1

1 Article

2 Modeling of Ammunition Dynamic Pressure Measurement

3 Chain in Ballistic Tests
4 Caio Bittencourt Cardoso Felix 1, Khrissy Aracélly Reis Medeiros 2 and Carlos Roberto Hall Barbosa 1,*

5 1
Postgraduate Programme in Metrology, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Marquês de São
6 Vicente Street, 225, Gávea, Rio de Janeiro 22451-900, Brazil; caiobittencourt@gmail.com
7 2
Mechanical Engineering Department (DEM), Optical Fiber Sensors Laboratory (LSFO), Pontifical Catholic
8 University of Rio de Janeiro, Marquês de São Vicente Street, 225, Gávea, Rio de Janeiro 22451-900, Brazil;
9 kmedeiros@puc-rio.br
10 * Correspondence: hall@puc-rio.br

11 Abstract: The use of piezoelectric transducers for internal dynamic pressure measurements in
12 ammunition testing provides a significant advantage in the development and performance
13 analysis of weapons and ammunition. Knowledge of the electrical characteristics of the dynamic
14 pressure measurement chain, which includes the piezoelectric transducer and the charge
15 amplifier, is a relevant condition for the design of interior ballistics pressure measurement
16 systems. Thus, this study aims to characterize and model a piezoelectric transducer and its
17 associated charge amplifier. First, the piezoelectric transducer was characterized using impedance
18 analysis and modeled using a least squares curve fitting tool, according to the Butterworth Van-
19 Dyke model. Next, the charge amplifier was characterized through response analysis based on
20 known inputs and modeled using LTSpice simulation techniques and the least squares curve fit
21 tool. Consequently, a measurement chain model was presented and simulated for two cases with
22 different impulse signals. The first impulse signal was obtained from an interior ballistics
23 computer simulation, and in the second case it was considered the negative step signal
24 characteristic of the calibration of piezoelectric transducers by means of dead weight. From the
25 simulations, it was possible to verify the effectiveness of the model and its applicability.
Citation: To be added by editorial
staff during production.
26 Keywords: equivalent circuit; impedance analysis; interior ballistics; pressure measurement;
27 Academic Editor: First name Last- piezoelectric transducer
28 name

Received: date
Revised: date
29 Accepted: date
1. Introduction
30 Published: date The piezoelectric effect was first discovered in 1880 by Pierre Curie and Jacques
31 Curie [1]. However, its first application as a sensor was explored only in 1919 by J. J.

Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.

Submitted for possible open access
publication under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license
(https://creativecommons.org/license
s/by/4.0/).

3 Sensors 2023, 23, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors

 4 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 29
5

32 Thomson, who reported that tourmaline or quartz crystals could be used in pressure
33 measurements from explosions [2].
34 The direct piezoelectric effect is observed in specific materials, such as quartz
35 crystals. This physical phenomenon can be described as the generation of an electrical
36 charge in a material that has such properties when it is subjected to mechanical stress [3].
37 This effect has several applications, one of which is the use of piezoelectric transducers
38 to measure dynamic pressure in different systems.
39 Thus, piezoelectric pressure transducers convert pressure into an electrical charge,
40 allowing the measurement and monitoring of that physical quantity. These measuring
41 instruments can be used in different contexts, such as the automotive, petrochemical,
42 aerospace, ballistics and defense industries [4,5].
43 Notably, in ballistics tests, piezoelectric transducers are used to measure the
44 internal pressure during the combustion process of an ammunition propellant. This
45 measurement method is the most advantageous in several aspects [6]. Piezoelectric
46 transducer measurements make it possible to obtain relevant information, such as the
47 maximum pressure inside the chamber and the pressure profile over time, yielding
48 helpful knowledge in the development of weapons and the analysis of performance and
49 safety of ammunition [7].
50 Measurements using piezoelectric transducers originate, from the direct
51 piezoelectric effect, an electrical charge on the order of picocoulombs ( pC ), which must
52 be converted to pressure by dividing it by the piezoelectric sensitivity coefficient, whose
53 unit is pC /MPa . Because the charge generated is too small for direct measurement, to
54 make pressure measurements possible using piezoelectric transducers, it is necessary to
55 use charge amplifiers, which convert the electric charge originating from the direct
56 piezoelectric effect into a voltage [8,9]. For example, in the case of the HPI B217 charge
57 amplifier, the output voltage is from – 10 V to +10 V , a voltage range with sufficient
58 amplitude to be measured by any commercial oscilloscope.
59 Given this, the measurement of ammunition dynamic pressure in ballistics tests
60 necessarily takes place by means of a measurement chain composed of a piezoelectric
61 transducer and a charge amplifier. Therefore, modeling piezoelectric transducers and
62 charge amplifiers as electrical circuits undoubtedly represents a valuable tool for
63 simulations and theoretical studies of the dynamic pressure measurement chain,
64 allowing a better understanding of how these devices work and how their electrical
65 configuration affects dynamic pressure measurements in ammunition testing. As the
66 signals obtained from dynamic pressure measurements are necessarily conditioned by
67 charge amplifiers, the modeling of the two components of the measurement chain is
68 relevant because it will ensure that the result of simulations provided by the model
69 created is as reliable as possible to the real case.
70 Therefore, this study aimed to model the dynamic pressure measurement chain of
71 interior ballistics. For this, two different methods were considered: (i) impedance

6
 7 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 29
8

72 analysis for the HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer; and (ii) characterization for the HPI
73 B217 charge amplifier, that is, the identification of the circuit parameters by means of the
74 system response, given a known input. Furthermore, with the results, a simulation with
75 ballistics data is implemented, aiming to demonstrate the applicability of the complete
76 model.
77 This paper is divided as follows: Section 2 briefly discusses the theoretical
78 foundation of the metrological core of the study; Section 3 presents the methods used for
79 the modeling; Section 4 shows the results obtained, that is, the elements of each electrical
80 circuit model of the piezoelectric transducer and the charge amplifier, as well as
81 examples of the application of the model with the pressure curve of interior ballistics
82 obtained by simulation and with pressure curves characteristic of the calibration of
83 piezoelectric transducers using dead weight. Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusions
84 and final considerations of the study.

85 2. Interior Ballistics – Internal Pressure Measurement

86 Piezoelectric transducers play a crucial role in ensuring metrological reliability
87 during weapons and ammunition testing, because the most critical parameter to
88 measure is the internal pressure resulting from the expansion of the propellant's
89 combustion gases [10]. These transducers allow for the measurement of the pressure
90 profile developed by the ammunition, enabling the accurate evaluation of weapon and
91 ammunition performance and safety. Therefore, piezoelectric transducers are essential
92 devices for testing weapons and ammunition.
93 In ammunition tests in which the internal pressure is measured, one or two
94 piezoelectric transducers can be installed, with the positions defined by each certifying
95 organization. For EPVAT tests (Electronic Pressure Velocity and Action Time), the North
96 Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) determines that a transducer is installed in the test
97 barrel in a position equivalent to the mouth of the ammunition case for tests of all
98 calibers, aiming to measure the “case mouth pressure”, and in the case of calibers
99 5.56x45 mm and 7.62x51 mm, a transducer should also be installed close to the
100 intermediate region of the test barrel, for the measurement of “port pressure” [11].
101 shows the test barrel with two transducer mounting ports. For the EPVAT tests, the
102 HPI model GP6 transducer (HPI GP6) can be used for both case mouth and port
103 pressure measurements.

9
10 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 29
11

104

105 Figure 1. Test barrel with two transducer mounting ports for EPVAT test.

106 Piezoelectric sensors are classified as active, that is, they do not require an external
107 power source to perform measurements [12]. Piezoelectric transducers used in ballistics
108 tests generate electrical charge as their sensitive material, a piezoelectric crystal, is
109 compressed by the effect of increased pressure inside the barrel.
110 The HPI GP6 transducer, shown in Figure 2, used in this study, has a gallium
111 phosphate (GaPO4) sensitive element, a synthetic piezoelectric crystal derived from
112 quartz. This material has a higher sensitivity than quartz, which is the sensitive element
113 of other piezoelectric pressure transducers used in ballistics tests [13]. As quartz, the
114 gallium phosphate used in pressure transducers works ideally for dynamic
115 measurements, i.e., it generates electrical charge as pressure is applied to or removed
116 from it. If static pressure is applied, the charge quickly leaks away, and the transducer
117 response returns to zero [14].

118

119 Figure 2. HPI GP6 pressure transducer and an example of use to measure internal barrel pressure
120 of Imbel IA2 5,56x45 mm.

121 The HPI GP6 transducer measures dynamic pressures of up to 600 MPa, has a
122 natural vibration frequency greater than 240 kHz and, in the case of the unit used in the
123 tests described in this document, has a nominal sensitivity of 33 pC/ MPa.

12
13 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 29
14

124 To obtain accurate and reliable readings from piezoelectric transducers, it is

125 necessary to use charge amplifiers in the instrumentation to convert the electric charge
126 originating from the direct piezoelectric effect into a proportional electric voltage. Thus,
127 from the dynamic pressure pulse, the piezoelectric transducer produces an electric
128 charge that, in turn, is converted into a voltage by the charge amplifier. Finally, the
129 voltage measurement can be performed using an oscilloscope, for example, so that it is
130 converted into pressure, knowing the charge amplifier amplification factor and the
131 sensitivity of the piezoelectric transducer, completing the pressure measurement chain,
132 summarized in Figure 3.

133

134 Figure 3. Measuring chain for pressure using a piezoelectric transducer: (a) pressure is converted
135 to electric charge by the piezoelectric transducer; (b) electric charge is converted to voltage by the
136 charge amplifier; (c) voltage is read by an oscilloscope; (d) knowing the sensibility of the
137 piezoelectric transducer and the gain of the charge amplifier, pressure is computed. Adapted from
138 [15].

139 In this study, the charge amplifier used was the HPI B217, which provides voltage
140 as an output parameter, or even pressure over time, employing its control and
141 parameter reading software, the HPI B3000. The pressure curve over time is determined
142 using the HPI B217 charge amplifier’s amplification factor, which will provide the
143 charge measurement, and, finally, with the piezoelectric sensitivity of the HPI GP6
144 transducer, converting charge to pressure.
145 The measurement chain provides the reading of the pressure pulse inside the
146 barrel, which has the particularity of high-pressure levels reached in a few milliseconds

15
16 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 29
17

147 [16,17]. A typical pressure-time curve that characterizes the interior ballistics of
148 ammunition is shown in Figure 4. In that curve, which is the measurement of the
149 pressure variation between the ignition of the primer and the output of the projectile by
150 the barrel, the maximum pressure of approximately 363 Mpa is verified, reached at
151 0. 240 ms after the rise of pressure variation, in the case of a pressure test of 7.62x51 mm
152 NATO Ball ammunition, measured at the case mouth port and filtered by a 10 kHz 2 nd
153 order Butterworth low pass filter, as recommended by the experimental procedure.

154

155 Figure 4. Case mouth pressure-time variation in EPVAT test barrel for 7.62x51 mm NATO Ball
156 ammunition: pressure can be obtained by dividing the measured charge by the transducer
157 sensitivity (33 pC/MPa), considering a linear behavior.

158 The modeling of the entire measuring chain in equivalent electronic circuits, that is,
159 the modeling of piezoelectric transducers and charge amplifiers, provides a better
160 understanding of the electrical characteristics of piezoelectric transducers. Therefore, it is
161 essential for the design of measurement systems based on piezoelectric sensors [18].

162 3. Modeling of the Interior Ballistics Pressure Measurement Chain

163 To obtain the electrical model of the entire measurement chain, the methods used in
164 modeling the piezoelectric transducer, by impedance analysis, and then for the charge
165 amplifier, using the characterization method, will be presented.

166 3.1. Piezoelectric transducer modeling Subsection

167 For the modeling of the HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer, the model called
168 Butterworth-Van Dyke (BVD) was considered, as recommended by the IEEE Standard
169 on Piezoelectricity (ANSI/IEEE Std 176-1987) [19]. The BVD model is useful for the

18
19 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 29
20

170 analysis of the electrical performance of piezoelectric transducers [20] and can be used in
171 the design and optimization of piezoelectric devices [21–24]. The BVD model circuit
172 consists of a resistor, an inductor, and a capacitor in series ( Rm , Lm, C m), all connected in
173 parallel with a second capacitor (C 0), as shown in Figure 5.

174

175 Figure 5. Butterworth-Van Dyke electric model.

176 The capacitance C 0, which dominates the transducer impedance outside the
177 resonance region, models the piezoelectric elements’ dielectric capacitance and the
178 parasitic capacitance of the cables, whereas the parameters Rm , Lm e C m model the
179 mechanical oscillation of the transducer [25].
180 For piezoelectric transducers used in ballistics tests, the magnitude to be measured
181 is the dynamic pressure developed inside the barrel of a weapon. Therefore, pressure
182 must be the input data of the circuit. In turn, the electrical charge ( q ) is defined by the
183 piezoelectric sensitivity (d ) of the transducer, which defines the relationship between
184 electrical charge and pressure. Thus, in the electrical model, the input data will be
185 represented by a current source ( I ), which will be determined by the derivative of the
186 electrical charge with respect to time (dQ /dt ), or by the derivative of pressure in time (
187 dP /dt ), multiplied by the piezoelectric sensitivity (d ):
dQ dP
I= =d . (1)
dt dt
188 To determine the BVD model’s parameters, the following technique will be used:
189 the impedance of the BVD model ( Z BVD) will be fitted to the characteristic impedance of
190 the piezoelectric transducer, measured experimentally. For the BVD model, the Z BVD
191 impedance is given by:

21
22 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 29
23

Z BVD =
( 1
jω C0
)( jω L + R +
m m
jω C )
1
m
(2)
1 1
+ jω Lm + Rm +
jω C 0 jω C m
192 From the impedance equation of the BVD model (2), its elements can be determined
193 employing the least squares curve fitting of the impedance obtained experimentally,
194 unlike other approaches, in which the determination of the elements of the electric
195 circuit takes place by means of parametric equations dependent on the magnitude of the
196 impedance at specific frequencies [22,24,25], or even employing physical parameters
197 characteristic of the piezoelectric material of the transducer [26]. For this, a Keysight
198 E4900A impedance analyzer was used, which basically excites the transducer through a
199 voltage of 100 mV with a variable frequency and measures its response, providing the
200 reactance and resistance for a frequency range from 1 kHz to 100 kHz . Calculated by
201 Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), the frequency domain representation of the pressure-time
202 signal of Figure 4 is shown in Figure 6, showing that the useful signal is lower than
203 20 kHz . So, it is acceptable to use the referred frequency range ( 1 – 100 kHz ) for the
204 impedance fit.

205

206 Figure 6. Fast Fourier Transform of the pressure-time signal shown in Figure 4.

207 For impedance measurements by impedance analyzer, some connection circuits can
208 be used depending on many factors, such as the frequency range to be examined. In this
209 case, the circuit detailed in Figure 7, called Auto-Balancing Bridge Method, was used.

24
25 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 29
26

210

211 Figure 7. Impedance measurement circuit: Auto-Balancing Bridge Method [27].

212 In the measuring circuit, the current I x passes through the device under test (DUT).
213 In turn, the current I r , which passes through resistor Rr , is converted into voltage V x,
214 measured by terminal 4.
Vx Vr
=I x =I r= (3)
Zx Rr
215 Since the current I r is equal to I x , the impedance Z x is determined by the V x and
216 V r voltages, measured by terminals 2 and 4, respectively [27], that is:
Vx
Z x =Rr . (4)
Vr
217 Based on the results of the impedance analysis, the function “lsqcurvefit”, available
218 in MATLAB (version 9.13.0.2105380), was used to determine the parameters of the BVD
219 model for the piezoelectric transducer HPI GP6. The function receives as input
220 parameters the nonlinear function given by (2), as well as the experimental data to
221 which it must be fitted, in addition to the initial values and the upper and lower limits
222 for the variables to be estimated.

223 3.2. Charge amplifier modeling

224 Advancing in the modeling of the dynamic pressure measurement chain, in the case
225 of the charge amplifier, the simplified topology presented in Figure 8 [28–31] was
226 adopted to compose the modeling as a whole.

27
28 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 29
29

227

228 Figure 8. Charge amplifier electrical model.

229 In this circuit model, the transfer function is given by:

E0 ( s ) −Z 2 ( s ) −1/ R¿ C f
= = (5)
Ei (s) Z 1 ( s ) s +1/C f Rf
230 Applying the inverse Laplace transform to the transfer function, the following
231 relationship between the output voltage and the input voltage is obtained:
−1
e o ( t ) −1 R C
t
= .e f f
(6)
ei (t) R¿ C f
232 Upon input of a step signal, the initial output voltage will be −1/ R¿ C f , returning
233 to zero according to the exponential function with the time constant τ =C f Rf . The limit
234 for the duration of charge measurements can be defined in the interval 0< t<0.02 τ , for
235 an error limit of 2 %, for example [12].
236 Intending to characterize the HPI B217 charge amplifier, including allowing the
237 determination of the time constant, the following procedure was adopted: from a
238 previously defined input voltage, the amplifier response was observed using the digital
239 oscilloscope Tektronix model TBS 1102B. The input was established using the HPI B202
240 function generator, as shown in Figure 9. The instrument generated a negative
241 rectangular curve e i ( t ) with a minimum amplitude of approximately −2.7 V .

30
31 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 29
32

242

243 Figure 9. Input curve generated from HPI B202 for characterization of the charge amplifier.

244 Plugged into the output of the function generator, a reference capacitor with
245 capacitance C ref was inserted, allowing the voltage e i ( t ) to be converted into electric
246 charge q (t), according to:

q ( t )=C ref . ei (t) (7)

247 Subsequently, the amplifier was connected in series to the circuit, and its response
248 was observed with the same oscilloscope mentioned above. For the characterization,
249 four different reference capacitors were used, with the respective capacitances described
250 in Table 1.

251 Table 1. Reference Capacitors Values.

C ref 1 C ref 2 C ref 3 C ref 4

2218.8 pF 2199.2 pF 1509.7 pF 1000.1 pF

252 Figure 10 shows the instruments connected in series for the characterization of the
253 HPI B217 charge amplifier.

33
34 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 29
35

254

255 Figure 10. Instruments series connection: (a) function generator HPI B202; (b) reference capacitor,
256 (c) charge amplifier HPI B217 and; (d) oscilloscope.

257 From the different responses obtained in the characterization, similar to the
258 piezoelectric transducer modeling, a MATLAB curve fitting tool was used. This time, the
259 function used was “lsqnonlin”, which also fits the parameters vector to a nonlinear
260 function. In this case, the Matlab function fits the data measured by the oscilloscope to
261 the data simulated by a circuit model implemented in LTSpice (version 17.0.36.0); that is,
262 the corresponding parameters (the values of the components in Fig. 8) were inserted into
263 LTspice, and the simulated result was compared to the input data obtained with the
264 oscilloscope, thus determining the error. Figure 11 illustrates the routine developed for
265 the charge amplifier characterization.

36
37 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 29
38

266

267 Figure 11. Charge amplifier characterization routine.

268 3.3. Parameters refinement

269 For now, the data fitting made took into account the behavior of the measurement
270 chain components separately, that is, the data fitting of the electrical model of the
271 piezoelectric transducer (Figure 5) to the data originated with the impedance analysis, as
272 well as the data fitting of the respective model (Figure 8) to the charge amplifier
273 characterization data.
274 Since the study deals with a measurement chain modeling composed of the HPI
275 GP6 piezoelectric transducer and the HPI B217 charge amplifier, it is possible to perform
276 the data fitting considering the complete electrical model. For this, it is necessary to
277 determine the input and the expected response data of the circuit. Considering the
278 experimental pressure/electric charge curve, illustrated in Figure 4 and assuming that it
279 is identical to the input of the piezoelectric transducer, that is, that it faithfully represents
280 the phenomenon of internal ballistics characterized in the pressure curve over time, it is
281 desirable that the measurement chain response is identical to the input. Therefore,
282 aiming at a refinement of the parameters, with the objective of reducing the response
283 error of the electrical model developed, a data fitting of the electrical model of the
284 measurement chain to the experimental data illustrated in Figure 4 was carried out.
285 Similar to the characterization of the charge amplifier, using Matlab's “lsqnonlin”
286 function, the parameters were fitted to the data simulated by the electrical model

39
40 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 29
41

287 implemented in LTspice, that is, the parameters of the complete model of the
288 measurement chain were inserted in LTspice, and the simulation results were compared
289 with the experimental data, identical to the model input data, thus determining the
290 error. In this case, the initial values of the seven parameters were those obtained in the
291 first two steps of the modeling, that is, in the characterization of the piezoelectric
292 transducer and then, in the characterization of the charge amplifier. Figure 12 illustrates
293 the refinement routine of the parameters determined in the characterizations.

294

295 Figure 12. Parameters refinement routine.

296 Finally, the three-step modeling is completed, starting with the piezoelectric
297 transducer and the charge amplifier modeling, and ending with parameters refinement.
298 Figure 13 illustrates the entire modeling process, culminating in the electrical model of
299 the dynamic pressure measurement chain.

42
43 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 29
44

300

301 Figure 13. Modeling of dynamic pressure measuring chain.

302 3.4. Simulations applied to pressure measurement in calibration

303 To demonstrate the applicability of the complete model, two sequential simulations
304 were performed. The first uses data obtained with the interior ballistics module of
305 PRODAS software (Projectile Rocket Ordnance Design and Analysis System), which
306 simulates the pressure gradient inside the barrel based on empirical functions [32].
307 Basically, PRODAS provides the temporal evolution of displacement, pressure, and
308 velocity for a projectile inside the barrel based on characteristics of primer and
309 propellant, projectile and weapon, that is, dimensions of chamber, rifling, and barrel
310 length, in addition to maximum pressure data inside the barrel and final velocity of the
311 projectile (muzzle velocity) [33].
312 Then, a second simulation was performed using data from a hypothetical
313 calibration. The calibration of piezoelectric transducers similar to HPI GP6, according to
314 the standards for the evaluation of ammunition [11,34], can be performed using a dead
315 weight, a system intended for the direct calibration of static pressure measuring
316 instruments. Since piezoelectric transducers are not able to measure static pressures, a
317 valve system with rapid pressure relief is coupled to the dead weight, inserting into the
318 calibration process a dynamic event that can be characterized as a negative step [16].
319 Therefore, in the case of the calibration simulation, the negative step was modeled
320 according to the sigmoid function [32], whose expression is given by:

45
46 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 29
47

(
q ( t )=d . Pmax . 1−
1
1+ e
−2 kt ) (8)

321 where d is the piezoelectric sensitivity, Pmax is the maximum pressure obtained in the
322 calibration, determined by the dead weight, and k the coefficient that will determine the
323 duration of the dynamic event.
324 For the calibration of piezoelectric transducers, the duration of the dynamic event is
325 directly linked to the characteristics of the charge amplifier, as already mentioned in
326 Section 3.2. Thus, there is relevance in simulating step inputs with varying fall times
327 (defined between the levels of 90 % and 10 % of the maximum charge), in order to
328 determine the limit for the correct measurement of pressure/electric charge, without
329 attenuation of the response caused by the measurement chain. Thus, by varying the
330 constant k , it is possible to create different dynamic events with their respective fall
331 times, as shown in Table 2.

332 Table 2. Dynamic events fall times for each value of k .

k =80 k =150 k =400 k =800 k =1600 k =2400 k =3200

27.465 ms 14.648 ms 5.493 ms 2.746 ms 1.373 ms 0.915 ms 0.687 ms

333 In both simulations, the current ( I ), input to the electrical model of the pressure
334 measurement chain, was calculated by the discrete derivative of pressure ( P ) with
335 respect to time, which in turn was calculated by the piezoelectric sensitivity (d ) of
336 33 pC/ MPa, according to equation (1).

337 4. Results

338 4.1. HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer electric model

339 After measuring the impedance of the HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer with the
340 impedance analyzer, and considering the BVD model impedance equation presented in
341 Figure 5, by using the methodology detailed in Section 3.1, the curve fitting in MATLAB
342 using the “lsqcurvefit” function could be obtained as shown in Figure 14.

48
49 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 29
50

343

344 Figure 14. Result of data fitting for BVD model: (a) resistance and; (b) reactance.

345 The parameters determined with the “lsqcurvefit” function for the HPI GP6
346 piezoelectric transducer are shown in Table 3.

347 Table 3. BVD model parameters determined for the HPI GP6 transducer.

Parameter Value
C0 0. 20704 nF
Rm 82.39631 MΩ
Lm 0.12766 μH
Cm 0.56565 pF

348 To verify the feasibility of the BVD model in simulations, the equivalent electrical
349 circuit model for the charge amplifier will first be determined, and then it will be
350 observed the response of the measurement chain electrical model.

351 4.2. HPI B217 charge amplifier electric model

51
52 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 29
53

352 By means of the procedure described in Section 3.2, using the curve fitting
353 procedure to obtain the charge amplifier circuit response from the known input, it is
354 possible to determine the desired parameters of the HPI B217 charge amplifier electric
355 model. Figure 15 shows the curve fitting result considering the four outputs for each
356 reference capacitor.

357

358 Figure 15. Results of the series of data fitting for each reference capacitor, which compose the
359 equivalent circuit modeling of the HPI B217 charge amplifier.

360 The obtained parameters are presented in Table 4. For the curve fit, the
361 determination coefficient was 0.9984 , and the charge amplifier time constant was
362 calculated as τ =0.6273 s . The amplification factor of the HPI B217 charge amplifier is
363 1.667 mV / pC , defined by the relationship between the maximum response voltage and
364 the input charge calculated by equation Table 4.

365 Table 4. Determined parameters for the HPI B217 charge amplifier.

Parameter Value
Rf 1.07132 GΩ

54
55 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 29
56

Cf 0.58555 nF
R¿ 1.00236 kΩ

366 4.3. Parameters refinement

367 After modeling each element of the dynamic pressure measurement chain, the
368 refinement of the parameters described in Section 3.3 was carried out. Using the
369 experimental data illustrated in Figure 4, the electrical model was fitted, obtaining the
370 response through simulation in LTspice as shown in Figure 16. For the obtained data
371 fitting, the determination coefficient was 0.9999.

372

373 Figure 16. Result of the refinement of the parameters determined by means of the experimental
374 data, and the calculated error.

375 The calculated error can be best seen in Figure 17, with the error at the point where
376 the maximum electric charge is obtained of 6.89511 pC (0.0575 %).

57
58 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 29
59

377

378 Figure 17. Error calculated between experimental data and simulated data obtained with refined
379 parameters.

380 Thus, with the modeling of the HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer and the HPI B217
381 charge amplifier, after the parameters refinement with experimental data, it is possible
382 to compose the entire pressure measurement chain and present the complete circuit, as
383 shown in Figure 18.

60
61 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 29
62

384

385 Figure 18. Dynamic pressure measuring chain electrical model composed by piezoelectric
386 transducer and charge amplifier.

387 The values of each parameter obtained in the two least squares curve fit procedures,
388 followed by the refinement of the entire parameter set, are shown in Table 5.

389 Table 5. Parameters of the electrical model of the dynamic pressure measurement chain.

Parameter Value
C0 0.20704 nF
Rm 80.78297 MΩ
Lm 0.13356 μH
Cm 0.55958 pF
Rf 1.06508 GΩ
Cf 0.59947 nF
R¿ 0.72604 kΩ

390 Regarding the modeling of the measurement chain, it is important to highlight that
391 it was based on the impedance analysis and the response of the charge amplifier, aiming
392 at electrical modeling and without any relationship with the pressure curve originating
393 with the interior ballistic. Therefore, aspects relating to interior ballistics, such as design
394 values of weapons and ammunition and the energy characteristics of the gun propellant,
395 are not considered. In other words, the generation of the pressure curve P(t ) was not
396 the objective of the modeling, but the curve itself was used as input to improve the
397 electrical model of the measurement chain.

63
64 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 29
65

398 4.4. Simulation of interior ballistics pressure measurement

399 After determining the measurement chain equivalent circuit, that is, the modeling
400 of the HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer and the HPI B217 charge amplifier, in order to
401 demonstrate the applicability of the complete model, simulations were performed with
402 interior ballistics data in LTspice, according to the methodology described in Section 3.
403 In order to generate input data for the first simulation, that is, the pressure-time
404 curve, the PRODAS interior ballistics module was used. In this example, the parameters
405 of the 7.62x51 mm NATO Ball ammunition were adopted, with data from a 7.62x51 mm
406 EPVAT test barrel. Figure 19 shows the theoretical breech pressure curve over time for
407 the 7.62x51 mm NATO Ball caliber simulation, as well as the calculated electrical charge
408 for a transducer with a nominal sensitivity of 33 pC/ MPa .

409

410 Figure 19. Theoretical breech pressure-time curve for 7,62x51 mm NATO Ball ammunition in
411 EPVAT test barrel.

412 As the current is the derivative of electric charge with respect to time, it is possible
413 to determine it from the charge-time curve. This, therefore, will be the input of the
414 pressure measurement chain electric model, to be simulated by LTspice.
415 From the assembly of the electrical circuit in LTspice and the data from simulation
416 of interior ballistics obtained with PRODAS, it was possible to obtain the results shown
417 in Figure 20.

66
67 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 29
68

418

419 Figure 20. Charge-time curve of PRODAS simulation and LTspice circuit model simulation, and
420 calculated error between them.

421 The calculated error can be better seen in Figure 21. The error corresponding to the
422 maximum pressure point is 7.6140 pC (0.0653 %).

423

424 Figure 21. Calculated error between Charge-time curve of PRODAS simulation and LTspice circuit
425 model simulation

426 For the simulation of the calibration by means of dead weight together with the
427 pressure relief system, seven characteristic curves of the negative step of pressure/electric

69
70 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 24 of 29
71

428 charge were used, based on the expression (8), by varying the constant k according to
429 Table 2.
430 For a calibration pressure ¿) of 400 MPa, assuming the piezoelectric sensitivity ( d )
431 of 33 pC/MPa, the different inputs can be determined according to Figure 22. Each input
432 signal is a negative step with an initial electric charge of 13200 pC, corresponding to 400
433 MPa, with the different fall times of the dynamic event, with a final electric charge of 0
434 pC, corresponding to 0 MPa.

435

436 Figure 22. Input signal with different fall times for calibration simulation.

437 After differentiating the negative step signals with respect to time, an operation
438 necessary for the use of the different input signals in the current source of the electrical
439 model, the seven calibration simulations were performed, resulting in the responses
440 illustrated in Figure 23, which highlights the Region of Interest (RI), in which the
441 different responses reach their respective minimum values of electric charge. Since the
442 pressure step produces a negative pressure variation, the response signal has negative
443 values. Therefore, the maximum expected charge is -13200 pC.

72
73 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 25 of 29
74

444

445 Figure 23. Output signal with different fall times originated with calibration simulation, focused on minimum charge values (RI).

446 Analyzing the responses, it is noticed that the slower the dynamic event, that is, the
447 opening of the valve system represented by the negative step inserted in the model, the
448 greater the attenuation of the input signal by the measurement chain. In all cases, after
449 reaching the respective minimum values, the electric charge curves follow the
450 characteristic discharge curve of the modeled charge amplifier. Table 6 details, for each
451 electric charge curve originated with the simulation, the difference between the desired
452 charge, i.e., -13200 pC, and the minimum charge obtained, in addition to the equivalent
453 pressure, considering the piezoelectric sensitivity of 33 pC/MPa.

454 Table 6. Error for each signal with respective fall time (duration of dynamic event).

k Fall Time Error

k =80 27.465 ms 700.6 pC / 21.23 MPa (5.31 %)
k =150 14.648 ms 414.2 pC / 12.55 MPa (3.14 %)
k =400 5.493 ms 174.5 pC / 5.29 MPa (1.32 %)
k =800 2.746 ms 90.7 pC / 2.75 MPa (0.69 %)
k =1600 1.373 ms 44.1 pC / 1.34 MPa (0.33 %)
k =2400 0.915 ms 27.3 pC / 0.83 MPa (0.21 %)
k =3200 0.687 ms 18.5 pC / 0.56 MPa (0.14 %)

455 5. Conclusions

75
76 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 26 of 29
77

456 Fundamentally, this work starts from the assumption that a better understanding of
457 the electrical characteristics of piezoelectric transducers can be obtained from the
458 modeling of the entire measuring chain in equivalent electronic circuits. Thus, the
459 interior ballistics pressure measurement chain of ammunition was modeled by an
460 electronic circuit.
461 For this purpose, the HPI GP6 piezoelectric transducer and the HPI B217 charge
462 amplifier, both used to measure dynamic pressure in ballistics tests of ammunition, were
463 modeled. As an initial step for the HPI GP6 modeling, the BVD model for the
464 piezoelectric transducer was determined from its characteristic impedance, obtained
465 with an impedance analyzer, and the curve fit for the equivalent circuit was solved
466 using MATLAB.
467 With regard to the charge amplifier, the characterization occurred based on the
468 observation of its response to input variation, with the curve fit performed again with
469 the help of MATLAB, this time in conjunction with LTspice software. Finally, the
470 parameters were refined using the experimental pressure-time curve.
471 In addition, from the determination of the measurement chain circuit, that is, the
472 transducer in series with the charge amplifier, two simulations were performed. First,
473 the data obtained with the PRODAS interior ballistics module were used, resulting in an
474 error at maximum pressure point of 7.6140 pC (0.0653 %).
475 In view of the results obtained, both in the refinement of the parameters through
476 the experimental data, and in the simulation with the data from PRODAS, the dynamic
477 pressure measurement chain modeling was considered effective since the operations of
478 multiplication by piezoelectric sensitivity and the derivation to obtain the current,
479 followed by the simulation of the piezoelectric transducer and the charge amplifier
480 electric models and, finally, the conversion of the output voltage in electric
481 charge/pressure, return to the original curve without significant distortions.
482 Next, the calibration of the piezoelectric transducer was simulated using a dead
483 weight with pressure variations with different fall times, represented by negative steps
484 as presented in Figure 22. In this case, the simulations demonstrated the attenuation of
485 the input signals by the modeled measurement chain, indicating that the slower the
486 dynamic event of pressure variation, the greater the difference between the input
487 pressure and the measurement chain response.
488 In short, it was concluded that, the calibration simulation of the piezoelectric
489 transducer demonstrates the applicability of the generated model, and the information
490 related to the attenuation of the signal by the measurement chain is relevant for studies
491 aimed at the construction of calibration systems.
492 Regarding the applicability of the model to other piezoelectric transducers used in
493 ballistics tests, it is believed that the methodology is applicable, given the similarity of
494 the measurement chain. However, this statement requires scientific confirmation, which

78
79 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 27 of 29
80

495 will provide comparability between the electrical models of different piezoelectric
496 transducers.
497 Finally, it was also observed that the effectiveness of the modeling can be verified
498 along with other applications focused on ammunition testing, such as the calibration
499 method for the piezoelectric transducer, called ‘drop weight’, for example. In this sense,
500 this observation is an interesting suggestion for future work.

501 Author Contributions: Methodology, C.B.C.F. and C.R.H.B.; Investigation, C.B.C.F., K.A.R.M. and
502 C.R.H.B.; Writing—original draft preparation, C.B.C.F.; Writing—review and editing, C.B.C.F.,
503 K.A.R.M. and C.R.H.B.; Supervision, K.A.R.M. and C.R.H.B.; All authors have read and agreed to
504 the published version of the manuscript.
505 Funding: This research received no external funding.
506 Acknowledgments: The authors thank for the financial support provided by the Brazilian funding
507 agencies CNPq, CAPES, FINEP, and FAPERJ. This study was financed in part by the Coordenação
508 de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, Brasil (CAPES), Finance Code 001.
509 Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

510 References
511 1. Curie, J.; Curie, P. Développement Par Compression de l’électricité Polaire Dans Les Cristaux Hémièdres à Faces Inclinées.
512 Bulletin de la Société minéralogique de France 1880, 3, 90–93, doi:10.3406/bulmi.1880.1564.
513 2. Thomson, J.J. Piezo-Electricity and Its Applications. Engineering 1919, 107, 543–544.
514 3. Arnau, A. Piezoelectric Transducers and Applications; Arnau Vives, A., Ed.; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin, Heidelberg,
515 2004; ISBN 978-3-662-05363-8.
516 4. Elkarous, L.; Nasri, A.; Nasri, R. Numerical Modeling and Analysis of the Pressure Pulses Generator for the Dynamic Cali -
517 bration of High-Pressure Transducers. Applied Acoustics 2019, 147, 56–63, doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2018.04.015.
518 5. Lavayssière, M.; Lefrançois, A.; Crabos, B.; Genetier, M.; Daudy, M.; Comte, S.; Dufourmentel, A.; Salsac, B.; Sol, F.; Verdier,
519 P.; et al. Toward Improvements in Pressure Measurements for Near Free-Field Blast Experiments. Sensors 2023, 23, 5635,
520 doi:10.3390/s23125635.
521 6. Vlhova, J.; Vitek, R. The Analysis of 7.62 Mm × 39 Ammunition Ballistic Pressure Measurement Results by a Pressure Gauge
522 and a Piezoelectric Transducer. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Military Technologies (ICMT); IEEE:
523 Brno, Czech Republic, June 8 2021; pp. 1–6.
524 7. Carlucci, D.E.; Jacobson, S.S. Ballistics: Theory and Design of Guns and Ammunition; CRC Press, 2018; ISBN 978-1-138-05531-5.
525 8. Webster, J.G. Measurement, Instrumentation, and Sensors Handbook; Chapman & Hall/CRCnetBASE: Boca Raton, Fla., 1999;
526 ISBN 978-0-8493-2145-0.
527 9. Pallas, A. Sensores and Signal Conditioning; John Wiley & Sons, 2012;

81
82 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 28 of 29
83

528 10. Elkarous, L.; Pirlot, M.; Golinval, J.; Maldague, M.P. Investigation on Gas Pressure Measurement inside Small Caliber
529 Weapons with Piezoelectric Transducers.; 2011.
530 11. NSO AEP- 97: Multi-Calibre Manual of Proof And Inspection (M-CMOPI) For NATO Small Arms Ammunition; 2020;
531 12. Gautschi, G. Piezoelectric Sensorics; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2002; ISBN 978-3-642-07600-8.
532 13. Krempl Quartz Homeotypic Gallium-Orthophosphate-a New High Tech Piezoelectric Material. In Proceedings of the Pro-
533 ceedings of IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium ULTSYM-94; IEEE, 1994; pp. 949–954 vol.2.
534 14. Sensor Technology Handbook; Wilson, J.S., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam ; Boston, 2005; ISBN 978-0-7506-7729-5.
535 15. AVL Gmbh B3060-A01 Charge Amplifier Operational Instruction 1989.
536 16. Hjelmgren, J. Dynamic Measurement of Pressure. A Literature Survey. 2002.
537 17. Slanina, O.; Quabis, S.; Wynands, R. Reproducibility of C. I. P.-Compatible Dynamic Pressure Measurements. tm - Technis-
538 ches Messen 2020, 87, 630–636, doi:10.1515/teme-2020-0060.
539 18. Guan, M.; Liao, W.-H. Studies on the Circuit Models of Piezoelectric Ceramics. In Proceedings of the International Confer-
540 ence on Information Acquisition, 2004. Proceedings.; June 2004; pp. 26–31.
541 19. IEEE IEEE Standard on Piezoelectricity. ANSI/IEEE Std 176-1987 1988, 0_1-, doi:10.1109/IEEESTD.1988.79638.
542 20. Zhang, Y.; Xu, L.; Gu, J.; Hu, H. The Electrical Performance Analysis of Piezoelectric Micromachine Ultrasound Transducer
543 for Audio Directional Loudspeaker. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Computer and Electrical Engi-
544 neering; IEEE: Phuket, Thailand, December 2008; pp. 812–816.
545 21. Alkhfaji, S.S.; Garvey, S.D. Identification of Piezo-Electric Actuator Parameters Using a Simple Test Technique.; Leuven,
546 Belgium, September 2010.
547 22. Zhong, X.; Lam, S. Perpetual-Operation Frequency Response and Equivalent Circuit Modelling of Piezoelectric Ultrasonic
548 Atomizer Devices. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS); IEEE: Taipei, Taiwan, Octo-
549 ber 2015; pp. 1–4.
550 23. Jang, J.; Choi, J.; Lee, D.; Mok, H. Estimation Method of an Electrical Equivalent Circuit for Sonar Transducer Impedance
551 Characteristic of Multiple Resonance. Sensors 2023, 23, 6636, doi:10.3390/s23146636.
552 24. Feng, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Yan, H.; Cai, H. A Driving Power Supply for Piezoelectric Transducers Based on an Improved LC Match -
553 ing Network. Sensors 2023, 23, 5745, doi:10.3390/s23125745.
554 25. Stutzer, D.; Hofmann, M.; Wenger, D.; Harmouch, K.; Lenoir, D.; Burger, J.; Niederhauser, T. Characterization and Modeling
555 of a Planar Ultrasonic Piezoelectric Transducer for Periodontal Scalers. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2023, 351, 114131,
556 doi:10.1016/j.sna.2022.114131.
557 26. Casteleiro-Roca, J.L.; Calvo-Rolle, J.L.; Meizoso-Lopez, M.C.; Piñón-Pazos, A.; Rodríguez-Gómez, B.A. New Approach for the
558 QCM Sensors Characterization. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2014, 207, 1–9, doi:10.1016/j.sna.2013.12.002.
559 27. Keysight Technologies Impedance Measurement Handbook: A Guide to Measurement Technology and Techniques 2016.

84
85 Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 29 of 29
86

560 28. Op Amp Applications; Jung, W.G., Ed.; Analog Devices, Inc: Norwood, Mass, 2002; ISBN 978-0-916550-26-4.
561 29. Oven, R. Modified Charge Amplifier for Stray Immune Capacitance Measurements. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2014, 63,
562 1748–1752, doi:10.1109/TIM.2014.2298673.
563 30. Laurila, M.-M.; Tokito, S.; Mantysalo, M.; Matsui, H.; Shiwaku, R.; Peltokangas, M.; Verho, J.; Montero, K.L.; Sekine, T.;
564 Vehkaoja, A.; et al. A Fully Printed Ultra-Thin Charge Amplifier for on-Skin Biosignal Measurements. IEEE J. Electron Devices
565 Soc. 2019, 7, 566–574, doi:10.1109/JEDS.2019.2915028.
566 31. Alnasser, E. A Novel Low Output Offset Voltage Charge Amplifier for Piezoelectric Sensors. IEEE Sensors J. 2020, 20, 5360–
567 5367, doi:10.1109/JSEN.2020.2970839.
568 32. Cronemberger, P.O.; Lima Jr., E.P.; Gois, J.A.M.; Caldeira, A.B. Theoretical and Experimental Study of the Interior Ballistics
569 of a Rifle 7.62. RETERM 2014, 13, 20, doi:10.5380/reterm.v13i2.62089.
570 33. Arrow Tech Associates, Inc PRODAS V3 User Manual.
571 34. CIP Comprehensive Edition of Adopted C.I.P. Decisions; 2007;
572 35. From Natural to Artificial Neural Computation: International Workshop on Artificial Neural Networks, Malaga-Torremolinos, Spain,
573 June 7-9, 1995: Proceedings; Mira, J., Sandoval, F., Eds.; Lecture notes in computer science; Springer-Verlag: Berlin ; New York,
574 1995; ISBN 978-3-540-59497-0.
575

87