materials

Article
Study on Perforation Behavior of PTFE/Al Reactive Material
Composite Jet Impacting Steel Target
Hongda Li 1 , Hui Duan 1 , Zhili Zhang 1, * and Yuanfeng Zheng 2, *

1 Missile Engineering Academy, Rocket Force Engineering University, Xi’an 710025, China
2 State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology,
Beijing 100081, China
* Correspondence: zhang55427936@163.com (Z.Z.); zhengyf@bit.edu.cn (Y.Z.)

Abstract: To study the penetration and cratering effect of reactive material composite jets, a series
of experiments are carried out for the shaped charge (SC) with different composite liners damaging
steel targets. The inner layer of composite liners is metal and the outer one is a polytetrafluoroethy-
lene/aluminum (PTFE/Al) reactive material. Copper (Cu), titanium (Ti) and Al inner liners are
used in this paper. The reactive material liner is composed of 73.5 wt.% PTFE and 26.5 wt.% Al
powder through mass-matched ratios. Reactive material composite liners are prepared through
machining, cold pressing and a sintering process. The SC mainly consists of a case, a composite
liner, high-energy explosive and an initiator. The steel target is steel 45#, with a thickness of 66 mm.
A standoff of 1.0 CD (charge diameter) is selected to conduct the penetration experiments. The
experimental results show that when the inner layer of the composite liner is composed of Ti and Al,
the hole diameters on the steel target formed by the reactive material composite jet are significantly
larger than that of the inner Cu liner. By introducing the initiation delay time (τ) and detonation-like
reaction model of PTFE/Al reactive materials, an integrated numerical simulation algorithm of the
penetration and detonation-like effects of reactive material composite jets is realized. Numerical
simulations demonstrate that the initial penetration holes on the steel targets are enlarged under the
detonation-like effects of PTFE/Al reactive materials, and the simulated perforation sizes are in good
agreement with the experimental results.

Keywords: PTFE/Al; reactive material; shaped charge; composite jet

Citation: Li, H.; Duan, H.; Zhang, Z.;
Zheng, Y. Study on Perforation
Behavior of PTFE/Al Reactive
Material Composite Jet Impacting 1. Introduction
Steel Target. Materials 2023, 16, 2715.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16072715
Reactive materials have been one of the research hotspots in the field of new material
and engineering applications in recent years. Commonly used reactive materials mainly
Academic Editor: Giovanni Polacco include the mixture of a polymer powder matrix (such as PTFE) and certain amounts
Received: 3 March 2023
of energetic metal powders (such as metal, alloy, intermetallic compounds, etc.). Thus
Revised: 23 March 2023 far, the formulation system of reactive materials mainly includes PTFE/Al, PTFE/Al/W
Accepted: 27 March 2023 (tungsten), PTFE/Ti/W, etc. [1–3]. They can be formed into various samples, such as
Published: 29 March 2023 reactive fragments, reactive liners and reactive rods, through the use of cold pressing and
high-temperature sintering with special molds after being fully mixed [4–8]. These reactive
material samples have metal-like strength and explosive-like energy properties, and they
can release their chemical energy under intense dynamic loading or high pressure and high
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. strain rates [9].
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
Generally, reactive liners prepared using a class of reactive materials can be applied to
This article is an open access article
the SC (shaped charge). Under the action of the SC, the high-velocity reactive jet formed by
distributed under the terms and
the reactive liner can not only penetrate the target with its kinetic energy, but also enlarge
conditions of the Creative Commons
the initial perforation or enhance the after-effect through the release of chemical energy.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
Due to their excellent performance, shaped charges with reactive liners have been studied
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
extensively. Early in 2001, Baker [10] verified that reactive liners can effectively form a

Materials 2023, 16, 2715. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16072715 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2023, 16, 2715 2 of 17

continuous jet similar to metal Al liners through X-ray tests. Li [11] studied the forming
characteristics of PTFE/Ti/W reactive jets with SPH numerical simulations and pulsed
X-ray experiments, and analyzed the expansion phenomenon in the process of reactive
jet forming. Su [12] and Zheng [13] investigated the temperature and density evolution
behaviors and distribution characteristics of PTFE/Al reactive jets. Guo [14] studied
the influence mechanism of Al particle size on the forming characteristics and reaction
degrees of PTFE/Al reactive jets. In terms of the reactive jets damaging designed targets,
Daniels [15] and Xiao [16] conducted experiments on reactive jets penetrating concrete,
and found that PTFE-based reactive jets had good explosion enhancement damage effects.
Zheng [17] studied the damage behavior of PTFE/Al reactive jets impacting multilayer
spaced targets, and the results showed that the damage effects of the Al plates mainly
depended on the mass of the follow-through reactive materials. Guo [18] studied the
combined damage effects of PTFE/Al reactive jets against the thickness of steel targets
under different standoffs, and the theoretical analysis model of the reactive jet penetration
was established by introducing the initiation delay time of the reactive materials. However,
due to the limitations of the strength and ductility of PTFE/Al reactive materials, the
penetration capability of the PTFE/Al reactive jet was significantly worse than that of
traditional metal jets [19]. The penetration depth of the PTFE/Al reactive jet for the SC
with a charge diameter of 66 mm ranged from 0.32 CD to 0.79 CD (charge diameter) [20].
The maximum penetration depth of the reactive liner shaped charge with a diameter of
46 mm to the C35 concrete target was only approximately 2.4 CD [21], which limited the
application of this class of reactive materials in the SC to a certain extent.
To improve the penetration depth of the SC with the class of reactive materials, more
attention has been paid to the composite liner formed due to the reactive material liner and
the metal liner. Lee [22] fabricated composite liners by spraying Al or an Al/Ni alloy on the
surface of copper liners, which can form a high-density copper jet that can penetrate targets;
the energetic materials can then experience an exothermic reaction to improve the thermal
effect inside of the target. Waddell [23] proposed a composite liner that fills the reactive
liner between two inert liners, and the reactive materials can be mixed with a polymer-
based powder or energetic metal composite powder. Xu [24] experimentally studied the
penetration of the SC with PTFE/Al/W reactive material–Cu composite liners against steel
45#, and the results showed that the penetration depth caused by the composite jet was
approximately 4.0 CD. Wang [25] studied the penetration performances of PTFE/Al reactive
material–Cu jets under different liner thicknesses and standoffs, and the experimental
results showed that the penetration depth of the reactive material–Cu jet on steel 45# could
reach 3.7 CD. It could be seen that, compared with jets formed using traditional single-layer
reactive material liners, the penetration depth of the reactive material–metal composite
jet penetrating the steel target greatly increased. For the shaped charge, in addition to
the penetration depth, the penetration hole diameter on the target formed by the jet is
also an important index in engineering applications. However, not much research has
been conducted on the perforation behavior of the SC with reactive material composite
liners against steel targets, especially the influence of the inner metal liner material on the
penetration hole diameters of reactive material composite jets.
In this paper, the penetration and cratering effects of the SC with reactive material
composite liners against steel targets are investigated through static experiments and
numerical simulations. Firstly, samples of reactive material–Cu liners, reactive material–Ti
liners and reactive material–Al liners are fabricated. On this basis, penetration experiments
of the SC with reactive material composite liners against steel targets are carried out. Then,
the formation characteristics of the reactive material composite jets before impacting the
target are investigated, including the formation morphology and performance parameters
of the composite jets and the pressure and temperature distribution of the reactive materials.
Finally, the combined cratering effects of the kinetic energy penetration and detonation-like
reaction of the reactive material composite jets against steel targets are simulated and
compared with the experimental results.
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17

energy penetration and detonation-like reaction of the reactive material composite jets
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 3 of 17
against steel targets are simulated and compared with the experimental results.

2. Penetration Experiments
2. Penetration Experiments
2.1. Composite Liner Samples
2.1. Composite Liner Samples
Composite liners consist of an inner layer metal liner and an outer layer PTFE/Al
Composite liners consist of an inner layer metal liner and an outer layer PTFE/Al
reactive material liner. The typical preparatory process of composite liners is shown in
reactive material liner. The typical preparatory process of composite liners is shown in
Figure 1, mainly divided into four steps [25]:
Figure 1, mainly divided into four steps [25]:
(1) The first step is processing the metal liner. The metal bar is processed using
(1) The first step is processing the metal liner. The metal bar is processed using mechanical
mechanical equipment and the shape of the metal liner is processed according to the
equipment and the shape of the metal liner is processed according to the drawing.
drawing.
(2) The second step is preparing the PTFE/Al reactive materials. According to the
(2) The second step is preparing the PTFE/Al reactive materials. According to the
formula design of the reactive materials, the PTFE powder and Al powder are crushed
formula design of the reactive materials, the PTFE powder and Al powder are
separately, and then mixed evenly with a special mixer. Generally, evenly mixed
crushed separately, and then mixed evenly with a special mixer. Generally, evenly
PTFE/Al compounds can be obtained through mixing for 30 min.
mixed PTFE/Al compounds can be obtained through mixing for 30 min.
(3) The third step is cold pressing the composite liner. First, a certain amount of uniformly
(3) The third step is cold pressing the composite liner. First, a certain amount of uniformly
mixed PTFE/Al compounds is weighed out, poured into a special mold and the
mixed
formed PTFE/Al
into thecompounds
liner shapeisat weighed
a pressure out,of
poured
10 MPa.intoThen,
a special
the mold
metaland theisformed
liner placed
into
inside the prepressed PTFE/Al liner. At this time, a pressure of 300 MPa inside
the liner shape at a pressure of 10 MPa. Then, the metal liner is placed is usedtheto
prepressed
press for 10PTFE/Al liner. the
min. Before At this time, aprocess,
sintering pressuretheof cold-pressed
300 MPa is used to pressliner
composite for 10
is
min. Before the sintering process, the cold-pressed composite liner
placed in a room temperature environment for several hours to remove residual stress is placed in a room
temperature
in the liner. environment for several hours to remove residual stress in the liner.
(4) The fourth step
(4) The fourth stepis is sintering
sintering the the cold-pressed
cold-pressed composite
composite liner.
liner. The The cold-pressed
cold-pressed compos-
composite liner can be placed into a sintering furnace filled with nitrogen
ite liner can be placed into a sintering furnace filled with nitrogen for high-temperature for high-
temperature
sintering. Thesintering.
maximumThe maximum
sintering sintering
temperature temperature
is 380 ◦ C, and theistemperature
380 °C, and the
is kept
temperature
for 4 h. Then, is kept for 4 h. Then,isthe
the temperature temperature
reduced to 315 isCreduced
◦ ◦
at 0.5 C/minto 315 °Candatmaintained
0.5 °C/min
and
for 4maintained for 4composite
h. The sintered h. The sintered composite
liner sample liner be
can then sample
cooledcan then be
to room cooled to
temperature
room temperature while
while still in the furnace. still in the furnace.

Figure
Figure 1.
1. The
The flowchart
flowchart of
of the
the reactive
reactive material
material composite
composite liner
liner preparatory
preparatory process.
process.

The
The schematic
schematic structure
structure and
and samples
samples of of the
the reactive
reactive material
material composite
composite liners
liners are
are
shown in Figure 2. In these experiments, the formula design of the
shown in Figure 2. In these experiments, the formula design of the reactive materials reactive materials was
composed
was composed of 73.5 wt.%
of 73.5 PTFE
wt.% PTFEandand26.526.5
wt.%wt.% AlAlpowder.
powder.After
Afterthe thecold
coldpressing
pressing and and
sintering
sintering processes,
processes, the density of the the PTFE/Al
PTFE/Al liner was approximately
approximately 2.3 g/cm33.. To
2.3 g/cm To
study
study thethe effect
effect of
of the
the inner
inner metal
metal liner
liner material
material on on the
the crater-expanding
crater-expanding behavior behavior of of the
the
steel
steel target
target under
under the
the effect
effect of
of the
the SC
SC with
with thethe composite
composite liner,
liner, three
three composite
composite liners,
liners,
reactive material–Cu liner, reactive material–Ti liner and reactive material–Al
reactive material–Cu liner, reactive material–Ti liner and reactive material–Al liner, were liner, were
selected to
selected tocarry
carryout
outthe
thepenetration
penetrationexperiments.
experiments.The The wall
wall thickness
thickness of of
thethe three
three types
types of
of composite
composite liners
liners waswas consistent
consistent to ensure
to ensure the same
the same massmass
of the of main
the main charge.
charge. The wallThe
wall thickness
thickness of the of the liner
metal was 1t1mm,
metalt1 liner wasand
1 mm, and the PTFE/Al
the PTFE/Al liner thicknessliner tthickness
2 was 5 mm. t2 The
was
5 mm. The
caliber caliberDdiameter
diameter and cone D and
anglecone
α ofangle of the composite
the αcomposite liners66
liners were weremm 66 and
mm 60°,
and
60 ◦ , respectively.
respectively.
 Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 17
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 17
Materials 16,16,
2023,
Materials 2023, 2715PEER REVIEW
x FOR 4 of4 17
of 17

(a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) (b) (c) (d)
(a)
Figure 2. Schematic (b) of composite liner:
structure and sample (c)(a) schematic structure;
(d) (b) reactive
Figure 2. Schematic structure and sample of composite liner: (a) schematic structure; (b) reactive
material–Cu
Figure 2. 2. liner; (c) reactive
Schematic material–Ti liner; (d) reactive material–Al liner.
Figure
material–Cu liner;structure
Schematic structure
(c) and
reactive sample
and sampleof of
material–Ti composite
composite
liner; liner: (a)
liner:
(d) reactive schematic
(a) schematic
material–Al structure;
liner. (b)(b)
structure; reactive
reactive
material–Cu liner; (c) reactive material–Ti liner; (d) reactive material–Al liner.
material–Cu liner; (c) reactive material–Ti liner; (d) reactive material–Al liner.
2.2. Experimental Setup
2.2. Experimental Setup
2.2. Experimental
2.2. Experimental
The schematic Setup
Setup structure of the SC with the reactive material composite liners is shown in
The schematic structure of the SC with the reactive material composite liners is shown in
Figure
The 3. The
schematic
The schematic SC mainly
structureconsisted
of the of
SC a with
case, a composite
the the reactive liner, high-energy
material composite explosive
liners and
is shown an
Figure 3. The SCstructure of the
mainly consisted SCofwith
a case, areactive
composite material
liner,composite
high-energy liners is shown
explosive andin an
ininitiator.
FigureFigure
3. The The
3. length
The
SClengthSC of the
mainly
mainlyofconsisted main charge
consisted was
of a 110
case, mm
a and
composite its diameter
liner, was 66
high-energy mm. The
explosivemain
initiator. The the mainof a case,was
charge a composite
110 mm and liner,itshigh-energy
diameter was explosive
66 mm. and The an main
charge
and anThe
initiator. waslength
JH-2The
initiator. high-energy
of length
the main explosive,
ofcharge
the main was which
charge
110 mm was
wasanddetonated
110its mm withits
and
diameter andiameter
was initiator
66 mm. placed
was
The 66 in
mainmm.the
charge was JH-2 high-energy explosive, which was detonated with an initiator placed in the
The
charge main
centerwasof charge
the was
bottom JH-2
of the high-energy
SC. The explosive,
material of the which
case was was2024detonated
Al and with
its an
thickness initiator
was 2
center of JH-2 high-energy
the bottom of theexplosive, which was
SC. The material of thedetonated
case waswith 2024an Alinitiator
and its placed
thickness in the
was 2
placed
mm. The
center in the center
experimentalof of
thetheSC.bottom
setup of the ofSC
the SC.
against Thethe material
steel of the
target is case
shown was 2024 Al
in Figure 4. and 2its
In these
mm.ofThe the bottom
experimental setup The material
of the of the
SC against case
the wastarget
steel 2024 Alshown
is and its inthickness
Figure 4.was In these
thickness
mm. experiments, was
The experimental 2
the mm. The
standoff experimental
cylinders
setupcylinders were
of the SCwere setup
againstthe sameof the
and SC against
their value the
was steel
1.0 target
CD (H is
= shown
66 mm).
experiments, the standoff thethe
same steel
and target
theirisvalue
shown was in 1.0
Figure
CD (H 4. In= 66these
mm).
inThe
Figure
experiments, 4.the
standoff Inrefers
thesetoexperiments,
standoff the distance
cylinders thethe
from
were standoff
the
samebottomcylinders
and of thevalue
their were
SC the
towas same
the 1.0
surface
CD and
(H their
of =the
66 valueA
target.
mm).
The standoff refers to the distance from the bottom of the SC to the surface of the target. A
was
The 1.0 CD
hollow
standoff (H = 66
Al cylinder mm).
with an The standoff
outer refers
diameter ofto 76the
mm distance
and to from
an inner the bottom
diameter ofoftarget.
64themm SCwasto
hollow Al refers
cylinder to the
withdistance
an outer from the
diameter bottom
of 76 of mm the andSCan the
inner surface
diameter of theof 64 mmAwas
the
hollow surface
selected of
Al cylinder the target.
for the standoff.
with anThe A
The hollow
outersteel Al cylinder
target was
diameter of 76steel
mmwith
45#and an
with outer
anaainner diameter
diameter of
of 120of
diameter 76
mm mmand and
mmaawas
64 and an
height
selected
inner for theof standoff. steel target wasthesteel 45# with diameter ofwas
120 mm height
of 66 diameter
selected mm.
for the 64 mm
standoff. The was
steelselected
target for
was steel standoff.
45# with The
a steel
diameter target
of 120 mm steel
and 45#
a with
height a
of 66 mm.of 120 mm and a height of 66 mm.
diameter
of 66 mm.

Figure3.3.Schematic
Figure Schematicstructure
structureofofthe
theSC
SCwith
withthe
thereactive
reactivematerial
materialcomposite
compositeliner.
liner.
Figure 3. Schematic structure of the SC with the reactive material composite liner.
Figure 3. Schematic structure of the SC with the reactive material composite liner.

Figure 4. Experimental setup of the SC against steel target.

Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17

Materials 2023, 16, 2715 5 of 17

Figure 4. Experimental setup of the SC against steel target.

2.3. Experimental Results

typicaldamage
The typical damageeffectseffects of the
of the threethree
kindskinds
of SCsofwith
SCsthe with the reactive
reactive material material
compos-
composite
ite liners the
liners against against
steelthe steelare
targets targets
shown areinshown
Figurein5.Figure 5. The experimental
The experimental results
results showed
that
showedthe three
that thekinds of composite
three jets could penetrate
kinds of composite jets couldthe steel targets
penetrate withtargets
the steel a thickness
withofa
1.0 CD. There
thickness of 1.0were
CD. obvious
There were petal bulge effects
obvious on the
petal bulge front on
effects and back
the craters
front of the
and back steel
craters
targets. Aftertargets.
of the steel the penetration
After theexperiments, the penetratedthe
penetration experiments, steel targets were
penetrated steeldivided
targetswith
were a
special machine tool. It could be seen from the divided steel targets
divided with a special machine tool. It could be seen from the divided steel targets that that the shapes of the
through-hole
the shapes offormed by the threeformed
the through-hole kinds of byreactive material
the three kindscomposite
of reactivejets were similar,
material and
composite
that the diameters
jets were similar, andfromthatthethe
upper to the lower
diameters from penetration
the upper tocraters
the lowerwerepenetration
basically thecraters
same.
There was a large
were basically the amount
same. There of black
wasproduct formedof
a large amount byblack
the violent
product deflagration
formed by the of reactive
violent
materials
deflagrationin the perforation
of reactive channel
materials in theand on the front
perforation and the
channel and back surface
on the frontofand penetrated
the back
steel targets. However, it can also be seen in Figure 5 that the
surface of penetrated steel targets. However, it can also be seen in Figure 5 that the through-hole diameters
formed by thediameters
through-hole three kinds of reactive
formed by thematerial
three kinds composite jetsmaterial
of reactive were significantly
composite different.
jets were
Compared
significantly different. Compared with the reactive material–Cu jet, were
with the reactive material–Cu jet, the through-hole diameters significantly
the through-hole
larger under
diameters werethe significantly
combined action of under
larger the reactive material–Al
the combined jet and
action of thereactive
reactivematerial–Ti
material–Al jet
penetrating
jet and reactiveandmaterial–Ti
deflagrationjeteffects.
penetrating and deflagration effects.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure
Figure 5. 5. Perforation
Perforation effects
effectsofofthe
thesteel
steeltargets
targetsdue
duetoto
composite jets
composite impact:
jets (a)(a)
impact: reactive material–Cu
reactive material–
jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.
Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.

According
According to to experimental
experimental results,
results, the
the through-hole
through-hole shape
shape and
and representative
representative crater
crater
parameters of the typical penetrated steel targets are shown in Figure6.6.D
parameters of the typical penetrated steel targets are shown in Figure and D
D00 and are the
Dee are the
diameters
diameters ofof the
thepetal
petalbulge
bulgeatatthe
thefront
frontand
andthetheback
backofof
the target,
the respectively.
target, DmDrefers
respectively. to
m refers
the minimum diameter of the penetration channel, which is an important index parameter
to the minimum diameter of the penetration channel, which is an important index
of jet perforation capabilities [26]. The crater diameter of each part is the average value
parameter of jet perforation capabilities [26]. The crater diameter of each part is the
calculated through three measurements to reduce errors caused by the measurement. The
crater diameter of each part is the average value calculated through three measurements.
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

Materials 2023, 16, 2715 6 of 17

average value calculated through three measurements to reduce errors caused by the
measurement. The crater diameter of each part is the average value calculated through
three measurements. The crater parameters formed on the steel targets are listed in Table
The
1. It crater
can beparameters
seen that theformed
minimumon the steel targets
diameter are listed in Table
of the through-hole formed1. It
duecantobe
theseen that
reactive
the minimumjetdiameter
material–Al was 0.46ofCD.
the through-hole formed
When the reactive due to the reactive
material–Cu material–Al
jet and reactive jet was
material–Ti
0.46 CD. When the
jet penetrated the reactive material–Cu
steel targets, jet and
the values of Dreactive
m were material–Ti
0.32 CD and jet0.41
penetrated
CD, whichthe steel
was
targets, values of D
approximately 30.4% and 10.9% lower than that of the reactive material–Al and
the m were 0.32 CD and 0.41 CD, which was approximately 30.4% jet,
10.9% lower than that of the reactive material–Al jet, respectively.
respectively.

Figure 6.
Figure 6. The
The diameter
diameter parameters
parameters of
of penetrated
penetrated steel
steeltargets.
targets.

Table1.1.Experimental
Table Experimental results
results of penetration
of penetration hole diameters
hole diameters under under different
different reactive reactive material
material compos-
composite jets against steel
ite jets against steel targets. targets.

NO.
NO.
Composite Jet
Composite Jet
D0 (CD) D (CD)
D0 (CD)
Dm (CD) De (CD)
De (CD)
m
1 Reactive material–Cu jet 0.52 0.32 0.44
1 Reactive material–Cu jet 0.52 0.32 0.44
22 Reactive material–Ti
Reactive material–Ti jet jet 0.64 0.64 0.41 0.41 0.57
0.57
33 Reactive
Reactive material–Al
material–Al jet jet 0.71 0.71 0.46 0.46 0.61
0.61

3. Formation
3. Formation Behavior
Behavior of
of Reactive
Reactive Material
Material Composite
Composite Jets
Jets
3.1. Material
3.1. Material Model
Model and
and Main
Main Parameters
Parameters
Reactive material
Reactive material liners
liners cancan form
form aa high-velocity
high-velocity jet under the detonation of the SC,
and its
and its penetration
penetration and and deflagration
deflagration coupling
coupling effect
effect on
on the
the target
target isisvery
verycomplex.
complex. At At
present, there is no material model mature enough for the numerical
present, there is no material model mature enough for the numerical simulation of the simulation of the
whole process
whole process of of the
the jet
jet forming,
forming, penetration
penetration and and deflagration
deflagration coupling
coupling of of the
the SC
SC with
with
reactive
reactive material
material liners.
liners. For this reason, the reaction reaction delay
delay time
time ofof reactive
reactive materials
materials (τ) (τ)
was
was introduced
introduced by by some
some domestic
domestic and and foreign
foreign scholars
scholars [17,25,27].
[17,25,27]. Generally,
Generally, itit has has been
been
considered
consideredthat thatreactive
reactivematerial
materialjets jetsare
areinert
inertsuch
such asas
traditional
traditional metal
metal jetsjets
when
when time t <tτ.
time <
The shock
τ. The shockequation
equation of of
state
state(EOS)
(EOS)and andJohnson–Cook
Johnson–Cookconstitutive
constitutivemodelmodelwere wereusedused to to
describe
describe thethe formation
formation and and penetration
penetration behavior
behavior of of the
the reactive
reactive material
material jets.jets. Meanwhile,
the
the corresponding parameters
parameters of of the
thePTFE/Al
PTFE/Alreactive
reactive materials
materials were
were obtained
obtained basedbasedon
on
thethe separated
separated Hopkinsonshock
Hopkinson shockand andquasistatic
quasistatic compression
compression experiments;
experiments; the main main
material
material parameters
parameters are are listed
listed inin Table
Table 22 [17,28].
[17,28]. The
The material
material ofof the
the target
target waswas steel
steel 45#.
45#.
The EOS of the shock model incorporating the strength model
The EOS of the shock model incorporating the strength model of Johnson–Cook was of Johnson–Cook was chosen
to describe
chosen the material
to describe models; models;
the material the mainthe parameters are also listed
main parameters in Table
are also listed 2in[17], where
Table 2 [17],ρ
is the density of the material, a, b, n, C, m and S
where ρ is the density of the material, a, b, n, C, m and S are the material constants,
are the material constants, T m and T room are
Tm and
the melting
Troom are thetemperature and room and
melting temperature temperature, respectively,
room temperature, Γ is the Gruneisen
respectively, coefficient
Γ is the Gruneisen
and c0 is theand
coefficient acoustic sound
c0 is the speed
acoustic of thespeed
sound material.
of the material.

Table 2. Main parameters of the unreacted PTFE/Al reactive materials and steel target.

Materials ρ (kg/m3 ) G (GPa) a (MPa) b (MPa) n C m T m (K) T room (K) Γ c0 (m/s) S

PTFE/Al 2.27 0.67 8.04 250.6 1.8 0.4 1.03 500 294 0.9 1450 2.26
Steel 45# 7.83 77 507 320 0.28 0.064 1.06 1793 300 2.17 4570 1.49
 Table 2. Main parameters of the unreacted PTFE/Al reactive materials and steel target.

Materials ρ (kg/m3) G (GPa) a (MPa) b (MPa) n C m Tm (K) Troom (K) Γ c0 (m/s) S

1.0
PTFE/Al 2.27 0.67 8.04 250.6 1.8 0.4 500 294 0.9 1450 2.26
Materials 2023, 16, 2715
3 7 of 17
1.0 2.1
Steel 45# 7.83 77 507 320 0.28 0.064 1793 300 4570 1.49
6 7
For the metal liner, the shock EOSs were selected and the strength models were
For the metal liner, the shock EOSs were selected and the strength models were
neglected, because the liners behaved like a fluid under the extremely large pressure and
neglected, because the liners behaved like a fluid under the extremely large pressure and
temperature during the collapse of the SC [29]. The main material parameters of the Cu
temperature during the collapse of the SC [29]. The main material parameters of the Cu
liner, Ti liner and Al liner are listed in Table 3.
liner, Ti liner and Al liner are listed in Table 3.
Table 3. Main parameters of Cu, Ti and Al liner materials.
Table 3. Main parameters of Cu, Ti and Al liner materials.
Materials ρ (kg/m3 ) Γ c0 (m/s) S
Materials ρ (kg/m3) Γ c0 (m/s) S
CuCuliner
liner 8.93 8.93 2.02 2.02 39403940 1.489
1.489
Ti liner 4.53 1.09 5220 0.767
Ti liner
Al liner 2.78 4.53 2 1.09 53285220 0.767
1.338
Al liner 2.78 2 5328 1.338

For the structure of the SC, the jet forming and penetration characteristics were sig-
For the structure of the SC, the jet forming and penetration characteristics were
nificantly affected by the type of explosive. The JH-2 explosive was comprehensively
significantly affected by the type of explosive. The JH-2 explosive was comprehensively
selected considering the detonation speed, detonation pressure and operating cost. The
selected considering the detonation speed, detonation pressure and operating cost. The
corresponding parameters are listed in Table 4 [17], where D and P are the detonation
corresponding parameters are listed in Table 4 [17], where D and PCJ CJ are the detonation
speed and detonation pressure of the explosive, respectively, A, B, R , R and ω are the
speed and detonation pressure of the explosive, respectively, A, B, R11, R22 and ω are the
material constants, E is the specific internal energy and V is the relative volume.
material constants, E00 is the specific internal energy and V00is the relative volume.
Table 4. Material parameters of the JH-2 explosive.
Table 4. Material parameters of the JH-2 explosive.
3 ) 3 D (km/s)
Material
Material ρ (g/cm
ρ (g/cm ) PCJ (GPa)
D (km/s) A (GPa) A (GPa)
PCJ (GPa) B (GPa) R1
B (GPa) RR12 R2 ω ω EE00 (GPa)
(GPa) VV00
Explosive
Explosive 1.711.71 8.3158.315 28.6 28.6 524.23 524.23
7.678 7.678
4.2 4.2
1.1 1.1 0.34
0.34 8.499
8.499 1.00
1.00

3.2.
3.2. Numerical
Numerical Simulation
Simulation Method
Method
The
The formation
formation characteristics
characteristics of
of the
the SCSC with
with the reactive material
the reactive material composite
composite liners
liners
were
were studied based on the AUTODYN-2D code, and the numerical model is shown in
studied based on the AUTODYN-2D code, and the numerical model is shown in
Figure
Figure 7.7. The
The parts
parts of
of the
the SC,
SC, including
including thethe explosive,
explosive, composite
composite liner
liner and
and case,
case, were
were all
all
simulated
simulated using
using aa Euler
Euler method.
method. According
According to to the
the mesh
mesh sensitivity
sensitivity of
of the
the reference
reference [30],
[30],
the
the size of the Euler domain was set to 0.25 mm × 0.25 mm. In addition, the
size of the Euler domain was set to 0.25 mm × 0.25 mm. In addition, the boundary
boundary
condition
condition of of the
the model
model was
was the
the flow-out.
flow-out. TheThe initiation
initiation point
point was
was located
located atat the
the center
center of
of
the
the bottom
bottom ofof the
the SC.
SC.

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Numerical
Numerical model
model of
of the
the jet
jet forming
forming for
for the
the SC
SC with
with reactive material composite
reactive material composite liner.
liner.

3.3. Formation
Formation Characteristics of Composite Jets
gauge points were set on the
A series of gauge the outer
outer and
and inner
inner layers
layers ofof the
the reactive
reactive material
material
liners to
to observe
observethe
thepressure
pressureandandtemperature
temperatureevolution andand
evolution distribution
distribution lawslaws
of the
ofreac-
the
tive material
reactive elements
material in the
elements forming
in the process
forming of the
process composite
of the jets,jets,
composite as shown in Figure
as shown 8a.
in Figure
When the jet head reached the standoff of 1.0 CD, a typical distribution of gauge points
on the reactive material slug was generated, as shown in Figure 8b. In addition, five fixed
gauge points were set on the Euler domain along the axis of the SC to record the tip velocity
of the reactive material composite jets. Gauge #1 was set at the corresponding position of
the bottom of the composite liner, and gauge #5 was set at the standoff of 1.0 CD.
 8a. When the jet head reached the standoff of 1.0 CD, a typical distribution of gauge points
on the reactive material slug was generated, as shown in Figure 8b. In addition, five fixed
8a. When the jet head reached the standoff of 1.0 CD, a typical distribution of gauge points
gauge points were set on the Euler domain along the axis of the SC to record the tip
on the reactive material slug was generated, as shown in Figure 8b. In addition, five fixed
velocity of the reactive material composite jets. Gauge #1 was set at the corresponding
gauge points were set on the Euler domain along the axis of the SC to record the tip
position
velocityofofthe
thebottom
reactiveofmaterial
the composite liner,jets.
composite andGauge
gauge#1
#5was
wassetsetat
at the
the corresponding
standoff of 1.0
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 CD. 8 of 17
position of the bottom of the composite liner, and gauge #5 was set at the standoff of 1.0
CD.

(a) (b)
Figure 8. Gauge position (a)settings: (a) gauges on the reactive material liner (b) and axis of the SC; (b)
gauges on the reactive
Figure8.8. Gauge material
Gauge position composite jet.
Figure position settings:
settings:(a)
(a)gauges
gauges onon
thethe
reactive material
reactive liner
material andand
liner axisaxis
of the
of SC;
the (b)
SC;
gauges on the reactive material composite jet.
(b) gauges on the reactive material composite jet.
The influence of the metal liner material on the velocity–time curves of the composite
jets isThe
shown in Figure
Theinfluence
influence of 9. The
ofthe
the formation
metal
metal morphology
liner material
liner material of the three kinds
on the velocity–time curves
curvesof reactive
of
ofthe material
thecomposite
composite
composite
jets is jets
shown inbefore
Figure impacting
9. The the
formationtargets is shown
morphology in
of Figure
the three
jets is shown in Figure 9. The formation morphology of the three kinds of reactive material10. Although
kinds of the
reactive materials
material
of the innerjets
composite
composite metal
jets linerimpacting
before
before were different,
impacting the morphology
the targets
the targets shown in of
is shown
is the reactive
Figure material
10. Although
Although thecomposite
the materials
materials
jets formed
ofofthe
theinner by
innermetal the three
metalliner kinds
linerwere of SCs
were different, was
different, the similar.
the morphology The inner metal
morphology of the reactive liner mainly
reactive material formed
materialcomposite
composite the
high-velocity
jetsformed
jets formedby by jet,
theand
the threethe
three outerof
kinds
kinds ofreactive
wasmaterial
SCs was
SCs similar. The
similar. linerinner
becamemetaltheliner
main
liner part of
mainly
mainly the slug.
formed
formed the
the
From the mechanism
high-velocity
high-velocity jet, and analysis,
jet, and the outerduring
the outer reactivethe
reactive movement
material liner of
liner the liner
became
became the elements
the main
mainpart parttowards
ofofthe the
theslug.
slug.
From
axis,
From the the
the mechanism
detonation
mechanism analysis,
energy was
analysis, during
during thethe
concentrated movement
movementfrom the of the
outer
of the liner
liner elements
to
elementsthe towards
innertowards
liner, the
and
the axis,
axis,
the the
closer detonation
to the axis energy
of was
symmetry, concentrated
the faster the from
energy the outer liner
concentration.
detonation energy was concentrated from the outer liner to the inner liner, and the to the
When inner liner,
moving and
near
theaxis,
the
closer closer toaxis
the
to the the axis
elements of symmetry,
of symmetry,wouldthe the faster
widen,
faster owing the energy
the energy to the concentration.
pressure near
concentration. When When
the moving
inner
moving near
surface
near the
the axis,
increasing the elements
sharply,would
axis, the elements would
and itswiden, widen,
movement owing
owingdirection to the pressure
would change,
to the pressure near
near thewhich the inner
finally caused
inner surface surface
increasing the
increasing
inner
sharply, andsharply,
metal liner
its movement and itsdirection
to become movement
a high-velocity direction
would jet would
moving
change, change,
along
which thewhich
finallyaxis, asfinally
caused shown caused
the inner the
in Figure
metal
inner
11.
liner tometal
become liner to become a high-velocity
a high-velocity jet moving along jet moving
the axis,along the axis,
as shown in as shown
Figure 11.in Figure
11.

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Figure 9. Velocity–time histories of composite jets at gauges #1~#5: (a) reactive material–Cu9jet;
of (b)
17
Figure 9. Velocity–time
Figure9.material–Ti
reactive Velocity–time histories of
histories
jet; (c)
ofcomposite
compositejets
reactive material–Al
jets at gauges #1~#5: (a) reactive material–Cu jet;
jet. at gauges #1~#5: (a) reactive material–Cu jet; (b)
reactive
(b) material–Ti
reactive jet;jet;
material–Ti (c)(c)
reactive material–Al
reactive jet.jet.
material–Al

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 10. Formation morphology of composite jets before impacting the targets: (a) reactive
Figure 10. Formation morphology of composite jets before impacting the targets: (a) reactive material–
material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.
Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.
 (a) (b) (c)
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 9 of 17
Figure 10. Formation morphology of composite jets before impacting the targets: (a) reactive
material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.

Figure 11.
Figure 11. Typical detonation wave
Typical detonation wave propagation
propagation and
and composite
composite jet
jet formation
formation process.
process.

According to
According to the
thesimulation
simulationresults,results,the theperformance
performanceparameters parameters ofof thethe
threethreekindskinds
of
of reactive
reactive material
material composite
composite jetsjets
areare
listedlisted in Table
in Table 5, where5, where
vj,1 vand
j,1 and
vj,5vare
j,5 are
thethe
jetjet velocity
velocity at
at gauges
gauges #1 #1and and#5,#5, respectively,
respectively, dm,jisisthe
dm,j themaximum
maximumdiameter diameterof ofthe
thejet jethead
head and and LLjj and
j,m are
Lj,m are the
the whole
whole length
length of of the
the composite
composite jet jet and
and thethe length
lengthof ofthe themetal
metaljet, jet,respectively.
respectively.
numerical results
The numerical results showedshowed that that vvj,1j,1 and v vj,5
j,5 increased
increased gradually
gradually as as the the material of the
metal liner
liner changed
changed from fromCu CutotoTiTiand andAl. Al.This This was was mainly
mainly because,
because, for for
the theSC with
SC with the
the
same same structure,
structure, the the tip velocity
tip velocity of the
of the jet was
jet was inversely
inversely proportional
proportional to the to the
densitydensity of
of the
the composite
composite liner.
liner. Compared
Compared withwith the thereactive
reactivematerial–Cu
material–Cujet jet velocity
velocity (vj,5-Cu j,5-Cu),), the
the jet
velocity values
values of of vvj,5-Ti and vvj,5-Al
j,5-Ti and increasedby
j,5-Alincreased by18.2%18.2%and and25.1%,
25.1%,respectively.
respectively. In In addition,
addition,
by comparing the velocity of the reactive material–Ti jet with
comparing the velocity of the reactive material–Ti jet with that of the reactive material– that of the reactive material–Al
jet, vj,1-Al
Al jet, was
vj,1-Al was approximately
approximately 7.2%7.2% higher
higher than
than vj,1-Ti whilevvj,5-Al
vj,1-Ti, ,while j,5-Al was only approximately
5.8% higher than than vvj,5-Ti
j,5-Ti.. This
This phenomenon
phenomenonshowed showed that that the
the tip
tip velocity
velocity of the reactive
material–Al
material–Al jet jet was
wasgreatlygreatlyaffected
affectedbybythe thestandoff.
standoff. Specifically,
Specifically, whenwhen thethe standoff
standoff waswas 1.0
CD,
1.0 CD, vj,5-Al
the the decreased
vj,5-Al decreased by by
approximately
approximately 5.7% 5.7%compared
compared withwith vj,1-Al . .
vj,1-Al

Table 5.
Table 5. Performance
Performance parameters
parameters of
of the
the three
three kinds
kinds of
of reactive
reactivematerial
materialcomposite
compositejets.
jets.

Materials
Materials vj,1 (m/s)
vj,1 (m/s) vj,5 (m/s) dm,jdm,j
vj,5 (m/s) (mm)(mm) LjL(mm)
j (mm) LLj,m (mm)
j,m (mm)

Reactive
Reactive material–Cu
material–Cu jet jet 5985 5985 57685768 5.4 5.4 112
112 59.3
59.3
Reactive material–Ti jet 7142 7142
Reactive material–Ti jet 6820
6820 8.0
8.0 113
113
56.7
56.7
Reactive material–Al jet 7653 7218 10.0 113 53.4
Reactive material–Al jet 7653 7218 10.0 113 53.4

As to the diameter of the composite jet before impacting the target, the diameter of
As to thematerial–Cu
the reactive diameter of the composite
jet (d m,j-Cu) was jetthe
before impacting
smallest, and the the target,
diameterthe diameter of the
of the reactive
reactive material–Cu jet
material–Al jet (dm,j-Al) was (d ) was the smallest, and the diameter of
the largest. The value of dm,j-Al was 10 mm, which was
m,j-Cu the reactive material–
Al jet (dm,j-Al ) was
approximately the and
85.2% largest.25%The value
larger thanof ddm,j-Al was d10
m,j-Cu and mm,
m,j-Ti which was In
, respectively. approximately
terms of the
85.2%
length and 25%
of the larger than
composite jet,dthe
m,j-Cutotal dm,j-Ti ,ofrespectively.
andlength In terms jets
the three composite of the length
was of the
almost the
composite jet, thethe
same. However, total lengthofofthe
length themetal
threejetcomposite
would drop jets was almost thewith
off gradually same.the
However,
decreasethe
in
length of the metal jet would drop off gradually with the decrease in
the material density of the inner liner. That is, the value of Lj,m-Al was the smallest, which the material density
of
wasthe inner liner. That
approximately 9.9% is,and
the 5.8% of Lj,m-Al
valuesmaller was
than the smallest,
Lj,m-Cu and Lj,m-Ti,which was approximately
respectively.
9.9% and 5.8% smaller than Lj,m-Cu and Lj,m-Ti , respectively.
Figure 11 also shows that the detonation wave spread gradually from the outer layer
of the reactive material liner to the inner layer of the metal liner during the process of jet
forming. When the jet head formed (t = 14 µs), a high-pressure zone was produced at
the interface between the metal jet and the slug. As the jet head continued to go forward,
the high-pressure zone gradually moved to the interface between the two materials. The
pressure–time curves of the gauges in the reactive material liner are shown in Figure 12. It
can be seen that there were two pressure peaks at each gauge point. At t = 7µs, the pressure
reached a peak at gauge #9, followed by gauge points 11, 13, 15 and 17. As the material
of the metal liner changed from Cu to Ti and Al, the instantaneous peak pressure at the
gauge points decreased from 75.3 GPa to 65.9 GPa and 56.3 GPa. At t = 13µs, the second
pressure peak appeared at gauges #9 and #11. However, compared with the first pressure
peak, the second peak was significantly lower. Combining Figure 11, it can be seen that the
detonation wave transmitted from the outer layer of the reactive liner to the inner elements,
 pressure reached a peak at gauge #9, followed by gauge points 11, 13, 15 and 17. As the
material of the metal liner changed from Cu to Ti and Al, the instantaneous peak pressure
at the gauge points decreased from 75.3 GPa to 65.9 GPa and 56.3 GPa. At t = 13µs, the
second pressure peak appeared at gauges #9 and #11. However, compared with the first
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 pressure peak, the second peak was significantly lower. Combining Figure 11, 10it ofcan 17 be
seen that the detonation wave transmitted from the outer layer of the reactive liner to the
inner elements, and from the top to the bottom of the liner. As such, the first pressure peak
wasandgenerated
from the topby to
thethe
explosive
bottom ofdetonation
the liner. Aswave,
such, while
the firstthe secondpeak
pressure peak
waswas generated
generated
byby thecollision
the explosive detonation
between the wave,
inner while the second
material elementspeak
of was generatedliner
the reactive by the
andcollision
the metal
between the inner material elements of the reactive liner and the metal ones.
ones. The pressure generated by the collision was much lower than that of the explosion. The pressure
Asgenerated by the collision
the jet forming enteredwas much state,
a stable lower the
thanpressure
that of the
atexplosion. As the
these gauge jet forming
points gradually
entered a stable state, the pressure
decreased and tended to fall to zero. at these gauge points gradually decreased and tended to
fall to zero.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 12. Pressure–time history curves of gauge points during the composite jet formation process:
Figure 12. Pressure–time history curves of gauge points during the composite jet formation process:
(a) reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.
(a) reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.

Under
Under the effect
the ofof
effect thethe
high-pressure
high-pressuredetonation
detonationwave,
wave,thethereactive
reactivematerial
materialliner
linerwas
bewas
crushed and gradually
be crushed and gradually formed
formedthethemain
mainpart
part of thethe slug.
slug.TheThedetonation
detonation wavewave
propagation
propagationand
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW
and the plasticdeformation
the plastic deformation of the
of the reactive
reactive material
material liner would
liner would cause
cause the tem- the
11 of 17
perature riserise
temperature effect [20]. When
effect the jet head
[20]. When reached
the jet headthe standoffthe
reached of 1.0 CD, the of
standoff temperature
1.0 CD, the
distributiondistribution
temperature of the slug formed
of the by theformed
slug reactivebymaterial liner is shown
the reactive materialin liner
Figureis13. The in
shown
Figure 13. The temperature–time curves of the gauge point settings on the outer andthe
temperature–time curves of the gauge point settings on the outer and inner layers of inner
reactive material liner are shown in Figure 14.
layers of the reactive material liner are shown in Figure 14.
TEMP.(K)
900
840
780
720

660
600
540
480
420
360
300

(a) (b) (c)

Figure13.
Figure 13. Temperature
Temperature distribution
distribution of of the
the reactive
reactive material
material slug
slug under
under different
different composite
composite jets:
jets: (a)
reactive
(a) material–Cu
reactive jet;jet;(b)
material–Cu (b)reactive
reactivematerial–Ti
material–Tijet;
jet;(c)
(c)reactive
reactive material–Al jet.
material–Al jet.
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

(a) (b) (c)

Materials 2023, 16, 2715 11 of 17
Figure 13. Temperature distribution of the reactive material slug under different composite jets: (a)
reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.

(a)

(b)
Figure
Figure 14.
14. Temperature–time
Temperature–time history
history curves
curves of
of gauge
gauge points
points in
in the
the reactive
reactive material
material liner
liner during
during the
the
jet formation process: (a) gauge points on the outer layer; (b) gauge points on the inner layer.
jet formation process: (a) gauge points on the outer layer; (b) gauge points on the inner layer.

Figure
Figure 14a14a shows
shows thatthat the
the temperature
temperature peak peak first
first appeared
appeared at at gauge
gauge #8#8 on
on thethe outer
outer
layer of the reactive liner, and then at gauge points 10, 12, 14
layer of the reactive liner, and then at gauge points 10, 12, 14 and 16. Under the three and 16. Under the three
conditions,
conditions, the the peak
peak temperature
temperature at at gauge
gauge #8 #8 was
was approximately
approximately 840 840 K,
K, and
and there
there waswas
little difference between the peak
little difference between the peak temperature temperature at other gauge points. This
This was mainly
was mainly
because
because of of the
thesame
samestructure
structureofofthe theshaped
shapedcharges;
charges;that is,is,
that thetheouter layer
outer layerelements
elements of
the
of thereactive
reactiveliner were
liner were subjected
subjected totothe
thesame
sameexplosive
explosivedetonation
detonationwave,wave, resulting
resulting in in
almost
almost no no difference
difference in in the
the temperature
temperature rise rise of
of these
theseelements.
elements.Compared
Comparedwith withFigure
Figure14a, 14a,
the
the temperature
temperature peaks peaks at at several
several gauge
gauge points
points in in the
the inner
inner layer
layer ofof the
the reactive
reactive linerliner in
in
Figure 14b occurred two
Figure 14b occurred two or more or more times. This was mainly because the temperature
This was mainly because the temperature rise in rise in
the
the inner
inner elements
elements of of the
the reactive
reactive liner
liner was
was mainly
mainly composed
composed of of three
three parts:
parts: one
one waswas the
the
temperature
temperaturerise risecaused
causedby bythe
theexplosive
explosive detonation
detonation wave, thethe
wave, second
secondwas thatthat
was caused
causedby
by the
the plastic
plastic deformation
deformation andand thethe third
third wasthat
was thatcaused
causedby bythethecollision
collision and
and extrusion
extrusion
between the
between the inner
inner elements
elements of of the
the reactive
reactive liner
liner and
and the metal liner elements. When When the the
metal liner
metal liner changed
changedfrom fromCuCu to to
Ti and
Ti andAl, the
Al, instantaneous
the instantaneous peak temperature
peak temperatureof the gauges
of the
decreased
gauges from 780
decreased K to780
from 758KKtoand 758726 K, respectively.
K and 726 K, respectively.
Meanwhile, Figure
Meanwhile, Figure 13 13 also
also shows
shows that
that the
the temperature
temperature of of the
the majority
majority ofof the
the reactive
reactive
material elements
material elements was below 700 K, K, while
while only
only some
some elements
elements at thethe two
two wings
wings of of the
the slug
slug
were more
were morethan than900900K. K.
In fact, the material
In fact, elements
the material of the PTFE/Al
elements liner could
of the PTFE/Al linerbe could
activated
be
under theunder
activated detonation wave of the
the detonation SC, but
wave only
of the SC,when
but the
onlytemperature of the PTFE-based
when the temperature of the
rose to approximately
PTFE-based 900 K and decomposed
rose to approximately enough oxidant
900 K and decomposed enoughC2 F4oxidant
could the
C2FAl particles
4 could the
experience a violent detonation-like reaction with the released oxidant [12,31]. As such, the
elements at the two wings of the slug may have had a chemical reaction during the process
of jet forming and penetration. However, it was difficult to cause the overall reaction of the
reactive materials due to their small mass.
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Materials 2023, 16, 2715
Al particles experience a violent detonation-like reaction with the released oxidant [12,31].
As such, the elements at the two wings of the slug may have had a chemical reaction 12 of 17
during the process of jet forming and penetration. However, it was difficult to cause the
overall reaction of the reactive materials due to their small mass.
These phenomena further verified that the chemical reaction of the PTFE/Al liner
These phenomena further verified that the chemical reaction of the PTFE/Al liner
material was negligible when time t < τ. The time interval between the initiation of the SC
material was negligible when time t < τ. The time interval between the initiation of the
and the violent detonation-like reaction is generally called the reaction delay time, and
SC and the violent detonation-like reaction is generally called the reaction delay time, and
the chemical reaction behavior can be ignored in the time range [17]. In addition, the
the chemical reaction behavior can be ignored in the time range [17]. In addition, the
reaction delay time τ was not only affected by the particle size and preparation process of
reaction delay time τ was not only affected by the particle size and preparation process
the PTFE/Al liner, but also related to the impact pressure and explosive type [32]. The time
of the PTFE/Al liner, but also related to the impact pressure and explosive type [32]. The
τ could be obtained through relevant experiments. In this paper, the corresponding
time τ could be obtained through relevant experiments. In this paper, the corresponding
parameters of
parameters of the
the PTFE/Al
PTFE/Al liner
liner were
were consistent
consistent with
with that
that of the reference
of the reference [17],
[17], and
and the
the
reaction delay
reaction delay time
time ττ was
was approximately
approximately 166.5
166.5 µs.
µs.

4. Perforation
4. Perforation Mechanism
Mechanism of of Reactive
Reactive Material
Material Composite
Composite Jet
Jet
4.1.
4.1. Perforation Behavior of Composite
Composite Jets
Jets Due to Its
due to Its Kinetic
Kinetic Energy
Energy
For time tt ≤
For time ≤ τ, penetration processes
τ, the penetration processes of the three kinds of composite jets due
due to
to
their
their kinetic
kinetic energy
energy are
are shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 15.
15. The numerical
numerical results
results showed
showed that
that the
the 1.0
1.0 CD
CD
thick
thick steel
steel targets
targets were
were all
all perforated
perforated with
with the
the three
three kinds
kinds of
of reactive
reactive material
material composite
composite
jets,
jets, causing
causing penetration
penetration holes
holes with
with different
different diameters
diameterstotobe
beformed.
formed.

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 15. Penetration process of reactive material composite jets against steel targets: (a) reactive
Figure 15. Penetration process of reactive material composite jets against steel targets: (a) reactive
material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.
material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.

Figure 15a,b
Figure 15a,bdemonstrate
demonstratethat
thatthe
thereactive
reactivematerial–Cu
material–Cu jetjet
andand reactive
reactive material–Ti
material–Ti jet
jet penetrated the steel target through the high-velocity metal jets, while
penetrated the steel target through the high-velocity metal jets, while Figure 15c shows Figure 15c shows
that
thatAl
the the
jetAl jet section
section was consumed
was consumed beforebefore the reactive
the reactive material–Al
material–Al jet perforated
jet perforated the
the target.
target. From the penetration theory of the SC jet [33], the penetration
From the penetration theory of the SC jet [33], the penetration depth was proportional depth was
proportional
to the effective to length
the effective
of thelength of thethe
jet. When jet.standoff
When thewas standoff
1.0 CD,was 1.0 CD,
Table Table that
6 shows 6 shows
the
length of the metal Cu jet and Ti jet was larger than that of the Al jet. At the same same
that the length of the metal Cu jet and Ti jet was larger than that of the Al jet. At the time,
time,
the the penetration
penetration depthdepth wasproportional
was also also proportionalto thetosquare
the square
root ofroot
theofratio
the ratio
of theofjet
the jet
and
andtarget
the the target density.
density. ThisThis showed
showed thatthat
thethe higher
higher thethe densityofofthe
density themetal
metaljetjetat
at the
the head,
head,
the greater
the greater would
would thethe penetration
penetration depth
depth of of the
the same
same material
material target
target be. be. In
In other
other words,
words,
when penetrating a steel target with the same thickness and material, a jet with the smaller
density would be consumed more seriously.
 when penetrating a steel target with the same thickness and material, a jet with the smaller
density would be consumed more seriously.
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 13 of 17

Table 6. Comparison between numerical penetration hole diameters and experimental results.

Table 6. Comparison D0
Comparison between numericalComparison Dmdiameters and experimental
penetration hole Comparisonresults.
De
Composite Jet
D0,p (mm) Errors Dm,p (mm) Errors De,p (mm) Errors
Reactive material–Cu jet Comparison
30.2 D0 −13.2% Comparison
18.8 Dm−10.5% Comparison D
26.6 e
−8.9%
Composite Jet
Reactive material–Ti jet D0,p (mm)
38.6 Errors
−9.0% Dm,p (mm)
24.0 Errors
−10.5% De,p 34.0
(mm) Errors
−9.1%
Reactive
Reactive material–Al jet
material–Cu jet 30.2 40.6 −13.2%
−13.2% 18.827.2 −11.5%
−10.5% 36.0
26.6 −10.4%
−8.9%
Reactive material–Ti jet 38.6 −9.0% 24.0 −10.5% 34.0 −9.1%
Reactive material–Al jet 40.6 −13.2% 27.2 −11.5% 36.0 −10.4%
Figure 15 also shows that the type of inner metal liner had a significant influence on
the reactive material’s distribution. For the reactive material–Cu jet, when the penetration
time reachedFigurethe15 initiation
also shows delay
that time τ, most
the type of reactive
of inner metal linermaterials were blocked
had a significant outside
influence on
the the
entrance
reactive ofmaterial’s
the penetration
distribution.hole. For
Thisthe
was mainly
reactive due to thejet,
material–Cu smaller
when thediameter and
penetration
lowertime reached
velocity ofthe
theinitiation delay time τ,jet
reactive material–Cu most
head of (seen
reactive materials
in Table were blocked
5), resulting outside
in a smaller
thediameter
crater entrance on of the
the penetration
entrance ofhole. Thistarget.
the steel was mainly
In terms dueoftothethemechanism,
smaller diameter and
the hole
lower velocity of the reactive material–Cu jet head (seen in
diameter of the penetrated target was proportional to the head diameter and tip velocityTable 5), resulting in a smaller
crater
of the diameter
SC jet based on on the
the radial
entrance of the
crater steel theory
growth target. [34,35].
In termsFor of the
the reactive
mechanism, the hole
material–Ti
diameter
jet and of the
reactive penetrated
material–Al jet,target
Figure was proportional
15b,c show thattoalmost the head diameter
all of and tip
the reactive velocity
materials
of the SC jet based on the radial crater growth theory [34,35].
could enter into the penetration hole, and the great mass of the reactive materials was For the reactive material–Ti
rightjetin
andthereactive material–Al
perforation channels. jet, Figure 15b,c show
Furthermore, that almost
compared withall of reactive
the the reactive materials
material–Ti
could enter into the penetration hole, and the great mass of the reactive materials was right
jet, more reactive materials could go through the penetration channel with the reactive
in the perforation channels. Furthermore, compared with the reactive material–Ti jet, more
material–Al jet impact, and the distribution behind the target was relatively uniform at
reactive materials could go through the penetration channel with the reactive material–Al
each position.
jet impact, and the distribution behind the target was relatively uniform at each position.
Under the three conditions, the penetration results of the steel targets through the
Under the three conditions, the penetration results of the steel targets through the
onlyonly
kinetic energy
kinetic energy of the reactive
of the reactive material
materialcomposite
composite jets
jetsare
areshown
shownininFigure
Figure16.16.The
The
penetration hole diameters (D(D 0,p, Dm,p and De,p) formed on the steel targets and the errors
penetration hole diameters 0,p , Dm,p and De,p ) formed on the steel targets and the errors
between
between the the
numerical
numerical and and
experimental
experimental results are listed
results in Table
are listed 6. It can
in Table 6. Itbecan
seenbefrom
seen
Tablefrom Table 6 that under the action of the only kinetic energy penetration of thematerial
6 that under the action of the only kinetic energy penetration of the reactive reactive
composite
materialjets, the different
composite hole diameters
jets, the different were greatly
hole diameters were greatlysmaller thanthan
smaller that ofofthe
that the
experimental
experimental results. TheThe
results. minimum
minimum difference
difference between
between the thenumerical
numericalsimulations
simulationsand and
experimental
experimental results was
results was8.9%,
8.9%, and andthethe
maximum
maximum difference
differencewas was13.2%.
13.2%.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 16. Numerical
Figure results
16. Numerical of kinetic
results energy
of kinetic penetration
energy for the
penetration forthree kindskinds
the three of composite jets: (a)
of composite jets:
reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.
(a) reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive material–Al jet.

4.2. 4.2. Re-Expansion

Re-Expansion Cratering
Cratering duedue to Detonation-likeEffects
to Detonation-Like EffectsofofReactive
ReactiveMaterials
Materials
According
According totothe
the references
references [36,37],
[36,37],it isit considered
is consideredthat the PTFE/Al
that reactive reactive
the PTFE/Al materials
can have a violent detonation-like reaction instantly at t ≥ τ, and the
materials can have a violent detonation-like reaction instantly at t ≥ τ, and the behavior behavior can be
described through the EOS of the JWL. The corresponding
can be described through the EOS of the JWL. The corresponding parameters of the parameters of the reactive
material
reactive detonation-like
material effectseffects
detonation-like are listed
are in Table
listed in7.Table 7.
Table 7. Main parameters of the reacted PTFE/Al reactive materials.
Table 7. Main parameters of the reacted PTFE/Al reactive materials.
Materials D (km/s) PCJ (GPa) A (GPa) B (GPa) R1 R2
Materials D (km/s) PCJ (GPa) A (GPa) B (GPa) R1 R2 ω ω
PTFE/Al
PTFE/Al 5.200 0.67
5.200 15.9
0.67 0.002315.9 7 0.0023 0.6 7 0.6 0.38
0.38
Materials 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17
Materials 2023,
Materials 16, x2715
2023, 16, FOR PEER REVIEW 1414ofof 17
17

Based
Based on on the
thediscussion
discussionabove, above,thethe penetration
penetration process
process of reactive
of the the reactive material
material com-
Based
composite on
liner the discussion
shaped charge above,
against the penetration
the steel target process
was of
divided the
intoreactive material
two stages. The
posite
compositeliner shaped
linerthe
shapedcharge against
charge the
against steel target
the steel was divided
target was into
divided two stages.
into two The
stages. first
The
first
stage stage
was was
the process
process of theof the composite
composite jet jet forming
forming and and penetrating
penetrating the the
steel steel target.
target. The
first
The stage
second was the process
stage was theof violent
the composite jet forming
detonation-like and penetrating
reaction the steelreactive
of the reactive
PTFE/Al target.
second
The stage
second was the violent detonation-like reaction of the PTFE/Al materials.
materials.
At the second At stage
the
stage,
was the
secondit was
violent
stage, it wasdetonation-like
necessary necessary
to save theto
reaction
save
effectivethemeshof the PTFE/Al
effective
data mesh
of thedata
reactive
of the
composite
materials.
composite At
jetsthe
and second
steel stage,
targets it
in was
a necessary
two-dimensional to save the effective
Euler–Lagrange mesh
domain data
at of the
time τ,
jets and
composite steel targets
jets and in
steela two-dimensional
targets in a Euler–Lagrange
two-dimensional domain
Euler–Lagrange at time τ,
domain as shown
at time in
τ,
as shown in Figure 17a. On this basis, a 3D model was established
Figure 17a. On this basis, a 3D model was established based on the SPH algorithm. Then, based on the SPH
as shown in
algorithm. Figure
Then, 17a. On this
the extracted basis, awas
2D model 3D model was into established based onasthe SPH
the extracted 2D model was transformed into transformed
a 3D SPH model, aas3D SPH
shown model,
in Figure shown
17b. At
algorithm.
in Then, the extracted 2D model was transformed into a 3D SPH model, as shown
theFigure
same 17b.
time,Atthethe same
JWL time,ofthe
model theJWL model
reactive of the reactive
materials materials
was added, which was added,
would which
simulate
in Figure
would 17b. At the
simulate the damage
same time, the JWL model
enhancement of the caused
reactivebymaterials was added, which
the damage enhancement behavior causedbehavior
by the chemical the chemical
reactions reactions
of the PTFE and Alof
would
the simulate the
PTFE and Al powders. damage enhancement behavior caused by the chemical reactions of
powders.
the PTFE and Al powders.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 17. Algorithm transformation and simulation method of the detonation-like reaction effects:
Figure
(a) 17. Algorithm
2D model at τ; (b) transformation
3D SPH model. and simulation method of the detonation-like reaction effects:
Figure 17. Algorithm transformation and simulation method of the detonation-like reaction effects:
(a) 2D model at τ; (b) 3D SPH model.
(a) 2D model at τ; (b) 3D SPH model.
The combined perforation effects of the reactive material composite jets against the
steel The
targetscombined
after theperforation
The combined detonation-like
perforation
effects
effects
of the of
reaction reactive material
the reactive
of the reactive
composite
materials
material
jets against
are shown
composite
the
in Figure
jets against the
steel
18. targets
The after the
hole diameters detonation-like reaction
of the steel targets of
producedthe reactive materials
duereactive are shown
to the detonation-like in Figure
effects of
steel targets after the detonation-like reaction of the materials are shown in
18.
the The
Figure holeThe
reactive
18. diameters
materials of 0,d
(D
hole diametersthe
, Dsteel targets
of and
m,d the De,dproduced
steel ) targets due
and theproduced
errorsto the detonation-like
between
due numericaleffects
to the detonation-like of
and
the reactive
effects of the materials
experimental results are
reactive (Dlisted
0,d, Dm,d and De,d) and the errors between the numerical and
materials in 0,d
(D Table
, Dm,d8. It
andcan be)seen
De,d from
and the Table
errors 8 that the
between the simulated
numerical
experimental
hole results
diameters with
and experimental are listed in Table
the detonation-like
results are listed in Table 8.reaction
It
8. can
It canbe seen
ofbethe from
fromTable
PTFE/Al
seen 88that
reactive
Table that the
thesimulated
materials were
simulated
hole diameters
hole diameters
similar to that ofwith
with the
the the detonation-like
detonation-like
experimental results,reaction
reaction
and the of the PTFE/Al
of difference
the PTFE/Al reactive
reactive
between materials
themmaterials were
were
was within
similar
similar
5%. to
In fact, that
to that
theofof the experimental
the experimental
detonation-like results,
results,
reaction of andand the difference
the difference
the PTFE/Al between
between
reactive them
themwould
materials was
was within within
release5%.a
5%.
largeInamount
In fact, fact, theofdetonation-like
the detonation-like
chemical reaction reaction
energy of theof
and gas the
PTFE/Al PTFE/Al
products, reactive
reactive
i.e., materials
materials
AlF andwould
3, AlF2would release
AlF release
a large
[12,14,17], a
large
amount
which amount
would of
of chemicalchemical
produce energy energy and
and gas in
overpressure gas
products, products, i.e., AlF
i.e., AlF3channel
the penetration 3, AlF2 and AlF [12,14,17],
, AlF2 and andAlF [12,14,17],
further expand which
the
which
initial would
wouldcrater
produce produce
size. overpressure
overpressure
Therefore, incoupling
the in thesimulation
the penetration penetration
channel channel
method andused andthefurther
further EOS ofexpand
expand the
the initial
shock, the
initial
crater crater
size. size. Therefore,
Therefore, the the
coupling coupling
simulation simulation
method method
used
Johnson–Cook model and the JWL equation to describe the penetration and detonation-theused
EOS the
of EOS
shock, of shock,
the the
Johnson–
Johnson–Cook
Cook model andmodel
the JWLand the JWL
equation toequation
describe to describe
the the
penetration penetration
like reaction behavior of the PTFE/Al reactive materials, showing a good computationaland and
detonation-like detonation-
reaction
like reaction
behavior
accuracy. behavior
of the PTFE/Al of the PTFE/Al
reactive reactive
materials, materials,
showing a goodshowing a good computational
computational accuracy.
accuracy.

(a)
(a)
Figure 18. Cont.
Materials2023,
Materials 16,x2715
2023,16, FOR PEER REVIEW 1515ofof17
17

(b)

(c)
Figure
Figure18.
18.Combined
Combinedperforation
perforationeffects
effectsof
ofcomposite
compositejets
jetsagainst
againststeel
steeltargets
targetsafter
afterthe
thedetonation-
detonation-
like reaction of reactive materials: (a) reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive
like reaction of reactive materials: (a) reactive material–Cu jet; (b) reactive material–Ti jet; (c) reactive
material–Al jet.
material–Al jet.
Table 8. Comparison between experimental results and numerical penetration hole diameters after
Table 8. Comparison between experimental results and numerical penetration hole diameters after
the detonation-like reaction of reactive materials.
the detonation-like reaction of reactive materials.
Comparison D0 Comparison Dm Comparison De
Composite Jet
Composite Jet D0,d (mm)D0
Comparison Errors Comparison
D m,d (mm)
Dm Errors De,dComparison
(mm) DErrors
e

Reactive material–Cu jet D0,d (mm) 33.6 Errors −3.4% Dm,d (mm)
20.2 Errors
−3.8% De,d (mm)
28.4 Errors
−2.7%
Reactive
Reactive material–Ti
material–Cu jet jet 33.6 42.0 −3.4% −0.7% 20.2 27.2 +1.5%
−3.8% 28.436.8 −−1.6%
2.7%
Reactive material–Ti
Reactive jet jet
material–Al 42.0 47.8 −0.7% +2.1% 27.2 29.4 +1.5%
−3.6% 36.841.6 −+3.5%
1.6%
Reactive material–Al jet 47.8 +2.1% 29.4 −3.6% 41.6 +3.5%
5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
In this paper, reactive material composite liners were fabricated with machining, cold
In this
pressing andpaper, reactive
sintering material On
processes. composite linersthe
this basis, were fabricatedbehavior
perforation with machining, cold
of reactive
pressing composite
material and sintering processes.
liners shapedOn this basis,
charges the perforation
against behavior
steel targets of reactive material
were investigated using
composite simulations
numerical liners shaped andcharges
static against steel targets
experiments. were
Several investigated
conclusions wereusing numerical
presented as
simulations
follows: and static experiments. Several conclusions were presented as follows:
(a) The
(a) Theexperimental
experimentalresults
resultsshowed
showed that
that when
when thethe thickness
thickness of the
of the steelsteel
targettarget
waswas
1.0
1.0 CD, the penetration hole diameters of the reactive material–Al
CD, the penetration hole diameters of the reactive material–Al jet and reactive jet and reactive
material–Tijet
material–Ti jetwere
weresignificantly
significantlylarger
largerthan
thanthat
thatof
ofthe
the reactive
reactive material–Cu
material–Cujet. jet. In
In
particular, the entrance hole and minimum diameters formed
particular, the entrance hole and minimum diameters formed due to the reactive due to the reactive
material-Cu
material -Cujetjetwere
wereapproximately
approximately26.8%26.8%andand30.4%
30.4%smaller
smallerthan
thanthat
thatof ofthe
thereactive
reactive
material–Al
material–Al jet. jet.
(b) For
(b) Forthe
thestructure
structureofofthethecomposite
compositeliner
linershaped
shapedcharges,
charges,the
theinner
innermetal
metalliner
linermaterial
material
had a little influence on the jet morphology. However, it significantly affected the tip
had a little influence on the jet morphology. However, it significantly affected the tip
velocity and head diameter of the reactive material composite jet. As the material
velocity and head diameter of the reactive material composite jet. As the material of
of the metal liner changed from Cu to Ti and Al, the jet tip velocity and diameter
the metal liner changed from Cu to Ti and Al, the jet tip velocity and diameter
increased gradually, which was an important reason for the larger hole diameter
increased gradually, which was an important reason for the larger hole diameter
formed by the reactive material–Al jet.
formed by the reactive material–Al jet.
(c) The hole diameters of the three kinds of reactive material composite jets obtained
(c) The hole diameters of the three kinds of reactive material composite jets obtained
through numerical simulations were in good agreement with the corresponding
through numerical simulations were in good agreement with the corresponding
experimental results. This proved that the simulation method combining the inert
experimental results. This proved that the simulation method combining the inert
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 16 of 17

assumption during the jet formation and penetration and the JWL equation describing
the detonation-like reaction behavior of the PTFE/Al reactive materials was reliable.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.L., Z.Z. and Y.Z.; methodology, H.L. and Y.Z.; software,
H.D.; data curation, H.L. and H.D.; writing—original draft preparation, H.L.; writing—review
and editing, H.L., Z.Z. and Y.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no.
12172052) and also supported by the Youth Foundation of the State Key Laboratory of Explosion
Science and Technology (no. QNKT22-12).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The study was also supported by the Missile Engineering Academy of the Rocket
Force Engineering University.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Nicolich, S. Reactive materials enhanced lethality EFP. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Armament Systems: Gun and Missile
Systems Conference and Exhibition, Charlotte, NC, USA, 23–26 April 2007.
2. Herbold, E.B.; Nesterenko, V.F.; Benson, D.J.; Cai, J.; Vecchio, K.S.; Jiang, F.; Addiss, J.W.; Walley, S.M.; Proud, W.G. Particle size
effect on strength, failure and shock behavior in Polytetrafluoroethylene-Al-W granular composites. J. Appl. Phys. 2008, 104, 1007.
[CrossRef]
3. Li, Y.; Wang, Z.; Jiang, C.; Niu, H. Experimental study on impact-induced reaction characteristics of PTFE/Ti composites enhanced
by W particles. Materials 2017, 10, 175. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Liu, S.; Zheng, Y.; Yu, Q.; Ge, C.; Wang, H. Interval rupturing damage to multi-spaced aluminum plates impacted by reactive
materials filled projectile. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2019, 130, 153–162. [CrossRef]
5. Tang, L.; Wang, H.; Lu, G.; Zhang, H.; Ge, C. Mesoscale study on the shock response and initiation behavior of Al-PTFE granular
composites. Mater. Des. 2021, 200, 109446. [CrossRef]
6. Yuan, Y.; Shi, D.; He, S.; Guo, H.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, H. Shock-Induced Energy Release Performances of PTFE/Al/Oxide.
Materials 2022, 15, 3042. [CrossRef]
7. Ehsan, G.; Yahya, P.; Alireza, J.; Hosein, R.; Touradj, E. Effect of Al and Mo addition on phase formation, mechanical and
microstructure properties of spark plasma sintered iron alloy. Mater. Today Commun. 2017, 13, 221–231.
8. Ehsan, G.; Arash, K.; Davoud, G.; Yasin, O.; Touradj, E. Microwave sintering of mullite-Nd2 O3 composites: Investigation of
microstructure and mechanical properties. JOM 2022, 74, 4335–4343.
9. Wang, H.; Zheng, Y.; Yu, Q.; Liu, Z.; Yu, W. Impact-induced initiation and energy release behavior of reactive materials. J. Appl.
Phys. 2011, 110, 074904.
10. Baker, E.L.; Daniels, A.S.; Ng, K.W.; Martin, V.O.; Orosz, J.P. Barnie: A unitary demolition warhead. In Proceedings of the 19th
International Symposium on Ballistics, Interlaken, Switzerland, 7–11 May 2001.
11. Li, Y.; Wang, W.; Zhang, L.; Wang, Z.; Jiang, C. Research on jet coherency of PTFE-based energetic liner. Acta Armamentarii 2019,
40, 2433–2439.
12. Su, C.H.; Guo, H.G.; Zheng, Y.F.; Xie, J.W.; Wang, H.F. Formation Behavior and Reaction Characteristic of a PTFE/Al Reactive Jet.
Materials 2022, 15, 1268. [CrossRef]
13. Zheng, Y.F.; Zheng, Z.J.; Lu, G.C.; Wang, H.F.; Guo, H.G. Mesoscale study on explosion-induced formation and thermochemical
response of PTFE/Al granular jet. Def. Technol. 2022. [CrossRef]
14. Guo, M.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Xiao, J.; Wang, H. The effect of aluminum particle size on the formation of reactive jet. Crystals 2022,
12, 1560. [CrossRef]
15. Daniels, A.S.; Baker, E.L.; De Fisher, S.E.; Ng, K.W.; Pham, J. Bam bam: Large scale unitary demolition warheads. In Proceedings
of the 23rd International Symposium on Ballistics, Tarragona, Spain, 16–20 April 2007.
16. Xiao, J.G.; Zhang, X.P.; Guo, Z.X.; Wang, H.F. Enhanced damage effects of multi-layered concrete target produced by reactive
materials liner. Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2018, 43, 955–961. [CrossRef]
17. Zheng, Y.F.; Su, C.H.; Guo, H.G.; Yu, Q.B.; Wang, H.F. Behind-target rupturing effects of sandwich-like plates by reactive liner
shaped charge jet. Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2019, 44, 1400–1409. [CrossRef]
18. Guo, H.G.; Zheng, Y.F.; Yu, Q.B.; Ge, C.; Wang, H.F. Penetration behavior of reactive liner shaped charge jet impacting steel plates.
Int. J. Impact Eng. 2019, 126, 76–84. [CrossRef]
Materials 2023, 16, 2715 17 of 17

19. Guo, H.; Xie, J.; Wang, H.; Yu, Q.; Zheng, Y. Penetration Behavior of High-Density Reactive Material Liner Shaped Charge.
Materials 2019, 12, 3486. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Guo, H.G.; Zheng, Y.F.; Tang, L.; Yu, Q.B.; Ge, C.; Wang, H.F. Effect of wave shaper on reactive materials jet formation and its
penetration performance. Def. Technol. 2019, 15, 495–505. [CrossRef]
21. Su, C.H.; Wang, H.F.; Xie, J.W.; Ge, C.; Zheng, Y.F. Penetration and damage effects of reactive material jet against concrete target.
Acta Armamentarii 2019, 40, 1829–1835.
22. Lee, S.; Kim, J.; Kim, S.; Lee, S.; Jeong, J.; Lee, C. Performance comparison of double-layer liner for shaped charge fabricated using
kinetic spray. J. Therm. Spray Technol. 2019, 28, 484–494. [CrossRef]
23. Waddell, J.T.; Bootes, T.H.; Budy, G.D.; Polly, R.K.; Shire, J.M.; Lee, W. Reactive Shaped Charge, Reactive Liner, and Method for
Target Penetration Using a Reactive Shaped Charge. U.S. Patent Application 20120024180, 2 February 2012.
24. Xu, S.C. Studies on the Jet Formation and Penetration Property of Shaped Charge with Double Layer Liners Comprised of Reactive Material;
Nanjing University of Science & Technology: Nanjing, China, 2015.
25. Wang, H.; Guo, H.; Geng, B.; Yu, Q.; Zheng, Y. Application of reactive materials to double-layered liner shaped charge for
enhanced damage to thick steel target. Materials 2019, 12, 2768. [CrossRef]
26. Shekhar, H. Theoretical Modelling of Shaped Charges in the Last Two Decades (1990–2010): A Review. Cent. Eur. J. Energetic
Mater. 2012, 9, 155–185.
27. Mock, W., Jr.; Jason, T.D. Effect of aluminum particle size on the impact initiation of pressed PTFE/Al composite rods. AIP Conf.
Proc. 2007, 955, 971–974.
28. Raftenberg, M.N.; Mock, W.; Kirby, G.C. Modeling the Impact Deformation of Rods of a Pressed PTFE/Al Composite Mixture.
Int. J. Impact Eng. 2008, 35, 1735–1744. [CrossRef]
29. Xu, W.; Wang, C.; Chen, D. The jet formation and penetration capability of hypervelocity shaped charges. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2019,
132, 103337. [CrossRef]
30. Guo, H.G.; Su, C.H.; Cai, Y.Q.; He, S.; Yu, Q.B.; Wang, H.F. Reactive jet density distribution effect on its penetration behavior. Def.
Technol. 2022. [CrossRef]
31. Osborne, D.T.; Pantoya, M.L. Effect of Al particle size on the thermal degradation of Al/Teflon mixtures. Combust. Sci. Technol.
2007, 179, 1467–1480. [CrossRef]
32. Ames, R.G. Energy release characteristics of impact-initiated energetic materials. In Proceedings of Materials Research Society
Symposium; Materials Research Society: Boston, MA, USA, 2006; Volume 896 (H03-08), pp. 1–10.
33. Elshenawy, T.; Elbeih, A.; Li, Q.M. A modified penetration model for copper-tungsten shaped charge jets with non-uniform
density distribution. Cent. Eur. J. Energetic Mater. 2016, 13, 927–943. [CrossRef]
34. Xiao, Q.; Huang, Z.; Zhu, C.; Zu, X. Calculation of depth and crater diameter for the supersonic penetration of shaped charge jet
into concrete. Propellants Explos. Pyrotech. 2013, 38, 224–231. [CrossRef]
35. Zhu, Q.F.; Huang, Z.X.; Xiao, Q.Q.; Zu, X.D.; Jia, X. Theoretical and experimental study of shaped charge jet penetration into high
and Ultra-high strength concrete targets. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2018, 122, 431–438. [CrossRef]
36. Ren, S.; Zhang, Q.; Wu, Q.; Long, R.; Gong, L.; Lu, Y. A reactive material double-bumper shield for centimeter sized projectile. Int.
J. Impact Eng. 2021, 158, 104028. [CrossRef]
37. Zheng, Y.; Wang, S.; Li, P.; Zhang, Y.; Ge, C. Penetration and blast coupled damage behavior of reactive/metal tandem EFPs.
Acta Armamentarii 2022. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.2176.tj.20220926.1754.002.html (accessed on
28 September 2022).

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.