The Gurney Equation

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Garyt

Senior Airman
354
25
Jan 2, 2014
Anyone had any experience calculation the damage of a high explosive round using the Gurney equation?

I seem to be doing something wrong I think. I'm coming up with numbers that show the damage to me caused be the exploded casing to be far greater than the damage caused be the explosion itself, using kilojoules to measure.

When I say much greater, I mean even with a GP bomb the fragmentation effects are about 10x that of the explosion itself.
 
I am familiar with the equation - you can find some Gurney calculators online.

I am wondering if I am modeling it properly. AP shells should do lees than HE shells - and I am finding that they generally get better fragmentation results, as to be expected, but the increased HE energy is not enough to compensate for the HE rounds reduced fragmentation, and they wind up coming out somewhat equal.

I am wondering if some the factors should be changed.

I am already reducing fragment velocity to 80% of calculated, this is due to the casing requiring energy to be spent to break it. I am using the "brittle metal" example, though I am not sure if a shell casing really should be categorized as "brittle", though they did not have any other possible categories.

But I am wondering to model damage properly, should frag damage kinetic energy be modelled the same as HE kinetic energy?


BTW - Here is an online gurney calculator, Valengo

http://www.un.org/disarmament/un-saferguard/gurney/
 
Last edited:
I have read (Wiki) about unexpected results when applying the equation inside certain range of M/C rate.

What do you mean here? I guess I'm not familiar with what the M/C rate means.
 
Got It Now!

From what I can see, it provides incorrect results if the mass of the shell is 50% or less than the mass of the burster. Even on a 30mm Minengeschoss shell, the shell is 3 times the

weight of the burster, so his should not be an issue.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back