1、 METRIC MIL-STD-3029 23 July 2009 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TEST METHOD STANDARD HOT GUN COOK-OFF HAZARDS ASSESSMENT, TEST AND ANALYSIS AMSC 9075 FSC 1395 Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 FOREWORD 1. This standard is approved
2、for use by the Department of the Navy and is available for use by all Departments and Agencies of the Department of Defense. 2. This standard provides a practical, comprehensive, consistent, and LEAN-efficient process to define the hot gun hazards associated with a cook-off of propellants or explosi
3、ves in ammunition left in a hot gun barrel as a result of a misfire, hangfire, or even in some instances a ceasefire. Insensitive munitions tests do not provide the information needed to evaluate hot gun cook-off hazards (see MIL-STD-2105 for additional tests). The hot gun hazards determined by exec
4、uting this process should be used as a rationale for developing hot gun misfire procedures used by a gun crew in the event of a hangfire or misfire. Hot gun procedures are also required for a ceasefire situation in guns that chamber a round prior to an intent-to-shoot. 3. A hot gun cook-off is a ser
5、ious, thermally-induced reaction (for example, detonation, deflagration, burning, and out-gassing) of an explosive in a projectile or propellant in a propelling charge resulting from significant heating from the gun barrel. In the past, prolonged gun firings have ended in a hangfire or misfire where
6、 either or both the propelling charge or projectile remained in a very hot gun barrel for a prolonged period of time and a cook-off has occurred. Such a detonation or deflagration can result in serious injury to, or even death, of a guns crew and/or serious damage to a weapon or weapon platform. Exa
7、mples of actual cook-offs aboard U.S. Navy ships include: a. On September 25, 1965, near the end of a 24-hour shore-bombardment by USS TURNER JOY off the coast of Vietnam, a 5-inch round misfired. The projectile in the hot gun barrel cooked off; three sailors were killed and three more were wounded.
8、 b. While the USS BOSTON was conducting a gunfire support mission off the coast of Vietnam on July 9, 1969, the left gun in mount number 53 had a round cook-off in the gun barrel. The explosion from the round caused part of the barrel to hit the ships superstructure and exit through the top of the b
9、ridge. One officer on the bridge and ten sailors from the gun crew were injured. A cook-off of the round or a fuze activation was assumed. c. In 1972, aboard the USS BENJAMIN STODERT, a misfired-round was jettisoned from gun mount number 52 after a 4-minute waiting period. The propelling charge igni
10、ted just prior to entering the water. d. While conducting reliability tests of a 5-inch/54-caliber MK 45 gun mount aboard the USS NORTON SOUND in 1972, 567 rounds were fired in 4 hours prior to a misfire occurring. The propelling charge in the hot gun barrel cooked off in 2 minutes and 45 seconds. e
11、. In 1977, a hangfire was experienced aboard the USS MANLEY. Subsequently, two crewmen were injured after a second attempt to fire the propelling charge. Facts indicate that the breech block was not completely closed and the gun mount was seriously damaged. 4. This document contains a description of
12、 the process (tests and analyses) that is used to define the hazards associated with ammunition (projectile and propelling charge) being left in a hot gun barrel as the result of an inadvertent hangfire or misfire. Knowledge of these hazards is the starting point for developing hot gun misfire proce
13、dures to be used by a gun crew to safely attempt to clear ammunition from a hot gun barrel and prevent the ammunition from cooking off. Hot gun hazards are a function of the firing scenario conducted immediately prior to a hangfire/misfire (types and number of rounds fired, rates of fire, lengths of
14、 pauses in the firing), as well as the type of gun, and the type of ammunition left in a hot gun barrel. 5. Four types of tests are normally conducted to generate data that will be used to determine how: (1) the gun barrel heats up during firing, (2) the heat flows from the hot barrel back into the
15、projectile, (3) the heat flows into the propelling charge subsequent to a misfire, and (4) the explosive or propellant reacts (e.g., detonates or deflagrates) once it is heated. 6. The data from these tests are used to calibrate finite element method (FEM) thermal models of the gun barrel, projectil
16、e (warhead and rocket motor if appropriate), and propelling charge. These FEM thermal models are used to evaluate the cook-off hazards that exist for realistic and reasonable (but not all possible) firing scenarios. ii Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without lice
17、nse from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 7. This process should apply to each different combination of ammunition and gun, because the cook-off hazards are dependent upon the designs of both. Different variants of the same type of gun can heat up differently when firing the same ammunition. Different ammunitio
18、n can heat up differently in the same hot gun if the two types of ammunition have different designs, including the type of explosive and propellant used, the projectile design (such as wall thickness), the presence or absence of liners, or the cartridge case design (material). 8. Fortunately, docume
19、nted lessons learned from one gun and ammunition combination can frequently be used to help evaluate other similar combinations, e.g., the same explosive used in another gun. Accordingly program managers and munitions developers should tailor the process in this standard to take advantage of documen
20、ted lessons learned in other ammunition and gun programs. 9. Gun and ammunition program managers are responsible for planning and executing hot gun cook-off hazards assessment programs. The cook-off assessment includes a test plan (that is dove-tailed with the insensitive munitions and system safety
21、 evaluation plans) based on realistic firing scenarios. Program managers should establish safety design goals for the assessment plan and have these goals approved by the service review organization within the applicable department. Program managers should generate test and analysis reports (documen
22、ting a rationale for the final hot gun misfire procedures) for submission to their service review organization. 10. The service review organization should review the hot gun cook-off assessment plan as well as the test and analysis reports. It should examine the results of the hot gun cook-off hazar
23、ds assessment program to ensure that hot gun cook-off safety as well as insensitive munitions and system safety requirements are met. The service review organization should produce a final recommendation for or against service use of each gun/ammunition combination and whether the hot gun misfire pr
24、ocedures are adequate. For joint programs, all affected service review organizations should conduct this review and examination and develop a final recommendation. 11. Documentation of a hot gun cook-off assessment should be kept in a library for use by future gun and ammunitions programs. Such a co
25、llection should minimize unnecessary and redundant testing and analyses in the future, allowing the potential use of previously conducted testing and analyses as leverage in current efforts. 12. Comments, suggestions, or questions on this document should be addressed to: Commander, Naval Sea Systems
26、 Command, ATTN: SEA 05M2, 1333 Isaac Hull Avenue, SE, Stop 5160, Washington Navy Yard DC 20376-5160 or emailed to CommandStandardsnavy.mil, with the subject line “Document Comment”. Since contact information can change, you may want to verify the currency of this address information using the ASSIST
27、 Online database at http:/assist.daps.dla.mil iii Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 CONTENTS PARAGRAPH PAGE 1. SCOPE1 1.1 Scope1 1.2 Purpose 1 1.3 Application.1 2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS 1 2.1 General.1 2.2 Government documen
28、ts .1 2.2.1 Specifications, standards, and handbooks 1 2.2.2 Other Government documents, drawings, and publications.2 2.3 Non-Government publications.2 2.4 Order of precedence.2 3. DEFINITIONS .2 3.1 All-up-round (AUR) 2 3.2 Ambient temperature .2 3.3 Bare round or configuration.2 3.4 Cartridge case
29、 2 3.5 Ceasefire 2 3.6 Cold gun.2 3.7 Cook-off.3 3.8 Data acquisition system (DAS)3 3.9 Energetic material 3 3.10 Exothermic decomposition 3 3.11 Explosive .3 3.12 Explosive device3 3.13 Exudation.3 3.14 Fixed ammunition 3 3.15 Hangfire .3 3.16 Hazardous fragment.3 3.17 Hot gun 3 3.18 Hot gun misfir
30、e procedures3 3.19 Insensitive munitions (IM).3 3.20 Kinetic thermal properties3 3.21 Magazine3 3.22 Misfire3 3.23 Munition 4 3.24 Munition subsystem.4 3.25 Primer 4 3.26 Projectile 4 3.27 Propelling charge .4 3.28 Propulsion 4 3.29 Reaction types4 3.29.1 Type I (detonation reaction).4 3.29.2 Type I
31、I (partial detonation reaction) 4 iv Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 CONTENTS PARAGRAPH PAGE 3.29.3 Type III (explosion reaction) .4 3.29.4 Type IV (deflagration reaction) .4 3.29.5 Type V (burning reaction) .4 3.30 Round
32、.4 3.31 Safe clearing time predictor (SCTP)5 3.32 Semi-fixed ammunition .5 3.33 Service review organization.5 3.34 Thermophysical properties.5 3.35 Threat hazard assessment (THA).5 3.36 Units of measurement and abbreviations .5 3.37 Weapon system5 4. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS6 4.1 General.6 4.1.1 Test an
33、d analysis plan6 4.1.2 Environmental profile6 4.1.3 Threat hazard assessment (THA).6 4.2 Test parameters6 4.2.1 Initial temperatures 6 4.2.2 Barrel temperatures6 4.2.3 Ammunition configurations.6 4.4 Test hardware.7 4.5 Test facilities7 4.5.1 Test ammunition 7 4.5.1.1 Live ammunition7 4.5.1.2 Instru
34、mental ammunition.7 4.5.2 Test gun barrel .7 4.5.3 Ancillary test hardware7 4.6 Instrumentation requirements 7 4.6.1 Thermal instruction7 4.6.2 Pressure instrumentation8 4.7 Photographic requirements 8 4.7.1 Still photography .8 4.7.2 Video coverage 8 4.8 Analysis of hot gun hazards.8 4.9 Pre-test e
35、xamination.8 4.10 Post-test requirements8 5. DETAILED REQUIREMENTS.8 5.1 Hot gun tests 8 5.1.1 Barrel heat input tests 8 5.1.1.1 Single-shot tests.8 5.1.1.2 Multiple-round tests.9 5.1.2 Hot gun cook-off tests10 5.1.2.1 Hot gun cook-off testing procedures10 v Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduct
36、ion or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 CONTENTS PARAGRAPH PAGE 5.1.2.2 Simulated hot gun cook-off test fixture10 5.1.2.3 Barrel thermal instrumentation 10 5.1.2.4 Ammunition for cook-off tests.10 5.1.2.5 Ammunition thermal instrumentation 11 5.1.2.6 Ancillary test hard
37、ware 11 5.1.2.7 Video coverage 11 5.1.2.8 Still photography11 5.1.2.9 Test documentation11 5.2 Analysis of hot gun hazards.11 5.2.1 Preparing for thermal analysis11 5.2.1.1 Creating thermal models 11 5.2.1.2 Thermophysical and kinetic properties 12 5.2.1.3 Calibrating thermal models12 5.2.2 Parametr
38、ically evaluating hot gun cook-off hazards 12 5.3 Hot gun hazard definitions.12 5.3.1 Hot gun criteria 12 5.3.1.1 Margin of safety.12 5.3.1.2 Hot gun condition 12 5.3.1.3 Safe clearing time.13 5.3.1.4 Safe return time13 5.3.1.5 Violence of reaction.13 5.4 Hot gun misfire procedures13 5.4.1 Simplest
39、hot gun misfire procedures13 5.4.2 Sophisticated hot gun misfire procedures 13 5.4.3 Paper backup hot gun misfire procedures 13 6. NOTES .13 6.1 Intended use .13 6.2 Acquisition requirements .14 6.3 Associated Data Item Descriptions (DIDs)14 6.4 Tailoring guidance for contractual application 14 6.5
40、Subject term (key word) listing14 6.6 International standardization agreement implementation 14 6.6.1 General.14 6.6.1.1 STANAG 4224 .15 6.6.1.2 STANAG 4382 .15 6.9.1.3 STANAG 4439 .15 6.6.1.4 STANAG 4516 .15 6.6.1.5 AOP-15.15 6.6.1.6 AOP-39.15 6.6.1.7 ITOP 4-2-504(1) .15 6.6.1.8 ITOP 4-2-504(4) .15
41、 6.7 Submission of test reports and results15 6.8 Service review organizations .15 6.9 Tests for hazard classification16 vi Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 vii CONTENTS PARAGRAPH PAGE 6.10 Hot gun misfire procedures16 6.1
42、0.1 Hot gun criteria16 6.10.2 Simplest hot gun misfire procedures16 6.10.3 Sophisticated hot gun misfire procedures 16 6.10.4 Paper backup hot gun misfire procedures16 FIGURES PAGE 1 Testing and analysis process to define hot gun misfire procedures 17 2 Gun simulator test fixture (projectile tests)
43、18 3 Instrumentation port for slow-response (100 mils) thermocouple19 4 Example of instrumented inert ammunition .20 5 Example of instrumented inert ammunition with self contained DAS .21 6 Example of barrel fragments produced by a projectile cook-off reaction.22 7 Coupled barrel, projectile, and pr
44、opelling charge models 23 8 Example of a projectile hot gun cook-off hazard summary24 Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-MIL-STD-3029 1. SCOPE 1.1 Scope. This standard provides or references test and analysis procedures for the assessmen
45、t of hot gun cook-off hazards for all non-nuclear gun munitions. These procedures compliment the insensitive munitions (IM) evaluation procedures in MIL-STD-2105, as well as the appropriate system safety requirements specified in MIL-STD-882. 1.2 Purpose. The purpose is to provide a framework for th
46、e development of a test and analysis program for non-nuclear gun munitions. These tests and analyses are to assist in the characterization of gun munitions to yield a documented record of the hot gun hazards for each gun/ammunition combination. This document provides the rationale for hot gun misfir
47、e procedures for gun crews that must deal with a misfire/hangfire (or even a ceasefire if the ammunition is loaded into a gun chamber prior to an intent to fire) involving live ammunition in a gun barrel/chamber. These procedures address a comprehensive range of firing scenarios that could be expect
48、ed prior to a misfire/hangfire/ceasefire, not just the worst case scenario. This document also provides the service review organization information with which to make a decision. 1.3 Application. This standard applies to all-up non-nuclear gun propelling charges and projectiles (e.g., which may cont
49、ain fuzes, booster charges, warheads, and rocket motors). It is not possible to test all hot gun conditions; however, a comprehensive range of realistic firing scenarios should be evaluated through a minimum of testing and an analytical extrapolation of data from those tests. 2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS 2.1 General. The documents listed in this section are specified in sections 3, 4, or 5 of th
