Analytical and numerical models, validated against published data, were developed to calculate the velocity and time of arrival duration (ToAD) of the flyer-plasma material at the top of the barrel of an exploding foil initiator (EFI), as commonly used in explosive devices. Such tools will aid system designers in the optimization of capacitor discharge circuit (CDC) or EFI bridge material properties.
The analytical elements of the approach developed support the requirement for the consideration of mass ejection variation with respect to initial capacitor voltage.
The numerical elements of the approach developed demonstrate that EFI design alteration to increase flyer mass is less effective in reducing ToAD than supply voltage modulation via the CDC. This finding is of particular relevance for in situ control of functional performance characteristics. This work goes on to demonstrate that such control is impracticable when using hexanitrostilbene, since the initial capacitor voltages necessary to yield appropriate ToAD for deflagration deliver insufficient energy to instigate a response from the EFI.
StroudJR.A new kind of detonator - the slapper. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1976.
2.
SchmidtSCSeitzWLWackerieJ.An empirical model to compute the velocity histories of flyers driven by electrically exploding foils. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, 1977.
3.
GurneyRW.The initial velocities of fragments from bombs, shells, grenades. Aberdeen, MD: Ballistic Research Laboratories, 1943.
4.
FurnbergCMPeevyGRBrighamWPLyonsGRComputer modeling of electrical performance of detonators. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Labs, 1995.
5.
GhoshA.Modelling and simulation of burst phenomenon in electrically exploded foils. Ropar: Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory Electro Explosive Devices (EED) Division, 2012.
6.
NappertL.An exploding foil initiator system. Valcartier: Defence Research Establishment, 1996.
7.
SmetanaWReicherRHomolkaH.Improving reliability of thick film initiators for automotive applications based on FE-analyses. Microelectron Reliab2005; 45: 1194–1201.
8.
ChristensenJSHrousisCAThree-Dimensional Magnetohydrodynamic Simulation of Slapper Initiation Systems. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Lab, 2010.
9.
SchwarzAC. Shock initiation sensitivity of hexanitrostilbene (HNS). Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Labs, 1981.
10.
PriceD.Effect of particle size on the shock sensitivity of pure porous HE. Silver Spring, MD: Naval Surface Weapons Centre, 1986.
11.
JamesHRHewittDB.Critical energy criterion for the initiation of explosives by spherical projectiles. Propellant Explosive Pyrotechnic1989; 14: 223–233.
12.
JamesHR.Critical energy criterion for the shock initiation of explosives by projectile impact. Propellant Explosive Pyrotechnic1988; 13: 35–41.
13.
BormanAJDowdingCFGriffithsJD, et al. Exploding foil initiator (EFI) modes of operation determined using down-barrel flyer layer velocity measurement. Propellant Explosive Pyrotechnic2016; 42: 318–328.
14.
BrundageAL. Modeling Compressive Reaction in Shock-Driven Secondary Granular Explosives. In: ASME/JSME 2011 8th Thermal Engineering Joint Conference 2011 Jan 1. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
BowdenM.The development of a laser detonator system. PhD Thesis, CranfieldUniversity, Bedford, 2014.
25.
ZengQLiBLiM, et al. A miniature device for shock initiation of hexanitrostilbene by high-speed flyer. Propellant Explosive Pyrotechnic2016; 41: 864–869.
26.
ScholtesJHPrinseWCBoumaRHMeukenB. Development of exploding foil initiators for future IM. In: 2007 Insensitive Munitions & Energetic Materials Technology Symposium (IMEMTS): New Programs, New Policies, New Strategies leading to New Joint Solutions, Miami, FL, 15–18 October2007.
27.
XuCZhuPChenK, et al. A highly integrated conjoined single shot switch and exploding foil initiator chip based on MEMS technology. IEEE Electron Device Lett2017; 38: 1610–1613.
28.
VirkHSChandiPSSrivastavaAK.Physical and chemical response of 70 MeV carbon ion irradiated Kapton-H polymer. Bull Mater Sci2002; 24: 529–534.
29.
RossCB. Wavelengths and energy levels of singly ionized copper, Cu II. New Mexico: Los Alamos Scientific Lab, 1970.
30.
WilleyTMChampleyKHodginRLauderbachLBagge-HansenMMayCSanchezNJensenBJIversonAVan BuurenT. X-ray imaging and 3D reconstruction of in-flight exploding foil initiator flyers. Journal of Applied Physics2016; 119(23): 235901.
31.
NealWBowdenMHigh fidelity studies of exploding foil initiator bridges, part 2: experimental results. In: AIP Conference Proceedings 2017 Jan 13, Vol. 1793. Melville, NY: AIP Publishing, 1973.
32.
NealWGarasiCHigh fidelity studies of exploding foil initiator bridges, Part 3: ALEGRA MHD simulations. In: AIP Conference Proceedings 2017 Jan 13, Vol. 1793. Melville, NY: AIP Publishing, 1973.
33.
WaschlJAHattDJ.Characterization of a small-scale exploding bridge foil flyer generator. Int J Impact Eng1993; 14: 785–796.
34.
ScholtesGPrinseWDevelopment of exploding foil initiators and micro chip EFIs. In: Proceedings of Insensitive Munitions and Energetic Materials Technology Symposium, Miami, FL, 2007. Arlington, VA: NDIA.
35.
PrinseWCvan’t HofPGChengLKScholtesJHHigh-speed velocity measurements on an EFI-system. In: 27th International Congress on High-Speed Photography and Photonics 2007 Jan 29 (Vol. 6279, p. 62795E). Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
