RESEARCH ARTICLE | MARCH 21 2024

Numerical simulation of the underwater gun using gas-

curtain launch 
Wenbin Bai (柏雯斌) ; Yonggang Yu (余永刚)  ; Xinwei Zhang (张欣尉)

Physics of Fluids 36, 036128 (2024)

https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0196584


View Export
Online Citation

21 June 2024 08:18:45

 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof

Numerical simulation of the underwater gun using

gas-curtain launch
Cite as: Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Submitted: 8 January 2024 . Accepted: 9 March 2024 .
Published Online: 21 March 2024

Wenbin Bai (柏雯斌),a) Yonggang Yu (余永刚),b) and Xinwei Zhang (张欣尉)c)

AFFILIATIONS
School of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, Jiangsu, China

a)
Electronic mail: bwb@njust.edu.cn
b)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: yygnjust801@163.com
c)
Electronic mail: zxwnjust@163.com

ABSTRACT
A novel gas-curtain launch technique is proposed to enhance the interior ballistic performance for underwater guns. The size of the initial
gas curtain in front of the projectile is a critical factor in determining the subsequent behavior of the gunpowder gas jet flow field once the
projectile leaves the muzzle. Hence, a validated two-dimensional unsteady multiphase model is built for the flow field at the muzzle of an
underwater gas-curtain launch. The calculation involves determining the development of the initial gas curtain sizes for a 30 mm underwater

21 June 2024 08:18:45

gun, specifically focusing on the evolution of the precursor jet and gunpowder gas jet flow field. The results indicate that a double three-wave
point structure forms within the bottle-shaped shock wave structure of the precursor jet when the initial gas curtain length equals the barrel.
As the initial gas curtain size increases, the “bottle” structure elongates along the axial direction and compresses radially. After the projectile
exits the muzzle, the gunpowder gas quickly expands toward the front, causing the collapse of the Mach disk of the precursor jet. The
gunpowder gas jet then reforms a new bottle-shaped shock wave structure. A larger initial gas curtain can facilitate the expansion of the gun-
powder gas, resulting in an increased size of the bottle, delayed formation, and weakened intensity of the Mach disk. Additionally, increasing
the size of the initial gas curtain decreases the resistance experienced by the projectile outside the barrel. The initial gas curtain can also affect
the cavitation bubble evolution process on the projectile sidewall, showing a growth-(attenuation)-stability trend.
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0196584

I. INTRODUCTION
The gas-curtain launch refers to the complete submerging of the
barrel in water, where the orifice between the barrel and the projectile
distributes a portion of the gunpowder gas toward the front of the pro-
jectile, forming a gas curtain and then pushing the water column out
of the barrel. With this launch technique, the projectile only contacts
the gas while traveling within the barrel, and the resistance to the head
of the projectile is significantly reduced. Consequently, this technique
enhances the speed at which the bullet is propelled and reduces the
chamber pressure of underwater guns. Because of the advantages of
simple structure, compared with sealed launch,1 and high muzzle
velocity, compared with full submerged launch,2 the gas-curtain
launch technique has become a research hotspot in recent years. In the
research of underwater guns using the gas-curtain launch technique,
the study of the muzzle flow field deserves particular attention. The
term “muzzle flow field” pertains to the speedy expansion of gunpow-
der gas, which is both high in temperature and pressure, following
the escape of the projectile away from muzzle, accompanied by
high-intensity shock wave structures and unique flow structures, which
will exert detrimental effects on shooting accuracy and the motion of
underwater vessels. Therefore, studying the evolution characteristics of
this unsteady flow field can provide valuable guidance for optimizing
the structure and charge design of underwater guns using gas-curtain
launch.
A number of researchers have conducted extensive research on
the flow field of the muzzle of conventional artillery fired in the air.
Experimental investigations were conducted to study the flow field at
the muzzle using high-speed video recording, spark shadow imaging,
and particle image velocimetry. These tests successfully captured dis-
tinct flow field structures and shock waves in the muzzle flow field.3–7
However, the information obtained from experimental images or data
are pretty limited due to the strong transient characteristics of the
muzzle flow field evolution. Although some have devised formulas to
calculate the distribution of flow parameters or shock wave energy in
the muzzle flow field, using specific theories or principles,8 these for-
mulas typically have limited applicability due to their highly empirical

Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584 36, 036128-1

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
nature, which means they are only applicable within a specific range of
operating conditions. Fortunately, the advancement of numerical sim-
ulation methodologies allows for a more thorough comprehension of
the evolution of the muzzle flow field and the structure of the shock
wave system.8–11 Additionally, in certain numerical simulation studies,
The secondary flame, which is generated through chemical reactions
in the muzzle flow field, is also taken into account.12–14 Furthermore,
certain researchers have proposed an artificial intelligence training
framework that integrates known flow field data with physical princi-
ples to predict the muzzle flow field. This approach has resulted in a
substantial reduction in the processing resources needed to simulate
the muzzle flow field.15
However, due to the liquid water environment’s high density and
high viscosity, the development of the multi-phase flow field during
launch results in increased complexity of the structures of the muzzle
flow field. Moreover, compared to guns fired in the air, the interior bal-
listic process of underwater guns with full submerged launch, sealed
launch, or curtain launch is significantly different.16–18 The combina-
tion of these factors makes the numerical calculation of the muzzle
flow field in underwater guns a complex challenge. Previous research
on the evolutionary properties of underwater muzzle flow fields has
predominantly focused on two main aspects: launch while fully sub-
merged and launch with a sealed device. The fully submerged launch
refers to the gun barrel, sans any devices, entirely immersed in water.
Upon ignition of the gunpowder, the gunpowder gas simultaneously
propels the projectile and the water column ahead of it forward. In a
sealed launch, a sealing device is set up at the muzzle to isolate the air
in front of the projectile from the surrounding water environment,
thereby enabling low-resistance and high-speed projectile movement
within the barrel. For a fully submerged launch, according to its princi-
ple, there will be two cavitation19,20 processes in the entire launch pro-
cess: one occurs near the muzzle when the water column in front of
the projectile is forcefully expelled from the barrel and the other on the
projectile sidewall when it gets to the water environment. Zhang
et al.21 designed a visual underwater shooting experiment platform to
record these two cavitation phenomena with high-speed video record-
ing. They also simulated the impact of various projectile muzzle veloci-
ties on the evolution characteristics of the muzzle flow field during a
fully submerged launch. Regarding the sealed launch, preliminary
investigations on the muzzle flow field did not take into account the
cavitation phenomenon. These studies mostly concentrated on small-
caliber machine guns deployed in shallow water depths. To address
this gap, Zhang and Yu22 conducted a thorough investigation on the
flow of water from the muzzle of a 30 mm underwater gun with a
sealed launch. They carefully examined how the water depths (i.e.,
ambient pressure) and projectile shapes impact the changes in the evo-
lution characteristics of the gunpowder gas jet flow field.
Compared to the other two underwater launch methods, the
physical phenomena occurring during the curtain launch process are
more complex. This is because there are three jet expansion processes
throughout the gas-curtain launch process: namely, the limited expan-
sion of gunpowder gas through the nozzle in the liquid-filled barrel
forms the gas curtain, the precursor jet flow field is created by the gas
curtain, which is compressed by the projectile motion within the bar-
rel, and the quasi-restricted expansion process of the gunpowder gas
with higher temperature and pressure in the gas cavity formed by the
precursor jet. Presently, considerable study has been carried out on the
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
evolution and formation process of the gas curtain inside the barrel,
focusing on two distinct instability theories (i.e., the Taylor instability
and the K–H instability).23–25 Hu et al.26 designed a simulated projec-
tile with straight grooves on the sidewall and recorded the process of
gas curtain development within the barrel. Subsequently, they acquired
detailed information about the distribution of flow parameters and
phases using numerical simulation. The drainage effect was found to
be particularly remarkable in the case of six wall jets.27 Zhao et al.28
altered the distribution of the nozzle on the inclined plane of the pro-
jectile head and simulated the impact of alterations in the nozzle struc-
ture on the formation of the gas curtain. To accommodate the actual
underwater launch scenario, Zhou and Yu29,30 also evaluated the
impact of different injection pressures and nozzle/projectile move-
ments on the development of the gas curtain. In view of the issue of
uneven force caused by nozzles on the projectile, Hu et al.31 introduced
an innovative technique for enhancing the creation of a gas curtain by
carving linear grooves onto the inner surface of the barrel and numeri-
cally calculated the influence of various groove structures on the evolu-
tion of the gas curtain.
As previously mentioned, extensive studies have been conducted
on the muzzle flow field in air and underwater muzzle flow using fully
submerged launch and sealed launch. However, research on underwa-
ter guns using gas-curtain launch is still in the exploratory stage, with
most studies focusing on the evolutionary process of the gas curtain
inside the barrel. Currently, there is insufficient research on the evolu-
tionary properties of the gas-curtain launch’s muzzle flow field. Hence,
this study targeted a 30 mm underwater gun and conducted a deep
21 June 2024 08:18:45
analysis of the effects of different launch conditions (i.e., varying initial
gas curtain sizes) on the precursor jet flow field and gunpowder gas jet
flow field, focusing on unique flow structures and shock wave variation
laws of these two jets. In addition, considering the projectile’s contin-
ued exposure to gunpowder gas upon entering the water environment,
this study also investigated the evolving cavitation process on the pro-
jectile sidewall.
II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL AND NUMERICAL
METHODS
A. Physical model
The development of the flow field around the muzzle underwater
is a dynamic process that involves the movement of many phases and
intense turbulence. This flow interacts with the fast motion of the pro-
jectile and the occurrence of cavitation. For the sake of simplifying the
simulation process and ensuring accuracy, the following assumptions
are made from the attributes of this flow field:
(1) The hypothesis of gunpowder particles igniting simultaneously
is fulfilled, and the combustion process adheres to the geometric
combustion law and exponential burning rate law, occurring
under an average pressure.
(2) The gunpowder gas is considered to be an ideal compressible gas,
thereby adhering to the ideal gas state equation. Secondary com-
bustion, which occurs due to chemical reactions at the muzzle, is
not taken into account. Therefore, it is believed that the gas tem-
perature remains constant and the gas composition remains intact.
Additionally, since the projectile velocity is less than 800 m/s, the
liquid water and vapor are considered incompressible fluids.32
(3) Due to the short evolution time of the muzzle flow field and the
significant difference in density between gas and liquid water,
36, 036128-2
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof

the effects of gravity on projectile movement and fluid dynam- X

3

ics are neglected. The projectile is assumed to only move along q¼ a i qi ; (9)
i¼1
the axial direction. The muzzle flow field is modeled as a two-
dimensional axisymmetric transient system to simplify the where q represents the average density resulting from the mixture of
simulation. the three phases; p represents the static pressure of the mixed fluids;
(4) During the entire launch procedure, the duration of contact and l is the viscosity coefficient.
between the gunpowder gas and liquid water is quite short in Energy equations are given as
terms of heat transmission. Therefore, the evaporation of liquid
water due to heat absorption is not considered. The interaction @  
ðqEÞ þ r  vðqE þ pÞ ¼ r  ðkeff rT Þ þ Rm Lev ; (10)
between the projectile and liquid water, namely the cavitation @t
phenomena, is analyzed. To accurately depict this phenomenon,
X
3 X
3
the Schnerr–Sauer cavitation model is utilized. E¼ ai qi Ei = ai qi ; (11)
i¼1 i¼1
B. Mathematical model
X
3 X
3
1. Fluid equations T ¼ ai qi Ti = ai qi ; (12)
i¼1 i¼1
The entire process of gas-curtain launch primarily encompasses
the turbulent multiphase flow of the three fluids and the cavitation of where E is the mixing average energy of fluids; T is the mixing average
liquid water on the sidewall of the projectile. In this paper, the flow temperature; keff is the effective thermal conductivity; and Lev is the
field is described using the standard k–e turbulence model and the vol- latent heat of vaporization.
ume of fluid (VOF) multiphase model,33 while the Schnerr–Sauer cavi- Gas state equation is given as
tation model34 is utilized to simulate cavitation phenomena.
Continuity equations are given as p ¼ q1 RT1 ; (13)
@
ðai qi Þ þ r  ðai qi vi Þ ¼ Rm ; (1) where R is the gunpowder gas constant that equals 339.4 J kg1K1.
@t
The k–e turbulence model requires only two equations to pre-
X3
ai ¼ 1; (2) dict turbulence through two variables k and e, which greatly

21 June 2024 08:18:45

i¼1 reduces the computational complexity and cost compared to other
Rm ¼ Re  Rc ; (3) complex turbulence models. Due to an enormous number of time
steps required to compute the development of the muzzle flow
where the subscript i equals 1, 2, and 3 denote the gas phase of gunpow- field, the k–e model is an ideal choice for this study because of its
der, the liquid phase of water, and the vapor phase of water, respectively, computational speed and stability advantages. Furthermore, the
while qi , vi , and ai indicate the density, velocity, and volume fraction of standard k–e, RNG k–e, and realizable k–e models were used to
the relevant phase; Rm represents the rate at which mass is exchanged simulate the gas jet expansion in a liquid-filled circular tube, and
between vapor and the liquid. Re and Rc are source terms for mass the standard one agrees well with experimental data. Thus, this
transfer that are associated with the growth and collapse of vapor bub- paper selects the standard k–e model as the computational model
bles, respectively. The equations for these terms are as follows: for turbulent gas–liquid mixing. The corresponding equations of
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi the model are
q2 q3 3 2ðpv  pÞ "  #
Re ¼ Fe a3 ð1  a3 Þ ; pv < p; (4) @ @ @ l @k @uj
q 2;3 <b 3q2 ðqkÞ þ ðqkui Þ ¼ lþ t  qu0 i u0 j  qe;
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi @t @xi @xj re @xj @xj
q2 q3 3 2ðp  pv Þ
Rc ¼ Fc a3 ð1  a3 Þ ; pv > p; (5) (14)
q 2;3 <b 3q2 " #

 1 @ @ @ lt @e e 2
a3 3 1 3 ðqeÞ þ ðqeui Þ ¼ lþ  Ce2 q
<b ¼  ; (6) @t @xi @xj re @xj k
1  a3 4p n
X e2 0 0 @uj
q 2;3 ¼ ai qi ; (7) þ Ce1 qu i u j ; (15)
i¼2;3 k @xj
where Fe and Fc are the empirical calibration coefficients of evaporation lt ¼ qCl k2 =e; (16)
and condensation; <b and n are cavitation bubble radius and cavitation
bubble number density; q 2;3 is the mixing density of liquid phase and where k represents the turbulent kinetic energy, while e represents the
vapor phase; pv is the saturated vapor pressure that equals to 3540 Pa. In turbulent dissipation rate; lt is the turbulent viscosity; xi and xj are the
this way, Eqs. (4)–(7) constitute the Schnerr–Sauer cavitation model. free coordinate vector; ui and uj is the fluid’s velocity components;
Momentum equations are given as the term u0 i u0 j is the Reynolds pressure; rj ¼ 1:0 and re ¼ 1:3
are Prandtl numbers associated with turbulent kinetic energy and
@   turbulent dissipation rate, respectively; Cl ¼ 0:08, Ce1 ¼ 1:44, and
ðqvÞ þ r  ðqvvÞ ¼ rp þ r  lðrv þ rvT Þ ; (8)
@t Ce2 ¼ 1:92 are the empirical constants.

Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584 36, 036128-3

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
2. Equations governing interior ballistic process
gas-curtain launch
To calculate the muzzle flow field, it is necessary to couple the
interior ballistic process and flow field in the computational fluid
dynamics software FLUENT. This involves using user-defined func-
tions to obtain projectile velocity and muzzle injection pressure, as
FLUENT is specifically designed for calculating flow field parameters.
The fundamental internal ballistic equations for gas-curtain launch are
derived from the theory mentioned earlier.
Momentum equation of the projectile is given as
ð1
A ð2
A Operators (PISO), whereas the PRESTO! interpolation method is uti-
dvp
um ¼ pb dA  ph dA; (17)
dt
0 0
where u is the secondary work coefficient; m is the projectile mass; vp
is the projectile axial velocity; pb and ph are the bottom pressure and
head pressure of the projectile, and these pressures are obtained by
reading flow field parameters via user-defined functions; A1 and A2
are the areas of the bottom and head of the projectile.
Interior ballistic energy equations is given as
ðt ð x ð A1 !
u 2
S0 pb ðlw þ lÞ ¼ f xw  h mv þ qm vg dt þ dl ph dA ;
2 p 0 0 0
(18)
2 !3 Ðt
D q v dt
lw ¼ l0 41  ð1  wÞ  a Dw  0 5;
m g
(19)
qp V0
where S0 is the cross-sectional area of the projectile; lw and l0 represent
the length of the free volume of the chamber and the length of the vol-
ume of the chamber, respectively; l denotes the displacement of the
projectile in the barrel; f is the total energy of gunpowder; w is the per-
centage of burned gunpowder; x and qp are the mass and density of
gunpowder; D is the charging density; h ¼ kp  1, and kp is the adia-
batic exponent; qm and vg are the mass flow rate and velocity of gun-
powder gas at the orifice between the projectile and barrel; a is the
remainder of gunpowder gas that is proportional to the gas molecules’
volume per unit mass.
Motion equation of the projectile is given as
vp ¼ dl=dt: (20)
Equations (17)–(20) form the basic interior ballistic model of gas-
curtain launch.
C. Numerical method
This paper describes the approach of using user-defined functions
and the dynamic mesh methodology in the FLUENT program to sim-
ulate the motion of the bullet both within and outside the barrel, which
means the user-defined functions employ interior ballistic equations to
determine the chamber pressure and projectile’s velocity, assign them
to the pressure-inlet boundary condition and control the mesh defor-
mation, and then the projectile head pressure in the flow field is looped
back to the user-defined functions to compute the interior ballistic
parameters for the subsequent time step. Back and forth, the
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
bidirectional connection between projectile motion and flow field
parameters is achieved throughout time.
The layering dynamic mesh technique is utilized to calculate the
flow field, enabling the projectile to move in a single direction. This
approach is based on the assumptions and features of the flow field.
The VOF multiphase flow model, which incorporates the Schnerr–
Sauer cavitation model, is chosen to simulate the gas curtain expan-
sion, the gas–liquid interface outside the barrel, and the cavitation
phenomenon occurring when the projectile hits the water. Thus, the
pressure-based implicit solver is selected. The pressure–velocity cou-
pling methodology employed is the Pressure Implicit with Splitting of
lized to discretize the pressure term, hence enhancing the speed of
computation convergence. The QUICK scheme is employed for discre-
tizing the convection term to guarantee precise and stable calculations,
while the first-order upwind strategy is utilized for the other terms.
The computational time step of the gas curtain evolution stage is con-
trolled within 1 ls, and that of the projectile movement stage is within
0.2–0.5 ls.
III. CALCULATION MODEL
A. Grid generation and initial boundary conditions
Since this work seeks to examine the influence of the initial gas
curtain size on the development of the muzzle flow field, a simple
annular orifice construction is positioned between the projectile and
barrel, which effectively channels the gas to create a gas curtain in front
21 June 2024 08:18:45
of the projectile. In addition, the barrel length is fixed at 1.0 m, which
accelerates the gas curtain’s development. The calculation domain for
the muzzle flow field, with a length of 1.6 m and a radius of 0.6 m,
effectively captures shock waves and flow structures. As shown in
Fig. 1, considering the specific features of a 30 mm underwater gun
with gas-curtain launch technique, the calculation domain is parti-
tioned into three distinct sections. These sections include Zone I,
which comprises the combustion chamber and the annular orifice,
Zone II, which encompasses the gun barrel, and Zone III, which repre-
sents the muzzle flow field.
Before the numerical calculation, Zone I is initialized into the gas
phase region, and Zone II and Zone III represent the liquid phase
region. Since the launch is assumed at low water depths, the initial
pressure and temperature across the entire domain are set to 0.1 MPa
and 300 K, respectively. The lower part of the combustion chamber is
designated as pressure inlet, and the pressure value is determined
through the utilization of internal ballistic equations in UDFs. The
projectile and barrel surfaces serve as solid wall boundaries and utilize
the conventional wall function. The outer perimeter of the muzzle flow
field functions as the pressure outlet, maintaining a pressure level of
0.1 MPa. In Fig. 1, the point O on the central axis is the reference
origin.
To improve the calculation efficiency and accommodate the
requirements of the dynamic mesh technique, quadrangular grids are
generated across the whole calculation domain, and a Y-shaped grid
division is performed near the warhead. To avoid the numerical diver-
gence caused by grid deformation, the grid size of the first layer on
both sides of the interface is maintained uniformly in all directions,
and the grid size in the vicinity of the muzzle is refined to achieve a
higher resolution for shock waves and the gas–liquid interface. The cal-
culating domain has a minimum grid size of 0.4  0.4 mm2.
36, 036128-4
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof

FIG. 1. (a) Schematic diagram of the calculation domain. (b) Schematic diagram of the computing mesh and initial boundary conditions.

B. Grid independence verification

To guarantee the precision and effectiveness of the numerical
simulation, this study conducted calculations for different scenarios
using the grid numbers N ¼ 185 000, 242 000, and 306 000, respec-
tively, through varying degrees of grid refinement near the muzzle.
Given that the highly under-expanded gunpowder gas will form a
complex shock wave system near the muzzle after the projectile exits,
the axial temperature distribution at r ¼ 0.03 m will be an excellent ref-
erence for grid independence verification. As shown in Fig. 2, com-
pared to the refined grid case calculation results, the average errors of
the coarse and medium grid cases are 8.6% and 2.6%, respectively.

21 June 2024 08:18:45

Consequently, the case with the grids of 242 000 is employed for subse-
quent numerical calculations.
C. Verification of the numerical model
In the process of gas-curtain launch, the limited expansion of gas
jet inside the barrel, the free expansion outside the muzzle, and the
cavitation phenomenon on the projectile’s sidewall are included. In a
high-speed video recording experiment, the expansion properties of
eight gas jets in a cylindrical liquid-filled round tube were documented
in Ref. 35. The simulated experimental platform and projectile struc-
ture are shown in Fig. 3. This study utilizes the above-mentioned
numerical models to investigate the expansion process and assesses the
temporal error in the maximum displacement of the gas curtain head,
based on experimental findings. As shown in Fig. 4, the average dis-
crepancy between the numerical simulation outcome and the
FIG. 3. The schematic diagram of the experimental shooting platform and the pro-
jectile structure [(a) shows the experimental gas-curtain launch platform, and
(b) shows the top view of the simulated projectile].
experiment result is 4.36%, indicating the practicality of the numerical
model and methodology employed in the evolution process of gas cur-
tain of this work.
In order to further verify the correctness of the numerical model
used in this paper, it is necessary to verify the projectile’s multi-phase
distribution after the projectile exits the muzzle. In Ref. 21, an experi-
mental launch system employing submerged launch was constructed
to observe the multi-phase distribution of projectile, with the high-
speed camera recording. Figure 5 illustrates the schematic diagram of

FIG. 4. The comparison between the simulated results and the experimental results
[(a) is the gas curtain shape of simulated and experimental results (t ¼ 6 ms), and
FIG. 2. The axial distribution of temperature at r ¼ 0.03 m. (b) is the comparison of jet displacements].

Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584 36, 036128-5

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 5. The schematic diagram of the experiment launch system.
this experimental launch system. In this paper, the aforementioned
numerical models (specifically, the cavitation model) and the numeri-
cal methods are utilized again for simulation and subsequently com-
pared against experimental results. As depicted in Fig. 6, the
simulation results are in good agreement with the experimental find-
ings, with an average error of projectile displacement of 3.76%.
Consequently, the numerical models and methods selected in this
paper are deemed reasonable and effective.
IV. NUMERICAL CALCULATION RESULTS
AND ANALYSIS
When the gunpowder particles are ignited, they undergo contin-
ual combustion, resulting in the production of gas that is both high in
temperature and pressure, causing a constant rise in the pressure
within the chamber. At a chamber pressure of 8 MPa, the film between
the projectile and the barrel breaks, directing some of the gas to go
toward the front of the projectile through the annular orifice. This
results in the water column exiting and forming the gas curtain. When
the chamber pressure reaches the projectile start pressure (30 MPa),
the projectile starts moving. The gas curtain in front of the projectile
forms at this moment is referred to as the initial gas curtain.
Subsequently, under the pushing of the projectile, the initial gas curtain
is further expelled from the barrel to form the precursor jet. Once the
tail of the projectile exits the muzzle, the high temperature and
FIG. 6. The comparison between the simulated results and the experimental findings [(a) shows the multi-phase interfaces of simulated and experimental results and (b) shows
the comparison of projectile displacements].
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
high-pressure powder gas behind the projectile rapidly expands out-
side of the barrel, forming the gunpowder gas jet. As previously men-
tioned, the length of the barrel is 1.0 m. Due to the limitation of the
projectile start pressure, the gas curtain cannot evolve continuously
with the combustion of gunpowder. Hence, in this study, the initial gas
curtain length lgc (i.e., the initial distance between the projectile head
and the gas curtain head at the commencement of the projectile’s
motion) is, respectively, set to 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 m for the launch condi-
tions by changing the charge of gunpowder to correspond to certain
typical situations of gas-curtain launch. Furthermore, it is important to
highlight that if the projectile starts moving prior to the initial gas cur-
tain reaching the muzzle, the muzzle velocity will be greatly dimin-
ished, and the pressure in the chamber would increase tremendously.
Therefore, this study does not consider the case that a gas curtain
length is shorter than the barrel length.
A. Precursor jet flow field
The phase nephograms near the muzzle under the three launch
conditions at the initial moment of the projectile startup are illustrated
in Fig. 7. The gas curtain expands predominantly in the axial direction
upon departing the muzzle, as the axial velocity component of the air-
flow within the gas curtain is considerably greater than the radial
velocity component. As the gas curtain continues to expand outward
from the muzzle, it assumes a wedge-shaped profile when the gas cur-
tain head is displaced to 1.2 m. Moreover, influenced by the Kelvin–
Helmholtz (K–H) instability, the water outside the gas curtain is
21 June 2024 08:18:45
entrained into the gas curtain in the form of droplets at the base of the
“wedge.”
Through the ongoing combustion of gunpowder, the projectile
gains speed within the barrel and compresses the gas curtain at the
front. The gas in front of the projectile expands beyond the muzzle
due to the combined effects of projectile motion compression and its
inherent momentum. This expansion leads to the development of the
precursor jet. As illustrated in Fig. 8, the upper half shows the Mach
number contour maps at the exit of the projectile tail from the muzzle,
while the lower half represents the streamlines simultaneously. For the
convenience of subsequent analysis, this moment is defined as t ¼ 0 ls.
The K–H instability is intensified at the gas–liquid contact in close
proximity to the muzzle, resulting in the formation of vortex rings and
36, 036128-6
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 7. The phase nephograms of the projectile start time: (a) lgc ¼ 1.0, (b) lgc ¼ 1.1, and (c) lgc ¼ 1.2 m.
FIG. 8. The Mach number contour maps and streamline diagrams at t ¼ 0 ls: (a) lgc ¼ 1.0, (b) lgc ¼ 1.1, and (c) lgc ¼ 1.2 m.
motion toward the upstream of the muzzle in the region between the
jet boundary and the gas–liquid interface. According to the Mach
number contour maps, the first bottle-shaped shock wave structure
with varying shapes has developed under the three launch conditions.
The airflow near the central axis is deflected by the Mach disk of the
precursor jet, generating a radial velocity component. Subsequently,
obstructed by the airflow bypassing the Mach disk, a vortex ring forms
downstream of the Mach disk, and its size increases as the diameter of
the Mach disk increases.
To intuitively demonstrate the influence of the initial gas curtain
size on the wave structure of the precursor jet, the bottle-shaped shock
structures have been isolated from the bottle-shaped shock structures
from the contour maps of the Mach number, as shown in Fig. 9.
Under the launch condition with an initial gas curtain length of 1.0 m,
the gas–liquid boundary limits the radial expansion of the precursor
jet outside the muzzle, causing a double three-wave point structure for-
mation. In this case, the shock wave core region (i.e., the core region of
gas expansion) and Mach disk diameter are the minimum. For the
FIG. 9. The bottle-shaped shock structures of precursor jet flow field under three
launch conditions.
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
launch conditions with an initial gas curtain length of 1.1 m, the gas–
21 June 2024 08:18:45
liquid boundary imposes less limitations on the radial expansion of the
initial jet, resulting in a notable enlargement of both the shock wave
core area and the diameter of the Mach disk. For the launch condition
with an initial gas curtain length of 1.2 m, compared to the previous
cases, the larger gas curtain size allows the internal airflow of the pre-
cursor jet to expand more fully after the outlet. The shock wave core
region is elongated in the axial direction, but the Mach disk diameter
decreases.
B. Gunpowder gas jet flow field
In order to examine the pressure and flow properties of the gun-
powder gas jet flow field, Fig. 10 presents the pressure distribution and
streamlines under the three launch conditions, along with the gas–
liquid interface (i.e., the white curves). The pressure nephograms show
that at 50 ls, the gunpowder gas inside the barrel rapidly expands after
the projectile leaves the muzzle and blows the previously entrained
droplets outside. During the launch, with an initial gas curtain length
of 1.2 m, the Mach disk from the shock wave core region of the precur-
sor jet remains visible due to its significant axial dimension. The air-
flow velocity is greater on the sidewall of the projectile compared to
the area near the axis due to the influence of the projectile tail. This
causes the precursor jet Mach disk to curve outward toward the muz-
zle. At 140 ls, the Mach disk of the precursor jet collapses under the
impact of the projectile movement and the gunpowder gas jet. A jet
boundary compresses the airflow within the gunpowder gas, resulting
in the generation of an oblique shock wave. It can be seen from the
gas–liquid boundary that the greater the radial expansion restriction of
the gunpowder gas, the steeper the oblique shock wave slope. At
300 ls, the gunpowder gas jet has formed the second bottle-shaped
shock structure, whose size is positively correlated with the initial gas
36, 036128-7
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 10. The pressure nephograms and streamline diagrams of gunpowder gas jet flow: (a) lgc ¼ 1.0, (b) lgc ¼ 1.1, and (c) lgc ¼ 1.2 m.
curtain size. The projectile has not entirely detached from the gas
action under the two launch conditions with smaller initial gas cur-
tains. The gas is compressed in a radial manner by the contact between
the gas and liquid, resulting in the formation of high-pressure gas
masses at the bottom and sidewall of the projectile. At 520 ls, the gas
expansion is now unrestricted by the projectile. However, the gas still
pushes the gas–liquid interface radially and enters the “quasi-restricted
expansion” stage.
From the streamline diagrams, in the early expansion stage of the
gunpowder gas jet, the vortices between the precursor jet boundary
and the gas–liquid interface disappear under the impact of the gas.
The downstream vortices of the precursor jet’s Mach disk become
larger under the influence of the projectile’s pushing. It should be
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
21 June 2024 08:18:45
noted that under the most extended initial gas-curtain launch condi-
tion, a double vortex unique structure is formed downstream of the
precursor jet Mach disk. As gunpowder gas expands, it creates a new
vortex downstream of the Mach disk. This occurs under three launch
conditions. However, the vortex only lasts for a short period and dissi-
pates rapidly with the Mach disk growth. When the region is large
enough, several vortices are also generated between the gas–liquid
interface and the gas jet boundary. Hence, under the two launch condi-
tions with larger initial gas curtains, the formation time of vortices in
this region is relatively earlier.
To analyze the structural differences of the gunpowder gas jet’s
bottle-shaped shock waves under the three launch conditions, Fig. 11
depicts the temporal variation of the muzzle injection pressure, while
36, 036128-8
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 11. The muzzle injection pressure of powder gas jet over time.
Fig. 12 displays the radial pressure distribution at x ¼ 1.05 m and
t ¼ 300 ls, together with the contemporaneous axial pressure distribu-
tion. As can be seen from Fig. 11, the size of the initial gas curtain has
a very tiny effect on the muzzle injection pressure, provided that the
gas curtain length is longer than the barrel length. By curve fitting, it is
found that the muzzle injection pressure over time under the three
launch conditions satisfies the law of logarithmic attenuation, that is,
pe ðtÞ ¼ 86:28  9:96 lnðtÞ;
where pe(t) is the muzzle injection pressure of gunpowder (MPa), and
the unit of the time t is ls.
According to Figs. 10 and 12, the projectile’s movement within
the gas curtain is highly concentrated under the three launch condi-
tions, with the expansion of the gunpowder gas mostly influenced by
the gas–liquid interface and the precursor jet flow field. At the same
time, when the launch circumstance involves a larger initial gas cur-
tain, the gas–liquid contact has a more minor impact on the expansion
of the gunpowder gas. Moreover, the larger the initial gas curtain, the
larger is the shock wave core region of the precursor jet; the two factors
FIG. 12. The pressure distribution at t ¼ 300 ls [(a) shows the axial pressure distribution, and (b) shows the radial pressure distribution].
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
reduce the environmental pressure. It is known that the size of the
Mach disk of the under-expanded jet is positively correlated with na
(i.e., the ratio of the muzzle injection pressure to the ambient pressure,
where na ¼ pe/pa). Moreover, it can be seen from Fig. 12 that the size
of the initial gas curtain has minimal effect on the muzzle injection
pressure. Therefore, under the launch condition with a larger initial
gas curtain, the size of the bottle-shaped shock wave at the same time
in the gunpowder gas jet flow field is smaller, the formation time is ear-
lier, and the shock intensity of the Mach disk is greater.
To directly describe the shock wave system evolution process of
the gunpowder gas jet flow field, Fig. 13 presents the Mach number
nephograms (i.e., the upper part), shadowgraphs (i.e., the lower part)
and gas–liquid interface (i.e., the white curves) from the intersection of
oblique shock waves under three launch conditions. The oblique shock
of gunpowder gas jet intersects at the central axis at 170, 190, and
230 ls, respectively, and reflects to form an X-type shock structure.
The shock wave core region has a similar morphology but different
sizes. With the expansion of gunpowder gas, a transition of the regular
reflection into Mach reflection of oblique shock wave occurs, then,
Mach disks begin to form, and their diameter increase. The bottle-
shaped shock waves under three launch conditions are identical in
shape once more with varied size at 620 ls. However, the evolution of
shock waves during this period is quite different. The launch condition
of the shortest initial gas curtain is shown in Fig. 13. (a) at 300 ls, the
oblique shock wave occurs, the first Mach reflection under the obstruc-
tion of the gas–liquid interface, forming the inner shock wave pointing
21 June 2024 08:18:45
to the axis. Then, the inner shock wave occurs, the second Mach reflec-
tion on the central axis, thus forming a double three-point structure.
After that, a phenomenon called the “three-wave point fusion” occurs
due to the Mach disk growth and the inner shock wave being short-
ened, leading to the three-wave point meeting. The launch condition
of the most extended initial gas curtain is shown in Fig. 13. (c) at
420 ls, a double three-wave point like the above one also forms. In the
early stage of the shock waves evolution, the motion rules of the inner
shock wave and the double three-wave point are similar to those of the
former. The difference is in the later evolutionary process when the
inner shock wave is shortened to a certain length, the double three-
wave point structure suddenly disappears, and the inner shock wave is
36, 036128-9
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 13. The Mach number nephograms and shadowgraphs of gunpowder gas jet flow: (a) lgc ¼ 1.0, (b) lgc ¼ 1.1, and (c) lgc ¼ 1.2 m.
fused with the Mach disk; in this paper, this phenomenon can be called
the “shock fusion” phenomenon. For the launch condition of the initial
gas curtain length of 1.1 m, there is no double three-wave point struc-
ture compared to the other two; after the formation of the Mach disk,
the diameter begins to increase, and the three-wave points constantly
move toward the muzzle.
Figure 14 shows the Mach disk size variation over time under
three launch conditions. It can be seen that, in the radial direction, due
to the phenomenon of “three-wave fusion” and shock fusion, the
diameter of the gunpowder gas jet’s Mach disk under the launch con-
dition of the initial gas curtain lengths of 1.0 and 1.2 m has a rapid
growth stage. In the axial direction, under the launch condition of the
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
21 June 2024 08:18:45
initial gas curtain length of 1.2 m, the displacement of the gunpowder
gas jet’s Mach disk from the muzzle shows an exponential attenuation
law with time, that is,
Xm ðtÞ ¼ 100:313 þ 122:316et=159:249 ;
where Xm(t) is the axial displacement (mm) of the Mach disk from the
muzzle, and the unit of the time t is ls.
Regarding the launch conditions of the two smaller initial gas
curtains, shortly after the Mach disk is formed, the radial constraint of
the gas–liquid boundary on the gunpowder gas causes the Mach disk
to proceed in the downstream direction. With the damping of the
muzzle injection pressure, the gas–liquid boundary’s radial constraint
36, 036128-10
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof

FIG. 14. The Mach disk structural change over time [(a) shows the Mach disk diameter and, (b) shows the Mach disk displacement from the muzzle].

outside the barrel under the three launch conditions and the char-
acteristics of the interior ballistic parameters. pmax is the highest
pressure within the chamber, and v0 denotes the muzzle velocity.
As can be seen from Table I, the change of the initial gas curtain
has a minimal effect on the underwater interior ballistic process,
which explains the similarity of the muzzle injection pressures
under the three launch conditions. From Fig. 15, it can be observed
that the projectile’s velocity during its entry into the water is higher

21 June 2024 08:18:45

under launch conditions with a larger initial gas curtain. The tra-
jectory of the projectile outside the barrel can be categorized into
three distinct stages: the first stage is after the projectile leaves the
muzzle, during which it continues to accelerate due to the pushing
of the gunpowder gas and then slightly decelerates due to com-
pressing the front gas; the second stage is when the projectile is
close enough to the head of the gas curtain, and as it continues to
move, the pressure of the front gas increases further, causing it to
decelerate faster until it contacts the gas–liquid interface; the third
FIG. 15. The projectile’s velocity outside the muzzle vs displacement. stage is when the projectile reaches the head of the gas curtain and
contacts water, at which point its velocity drops sharply. Due to its
on the gas is diminished. As a result, the Mach disk moves in the oppo- relatively high velocity relative to the water, cavitation is continu-
ously induced on the projectile sidewall until a complete cavitation
site direction of the flow. The Mach disk’s displacement from the muz-
bubble forms, and then the projectile steadily decelerates. As can
zle exhibits a pattern of initial growth followed by subsequent decline
be seen from Fig. 15, a larger initial gas curtain can significantly
as time progresses.
reduce the resistance experienced by the projectile in the second
stage and increase its velocity during entry into the water.
C. Cavitation bubble evolution process After the projectile contacts the water, its velocity drops sharply
To clarify the evolution characteristics of cavitation during but still moves at a high speed relative to the water. The water on the
the projectile’s entry into the water under three launch conditions, sidewall of the projectile undergoes a phase change from a saturated
Fig. 15 and Table I provide the variation of the projectile’s velocity vapor pressure to induce a cavitation bubble. Figure 16 shows the
vapor phase nephograms of the projectile sidewall and streamline dia-
TABLE I. The characteristics of the interior ballistic parameters. grams at various time intervals following the projectile’s entry into the
water, considering the three varied launch conditions. As can be seen,
lgc (m) pmax (MPa) v0 (m s1) under the launch conditions with an initial gas curtain lengths of 1.0
and 1.2 m, as the projectile progresses, the cavitation bubbles gradually
1.0 299.57 703.93 increase in size until they completely surround the entire projectile.
1.1 299.41 704.37 Subsequently, due to the continuous inflow of gunpowder gas into
1.2 299.34 704.63 the low-pressure cavitation region, the size of the cavitation bubbles
is reduced, and the gunpowder gas and cavitation bubbles

Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584 36, 036128-11

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 16. The vapor phase nephograms and streamline diagrams: (a) lgc ¼ 1.0, (b) lgc ¼ 1.1, and (c) lgc ¼ 1.2 m.
simultaneously surround the projectile. The development of the
sidewall cavitation bubble generally shows a trend of growth-
attenuation-stability. However, the sidewall cavitation bubble shows a
growth-stability trend under the launch condition with a 1.1 m ini-
tial gas curtain. In this launch condition, combined with the gas–
liquid interface, it can be attributed that the “corridor” between the
gas curtain zone and the cavitation zone is significantly larger than
the other two, and the gunpowder gas is less compressed by the gas–
liquid interface during its entry into the cavitation region, resulting
in a weakened impact of the gunpowder gas on the cavitation bub-
bles. As indicated by the streamline diagram, when the gunpowder
gas flows toward the rear cavitation zone of the projectile under the
three launch conditions, a vortex ring is formed near the tail of the
projectile. The location where the vortex ring is formed moves
toward the bottom of the projectile as the initial gas curtain size
increases. Under the launch conditions with the initial gas curtain
lengths of 1.0 and 1.1 m, the vortex ring is in the gas curtain zone
and moves upstream. As for the launch condition with the initial gas
curtain lengths of 1.2 m, the vortex ring stays on the side of the cavi-
tation area near the channel.
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
21 June 2024 08:18:45
V. CONCLUSION
A two-dimensional multi-phase flow calculation model has been
established for the underwater gun using a gas-curtain launch to simu-
late the precursor jet flow field and gunpowder gas jet flow field, and
the feasibility of the numerical models and methods is verified. After
that, a comparative analysis was conducted on the precursor jet flow
field, the gunpowder gas jet flow field, and the evolution characteristics
of the cavitation bubble on the projectile sidewall after entering the
water under the launch conditions with initial gas curtain lengths of
1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 m. The main conclusions of this study can be drawn as
follows:
(a) As the evolution time of the initial gas curtain increases, the
larger the initial gas curtain size, the less significant the influ-
ence of the projectile motion and the gunpowder gas sprayed
through the annular orifice becomes on the expansion of the
gas curtain outside the barrel. Under the launch condition
with an initial gas curtain length of 1.0 m, the precursor jet
forms a double three-wave point structure. With the initial
gas curtain size increasing, the double three-wave point
36, 036128-12
 Physics of Fluids
structure of the precursor jet dissipates. Consequently, the
morphology of the precursor jet’s bottle-shaped shock waves
becomes similar to that of a typical under-expanded jet, with
the bottle-shaped shock waves elongating in the axial direc-
tion; the shock wave core region increases, but the Mach disk
diameter decreases.
(b) The initial gas curtain size has a negligible effect on the cham-
ber pressure, the muzzle velocity, and the muzzle injection
pressure. For the gunpowder gas jet, a larger initial gas curtain
means a smaller ambient pressure, which is beneficial to
improving the expansion degree of the gunpowder gas outside
the barrel. This ultimately results in a later formation time of
the bottle-shaped shock wave structure of the gunpowder gas
jet, a larger shock wave core region, and a weaker intensity of
the Mach disk. Under the launch conditions with initial gas
curtain lengths of 1.0 and 1.2 m, the phenomena of three-
wave point fusion and “shock wave fusion” occur within the
gunpowder gas jet’s bottle-shaped shock wave structure.
(c) After the projectile tail exits the muzzle, a larger initial gas
curtain improves the projectile’s speed upon entering the
water as its resistance is more minor. When the projectile
enters the water environment, a vortex ring will be generated
near the projectile tail, and as the initial gas curtain size
increases, the position of the vortex ring will be closer to the
projectile tail. Under the launch conditions with the initial gas
curtain lengths of 1.0 and 1.2 m, the size of the cavitation
bubble on the projectile sidewall evolves in a growth-attenua-
tion-stability trend. In comparison, it evolves in a growth-
stability trend under the launch condition with the initial gas
curtain length of 1.1 m.
AUTHOR DECLARATIONS
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
Author Contributions
Wenbin Bai: Data curation (equal); Investigation (equal); Writing –
original draft (equal). Yonggang Yu: Methodology (equal); Supervision
(equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Xinwei Zhang: Formal
analysis (equal); Funding acquisition (equal); Investigation (equal).
DATA AVAILABILITY
The data that support the findings of this study are available from
the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
1
Y. Gu, X. Chen, and J. Wang, “Research on the sealed launching technology of
underwater gun,” J. Phys. 2460(1), 012065 (2023).
2
D. Kong, C. Wang, and G. Liu, “Analysis of interior ballistic characteristics of
underwater gun and theoretical model’s establishment,” J. Ballist. 3, 56–60
(1998).
3
R. Hruschka, D. Klatt, and F. Leopold, “Different methods for density gradient
visualization within transient gun muzzle flow fields in comparison,” in 18th
International Symposium on Flow Visualization Zurich, Switzerland, 2018.
4
A. Moumen, B. Stirbu, J. Grossen, D. Laboureur, J. Gallant, and P. Hendrick,
“Particle image velocimetry for velocity measurement of muzzle flow: Detailed
experimental study,” Powder Technol. 405, 117509 (2022).
Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof
5
A. Moumen, J. Grossen, I. Ndindabahizi, J. Gallant, and P. Hendrick,
“Visualization and analysis of muzzle flow fields using the Background-
Oriented Schlieren technique,” J. Vis. 23(3), 409–423 (2020).
6
E. M. Schmidt, R. E. Gordnier, and K. S. Fansler, “Interaction of gun exhaust
flowfields,” AIAA J. 22(4), 516–517 (1984).
7
G. Klingenberg, “Investigation of combustion phenomena associated with the
flow of hot propellant gases. III: Experimental survey of the formation and
decay of muzzle flow fields and of pressure measurements,” Combust. Flame
29, 289–309 (1977).
8
C. Zhuo, F. Feng, and X. Wu, “Development process of muzzle flows including
a gun-launched missile,” Chin. J. Aeronaut. 28(2), 385–393 (2015).
9
Z. Li and H. Wang, “Analysis of ground distance effect on hypervelocity jet
flow and stability of projectile in half-space,” AIP Adv. 12(4), 045013 (2022).
10
A. Kumar R and V. Pathak, “Shock wave mitigation using zig-zag structures
and cylindrical obstructions,” Def. Technol. 17(6), 1840–1851 (2021).
11
L. A. Florio, “Effect of vent opening area and arrangement on gas flow field as
gas propelled cylinder exits a flow tube,” Meccanica 45(4), 475–501 (2010).
12
P. Li and X. Zhang, “Numerical research on adverse effect of muzzle flow
formed by muzzle brake considering secondary combustion,” Def. Technol.
17(4), 1178–1189 (2021).
13
Z. Sun, Q. Li, and P. Qu, “Numerical investigation of the influence of supersonic
flow on muzzle combustion,” Phys. Fluids 35(2), 025121 (2023).
14
Q. Qin and X. Zhang, “Numerical investigation on combustion in muzzle flows
using an inert gas labeling method,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 101, 91–103 (2016).
15
M. Zhou, L. Qian, C. Cao, G. Chen, J. Kong, and M. Tong, “Research on simula-
tion of gun muzzle flow field empowered by artificial intelligence,” Def.
Technol. 32, 196–208 (2024).
16
X. Zhang, Y. Hu, and Y. Yu, “Effect of starting conditions on the internal flow
field and interior ballistic performance of an underwater ventilated launch,”
J. Mar. Sci. Eng 11(8), 1525 (2023).
17
X. Xue, J. Zhang, and Y. Yu, “Muzzle flow field characteristics of underwater
21 June 2024 08:18:45
sealed launch system under different projectile shapes,” Ocean Eng. 285,
115409 (2023).
18
P. Konecny, D. V. Dao, H. V. Nguyen, and B. H. Le, “Interior ballistic of amphibi-
ous rifle when firing under water,” Adv. Mil. Technol 15(1), 137–148 (2020).
19
W. Liu, N. Li, C. Weng, X. Huang, and Y. Kang, “Bubble dynamics and pressure
field characteristics of underwater detonation gas jet generated by a detonation
tube,” Phys. Fluids 33(2), 023302 (2021).
20
C. Qi, X. Wang, and X. Lyu, “On the flow characteristics of two supercavitating
projectiles moving in water side-by-side,” Phys. Fluids 35(1), 017127 (2023).
21
J. Zhang, Y. Yu, and X. Zhang, “Numerical investigation of a muzzle multiphase
flow field using two underwater launch methods,” Def. Technol. 18(8),
1454–1469 (2022).
22
X. Zhang, Y. Yu, and X. Zhang, “Study on the characteristics of the transient
flow field under different underwater environments,” Phys. Fluids 35(9),
094118 (2023).
23
X. Zhang, S. Li, D. Yu, B. Yang, and N. Wang, “The evolution of interfaces for
underwater supersonic gas jets,” Water 12(2), 488 (2020).
24
C. Weiland and P. P. Vlachos, “Round gas jets submerged in water,” Int. J.
Multiphase Flow 48, 46–57 (2013).
25
A. Khan, N. U. Haq, I. R. Chughtai, A. Shah, and K. Sanaullah, “Experimental
investigations of the interface between steam and water two phase flows,” Int. J.
Heat Mass Transfer 73, 521–532 (2014).
26
Z. Hu and Y. Yu, “Study on three-dimensional expansion characteristics of
four wall combustion-gas jets in confined liquid space,” Acta Mech. Sin. 33(2),
341–355 (2017).
27
Z. Hu and Y. Yu, “Expansion characteristics of multiple wall jets in cylindrical
observation chamber,” Appl. Therm. Eng. 113, 1396–1409 (2017).
28
J. Zhao and Y. Yu, “Flow structure of conical distributed multiple gas jets
injected into a water chamber,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 31(4), 1683–1691 (2017).
29
L. Zhou and Y. Yu, “Study on interaction characteristics between multi gas jets
and water during the underwater launching process,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci.
83, 200–206 (2017).
30
L. Zhou and Y. Yu, “Study on the gas-curtain generation characteristics by the
multiple gas jets in a liquid-filled tube,” Appl. Ocean Res. 64, 249–257 (2017).
31
Y. Hu, Y. Yu, and X. Zhang, “Study on a new method for generating a gas cur-
tain in the gas-curtain launching,” AIP Adv. 12(2), 025101 (2022).
36, 036128-13
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE pubs.aip.org/aip/pof

32
C. Huang, K. Luo, J. Bai, Z. Wang, and B. Jiang, “Influence of liquid’s compressibility
on supercavitating flow,” J. Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ. 50(8), 1241–1245 (2016).
33
C. Mulbah, C. Kang, N. Mao, W. Zhang, A. R. Shaikh, and S. Teng, “A review
of VOF methods for simulating bubble dynamics,” Prog. Nucl. Energy 154,
104478 (2022).
34
M. Nezamirad, A. Yazdi, S. Amirahmadian, N. Sabetpour, and A. Hamedi,
“Utilization of Schnerr-Sauer cavitation model for simulation of cavitation
inception and super cavitation,” Int. J. Aerosp. Mech. Eng. 16(3), 31–35 (2022).
35
Y. Hu, Y. Yu, and X. Zhang, “Groove structure on the drainage characteristics
of the gas curtain,” Ocean Eng. 243, 110280 (2022).

21 June 2024 08:18:45

Phys. Fluids 36, 036128 (2024); doi: 10.1063/5.0196584 36, 036128-14

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing