Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

www.springerlink.com/content/1738-494x

DOI 10.1007/s12206-012-1223-8

Investigations on the exterior flow field and the efficiency of the muzzle brake
Huanhao Zhang, Zhihua Chen*, Xiaohai Jiang and Hongzhi Li
Key Laboratory of Transient Physics, Nanjing University of Science & Technology, Nanjing, 210094, China
(Manuscript Received March 20, 2012; Revised July 19, 2012; Accepted August 17, 2012)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstract
Numerical investigations of the projectile launch process with different muzzle brakes have been performed in a nearly realistic situation. Both two- and three-dimensional unsteady Euler equations are used as the governing equations. The hybrid Roe type scheme is
employed to solve the flow fields with strong blast waves, and structured dynamic mesh technique is used for describing projectile motion. Based on the numerical solutions, the flow structures of a bare muzzle, the three-way and multi-hole muzzle brakes have been described, respectively, which agree well with our previous experimental shadowgraphs. Moreover, the efficiency of the three-way muzzle
brake is calculated, which is also comparable to the corresponding experimental value. Our results showed that the numerical simulation
can be a useful and efficient way for the design of new muzzle brakes.
Keywords: Muzzle brake; Muzzle blast wave; Muzzle brake efficiency; Muzzle flow field; Numerical simulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Introduction
The muzzle flow field induced by a supersonic projectile is
very complicated, due to its association with the strong unsteadiness in the vicinity of the exit of the barrel. These kinds
of muzzle flows are usually characterized mainly by two blast
waves originating by two jet flows, and their interactions with
the projectile [1-3]. The first blast is caused by the precursor
shock wave ahead of the projectile, and then the shock wave
diffracts at the exit of the launch tube with an associated starting vortex. The second is developed due to the expansion of
high pressured propellant gas behind the projectile after leaving the muzzle. When the projectile catches up and travels
through the first unsteady jet flow, the unsteady load acting on
the projectile may influence its flight stability. At the same
time, a bow shock wave forms on the projectile as it moves
out of the precursor shock wave.
Usually, a heavy recoil load is created during firing; thus,
the muzzle brake is used to redirect the forward momentum of
the muzzle gases. After escaping the muzzle exit, the highpressure propellant gases reach sonic condition rapidly inside
the muzzle brake and translate internal energy into kinetic
energy. As the propellant gases impinge on the baffle brake, a
portion of the propellant gases is deflected to the main flow,
and travels through the side-hole generating a force with a
reverse direction to that of the recoil, thereby reducing the
*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 25 8430 3929, Fax.: +86 25 8431 5644
E-mail address: chenzh@mail.njust.edu.cn

Recommended by Associate Editor Simon Song

KSME & Springer 2013

recoil energy. However, the peak value of the overpressure

behind the muzzle would also be augmented at the same time,
which is harmful to the operational personnel. Hence, it is
important to investigate the flow field of a muzzle brake for
launching safety.
Many studies on muzzle blast flows have been performed
experimentally [4-7]. However, due to the restrictions of the
measuring methods, it is rather difficult to fully understand the
flow evolution of such a complicated phenomenon. The numerical simulation of the muzzle brake flow field is thus recognized as a highly effective alternative. However, numerical
investigations of the complex geometry of the projectile and
the muzzle brake are still difficult, and it needs to predigest the
computational model, such as ignoring the chemical reactions,
two-phase flow and the projectile shape [1, 8, 9], as well as the
moving of projectile [10, 11] etc.
Bin et al. [10] used a high-order dispersion preserving finite
difference method and four-level marching methods for capturing blast waves and examining the basic generation mechanism of acoustic waves from a muzzle. In their work, the
complicated shapes of both projectile and the muzzle brake
are ignored. The blast wave dynamics of the muzzle flow, the
physics and detailed mechanisms of the noise generation and
propagation are demonstrated in detail. To develop CFD modeling techniques and validate the CFD codes, Cler et al. [11]
employed two CFD codes, FLUENT and the Discontinuous
Galerkin Code methods (DGMs). In comparison with experimental shadowgraph data from a 7.62 mm rifle gun, the muzzle flow without the moving projectile was taken as the simulating example, the numerical precursor flow results matched

96

H. Zhang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

well with corresponding experimental shadowgraphs. Jiang et

al. [3] employed the AUSMDV scheme for solving the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) of Euler equations, and the
dynamic chimera grid technique was adopted for describing
the moving of the projectile. In their work, the projectile is
simplified as a cylinder and is initiated at the bottom of the
tube. The blast flow fields and wave dynamics processes are
discussed in detail.
For muzzle device investigations, Florio [12] employed
FLUENT to simulate the fundamental effects of the use of
general supplemental simple side-vent openings near the end
of the basic cylinder-flow tube, and found that a larger single
opening is more effective in reducing the flow pressure at the
tube end, while multiple openings are more conducive for
recoil force reducing. Chevaugeon et al. [13] applied DGMs
and mesh adaptation methods to present the possibility of
predicting shock strengths and blast overpressure of the blast
flows with perforated muzzle brake. Yang et al. [14] used a
uniform Cartesian mesh and an un-split MUSCL-Hancock
method of the Godunov type to calculate the muzzle flow field
mounted with a multi-element brake. In addition, to show the
possibility of performing high scale calculations on a usual PC,
Zibarov [15] applied a multi-purpose CFD package, a GasDynamics-Tool, to simulate four representative types of gas
dynamic processes, including the muzzle blast flow of a projectile flying away from the muzzle brake. The main characteristics of the muzzle brake flow field are also shown. To
attenuate the impulsive sound pressure of the muzzle equipped
with a baffle silencer, Kang et al. [16] performed both experimental and computational work to study the muzzle blast flow
field and recommended that the two parameters of baffle arrangement and location of the first baffle should mainly be
considered for designing gun silencers. Rehman et al. [17]
numerically investigated the muzzle flow field of a threebaffle silencer, and approximately 90% and 20 dB of sound
level was attenuated in comparison to the tank gun without
silencer.
To capture detailed structures of the blast flow field and the
efficiency of a muzzle brake, in this paper, the unsteady Euler
equations are solved with a combination of a hybrid Roe/HLL
scheme and the structured dynamic mesh. The real shape of
projectile launching from the breech was simulated. Our numerical results reveal the process of the complex muzzle flow
evolution under different muzzle brakes in detail. Furthermore,
the efficiency of a three-way muzzle brake is calculated based
on the numerical results.

2. Numerical method and physical model

2.1 Governing equations
Two-dimensional (2d), time-dependent symmetric compressible Euler equations are used as the governing equations:

U F G W
+
+
+
=0.
t x r
r

(1)

where the conserved variable vector U, and the flux vectors F,

G and W are given, respectively, as
T

U = , u , v, E ,
T

F = u , u 2 + p, uv, ( E + p ) u ,
T

G = v, uv, v 2 + p,( E + p )v ,
T

W = v, uv, v 2 ,( E + p )v .
u and v are the components of the fluid velocity in the x and y
direction, respectively. is the density, p the pressure, and E
the total energy per volume which is defined as,

E=

p
1
+ u 2 + v2 .
( r 1) 2

(2)

The parameter is the specific heat ratio (assumed to be

common for both reactants and products). The gun propellant
specific heat ratio is assumed as = 1.25. Ideal-gas equation
of state is defined as
p = RT .

(3)

R is the gas constant. Eqs. (1) to (3) constitute a closed system of equations.

2.2 Computational domain and methods

To simulate the launch process in a relative realistic condition, we chose the computational domain, the bullet geometry
and its interior ballistic parameters as shown in Fig. 1. The
computational domain is shown in Fig. 1(a). It consists of the
launch tube and the exterior flow field (C). The launch tube is
divided into a closed chamber (A) closed by the projectile and
an open chamber (B). Initially, the projectile is located inside
the launch tube near the bottom at l = 130 mm. The friction
between the projectile and the tube is assumed to be negligible.
The tube inner diameter, d = 20 mm, outer diameter, d1 = 30
mm, and its length, l1 = 733 mm. The length of the exterior
flow field is chosen as l2 = 40.0 d = 800 mm, and its width,
d2 = 40.0 d = 800 mm.
The Roe scheme has the advantage of high resolution for
capturing the shock waves and contact discontinuity. However,
for simulating the muzzle flow, the initial ratio of pressure
behind the projectile (domain A) to its front (domain B) is
limited to a critical value due to the carbuncle phenomenon.
Quirk [18] has developed a hybrid Roe type scheme with the
HLL scheme used in shock region while Roe scheme is used
elsewhere. This hybrid Roe-type method is constructed to
allow the reliable simulation of strong detonation phenomenon [19], which is employed herein to discretize the convec-

97

H. Zhang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

(a) Experimental shadowgraph

(a) Computational domain

(b) Computational shadowgraph

Fig. 2. Comparison of the wave structures near the muzzle for the
ejection of the precursor shock wave.

(b) Schematic of projectile geometry

(a) t = 0.87 ms

(b) t = 0.96 ms

(c) t = 1.476 ms

Fig. 3. Numerical schlieren images of muzzle flow field with the projectile flying away from the muzzle. (SW: Shock Wave)

(c) Distribution of initial velocity and pressure

Fig. 1. The computational model and the interior ballistic parameters.

tion terms. The time integration is carried out by the 2nd-order

Runge-Kutta method.
To simulate the motion of the projectile, the whole computational domain is divided into the dynamic mesh and the
fixed mesh domain by the sliding interface. The dynamic
mesh domain is located inside the flow tube and extends to the
axial end of the computational domain (Fig. 1(a)). Mesh deforming is induced due to the movement of the projectile. To
maintain the grid size limit on a specified range during the
simulation, layers of the grid are destroyed at the far end of the
dynamic mesh and generated at the closed end of the tube
with the application of linear interpolation. The structured grid
system is used and the corresponding base grid number of the
computational domain is chosen to be 167000 after the grid
convergence test. A schematic of projectile geometry is shown
in Fig. 1(b).
The free boundary condition is applied to the left, right and
upper boundaries of the region C, and the wall boundary condition is applied to the closed end and outer wall of the launch
tube, as well as the projectile surface. The inner wall of the
tube is assumed to be slip, whose velocity is equal to the projectile velocity. Before the ejection of the projectile, the
physical parameters behind it are based on the typical interior

ballistic computational results as shown in Fig. 1(c). During

the launch process, its bottom pressure decreases from 320
atm to 290 atm, and the axial velocity increases to about 800
m/s. The gas average density inside the tube is about 42.7
kg/m3.

3. Numerical results and discussion

3.1 The flow field of a bare muzzle
To demonstrate the high quality of the numerical results in
this study, the projectile launch process from a barrel without
muzzle brake is chosen to be the validation case. Fig. 2 shows
the comparison of our computational shadowgraph (Fig. 2(b))
with corresponding previous experimental result (Fig. 2(a)).
The typical Prandtl-Meyer expansion fans and Mach cones are
clearly shown both in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), and agree well and
clear with each other. Furthermore, the computational result
shows the major features of such supersonic shock wave
structures, e.g., Mach disk, jet boundary, barrel shock wave,
slip surface and vortex, etc.
Fig. 3 displays three numerical schlieren images of typical
muzzle blast flow fields with the supersonic projectile flying
away from the muzzle. The correlated experimental shadowgraphs are shown in Fig. 4. Based on the numerical results,
after the projectile flies out of the muzzle, the second blast
behind the projectile ejects out and expands rapidly into the
ambient region. It catches up with the projectile rapidly, and at
the same time a nearly vertical shock wave is generated at its
base (Fig. 3(a)). At t = 0.87 ms, the precursor flow is partly
engulfed by the propellant gas plume. The wave structure also
agrees well with the experimental shadowgraph (Fig. 4(a)).

98

H. Zhang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 4. Experimental shadowgraphs of muzzle flow field with projectile launch.

At t = 0.96 ms, the propellant gas (second jet flow) is still

inside the first jet flow region, (precursor SW), and its front is
distorted due to the interaction with the complicated flow behind the first jet (Fig. 3(b)). The shock wave at the base of the
projectile changes its shape from vertical to oblique (Fig. 3(b)),
and two triple-points or Mach reflections are formed due to
the interaction between the barrel shock and the oblique shock.
With the continuing expansion of the propellant gas, the effects of the second blast on the Mach disk weaken. The typical
muzzle flow structure consists of the Mach disk and barrel
shock wave (Fig. 4(c)). The propellant flow field exhibits the
structure of a free, underexpanded flow, and the barrel shock
wave develops and terminates in the triple-point from which
the reflected shock and Mach disk originates. On the other
hand, due to the high intensity of the propellant shock wave,
its Mach disk length and the expansion angle of jet boundaries
are larger than that of the first jet flow. The development
process of our computational jet flow agrees well with related
results in Ref. [20].
3.2 Muzzle flow field of the three-way muzzle brake
For practical applications, muzzle brakes are frequently
mounted to improve the recoil performance as well as to
lessen the blast and flash [21]. To understand the gasdynamics and the inherent mechanism of the moving blast
through the muzzle brake, numerical simulations were performed. Practically, the geometry of the muzzle brake is threedimensional (3d): however, for the 3d-simulation, due to the
limitation of the computational resources, only a very restricted domain can be simulated. On the other hand, we found
that the 2d-simulation can be performed in a large enough area,
and its numerical results can reveal the main flow characters.
Therefore, in the following, two different muzzle brake cases
are simulated two-dimensionally.
Fig. 5 shows the sequential numerical schlieren images of a
supersonic projectile flying away from the three-way muzzle
brake, and the corresponding experimental shadowgraphs are
shown in Fig. 6. The precursor blast ejects rapidly through
three holes of the muzzle brake, expands into the ambient
region, which generates three typical supersonic jet flows.
However, when the high-pressure, high-temperature propellant gases expand inside the muzzle brake, collisions and reflections occur between them, which intensifies the previous

(a) t = 0.90 ms

(b) t = 1.05 ms

(c) t = 1.24 ms

Fig. 5. Numerical schlieren images of muzzle flow field with the projectile flying away from the three-way muzzle brake. (SW: Shock
Wave)

(a)

(b)

Fig. 6. Experimental shadowgraphs of muzzle flow field with a threeway muzzle brake.

jet flow (Fig. 5(a)), and makes the flow structure of two side
holes more complicated. Although one portion of the propellant gases discharge from the side-holes, the velocity of propellant gases through the main central hole is still higher than
that of two side holes; therefore, its plume outside the brake is
the largest.
On the other hand, two triple points are formed due to the
interaction of the side blast waves with the main blast. The
blast wave shape is of an elliptic kind (Fig. 5(b)), which is
different from the circular shape of the blast without muzzle
devices (Fig. 3(b)). When the second blast almost catches up
with the first (located just in front of the projectile), its shape
appears to be a half-sphere (Fig. 5(b) and Fig. 6(b)). The
oblique shock wave is generated at the top of the projectile
after flying out of the two blast waves area (Fig. 5(c)). Our
numerical results are also comparable with corresponding
experimental results (Fig. 6).
3.3 Muzzle flow field of the multi-hole muzzle brake
Fig. 7 shows the sequential numerical schlieren images of
the flow field of a multi-hole muzzle brake. The corresponding experimental shadowgraphs are shown in Fig. 8. Although
there are multi-jet supersonic flows appearing, only the structure of the main central flow is typical. The wave structures of
the side flows are complicated and not clear due to the small
spaces and their interactions with the neighbor jets. On the
other hand, due to the larger inner diameter of the muzzle
brake than that of the barrel, after the projectile has left the

H. Zhang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

(a) t = 1.17 ms

(b) t = 1.38 ms

(c) t = 1.55 ms

Fig. 7. Numerical schlieren images of muzzle flow with the projectile

flying away from the multi-hole muzzle brake. (SW: Shock Wave)

(a)

99

(b)

(a) The computational model

(b) Half domain of the grid system

Fig. 8. Experimental shadowgraphs of muzzle flow field with a multihole muzzle brake.

Fig. 9. The computational model: (a) and half domain of the grid system; (b) of the three-way muzzle brake system.

barrel, one portion of the propellant gases will overtake the

projectile and eject out from the brake in front of the projectile,
which produces one more propellant blast as compared to the
usual two blasts as mentioned above and in the literature.
Therefore, the flow fields at the exit of the brake can be characterized with three blast waves (two propellant and one
precursor blasts, Fig. 7(a)). In addition, due to its large
strength, only the flow structures of the propellant jet SW in
front can be clearly seen (Figs. 7(b)-(c)). Also, our computational results are comparable with corresponding experimental
results (Fig. 8).
Based on the numerical results of the above shown three
cases, with the mounting of a muzzle brake, the momentum of
the flow is decreased due to the ejection of flow from the side
holes. Our results also show that the decreasing amount is
larger for the three-way muzzle brake than for the multi-hole
case. However, the blast overpressure area will be enlarged
with the ejecting of the side jet flows, which is harmful to the
safety of the operators and environment. In addition, the shock
wave structures of flow fields become complicated due to the
collision and reflection of blast waves inside the muzzle brake.
All of these undesired effects caused by the muzzle brakes
should be considered during the design.

ests, only the areas near three holes are computed. To save
computational time, the mesh size of the outer domain is chosen to be larger than that of the dynamic mesh domain. After
the grid convergence tests, the total mesh number is chosen to
be about two million.
As shown in Fig. 9(a), the barrel inner diameter is d = 37
mm, and its length, l1 = 2315 mm. The length of the projectile
is chosen to be 3.3 d; then, the projectile mass is of q = 0.7647
kg. The mass of propellant is assumed to be = 0.221 kg;
based on typical interior ballistic computations, the projectile
launch velocity is calculated to be 0 = 867 m/s.
To evaluate the usefulness of equivalent 2d-solution, both
2d- and 3d-simulations are conducted and their recoil histories
are shown in Fig. 10. The bottom force at the breech of the 2dsolution is obtained from the product of bottom area of the
circular launch tube and the recoil per unit area. From Fig. 10,
the bottom force is always negative. The collision of the propellant gases with the muzzle brake generates a large positive
force (muzzle brake force), which makes the total force positive immediately. For the 3d case (Fig. 10(b)), the muzzle
brake force vibrates resulting in the vibration of recoil. However, its vibration cannot be shown for the 2d-solution (Fig.
10(a)), but both recoil variation tendencies agree well with
each other.
Fig. 11 presents the comparison of the bottom (I0) and total
(In) impulse of both 2d and 3d cases. The impulse is defined as
the product of the force at time t and the corresponding time
step of numerical simulation. Our results show that both the
impulses of 2d- and 3d-cases acting on the barrel have almost
the same value, I0 = -169.0 Ns, In = 5.75 Ns.
Fig. 12 shows the force histories of the launch tube without
a muzzle brake. In comparison with the recoil history shown

3.4 Efficiency of the three-way muzzle brake

To obtain the influences of the three-way muzzle brake on
the recoil, the launch process of a projectile out of a largecaliber cannon with a three-way muzzle brake is simulated
three-dimensionally. Fig. 9 shows the computational model
and half domain of the grid system. However, due to the limitation of computational resources and the investigation inter-

100

H. Zhang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

The gas dynamic muzzle brake coefficient, T, is defined as

[20]:

T = 0.5 +

In
.
v0

(4)

Without a muzzle brake, , is given by:

= 0.5 +
(a) 2d-solution

I0

v0

(5)

Then the efficiency of the three-way muzzle brake, T, can

be obtained:

1 + T q
T = 1
1+

(b) 3d-solution
Fig. 10. Comparison of the recoil, bottom force and muzzle brake force
between: (a) 2d- and (b) 3d-solution.

(6)

Based on our numerical results, the calculated three-way

muzzle brake efficiency, T, is about 34.1%, and our corresponding experimental result is about 33%, which agree well
with each other.

4. Conclusions

Fig. 11. Comparison of the recoil impulse I0 and total impulse In of

both the (a) 2d- and (b) 3d-solution.

Based on Euler equations, the hybrid Roe type scheme and

the structured dynamic mesh technique are employed to investigate the generation and development processes of the complicated muzzle flow structures during launch. Three different
muzzle flow fields, the bare muzzle, the three-way and the
multi-hole muzzle brakes, were simulated, and their launch
processes were visualized numerically. For the three-way
muzzle brake, the flow structure of the central hole is similar
to the typical bare muzzle case, and the flow structures of its
two side-holes are comparable to the typical supersonic underexpanded jet flow. However, the flow field with a multi-hole
muzzle brake is different and can be characterized with three
blast waves and three jet flows compared to the usual two
blast waves and two jet flows. Our numerical results agree
well with the corresponding experimental results.
Based on the 2d- and 3d-solution of the launch process with
a three-way muzzle brake, the efficiency of the muzzle brake
is calculated to be 34.1%, which agrees well with the corresponding experimental result. Our studies show that the numerical calculation method can be used as guidance for future
muzzle brake design and development.

Fig. 12. Force histories of launch tube without muzzle brake.

Acknowledgment

in Fig. 10, the muzzle brake can reduce the magnitude of recoil and even make it positive at first. Therefore, it does improve the system performance.

This work supported by the Foundation of Key Laboratory

of Transient Physics (9140C300205110C30, 9140C30040809
03) and the National Natural Science foundation of China
(10902052).

H. Zhang et al. / Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 27 (1) (2013) 95~101

References
[1] R. Gopalapillaia, H. D. Kima, T. Setoguchib and S. Matsuo,
On the near-field aerodynamics of a projectile launched from
a ballistic range, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 21 (2007) 1129-1138.
[2] A. Merlen, Generalization of the muzzle wave similarity
rules, Shock Waves, 9 (1999) 341-352.
[3] X. Jiang, Z. Chen, B. Fan and H. Li, Numerical simulation
of blast flow fields induced by a high-speed projectile, Shock
Waves, 18 (2008) 205-212.
[4] T. Mizukaki, Detached shock waves around cylinders flying
at mach number ranging from 1 to 2, Journal of Visualization, 11 (2) (2008) 133-141.
[5] E. Schmidt, Secondary combustion in gas exhaust flows,
Proc. of ARBRL-TR-02373 (1981).
[6] G. S. Settles, T. P. Grumstrup, J. D. Miller, M. J. Hargather,
L. J. Dodson and J. A. Gatto, Full-scale high-speed edgerton retroreflective shadowgraphy of explosions and gunshots, Proc. of 5th Pacific Symposium on Flow Visualisation
and Image Processing, Australia (2005) 1-13.
[7] A. Merlen and A. Dyment, Similarity and asymptotic analysis for gun-firing aerodynamics, Journal of Fluid Mechanical, 225 (1991) 497-528.
[8] Z. Jiang, Wave dynamic processes induced by a supersonic
projectile discharging from a shock tube, Physics of Fluids,
15 (6) (2003) 1665-1675.
[9] A. B. Crowley and J. Szmelter, Computation of muzzle flow
fields using unstructured meshes, Proc. of 19th International
Symposium of Ballistics, Interlaken, Switzerland (2001) 265271.
[10] J. Bin, M. Kim and S. Lee, A numerical study on the generation of impulsive noise by complex flows discharging
from a muzzle, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 75 (2008) 964-991.
[11] D. L. Cler, N. Chevaugeon, M. S. Shephard and J. F.
Remacle, CFD application to gun muzzle bast - A validation
case study, Proc. of 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and
Exhibit, Reno, Nevada (2003) 1-20.
[12] 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) (2010) 475-502.
[13] N. Chevaugeon, J. Xin, P. Hu, X. Li, D. Cler, J. E. Flaherty
and M. S. Shephard, Discontinuous galerkin methods applied to shock and blast problems, Journal of Scientific
Computing, 22 (2005) 227-243.
[14] G. Yang, D. M. Causon and D. M. Ingram, Calculation of
compressible flows about complex moving geometries using

101

a three-dimensional cartesian cut cell method, International

Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 33 (2000) 11211151.
[15] A. V. Zibarov, Numerical simulation of intermediate ballistics for gun and rocket systems, Proc. of 19th International
Symposium of Ballistics, Interlaken, Switzerland (2001) 1-8.
[16] K. J. Kang, S. H. Ko and D. S. Lee, A study on impulsive
sound attenuation for a high-pressure blast flowfield, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 22 (2008) 190200.
[17] H. Rehman, S. H. Hwang, B. Fajar, H. Chung and H. Jeong,
Analysis and attenuation of impulsive sound pressure in
large caliber weapon during muzzle blast, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 25 (10) (2011) 2601-2606.
[18] J. J. Quirk, A contribution to the great Riemann solver
debate, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 18 (1994) 555-574.
[19] R. Deiterding, A parallel adaptive method for simulating
shock-induced combustion with detailed chemical kinetics in
complex domains, Computers and Structures, 87 (2009)
769-783.
[20] G. Klingenberg and J. M. Heimerl, Gun Muzzle Blast and
Flash, Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, SW, Washington (USA) 1992.
[21] L. W. Longdon, Textbook of Ballistics and Gunnery, Part
I: Basic Theory, Part II: Applications and Design, Her Majestys Stationery Office, London (1987).

Huanhao Zhang received her MSc

degree from the Key Laboratory of
Transient Physics, Nanjing University of
Science & Technology in 2009. Ms.
Zhang is in pursuit of her Ph.D at the
same university. Her research interests
include computational fluid dynamics of
supersonic flow and blast system.
Zhihua Chen received his two Ph.D
degrees from the New Jersey Institute of
Technology, USA in 2001, and Nanjing
University of Science & Technology,
China in 1997, respectively. Dr. Chen is
currently a Professor at the Key Laboratory of Transient Physics at Nanjing
University of Science & Technology in
Nanjing, China. His research interests include supersonic and
hypersonic flow, detonation and flow control.