI.brary)I Radford Army Ammunition Plan1 Redstone Arsenal (Rocket Development: Laboratory, Tedt and Evaluation Branch)1 Rock Isand ArsenAl1 White Sands Missile Range (STEWS-ADQL1 Yuma Proving Grounds (STEIT-OTE, M&W Branch)I Tactical Mir Command, Langley Mir Force Bus (TPLQD-M)1 Mir University Library, Maxwell Mir Force BanmI Tactical Fighter Weapons Center, Ne"i Air Force Ban (CC/CV)2 57th FIghter Weapons Wing, Nellis Alt Force Base

FWW/DTE (1)FWWIDTO (1)

I 554th Combat Support Group, Nellis Air Force Base (0O)1 Defense Nuclear Agency (Shok Physics Directorate)

12 Defense Technical Information Center1 Department of Defene-Institute for Defense Analyses Management Office (DIMO),

Alexandria. VA1 Lewis Research Center, NASA, ClevlandI California Institute of Technology, jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasdena, CA (Technical

* Library)2 Hercules Incorporated, Allegany Ballistics Laboratory, Cumberland, MD)I. IT Research Institute, Chicago, IL (Department M4, Document Librarian)2 Johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD (Document Library)2 johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory, Chemle Propulion Informaion

1Agency, Laurel, MD)ILos Alamos National Laboratory, Las Alamos, NM (Reports Library)

1 Princeton University, Forrestal Campus Library, Prin~ceton, NJI Stanford Research institute, roulter Laboratories, Menlo Park, CAI The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA (Technical Library)1 University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA1 University of Denver, Denver Research institute, Denver, coI University of South Florida, Tampa, Fl, (Department of Structures, Materials and

Fluids, W. C. Carpenter)