Burst Height of Nuclear Weapons

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

Report wri ttexx
May 1954
-c i 6* *
B *
B: :
B B oe : 9:.
B 68
B
9*
:
B **
B
B
B
B+
B
B
*O
9*
B *
B *
9*
LOS ALAMOS SCI ENTI FI C
of the
LABOI WTORY
LA-1664
UNI VERSI TY OF CALI FOW@Ui 3~~CLY RELEASABLE
FSS- 1 6 Da t e : , 4 -/ # -# ? <
CIC- 1 4 Da t e : 2 -/ !-7 4
Chsi fi catfon changed to UNCI ,ASSI PI ED
by iilitb.ority of the cc S. 3.t7xni c!.l ncqv Cmnmi wi ~%
,.. ....Qf?. . .._&22@%@&@&
y +-6 d
...........,,. !.,..,,#,,.. m.#,. #.#,,, !,,, !!!!,, m,!!! .,!,m,,#!. *u
By REPORT LI BRARY
Thi s document consi sts of 140 pages,
9[ 3 -@
-JQ- copi es seri =~.
HEI GHT OF BURS OMI C BOMBS, 1954
aAI R .GH.i Rvl ?or%kz
h,b,;~~by k.W.
by
gS9 ,
F. B. Porzel
-Ad d 0 /<
Be:
B e
B *
B *
B m
Report di stri bute&JuN 23 *5
UNCLASSIR~
LA-1664
AEC Cl assi fi ed Techni cal Li brary
1-7
Uni versi ty of Cal i forni a Radi ati on Laboratory, Li ver more
8
Los Al amos Report Li brary
9-50
B
++
*O
cc
60
ABSTRACT
Thi s paper i s i ssued i n two vol umes: LA-1664 and LA-1665.
I n LA-1664, the fundamental properti es of a shock i n free ai r are descri bed, i ncl udi ng the rea-
sons for fai l ure of si mi l ari ty scal i ng. The resul ts of an anal yti c sol uti on for strong shocks are
presented, whi ch permi t a determi nati on of the energy i n a shock wave from i ts rate of growth wi th-
out recourse to si mi l ari ty assumpti ons; from i t the scal i ng l aws for both homogeneous and i nhomo-
geneous atmospheres are expl i ci tl y shown. The total energy i s eval uated i n a machi ne cal cul ati on
for the bl ast wave and from thi s eval uati on, the free ai r wave form for al l hydrodynami c vari abl es
i s presented. The general nature of the l aws governi ng thermal radi ati on from atomi c bombs i s de-
duced, a new fi gure of meri t for thermal radi ati on i s suggested to repl ace the concepts of thermal
energy and cri ti cal cal ori es, whi ch are consi dered ambi guous. Parti ti on of energy i s consi dered
negl i gi bl e i n most cases of i nterest; the waste heat concept i s reconsi dered and the fai l ures of
scal i ng to TNT are regarded pri mari l y as a fai l ure of the i deal gas l aw.
LA- 1665 i s concerned wi th preparati on of hei ght of burst curves. I n the refl ecti on process over
i deal surfaces, the usual subdi vi si on i nto regi ons of regul ar and Mach refl ecti on i s consi dered i n-
adequate, and the refl ecti on process i s subdi vi ded i nto fi ve zones: regul ar refl ecti on, transi ti on r e-
fl ecti on, l ow stem hei ght Mach refl ecti on, hi gh stem hei ght Mach refl ecti on, and hemi spheri cal re-
fl ecti on. On the basi s of these concepts, the refl ected stati c pressures and dynami c pressures are
deduced as a functi on of free ai r pressure and angl e of i nci dence, from whi ch the hei ght of burst
curve appl i cabl e to an i deal surface i s deduced and drawn.
A theory of surface effects i s postul ated i n two parts for reducti on i n peak pressure over real
surfaces. The fi rst i s categori zed as mechani cal effects, whi ch i ncl ude dust l oadi ng, surface vi s-
cosi ty and roughness, turbul ence, fl ow effects, shi el di ng, and ground shock. Based on these con-
cepts, the hei ght of burst curves whi ch are appl i cabl e i n the presence of mechani cal effects are de-
duced. The category of thermal effect i s postul ated i n two parts: the radi ati on from a bomb i s suf -
fi ci entl y strong and vi ol ent so that the ground surface may l i teral l y bl ow up pri or to shock arri val
B o B O
.O: B B
B *
B00:
. . : . ?.. :! . ! : ~NcLAsIFIED
hmu:: : :
B:: B * *
B 9*
B * . * 9
9* * m
B B 00 B
B 00 B0:000
~.: muibii
B *B *e B O* B:0 :00 B
B D
UNCLASSIFIED
9* * * ::
but at l east creates a l ayer of dusi & &r@e-l &e~~i Z akar the surface i n whi ch subsequent radi a-
ti on i s absorbed, thus formi ng a l ayer of hot ai r near the surface. The second part of the postul ate
i s that once such a l ayer i s formed, the hydrodynami cs of the wave enteri ng i t are vi ol entl y al tered
by mechani sms descri bed as strong precursor acti on and weak precursor acti on. Based on these
concepts, the thermal hei ght of burst curves are drawn for 1 kt and shown to be appropri ate over a
fai r range of scal i ng.
B B B B 9*
B :0
::
B * .: 4: .: ~ Be
;=; ;::
UNCLASSI FI E
B
B: : . 0:
. 9*
B eeee
9**B
UNCLASSIFIED
AUTHORS NOTE
The present paper suffers from a number of defi ci enci es whi ch the author wi shes to acknow-
l edge. These are due, i n part, to a l ack of ti me for preparati on because the author i s presentl y
transferri ng from the Los Al amos Sci enti fi c Laboratory.
I n some respects the paper i s too l ong. Many of i ts secti ons are more appropri atel y parts of
separate papers. For emphasi s, i t i s usual l y worthwhi l e to present onl y one new theory for a meth-
od of approach i n a si ngl e paper; the present paper probabl y contai ns too many.
No l i brary search has been made to check whether the materi al i n the present paper has been
publ i shed previ ousl y. The author wi shes to apol ogi ze i f any such oversi ghts have been made, be-
cause they are certai nl y uni ntenti onal . He has tri ed to exerci se extreme care i n what i s consi dered
common knowl edge and i n acknowl edgi ng the source of i nformati on when i t has come from someone
el se.
Much of the di scussi on i s sketchy and shoul d be carri ed to l ogi cal compl eti on. Even i n i ts pres-
ent l ength onl y the pri nci pal resul ts for many of the deri vati ons are gi ven. I f ti me and opportuni ty
permi t, the author i ntends to carry these projects to thei r l ogi cal compl eti on, but i t woul d requi re
at l east a man year of work, and coul d appropri atel y be parts of a dozen or mo~e papers.
The author has had the benefi t of excel l ent edi ti ng by members of hi s own group at Los Al amos,
and by Bergen R. Suydam of the Los Al amos Sci enti fi c Laboratory, but i t i s recogni zed that many
parts coul d be rewri tten. Despi te the defi ci enci es of the paper, i t i s bei ng i ssued at the present
ti me wi th the hope that the methods i t suggests and the approach to the probl ems may furni sh suffi -
ci ent food for thought to offset i ts defi ci enci es.
B 0 B * B B *
B0 B B B B*9
B a 2 B 9
09 . . . . .
:ii ;;
uNcLAssiF@
B Bm. :00 B e*
B * B B *D B
UNCI-ASSIFIED
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wi shes to thank the Commandi ng General and other members of AFSWP, Sandi a
Base, for thei r cooperati on i n the preparati on of the work. I n parti cul ar, Commander Carl A.
Schwei kert, USN, Major Thomas Carew, USA, Captai n Robert E. Babb, USAF, and Li eutenant
Graham D. Stewart, USN, parti ci pated di rectl y i n the preparati on of the deri ved curves from the
I BM Run.
The author wi shes al so to thank Major General Stanl ey Mi kkel sen, Commandi ng General , and
Col onel Jesse F. Thomas, Chi ef of Weapons Di vi si on, both of Ft. Bl i ss, Texas for thei r encourage-
ment. I n parti cul ar, Lt. Col onel Raymond I . Schni ttke, USA, and Corporal Joseph Bukowski spent
several weeks at Los Al amos assi sti ng di rectl y wi th the preparati on of the thermal hei ght of burst
curves.
The author wi shes to acknowl edge the assi stance and many useful comments i n di scussi ons
wi th Bergen R. Suydam of Los Al amos Sci enti fi c Laboratory, who was al so ki nd enough to read and
comment on parts of thi s paper.
B B e B B * B
B*9 B B :0
B e
6: B: : B,
::
B .0: B~o . . .: B *
UNCLASSI Fi Eb
B B 00
..e B** :
J :Omd:::
B m B . . B 00 B a. B ** B
B 9*
B : B 0 B0::
B m :0
B:
B *
B
B B: B
B O
:0 :0 B 0
! OLASS U
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
F
Page
CONTENTS
PART I . THE FREE-AI R CURVE
ABSTRACT . . . .
AUTHORS NOTE . . .
ACKNOWLEDGMENT . .
DEFI NI TI ONS . . . .
SYMBOLS . . . . .
FUNDAMENTAL LAWS . .
CHAPTER 1 I NTRODUCTI ON
1.1 Purpose . . .
1.2 Hi story of the Probl em
3
5
6
10
17
21
24
24
25
26
27
27
27
28
35
37
38
41
42
43
44
47
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.3 Present Approach to the Probl em
CHAPTER 2 THE SHOCK WAVE FROM A NUCLEAR EXPLOSI ON I N FREE AI R
Defi ni ti ons and Basi c Pri nci pl es . .
2.1.1 Statement of Probl em . . .
2.1
2.2
2.3
. . . . .
. . . . .
2.1.2 Shock Process Ranki ne - Hugoni ot Equati ons . . .
2.1.3 Hydrodynami c Rel ati onshi ps on the I nteri or of a Shock Wave .
2.1.4 Entropy Change Across the Shock Front . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
2.1.5 Si mi l ari ty Sol uti ons for Strong Shocks
Anal yti c Sol uti on for Strong Shock . .
2.2.1 Defi ni ti on of the Hydrodynami c Ki l oton
2.2.2 Vari abl e Gamma Theory. . .
2.2.3 Wave Forms Behi nd the Shock Front
2.2.4 Energy Expressi on for the Shock Wave
2.2.5 Scal i ng Laws . . . . .
I BM Machi ne Cal cul ati on of the Bl ast Wave
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
50
5 6
2.3.1 Ori gi nal Deri vati on . . .
2.3.2 Energy I ntegrati on of I BM Run .
2.3.3 Anal yti c Sol uti on on the I BM Run .
B * B * B *
5 6
5 7
5 9
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . .
. . .
. . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
B 9
B B9 *
B *
B
:0
B B e i B 00 B om 9*. B *
B B m. B ** B *. B 9.
B m .* .m.
2 . 4 Deri ved Curves for Free Ai r . . . . .
2.4.1 Vari abl es at the Shock Front . . . .
.
.
2 . 4 . 2 Hydrodynami c Vari abl es on the I nteri or of a Wave .
2.5 Thermal Radi ati on . . . . . . . .
2.5.1 Total Thermal Energy of the Bomb . . .
2.5.2 Bl ack Body Model for Thermal Radi ati on . .
2.5.3 Radi ati on i n Depth . . . . . . .
2.5.4 Absorpti on External to Sphere of Effecti ve Radi ati on
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
2.5.5 Effecti ve Thermal Radi ati on from Space and Ti me Dependence
2.5.6 Scal i ng Laws for Thermal Radi ati on . . . . .
2.6 Effi ci ency of a Nucl ear Expl osi on . . . . . . .
2.6.1 Waste Heat Concept . . . . . . . .
2.6.2 Effi ci ency wi th Respect to TNT . . . . . .
2.6.3 Parti ti on of Energy. . . . . . . . .
2.7 The Shock Front i n Free Ai r . . . . . . . .
2.7.1 Proofs for the Exi stence of a Sharp Shock . . . .
2.7.2 Possi bl e Perturbati on to Sharp Shocks . . . . .
APPENDI X A. SHOCK CONDI TI ONS FOR 1 KT I N FREE ~ . . .
PART I I . THEORY OF SURFACE EFFECTS (LA-1665)
TABLE
Tabl e I . Some Resul ts from the Anal yti c Sol uti on Appl i ed to I BM Probl em M
LI ST OF I LLUSTRATI ONS
CHAPTER 2 THE SHOCK WAVE FROM A NUCLEAR EXPLOSI ON I N FREE AI R
2.1.2a
2.1.2b
2.1.3-1
2.1.3-2
2.2.2-1
2.2.2-2
2.2.2-3
2.2.2-4
2.2.5-1
2.2.5-2
2.2.5-3
2.4.1-1
2.4.1-2
UIWASSIFIFn
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Process of a Shocki ng Up . . . . . . . . .
Defi ni ti ons for Deri vi ng the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot Equati ons . . . .
The Uni t Vol ume for Di fferenti al Conservati on of Mass . . . .
Ther-t Pl ot foreshock . . . . . . . . . .
Thermodynami c Properti es of Ai r Al ong the Hugoni ot . . . . .
Thermodynami c Properti es of Ai r Showi ng the Hugoni ot and I ts Branches .
I l l ustrates the Cross-over Poi nt Where Changes i n the Equati on of State
Compensate for Changes i n (W/PO) Scal i ng . . . . . .
Lateral Feedi ng of Energy Near Shock Front . . . . . .
Growth of a Shock Front i n an I nhomogeneous Medi um. . . . .
Free Ai r Peak Overpressure vs Di stance . . . . . . .
Peak Pressure Effi ci ency I BM at 11.5 kt Compared wi th Ki rkwood- . .
Bri nkl ey atl kt . . . . . . . . . . .
.e . .
B0:
B *
.! i .! i c
: :
B B0: B:0 B00 B:. B .
9
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Page
. 61
. 61
. 63
. 65
. 65
. 70
. 71
. 75
. 83
. 88
. 90
. 90
. 91
. 92
. 94
. 94
. 96
. 122
. 60
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
UNCLASSI FI E
-: 2: 9!
B0000:
B m*e.
bm.
B *. .
2.4.2-1
2.4.2-2
2.4.2-3
2.4.2-4
2.4.2-5
2.5.1-1
2.5.3-1
2.5.3-2
2.5.4-1
2.5.5-1
2.5.5-2
. . B 9.4 B
B B O
B :9**. ::
LI ST &I &USTti VI ONS <c&ti nued)
UIVCLASSIHED
I sobars i n Space-ti me . . . . . . .
Parti cl e Posi ti on i n Space-ti me . . . . .
Densi ty i n Space-ti me . . . . . . .
Materi al Vel oci ty i n Space-ti me . . . . .
Dynami c Pressure i n Space-ti me . . . .
Thermal Radi ati on Functi on vs Ti me . . . .
Qual i tati ve Presentati on of Thermal Yi el d vs Total Yi el d
Absorpti on Coeffi ci ent of Ai r vs Wave Length . .
. . . .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. .
Cl oud Chamber Effect on Total Thermal Radi ati on for Vari ous Humi di ti es .
Resi dual Heat from Space Dependence R2A T vs R . . . . .
Dependence of the Thermal Pul se Shape on Yi el d. . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Page
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
B B **a..*.
B
B
+
B 0 ii.;:.
B *
B
B
B0: B:0 B0 B:0 B 0
B 9* :00-00
B 0 B B B ** B
B 0 :0 9* B e* :Co B
B
B ***99 ::
IJNCLASSIFIED
i . DEFI NI TI ONS
A parti al l i st of defi ni ti ons used i n thi s paper i s gi ven bel ow, arranged accordi ng to subject
headi ngs. Those defi ni ti ons whi ch deal wi th the ori gi n of thermal radi ati on i n the bomb are i n-
cl uded under the headi ng of Free Ai r; those deal i ng wi th the effects of thermal radi ati on are un-
der the headi ng of Thermal Effects.
DAMAGE CRI TERI A
2
Dynami c Pressure: The quanti ty ~; i t has the di mensi ons of pressure.
Peak Overpressure: The maxi mum val ue of pressure above ambi ent behi nd the shock wave, i n
the absence of i sol ated, l ocal l y refl ecti ng surfaces.
Peak Pressure Damage Level : The damage occurri ng from a bl ast wave speci fi ed by the peak
overpressure of a free ai r wave form. I t i ncl udes the contri buti on to damage from dynami c pres-
sures, the thermal shock or precursor acti on. I t appl i es to objects i n whi ch the damage i s not seri -
ousl y affected by the durati on of the wave.
Total Pressure Head: The sum of the peak stati c overpressure pl us the dynami c pressure be-
hi nd the shock. As used i n thi s paper, the total pressure head characteri zes the peak pressure dam-
age l evel , but the peak pressure &mage l evel i s l abel ed by the peak stati c pressure al one.
FREE AI R
Absol ute Yi el d: An energy rel ease determi ned wi thout reference to scal i ng from other bombs.
Anal yti c Sol uti on: The eval uati on of the total hydrodynami c yi el d as deri ved by the author from
a measurement of the growth of the shock f rent, i ncl udi ng the fi rst and second deri vati ves of radi us
wi th respect to ti me, on an absol ute basi s, wi thout the assumpti ons of si mi l ari ty scal i ng.
Breakaway: The ti me duri ng whi ch the shock front ceases to be l umi nescent and becomes de-
tached from the fi rebal l . Thi s ti me marks the di vi si on between earl y and l ate fi rebal L I t i s cl ose
i n ti me, but not necessari l y i denti cal wi th the l i ght mi ni mum.
UNI ASSI FI E
B B +
B B0 :
~-: ~:. wmb
UNCLASSf j qED B * B 0B *CB: 0B 00B
B
B
B : B * B ~~
:
Earl y Fi rebal l : That peri cki %f.~e arowth d~ a ?@l ear expl osi on duri ng whi ch the shock front
i s l umi nescent, and i denti fi ed wi th the fi rebal l on a photographi c pl ate.
Effecti ve Thermal Radi ati on: The thermal energy radi ated from a hmb up to some arbi trary
ti me when i t i s no l onger effecti ve i n rai si ng the temperature of i rradi ated objects. Thi s term i s to
be di sti ngui shed from the term Thermal Yi el d, whi ch i s consi dered ambi guous.
Free Ai r Pressure: The pressures achi eved by an expl osi on burst i n the absence of any l arge
refl ecti ng medi um. Thi s i s to be di sti ngui shed from Free Stream pressures.
Free Steam Pressures: The pressures l ocal l y achi eved by an expl osi on whi ch may be burst
over a l arge refl ecti ng medi um such as the earths surface, but i n the absence of a l ocal l y refl ec-
ti ng structure. I t i s used to compare the enhancement of pressure of the l ocal structure wi th the
pressure i n the absence of thi s structure.
Hydrodynami c I nvari ants: These are deri ved rati os of the state vari abl es @ di mensi onl ess
form whi ch can be, hel d constant i n compari ng expl osi ons i n di fferent medi a, or yi el ds. One sel f-
consi stent scheme compri ses
Pressure P/P~
Densi ty
P/Po
Shock Vel oci ty u/co
Materi al Vel oci ty u/co
Sound Vel oci ty c/co
Temperature T/T.
()
Hydrodynami c Ki l oton: ~
#.
x 1019 ergs, or approxi matel y 1012 cal ori es.
Hydrodynami c Transport Vel oci ty: The sum of l ocal materi al vel oci ty PI US l ocal sound vel oci ty,
whi ch gi ves the vel oci ty of a si gnal i n a movi ng fl ui d.
Hydrodynami c Vari abl es: These refer to quanti ti es l i ke pressure, densi ty, temperature, mate-
ri al vel oci ty, sound vel oci ty, entropy, or other quanti ti es whi ch descri be the condi ti on of a movi ng
fl ui d.
Hydrodynami c Yi el d: The i ntegrated total of i nternal and ki neti c energy per uni t vol ume on the
-.
i nteri or of the shock. I n part, thi s concept i s i ntended to repl ace the concept of bl ast effi ci ency,
whi ch i s consi dered ambi guous. The hydrodynami c yi el d i s practi cal l y 100% of the total energy re-
l ease, when measured pri or to breakaway.
I deal Gas Law:
PV/T = constant.
The approxi mati on that the equati on of state of a gas may be represented by
UNCtAS$lI@
B B m.
B O B*O :
.{::=W9ilidb
Um[il,y?lvrn
B * B * B *B **B 9* B
9
B
@*
B .
::
: :
I nhomogenei ty Effects: l %e ~a~tu~ati ~o$i a ~k!st wave whi ch i s propagati ng i n non-uni form
ai r as a resul t of the l ocal l apse rate of temperature and pressure wi th al ti tude. I t i ncl udes re-
fracti on effects as wel l as di fferences i n scal i ng because of the l ocal ambi ent condi ti ons.
Late Fi rebal l : That peri od of the growth of a nucl ear expl osi on i n whi ch the shock front i s too
cool to be l umi nescent, and the vi si bl e fi rebal l i s wel l wi thi n the shock front.
Li ght Mi ni mum: The ti me near breakaway at whi ch the radi ati on rate from the fi rebal l reaches
a mi ni mum val ue; i t does not necessari l y exi st on al l bombs.
Mass Effect: The perturbati on on the growth of a shock front and the wave form behi nd i t due
to the fi ni te mass of bomb parts or adjacent materi al s other than ai r.
Parti ti on of Energy: The di vi si on of nucl ear energy from the bomb, from energy rel eased pri or
to breakaway, whi ch i s not l ater i nvol ved i n a conversi on from hydrodynami c to thermal energy or
vi ce versa. For most kembs fi red near the earths surface, thi s i nvol ves onl y a smal l fracti on of
the nucl ear yi el d, l ess than 1%, whi ch escapes the fi rebal l to l arge di stances pri or to breakaway.
By custom, nei ther the anal yti c sol uti on nor the radi ochemi cal yi el d i ncl udes the energy from fi s-
si on decay products or neutrons after breakaway. The defi ni ti on here i s to be careful l y di sti n-
gui shed from the usual concept of parti ti on of energy whi ch represents the si tuati on as i f the
bl ast yi el d, thermal yi el d, and resi dual nucl ear radi ati on were supposed to total 100% of the total
yi el d.
Radi ati ve Phase: The very earl y peri od of fi rebal l growth i n whi ch the energy at the edge of
the fi rebal l i s transmi tted by radi ati ve transport i nstead of hydrodynami c transport as i n shocks.
Radi ati ve Transport: The mechani sm by whi ch energy i s transferred by photons. I t i s di s-
ti ngui shed from hydrodynami c transport of energy associ ated wi th materi al and sound vel oci ti es.
Refracti on: The mechani sm by whi ch acousti c si gnal s travel al ong curved paths because of the
vari ati on i n sound vel oci ty i n the medi um.
Second Maxi mum: The ti me duri ng the l ate fi rebal l stage at whi ch the thermal radi ati on rate
from the fi rebal l reaches a maxi mum val ue. I t does not necessari l y exi st on al l bombs.
Shock Front Yi el d: A yi el d whi ch i s based on compari son by si mi l ari ty scal i ng from condi ti ons
at the Silock front al one. I t i s to be di sti ngui shed from the anal yti c sol uti on whi ch, i n pri nci pl e, de-
termi nes condi ti ons on the i nteri or from the growth of the shock front, wi thout assumi ng si mi l ari ty
of wave forms on the i nteri or.
Si mi l ari ty Scal i ng: The assumpti on that the hydrodynami c vari abl es can be expressed i n di men-
si onl ess uni ts i n such a way that i n a compari son between hmbs of two di fferent yi el ds, the same
B m B *
B*9 . .
B * B
:
::
9 *..
UNCLASSIFIED
:: ;; :s
B **
B *..*
B e.
B om.
B B
B B + B
.:::.iti
fHUCJ . ASSI H
c- so B B *O B om b
B m
: B *
::
val ues of hydrodynami c i nvari ~ fi l l $ccu~$$$i i s~;ces whi ch are proporti onal to (W/Po)Ys and-
at ti mes proporti onal to I /c. (W/Po)%.
Space Ti me I nvari ants: These are deri ved rati os of space and ti me whi ch are hel d constant i n
the scal i ng process to compare di fferent expl osi ons i n di fferent medi a. One sel f-consi stent scheme
states that the same val ues of hydrodynami c i nvari ants are achi eved at the same val ues of
space: R (Po/W)%
ti me: t co (Po/w)~
Strong Shock: A shock i n whi ch al l poi nts behi nd the shock front sati sfy the condi ti on that the
hydrodynami c transport vel oci ty i s greater than the shock vel oci ty, i .e., u + c > U. Thi s concept
repl aces the condi ti on someti mes demanded that ~ >> 1. As defi ned herei n, the strong shock regi on
extends down to approxi matel y 3 atmospheres peak overpressure.
Tayl or Si mi l ari ty: The condi ti on that, for suffi ci entl y strong shocks, the shock pressure i s i n-
versel y proporti onal to the cube of the di stance. The assumpti ons l eadi ng to thi s sol uti on are not
made i n thi s paper because the resul t i s shown to be onl y an approxi mati on.
Total Thermal Energy: The energy represented by ai r at temperatures above ambi ent l eft be-
hi nd the shock after a l ong ti me. The temperatures are due to i rreversi bl e changes occurri ng when
the shock passes over the ai r, and due to departures from the i deal gas l aw. Thi s term i s to be di s-
ti ngui shed from thermal yi el d, whi ch i s consi dered ambi guous. At a very l ate stage the total
thermal energy i s nearl y 100% of the total energy rel ease.
Vari abl e Gamma Theory: The system of hydrodynami cs based on the fundamental defi ni ti on of
gamma as E ~ = PV/y-1, where Em i s the i nternal energy per uni t mass, P i s the absol ute pres -
sure, and V i s the speci fi c vol ume.
Weak Shock: A shock i n whi ch some poi nt behi nd the shock front has a hydrodynami c transport
vel oci ty whi ch i s l ess than the shock vel oci ty, i .e., u + c c U.
I DEAL SURFACES
Hemi spheri cal Refl ecti on: The l ate phase i n the refl ecti on process when the Mach stem i s ef-
fecti vel y cl osed so that the wave forms at or near the surface can be descri bed by free ai r wave
forms wi th a refl ecti on factor whi ch i s constant i n space and ti me.
Hi gh Stem Hei ght Mach Refl ecti on: The phase i n the refl ecti on process fol l owi ng l ow stem
hei ght Mach refl ecti on, i n whi ch the Mach stem ri ses rapi dl y. The boundary between l ow stem
hei ght and hi gh stem hei ght Mach refl ecti on i s somewhat arbi trary. Hi gh stem hei ght Mach refl ec-
ti on represents the transi ti on between earl i er phases of the refl ecti on process i n whi ch the peak
B B be
::
.! i; :.
UI VCLASS/ F/ : : . .
i i : ! : &
:
B: :
B 009
B *
Bo:
B *.
B m
B 9*.
B B z
B m . . B B O* B ** B
B 0
B :000
::
pressure and wave forms are s~ng~ @mtr~e~by:c&di ti ons at or near the shock front, and the
l ate phase when the stem approaches a hemi sphere.
I deal Surface: A smooth, ri gi d, thermal l y refl ecti ng surface. I n practi ce, i t means any surface
approxi mated by these condi ti ons such as water, i n whi ch the thermal and mechani cal effects, as
defi ned l ater, are smal l .
Low Stem Hei ght -Mach Refl ecti on: The earl y phase of Mach refl ecti on fol l owi ng transi ti on
refl ecti on i n whi ch the growth of the Mach stem i s sl ow, and the tri pl e poi nt path remai ns essen-
ti al l y paral l el to the ground.
Pressure Mul ti pl i cati on: The rati o of the refl ected pressure to the free ai r pressure at the
same di stance and angl e from the bomb. I t i s to be di sti ngui shed from the refl ecti on factor.
Pri nci pl e of Least Possi bl e Pressures: The assumpUon i n thi s paper that i n a shock process,
the shock front and wave forms wi l l al ways achi eve that confi gurati on whi ch requi res the l east pres-
sure out of al l possi bl e confi gurati ons whi ch can sati sfy the boundary condi ti ons.
PR 0 Pl ot: A graph whi ch speci fi es the rel ati onshi p between refl ected pressures, i nci dent
pressures, and angl es of i nci dence, based on the fundamental assumpti on i n thi s and i n earl i er
papers that the refl ected pressure i s a functi on onl y of the i nci dent pressure and the angl e of i n-
ci dence, i f the yi el d and the type of surface are hel d constant.
Refl ecti on Factor: The rati o of the yi el d requi red to obtai n the same pressure i n free ai r at
the same di stance as the refl ected pressure obtai ned from the enhancement due to the refl ecti on
process i tsel f. The refl ecti on factor of 2 appl i es onl y duri ng hemi spheri cal refl ecti on. At other
ti mes, the refl ecti on factor may vary from 2 to 8 or, i n compl ex si tuati ons, go as hi gh as 27. The
refl ecti on factor i s uni quel y rel ated to the pressure mul ti pl i cati on but usual l y has a cl i ff erent nu -
meri cal val ue.
Regul ar Refl ecti on: The phase of the refl ecti on process i n whi ch the i nci dent and refl ected
shocks i ntersect at the ground surface accordi ng to the theory by J. von Neumann. As used i n thi s
paper, regul ar refl ecti on i s restri cted to that peri od i n whi ch the strength of the refl ected shock
and the refl ected angl e are uni quel y determi ned by the condi ti ons at the shock front wi thout bei ng
affected by past hi story of the shock.
Soni c Li ne: The l i ne of poi nts i n regul ar refl ecti on on a PR @ pl ot where the sum of materi al
and sound vel oci ty behi nd the shock become equal to the vel oci ty of the i ntersecti on of the refl ected
and i nci dent waves al ong the ground. I t i s to be di sti ngui shed from the customary end of regul ar
refl ecti on where regul ar refl ecti on sol uti ons become i magi nary. The soni c l i ne occurs shortl y
before thi s ti me and i n thi s paper i t del i neates the boundary between regul ar refl ecti on and tran-
si ti on refl ecti on.
B B B
B
++
+
+ 1~ ::
::. .
i :; :;*
B::
B ooe
B *
:**
B
B a
B B 00 .
B 9.*
B * B** :
-~::.~rn
u/VCIASSIRED
B * .*
B B:4 B 00 B
B B
B 000.
::
Transi ti on Refl ecti on: The ~~~sgl of $he r~fl q~ti ~ ~rocess fol l owi ng regul ar refl ecti on i n
whi ch the i nci dent and refl ected shock i ntersect at the ground, but the refl ected angl e and refl ected
shock depend upon the past hi story of the shock, and cannot be uni quel y determi ned from the i nci -
dent shock strength and the i nci dent angl e al one.
MECHANI CAL EFFECTS
Dust Loadi ng: The addi ti on of sol i ds (dust, smoke, etc.) to the ai r, when thei r mass per uni t
vol ume i s appreci abl e rel ati ve to the densi ty of ai r.
Dust Loadi ng Factor: The rati o of the sol i ds per uni t vol ume to the densi ty of ai r i n dust-l aden
ai r.
Fl ow Effects: The general category of pressure reducti on due to the fami l i ar Bernoul l i effect.
Mechani cal Surface: A real surface whi ch i s non-ri gi d, rough, and/or dusty but not producti ve
of a thermal l ayer.
Surface Vi scosi ty: The mechani sm
compari son wi th the vel oci ti es obtai ned
i nterest for damage. I t i s di sti ngui shed
enon of mol ecul ar di mensi on.
by whi ch the materi al vel oci ty near the ,ground i s sl owed i n
over an i deal surface i n a l ayer whose depth i s of practi cal
from the usual concept of gas vi scosi ty whi ch i s a phenom -
Turbul ence: The phenomenon i n whi ch the fl ow behi nd the shock i s vi ol entl y perturbed i n di rec-
ti on by the surface roughness, not i n conformi ty wi th the fl ow pattern demanded by the refl ecti on
process over an i deal surface.
THERMAL EFFECTS
Conducti on Coeffi ci ent: The val ue of the expressi on
&o
I t i s a property of the surface com-
posi ti on i n determi ni ng the surface temperature for a thi ck sl ab when exposed to thermal radi ati on.
The product of the conducti on coeffi ci ent and the thermal i ntensi ty gi ve the surface temperature at
a gi ven ti me. I t parti al l y repl aces the concept of a cri ti cal number of cal /cm2, whi ch i s usual l y
ambi guous i n determi ni ng the effect of thermal radi ati on on materi al s.
Maxi mum Thermal I ntensi ty: The maxi mum val ue of I (t). (See Thermal I ntensi ty).
Parti al Shock: A wave form i n whi ch the i ni ti al ri se i s fai rl y sharp and i s fol l owed by a
rounded-off peak due to the mai n shock; i t characteri zes weak precursor acti on.
Precursor: A marked change i n outward curvature of a mai n shock as a resul t of strong or
weak precursor acti on. I n practi ce, i t usual l y means the resul t of precursor acti on pl us the ther-
mal shock, i f any, together wi th thei r mutual rei nforcement.
UNCLASSI FI ED
B B >0
B * BO.:
.;~:. diii
UIVCLASS/RED
B B 0 9B * 9B O* .
B
B
B *
B *
:
::
Ri se Ti me: The peri od of ~hg#@ th~.i ~Ji a~o~se of the pressure to i ts maxi mum val ue be-
hi nd the wave. I n weak precursor acti on i t i s the i nterval between the ti me the shock front i s
rounded off and the ti me when i t reaches i ts maxi mum. I n strong precursor acti on, the ri se ti me
i ncl udes the enti re ti me l ength of the precursor, pl us whatever roundi ng occurs wi thi n the mai n
wave.
Sl ow Ri se: A wave form i n whi ch the pressure ri ses gradual l y from ambi ent; i t characteri zes
strong precursor acti on,
Strong Precursor Acti on: The perturbati on occurri ng i n a shock wave i n ,a regi on i n whi ch the
ambi ent sound vel oci ty at or near a surface exceeds the projecti on of the shock vel oci ty on the
ground. I t i s marked by a sl ow ri se i n pressure, separated by an appreci abl e di stance i n ti me and
space from the mai n wave.
Thermal Bl ow-Up: The postul ate i n thi s paper that the thermal radi ati on ,from a bomb i s suffi -
ci entl y vi ol ent to generate a dust or smoke-l aden l ayer of ai r near ground surface.
Thermal I ntensi ty: An i ntegral quanti ty whi ch expresses the effect of the bomb i n produci ng a
ri se i n surface temperatures. I t i s defi ned by I (t) = ~C [(~) ] dT /=t. I t repl aces the usual con-
cept of thermal yi el d whi ch i s consi dered ambi guous for determi nati on of surface temperatures.
Thermal Shock: A thermal bl ow-up of suffi ci ent vi ol ence that a fi ni te pressure pul se coul d be
observed as a resul t of the i mpact of thermal radi ati on.
Thermal Surface: A real surface whi ch absorbs thermal radi ati on from the bomb but mi ght
otherwi se be smooth and ri gi d so that the mechani cal effects woul d be at a mi ni mum.
Thermal Threshol d: The postul ate i n thi s paper that the surface bl ow-up may not occur unti l
a cri ti cal temperature i s reached. I t usual l y means a temperature at whi ch the surface begi ns to
decompose i n such a way as to gi ve a marked ri se i n the vol ume of the decomposi ti on products.
Weak Precursor Acti on: The perturbati on i n a shock wave whi ch occurs i n a thermal l ayer i n
whi ch the sound vel oci ty i n the l ayer i s above ambi ent but l ess than the shock vel oci ty or i ts proj -
ecti on al ong the ground. I t i s marked by a parti al shock front fol l owed by a roundi ng off of the peak
pressure spi ke.
B B
B0 B B
::
.: ly ::
8 *.*
; L; :k
UNOLASSIFIED
B: :
B
B0:
B eDO
B . * e
B O
. m. .
B
*+ <++ Mailii
B 9* B=* B om B
...
B
b B 9*
B
::
:
B:
B 0
B B 9 :
B**
:0 :0 l,lrIlCL4SSlFW,)
i i . SYMBOLS
a The thermal absorpti vi ty of a surface. I n thi s paper i t i s meant to be the average over al l
wave l engths, and i ntegrated over the normal components of al l radi ati on wi thi n 90 of the
normal to the surface.
A - Someti mes used as the i nci dent angl e of a shot.
b Stefan-Bol tzmann constant.
B Someti mes used as the refl ected angl e of a shock.
c Local sound vel oci ty.
PO, po,TO, CO The quanti ti es pressure, densi ty, temperature, and sound vel oci tY, respecti vel y,
i n the medi um ahead of a shock.
P*, T*, U*, CO*, etc. The superscri pt denotes the hydrodynami c vari abl es i n a
Ps, PS, CS, etc.
The subscri pt refers to the peak val ue i mmedi atel y behi nd the
wave form.
Cp Speci fi c heat at constant pressure.
c speci fi c heat at constant vol ume.
d Thi ckness of a thermal l ayer.
Ei I nternal energy.
Ek - Ki neti c energy.
Em I nternal energy per uni t mass.
Ev I nternal energy per uni t vol ume.
thermal l ayer.
shock i n an i deal
f A general symbol reserved for an arbi trary functi on of several vari abl es denoted as f (xl ,
)
X2, . . . .
g
The uni versal gravi ty constant.
h Speci fi c heat.
i A runni ng i ndex.
I
I (t) The thermal i ntensi ty (see defi ni ti on).
UN( l ASSI FI E
I
k
m
n
P
PD
Pf
Pm
R
P~
th
i
Q(t)
QN
r
R
s
t
T
Tc
TO
TR
u
u
U*
v
B 9 **...* B
:; Nlmm
UNCLASSFUTJ
9*B *OB 00 B O* :00
B B B B9*
B 0 9-O*
The descri pti on of a paraa&te~ w$ch ~~qi b~~ke pressure behi nd a shock front of a
strong shock i n whi ch 1 k represents the rati o of the l i mi ti ng val ue of the absol ute pres-
sure on the i nteri or of the wave to the peak pressure at the shock front.
The approxi mati on that the path of the mass parti cl es behi nd the shock front may be de-
dl nr
scri bed i n the form that r - tm. I t i s ri gorousl y defi ned by m = ~.
The coeffi ci ent whi ch approxi mates the rate of growth of the shock coordi nate R and the
ti me t, as R N
dl n R
tn. I t i s ri gorousl y defi ned by n = ~.
An absol ute pressure.
12
Dynami c pressure = ~ pu .
The peak overpressure behi nd an i nci dent shock, or free ai r shock.
The refl ected peak overpressure over a mechani cal surface.
The refl ected peak overpressure behi nd the shock, P Po.
The subscri pt refers to the peak val ue i mmedi atel y behi nd the shock i n an i deal wave form.
The refl ected peak overpressure over a thermal surface.
The coeffi ci ent i n the power l aw whi ch approxi mates the densi ty di stri buti on behi nd the
()
rq
strong shock: p = p ~ ~ .
Total thermal radi ati on i nci dent on a surface up to ti me t.
Arbi trary val ue of cal ori es used to normal i ze the thermal i ntensi ty. I t shoul d not be con-
fused wi th the total i ntegrated cal /cm2.
The space coordi mte of a parti cl e behi nd the shock.
\
The radi us of a shock front.
Entropy.
Ti me.
Temperature.
Temperature of a surface, consi deri ng conducti on process al one.
Temperature i n the medi um ahead of a shock.
Temperature of a surface exposed to thermal radi ati on i n whi ch the phenomenon of re - .
radi ati on has been taken i nto account.
Local materi al vel oci ty.
Shock vel oci ty.
Shock vel oci ty i n a thermal l ayer.
Speci fi c vol ume.
B mB 9O
B: B B
B 9
B9 *: :
.$8; :
B * *O--9 B
J*:au
UNOMSSIFSIEb
B 9***
B:: BO: B **
B eb*m B 9* B
v~
Vf
V8
w
Y
B B ****O* B
2::.amB:.
B 0 B O* B OO B:0 :00 B
B a
B O ::
An ambi ent speci fi c vol ume;: .: : :. ~1 ~.s
:
IJNOLASSIHED
The speci fi c vol ume of a gram of ai r i ni ti al l y shocked, but now returned to ambi ent pres-
sure.
The speci fi c vol ume di rectl y behi nd the shock.
Hydrodynami c yi el d.
Thermal yi el d.
GREEK SYMEOLS
Someti mes used as an angl e of i nci dence; corresponds to 8 or A.
Defi ned here by E ~ = PV/(y 1); to be di sti ngui shed from the customary defi ni ti on of
y = cp/q.
General functi on denoti ng an i ncrement.
l /(y 1).
l /(yo - 1) = 2.5.
The average val ue of ~ on ti e i nteri or of a shock wave, defi ned by
,- folume [e+
J
PdV
volume
The densi ty rati o across the shock, gi ven by p/po.

The angl e between an i nci dent shock and the ground.
The angl e between a refl ected shock and the ground.
Absorpti on coeffi ci ent for thermal radi ati on. I n thi s paper i t means the average overal l
wave l engths.
y+l
~1
A frequency, usual l y of l i ght.
The rati o of absol ute pressure to the ambi ent pressure
P/Po.
The rati o of absol ute pressures at the shock front.
The pressure rati o across the refl ected shock.
The i nci dent shock pressure rati o.
The pressure rati o across the refl ected shock.
just i n front of the shock, i .e.,
9* -O....
B: B B
B 0 B
B00:.
& : :.
B * B
B B0: B:O B 00 B:e B 0
UNCI ASSI FI Eb
9* t oeB * 8B:0 :00 B
B *
P
B *O* ::
Densi ty.
B : B *
B: B *
UNCLASSI FI ED
B B: : : 0: *B
Po
Densi ty i n the medi um ahead of a shock.
PB
Densi ty at the shock front.
u Thermal conducti vi ty.
T A dummy vari abl e for ti me.
~(t) The normal i zed val ue of I (t).
?J5
Equal s $.
dQ/dt The rate of energy transport due to thermal radi ati on. I n practi ce i t refers to the average
val ue from the normal component of al l angl es of i nci dence i ntegrated over the enti re
spectrum of wave l engths.
B B
B 9..
B 0 .~o:- ::
::00
i ii&
B *B **B ** B
UNO1- ASSI FI I
99 B * B C B:0 :00 B
B : B 0 B O ::
. B 90
B 9* i,
B 99 : B 0 B * B
UNCLASSIHEP
i i i . FUNDAMENTAL LAWS
Thi s paper i s based on the devel opment of certai n wel l known physi cal l aws whi ch are part of
the standard l i terature. The symbol s are defi ned i n the previ ous secti on.
Adi abati c Law: A resul t of the pri nci pl e of conservati on of energy from the fi rst l aw of thermo -
dynami cs. When gamma i s constant i t can be expressed i n the form:
P = py const.
Conti nui ty of Mass: A fundamental l aw of hydrodynami cs whi ch demands that there be no
source or si nk of mass wi thi n the bl ast wave. I t i s gi ven by the condi ti on that:
:+di v(pu)=o
For a pl ane wave thi s reduces to:
U:+g+p:=o
Conservati on of Momentum: A fundamental l aw of hydrodynami cs whi ch i s essenti al l y the ex-
pressi on of Newtons l aw:
()
~radp+~@=o
/) dt
Conservati on of Energy: A fundamental l aw of hydrodynami cs whi ch demands that there be no
source or si nk of energy wi thtn the bl ast wave at the ti me i t i s consi dered. I n i ts most si mpl e form,
i t i s gi ven by the fi rst l aw of thermodynami cs:
dq = dEi + PdV
I n practi ce, i t i s expressed by the condi ti on that:
8 s +8 8 =0
W at
B B B B
9*O
B
B *
B *
B **,
UNCMSSI FI Eb
: i i i k
B: : B ** B *
B eOe* B ee9
9
::
B:
B a
**
B
B
B:
UNCLASSIFIED
--
Conservati on of Mass - Ranki ne~HU~o~t C~n~Uo~, ~ speci al form of the conti nui ty of mass
whi ch demands that across a shock movi ng i nto sti l l ai r
p))u= p(u u)
Conservati on of Momentum Ranki ne-Hugoni ot Condi ti on: A deri ved l aw whi ch demands that
across a shock movi ng i nto sti l l ai r
(P - PJ = p@l u
Conservati on of Energy Ranki ne-Hugoni ot Condi ti on: A speci al case of the conservati on of
energy whi ch demands that across a shock:
;(P+Po)(vo -v)= fi -*)
Conducti on or Di ffusi on Equati on:
ture wi thi n a substance i s gi ven by:
KV2T+$8==0
The general l aw that the space-ti me vari ati on of tempera-
For a thi ck sl ab of i nfi ni te extent i n whi ch the depth
duces to:
I nverse R2-cosi ne Law: A l aw whi ch expresses
Q (R) w (COS 19/R2) e- constat ti me R
i nto the surface i s expressed by x, thi s l aw re-
the thermal i ntensi ty from a poi nt source as
The Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti ons across the shock uni quel y determi ne the rel ati onshi p between the
peak hydrodynami c vari abl es behi nd the shock when speci fi ed by one of the hydrodynami c vari abl es.
These rel ati onshi ps are exceedi ngl y useful and for conveni ence are tabul ated as fol l ows:
Densi ty Compressi on Rati o:
~g+l
T=-
Shock Vel oci ty:
Materi al Vel oci ty:
Jco=m
5(g I )[g@ 1) 5]
7(p.tj + 1)
I
:0
B *
B:
Sb
B
B
B
B+
B
Sound Vel oci tv:
UNI OLASSI FI EU
Temperature:
T/TO = ~
Excess Energy per Uni t
Vol ume at Shock: Ev = P~[(VO/V) 1] = POE (q 1)
Stefan-Bol tzmann Law: Law gi vi ng the rate of radi ati on from a bl ack body as
dQ/dt = bT4
UNCLASSI Fl @
B
99. . a -
-
O*;-=*
:: . . .
::ww~
:.B B B em B . * B
B
9
BC:.::
B:
:
B
B
B0:0 :
..:.
-
::
-----
uNCLASSi f l
Chapter 1
I NTRODUCTI ON
1.1 PURPOSE
The pri mary purpose of thi s paper i s to provi de, as a functi on of hei ght of burst and hori zontal
di stance, reasonabl e esti mates for the pattern of stati c and dynami c pressures achi eved from a nu-
cl ear expl osi on burst over both i deal and real surfaces.
The paper has a number of secondary purposes. The fi rst of these i s broad: to defi ne the
probl ems connected wi th hei ght of burst for atomi c bombs, and to suggest methods for thei r sol u-
ti on by actual l y carryi ng the probl em from fundamental pri nci pl es through reasonabl e compl eti on.
Another purpose i s to suggest a number of new theori es. A pri nci pal one i s the theory of sur -
face effects, whi ch refers to the reducti on i n peak pressure due to effects over real surfaces,
categori zed as mechani cal and thermal effects. To defi ne the free ai r curve resul ts of an anal -
yti c sol uti on for strong shocks i s presented. The probl em of thermal radi ati on from an atomi c
bomb i s consi dered i n some detai l and thi s suggests marked revi si ons of previ ous concepts. The
refl ecti on process over i deal surfaces i s descri bed i n a di fferent fashi on. Fi nal l y, certai n phenom-
ena associ ated wi th nucl ear expl osi ons are expl ai ned. These studi es are by no means compl ete, but
at l east show separate parts of the whol e probl em.
From the poi nt of vi ew of securi ty cl assi fi cati on, a requi rement seems to exi st for a study to
del i neate between the types of i nformati on whi ch must be consi dered as Restri cted Data, and the
type whi ch can be consi dered common knowl edge, si nce they can be readi l y deduced from funda-
mental pri nci pl es. Another secondary purpose of thi s paper i s to show the great extent to whi ch
the phenomenol ogy from nucl ear expl osi ons may be deduced i n quanti tati ve detai l wi thout recourse
to Restri cted Data, and the extent to whi ch i nformati on affecti ng the securi ty of the Uni ted States
may be deduced from apparentl y tri vi al scattered i nformati on concerni ng actual tests.
UNCIASSIFIEb
:0
B 0
B :
B
B O
B
B +
9*. . B
B *
B** B
:e:
B
*
B o
B
B
:o. :~
B ::
UNCLASSI FI ED
.
I n order to provi de reasonabl y r%l i ~bl e ~ata ~or:pur~%es of Ci vi l Defense, i t i s cl ear that Re-
stri cted Data from real bombs shoul d not general l y be rel eased. Thi s paper provi des &ta enti rel y
from non-cl assi fi ed sources. I t i s the authors hope that the paper wi l l sati sfy a need for fai rl y
real i sti c, but uncl assi fi ed materi al .
1.2 HI STORY OF THE PROBLEM
Duri ng Worl d War I I , and even pri or to the devel opment of the atomi c bomb, an i mmense
amount of work had been done on bl ast from smal l charges by many i nvesti gators. J. von Neumannl
poi nted out the fundamental fact that the peak pressure coul d be enhanced by rai si ng the hei ght of
burst, and he provi ded the theory of regul ar refl ecti on to descri be part of the proces% Cal cul ati ons
for regul ar refl ecti on were carri ed out i n detai l by Pol achek and Seeger. 2 Taubg and Smi th corre-
l ated the theory of regul ar refl ecti on wi th resul ts from smal l -charge and shock-tube tests, and i n-
ve sti gated Mach refl ecti on to provi de the pattern of refl ected pressures on the ground from smal l
charges over an i deal surface. Perti nent data were al so obtai ned by Hal vorsen5 and Kennedyc i n
the regi on above the ground and over di fferent surfaces.
Many of these resul ts are contai ned i n Summary Techni cal Report, OSRD-Di v. 2. Duri ng the
past few years, Bl eakney has made fundamental contri buti ons; he provi ded perhaps the f i rst sati s-
factory empi ri cal free-ai r curve for smal l charges; and l ater conducted a l arge number of shock-
tube studi es whi ch are basi c to the understandi ng of bl ast phenomena.
Thi s paper i s an extensi on and revi si on of a number of previ ous papers by the author, dati ng
from 1949, and many of the contents have been hi therto unpubl i shed. Very acti ve work on the the-
or y of surface effects was pursued by the author from the summer of 1951 through the summer and
fal l of 1952. At that ti me pol i cy changes at the Los Al amos Sci enti fi c Laboratory no l onger per-
mi tted pri mary i nterest i n thi s fi el d, and si nce then the work has proceeded on a part-ti me basi s.
The pri nci pal parts of the theory of surface effects date from the summer of 1951. The theory of
vari abl e gamma and the anal yti c sol uti on date from 1950; the detai l ed use of the anal yti c sol uti on
and appl i cati on to I BM probl em M was done duri ng the fal l of 1952 and up to the spri ng of 1953.
The theory concerni ng thermal radi ati on was done pri nci pal l y duri ng the same peri od, al though
parts of i t i n i ts present defi ni te form were done as l ate as the fal l of 1953.
Thi s paper i s a l qgi ca.1 extensi on of a previ ous paper, LA-1406, Hei ght of Burst for Atomi c
Bombs, whi ch was compl eted i n March 1952 but was i ssued onl y recentl y. An authors note i n that
paper contai ns a compari son wi th the present paper.
25 , B - .O
B *O
B :
B .*
B
B s :
UNCLASSI FI ED
B
. ** . *
@l -
. B
8*
. *
B . O: B
B0: :
B * B B*
B
. **
B. **.
:0
B 000.
:: iiiiilw~;
B
B m.
:OO.
::
B:..:
UNCLASSI UEP
: :
1.3 PRESENT APPROACH TO THE ;R;BL~M B
The present paper may be consi dered enti rel y theoreti cal , and the reason deserves some am-
pl i fi cati on. No use i s made nor reference gi ven to ei ther ful l -scal e or smal l -charge tests i n the
preparati on of the theory and resul ts for thi s paper. I BM probl em M suppl i es the bul k of the detai l s
for the free ai r wave forms but thi s was deduced from stratghfforward hydrodynami c pri nci pl es.
The reason for the theoreti cal approach i s partl y for securi ty reasons as menti oned above,
but there i s a stronger reason i n that i t di vorces the resul ts from subsequent changes and re-
vi si ons i n the data as they occur. The theoreti cal approach has a number of other advantages. I f
one professes to know and understand the phenomena, i t ought to be possi bl e to carry i t through
compl eti on wi thout recourse to data, and the theoreti cal approach i s useful i n forci ng one to defi ne
al l the probl ems whi ch exi st. Understandi ng i s al so cl earer i f no recourse i s made to the semi -
empi ri cal approach of peggi ng the theory to the data; once empi ri cal data are used, i t becomes ex-
tremel y di ffi cul t to separate the ri ghtness or wrongness of the data from the ri ghtness or wrong-
ness of the theory. The theory descri bes the rul es whi ch ought to appl y i n al l cases, especi al l y the
abi l i ty to extrapol ate to new si tuati ons. One does not ask i f the data fi t the theory, but, ful l y ex-
pecti ng that the data wi l l depart from the theory, he fi nds the most i nteresti ng aspect to be the
magni tude of the di screpanci es whi ch do occur, because thei r magni tude then furni shes frui tful
suggesti ons for further work.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
J. von Neumam, Obl i que Refl ecti on of Shocks, AM-251, Expl osi ves Research Report No. 12,
Navy Department, Washi ngton, D. C.
H. Pol achek and R. J. Seeger, Regul ar Refl ecti on of Shocks i n I deal Gases, February 12,1944,
Expl osi ves Res. Report No. 13, Navy Department, Bu. Oral ., Washi ngton, D. C.
A. H. Taub, Peak Pressure Dependence on Hei ght of Detonati on, NDRC Di v. 2 I nteri m Report
No. 1, OSRC-A-4076. See al so OSRC-6660.
L. G. Smi th, The Refl ecti on of Shock Waves i n Ai r, Ai r and Earth
August 1944, NDRC, Di v. 2, OSRC-4076.
R. R. Hal vorsen, The Effect of Ai r Burst on the Bl ast from Bombs
of Experi mental Resul ts, OSRD-4899.
.
Shock, I nteri m Report No. 1,
and Charges. I L Anal ysi s
W. D. Kemedy, The Effect of Ai r Burst on the Bl ast from Bomb and Smal l Charges. I . Experi -
mental Resul ts, OSRD-4246, September 1944.
B*26. : : :
9; B
00 :
B
B
~
B *
UNCi wASSI FI Eb
B B*
. 0
. 0: . *
, **:
0: :
9
. 0.9** B .. B
. *8*
9* B *. B ba B ** B ** B
e B *
B : So B m ::
B :
B:
B 9
B B
B
B *
B: B :0 B * SO
Chapter 2
THE SHOCK WAVE FROM A NUCLEAR EXPLOSI ON I N FREE AI R
2.1 DEFI NI TI ONS AND BASI C PRI NCI PLES
2.1.1 Statement of Probl em.
The purpose of thi s chapter i s to deri ve and descri be the nature of a shock wave from a nu-
cl ear expl osi on i n free ai r usi ng onl y wel l known pri nci pl es of cl assi cal physi cs.
The deri vati on i s i ndependent of ei ther smal l -charge tests or tests on nucl ear expl osi ons. I t
i s a fai r statement that consi derabl y more i s known about the fundamental behavi or of nucl ear ex-
pl osi ons than about TNT expl osi ons. Whi l e compari sons wi th TNT are useful , they are often mi s-
l eadi ng, i f not treacherous, and i t i s no exaggerati on that such compari sons have probabl y done
more harm than good i n the attempt to understand nucl ear expl osi ons duri ng the past few years.
I nsofar as i t appears possi bl e to do so, probabl y the best procedure i s to descri be the nucl ear ex-
pl osi on on i ts own meri ts wi thout besetti ng the probl em wi th the vastl y more compl ex phenomena -
l ogy of a TNT expl osi on.
By free ai r i s meant the descri pti on of a spheri cal l y symmetri cal expl osi on i n the absence
of any l arge refl ecti ng surface. The term i s not to be confused wi th the term free stream pres-
sures, whi ch i s usual l y used to mean the pressures i n a bl ast wave wi thout the presence of a l o-
cal l y refl ecti ng surface such as a structure, as di sti ngui shed from the l ocal l y refl ected pressures
near such a structure.
The descri pti on and speci fi cati on of the free ai r curve i s a prerequi si te to a di scussi on of fur-
ther probl ems. I t i s the basi c framework upon whi ch rest
(1) The refl ecti on pattern on the ground
(2) Scal i ng of bombs to di fferent energi es and atmospheres
(3) Thermal radi ati on from the bomb
B a*m ***m
..: . .
U*
B:
: ~z: : :.
::0
B Boe B m. B 9* B:. .*
B
B B e.
B 9 90 : B*b B
~.ii:mrn::
B 0 B b B ** 9*8 B ** B
~~~~psm??
B O B *
B *O*** ::
2.1.2 Shock Process Ranki ne-Hti ~ti t @uati !m$. .
::
The steep shock front i n the conventi onal pi cture of a shock wave i ntri nsi cal l y fol l ows from
the thermodynami c properti es of ai r. Later porti ons of thi s paper wi l l deal wi th the reasons why a
sl ow ri se i s obtai ned i nstead, and i t i s useful to consi der fi rst the strong requi rement for a sharp
shock i n an i deal si tuati on.
The process of shocki ng up has been adequatel y descri bed by vari ous authors, but the fol -
l owi ng exposi ti on may be sati sfactory. Consi der an arbi trary pressure di sturbance movi ng to the
ri ght as shown by the l eft hand ful l l i ne i n Fi g. 2.1.2a. The condi ti ons to the ri ght of thi s pressure
di sturbance are a pressure, PO, and an ambi ent sound vel oci ty, CO. Condi ti ons to the l eft of the di s-
turbance are speci fi ed by the vari abl es, P, c, and u, each regarded as a functi on of space and ti me.
By defi ni ti on, sound vel oci ty i s gi ven by
where the subscri pt S denotes that the entropy i s hel d constant, and usual l y one speaks of thi s as
an adi abati c change of state. A fundamental property of nearl y al l materi al s, and ai r i n parti cul ar,
i s that the quanti ty aP/ap i ncreases wi th pressure, whi ch i s si mpl y the observati on that i t becomes
i ncreasi ngl y di ffi cul t to compress materi al s the more they are compressed. The sound vel oci ty i s
therefore an i ncreasi ng functi on wi th pressure. I n the pressure di sturbance of Fi g. 2.1.2a, we may
regard the pressure wave as composed of pressure si gnal s of i nfi ni tesi mal ampl i tudes dP propaga-
ti ng i n the fi el d of pressure P as shown i n the fi gure. Duri ng the next i nstant of ti me the pressure
si gnal s at hi gh pressures wi l l be propagated forward wi th greater l ocal sound vel oci ty, c, and hence
over greater di stances, than the l ow pressure si gnal s wi l l be carri ed. The wave form i s steepened
as the pressure front moves to the ri ght, as i ndi cated by the dashed l i ne A i n the fi gure.
Superi mposed on thi s process i s another whi ch contri butes to the steepeni ng. A smal l vol ume
of ai r i n the pressure fi el d i s subject to a pressure gradi ent, speci fi ed as aP/8r whi ch, by Newtons
l aw, wi l l accel erate the ai r to the ri ght and i mpart materi al vel oci ty to i t, accordi ng to
aP/8r = (l /p) du/dt
The vel oci ty of ai r parti cl es to the ri ght i ncreases as l ong as the gradi ent i s negati ve (as shown)
and the l onger the ti me; that i s
B 90 B * B .*
B *
::
.**
B : 2&: : .
::
B
B
B0: B:0 coo B:- B .
B 9 . .
B B *O B ** B
B *
B :00 B ::
:
Sound si gnal s from wi thi n the med~ ~e $rop~a~d f~fi ard wi th the vel oci ty, u + c, whi ch we
cal l the hydrodynami c transport vel oci ty. The added component of materi al vel oci ty, u, agai n con-
tri butes to the steepeni ng, as shown by posi ti on B.
Thi s argument for steepeni ng of the pressure wave must conti nue unti l the thi ckness of the
shock i f of mol ecul ar di mensi ons, when the vari ous defi ni ti ons for c and u become ambi guous, and
the probl em passes from hydrodynami cs i nto the real m of ki neti c theory. Because the steep shock
front fol l ows from such fundamental properti es of ai r, i t i s reasonabl e to expect that onl y strong
perturbati ons coul d al ter the shock front to a sl ow ri se i n pressure.
Gi ven a shock front propagati ng i n space, rel ati onshi ps between the vari ous hydrodymmi c
vari abl es across thi s shock front were deri ved many years ago by Ranki ne and by Hugoni ot, i nde-
pendentl y and wi th di fferent methods. These deri vati ons are consi dered wel l known. I t i s al so
known that the pressure di fference across a true shock i s one of the sharpest di sconti nui ti es i n
nature and the shock thi ckness i s onl y a few mol ecul ar free mean paths of ai r. But thi s sharp-
ness, together wi th the usual deri vati ons for the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti ons, has l ed to the suppo-
si ti on that a sharp shock front i s a necessary condi ti on for the val i di ty of the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot
equati ons. I n the remai nder of thi s secti on the Ranki ne -Hugoni ot rel ati ons wi l l be deduced i n
manner i ntended to emphasi ze the fundamental val i di ty of the equati ons, whether the shock i s
perfectl y sharp or not.
We fi rst appl y conservati on of mass to the arbi trary pressure di sturbance shown i n Fi g.
a
2.1.2b.
To the ri ght of the dashed l i nes, ambi ent condi ti ons are speci fi ed by subscri pts zero. To the l eft of
the dashed l i nes the state vari abl es are as shown wi thout subscri pts. The mi ddl e band l abel ed the
shock front wi l l be a l oosel y defi ned regi on of transi ti on from the hydrodynami c vari abl es on the
ri ght to the hydrodynami c vari abl es on the l eft, caused by the shock f rent as i t passes through
the ai r. We i mpose two restri cti ons on thi s shock front: that the decay of pressure i n the pressure
wave to the l eft of the dashed l i nes be suffi ci entl y sl ow so that there i s some m,eani ng to peak
val ues of u, P, V, c and T; next, that thi s shock front be suffi ci entl y stabl e i n ti me or suffi ci entl y
thi n i n space so the mass wi thi n i t does not change appreci abl y i n ti me. The materi al engul fed by
the shock front i n uni t ti me across uni t cross secti on i s a col umn of ai r u cm l ong and of densi ty
Po, wi th mass POU. After unit ti me the front edge of the di sturbance wi l l be a di stance U to the
ri ght, but the trai l i ng edge of the materi al engul fed wi l l have been carri ed forward a di stance, u,
compressi ng the col umn to a l ength, U u, wi th a densi ty, p. Si nce the mass of the col umn i s un-
changed, we wri te
B B m
B** 9 B
B 9
B 0
: B .O.
B : 29. : B.
::
9
B0: B:0 B 00 B:. ..
B
UNOLASSlflEb
.:. :~:
B++
B 90
B *9..
B 9O .
and
. . B B B
B B 9
B B e B
::
: B
B:
::
p(uu)=p~u . B * : :.:0 B (2.1.2-1)
speak of thi s as the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti on for conservati on of mass.
The conservati on of momentum i s appl i ed to thi s system wi th si mi l ar restri cti ons that
momenta stored wi thi n the shock front do not change appreci abl y i n \i me. The fundamental state-
ment of Newtons l aw i s
F = -$ (mu)
Duri ng the passage of the shock over the materi al , the col umn of ai r i s i ni ti al l y U cm l ong, and 1
cm2 i n area; i t i s subject to a force P on the l eft and force P. on the ri ght, and the di fference i s
P Po. Accordi ng to Newtons l aw, the ti me rate of change of momentum i s equal to thi s appl i ed
force. The mass of thi s materi al i s gi ven by ei ther si de of the equati on for conservati on of mass,
and we take i t as POU. I ts i ni ti al vel oci ty was zero and i ts fi nal vel oci ty i s u so that the change i n
momentum per uni t ti me i s si mpl y
pouu
By Newtons l aw, we have
PPo=pouu (2.1.2-2)
and speak of thi s as the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti on for the conservati on of momentum.
The conservati on of energy i s appl i ed to thi s system wi th a si mi l ar assumpti on that no appre-
ci abl e change occurs i n the energy stored i n the shock front. Before proceedi ng di rectl y we wi l l
use an expressi on for u whi ch i s obtai ned di rectl y from Equati ons 2.1.2-1 and 2.1.2-2, by el i mi na-
ti ng U; that i s,
U2= (P PJ(VO v).
Consi der the work done on a uni t mass of gas as i t i s shocked. The materi al to the l eft acts on thi s
uni t mass wi th a pressure, P, and regardi ng thi s uni t mass as contai ned i n a col umn 1 cm2, thi s
uni t mass i s
process, the
compressed from l ength V. to l ength V. Qui te i ndependent of the detai l s i n the shock
total work done on the gas by the materi al to the l eft of the shock i s just
P (Vo v)
The work i s di stri buted between the ki neti c energy and change i n i nternal energy of the ai r pres-
entl y bei ng shocked. Si nce we are deal i ng wi th uni t mass, i ts ki neti c energy i s si mpl y 1/2 u*. Sub-
sti tuti ng for U2 we have
B 8 ,* . B *
B*e B B
B O
B**
B , : 30: : .
B 0
B B0: B:O B. . B: B .
B0:-.
B B SQ:o
B:: 00:
B 0
B **9. B ** B
B e B 8 B B* a :00 B
B :.*C ::
HIWASY%t--
Total Work Done = Change i n I n$&@ ~ner~*+:~n~@ Energy
P(VO V)= AEi +
(P P~)(v~ v)
2
The change i n i nternal energy of the ai r as i t i s shocked i s then gi ven by
AEi = 1/2 (P + PO)(I JO V)
I t i s a fundamental property of thermodynami cs that the state of a materi al can be speci fi ed by
onl y two i ndependent hydrodynami c vari abl es. I n thi s case we mean that the equati on of state must
regard Ei , P, and V as connected i n some fashi on so that Ei may be el i mi nated from the above
equati on. Now i t i s wel l known that i n an i deal gas
Ei = PV/(~ 1)
where y i s the rati o of the speci fi c heat at constant pressure to the speci fi c heat at constant vol -
.
ume. Based on thi s cl ue, we suspect that i n real gases, y i s a sl owl y varyi ng functi on of P and V.
Let us do more and si mpl y say we wi l l defi ne a y such that
Ei = PV/(y 1)*
Based on thi s defi ni ti on, the i nternal energy per uni t mass before the shock i s POVO/(yo 1) and
after the shock i t i s PV/(y 1). Equati ng the change i n i nternal energy to the rel ati onshi ps ob-
tai ned, we fi nd that
Pv/(y 1) P~v~/(y~ 1) = 1/2 (P+ PJ(vl l v) (2.1.2-3)
and speak of thi s as the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti on for conservati on of energy.
I n the precedi ng deri vati ons there i s surpri si ngl y l i ttl e requi rement for a sharp shock for the
.
val i di ty of the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti ons. The equati ons for conservati on of mass and momentum
are i ndependent of any equati on of state, and appl i cabl e to any medi um. Even Equati on 2.1.2-3 ap-
pl i es so l ong as we defi ne y as we have. From these three condi ti ons a number of exceedi ngl y use-
ful rel ati onshi ps are readi l y deri ved. These speci fy the val ue of any of the state vari abl es, pro-
vi ded the shock strength i s speci fi ed by onl y one of them. Usual l y i t i s conveni ent to speci fy the
*Thi s rel ati onshi p i s, of course, wel l known for i deal gases. The author has i ndependentl y ex-
tended thi s formal i sm and i ts i mpl i cati ons as used i n thi s and i n succeedi ng secti ons. I t i s tanta-
mount to the constructi on of a hydrodynami c system to expl oi t thi s fundamental defi ni ti on of y,
whi ch i s often referred to as vari abl e gamma theory.
B*9
B
UNCLASSIFIEb
B
9* B * . B *
.* e
::
B m* *
B:* iiiii!h
B

B++
<
B ;;0
B 0 B *
B r -
B10-0
B B L* B B
2!:mimt:
B e 4, B * e * * * e
8 am
::
UNCt-ASSIBEV
shock strength i n terms of the pres@w,~or~*mo~a ~Onet#y, by the rati o of pressures~ ~ = P/P~
across the shock front.
The densi ty rati o i s obtai ned by sui tabl e al gebrai c transformati on of Equati on 2.1.2-3 to gi ve,
v@T=
(y+l )P+ (yl )Po. (yol )
(YOl )P+(YO+l )PO (Y1)
(2.1.2-4)
I t i s conveni ent to express these i n the non-di mensi onal form by defi ni ng a densi ty compressi on
rati o as q, and
( )
=[+1
=Yl
~+ Yo+l
Ye-l
The equati on for q has certai n i nteresti ng properti es. For l ow pressures, i .e., { -1, thi s equati on
passes i nto the ordi nary adi abati c l aw for i deal gases, namel y: PV Y= constant. However, at ex-
tremel y hi gh pressures, namel y, ~ - ~, the compressi on rati o does not i ncrease wi thout l i mi t, as
i ndi cated i n the adi abati c l aw, but reaches a constant l i mi t gi ven by
IJ = (Y + 1)/(7 1)
The i mpl i cati ons of thi s fact are perhaps the most i mportant of any i n the hydrodymmi c of strong
shocks for nucl ear expl osi ons.
The shock vel oci ty of the pressure di sturbance i s speci fi ed by U and fol l ows i mmedi atel y from
conservati on of mass and momentum. By el i mi nati ng the materi al vel oci ty u from Equati ons
2.1.2-1 and 2.1.2-2 we obtai n
Pov@/po 1) = povo (~ l)n P-l?o v;= lTJ/vo
@.-
Vov ql
I n thi s form the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot shock vel oci ty equati on i s appl i cabl e to any medi um, because i t
does not depe l d on the equati on of state, and can be regarded to be as fundamental l y sound as the
pri nci pl es of the conservati on of mass and momentum. I f we are deal i ng wi th ai r and defi ne the
sound vel oci ty as
then
c: = yPovo
B z B m
B*S B
B *
: 32 : :0 : UNCLASSIFIEb
* B 9 * -m

::
B B8: e.B
B
B: B *
B 9**
B 00 B0 : .** B
~.~ ::. w
~;@ :fj:$,:;:;f $~pf~
B * B 00 B a, B * . B 0.
B B O
: B 0
Bme
-.
The Mach number of the shock i s me ti i rAmsi &h&s ~~ti ty U/cO rel ati ve to the ambi ent sound
B B * B 0 B m B e
vel oci ty ahead of the shock, and rel ated to ~ and q by
For l ow pressures i n ai r y ~ 7/5 and a useful rel ati onshi p i s that
U/cO = ~(6~ + 1)/7
I
Some properti es of thi s equati on are of i nterest. At l ow pressures <--1, and the shock vel oci ty
degrades i nto sound vel oci ty as U/cO -1. At hi gh pressures the shock vel oci ty i s roughl y propor-
ti onal to (i z. As l ong as the shock pressure i s fi ni te the shock vel oci ty i s supersoni c, and i t woul d
be hazardous to appl y the adi abati c l aw to a fi ni te shock wave as i s occasi onal l y done i n attempti ng
to descri be the sl ow ri se. Some further i nsi ght may now be gai ned i nto the process of shocki ng
up. Consi der the shock front as extremel y broad and, i f the very front of the wave were of i n-
fi ni tesi mal ampl i tude, i t woul d travel wi th ambi ent sound vel oci ty. As deri ved previ ousl y, the
shock vel oci ty equati on descri bes the vel oci ty of the pressure di sturbance at the poi nt of pressure,
P; thi s maxi mum pressure wi l l travel wi th supersoni c vel oci ti es and cl earl y overtake any acousti c
si gnal ahead of i t, provi ded the medi um i s homogeneous and no energy l osses are occurri ng wi thi n
the shock front.
The materi al vel oci ty of the fl ow i mmedi atel y behi nd the shock fol l ows from Equati ons 2.1.2-1
and 2.1.2-2 as
U2= (P P~)(v~ v) = P~v~ (g l )(q 1)/q
I
As stated i n thi s form, the materi al vel oci ty equati on i s i ndependent of the equati on of state and i s
appl i cabl e to any medi um. Usi ng the rel ati onshi p for sound vel oci ty as before, we fi nd the rati o of
materi al vel oci ty to the sound vel oci ty ahead of the shock i s a di mensi onl ess number gi ven by
I
~u,c o) = (q- 1)($ -1)
?On
I n the speci al case of ai r at l ow pressures, where y = 7/5,
I
J!_&..Q
c =Jmm-T
Thi s equati on has several i nteresti ng properti es. At l ow pressures, as ~ ---1, the materi al vel oci ty
WWLASSiF%W
. . B ..9 9:0 :~. .
B
B :** . . .
::
approaches zero. At hi gh pressti s~ ~h~re ,$;% ~ti t~$ &ateri al vel oci ty i s roughl y proporti onal to
.!j. At hi gh pressures the materi al vel oci ty i s onl y sl i ghtl y smal l er than the shock vel oci ty, and
the rati o between them i s speci fi ed by
u/TJ_@ P1 2
- = .
v
P
y+l
We have used the rel ati onshi p for sound vel oci ty a number of ti mes and, whi l e i t i s not i n-
tri nsi cal l y part of the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons, some remarks are i n order regardi ng i ts appl i -
cati on. By defi ni ti on, we speak of
c = @P/@)~
whi ch i s ri gorous as a defi ni ti on whether c i s the actual sound vel oci ty or not. Fol l owi ng thi s defi n-
i ti on and usi ng the rel ati onshi p that the sl ope of an adi abat on l og P l og p coordi nates i s k,
k = dl n P/dl np = (p/P) dP/dp
I t fol l ows that
whi ch i s an equal l y ri gorous expressi on. I f c i s to be used i n the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons, i t
wi l l be more accurate to cal cul ate i t from thi s equati on than to use a measured val ue of actual
sound vel oci ty, or to cal cul ate i t from the temperature. The usual deri vati on for sound vel oci ty i s
from el ementary thermodynami cs, wi th the assumpti on that the i deal gas l aw hol ds i n the form
PV = RT, and that
++
v
Under these condi ti ons, one fi nds that
c=4jxT
or
c/c. = #--
Thi s expressi on rel ati ng temperature to sound vel oci ty i s actual l y a speci al case, appl i cabl e onl y
where the i deal gas l aw appl i es, and l ess general than
UNCLASS! F4E~
.0
B.:ee.
.* :**
B *
.0
a!iillv
B
B *
e
**, ,
B * B
B. 9*
. B *8
B*.9
B . .O*
B *
B ** .*.: ..*
8:::
B
.***
..**
.*. ,*
..0
9 B *9
B m B0 :
~-: mdiik
B *B 8* B 9* B:8 B *9 B
B
UNCLASSIFIED
B
B :0000::
2.1.3 Hydrodynami c Rel ati onshi p@ ~ the I nt~J@O of ~ %hock Wave
The rel ati onshi ps between pressure, densi ty, and materi al veI oci ty on the i nteri or of a shock
wave are obtai ned by strai ghtforward appl i cati on of the pri nci pl es of conservati on of mass, mo -
mentum, and energy. These are expressed i n di fferenti al form rather than the di rect form as i t i s
possi bl e to do by the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot rel ati ons across the shock front.
The di fferenti al equati on for conservati on of mass i s obtai ned by consi deri ng uni t vol ume of
gas as i ndi cated i n Fi g. 2.1.3-1. The net fl ow of mass across any of the boundari es i s the vector
quanti ty p i i . The net fl ow per uni t ti me across al l surfaces i s gi ven by di v (p fi ). I n uni t ti me the
average densi ty of thi s curve must i ncrease or decrease accordi ng to the net fl ow, and we wri te
the conservati on of mass as
ap/8t = di v (p 3) (2.1.3-1)
I n the speci al case where the symmetry of the wave permi ts a descri pti on i n terms of a si ngl e
space vari abl e, r, the conservati on of mass i s si mpl y portrayed by use of a radi us-ti me graph on
whi ch the path of the shock front and the mass parti cl es may be pl otted, as shown i n Fi g. 2.1.3-2.
The sl ope of the parti cl e paths i n thi s r-t pl ane, wi th l i near coordi nates i s, by defi ni ti on, the l ocal
materi al vel oci ty. The spaci ng between adj scent mass l i nes graphi cal l y portrays the speci fi c vol -
ume of the ai r.
Some i nsi ght i nto the broad val i di ty of the Ranki ne -Hugoni ot equati ons may be gai ned i mme-
di atel y from such a pl ot. Consi der the parcel of ai r ori gi nal l y bound wi thi n the spati al l i mi ts
l abel ed VOon the graph. After ti me At, when the shock has passed over thi s materi al , i t wi l l be
compressed i n some manner, i ndi cated as arbi trary. Before the shock arri ved, thi s mass occupi ed
the vol ume whi ch i s proporti onal to VO; just after the shock has passed over i t, the front of thi s
l ayer remai ns i n the same posi ti on, but the rear of the l ayer has been moved forward to occupy the
vol ume V. Before the shock V. i s proporti onal to ~ A t. After the shock i s passed the same mate-
ri al now occupi es a vol ume proporti onal to (~ i i ) A t. Setti ng the mass equal , and usi ng the pro-
porti onal i ty
we have
p~u=p(uii)
UNCLASSI FI E~
I
B B **a..
f.: !:.-
c o B . ~o B 9* B OO B
I J NOMSSI HED
B 80
B 000 B ::
:
whi ch i s nearl y i denti cal to the e~8$i o~ prey~o~#y fi ~i ved from Ranki ne-Hugoni ot rel ati ons
al one. Note that vari ati ons i n shock or materi al vel oci ty duri ng At do not deny the val i di ty of the
expressi ons for conservati on of mass, provi ded we i nterpret both U and u as average val ues dur-
i ng the ti me i n questi on.
I n the speci al case of a wave of spheri cal symmetry, conservati on of mass can agai n be ex-
pressed si mpl y. From the r-t pl ot, we regard the band i ndi cated by VOas speci fyi ng the thi ckness
of a shel l wi th a vol ume i ni ti al l y proporti onal to 4n r 2. I n thts case, a general expressi on for con-
servati on of mass can be wri tten as
pr2 dr = constant
where dr means the thi ckness of the mass shel l as measured by the di stance between two adjacent
mass poi nt l i nes.
Conservati on of momentum i s appl i ed by the appl i cati on of Newtons l aw to a parti cl e. I n any
type of wave, i t i s readi l y shown that such a uni t vol ume i s subject to a net force of grad P. By
Newtons l aw thi s i s equal to the ti me rate of change of momentum for uni t vol ume of gas:
Grad P = p du/dt
The equati on appl i es al ong a parti cl e path u, so by du/dt we wi l l mean
du/dt = u au/ar + au/at
Thi s expressi on for du/dt i s readi l y vi sual i zed on the r-t pl ot as the curvature of a mass l i ne. I f
the pressure gradi ents are hi gh the curvature i s great; when the pressure gradi ent i s l ow the
curvature i s smal l , and the mass moti on l i nes are effecti vel y strai ght on a l i near pl ot.
The conservati on of energy i s appl i ed on the i nteri or of a wave through a customary assump-
ti on that after the passage of the shock the subsequent changes are adi abati c, and the entropy re-
mai ns constant. Thi s i s someti mes wri tten as
dS as as
Z= UK+%=O
meani ng that the entropy i s constant al ong a parti cl e path u. The al ternate form of thi s expressi on,
namel y, P = p k oconstant, i s an equal l y val i d expressi on al ong thi s path. I t wi l l be observed i n the
precedi ng equati ons that the form of the equati on for conservati on of energy i s the onl y expressi on
whi ch i s not val i d when radi ati ve transport occurs. I f ei ther pressure P or densi ty p are speci fi ed
on the i nteri or of the wave, the other val ue i s determi ned by
v ikhl!m
B m 99* 900 B:0 :.~ .**
B :
B**:***
B
B *
UNCLASSI F\ ED
P/P. = (p/p~)k :: .: : :. :0 B 0
where k i s the sl ope of the adi abat i n the equati on of state (usual l y y) and P~ and p ~ are the shock
val ues for the mass parti cl e i n questi on.
2.1.4 Entropy Change Across the Shock Front
The entropy change across the shock front, as demanded by the RanMne-Hugoni ot rel ati onshi ps,
has i mportant i mpl i cati ons when coupl ed wi th the adi abati c expansi on of the same materi al after
the shock has passed.
The compressi on at the shock front i s gi ven by
(2.1.4-1)
Duri ng the subsequent expansi on the adi abati c l aw i s assumed to hol d, so the fi ml pressure and
densi ty can be wri tten i n terms of the shock front val ues by
fi nal = ~fi nal
Y
%hock
()%hock
(2.1.4-2)
or
qf = % (tf/#7 (2.1.4-3)
I f the fi nal pressure returns to PO, &f = 1, and i nserti ng the rel ati onshi p for qs we obtai n
~f=L%l +l
[5 + /lo
(1/&! j/y (2.1.4-4)
For ai r shocked at l ow pressure, recal l that qs approaches f~j~ meani ng that qf --1, and the
1/7 ~i s
materi al returns to i ts pre-shock densi ty. At hi gh pressures, however, qf - p(l /~ ~) .
means that i f the parti cl e was ori gi nal l y shocked to a hi gh pressure, even though the materi al
fi nal l y returns to ambi ent pressure, the fi nal densi ty i s very much smal l er than the i ni ti al densi ty.
I t fol l ows from thi s that the fi nal temperatures of such ai r are very hi gh even though i t returns to
normal pressure.
By an expansi op of the adi abati c l aw and the Ranktne-Hugoni ot energy rel ati onshi p i t can be
shown that the di fference between them i s onl y a thi rd-order di fference. As a consequence, the
hydrodynami cs of weak shocks, l i ke those of TNT, are not seri ousl y al tered by the entropy change
across the shock front. Once the pressures become hi gh enough, as i n a nucl ear expl osi on, the
changes rapi dl y become profound.
B B be B
B*:
9*
9*
8*
+3%:bin. :
B B0: B:0 B 00 B:- B 0
uNcLAsslimJ

B B oo B * * B:0 :0. B**
B *
B B *** B *
UNGLASSI FI ED
I t i s thi s entropy change ac~ fi e $hoc~ frbat ~h~ch gi ves ri se to the most spectacul ar fea-
ture of a nucl ear expl osi on, namel y, the fi rebal l i tsel f. Because of the presence of such a fi rebal l
one knows wi thout further experi mentati on that a non-adi abati c change such as the Ranki ne-
Hugoni ot rel ati onshi p must i ndeed have occurred at the shock front duri ng i ts strong shock phases.
I t i s thi s vi ol ent resi dual heat whi ch gi ves ri se to a pri nci pal effect from a nucl ear expl osi on,
namel y, the thermal radi ati on. As the author del i ghts i n tel l i ng hi s col l eagues who speci al i ze i n
thermal radi ati on, the thermal radi ati on from a bomb i s onl y the garbage l eft behi nd the shock
wave.
Fuchs appl i ed the concept of waste heat to thi s phenomenon, and for many years i t has been
taken for granted that thi s waste heat accounted for a presumabl y reduced bl ast effi ci ency from
atomi c bombs i n compari son wi th TNT, and a l arge-scal e parti ti on of energy. As wi l l be shown
i n detai l , thi s heat i s not enti rel y wasted, even to the bl ast wave. Because of the hi gh fi nal tem-
peratures and correspondi ngl y l arger fi nal vol ume of the l ate fi rebal l , conservati on of mass woul d
demand a greater average compressi on, and hi gher average pressure, for the ai r between the fi re-
bal l and the shock than from a cool i nner core. One coul d then argue wi th equal pl ausi bi l i ty that the
shock front pressures are enhanced by the fi rebal l . When the fai l ure of the i deal gas l aw i s taken
i nto account i t i s found that a greater total hydrodynami c energy i s actual l y requi red for an expl o-
si on i n ai r to gi ve the same shock front yi el d as an expl osi on i n gas of y = 1.4, but thi s i s not
waste heat per se. The energy per uni t vol ume i s P/(y 1) and i t happens that the ai r i n the l ate
fi rebal l has val ues of Y l i ke 1.18, so the energy densi ty i s more than twi ce that for the i deal case.
I n other words, the fai l ure of the i deal gas l aw i nvol ves as much energy i n the fi rebal l regi on as
an overpressure of more than 1 atm of i deal ai r.
2.1.5 Si mi l ari ty Sol uti ons for Strong Shocks
An approxi mate sol uti on for the propagati on of a strong shock i n ai r has previ ousl y been gi ven
by a number of authors, such as Tayl or, von Neumann, and Bethe.
The detai l s of thei r deri vati ons wi l l not be repeated here but an essenti al feature i nvol ves the
constancy of the compressi on rati o q i n the l i mi t as .$-- ~. Under these condi ti ons certai n si mi -
l ari ti es exi st i n the expressi ons for the hydrodynami cs whi ch i n turn permi t a Tayl or si mi l ari ty
condi ti on usual l y speci fi ed by the statement that for strong shocks
P N l /RS
B B
9*
: ;::8; .: : :e
UWASSI FW
B0: B:0 B 00 B:0 B *
k:! i
B .0 B b* B *9
B *m*b B 9* B
B B B *O B:0 :00
B 0
.**
On the basi s of thi s si mi l ari ty l ~~~i ti ~~, B~th~go~kd out a fundamental characteri sti c of the
radi us vs ti me curve for a strong shock, someti mes referred to as the 0.4 power l aw. The deri va-
ti on was based on si mpl e, di mensi onal consi derati ons as i n the fol l owi ng fi ve steps. By the shock
vel oci ty rel ati onshi p i n Secti on 2.1.2, observe that
1. u - P12
From the si mi l ari ty condi ti on,
2. P N I /Rg
we have
Si nce by, defi ni ti on, U = dR/dt i t fol l ows that
3. U = dR/dt - l /R %
Mul ti pl y through by R% to obtai n
4. R% dR - dt
Thi s i s readi l y i ntegrated (the constant of i ntegrati on i s zero because R = O when t = O) to yi el d
5, Ry2-tor R*t%
I n other words, i f the l og of the shock front radi us i s pl otted agai nst the l og of the ti me, the shock
front woul d appear as a strai ght l i ne of sl ope 0.4.
The author has shown previ ousl y i n a number of papers that thi s deri vati on i s not exact for
strong shocks for a vari ety of reasons. Wi th regard to the fi rst step i n the deri vati on, the vari abl e
gamma theory shows that the rel ati onshi p i s more exactl y
()
y+l p
Y2
1 u
2y
I n thi s case there i s a sl i ght dependency of the shock vel oci ty on y as wel l as P so that the vari ati on
of U wi th P i s cl ose to, but not qui te l i ke, the ,2 power.
The si mi l ari ty condi ti on whi ch yi el ded the dependence of the pressure on the cube of the radi us
i s not stri ctl y appl i cabl e. I f there i s any quanti ty whi ch ought to decrease wi th vol ume i n a poi nt
source expl osi on i t wi l l be the energy densi ty per uni t vol ume rather than the pressure. By the
defi ni ti on of y i n thi s paper i t fol l ows that i f we regard y as some sort of average val ue at a gi ven
shock radi us,
Ei - P/(y -1) N l /R3
UNCLASSI FI ED
and
2 P N (y - 1)/R9
B e B 0 B B B:o :.0
B e
Bme
B m*O:
B 0
B
B O
B:1 CO*
.0
9 B e B
. . B O B
Upon combi ni ng thi s rel ati on wi th Stepl , thethi rd step i s repl aced by
Now the dependence of shock vel oci ty on I i s consi derabl y more seri ous because of the presence
of the term Y* 1, especi al l y because 7 i s a number usual l y not far di fferent from 1.
A further di ffi cul ty i s now recogni zed i n Step 4. I f } i s not a constant, then the precedi ng ex-
pressi on cannot be i ntegrated di rectl y but must be performed i n some compl ex fashi on, dependi ng
upon the vari ati on of y wi th R at the parti cul ar state of the ai r bei ng shocked.
The fi fth step has a further di ffi cul ty, stated as fol l ows: One cannot profess to know the func-
ti on R = R(t) unl ess one knows the enti re hi story of dR/dt starti ng from zero ti me. As i t turns out,
the growth of the shock wave i s such that the dependence of R on t from zero ti me i s not governed
enti rel y by the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons, and the di mensi onal arguments l eadi ng to the 0.4 l aw
are not appl i cabl e.
Duri ng a very earl y stage of growth, Hi rschfel der poi nted out (see Effects of Atomi c Weapons
(EAW)) that above a temperature of approxi matel y 300,000K the energy propagates outward by di f-
fusi on of radi ati on faster than i t can be propagated by shock hydrodynami cs. Several years ago,
the author showed the consequences of thi s fact that duri ng very earl y ti mes the shock radi us i s
consi derabl y l arger than i t woul d have been had i t propagated by shock hydrodynami cs al one. Thi s
effect mi ght be concei ved si mpl y as addi ng a constant i ncrement to R duri ng l ater stages of fi re-
bal l growth. I t decreases the sl ope of the radi us-ti me curve on l ogari thmi c coordi nates to val ues
l i ke 0.1 duri ng the radi ati ve phase. Thi s perturbati on persi sts for a remarkabl y l ong ti me unti l
the i ncrement i n R i s smal l compared wi th R i tsel f and extends wel l i nto those ti mes when the
shock front i s no l onger l umi nous, around 100 atmospheres.
As wi l l be di scussed l ater, si mi l ar mechani sms of radi ati ve transport persi st on the i nteri or
of the shock l ong after the shock front i tsel f has ceased to propagate by radi ati ve expansi on. Thi s
addi ti onal mechani sm for energy transport wi l l perturb the shock hydrodynami cs on the i nteri or,
and wi l l transmi t energy to the shock front i n a di fferent way from bomb to bomb; thi s parti al l y
negates the si mpl i ci ty whi ch mi ght have resul ted from si mpl e scal i ng i n the absence of such radi a-
ti ve transport.
B 9* B O B
..4h: e:::.
::
B B0: B:0 B 0 B: B .
&
IJNCMSSIFIEL
B
: :*.
B B B am*
.: :*.. B O
B **** 9** B
UNCLASSI FI ED
I
B B
2::.-
I I NQLAS?( m
B 0 :0 B Be* :00 B
.*4,
B *=.:
::
B 0
9*
B 0
Fi nal l y, i n al l expl osi ons, es~~~i ~!l y \hose: ~r~m Tfi T, there i s a peri od duri ng whi ch the mass
of the bomb parts or surroundi ng materi al i s not smal l i n compari son wi th the mass engul fed by
the shock. Si nce the energy densi ty or the temperatures on the i nteri or of the shock are strongl y
governed by the mass engul fed rather than si mpl e vol ume consi derati ons al one, the resul t i s that
the average pressure i n the fi rebal l and at the shock does not scal e l i ke I /Rs even apart from the
consi derati ons of vari abl e y or radi ati ve transport. Under the condi ti ons of l arge mass effect the
sl ope of the shock front wi l l be approxi matel y 1.0 i f radi ati ve transport i s al so present.
The purpose i n di scussi ng these perturbati ons here i s to show that the departures from si mi -
l ari ty are too great to be negl ected i n the attempt to compare di fferent expl osi ons at hi gh pres -
sures. Radi ati ve transport, mass effect, and vari abl e gamma represent competi ng mechani sms,
whi ch di ffer from one expl osi on to another, so there i s never a regi on i n whi ch the sl ope n can be
regarded as constant, or i n whi ch P - I /Rs stri ctl y appl i es. I t requi res, of course, a l ong and di f-
fi cul t process to predi ct how l ong these effects persi st, but the best procedure seems to be to de-
ri ve, i f possi bl e, the rate of growth of a strong shock wi thout recourse to si mi l ari ty assumpti ons
or scal i ng l aws. Thi s i s done i n the fol l owi ng secti on.
2.2 ANALYTI C SOLUTI ON FOR STRONG SHOCK
Thi s secti on descri bes bri efl y the resul ts of a deri vati on whi ch expresses the total hydrody-
nami c energy of a bl ast wave i n an anal yti c form from a measurement of the radi us of the shock
front at vari ous ti mes, together wi th i ts ti me deri vati ves, but wi thout recourse to si mi l ari ty as-
sumpti ons.
The purposes of presenti ng the resul ts here are fourfol d. Fi rst, they provi de some i nsi ght i n-
to the general nature of wave forms behi nd the shock front. Second, they provi de the basi s for
scal i ng l aws to transpose resul ts from one homogeneous atmosphere i nto another and, to a l i mi ted
extent, some i nsi ght i nto the perturbati ons to scal i ng whi ch wi l l resul t when an expl osi on occurs i n
an i nhomogeneous atmosphere. Whi l e these l aws have been deri ved previ ousl y from di mensi onal
consi derati ons, the deri vati on here i s more expl i ci t. The thi rd poi nt i s thi s: from theoreti cal con-
si derati ons one expects a defi ni te fai l ure of the ordi nary si mpl e cube root scal i ng l aws at hi gh
pressures and thi s fai l ure may persi st on some bombs down to pressures l ow enough to be con-
si dered of practi cal i mportance. These fai l ures i n scal i ng are bel i eved to be too seri ous to negl ect
i n an exposi ti on of shock hydrodynami cs, because of the shocks memory of i ts earl y and very
di fferent hi story, not onl y from TNT expl osi ons but among nucl ear expl osi ons as wel l . Fi nal l y, we
B m .* B B 09 :00 B
* B
B B B . B ::
wi l l use thi s sol uti on to eval uate ti& &er&y i n ~ fi ach~a~ sol uti on to the bl ast wave, and thereby
establ i sh the free ai r curve for an atomi c bomb, whi ch i n turn i s the basi c framework upon
whi ch are based al l the refl ected pressure patterns of wi despread practi cal i mportance.
2.2.1 Defi ni ti on of the Hydrodymmi c Ki l oton
We defi ne
1 hydrodynami c ki l oton = (47r/3) 1019 ergs
si nce
ti /3 = 4.1888
and the mechani cal equi val ent of heat i s such that
1 cal = 4.185 joul es
I t fol l ows that the hydrodynami c ki l oton i s effecti vel y 10i 2 cal , whi ch i s i denti cal to the radi ochemi -
cal ki l oton of 4.185 x 10i 9 ergs, quoted i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons.
The hydrodynami c or radi ochemi cal ki l oton i s equi val ent to the supposed energy rel ease of a
ki l oton of TNT i n onl y a very rough way because the energy rel ease of hi gh expl osi ves under these
or other condi ti ons may not be known wi th suffi ci ent preci si on. So far as the author can determi ne
from the fol kl ore at Los Al amos concerni ng the ori gi n of the ki l oton, i t seems that the energy re-
l ease of TNT was taken, i n round numbers, to be 1000 cal /gm. Under thi s very rough assumpti on
the ktl oton of 1012 cal i s 1000 metri c tons of TNT and not 2,000,000 l b of TNT. However, the radi o-
chemi cal ki l oton was al ways defi ned by an energy rel ease i n ergs, and never dependent on the ac-
tual energy rel ease of hi gh expl osi ve.
By hydrodynami c energy we mean the energy whi ch i s determi ned from the state vari abl es of
the ai r and bomb materi al wi thi n the shock front, namel y, pressure, densi ty, temperature, and
materi al vel oci ty. When so determi ned, the hydrodynami c yi el d i s cl ose, but not necessari l y i den-
ti cal , to the radi ochemi cal yi el d. The radi ochemi cal yi el d shoul d pertai n more nearl y to the en-
ergy rel ease of the nucl ear components of the bomb from known nucl ear reacti ons, and the trans -
l ati on of these numbers i nto bl ast phenomenol ogy requi res a l ong trai n of i ntermedi ate cal cul ati ons
and esti mates whi ch i nvol ve the energy per fi ssi on, the processes by whi ch nucl ear energy i s fi rst
transformed i nto radi ant energy, and then i nto hydrodynami c energy. There i s no guarantee that
these processes are exactl y si mi l ar for al l si zes and types of weapons, so i t appears preferabl e
descri be the bl ast wave on the basi s of the total hydrodynami c energy present after these trans-
formati ons have occurred.
B B s B 0 B m B
B O 42; : : :.
B *
:: B
B B*:9. B: . .
&lluu
UNCLASSi Ff Eu
9*
:: *:
B B B **O
B: : B B** B m
B B B B @*B
to
B 9.9 **O
umiulum
B .B ...** B .9 B e. b
B B m
B : B 0 B0::
B :000
2.2.2 Vari abl e Gamma Theory .: .: :
l~NCLASSl~~p
B 9
:0:0 B 0
As a prerequi si te to the deri vati ons i n the anal yti c sol uti on, we requi re a formal i sm whi ch i s
adequate to treat ai r i n whi ch the i deal gas l aw does not hol d. We refer to thi s treatment as vari -
abl e gamma theory.
The whol e of the vari abl e gamma theory rests on expl oi ti ng a si mpl e defi ni ti on for gamma.
We defi ne a gamma such that the i nternal energy per gram i s
Ei = PV/(7 1)
For the moment we wi l l assume no properti es of gamma other than thi s defi ni ti on, al though i t i s
cl ear enough that at standard condi ti ons i t wi l l be, as usual , the rati o of speci fi c heats. The detai l s
of the deri vati ons i n the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons usi ng thi s formal i sm wi l l not be repeated here
and onl y the sal i ent resul ts are gi ven.
The adi abati c l aw becomes:
dP/P + y dV/V dy
whi ch can be i ntegrated for smal l
(y-l )=o
changes as:
PV~ = (y 1) constant
i nstead of the usual expressi on for constant y:
PVY = constant
The compressi on rati o across the shock front i s rel ated to the pressure by
()
y+l g+l
yl PO _p~+l
= I ?+yo+l
t+Po
Po y~1
Here i t wi l l be observed that i n the l i mi t $>>1, the expressi on i s i denti cal al gebrai cal l y to that i n
whi ch y i s a constant. Of parti cul ar i mportance i s the fact that, as y approaches val ues l i ke 1.18
for strong shocks, compressi on rati os as hi gh as 12 are achi eved where one mi ght have expected a
maxi mum val ue of 6 under the assumpti on that y = 1.4.
The equati on for shock vel oci ty becomes
(t - l)W +1)
KVCO)2 = &o[&/(y - 1) -1/(yo - 1)1
B
B 0
::
B
:
: B . . .
:43 .:
UNCLASSI FI ED
9
. : : . : 0 .... i e; : \ : ;
: kmmm
: 0
B
BZ;: . .
B
: *9$. . . . ***
B: :
B e B j+. . ; 2e : . ;*
. o. . ~. o . e-
For ~ >>1, thi s reduces to
B a B:* B 00 B:0 :00
B B**
900a*e 9**
B B e B *
B: B m* B 0
B B: B B O B 0 B *
[1
(Y+ 1)
(u/co)z = ~ t
The equati on for materi al vel oci ty becomes
~u/co)2 = 2(.$ I )[f/(y 1) - l /(y~ l )].
Yo
5(+1
Thi s formal i sm has found wi de appl i cati on for a number of years si nce i ts fi rst appearance i n
LA-1 214. On the basi s of l engthy theoreti cal cal cul ati ons by a number of authors, i t i s possi bl e to
cal cul ate the effecti ve val ues of y for ai r for l arge changes of the state vari abl es. These resul ts
were correl ated by the author and are presented graphi cal l y i n Fi gs. 2.2.2-1 through 2.2.2-4. I t i s
of parti cul ar i nterest to note that despi te the changes i n the equati on of state, the appearance of
these graphs i s not markedl y di fferent from what woul d have resul ted from the assumpti on of con-
stant }. The adi abats are nearl y strai ght l i nes wi th sl ope of nearl y y, i nstead of bei ng paral l el
l i nes of sl ope 1.4. The i sotherms are not strai ght l i nes of sl ope 1 but do not depart very strongl y
from that condi ti on. Note now a feature of these graphs whi ch wi l l be of i mportance l ater. Near
normal atmospheri c pressures, Y decreases markedl y as the densi ty decreases (and the tempera-
ture i ncreases). Thi s means that much l arger quanti ti es of energy are contai ned i n uni t vol ume at
normal pressure but smal l densi ty than woul d be requi red i f the i deal gas l aw hel d and y = 1.4.
2.2.3 Wave Forms Behi nd the Shock Front
The detai l s of the anal yti c sol uti on wi l l not be repeated here but the
deri vati on are as fol l ows:
An i ntri nsi c property of a strong spheri cal shock i s a sharp densi ty
mai n outl i nes for the
gradi ent behi nd i t, for as-
soci ated wi th the hi gh shock pressure i s a materi al vel oci ty enti rel y comparabl e i n magni tude to
the shock vel oci ty. Because of spheri cal di vergence, the rapi d movement of materi al outward from
the center causes an enormous drop i n densi ty, and a correspondi ng drop i n pressure because of
the adi abati c expansi on of each ai r parcel . Any reasonabl e mathemati cal descri pti on of the wave
form wi l l show thi s characteri sti c hi gh pressure and al so densi ty gradi ents near the shock front.
As we now l ook at materi al successi vel y cl oser to the center, the i ni ti al shock pressure asso-
ci ated wi th each parti cl e rapi dl y i ncreases and, because of thi s, had a hi gher entropy change i ni ti -
al l y and has greater resi dual temperatures now. Thi s i n turn l eads rapi dl y to states of gas i n
B B
B
B
++
+ B
:44 .:
::
B
.:; .:. ..O .;.:; :\ ;;;
.:-
UNCLAfWEf)
B
.: * B**.*
B*.,*
B~a*
B
B,C: .
B 0
:.: B,;+ ..;,y ~:::
.*-. B
B . B.*
9 B **
B 0 B*O : Bmb B
~.:UI-::
B *:0 B 00 B:0 :00
I J N( l ASSFf ~
B B0
whi ch radi ati ve transport of energy.~ai c;l y %er~i db h~odynami c transport, for, apart f rom de-
B B * B B * B * B
tai l s, the mean free path for radi ati on goes roughl y as T3 and i nversel y as p. The hydrodynami cs
al one wi l l al most guarantee that pressures wi l l be fai rl y uni form on the i nteri or of the wave, be-
cause once the vi ol ence of the i ni ti al shock has passed, pressure i s a sel f-l evel i ng vari abl e i n the
sense that pressure si gnal s al ways propagate from regi ons of hi gh pressure to regi ons of l ow pres-
sure. I f the pressure wave form i s somewhat fl at, near the center, the i deal gas l aw woul d requi re
the densi ty to be i nversel y proporti onal to the temperature, and an overal l dependence of mean free
path woul d be somethi ng l i ke the i nverse fourth power of the densi ty. Toward the i nteri or of the
fi rebal l , the rati o of radi ati ve transport to hydrodynami c transport has an enormous power depend-
ence on the radi us, and wi l l al most guarantee that pressure, densi ty, and temperature wi l l be uni -
form at a gi ven ti me wi thi n thi s regi on.
I t i s thi s radi ati ve transport on the i nteri or of a strong shock whi ch strongl y control s the
propagati on at the shock front, guarantees a sort of uni forml y i n the core (whi ch may be very
cl ose to the shock f rent), and consti tutes a pusher behi nd the shock by sendi ng hydrodynami c
si gnal s across the rel ati vel y short di stance from the i sothermal sphere to the shock front.
As a resul t of thi s radi ati ve transport on the i nteri or and the l i kel i hood of fai rl y uni form den-
si ty near the center, i t can be shown that the materi al vel oci ty wave form i s of the form
u-r
and to the extent that the i sothermal sphere i s cl ose to the shock front
u = us (r/R)
Gi ven a shock at radi us R, conservati on of mass over the enti re fi rebal l pl aces a restri cti on
on the densi ty di stri buti on of materi al wi thi n i t. One knows the densi ty at the shock f rent from the
Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons whi ch we speci f y as P5. From the entropy consi derati ons di scussed i n
Secti on 2.1.4, we know al so that the densi ty at the ori gi n shoul d be effecti vel y zero. To a fi rst ap-
proxi mati on we wi l l speci fy a power l aw dependence such that the densi ty p at a posi ti on coordi nate
r i s gi ven by:
P = PB (r/R)q
By appl yi ng conservati on of mass to the enti re shock, one obtai ns the resul t that the exponent q i s
gi ven by:
B :0 G B:0 :Ce B
B B B * B ::
[
B 9
%
1
B: :.:
q=3
l+@# B B .
: :0 :0
where M i s the mass of the bomb and M i s the mass of ai r engul fed. Si nce i t i s no secret that
atomi c bombs are carri ed by ai rcraft, i t i s easi l y veri fi ed that M/M ~ O for nucl ear expl osi ons at
al most al l pressures of i nterest. Ri gorousl y, q vari es wi th r, but the expressi on obtai ned gi ves the
correct average val ue of q. The si mpl i ci ty of the equati ons and the accuracy of the fi nal energy ex-
pressi on depend greatl y on the fact that q has hi gh val ues, rangi ng from 15 to 33.
As a consequence of radi ati ve transport and the densi ty di stri buti on on the i nteri or of the
shock, the rel ati on between materi al vel oci ty and di stance i s
u = us (r/R)
By hydrodynami c transport of energy al one, thi s rel ati on woul d not stri ctl y hol d, but the pres-
ence of radi ati ve transport on the i nteri or of the shock appears to perturb the hydrodynami cs i n
such a way that thi s equati on does hol d. Moreover, the fi nal energy expressi on i s not sensi ti ve to
the exact form of the vel oci ty di stri buti on. I f a body of gas i s al l owed to expand i n such a way that
the pressure, densi ty, and temperature at any ti me are uni form, then thi s di rect proporti onal i ty of
vel oci ty wi th radi al di stance necessari l y fol l ows. I t i s of i nterest to note that thi s vel oci ty di stri -
buti on i s preci sel y the same as i s gi ven i n the concept of an expandi ng uni verse: At the reference
poi nt al l other poi nts appear to di verge from i t wi th a vel oci ty proporti onal to the di stance from
the reference poi nt.
One can now do more. Wi th the observati on that the compressi on rati o across the shock front
i s not strongl y dependent on the shock pressure one can conserve mass l ocal l y i n the regi ons near
the shock front. Under these condi ti ons the densi ty gradi ent at the shock front i s agai n speci fi ed by
a power l aw wi th exponent q whi ch i s i denti cal to the expressi on previ ousl y deri ved for conserva-
ti on of mass over the shock front as a whol e, namel y
cl =3(%l ), :,=o
I t i s thi s coi nci dence that gi ves credi bi l i ty to the densi ty di stri buti on assumed, namel y, that the
densi ty i s correct at r = O, at r = R, that i ts i ntegrated val ue i s correct, and that i ts fi rst deri va-
ti ve i s correct at the shock front.
The pressure gradi ent behi nd the shock front i s then deri ved from the rel ati onshi p
B e B *
::
?6 : : : ..
UNCLASSI FI ED
: :
B*
B 9*. .
B
B0:B: 0.
:
B . *; ; , %
b
Arm
B : ;
B
B B
J : . .
B
B *
: , : B*J- : <: : : . + ; : .
B B-.
... .. .
..
B m .9. B *9 B ** .*. B
B
B
dP/dr = p du/dtl : .: :
P = %(r/R)q
u = dr/dt = mr/t
m(t) = dl n r/di n t
n(t) = dl n R/di n t
After i ntegrati on,
P=
J
: dr
and eval uati on of the i ntegrati on constant by ~ = .$8 at r = R, the pressure wave form i s gi ven by
where k i s the expressi on
=?w-d=)-l
111.n
()
ml
q~1
Thi s pressure vari ati on i s of consi derabl e i nterest because i t shows that the pressure drops very
sharpl y behi nd the shock, because of the power q + 2. I t rapi dl y settl es down to a constant fracti on
of the pressure at the shock front gi ven by 1 k. I t wi l l be observed that the val ue of 1 k depends
on qs, M/M, n, and dl n m/di n t at the shock front. I t i s thi s fundamental vari ati on i n the shape of
the wave on the i nteri or, through the dependenci es, whi ch prohi bi ts the assumpti on of si mpl e si mi -
l ari ty scal i ng i n the hydrodynami cs of strong shocks.
2.2.4 Energy Expressi on for the Shock Wave
Gi ven the vari ati on i n pressure, densi ty, and materi al vel oci ty as speci fi ed i n the previ ous
secti on, one wri tes the energy i n the wave as
W=~(Ei +Ek)d V
where Ei i s the i nternal energy per uni t vol ume and Ek i s the ki neti c energy per uni t vol ume and
the i ntegrati on i s performed over the enti re vol ume of the bl ast wave. After these operati ons have
been performed, an expressi on for the energy i s obtai ned i n terms of the shock strength ,$, and
the radi us R
Here Z i s a functi on of n, qs, and F gi ven by
where F i s the average val ue of 1(y 1) on the i nteri or of the wave, and Z i s the sum of al l the con-
stants resul ti ng from the i ntegrati on of energy over the vol ume of the bl ast wave. The si gni fi cance
of the vari ous terms i n Z i s as fol l ows. The fi rst term i nvol vi ng 1 k i s the energy represented
by the fl at porti on of the pressure wave on the i nteri or of the fi rebal l . The next term i nvol vi ng 3
F k i s the i nternal energy i n the pressure peak near the shock front whi ch i s above the fl at porti on
of the porti on of the pressure wave. The thi rd term i nvol vi ng q~ 1 i s the contri buti on by the
ki neti c energy to the total energy wi thi n the shock front. The fi nal term i nvol vi ng Z COi s a smal l
correcti on resul ti ng from the fact that the equati on of state of ai r has been modi fi ed from that
whi ch appl i ed under ambi ent condi ti ons, and thi s term ri gorousl y al l ows for the di fference i n en-
ergy i nvol ved by subtracti ng out the i ni ti al energy densi ty PO/(yO 1).
The expressi on for the energy can be numeri cal l y i mproved by removi ng the strong vari ati on
of both R3 and g~ si nce thei r product vari es sl owl y. One performs the transformati ons necessary
to rel ate shock vel oci ty to shock pressure and uses the rel ati onshi p
u = nR/t
The energy can now be expressed sol el y i n terms of the radi us-ti me curve, by
[1
W=pO~F=pOn2~5F
The fi rst l ogari thmi c deri vati ve of R i s contai ned i n n and F and i mpl i es the second deri vati ve as
wel l .
I t shoul d be poi nted out that i n the expressi ons, as they stand, no expl i ci t use was made of the
Ranki ne-Hugoni ot energy equati on i n the fi nal expressi ons of the anal yti c sol uti on. The transf or ma-
ti on from shock pressure to shock vel oci ty i s the same expressi on gi ven i n Secti on 2.2.2 and i n-
vol ves onl y the conservati on of mass and momentum. I n a practi cal case, one can resort to the
Ranki ne-Hugoni ot energy rel ati onshi p to speci fy the dependence of qs on gs. I n pri nci pl e, however,
48
UNCMSSIR
.
. . : :-:
q.L:~
b BBm .*
B
.*
B .*
.0:0
.* B*
B.*
B.V B
~ : .a*
.0 _.*-
B Bae *em
ui:.i:slim
B *
B 9 B 9 B 0 B:0 :00 B
6
B _R-: ,:3:::7yPEq
1!w I
thi s dependence coul d al so beO~te~m~i l ed I $y mea~~i ng the densi ty compressi on rati o concurrentl y
:0 :0
wi th a measurement of radi us ~n~ ti me. Thi s measurement i s easi l y accompl i shed by a measure-
ment of the materi al vel oci ty behi nd the shock concurrentl y wi th the shock vel oci ty. Then, i n turn,
q~ i s speci fi ed di rectl y by the rati o of materi al vel oci ty to the shock vel oci ty through
1
u/u = ~
7s
wi thout use of the equati on of state.
I f an approxi mati on i s desi red for expressi ng the radi us-ti me curve of a strong shock, one
suspects from di mensi onal consi derati ons that i nstead of n = 0.4, i t woul d be better to use m = 1/3,
whence
1
()
ml
=3 q~1
I n such a case, n woul d vary from
n = 0.36 where qs = 12
through
n = 0.4 where ~s = 6
and
n= 0.5 where qs = 3
Thi s i s apart from the earl y radi ati ve growth, where we expect an earl y dependence l i ke n = 0.1
.
and mass effects where the earl y dependence i s l i ke n = 1.
We can now expl i ci tl y tabul ate the fai l ure of the si mi l ari ty condi ti on P N l /R$ by the observa-
ti ons that
(1) n and hence ~ are not constant wi th ti me;
n can vary from s 0.1 to ~1.O.
(2) qs i s not i ndependent of the pressure but vari es from 12 to l ess than 4, because of changes
i n the equati on of state.
(3) z i s not i ndependent of the pressure but vari es from 2.5 at l ow pressures where y = 1.4, to
a maxi mum val ue of ~ 5.5 near several hundred atmospheres.
(4) There i s onl y the suspi ci on, but no ri gorous proof, that dl n m/di n t i s zero.
.0 : \:
B *
9&
,*
Bb
B*
9**
B
Be
B.*
Ba B
.0
B
Be BO B B .0
B*,*
B.* Ba :
B.*
: : .OOO
.m. m..
B B oee *e@ B
2::.c-
B 0 .09 B B ** :00 B
B
B :**9 ::
B b B *
2.2.5 Scal i ng Laws
B:
B B *
9 B 9 B
:0 :* B
The W% scal i ng l aw i s perhaps the most wi del y known l aw i n bl ast hydrodynami cs. The basi s
for the l aw l i es i n strong shocks and i ts l i mi tati ons are expl i ci t i n the energy expressi on i n the
anal yti c sol uti on.
The form of the equati on whi ch rel ates pressure and radi us to yi el d i s the di rect evi dence that
i t i s possi bl e to separate the vari abl es i nto groups of di mensi onl ess numbers, ~s and F, as sepa-
9. Thi s means, i f we regard ~s as an i nvari ant i n descri bi ng di f - rate from the space di mensi on R
ferent bombs of di fferent yi el ds, and i f F were al so uni quel y rel ated to fs on al l bombs, then i n the
same atmosphere, W/R9 i s al so an i nvari ant. Thi s si mpl e scal i ng l aw does not appl y sol el y to
pressures; through the hydrodymmi c equati ons the other hydrodynami c quanti ti es can al so be ex-
pressed i n ter ms of ~s as the i nvari ants, ps/pO, c /cO, u /cO, T/TO. These l atter expressi ons are
equal l y val i d as hydrodynami c i nvari ants i n the scal i ng l aw. Because vel oci ti es are i nvari ant, i t
fol l ows that ti me shoul d al so scal e l i ke W%. The compl ete statement for the scal i ng l aw i s as fol -
l ows: Gi ven bombs of di fferent yi el ds i n the same atmosphere, al l detai l s of the wave forms both
Y3
i n space and ti me, wi l l scal e l i ke W .
I n transposi ng the resul ts of an expl osi on i n one homogeneous atmosphere to another homo-
geneousatmosphere, the pressure i s al so i ntroduced i n the scal i ng. The dependence of thi s resul t
on pressure i s now wel l known; i t was deri ved i ndependentl y by Suydam and Sachs. Thei r concl u-
si ons were based essenti al l y on di mensi onal consi derati ons of the i nvari ance of the hydrodynami c
equati ons under certai n transformati ons of the state vari abl es. The anal yti c sol uti on expresses
the same rel ati onshi p somewhat more expl i ci tl y. I f two expl osi ons are si mi l ar i n al l respects, i n-
cl udi ng the vari ati ons i n n, y, and dl n m/di n t, the Fs wi l l be i denti cal at the same gi ven val ue of
&s. Thi s means that the quanti ty (W/POR9)i s al so i nvari ant. The rul e i s best appl i ed by regardi ng
the quanti ty (W/PO)Y3as the energy i nvari ant wi th POexpressed i n bars i f the ori gi nal curve i s i n
bars. By the same token, i f the quanti ty<~i s an i nvari ant, we mean that the overpressure expressed
i n l ocal atmospheres i s al so an i nvari ant. I n scal i ng from a hi gh pressure atmosphere to a l ower
pressure atmosphere i t fol l ows that di stances wi l l be i ncreased, but pressures wi l l be reduced. I t
i s easi l y veri fi ed that the resul t of these transformati ons makes no di fference i n the overpressure
vs di stance curves i n those regi ons where P - I /Rg, but makes substanti al di fference when P N
l /R. I n the l i mi ts as PO--0, i t i s easi l y veri fi ed that, whi l e a gi ven pressure rati o occurs, at i n-
fi ni te di stance, the actual overpressure anywhere i s zero; thi s i s consi stent wi th the i ntui ti ve judg-
ment that no bl ast wave can occur i n a vacuum. I n such a di fferent atmosphere the vel oci ti es are
88 B B B+ :09
B se.
i nvari ant i f they are express~~ ~n :at& t~agbi e~t $ound vel oci ty or to a si mi l ar quanti ty such as
~. Thi s means that the qu~n&y ~cO s;;l ~~ l i k~ (W/PO)i 3or that, i n compari ng di fferent expl o-
si ves wi th di fferent atmospheres, ti mes wi l l scal e l i ke I /c. (W/Po)Y3. I n a very col d atmosphere
the ti me durati ons wi l l be consi derabl y l onger than those obtai ned sol el y from (W/Po)Ys correcti on.
There are further di ffi cul ti es, however, i n scal i ng to very di fferent atmospheres. These are
occasi oned by changes i n the equati on of state, and the dependence of the energy expressi on on n
and F. The temperature i nvari ant i s T/To, so al l temperatures behi nd the shock are reduced as
TOi s reduced. Thi s changes the val ue of y i n the shocked ai r, at si mi l ar rati os of ~s, wi th corre -
spondi ng changes i n n and F. For a col d enough atmosphere, y mi ght remai n near 1.4, and the
changes i n 7 woul d al one make a di fference of more than 2 i n F, and gi ve the same scal ed peak
pressure-di stance curve wi th onl y hal f the total energy. Moreover, the effect of radi ati ve trans-
port i n supporti ng the strong shock i s l i kel y to be qui te di fferent i n, say, a col d but very rare at-
mosphere, and wi l l resul t i n correspondi ng changes i n n.
These effects wi l l per si st down to pressures of practi cal i nterest, for once the shock becomes
weak (~s = 3), the regi on near the shock front becomes hydrodynami cal l y i ndependent of the i n-
teri or. Even i f two expl osi ons scal e by (W/Po) to the same curve at sea l evel over a range of weak
shock pressures, thi s i s by no means a guarantee that the hydrodynami c energy i s the same.
The facts that W/PO scal i ng al one does not l ower the overpressure at al ti tude for strong
shocks, and that changes i n the equati on of state can rai se the overpressure, for a gi ven energy
content, suggest that a change to a rarer, but very much col der atmosphere, woul d actual l y rai se
the overpressure vs di stance curve. At l ong di stances, of course, W/P. scal i ng demands a l ower-
i ng of the overpressure vs di stance curve. Hence, one says there i s a regi on of hi gh enough pres-
sures where the overpressure curve at al ti tude i s hi gher than at sea l evel ; there i s a cross-over
poi nt at some pressure l evel , and bel ow thi s the overpressure curve l i es bel ow the sea l evel curve.
Wi thout recourse to detai l ed cal cul ati on, one can esti mate the poi nt at whi ch the overpressures
at al ti tude cease to be hi gher than those at sea l evel , from a pl ot of l og Pf vs l og R pl ot, as i n Fi g.
2.2.5-1. Assume that the equati on of state at al ti tude i ncreases by the factor Fs/Fa ~
al ti tude;
c5ea l evel
because W and F are roughl y proporti onal to Z thi s i s si mpl y a hori zontal shi ft by (Fs/Fa)~. At
the same ti me, W/PO scal i ng wi l l move poi nts downward by Ps/Pa and to the ri ght by (Ps/Pa)%.
I n general , hi gh al ti tudes are al so col d and, si nce z i s l argel y a functi on of temperature, (F~/Fa)Y3
i s expected to be a shi ft to the ri ght. Over a regi on i n whi ch the overpressure coul d be descri bed as
B B
B oe
B9* :
~.: ::.d
B ....B .8...... .
B
B
B *
:B .
B e
B e
::
:
UNCUSS! EE~
B:
B *
P-l Rn
B
:
B:
bo
: :- B 0 B 0
the geometry now gi ves the cross-over poi nt as occurri ng where
l og P5/Pa
n=
..
10g (FS/Fa)% +
whi ch yi el ds
l og Fs/Fa _3 n
l og PJPa n
l og (P5/Pa)l 3
Whi l e great detai l i s requi red to rel ate F, Ps/Pa, and n to sati sfy these equati ons, some features
are cl ear. For hi gh pressures, n ~ 3, (W/Po) scal i ng transforms poi nts al ong the curve i tsel f, but
a subsequent shi ft to the ri ght of F i ncreases the di stance at whi ch a gi ven overpressure occurs.
Hence we say that at hi gh pressures the di stance at whi ch a gi ven pressure occurs wi l l be (Fs/Fa)~
ti mes l arger, and the pressure-di stance curve i s rai sed. At l ow pressure, n <3, the net decrease
due to (W/PO) qui ckl y overri des the net i ncrease due to FV3.A cursory exami nati on of the equati on
of state i n Fi gs. 2.2.2-1 to 2.2.2-4 shows that F i ncreases i n the order of 5%for (Ps/Pa) = 10 or at
0.1 standard atm. I nserti on of these val ues gi ves
l og 1.05 = 3/(n 1)
l og 10
or
n = 2.93
Now n = 2.93 corresponds to hi gh pressures l i ke 100 atm, near the sea l evel fi rebal l stage, and to
thi s extent one expects the pressure-di stance curve to l i e bel ow the correspondi ng sea l evel curve,
bel ow a pressui .e rati o of 100 or, for Pa = 0.1 Ps, at 145 psi overpressure. To choose an extreme
i n whi ch Y = 1.4 throughout, the rati o of F has a l i mi ti ng val ue of about 2. At very l ow pressures
n = 1, whence
l og 2
l og PJPa =
2
Pa/P5 = a
and for al l such atmospheres i n whi ch Pa > 0.707 Ps, the pressure-di stance
the standard curve. Fr om these consi derati ons we concl ude that, i n general ,
curve wi l l l i e above
the shi ft to a rarer
B
B+
B
.0
.*:*
B .
.0
uiwLAsWlE
o
An
.0B *
&B.**
B .B
B B B**
B*eo
.*
.-o ,.0 :
B .O.
;:-
.D*:
*%..:*.
B
B B O*
B *9 B0 :
i.; ::.9:
B *B 9* B ** B ,0 B -0 B
B
B
B 0
: B 0
B .
B * ::
:*
UNCLASS[HEV
atmosphere wi l l rai se pressures ~l i egh~y i t hi ~ $es~es, and decrease pressures at l ow pres-
sures. Unusual ambi ent condi ti ons can be assumed i n whi ch the pressure-di stance curve l i es
above the correspondi ng curve at hi gh shock strengths, but for homogeneous standard atmospheres,
the cross-over poi nt from hi ghness to l owness probabl y occurs wel l above pressures of practi cal
i nterest.
I n an i nhomogeneous atmosphere the probl ems of scal i ng are very much more compl ex and i t
i s doubfful that any si mpl e aml yti c expressi on can ever be deri ved whi ch i s uni versal l y appl i cabl e.
The probl em has been treated previ ousl y by Fuchs, but he assumed no angul ar fl ow of energy
and has treated the probl em at best semi acousti cal l y. The negl ect of refracti on effects and earl y
hi story are fundamental l i mi tati ons on the method, and i n general i t pr edi cts l ower pressures at
hi gh al ti tudes. Occasi onal l y the probl em has been treated by acousti c refracti on methods; the di ffi -
cul ty here i s that the hydrodynami c transport of energy i s qui te di fferent from the propagati on of
acousti c si gnal s; thi s method l eads general l y to pressures hi gher than expected at al ti tude.
Ri gorousl y, each case ought to be treated separatel y, and thi s probabl y requi res a di ffi cul t and
at l east two-di mensi onal i ntegrati on to deri ve the wave form as a functi on of the atmospheri c pa-
rameters at di fferent angl es as wel l as the di stance from the bomb. Even an approxi mate deri va-
ti on i s too l engthy to present here i n detai l and i s more properl y the subject of a separate paper.
The general features of such an esti mate are i ndi cated bel ow, where a sol uti on i s suggested whi ch
does not requi re a detai l ed machi ne i ntegrati on.
Duri ng the strong shock phase of an i nhomogeneous atmosphere, the absol ute pressure at the
shock front strongl y tends to be constant at the same ti me, for, i f a pressure gradi ent exi sted al ong
the shock, thi s pressure gradi ent woul d i n i tsel f accel erate a fl ow of materi al i n a di recti on to re-
l i eve that pressure. The mechani sm of radi ati ve transport extendi ng i n cl ose proxi mi ty to the
shock front al so guarantees a uni formi ty of temperature wi thi n the fi rebal l , and thi s i s the pusher
or fl ow of energy necessary to support hi gh pressures at al ti tude. Thi s strong tendency to equal i ze
the absol ute pressure means that the overpressure i n the rari fi ed porti on of the atmosphere coul d
actual l y be hi gher at a gi ven ti me than the overpressures i n the denser porti ons of the atmosphere.
But the gravi ty head at al ti tude wi l l l i mi t the pressures to the statement that at l east the over-
pressure wi l l be constant at a gi ven ti me. I n ei ther case, because of the hi gher pressure rati o i n
the rari fi ed atmosphere at al ti tude, the shock vel oci ty there wi l l be correspondi ngl y hi gher and usu-
al l y wi l l exceed the shock vel oci ty i n a denser, .~t hotter, medi um near the surface through
=CC
6 Pf Po) + 7 = c ~[6/7(Pf/Po)] + 1
53
B
B*.*m*
U!WLASSIF!Eb
diw:.i!.
B B
B 0,
B0 :
o; -dii
9*
B . B ** B *a B *. *
B
B m
B B B *
B *
6
uNct hs~/ ~~
: :
For an adi abati c l apse rate, wi th ~~ I ?q, &
:Uo ::
- P. 7.0Vot!he extent that 6Pf/Po >> 1, thi s means
u - P017 PO-72 -J P()-
5/14
Therefore, for strong shocks, shock vel oci ty i ncreases wi th al ti tude, despi te the l ower sound vel oc-
i ty. Al ong any ray, R = j: U dt, and thi s means that the shock radi i are greater at al ti tude than on
the surface. The shape of the shock front can be carri ed forward i n i ntegrated steps al ong di ffer-
ent ~ays as l ong as the condi ti on for equal i ty of overpressure i s val i d
Si mi l arl y, the rate of work per uni t area by the shock i s W = Pu, and by si mi l ar arguments on
.
u, as used for U, i t wi l l fol l ow that W i s hi gher at al ti tudes than at the surface.
Thi s consti tutes a preferenti al fl ow of energy towards the regi ons of l i ghtest densi ty, just as
i t does at any i nterface, l i ke the ground. The concept shoul d not be thought of as bl owi ng a hol e
i n the earths atmosphere wi th a suffi ci entl y l arge bomb, because such a di re phenomenon woul d
requi re an expl osi on of such magni tude that the materi al vel oci ti es at, say, 200 mi l es al ti tude
woul d exceed the escape vel oci ty from the earth, whi ch i s i n the order of 7 mi l es/sec. I n such a
case i t i s doubtful i f there woul d be much further earthl y i nterest i n the val i di ty of scal i ng l aws i n
an i nhomogeneous atmosphere.
Eventual l y, at l ow enough pressure, shock vel oci ty becomes soni c, (6/7) (Pf/Po) --0. We reach
a pressure l evel where the l ow val ue of co overri des the hi gher pressure rati o, and not unti l then
does the shock at al ti tude sl ow down to gi ve the same radi us at the same ti me and overpressure.
Once the shock ceases to be strong, the regi on near the shock front becomes detached hydro-
dynami cal l y from the i nteri or and by thi s ti me the fi rebal l i s no l onger a mechani sm for keepi ng
the pressure uni form behi nd the shock. There i s sti l l si defeedi ng of energy whi ch per si sts for
some ti me, because u + c > U at the shock, and some i dea of i ts i mportance i s gai ned from con-
si deri ng the l ateral angul ar spread for whi ch hydrodynami c transport vel oci ty can i nfl uence the
shock. Fi gure 2.2.5-2 shows the constructi on and thi s l ateral angl e. Fr om these resul ts one judges
that l ateral feedi ng per si sts down to fai rl y l ow pressures l i ke 0.05 atm. wi th a correspondi ng tend-
ency to keep overpressures fai rl y uni form. Thi s i s the concept whi ch repl aces the concept of
acousti c refracti on.
Once the possi bl e angl e for l ateral feedi ng becomes smal l , the shock can propagate wi thout the
requi rement for uni form overpressure al ong the shock front. The subsequent decay of the shock
can then be cal cul ated by a method usi ng the i ntegrated resul ts of the ordi nary spheri cal probl em.
Si nce the shock front i s l ocal l y detached both radi al l y and angul arl y, i t shoul d decay l i ke a smal l
.:. : ; :
.. :*. .0
B
.@ ,0
( . J NCLASSI HE
@
B @. e*.
dl km
B. *
B B . *.
B. eo
. 0
. ** B**:
. . *
.. . @
. .***
B *.
. . * , .
.. . *. *.
B BO. ac me B
B 00
Whili! ~:.
.*B:0 B ** B O* B M* B UI VCLASSF/ ~
B
B a. . : : .
: :
part of the spheri cal wave at these co~&i &~ i f w~& && mean the l ocal radi us of curvature
i nstead of the true di stance from the ori gi n of the bomb. Fr om the i ntegrati on of the spheri cal l y
symmetr i c wave the rate of decay of a shock wi th di stance i s found to be rel ated to the radi us by:
(~s -1) - I /Ri
where, by si mi l ar i ty arguments, i i s a functi on onl y of the shock strength ~s 1. I ntui ti vel y one
knows al so that thi s rate of decay i s connected di rectl y to the shape of the wave form behi nd the
shock. Fr om the shape of the shock front as i t devel oped duri ng strong shock growth, the radi i of
curvature can be cal cul ated at several angl es. Wi th these val ues of radi us of curvature, and the i ,
whi ch corresponds to the l ocal val ue of ~~, the pressure at a new ti me can be cal cul ated by a short
rei terati ve process, usi ng the average vel oci ty i n thi s range. After thi s i s done at several angl es,
the new shock front path can be pl otted. The radi i of curvature for the next step can then be cal cu-
l ated.
Wi thout presenti ng the detai l s of the cal cul ati on, one can readi l y i nfer the general nature of the
resul ts shown qual i tati vel y i n Fi g. 2.2.5-3, i n whi ch the shapes are greatl y exaggerated. At earl y
ti mes the strong shock condi ti ons make the wave propagate faster at al ti tude than at the ground, as
i n A. Duri ng thi s peri od, at l east, the overpressure i s constant at a gi ven ti me, so the pressure-
di stance curve at al ti tude l i es above the pressure-di stance curve for the surface. I f we were to
demand that the average shock front energy be the same as the true total hydrodynami c yi el d, some
poi nt on the shock front has the i deal pressure for i ts di stance, as shown by the l i ne I ; above thi s
l i ne pressures woul d be above i deal , and bel ow i t the pressure woul d be bel ow i deal . Radi i of
curvature are smal l er at al ti tude than at the ground. As the shock becomes weak, the shock at al ti -
tude sl ows down rel ati ve to the shock at the surface, partl y because al l vel oci ti es become soni c,
and partl y because of the smal l er radi i of curvature, thus greater di vergence i s i ntroduced. The
shock frent di stance at al ti tude and surface become more nearl y al i ke, as i ndi cated by the semi -
ci r cl e B, al though i t woul d be fortui tous i f the ci rcul ar shape hel d for al l angl es. At sti l l l ater
ti mes, i ndi cated by C, the shock vel oci ty i s nearl y soni c, and the growth of the shock i s faster and
the di stance from zero i s l arger at the surface than at al ti tude. Thi s i mpl i es, however, that the
radi i of curvature at the surface are smal l er, and the surface peak pressure-di stance curve decays
more rapi dl y than one woul d expect for the same yi el d and hori zontal di stance. Thi s i mpl i es that
the pressure-di stance curve at the surface conti nues to di verge from the i deal curve; i t was al -
ready bel ow i deal duri ng the strong shock phase.
B
:00
~Jw:::
B *B:. B ea B 0. e.. .
B
B
UNCIJ?S?l?%
8
B O
B :
:.
B
::
The method presented above has&e#do~e se~er&l ti :m~s by members of Group J-10 at Los
Al amos by hand i ntegrati on, and requi res al mut one man week for each speci al case once the tech-
ni ques are l earned. The extensi on of the method to a burst at hi gh al ti tudes i s cl ear.
2.3 I BM MACHI NE CALCULATI ON OF THE BLAST WAVE
2.3.1 Ori gi nal Deri vati on
A machi ne i ntegrati on of the hydrodynami c equati ons for a shock wave was carri ed out at
LASL i n 1944 under the di recti on of Fuchs, von Neumann, and others.
The cal cul ati on started wi th the assumpti on of an i sothermal and i sobari c sphere of radi us 10
meters, and supposedl y contai ni ng 10 KT of energy. Thi s cal cul ati on was carri ed forward to a ra-
di us of 80 meter s by hand cal cul ati on, usi ng (y - 1) theory. At that ti me the wave form was put i nto
the machi ne as the boundary condi ti on for the star t of the machi ne probl em. The machi ne sol uti on
i s an i ntegrati on of the hydrodynami c equati ons as i ndi cated i n Secti on 2.1.3. An equati on of state
was used whi ch provi ded for vari ati ons i n y through a fi tted equati on; i t was probabl y val i d, at l east
near the shock front. I t was fel t that whatever reasonabl e errors i n wave form were present at the
star t of the run woul d not seri ousl y affect the shape and growth of the wave at some ti me l ater
when the hydrodynami c equati ons had l i teral l y taken over.
After the run was compl eted, the energy i n i t was sai d to have been i ntegrated (i n a manner
unknown to the author) and found to be as hi gh as 13.4 KT i nstead of the supposed 10 KT i t ori gi -
nal l y contai ned. For a number of years thi s probl em l ay untouchec$ i n part, because of the uncer-
tai nty of i ts yi el d and, i n part (whi ch now seems i roni cal ), because i t di d not agree wi th the data on
nucl ear expl osi ons whi ch were consi dered most rel i abl e duri ng the l ate 1940s and earl y 1950s.
Some three or four years ago the author, as wel l as Bergen Suydam of LASL, began to use the re-
sul ts of thi s probl em, accepti ng i ts supposed uncertai nty i n yi el d for the sake of i ts general uti l i ty.
Havi ng the vari abl e gamma theory and the aml yti c sol uti on avai l abl e, one now reasonabl y asks
two questi ons: Fi r st, whether 10 KT of energy was actual l y put i n the bl ast wave at a radi us of 10
meters, because thi s i s a matter of knowtng the correct val ues of y at pressure l evel s where i t
was known l ess rel i abl y than at l ower pressures. The second questi on i s whether the eval uati on of
13.4 KT was based on rel i abl e val ues of y at l ate ti mes for the bookkeepi ng.
Whatever the i ni ti al condi ti ons of the I BM Run were, or the speci fi c equati on of state used, we
now propose that the I BM Run speci fi es P, p, and u i n i ts l i sti ngs at separate ti mes. Thi s confi gu-
rati on of hydrodynami c vari abl es i s suffi ci ent to defi ne an energy content. E one then appl i es any
I
0 BDe. ..a .
: W::
B *B *80 .*. B ** B
9
B Bc:.
:
ulwAss[flED
:;
B:
B
B
equati on of state, the energy i n the w&e B&a~ be &e&at&l stmpl y as a matter of bookkeepi ng. I f
i t turns out that thi s energy content i s reasonabl y constant over a range of pressures, then the I BM
resul ts are useful , parti cul arl y i n vi ew of the i nsensi ti vi tyy of the most i nteresti ng parameters near
the shock front to the energy content of the wave as a whol e, and because the starti ng condi ti ons
and equati on of state were not i n great error.
The remai nder of thi s secti on i s devoted to thi s energy eval uati o~ whi ch was done i n two
ways, fol l owed by a presentati on of the resul ts of the I BM cal cul ati ons i n a usabl e form.
2.3.2 Energy I ntegrati on of I BM Run
Despi te the uncertai nti es regardi ng the val ues of y used i n the I BM Run, the exi sti ng entri es
speci fy the state of the materi al by gi vi ng speci fi c val ues of P, p, and u, whi ch are suffi ci ent to
prescri be the i nternal energy, usi ng whatever energy i s gi ven by modern val ues i n the equati on of
state.
The energy eval uati on of the I BM Run was fi r st i ntegrated di rectl y as fol l ows. By defi ni ti on,
the hydrodynami c energy i s gi ven by the expressi on
W = ~(Ei + Ek) dV
[
P.
+~Pu2
.4m JR &)(yOl ) 2
1
r2 dr
At pressures of i nterest (bel ow 3000 atm) the contri buti on of radi ati on energy densi ty to the i nte-
gral i s negl i gi bl e. To faci l i tate the numeral i ntegrati on, transform thi s equati on as fol l ows
Upon conversi on of materi al vel oci ty i n I BM uni ts, u, to cgs uni ts, u, and wi th p. = 1.1613 x 10-s
gm/cmS, PO= 108 ergs/ems,
q U2
()
q U* (1.1613 X 10-3) 2.0 2 = ,432 ~ U,2
=.
2 P~v~ 2 106 . ZB2
Observe that
rz dr = 1/3 d (rs)

The i ntegrati on i s faci l i tated by
B
:*9
B 00.
B** : b 9*
S:ti: :
B O B *
9 B .* ..* .
B :..::
::
B:=.: B 0
pl &t#g $e en&?r&de~l i i i tyagai nst
\
r s and
di rectl y.
Because the di stances i n the I BM Run are expressed i n uni ts of 20 meters, and wi th 1 KT =
()
4n
4.19 X 101gergs = ~ X l f)i g ergs,
J[
12
W(KT)=8X1O-4
+?ZL
1
,R(y: 1) (yO~ 1) 2 POVOd (rs)
The average densi ty 7j between mass poi nts maybe cal cul ated di rectl y from entri es i n the I BM
Run. Denoti ng the i ni ti al posi ti on of the mass poi nts by roi and the present posi ti on by ri , conser-
vati on of mass requi res that
I t i s conveni ent to i ntegrate thi s equati on i n numeri cal form as
shock
N
t
1
W= 8X10-4 -
1
+Z-.!!l (r~-r~-1)
(Y 1) (YO Q 2 Povl )
i =l
Both q and ~ are speci fi ed by the I BM Run. Fi gures 2.2.2-1 through 2.2.2-4 gi ve the val ue of y
to use through the defi ni ti on Ei = PV/(y 1).
I n some cases the I BM Run does not extend suffi ci entl y far i nto the i nteri or to speci fy pres-
sures compl etel y to the ori gi n. For strong shocks thi s di ffi cul ty i s overcome by use of the rel a-
ti onshi ps from the anal yti c sol uti on. The tabul ated resul ts of the i ntegrati on are as fol l ows:
Radi us Ti mes Pressure Yi el d
(I BM Uni ts) (I BM uti ts) (Bars) (KT)
4.0 0 77.25 11.7
5.1 38 40.02 11.4
8.37 222 11.58 11.1
23.28 2164 2.007 11.5
79.62 13,652 1.1375 11.6
Average 11.5
I n vi ew of the consi stency of these resul ts, the modi cum of effort whi ch coul d be devoted to
thi s study, the uncertai nti es i n the equati on of state i n Fi gs. 2.2.2-1 through 2.2.2-4, and the
meager requi rement for accuracy i n energy, i t seems cl ear enough that the energy i n the I BM Run
over the enti re range i s 11.5 + 0.5 KT for practi cal purposes.
B O B *
./ -
B **9*.
B
B
B .
B * .
B**
:
There i s one addi ti onal i nteresti n~ ~oncl u~i on &o$L th&&dy. At l ow pressures there i s a
strong temptati on to speci fy y as 1.4, whi ch i s certai nl y correct near the shock front, even at sub-
stanti al pressures l i ke 50 psi , and the i nteri or of the wave has l ong si nce decayed to normal at-
mospheri c pressures. An exami nati on of the l i nes of constant y i n Fi gs. 2.2.2-1 through 2.2.2-4
shows, however, that thi s i s not the case; despi te the fact the ai r near the center has returned to
ambi ent pressure, i t i s at the very hi gh temperatures i nduced by the ori gi nal entropy change, and
the departures are l arge from the i deal equati on of state wi th y = 1.4. I f the energy i ntegrati on i s
performed at l ow pressures wi th y = 1.4 over the enti re wave the remarkabl e resul t i s that the
apparent energy of the bl ast wave at l ow pressures drops to 5.5 KT. The rati o of thi s number to
the average val ue of 11.5 KT i s surpri si ngl y cl ose to the so-cal l ed bl ast effi ci ency of a nucl ear
expl osi on, i n compari son wi th TNT. Thi s means further that the entropy change i tsel f does not
waste heat as such, but that the fi nal confi gurati on of pressure and densi ty on the i nteri or of the
wave requi res a greater energy by vi rtue of l ow val ues of y 1 than woul d be requi red for y = 1.4.
2.3.3 Anal yti c Sol uti on on the I BM Run
The anal yti c sol uti on was appl i ed to the I BM Probl em M for several purpose= (1) to fi nd the
pressure l evel at whi ch the anal yti c sol uti on i s no l onger val i d because i t i s a strong shock sol u-
ti on; (2) to gi ve an i ndependent determi nati on of the I BM yi el ~ and (3) to test the val i di ty of the
second deri vati ve ter ms i nvol ved i n dl n m/di n t by appl yi ng the sol uti on i n a regi on where the
l ogari thmi c sl opes n snd m are known to be changi ng rapi dl y.
Some perti nent poi nts i n the procedure fol l ow. A zero ti me correcti on i s necessary and zero
ti me for the I BM run was arbi trari l y set to make the sl ope of the l og r vs l og t pl ot exactl y 0.4 at
the fi r st l i sti ng at 80 meters. Thi s may or may not correspond to a real bomb but the procedure i s
reasonabl e because thi s assumpti on of sl ope was current at the ti me the work was done. Second,
the val ues of q~ are tabul ated l i sti ngs and these were used di rectl y rather than those from Fi gs.
2.2.2-1 through 2.2.2-4. The val ues of F were abtai ned f rom the tabul ated val ues of ~~for a gi ven
ti me. Thi rd, the tabul ated val ues of pressure and vel oci ty at the shock front were used si nce these
are speci fi ed di rectl y by the run. Fi nal l y, no attempt was made to smooth out vari ati ons i n yi el d
by an i terati on of the sol uti on to correct for vari ati ons i n the pl otti ng and cal cul ati ng procedure.
The tabul ated resul ts of thi s study appear i n the fol l owi ng tabl e.
.0
.a. be.
B 0;
.*
B *
B *
&
o
B * , B*
b
..0
B B B*.
9*e8
Be* .** :
B.* B
.* .**
.:; : .*- . .
.- .:
SOME RESULTS FROM THE ANALYTI C SOLUTI ON APPLI ED TO I BM PROBLEM M
Ti me, t Radi us, R ~_dl nm Overpressure, P Yi el d, W
(msec) (Meters) dl n t (atm) (KT)
11.60 80.00 0.921 76.25 11.91
16.35 91.96 0.965 52.57 12.15
22.85 105.6 1.018 35.65 11.96
32.10 121.8 1.035 24.02 11.66
45.60 141.4 1.026 16.29 11.87
64.10 164.0 1.026 11.14 11.61
90.60 191.2 1.088 7.46 11.79
126.6 222.3 1.132 5.08 11.68
180.6 262.3 1.172 3.41 11.96
Average 11.84
At thi s pressure l evel the sol uti on fi nal l y becomes i nadequate, and sl i ghtl y after i t i s expected to do
so by a compari son of wave forms.
256.6 310.9 1.222 2.31 12.77
360.6 369.5 1.259 1.593 14.11
520.5 450.3 1.374 1.074 13.57
720.5 542.7 1.488 0.753 15.99
1040.5 680.0 1.532 0.504 21.93
1440.5 842.1 1.601 0.355 29.45
As a resul t of thi s study i t seems cl ear enough that the I BM Run eval uates i n the order of
11.8 + 0.1 KT. The sol uti on evi dentl y breaks dawn from 1%accuracy arwnd the 30 psi l evel . Even
at the l ow val ue of 10 psi overpressure the apparent energy i s off onl y by 35%, and because of the
cube root dependence thi s means l i ttl e more than 10%i n pressures or di stances at l ow pressures.
I t i s especi al l y sati sfyi ng to see the sol uti on fai l near the 3 atmosphere l evel , preci sel y where
the strong shock assumpti ons fai l . As part of thi s study, the pressure wave forms, the I BM run,
and the anal yti c sol uti on were conti nuousl y compared. Duri ng the earl i est part of the run, when the
I BM wave form i s strongl y i nfl uenced by the starti ng condi ti ons used, the anal yti c sol uti on gi ves
sl i ghtl y hi gher pressures on the i nteri or than the l i sti ngs; thi s di sagreement i s expected and appears
as the hi gh val ue of yi el d 11.91 (fortui tousl y cl ose) and 12.15 KT at the fi r st two entri es. Thereafter,
the hydrodynami cs of the machi ne run control the wave form, and i t i s i nteresti ng that thi s changes
the I BM wave form to better agreement wi th the anal yti c sol uti on. Thi s consi stency i n wave form i s
associ ated wi th the consi stent anal yti c sol uti on yi el ds down to the 3.4 atmosphere l evel . Thereafter
the anal yti c sol uti on wave form gi ves pressures whi ch are hi gher than those of the I BM Run, and thi s
di screpancy i s di rectl y associ ated wi th the hi gh apparent yi el ds at 2.31 atmospheres overpressure and
bel ow.
.*
Bom.
B.* B
9**
B e
.*
*ee. ee
B a
iiik
.%** 0
B * . c .*.
.*
B@* B69 :
B.* B
.0
*m.
.:; : .m* B .
.- .:
B e. B .
:-.
B emm
3@l&;
9:
B 9
:0
. B.
B::::0
B
B * B ::
:. :. :.O
2.4 DERI VED CURVES FOR FREE AI R
2.4.1 Vari abl es at the Shock Front
Once the energy of the I BM probl em i s determi ned, tabl es and graphs can be constructed for
conveni ence i n appl yi ng the resul ts. For faci l i ty i n yi el d transformati ons, di stances and ti mes
have been scal ed to 1 KT usi ng the ori gi nal run as 11.5 KT. I n al l graphs and charts that fol l ow
throughout thi s paper, ambi ent condi ti ons are
PO= 1 bar, or 10s dynes/cm2
Densi ty pO= 1.1613 X 10-3 gm/cm3
Sound vel oci ty co = 1138 ft/see, or 347 meters/see.
Transformati ons to other atmospheres or yi el ds are made as descri bed i n Secti on 2.2.5.
Appendi x A contai ns the l i sti ngs of the radi us and ti me, as wel l as the hydrodynami c vari abl es
of i nterest at the shock front. The pressures l i sted as absol ute pressures i n bars wi l l al so be the
absol ute pressure rati o i n ter ms of whatever ambi ent atmosphere i s chosen. The densi ty rati o
l i sted as qs wi l l be the compressi on rati o at the shock f rent. Shock vel oci ty i s l i sted as the di men-
si onl ess quanti ty U/c. and for other atmospheres may be converted to vel oci ti es i n ft/sec or
meters/see by mul ti pl yi ng by the appropri ate ambi ent vel oci ty. Materi al vel oci ti es u/cO are l i sted
i n a fashi on si mi l ar to the shock vel oci ty.
Fi gure 2.4.1-1 i s a pl ot of the peak overpressure vs di stance. For conveni ence, the curve i s
al so pl otted wi th a refl ecti on factor of 2, and, as such, i s conveni ent for obtai ni ng di rectl y the peak
pressures over an i deal surface from shots at or near the ground surface.
The rel ati onshi p between a ki l oton of TNT and the hydrodynami c ki l oton i s not, nor i s i t ex-
pected to be, a fi xed quanti ty at al l pressure l evel s. For most pressure l evel s of i nterest, a nu-
cl ear expl osi on of yi el d W wi l l gi ve the same overpressure as approxi matel y 40~ W of TNT, i n the
usual compari son wi th short tons of TNT. I n compari ng smal l charges wi th TNT the appropri ate
scal i ng factors may be read di rectl y from the graph, because the hori zontal di spl acement between
the free ai r curve and the TNT curve and the TNT curve i s, of course, the cube root of the yi el d.
The rel ati ve effi ci ency i s al so pl otted i n Fi g. 2.4.1-2. Because the TNT curve and the curve wi th a
refl ecti on factor of 2 roughl y superi mpose, i t fol l ows that a rough rul e of thumb, val i d to a few
percent i n di stance, i s that the scal i ng factor of approxi matel y 100 appl i es between 1 l b of TNT and
a 1 KT nucl ear expl osi on.
B e b
B *
B :
*
..6~; .0 ::
B B
B ***1,
B *D :00 B
B B +ff
B 9** :00 :
.*. *
Bm...=
B **
-
B O
.**
B
B :
I
B
B *
B::
:
:
B B*
B
B0::. ::
UNCLASSl f l ED
Fr om these curves and graphs many useful re&i %ns~s can be deri ved at wi l l . For e=mpl e,
i f the peak pressure i s pl otted agai nst the ti me, i t wi l l be found that the rel ati onshi p Pf x ti i ~
constant i s sati sfi ed. Thi s i s expected because at hi gh pressures P i s nearl y proporti oml to l /R3,
and R x to.4, R8 N tl B2; hence, Pf X t
i 2 i s approxi matel y constant. At l ong di stances, the pressures
are usual l y sai d to approach l /R. At thi s pressure l evel the di stance i s proporti onal to the ti me,
(U ~ CO),so Pt = constant. When vari abl e y i s i ntroduced, the vari ati ons i n y and the departures
from the strong shock condi ti ons resul t i n P - l /R .25 at a ti me when R - to, whence Pti 1 s con-
stant. At pressures around 1 psi the shock i s not yet soni c and correspondi ng vari ati ons i n these
powers al so resul t i n a proporti onal i ty of the form: Ptl i ~ constant. Thi s suggests a conveni ent
form for a si mpl e, approxi mate i ntegrati on for condi ti ons at the shock front for formi ng anal yti c
expressi ons over a wi de range of pressures. Si nce the shock vel oci ty i s rel ated to the overpres -
sure by
and
i t fol l ows
u/c. = {(6/7) (Pf/Po) + 1
Pf/Po = A/tl i
that
U/Co = ~(6/7) (A/tl B) + 1
and further
dR = j{(6/7) (A/tl B) + 1 dt
Thi s form of expressi on ought to gi ve a consi derabl y better approxi mati on than the termi nated
seri es, someti mes used, of the form
R = Z Antn
The resul t that Ptn = constant, wi th n ~ 1.1 i s a si mpl e statement whi ch appl i es from strong
shocks wi th vari abl e gamma down to regi ons where Fuchs ter m of the P - l /R - appl i es.
Through the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot condi ti ons, i t then compl etel y defi nes al l the shock condi ti ons, and
wi th thi s as a boundary condi ti on, i t def hes the wave forms on the i nteri or. So, the whol e hi story
of a shock wave coul d be descri bed from thi s resul t. Wi th thi s di scovery one asks i f there i s any
i nherent property of shocks whi ch makes i t so, or i s i t onl y a fortui tous compr omi se between n =
B O B B * B 0 B
.em
B 0
B 0 :.*.::
B
B * B m B B:- :90 B
:m *..**
B *..
iidliw;
B .
BO:*
:
B*a
B:
B
UNCLhSSIF\E@
B0::. ::
1.2 and n = 1.0. I f there were a good physi cal reas~n,!t ~d~l d provi de a compl etel y new basi s for
sol vi ng the propagati on of a bl ast wave.
2.4.2 Hydrodynami c Vari abl es on the I nteri or of a Wave
The curves i n thi s secti on are a novel presentati on i ntended to per mi t a rapi d determtnati on of
the wave forms for stati c pressure, dynami c pressure, densi ty, materi al vel oci ty, or mass coor-
di nates for any yi el d or atmosphere. The wave form may be obtai ned at constant di stance as a
functi on of ti me, at constant ti me as a functi on of di stance, or al ong any arbi trary path desi red i n
the r-t pl ane.
On each curve the l i ne marked shock f rent i s the ti me of arri val curve. On the i nteri or of
the wave the posi ti ve or negati ve durati ons (where appl i cabl e) may be read from the di fference i n
ti me at the shock front to the ti me when the vari abl e i n questi on passes through ambi ent condi ti ons.
Si mi l arl y, the posi ti ve wave l ength may be read from the di fference i n di stances at the shock front
at the ti me i n questi on to the correspondi ng di stance at whi ch the vari abl e i n questi on passes
through ambi ent condi ti ons. I t shoul d be noted that the posi ti ve durati on and posi ti ve wave l ength
are di fferent for each vari abl e.
The method for obtai ni ng the wave forms i s si mi l ar i n al l fi gures, Fi gs. 2.4.2-1 through
2.4.2-5, whi ch we wi l l i l l ustrate wi th the case of the pressure l evel at 1000 ft. To obtai n the pres -
sure vs ti me wave at thi s ti me for 1 KT, pl ace a strai ght-edge al ong the l i ne 1000 feet. The
pressures and correspondi ng ti mes are read di rectl y at the i ntersecti on between the strai ght-edge
and the i sobars. I t i s even more conveni ent to use the bottom edge of a pi ece of l og paper (semi -
l og or l og-l og)* as the strai ght-edge, i f the functi onal modul us of the paper i s the same as the
graphs here. The pressure wave may then be pl otted di rectl y by extendi ng a verti cal l i ne upward o
from the i ntersecti on of the paper and i sobar and posti ng the pressure on any conveni ent ordi nate.
I f desi red, the wave form may then be transformed i nto any other set of coordi nates.
For conveni ence, a scal i ng l i ne has been drawn whi ch i l l ustr ates the method of transformi ng
the resul ts to other yi el ds. Thi s scal i ng al most demands the use of these graphs on standard si ze
paper. Ti ck mar ks are provi ded for 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200 and 500 KT, and 1 MT. Fi r st use
or draw up a transparent 1 x 1 cycl e l o~ri thmi c paper of the same functi onal modul us both i n
radi us and ti me as the ori gi nal , but wi th the coordi nates l abel ed to sui t the yi el d i n questi on. Now,
* These were ori gi nal l y drawn on Keuffel & Esser Co. No. 359-1OOL l ogari thmi c 1 x 1 cycl e.
Master ozal i d copi es (the ori gi nal on thi s standard paper) are avai l abl e through J-10 at LASL, and
consi derabl y faci l i tate the procedure.
B B B
B 0 B * B
B: B
,.
B
B me*
6:: ::
B *
B *
B * B * B ** B:0 :9* B
i:..
Bo: :
:Ailiii;
B *
: :
B B*
.*: :
B::0
::
l j i i bMJ hi !4E0
B 0 :0 .OQ
sl i de the 1000 ft and 1 sec i ntersecti on of the transparent paper up or down 45 al ong the scal i ng
l i ne unti l that i ntersecti on fal l s on the appropri ate yi el d. Thi s procedure automati cal l y scal es both
space and ti me to the yi el d i n questi on and the wave forms at the proper di stances and ti mes may
be read di rectl y as i l l ustrated i n the previ ous paragraph for 1 KT. I f the ambi ent atmosphere i s
di fferent from PO= 1 bar the procedure i s modi fi ed by usi ng (W/POi /3 as the energy i nvari ant i n-
stead of si mpl y W73. I f the ambi ent sound vel oci ty i s cl i fferent from 1138 ft/see, an addi ti onal shi ft
of the transparent sheet i s requi red to the ri ght i f CO>1138 ft/see, to the l eft i f CO<1138 ft/sec.
For the regi on i n questi on, the densi ty vari ati on may be determi ned f rom the pressure curve
nearl y as wel l by usi ng the adi abati c l aw as by usi ng the densi ty curve presented here. I f i t i s de-
si r ed to provi de i ndependentl y for the vari ati ons from the adi abati c l aw due to the di fferent en-
tropy, the fol l owi ng procedure may be used. Locate the poi nt i n questi on on the i nteri or of the
wave on the mass moti on graph. Fol l ow thi s mass moti on l i ne backward i n ti me and unti l i t i nter-
sects the shock front at thi s radi us and ti me; the peak shock pressure and densi ty may then be
read from the tabl e i n Appendi x A. The adi abati c l aw may safel y be appl i ed usi ng y = 1.4, when
the pressures i nvol ved are l ess than 10 atmospheres. At hi gher pressures, a si mi l ar procedure
woul d be fol l owed by readi ng the shock val ues di rectl y from the fi gures h Secti on 2.2.2 and fol -
l owi ng the correspondi ng adkbat down to the pressure at the ti me i n questi on.
The hydrodynami c transport vel oci ty i s often of i nterest. The l ocal sound vel oci ty on the i n-
teri or of the wave form maybe cal cul ated from the pressure usi ng the adi abati c l aw or, ti de-
si red, by readi ng pressure and densi ty both, and usi ng the equati on c = {~ I n thi s connecti on,
a poi nt i s often confused i n the current l i terature. I t i s often assumed that the end of the posi ti ve
pressure phase moves wi th ambi ent sound vel oci ty as i f posi ti ve durati ons were ti e same for al l
three vari abl es, pressure, materi al vel oci ty, and sound vel oci ty. Exami nati on of these fi gures or
hydrodynami c consi derati ons show that thi s cannot be the case. At the end of the posi ti ve pres-
sure phase, the materi al vel oci ty sti l l has a forward component, and wi l l not become zero unti l
deep i n the negati ve pressure phase. Because of the i ni ti al entropy change across the shock f rent,
the sound vel oci ty i s al so above ambi ent at the end of the posi ti ve pressure phase. A correct
statement i s that the end of the posi ti ve pressure phase al ways moves wi th a vel oci ty greater than
CO. Si mi l arl y, at the depth of the negati ve phase, sound vel oci ty wi l l be l ess than COand the mate-
ri al vel oci ty wi l l usual l y be i n a negati ve di recti on at thi s ti me. Hence, a correct statement here i s
that the negati ve phase al ways travel s sl ower than ambi ent sound vel oci ty. At the end of the nega-
ti ve pressure phase the sound vel oci ty i s agai n above ambi ent because of entropy changes, and the
B B B B B B 9
c:. .
B *
& ! : . :
iaiiiiii
B Ba* *me
B *
: B B
B
Bmm:.*
::~~a
B :
B O
B
:
B
B:*
9
* ::
00:0.
l J NCLA$sl Ft~o
: :
materi al vel oci ty may agai n be more posi ti ve tha~ateke depth of the pressure negati ve phase.
Thus, there i s a poi nt near the end of the negati ve phase whi ch travel s faster than the depth of the
negati ve phase precedi ng i t. Thi s catch up vel oci ty i s i mportant because i t enhances the pro-
ducti on of secondary shocks on the i nteri or of the wave near the end and depth of the negati ve
phase.
I t i s someti mes i ncorrectl y assumed that al l sound si gnal s on the i nteri or of a shock wave
eventual l y catch the shock f rent. The exi stence of the poi nt at the depth of the negati ve phase,
whi ch travel s more sl owl y than COwhi ch, i n turn, i s sl ower than U, consti tutes a barri er prevent-
i ng smal l si gnal s from ever catchi ng the front. I t i s, of course, possi bl e for a fi ni te shock of suf-
fi ci ent strength to be supersoni c i n the l ocal medi um and pass over the negati ve phase. However,
i n most cases the accumul ated si gnal s on the i nteri or wi l l not be thi s strong and the two shocks
may run behi nd one another forever. I n much the same way, other pressure si gnal s are trapped
i n a ser i es of osci l l ati ons behi nd the fi r st posi ti ve and negati ve phases.
2.5 THERMAL RADI ATI ON
2.5.1 Total Thermal Energy of the Bomb
I n Secti on 2.1.4 i t was shown that the entropy change associ ated wi th strong shocks resul ted i n
pronounced resi dual heati ng on the i nteri or of the fi rebal l . Thi s gi ves r i se to the pri nci pal di ffer-
ence between a nucl ear and a smal l -charge expl osi on, namel y, the fi rebal l and the thermal radi a-
ti on from i t. The basi c phenomena have been descri bed i n Chapter VI of Effects of Atomi c Weap-
ons. The ti me dependence of the radi ati on rate for a nomi nal bomb has been esti mated i n Fi g. 6.20
i n that publ i cati on and i t wi l l be made the basi s for the di scussi ons concerni ng thermal radi ati on
i n thi s and succeedi ng chapters.
The mai n features of the thermal radi ati on from the bomb are bri efl y revi ewed as fol l ows.
Fol l owi ng the i ni ti al detonati on, the radi ati on rate from the bomb rapi dl y r i ses to a maxi mum i n a
fracti on of a mi l l i second and thereafter begi ns to fal l sharpl y. A mi ni mum i n the radi ati on rate
occurs around 15 msec for a nomi nal bomb and thereafter the radi ati on rate r i ses to a second
maxi mum around 0.2 to 0.4 sec. For conveni ence, the fi gure i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons was
pl otted as the l og of the radi ati on rate vs the l og of the ti me. Thi s di stor ts the i mpressi on one
woul d obtai n from a l i near pl ot. Onl y a very smal l fracti on of the total radi ati on i s emi tted pri or
to the l i ght mi ni mum, at whi ch ti me the radi ati on rate fal l s effecti vel y to zero. The effecti ve f rac -
ti on of thermal radi ati on occurs rel ati vel y l ate compared to
B 0 B B * :* :*0
,Oq: o::
B0 B :
B
B
B m B 90
B
i =
B**
B
s
.0. B ** B om
be .eo**bm B
most phenomena, other than bl ast, i n a
uNcLAss\F
B 9. . .
:00
.0..
::klw~;
UNCLASSI RFB
B : . .
B e.B
:
. : : :
: . : :
B
B mB : :
B *
nucl ear expl osi on. The bul k of the radi ati on com~~ dti r ti ~e peri od from 0.2 to 1 sec at rates
whi ch are several hundred ti mes greater than at the mi ni mum, or at ti mes l i ke several seconds.
Fi gure 2.5.1 i s a l i near pl ot of Fi g. 6.20 i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons. Si nce the thermal
radi ati on rate was gi ven, thi s graph can be readi l y i ntegrated to obtai n the total thermal energy of
the bomb by performi ng the i ntegrati on
where dQ/dt i s the hei ght of the curve and the fi gure sui tabl y normal i zed at any di stance desi red.
I t i s thus found that the total thermal energy of the bomb i s 8.4 x 1012cal , or about 42% of the
speci fi ed nomi nal yi el d of 20 KT.
I n a l ater part of the secti on we wi l l postul ate that the total thermal energy of the bomb i s
more l i ke 100% of the yi el d and meanwhi l e i t i s i nstructi ve to consi der roughl y the decay rate of
the thermal radi ati on tai l . A ri gorous consi derati on of thi s probl em presents enormous di ffi cul ti es
i n the detai l ed physi cs of the radi ati ve transport i nteracti ng wi th shock hydrodynami cs. However,
si nce radi ati on rates, temperatures, and emi ssi vi ti es are often expressed i n power l aws, i t seems
reasonabl e to make esti mates for the power dependence i n the l ate hi story of
dQ/dt ~ l /tn
We questi on whether the sharp cut-off i n Fi g. 6.20 near 3 sec i s real or wi l l per si st, and wonder
why an abrupt change shoul d occur so l ate after that maxi mum. A temporary drop coul d be real
and the reason i s the very l ow opaci ty (and hence emi ssi vi ty) of col d ai r, but thi s merel y del ays
the emi ssi on of radi ati on, and woul d thus sustai n the rate at sti l l l ater ti mes. At l ate ti mes most
of the heated ai r i s returned to ambi ent pressure, and at a correspondi ng temperature, whi ch i s
hi gher than ambi ent. Assume al l el ements of the ai r radi ate wi th the temperature dependence l i ke
where we i ncl ude the dependence of emi ssi vi ty on temperature as part of the power b. I n a ra-
di ati ng mass of gas, the temperature wi l l fal l accordi ng to the heat remai ni ng from an ori gi nal Q,
after Q(t) has radi ated away. I f the speci fi c heat i s i ndependent of the temperature
T-(Qo -Q)
After substi tuti ng for T, we have
: 66: : ::
B** B B a
B
.0:* B *
UNCI AS! dFI ED
B
B 0
, , 0 *C* B
i - ml
. **
8 B
. : e.
B ~00
.B B **
. . O : . B *
B
B B
+
B
Wiiiiv;
B B .
.:*.*.
B0
:
::
B * :0 e~
B O
B
;
B - :
(Qo:QQ)6
- dt
After i ntegrati ng thi s expressi on, we have
(Q. - i f @- l - t
or
t - (Qo Q)l -b
Wi th
T - (QoQ) - ti l l -b
i t fol l ows that
dQ/dt - Tb - tbl l -b - l /tb~-l
or
n= b/b-l
A medi an val ue of b mi ght be 4 from the Stefan-Bol tzmann l aw and a bl ack body model , whence n =
1.333; some hi gher power i s appl i cabl e i f emi ssi vi ty fal l s wi th temperature, whence, for b = 5,
n = 1.25; or some l ower power, whence, for b = 3, n = 1.50. These woul d seem to be hi gh esti mates
of n, for i f the radi ati on rate fel l because part of the radi ati on was absorbed i n some speci al proc-
ess, the captured radi ati on woul d l ater re-radi ate and sustai n the tai l fracti on, thus l oweri ng the
val ue of n. I f the emi ssi vi ty fal l s, i t wi l l si mi l arl y sustai n the rate at l ater ti mes. Fr om thi s we
cannot defi ni tel y concl ude that the sharp break at 2 sec i n Fi g. 6.20 i s wrong, but i f i t i s real there
i s l i ttl e reason to expect a sharp break i n sl ope at thi s ti me to conti nue for al l ti me.
Conservati on of energy al so pl aces r estr i cti ons on the decay rate. Speci fy r as the ti me when
the tai l begi ns to behave l i ke
dQ/dt = A/t n
Then the radi ati on i n the tai l to i nfi ni te ti mes woul d be
AQ(T<t<~)=A
j/
- dt tn=
r
(n~-r n-l
Thi s i s sol ved wi th n 2 1.65. A repeat of thi s cal cul ati on at 7 = 1 sec gi ves n 2 1.23. I t al so means
that the total thermal energy i s 100% i f n has val ues between 1.25 and 1.50. Between 1 and 2 see,
Fi g. 6.20 actual l y shows a sl ope of 1.43.
The suspi ci on that the decay sl ope shoul d not change abruptl y at 2 see, and the l ow val ue of n
for 1< t <2 i n Fi g. 6.20 makes one suspect further that a l arge fracti on of thermal energy may be
i nvol ved i n the l ong tai l after 2 see, and we shoul d try to esti mate the total for reasonabl e l i mi ti ng
val ues of n, wi thout reference to the shape of the curve i n Fi g. 6.20. Wri ti ng the total thermal ra-
di ati on as Q~ and the radi ati on up to ti me 7 as Q~
:0
B.* B B
B *.*
M&; -
[~IyoL&T9wJ
B :..
B
:
B B0
B:.O
:
::
I t i s cl earl y requi red that n >1 i n th~ t;i ~, c%th~fn~r.?b l voul d di verge to i nfi ni te total thermal
energy. Even for n > 1, there i s a substanti al contri buti on i n the tai l for smal l n -1.
Because the radi ati on rate i s qui te l ow at ti mes l i ke 2 or 3 sec for a nomi nal bomb, there i s a
strong temptati on to regard the radi ati on up to these ti mes as the total thermal radi ati on. But a
compari son of the thermal radi ati on i ntegrated to i nfi ni te ti me for 1< n c 1.5 wi th the i ntegrated
thermal radi ati on to ti me ~, shows that such a tai l fracti on i s so l arge that i t i s enti rel y ambi gu-
ous to speak of total thermal radi ati on at ti mes l i ke several seconds. One mi ght speak of Q(r)
as the effecti ve radi ati on, but thi s depends i n turn on an arbi trary conventi on for sel ecti ng 7.
Thi s compari son between Q(7) and the tai l fracti on can be done careful l y on a speci fi c pul se
shape curve but the rel ati ve magni tude of the tai l fracti on can be i l l ustrated as fol l ows. Fr om Fi g.
2.5.1-1 the radi ati on rate over the enti re sphere at 2 sec i s 0.94 x 107 cdc~~~~rs2
whi ch gi ves
for the enti re fi rebal l
A = 41rx 0.94 x 101i cal /sec
The enti re area under the curve to 3 sec i ntegrates to 42% of the nomi nal bom~ by 2 see, 93% of
that has been radi ated, whi ch i s 39% of the energy of the bomb or 7.8 x 10i 2 cal . The decay rate i s
then l i mi ted by the total energy so that no
sec.
more than 12.2 x 10i 2 cal coul d be radi ated l ater than 2
122 x 1012cal 2 (n l ~7n-1
or
B 0
: 68 :* :. 9**
.9* B
.0
B .,..
.0 : B *
:
UNCIASWIEb
Bb boo
,,* :*O B
km
B *
.@-
.*
.*.
.B B**
::-:. :O
B
.** B B
.
[
=QTI + A
Q,(n-l ) rn-
11
The ter m i n the brackets i nvol vi ng A i s the rel ati ve thermal yi el d i n the tai l fracti on. Now some
mani pul ati on of the functi on Q(t) wi l l show that a reasonabl e approxi mati on duri ng ti mes from the
maxi mum to 1 sec i s
Q(t) = Q. (t/r)%
whence
(dQ/dt)7 = Q#2r = A/rn
so
A= Q7Tn-1
2
Usi ng thi s approxi mati on, we obtai n
[
1
T= Q71+2 (n-1)
1
Fr om thi s we concl ude that for n =1.5, the tai l fracti on i s equal to the so-cal l ed total thermal
radi ati on Q~, and for n = 1.25, the tai l fracti on i s twi ce the Yotal thermal radi ati on.
To summari ze the fi ndi ngs i n thi s secti on, we can sa~
(a) The sharp l ogari thmi c decay i n radi ati on rate i n Fi g, 6.20 i s probabl y not real forever, and
the fi nal rate shoul d be more l i ke n = 1.50,
(b) I f the fi nal rate i s from n = 1.25 to n = 1.50 the tai l fracti on 1s such that the total thermal
radi ati on wi l l approach the enti re energy of the bomb.
The decay rate for n = 1.50 i s shown as a dotted l i ne i n Fi g. 2.5.1-1. The di fferences from the
ori gi nal curve are hardl y detectabl e i n the i nterval 1 to 2 sec. I t wi l l be shown i n a l ater secti on
that these di fferences are uni mportant i n vi ew of hydrodynami c perturbati ons to the radi ati on rate
whi ch coul d be observed at these and l ater ti mes.
The di scussi on i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons l eads to the general i mpressi on that the total
thermal radi ati on from the bomb shoul d be a constant fracti on of the total yi el d, more or l ess i n-
dependent of the yi el d. I n the remai nder of the present secti on we wi l l questi on the si mpl i ci ty of
basi c theoreti cal arguments presented here, I n a l ater chapter we wi l l requi re a more detai l ed
B
B B 9 :**
.OO :
:69:0::
B *
B
.0 :
O*
,,* :00
~.e
~ u~c~slml
b*
.*.
B * .
B *
:: :.:.:
. : .a*
B
B
.*- B B
;:::.9 .
:l!dii#;:;
B :,*
:. m B*
B:.a
::
liw!%.!!~,~:~
.
:.
descri pti on of the thermal radi ati on ra~e ~~d i s ti >~i ~~ti ~ff~, and wi l l show that nei ther the total
thermal radi ati on nor the total cal /cm2 at a gi ven poi nt determi nes the effect of radi ati on; from
thi s a new fi gure of mer i t for thermal radi ati on on thi ck sl abs wi l l be suggested. I n the remai nder
of thi s secti on a di fferent presentati on of the thermal theory wi l l be undertaken, but i t i s i nstruc-
ti ve to fi r st retrace the steps whi ch l ead to the constant fracti on concept.
2.5.2 Bl ack Body Model for Thermal Radi ati on
The descri pti on i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons for thermal radi ati on i nvol ved several assump-
ti ons whi ch l ead di rectl y to the resul t that the thermal radi ati on i s a constant fracti on of the total
yi el d. The fi r st i s that the surface of the fi rebal l radi ates as a bl ack body fol l owi ng the Stefan-
Bol tzmann l aw, namel y, the radi ati on rate per uni t area i s
dQ/dt -0 @
where
a = a uni versal constant of nature, 5.67 x 10-5 ergs/cm2, sec deg
T = absol ute temperature of the body
Another assumpti on ,j,nvol ves the sharp cut-off i n transmi ssi on of ai r for wavel engths l ess than ap-
proxi matel y 2000 ~.
Wi th these assumpti ons the constant energy fracti on i s readi l y deduced. One wr i tes that at a
gi ven ti me, t, the fi rebal l surface i s speci fi ed by temperature T, and the total radi ati on from the
bomb at that
The fracti on
ti me has the rate gi ven by
dQ/dt = 4n R2 a T4
of the total radi ati on emi tted whi ch can penetrate a si gni fi cant di stance i n ai r i s sai d
to be a functi on of temperature onl y. However, si nce the fi rebal l i tsel f i s a hydrodynami c phe-
nomenon and i s expected to fol l ow hydrodynami c scal i ng l aws, i t fol l ows that, i n scal i ng to a l arger
bomb, the same temperature wi l l occur when the fi rebal l radi us i s i ncreased by a factor of W.
Thi s i mpl i es that the radi ati on rate scal es l i ke
dQ/dt = 4r W213 R2 u T4
To obtai n the total energy from the bomb i ntegrate the radi ati on rate over the ti me as
QT = 4770j,- R2(t) T4(t) dt
But i f the fi rebal l scal es hydrodynami cal l y, the ti me vari ati on al so scal es l i ke W, so
Thi s combi nati on of W2J9 from di stance scal i ng and WI Afrom ti me scal i ng resul ts i n the thermal
radi ati on bei ng di rectl y proporti onal to the yi el d, as
QT = 47rWJOR2 T cl t
The model al so i mpl i es that the detai l s of the thermal radi ati on, such as the mi ni mum and the
second maxi mum, shoul d al so occur at ti mes whi ch scal e l i ke WY3.
I n the secti ons whi ch fol l ow the assumpti ons used i n deri vi ng the constant fracti on wi l l be ex-
ami ned i n more detai l . One of the questi ons asked i s whether the surface area and temperature of
the fi rebal l al one determi ne the thermal radi ati on rate. I f the radi ati ng sphere i s semi -opaque,
so that there i s a contri buti on i n depth, there i s probabl y a correspondi ng change i n the scal i ng
l aws for thermal radi ati on. I t i s recogni zed that a ri gorous sol uti on i s al most hopel essl y compl ex,
but by aski ng these questi ons, i t coul d be hoped that the resul ti ng descri pti on wi l l be a step cl oser
toward real i ty.
2.5.3 Radi ati on i n Depth
I t appears i nadequate to treat a materi al l i ke ai r as i f i t were compl etel y opaque at one tem-
perature and compl etel y transparent at another. The opaci ty i s not a qual i tati ve di fference, but
represents a quanti tati ve di fference i n the di ffusi on rate of photons outwards i n a random wal k
from regi ons of hi gh temperatures i n the i nteri or of a fi rebal l to the l ow temperatures near an
observi ng i nstrument several mi l es di stant from i t. The vari ous cr oss secti ons for scatteri ng and
absorpti on are compl ex functi ons of the wavel ength, di recti on, and physi cal state of the medi um
traversed.
Consi deri ng absorpti on onl y, a di fferent fracti on of each wavel ength from an i nteri or parti cl e
i s absorbed. The absorpti on mi ght be descri bed by the cl i fferenti al equati on
dI /dx = k I
where X may al so depend on the temperature, densi ty, physi cal state, and chemi cal composi ti on of
the absorber i n dx. Assumi ng for si mpl i ci ty that X i s i ndependent of z and, defi ni ng A to be some
average val ue over al l wavel engths, the exponenti al absorpti on l aw fol l ows
1/10= e ti
where x i s the di stance traversed. Thi s
B
B9
B *
B *
.
el ementary l aw states two factors whi ch requi re a revi si on
B
+ B
B
B
:71s
B m
::
B *
,.. .*o: n*.
B 9*9
b** OO*:
B m
.O. -
8. .:* . . . . . . .*.
B
B O
B **.
B*.
B 9*.
:0
of the si mpl er concept of thermal radi a~i o~ the degr~~ o/&orpti on through A and the path
l engths for absorpti on through x
I t i s wel l known that a si mi l ar l aw i s requi red to descri be the radi ati on recei ved at l ong di s-
tances, but i t i s usual l y assumed that when there are proper transmi ssi on characteri sti cs, one
coul d correct back to the source. Here we are doi ng somethi ng di fferent by appl yi ng the absorpti on
concept to the source i tsel f.
These consi derati ons suggest that the radi ati on rate of the bomb, especi al l y as observed be-
yond the shock front, shoul d not be as i n the ori gi nal equati on, but shoul d be repl aced by a more
compl ex expressi on, perhaps l i ke
dQ/dt = 41r~ORJO-rz e(r) a Tn(r) f [R r, 0, A(v,r)] dr dv
where f i tsel f i s some compl ex functi on whi ch descri bes the compl ex behavi or of the absorpti on i n
the path l ength between the radi ati ng parti cl es at r and the shock f rent at R. Thi s i ntegral i s i n-
tended to state that the radi ati on we see beyond the shock R i s the sum of contri buti ons i n depth
from shel l s of radi us r and thi ckness dr. Each shel l i s characteri zed by i ts own temperature, T,
a functi on of the radi us r, and near the front of a strong shock thi s temperature fal l s rapi dl y wi th
i ncreased radi us because of the di fferent entropy changes. Associ ated wi th each temperature may
be a di fferent absorpti on coeffi ci ent for each wavel ength from farther i n the tnteri or. The radi a-
ti on whi ch eventual l y escapes the shock i s al so a functi on of the ki nd and quanti ty of materi al l yi ng
between the i nteri or and the exteri or of the shock whi ch i s i ndi cated by the functi on f. Now, i t i s
the i ntroducti on of the path l ength i n f whi ch shoul d resul t i n the fai l ure of thermal radi ati on to
scal e l i ke W. The form of the equati on i s not unl i ke the ori gi nal . To the extent that radi ati ve
transport i s rel ati vel y sl ow near the shock f rent, the state vari abl es sffecti ng absorpti on and re-
mi ssi on are control l ed pri mari l y by the bl ast hydrodynami cs, and these shoul d scal e. The angu-
l ar dependence al so scal es. So, by thi s si mpl e argument, one states that fracti on f wi l l be smal l er
for l arger bombs because the path l engths R - r near the shock front wi l l be proporti onal to W%
over some range of yi el d. The argument i s not uni versal because, for a smal l enough bomb, the
absorpti ve zone coul d be smal l compared wi th any mean free paths, and absorpti on arguments are
not appl i cabl e; for l arge enough bombs (l i ke the sun) the mean free path i s negl i gi bl y short i n com-
pari son wi th other l engths, and true bl ack body concepts appl y. However, i n the range of i nterest
where we assume that semi -opaque condi ti ons appl y, i t i s noted that
dQ/dt #constant (WY3R)z - W2/9
UNCLASSI F1~b
B Ba..... B
:.kui ::.
B
B B 90 9:0 B *. .
B
B : B .
B
::
but the ter m f wi l l be such that at hydsg~hai cal ~ $#.@ ?i mes and di stances, f i s a decreasi ng
functi cm wi th yi el d, so
dQ/dt N WY3f N Wn
where n c 2/3.
I f the assumpti ons l eadi ng to an el ementary exponenti al absorpti on l aw were appl i cabl e, the
factor f woul d be an exponenti al l i ke e @w%(R-rJ, the yi el d dependence mi ght be concei ved of as
taki ng pl ace over a l i mi ted range of yi el ds, somethi ng l i ke
I n di ffusi on processes, where the mean free path i s short, the dependence on a path l ength x mi ght
be l i ke e-xz i nstead of si mpl y e-x. Si nce the argument i s onl y qual i tati ve, assume a si mpl e expo-
nenti al form for i l l ustrati ve purposes onl y and the effect of the W% i n the negati ve exponent i s of
i nterest. When the yi el d i s smal l , or effecti vel y zero, the val ue of the exponenti al i s cl ose to 1,
and there i s no spati al effect on thermal scal i ng because of l onger path l engths for absorpti on.
Hence, Y N W where Y i s the thermal yi el d. Nothi ng i s sai d here nor i mpl i ed for what val ues of
W thi s occurs. As the val ue of W% i ncreases there i s a range over whi ch the fai l ure of scal i ng
coul d be approxi mated through
e-x= (l x) for x<<l
Thi s means that over a hi gher range of yi el ds the thermal yi el d wi l l not qui te scal e wi th the total
yi el d. For exampl e, over a certai n range we coul d arbi trari l y choose a certai n vari ati on l i ke V@g2
whi ch i mpl i es that over thi s range the thermal radi ati on woul d be l ess than expected from strai ght
scal i ng, fa.l l i ng sl owl y at hi gher yi el ds. For l arger val ues of W thi s approxi mati on fai l s i n turn,
and one woul d requi re a ri gorous expressi on for the exponenti al . I n a hi gh range of yi el ds the
thermal radi ati on rate from the bomb woul d be al most l i mi ted by the exponenti al absorpti on. When
the val ue of x i s smal l , then a fi vefol d change i n yi el d i ncreases the exponent from x = 0.01 to x =
0.05, and reduces the thermal radi ati on (from a constant fracti on) to 0.99 i n one case, and to 0.95
i n the second case a di fference whi ch may be too smal l to detect wi thi n the scatter of experi -
mental observati on. When x i s ori gi nal l y l arge, say, a number l i ke 2, a fi vefol d change i n yi el d
woul d then reduce the thermal radi ati on from a factor of e-2 ~ 0.14, down to e-5 ~ 0.00675, for a
total of 20 ti mes from a constant fracti on.
MM!
B 0 . .
B B 09 B **
B B 0
B O*.*
B = .
B 9
B
B
Bmm
B
++
For a range of sti l l l arger expl o~i ~nt$ i t:i s p~~l y ~r~e that the bl ack body concept woul d
agai n appl y everywhere i n the hi story, and, here agai n, the constant fracti on concept mi ght be ap-
pl i cabl e but, of course, a much smal l er fracti on than i n the range of l ow yi el ds.
The above arguments are i ntended to be merel y qual i tati ve, but are suffi ci ent to show that the
radi ati on rate (and by i mpl i cati on the total effecti ve thermal radi ati on) i s not a constant fracti on of
the total yi el d, but mi ght general l y be descri bed as a concave downward curve on l ogari thmi c co-
ordi nates, fal l i ng to a l ower fracti on at hi gh yi el ds, as i ndi cated i n Fi g. 2.5.3-1. The fi gure i s al so
i ntended to be onl y qual i tati ve.
The absorpti on coeffi ci ent A i s dependent on a l arge number of factors: the temperature of
the absorbi ng ai r, i ts densi ty, physi cal state, and chemi cal composi ti on and the wavel ength of the
radi ati on i tsel f. I n Effects of Atomi c Weapons the assumpti on i s made that a certai n cr i ti cal wave-
l ength exi sts, around 2000 ~ bel ow whi ch col d ai r i s compl etel y opaque, and above whi ch the
ai r i s compl etel y transparent. Thi s i s an i deal i zati on, the absorpti on coeffi ci ents for col d ai r are
shown i n Fi g. 2.5.3-2. Whi l e i t emphasi zes the essenti al physi cs, the cut-off concept i s not ade-
quate for temperatures wi th spectra contai ni ng a great deal of energy i n the range between 1400
and perhaps 3000 ~ By the Pl anck di stri buti on these wavel engths are the maxi ma correspondi ng
to 25,000 and 10,000 roughl y the temperature of the shock duri ng earl y fi rebal l growth before
breakaway. Duri ng earl i er stages of growth, nearl y the enti re fracti on of radi ati on from the i n-
teri or wi l l be absorbed i n the zone of hi gh densi ty near the shock front or the col d ai r just ahead
of i t. When the temperatures fal l consi derabl y bel ow these val ues, the spectrum i s di stri buted
over l onger wavel engths, to whi ch the ai r i s more transparent. I n thi s general regi on, the absorp-
ti ve path l engths pl ay a si gni fi cant rol e i n affecti ng the scal i ng, for here the fracti on of energy
whi ch i s captured near the shock front wi l l be a functi on of the thi ckness of the absorpti ve zone
behi nd the shock front, i n a compl ex way. I n summary, the fOreferred to i n Equati on 6.11 of Ef-
fects of Atomi c Weapons i s dependent on yi el d, and decreases wi th yi el d.
I t i s onl y duri ng thi s peri od that the concept of parti ti on of energy has any real meani ng i n
the sense that i t separates the fracti on of bomb energy whi ch appears as bl ast from a fracti on
whi ch appears as thermal radi ati on. Duri ng the very earl i est stages of bomb growth nearl y the
enti re energy of the bomb i s present as radi ant energy i n whi ch the energy densi ty i s gi ven by
41YT4
EN=
where, i n thi s case, c i s the vel oci ty of l i ght. At hi gh enough temperatures thi s quanti ty greatl y
exceeds
Ei = P/(y - 1) ~ pT/(y 1) constant
whi ch, i n a str i cter sense, i s the hydrodynami c energy. Because of the hydrodynami cs, the i n-
teri or of the fi rebal l i s much hotter than the regi ons near the shock front and much l ower i n den-
si ty. Wi thi n thi s regi on radi ati on transport of energy pl ays a predomi nant rol e. As we approach
the shock front the temperatures cool and densi ty i ncreases rapi dl y because, i n general , the mean
free path behaves somethi ng l i ke T3/p. By the anal yti c sol uti on, for q~ = 11, q = 30
T3/p N P3/p4 N 1
(1 k) + k(r/R)32]3 (gs ; 1)8
(r/R)to
Ps
Once k(r/R)S2 <<1 k, the mean free path for radi ati on woul d behave l i ke l /r120. Thi s means that
an i sobari c, i sothermal , i sopycni c sphere i s formed on the i nteri or of the shock but, at i ts outer
edges, the very sharp drop i n mean free path resul ts i n al most compl ete absorpti on. The zone be-
tween the i sothermal sphere and the shock front then consti tutes an absorpti ve zone i n whi ch the
conversi on of radi ant energy to hydrodynami c energy may take pl ace for some ti me after the shock
i tsel f has ceased to propagate by radi ati ve transport.
Thi s zone i s cl ose to the shock front and provi des the cl ose connecti on between the i nteri or
and the shock f rent whi ch makes the anal yti c sol uti on possi bl e. The degree and rate of support
whi ch i t gi ves to the shock wi l l vary from bomb to bomb as the thi ckness of the zone changes i n
hydrodynami c scal i ng, and i s one of the fundamental reasons for the fai l ure of si mi l ar i ty scal i ng
for strong shocks.
We wi l l i nvesti gate i n a l ater secti on what fracti on of the total thermal radi ati on of the bomb
i s l i kel y to be i nvol ved i n thi s parti ti on of energy before breakaway.
The same concept of exponenti al absorpti on appl i es after breakaway, because most of the ra-
di ati on on the i nteri or i s sti l l at too short wavel engths to move any appreci abl e di stance. To the
extent that the absorpti on coeffi ci ents depend on the temperature and densi ty of ai r, the paths for
hydrodynami c i nvari ance scal e l i ke WY3and, on a scal e basi s, the absorpti on-heati ng process i s
hel d down, al most as i f the absorpti on coeffi ci ent i ncreased by W%.
2.5.4 Absorpti on External to Sphere of Effecti ve Radi ati on
The usual equati on whi ch expresses the total i nci dent number of cal ori es at a poi nt (~0) from
the bomb i s gi ven by:
i NCLASSI Fi ED
B B ea
B ** B0 : B8* B
i.~-i B!:
B *B m. B ** B m. 9ma .
B m B 9
B e Qo::
Y cos 6 e-const R B:: .: :
: B 0
:
%?=
B *
:0 B 0 B Q
47TR2
ur w ssl ~m
I n general , the constant i s consi dered as part of an over-al l measurabl e absorpti on per mi l e,
rel ated to vi si bi l i ty, and tabl es are so gi ven i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons. By i mpl i cati on and
usage, the constant i s regarded as a functi on onl y of the l ocal atmosphere, i ndependent of a nu-
cl ear expl osi on and i ndependent of ti me. I n thi s secti on we i nvesti gate what i s requi red to descri be
thi s absorpti on i n more detai l for practi cal consi derati ons. The di sti ncti on between absorpti on
wi thi n the sphere of effecti ve radi ati on (i n the previ ous secti on) as opposed to absorpti on external
to i t (i n thi s secti on) i s somewhat arbi trary, but has been made pri nci pal l y because the absorpti on
external to the sphere of effecti ve radi ati on i s the onl y type whi ch has been general l y consi dered.
A l arge number of hydrodynami c phenomena i nfl uence the absorpti on constant both i n space
and ti me. The purpose of thi s secti on i s to poi nt these out, partl y because they show the ambi gui ty
i n quoti ng transmi ssi on and, i n turn, a thermal yi el d. They i ndi cate a requi rement for a cri -
teri on for thermal radi ati on whi ch i s l ess sensi ti ve to these effects. So far as the effecti veness of
total radi ati on at a di stance i s concerned, many of these have the same quanti tati ve effect as shown
i n the previ ous secti o~ because they i ntroduce factors i n the exponent for absorpti on whi ch i s of
the form
e -pwY3
Shock Dust
I t i s a major consi derati on of Chapter 4 (and of i nterest here because i t affects the total ther-
mal radi ati on) that dust rai sed by the shock at the ground surface shi el ds the surface i tsel f from
further thermal radi ati on. At most di stances of practi cal i nteres~ the shock arri ves shortl y after
the second maxi mum, and can readi l y reduce the total cal /cm2 by a factor of 2. The effect de-
pends on the l ocal surface and i s yi el d dependent through the l ength of the posi ti ve and negati ve
phases for materi al vel oci ty, whi ch scal e l i ke W%.
Dust and Smoke Rai sed by Thermal Radi ati on
Thi s i s a major consi derati on of Chapter 5 and i s agai n of i nterest here for any object exposed
to the radi ati on, not necessari l y at the ground surface. The effect i s most l i kel y to occur duri ng
the rapi d r i se i n radi ati on rate pri or to the second maxi mum, and thus not onl y reduces the i n-
tegrated cal ori es markedl y by a factor of 2 but, of more i mportance, i t wi l l reduce the maxi mum
76:0 : ~s:
B B O
B : .9
B
%limu
B *
.0 B
,.* B
.OO w B
B *
B * .*
::-.
.*9 B .
.*:
B
.** B
B B
B****9: B** B
~.~- B:: ~ , - : ( . T5
. ,
. . 9** 9** B *9 .9. .
b
.lJ ~c i 32 k
B -
B :0000 ::
B B
B: B *
B
::
B: B B 0 :Q B
rate of thermal radi ati on whi ch defi ni tel y i nfl uences the peak surface temperatures achi eved. The
fracti on absorbed tends to be yi el d dependent for the thi ckness of the thermal l ayer, fol l ows Q(t)
cl osel y, and therefore scal es l i ke a hydrodynami c l ength. On the other hand, the effect tends to be
sel f -compensati ng because the l ess radi ati on reachi ng the surface through absorpti on, the l ess
dust and smoke wi l l be rai sed.
Wavel ength and Angul ar Dependence
The effecti veness of thermal radi ati on i s a strong functi on of the wavel ength and the angul ar
dependence of the i nci dent radi ati on, whi ch are i nti matel y connected wi th the spectral di stri buti on.
Both are effecti vel y yi el d dependent because they depend on actual di stances from the bomb, whi ch
are usual l y l arger by WY3at poi nts of the same hydrodynami c i nterest, l i ke peak pressure. They
al so depend, i n good part, on other effects, such as the cl oud chamber effect. They i l l ustrate very
wel l the ambi gui ty associ ated wi th total thermal radi ati on wi th respect to ei ther effecti ve thermal
radi ati on or thermal effects. By conservati on of energy we demand that the total thermal radi ati on
approach 100%of the bomb, and whatever the absorpti on processes for thermal radi ati on, the en-
ti r e amount shoul d eventual l y reappear after successi ve conversi ons to hydrodynami c energy and
entropy changes. So, the absorpti on process we speak of i n transmi ssi ons l ess than 100% i s, i n the
l ast anal ysi s, onl y temporary, and i n the l ong run does not affect the total thermal radi ati on. Ab-
sorpti on resul ts i n a smoothi ng out of the thermal pul se shape, whi ch markedl y reduces the ef-
fecti veness of thermal radi ati on, not onl y by reduci ng the radi ati on rate near i ts maxi mum, but al so
by converti ng i t to l onger (i nfrared) wavel engths where subsequent del ays by HZOand COZabsorp-
ti on are much more acute. The anal ysi s i n a l ater secti on wi l l show that about one-hal f the thermal
radi ati on from the bomb woul d be at wavel engths bel ow 2200 ~ and above 10,000 ~ whi ch are not
transmi tted di rectl y i n ai r over any
Normal Cl oud Cover
Thi s i s a yi el d dependent effect
reasonabl e l ength, and therefore i n any reasonabl e ti me.
i n the crude sense that the expected i ntegrated thi ckness of
cl oud covers i ncreases as WY3just as the di stances of hydrodynami c i nterest i ncrease as W
3. Thi s
i s si mpl y the observati on that cl oud cover woul d never be a matter of consi derati on on smal l -
charge expl osi ons. Thi s effect by i tsel f al most precl udes the possi bi l i tyy of accurate predi cti ons
for thermal radi ati on.
Local Densi ty and Temperature 6 B B :
i i
:C :0 B
The densi ty changes the apparent thermal yi el d i n a very fundamental way. Accordi ng to pre-
vi ous di scussi ons, the absorpti ve path l engths i ncrease basi cal l y as W~a,absorbi ng l arger f rac -
ti ons of energy on l arge bombs and probabl y changi ng the spectral di stri buti on by absorbi ng some
wavel engths di fferentl y from others i n a nonl i near fashi on. Pri mari l y, i t i s the mass of absorbi ng
materi al whi ch counts and i n the perturbati ons to the basi c scal i ng PObehaves l i ke WY3i n l ncreas -
i ng the mass i n thi s path l ength. U, i n any way, the fracti on of effecti ve thermal yi el d or the radi a-
ti on rate i s bel i eved to vary wi th yi el d, i t fol l ows that si mi l ar changes woul d resul t from a change
i n densi ty correspondi ng to a change i n W73. Si nce the poi nt about path l engths was ori gi nal l y ar-
gued from a perturbati on, whi ch goes l i ke W%, i t means that we can equal l y regard the dependence
as p. W93.
The dependence on densi ty coul d be argued i n a di fferent way. A reasombl e model at l ate
ti mes i s one i n whi ch the fi rebal l i s regarded as a hot moti onl ess sphere after the hydrodynami c
effects have passed. Regard the radi ati on as di ffusi ng outward through the col d regi ons near the
edge. p characteri sti cal l y appears i n the di ffusi on equati on i n such a way that one expects si mi -
l ari ty vari abl es to exi st whi ch depend on the square root of the densi ty, but i t i s probabl y an
understatement to cal l thi s argument oversi mpl i fi ed. There i s a further effect of densi ty through
ti me dependence. I n subsequent chapters i t wi l l be argued that, from the standpoi nt of effect, the
l onger ti me durati on on l arge bombs decreases the effecti veness of the thermal radi ati on by the
square root of ti mes, or as Wfi si nce ti mes scal e l i ke W%. Thi s i s a perturbati on from a si mpl e
dependence l i ke W%scal i ng because of path l engths. I f p. behaves l i ke W%then we al so expect that
the effecti veness of thermal yi el d wi l l be decreased through the ti me dependence.
Wi thout a detai l ed consi derati on, i t i s not cl ear how ambi ent temperatures wi l l affect these
resul ts. For those wavel engths whi ch appear by di rect transmi ssi on, the hydrodynami c tempera-
ture wi l l be roughl y proporti onal to the ambi ent temperature, and the radi ati on rates strongl y
decreased as the ambi ent temperature decreases. However, much of the radi ati on appears onl y
after di ffusi on and degradati on to vi si bl e wavel engths at the outsi de of the fi rebal l or, that i s, when
certai n absol ute temperatures are reached near the fi rebal l surface. I n thi s case, much of the ra-
di ati on whi ch i ni ti al l y was at too short a wavel ength to l eak out through the fi rebal l i s shi fted. I n
a col der atmosphere, thi s earl y spectrum i s shi fted cl oser to wavel engths i n whi ch ai r i s trans-
parent, and by these arguments the same amount of thermal energy coul d be del i vered i n a shorter
ttme.
B e B * B 0 B *9 B 00 B
B O
B :000 ::
The above arguments on densi ty ~n~ ti ~mfi erat~~e&e:p&ti cul arl y appl i cabl e si nce they appl y
to the mai n radi ati on pul se. Whi l e they appl y i n the same measure to the thermal pul se before the
mi ni mum, thi s fracti on has al ways been known to be smal l , and was ori gi nal l y esti mated by Hi rsch-
fel der and Magee as somethi ng l i ke 1% of the thermal energy. Even thi s fracti on maybe hi gh and
coul d be more l i ke 0.3% so that, even i f the effecti ve fracti on at thi s ti me i s i ncreased by a factor
of 10, through decrease i n densi ty, there i s no materi al change i n the effecti veness of thi s porti on
of the radi ati on i n produci ng effects. On the other hand, a very seri ous change i n effecti veness of
thermal radi ati on i s associ ated wi th the suggesti on that the mai n radi ati on pul se can be si mi l arl y
affected by vari ati ons i n l ocal densi ti es.
Cl oud Chamber Effect
The cl oud chamber i s typi cal of these effects because i t i nterposes a bl anket of fog, l i teral l y
and fi gurati ve y, between the fi rebal l and an observer. Wi th perfect spheri cal symmetry, the
effect i s very smal l because the process i s pri nci pal l y one of scatteri ng l i ght, and the di rect ab-
sorpti on i s smal l . The thi ckness of the l ayer depends upon the l ocal humi di ty and upon the yi el d of
the bomb through the hydrodynami c l ength of that regi on i n the negati ve phase whi ch i s bel ow the
dew poi nt. The di scr ete water parti cl es scatter l i ght enormousl y, and the total absorpti on coul d be
hi gh after successi ve scatteri ng i nto ground surfaces, even though onl y a smal l chance of absorp-
ti on occurred after each scatteri ng col l i si on. Fi gure 2.5.4 .-1 i s a resul t of a study usi ng the tem-
peratures i n the negati ve phase, as deduced from Fi gs. 2.4.2-1 to 2.4.2-4, and appl i ed to the radi a-
ti on rate of Fi g. 2.5.1-1. I t suggests that somethi ng l i ke 25% of the total radi ati on coul d be screened
by the cl oud chamber i f the tai l fracti on of Fi g. 6.20, Effects of Atomi c Weapons, i s assumed
correct. I f, as we expect, there i s a l ong tai l fracti on of radi ati on, whi ch i s not shown i n Fi g. 6.20,
Effects of Atomi c Weapons, then as much as 75% of the total thermal radi ati on coul d be affected
except tha~ when the shock becomes weak enough and the ai r not saturated, the cl oud chamber ef -
feet wi l l l i ft as wel l as move outward.
Wi th perfect spheri cal symmetry, al l scatteri ng, and zero absorpti on, the cl oud chamber ef-
fect woul d be negl i gi bl e, but the practi cal i mpor t ari ses from the l ack of spheri cal symmetry.
When ambi ent humi di ty i s hi gher near the ground, and l ow at al ti tude, the cl oud chamber shoul d
form roughl y as a toroi dal ri ng surroundi ng the burst or, i n any case, wi th a cl oud bel ow the bomb
and rel ati vel y cl ear ai r above. Then the i mer surface of the cl oud pref erenti a.l l y scatter s l i ght to
al ti tude and away from the ground. The spheri cal symmetry
of the ground surface, where the pure absorpti on probabi l i ty
i s further destroyed by the presence
i s hi gh for each photon scattered i nto
B
B
B
B B+ B B
B B O
B ob. B >
.- .
::
FI ED
i t. The cl oud chamber effect suggests fl x?t $~e captu~e u th&%ml radi ati on near the ground i n the
negati ve phase can l ocal l y enhance the hydrodynami c energy there, i ncreasi ng the posi ti ve phase
l ength, but i t i s probabl y too deep wi thi n the wave, too l ate i n ti me, and confi ned to a regi on too
cl ose to the ground to i nfl uence markedl y the pressures at the shock front. The change i n apparent
thermal energy, as wel l as any hydrodynami c rei nforcement, i s of course expected to be more
seri ous on l arge bombs than on smal l bombs and more seri ous for dense and humi d atmospheres
than for rari fi ed and dry atmospheres.
Change i n Ai r Densi ty by the Shock
The vari ati on i n ai r densi ty caused by the shock coul d concei vabl y change the effecti ve trans-
mi ssi on by changi ng the average densi ty so that
~ORpdr#pOR
For very smal l bombs or bombs fi red i n rare atmospheres, where the bul k of the thermal radi a-
ti on comes out earl y, thi s effect woul d be part of the absorpti ve zone di scussi on i n the previ ous
secti on. For bombs of nomi nal yi el ds, and i n ordi nary atmospheres, the effect i s probabl y smal l
al so because the mean free path for ai r i s very l ong for the radi ati on of i nterest. The effect i s
al so smal l because of compensati ng effects. By conservati on of mass for spheri cal waves, the
average densi ty from burst center to the shock i s such that
~ORpdr c POR
However, thi s occurs because most of the path i s through the rarefi ed ai r of the i sothermal sphere,
the surface of whi ch i s regarded as the radi ati ng surface. The average densi ty from the end of the
densi ty posi ti ve phase at di stance x to the shock front at R i s certai nl y above normal
~~pdr>pO(Rx)
When and how much the transmi ssi on i s i ncreased or decreased depends on the detai l ed hydrody-
nami cs i n every case, wi th a r eal i sti c consi derati on of where radi ati ve transport actual l y puts the
i sothermal sphere. Wi thout recourse to a detai l ed di scussi on, the effect can be esti mated as i n-
creasi ng the path of ai r by a l ength comparabl e to the posi ti ve phase l ength of the shock wave, and
wi l l not be seri ous unti l the posi ti ve phase l ength of the bl ast i s comparabl e to the mean free path
for l i ght absorpti on.
: 84 : : :
.** :
:iill!di:o
UNCI ASSi FI Eb
. a~. o
. * B
. 8**
.. 9*: . : *. . *
S. : e. e
B
b B 00 B B
%iwi
GiM-ASSlflED
B B *B 000***
B
B m
:.*.
::
B
B:
B B O
, Ri se of Fi rebal l
B be :
***
:0 :0
Thi s coul d concei vabl y change the effecti ve transmi ssi on by changi ng the di stances to the
bomb and carryi ng the fi rebal l i n or out of l ocal strata of cl ouds, i f present. I t woul d be yi el d de-
pendent because gravi ty does not scal e. I t can be shown, as a hydrodynami c exerci se, that a
wei ghtl ess sphere (l i ke the vacuous fi rebal l ) wi l l r i se wi th an accel erati on of 2 g i n any fl ui d. On
l arge bombs, the whol e ti me scal e i s i ncreased and the fi rebal l i s not necessari l y rai sed to a cor-
respondi ng scal ed hei ght i n
S = 1/2 atz = gtz
However, even i f the ti me of i nterest extended to 3 sec for thermal radi ati on of a nomi nal bomb, i t
woul d l ead to a r i se of 200 f~ whi ch i s onl y 2/3 the fi rebal l radi us. The fi rebal l r i se coul d be of
academi c i nterest i n causi ng a change i n the apparent radi ati on rate i n the l ong tai l ; at 10 sec S =
gt2 gi ves a r i se of 3200 ft.
Functi on I (t) as a Fi gure of Mer i t for Thermal Radi ati on
The ambi gui ty surroundi ng the total thermal yi el d i n i ntegrated fl ux need not be as di stressi ng
as i t may appear at fi rst. The fact i s that nei ther the total thermal yi el d nor a cr i ti cal cal /cm2
usual l y determi nes the effect of thermal radi ati on. I I I the work on theory of surface effects i n
Chapter 5, we wi l l deri ve a general sol uti on to the conducti on equati on for an arbi trary fl ux rate,
and an i ntegral resul t whi ch i s useful and whi ch can be i ntegrated graphi cal l y.
The surface temperature of a thi ck sl ab exposed to thermal radi ati on at ti me t i s rel ated to
the fl ux rate through
where 7 i s a dummy vari abl e for ti me. The constants i n f rent of the i ntegral are al l characteri s-
ti cs of the materi al exposed to the radi ati on. They pl ay the same rol e i n thi s cal cul ati on as the
ordi nary concept of the cr i ti cal cal /cm2, except that such cr i ti cal energy i s yi el d dependent and
has l i ttl e meani ng. We defi ne the i ntegral as I (t) and i t i s readi l y i ntegrated graphi cal l y from the
thermal pul se dQ/dt. Si nce thi s i ntegral enters so di rectl y i nto the cal cul ati on of surface tempera-
tures, i t i s suggested that i t be used to repl ace the concept of total cal /cm2, whi ch i s ordi nari l y
used to descri be the same thi ng but whi ch i s, i n fact, ambi guous.
I n the succeedi ng secti on, (2.5.5), i t i s presumed that the total thermal radi ati on from the
bomb i s known, namel y cl ose to 100%. There i s no need to express thi s quanti ty i n vi ew of al l the
B +
8~ { ~:
B B ,e
B ::. *:*0 .
0
B
B:. bet B
-
B *
9*
dNcwWI ED
9*
B * B *
O* B
. O: O
. **
be . ..
. *@ . *.
: e: , . e~
..
B 0.
:eo
B=*:
B emm. a
B*. .
-~~ ::
B e 8:0 B O* B . . .. B
?
~~c! LAN l l m
9
B 9
b
:
:..::
9:;0
:
pi tfal l s whi ch wi l l be i ntroduced through ~e ;~an;mi ss??m:~t 1:~~ti mes. On the other hand, the
functi on I (t) represents the effecti ve fracti on of total thermal radi ati on.
I n parti cul ar, one i s not i nterested i n the compl ete hi story of I (t) but onl y i n i ts maxi mum
val ue, whi ch i s reached shortl y after the second maxi mum. Fr om thi s fl ux rate, the functi on I (t)
can be cal cul ated unti l i t reaches a maxi mum val ue. I n pri nci pl e, thi s i s not much more di ffi cul t
than i ntegrati ng the area under a fl ux vs ti me curve, al though there are some tr i cks whi ch are
useful i n performi ng thi s i ntegrati on. A poi nt here, however, i s that i f the thermal fl ux shape i s
known up to the ti me t ~u, the maxi mum temperature i s not affected by the shape of the fl ux curve
afterwards or, i n other words, by the total thermal radi ati on. I t i s expected that the functi on
I ~= (t) wi l l be yi el d dependent, but i t further turns out that, to a reasonabl e approxi mati o~ I mw
(t) scal es i n such a way that the surface temperatures actual l y behave l i ke hydrodynami c vari abl es.
The most i mportant aspect i s that I mm (t) has a practi cal meani ng on effects, whereas total ther-
mal yi el d does not.
There are other practi cal advantages to the use of thi s functi on to repl ace the concept of
total thermal yi el d because of the effects on transmi ssi on di scussed i n thi s secti on. The maxi mum
i n I (t) appears shortl y after the second thermal maxi mum and maybe l ocated approxi matel y i n
ti me i n the regi on i n whi ch the fl ux i s decayi ng l i ke t~z. Wi th regard to the hydrodynami c effects
di scussed previ ousl y, the fol l owi ng comments are perti nent. Shock wave obscurati on al most al -
ways occurs after I mm (t) i s reached. Thermal dust obscurati on wi l l begi n before I mm (t) but i t
seems l i kel y that I ~= (t) i s probabl y l ess sensi ti ve to thermal dust than i s total thermal yi el d.
The band wi dth and angul ar dependence i s of l ess seri ous i mportance because the l ong wavel engths
are emi tted at a sl ow rate and do not contri bute materi al l y to the maxi mum surface temperature
or the effecti ve total thermal radi ati on. Normal cl oud obscurati on wi l l affect I (t) just as i t does the
effecti ve thermal yi el ~ but one worri es l ess about the r i se of the fi rebal l changi ng the cl oud ob-
scurati on. The maxi mum i n I (t) occurs before the cl oud chamber effect sets i n and the fi gure of
mer i t i s thereby not affected by i t. The densi ty compressi on i n the shock front woul d sffect i t,
but coul d be taken as part of the over-al l yi el d dependence. Si nce I mm (t) occurs rel ati vel y earl y
there i s l i ttl e worry about the fi rebal l changi ng the path l ength or movi ng i t i nto l ocal cl oud cover.
Thel ocal densi ty and ti me dependent detai l s of the radi ati on affect I (t) but are much more mean-
i ngful when the resul ts are i nterpreted i n ter ms of surface temperatures.
UI f CMSSI FI Ct
B
:0
B *.*
B0 :
99* .
9.
:
*
:0: B
B .,O
B a.
B 9**
B
B*:*
.**
1
B:
:
=;yf:q
: ,;+ ,,* :. ! -. .. .
B :.
::
.Z ~ ~ \,/ J: J J,x~_.
B; : B 9
2.5.5 Effecti ve Thermal Radi ati on from Space and Ti ~e ~epe~dence
I f we accept Fi g. 6.20 of Effects of Atomi c Weapons as approxi matel y representi ng the thermal
radi ati on rate of the bomb duri ng most of the mai n pul se, then i t i s readi l y shown that the strength
of the shock front i s not strongl y connected wi th the thermal radi ati on emi tted. By the ti me the
thermal radi at~on from a nomi nal bomb has reached i ts maxi mum rate, near 0.2 see, the shock
pressure i s near 100 psi , the shock radi us near 800 ft; but the fi rebal l radi us i s onl y 400 ft, and i ts
pressure has returned cl ose to i ts ambi ent val ue. For pressures of practi cal i nterest, wel l bel ow
100 psi , the shock f rent i s even more separated from the fi rebal l . A homel y exampl e i s thi s: I f i t
i s possi bl e for an observer to feel the shock front pass at a ti me when the bomb i s sti l l radi ati ng,
i t i s cl ear that,some sor t of an i nner core i s the pri nci pal source of the radi ati on and i s wel l de-
tached from the shock front. I n thi s paper, we di vorce oursel ves compl etel y from the temperatures
I
of the shock front i n descri bi ng thermal radi ati on and choose i nstead the cri teri on that the radi a-
ti on i s pri nci pal l y control l ed by the resi dual temperatures l eft i n the ai r, after the ai r has re-
turned to ambi &t pressures and the shock wave hi story i s essenti al l y compl ete for the materi al i n
I
questi on. \
I n Secti on ~. 1.4 i t was shown that
I
I f we accept the i deal gas l aw as a rough approxi mati o~ i t fol l ows that the resi dual absol ute tem-
perature wi l l b~ i nversel y proporti oml to thi s fi nal densi ty. Consi der a gram of ai r, ori gi ml l y
shocked to a p:essure <~. I ts excess temperature wi l l be gi ven by T/TO 1, and the resi dual ab -
sol ute temperature of thi s ai r i s gi ven by
where Pf i s now the overpressure i n atmospheres and y i s assumed to be 1.4. We wi l l requi re the
behavi or of thi s functi on at l ow val ues of pressure. To obtai n thi s dependence we wi l l spl i t the
ri ght-hand ter m i nto two parts. The fi r st part expands as an i nfi ni te ser i es by the bi nomi al theo-
rem
(i + pf~%
= 1 + 5/7 Pf (1/2 B 5/7 2/7)P~ + (1/6 o 5/7 . 2/7 B 9/7)P: . B . .
The second part i s a quoti ent whi ch expands as
I
,
I
B B
B B 0
B*
B**
B :**0
B *
B 30 :*:
L%&
.*B **
B
B m*@
B *
B B
B
++ OO:. :
B 0
::O.
B::
:
k!uillR
B ..
:
9.*,
B . .
B
B 9* B
B
Ba:o
:
B:
::
~-.~~~y
B
C.* :
:
::
7+Pf
B * :. .
ul i t!-!~i ~>t . i L.ti
7 + 6Pf
= 1 5/7 Pf + 30/49 P: 180/343 P: -t-. . . .
These ser i es may then be mul ti pl i ed together and the i nteresti ng resul t i s that the fi r st three
ter ms of the product drop out. Thi s i s the thi rd order di fference menti oned i n Secti on 2.1.4. After
droppi ng out hi gher ter ms, we have remai ni ng a heat Qf, whi ch i s capabl e of radi ati ng by vi rtue of
i ts el evated temperature.
Qf N T/TO 1 N 10/343 P3
Now assume that at l ow pressures the overpressure fol l ows a l aw gi ven by
P - l /Rn
I t i s often assumed that the exponent n i s exactl y 1 at l ong di stances. However, i f we now i ntegrate
the energy potenti al l y capabl e of radi ati on by resi dual heat, i t wi l l be the sum of contri buti ons from
shel l s of radi us R, andthi ckness dR, and the heat per uni t vol ume wi thi n each shel l wi l l be pro-
porti onal to l /R3n. The total resi dual heat then becomes - 47rJ R2 dr/Rsn. Thi s i ntegral wi l l
di verge for al l val ues of n s 1. Hence, i t fol l ows that the pressure wave must decay by some val ue
of n > 1, otherwi se we woul d i mpl y an i nfi ni te amount of heat l eft behi nd the shock. On the other
hand, the shock wave i tsel f does exhi bi t powerful tendenci es to behave l i ke P - l /& because of the
soni c approxi mati on at l ong di stances. Thi s competi ti on i tsel f l eads to a reasonabl e compromi se:
That al l the energy of the bomb fi nal l y appears as resi dual heat l eft behi nd the shock, and thi s i s
the eventual death of the shock wave whi ch control s the pressure decay at l ong di stance.
Fi gure 2.5.5-1 i s a pl ot of thi s resi dual heat as a functi on of the radi us & whi ch was roughl y
esti mated from the free ai r curve of Appendi x A.
Havi ng pl otted R2AT, the area under thi s curve represents the total energy of the bomb. The
temperatures are al so proporti onal to Qf. A stri ki ng resul t from thi s fi gure i s the l arge amount of
heat contai ned i n the i mmense vol umes at l ow resi dual temperatures.
The radi ati on rate strongl y affects the effecti ve thermal radi ati on. The radi ati on rate i s
roughl y proporti onal to T accordi ng to the Stefan-Bol tzmann l aw. Thi s functi on dQ/dt - T i s al so
pl otted on a rel ati ve scal e on the fi gure as a dashed l i ne. Fr om thi s i t i s cl ear that a sharp cut-off
occurs from ai r i ni ti al l y at 300 ft for a 1 KT bomb. So, one can say, as a resul t of thi s combi nati on
of a l arge entropy cl i fference, and the T dependence i n turn, that resi dual heat from materi al i ni -
ti al l y beyond 300 ft from the burst center wi l l never contri bute materi al l y to the thermal radi ati on
rate whi ch may appear to an external observer.
B
B *m
B *..
B0 :
B*. B
9* -
Bee:
k
:0: B
o B B**
B *.
B
B 0
B .e* B 00 B
B :.* B
B .
B
::
UNCI LASSl f l E~
The effecti ve thermal radi ati on may b~~~c!~ce~ frok &ese:s~mpl e concepts from Fi g. 2.5.5-1.
Fi r st, one may say that no radi us i nsi de of 50 ft wi l l contri bute strongl y to the earl y thermal ra-
di ati o~ most of thi s radi ati on wi l l have been absorbed near the shock pri or to the l i ght mi ni mum.
Thi s fracti on of radi ati on, so trapped, eventual l y appears pri nci pal l y as bl ast energy. On the other
hand, the radi ati on rate from materi al beyond 300 ft i s too sl ow i n compari son wi th radi ati on from
materi al i nsi de of 300 ft to be recorded on an i nstrument or to affect surface temperatures of i r-
radi ated objects. By compari ng the area between 300 and 50 ft wi th the total area under the curve,
one fi nds that the rati o i s approxi matel y 50~. I f i t were possi bl e to bui l d a devi ce whi ch coul d
measure extremel y l ow radi ati on rates and i f i t were possi bl e to confi ne the atmosphere sur-
roundi ng the expl osi on, one mi ght very wel l fi nd 100% of the bombs energy present, over al l wave-
l engths and i n i nfi ni te ti me. There i s a further reason, however, why even thi s 50% i s an over-
esti mate. The bul k of the radi ati on i n the tai l exi sts at l ow temperatures, and for wavel engths
above 10,000 ~ the ai r i s qui te opaque because of absorpti on bands due to both C02 and water
vapor. Hence, i t fol l ows that the contri buti on from materi al at these l ow temperatures i s al most
bound to be absorbed successi vel y, agai n wel l behi nd the shock front or, i n any case, wi thi n a
reasonabl e di stance from the bomb.
I t i s reasonabl e to questi on how absorbi ng l engths can be i nvol ved whi ch scal e l i ke WV3,as i n
Secti on 2.5.3 when, at the same ti me, most of the radtati on comes from materi al deep wi thi n the
shock, whi ch i s assumed to have returned to ambi ent pressure. The answer i s i n part the absorp-
ti on external to the sphere of effecti ve radi ati on, whi ch i s control l ed by shock parameters, such
as the cl oud chamber effect, and Jp dr. BuG i n addi ti on, the absorpti on coeffi ci ents are sensi ti ve
to densi ty and temperature and the radi ati on must di ffuse through ai r whi ch i s l eft at certai n
resi dual temperatures and densi ti es, wi th path l engths varyi ng as W73i n scal i ng.
The ti me dependence of the radi ati on rate from the bomb fal l s natural l y i nto three categori es:
before the l i ght mi ni mum, duri ng the mi ni mum, and duri ng the second maxi mum.
As has been previ ousl y di scussed, the peri od before the l i ght mi ni mum consti tutes a peri od
duri ng whi ch absorpti on i s nearl y compl ete. Wi th the absorpti on model assumed i n the previ ous
secti on, we may now descri be the meani ng of the l i ght mi ni mum. Pr i or to the l i ght mi ni mum pres-
sures are approxi matel y proporti onal to l /R3 and temperatures fol l ow a si mi l ar l aw
T - l /R3
Then, accordi ng to the Stefan-Bol tzmam l aw, the radi ati on rate per uni t fi rebal l area goes as
B B B
9* B *
B *
B*
:85* : :
B *
;;:=
.0
B *m
B
B*****O
I J NL MSSI FI
But duri ng thi s peri od of strong shock, the radi us of the shock i s roughl y gi ven by
from whi ch i t fol l ows that
dQ/dt (total ) -477 R2T4- l /RI O - l /t4
Thi s i s the same ti me dependence as shown i n Fi g. 6.20, Effects of Atomi c Weapons, between 0.2
ms and 10 ms. At thi s ti me, however, the shock front and the i nteri or have cool ed to more trans-
parent wavel engths, and a greater fracti on of the i nteri or radi ati on i s seen by an external observer.
The i ncrease i n the transmi tted fracti on parti al l y offsets the decrease i n radi ati on rate due to the
cool i ng-expansi on of the fi rebal l , and the radi ati on rate curve becomes concave upwards on a l oga-
r i thmi c pl ot. Eventual l y, as the fi rebal l temperatures pass i nto more and more transparent wave-
l engths, the compensati on i n rates i s compl ete. We coul d, therefore, defi ne the mi ni mum as the
ti me at whi ch the rate of decrease i n dQ/dt, due to cool i ng, i s exactl y equal to the rate of i ncrease
of dQ/dt by the change of transmi ssi on for the wavel engths i nvol ved. I n other words, the mi ni mum
does not occur because of some sor t of a mi ni mi zi ng process, but qui te the opposi te, because of
the presence of i ncreasi ng transmi ssi on.
As poi nted out i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons, the formati on of oxi des of ni trogen i n the ai r
probabl y contri butes strongl y to the l ow surface temperatures near breakaway. Such compounds
probabl y deepen the mi ni mum and del ay i t i n ti me. However, the presence of such compounds i s
part of the argument for the rol e of absorpti ve path l engths, and does not negate the qual i tati ve
arguments presented previ ousl y.
As the fi rebal l cool s further a greater fracti on of energy i s present i n wavel engths to whi ch
ai r i s transparent and absorpti ve compounds wi l l di sappear so dQ/dt wi l l conti nue to ri se. Because
of the energy so radi ated, thi s reservoi r on the i nteri or wi l l eventual l y be depl eted. Sooner or
l ater the rate of decrease caused by cool i ng and depl eti ng wi l l just offset the i ncrease due to trans-
mi ssi on. I n a way si mi l ar to that for the l i ght mi ni mum, we can defi ne the second maxi mum as that
ti me at whi ch these rates al l cancel .
Wi th these defi ni ti ons of the mi ni mum and second maxi mum, there are marked changes i n the
concept of how these detai l s of the thermal radi ati on rate ought to scal e i n ti me, Wi thout enteri ng
i nto the enormous compl exi ty of the detai l s i nvol ved, one can say somethi ng about the ti me depend-
ence of thermal radi ati on.
B O9 . .
:0
B...:*: B** B
~::~ .;
B :.. :9
B:.
UNCLASSIFIED
::
:
:.
B *
Conservati on of energy wi l l pl ace gro~s ~~stri cti o~s &i hoc?~i me dependence. We requi re that
i n the l ong run, al l the energy i s degraded to thermal and there must exi st some QT ~ W such that
Q = !O-dQ/dt dt - W
By the conventi onal model , dQ/dt - R2, and wi th the fi rebal l scal i ng hydrodynami cal l y i n si ze, thi s
al one woul d demand that ti me scal e l i ke W73. However, by an absorpti on model duri ng earl y stages,
dQ/dt i s l ess than proporti onal to WY3,and thi s demands that ti mes scal e wi th a correspondi ngl y
l arger dependence than WY3.I n real i ty, the si tuatton i s much more compl ex than can be descri bed
i n a si mpl e manner because the hi ghness or l owness wi l l be di fferent for changes i n yi el d at
di fferent ti mes. Nonethel ess, i f i t were possi bl e to draw normal i zed radi ati on rates for bombs
over a l i mi ted range of yi el ds wi th dQ/dt - Wn then the ti me scal e must al so be restrai ned to be-
have l i ke W1n. I n parti cul ar, n < 2/3, so ti me must scal e by a power greater than 1/3; the next
obvi ous gross choi ce i s a whol e number fracti on l i ke 1/2.
The scal i ng l aw i s expected to be di fferent for each wavel ength, dependi ng on the degree to
whi ch i t i s i ni ti al l y absorbed. For some wavel engths and path l engths W% scal i ng coul d wel l appl y.
For other path l engths the phenomenon coul d be consi dered a di ffusi on process. I n nearl y any di f-
fusi on and conducti on process i n whi ch the parameter i s constant, and the mean free path short,
the di fferenti al equati ons are such that si mi l ar i ty vari abl es can be formed, i nvol vi ng l i near di s-
tances and the square root of the ti me as x/fi . Duri ng the l ate fi rebal l stage, i t mi ght be regarded
as a hot sphere of gas, at ambi ent pressure, wi th l i ttl e or no materi al moti orq some fracti on of the
radi ati on coul d be descri bed by such a si mi l ar i ty vari abl e.
NOW,the mai n features of the fi rebal l are control l ed by the hydrodynami cs i n whi ch the di s-
tance and ti me scal e l i ke W3. I f, by vi rtue of di ffusi on, a perturbati on i s i mposed whi ch del ays
ti me and goes l i ke the square root power, the net effect of the perturbati on i s ~ t = WVEt. Mul ti -
pl yi ng a functi on whi ch ought to scal e l i ke W3 by a perturbati on whi ch goes l i ke ws re sui ts i n an
over-al l ti me dependence, whi ch goes l i ke W13x WYG= WY2. I n thi s very crude way one suspects
that the ti mes at whi ch the mi ni mum and second maxi mum wi l l occur scal e more l i ke W% than W%.
These defi ni ti ons of the maxi ma and mi ni ma appl y to scal i ng, whi ch i s i l l ustrated qual i tati vel y
i n Fi g. 2.5.5-2. I f we go to a smal l er bomb or a rare atmosphere, the absorpti ve zone of ai r be-
tween the i sothermal sphere and the shock front wi l l decrease i n thi ckness; rel ati ve to a l arger
bomb, the transmi tted fracti on of radi ati on wi l l al ways be hi gher. Hence, one wi l l not have to wai t
rel ati vel y as l ong for the rate of i ncrease of transparency to just offset the cool i ng of the fi rebal l .
B 6*
:C
s B *
B*9:*9
~: o : : . . : .
i~OB. Aw! ?n
O:. e B
:
.:*O B
::
B. B
Thi s means that on the basi s of hydrodyna~i c&n~ W1~~h&ti ~% of the mi ni mum wi l l occur ear-
l i er, just as we deduced the WV2dependence. At the same ti me the radi ati on rates at the mi ni mum
wi l l be hi gher, whi ch means, i n turn, that greater amounts of energy wi l l be depl eted from the
bomb at rel ati vel y earl i er ti mes. The second maxi mum, whi ch i nvol ves the depl eti o~ shoul d then
al so occur at a ti me earl i er than i ndi cated by WY3and agatn about as we have deduced from the W12
l aw. Because the i ntegrated radi ati on l ost pri or to the maxi mum has been l arger, one wi l l not have
to wai t as l ong for the second maxi mum to set i n, and i t woul d seem that the radi ati on rate at the
second maxi mum wi l l fal l i n the case of thi s smal l er bomb.
As we go to sti l l smal l er bombs, the radi ati on rate at the mi ni mum wi l l shi ft hi gher and ear-
l i er i n ti me, and the second maxi mum wi l l shi ft to a l ower rate and al so earl i er i n ti me. For a
smal l enough bomb and a rare enough atmosphere, sooner or l ater so much radi ati on wi l l have
escaped that the l i ght mi ni mum and the second maxi mum wi l l coal esce i nto an i nfl ecti on poi nt.
I n the l i mi t as W --0 or as p + Oeven the i nfl ecti on wi l l di sappear because the shock front
wi l l now be too thi n i n thi ckness or too rare i n densi ty to absorb any radi ati on from the i nner core.
I n the ul ti mate l i mi t and for a wei ghtl ess bomb, the enti re energy of the bomb shoul d escape i n a
si ngl e pul se. Hydrodynami c scal i ng i n i tsel f mi ght show that the bl ast pressures approach zero i n
thi s l i mi t, but radi ati ve transport effects an equal l y strenuous reducti o~ no bl ast appears because
radi ant energy was never converted to hydrodynami c energy i n the fi r st pl ace.
For a bomb burst i n a very rare atmosphere, the major effect from an atomi c bomb woul d no
l onger be bl ast. The effecti ve thermal radi ati on woul d be enhanced, not onl y because of the greater
transmi ssi on exteri or to the radi ati ng sphere at these al ti tudes, but by l arge factors through the
fracti on whi ch escapes the radi ati ng sphere. There i s even more. I n a succeedi ng chapter i t wi l l
be shown that the surface temperature of i rradi ated objects i s al so dependent on the radi ati on rate,
as wel l as the total radi ati on recei ved and thi s greatl y i ncreases surface temperatures when the
bomb can rapi dl y di vest i tsel f of i ts energy through thermal radi ati on at earl y ti mes.
2.5.6 Scal i ng Laws for Thermal Radi ati on
We wi l l requi re a descri pti on of thermal radi ati on i n rel ati on to i ts effect on the shock wave.
I t i s conveni ent to descri be the scal i ng of thermal radi ati on rel ati ve to bl ast scal i ng by gi vi ng a
compari son of the rel ati ve thermal effect at a certai n pressure l evel as the yi el d of a bomb i s
changed.
The total radi ati on recei ved at a hydrodynami c poi nt depends on the model used. I n the bl ack
body model , i n whi ch Y - W, the total thermal radi ati on i nci dent at a poi nt wi l l be gi ven by
I
B
:00
BOe. :a:
;~j ;;
B
B *
:
:
B:
:.*
9
B: :
:
::
9. :. :**
QT .
Y cm o e-const R - w cos 6 e-const R
4r R2 47rRz
NCLASSI F! ED
I n hydrodynami c scal i ng, angl es are preserved so cos 6 i s i nvari ant. Di stances scal e l i ke W%and,
negl ecti ng the atmospheri c absorpti on i n e-const R,
QT=
aWcos6
w 73
4Tr(W~sR)z-
Accordi ng to thi s model the% the i nci dent thermal radi ati on wi l l i ncrease accordi ng to W%at a
gi ven pressure l evel .
I n the absorpti on model , thermal radi ati on wi l l be somewhat l ess than Y - W, so that the total
number of cal ori es at a gi ven hydrodynami c poi nt may i ncrease or decrease dependi ng on whether
n >0.67 or n <0.67 i n the rel ati onshi p Y = a Wn
QT N Y/R2 N Wn-0-67
A pri mary i nterest i n thermal radi ati on i s the surface temperatures produced by i t. Thi s i n-
troduces another dependence, for the l onger the ti me durati on duri ng whi ch a gi ven amount of
thermal radi ati on fal l s, the l ower wi l l be the surface temperatures produced by i t. A perti nent
exampl e here i s normal sunl i ght whi ch del i vers 2 cal /mi n/cm2 at the earths surface; thi s i s 10
cal i n 5 rei n, and accordi ng to the cr i ti cal tabl es i n Effects of Atomi c Weapons, the same radi ati on
from a nomi nal bomb wi l l char wood. I n general , thi s dependence i s i nversel y proporti onal to the
square root of the ti mes i nvol ved. I n a previ ous secti on i t was shown that the ti me of the radi ati on
scal es l i ke WY2. Combi ntng these dependenci es, we have
1/2-
Ts - QT/t
Y cos e
R2 t~2 - @3;;~2)Y2 - n-067-025 = n-092
I f, i n parti cul ar, n has the val ue 0.92 over a range of poi nts of i nterest i n yi el ~ then the surface
temperature i s i ndependent of the yi el d at a poi nt of hydrodymmi c i nvari ance, i .e., at the same
pressure l evel .
I t ts these dependenci es whi ch wel l l end i nsensi ti vi tyy to the effect of thermal radi ati on on
bl ast. QT behaves l i ke hydrodynami c l ength W3 for n s 0.92 ~ 1 whi ch i s as requi red for some of
i ts effects, whereas the surface temperatures behave J.&e a hydrodynami c vari abl e.
For a very l arge change ei ther i n ambi ent condi ti ons or i n yi el d, thi s i nsensi ti vi ty di sappears.
As assumed i n Secti on 2.5.3 for nomi nal bombs, nearl y al l the thermal radi ati on at earl y ti mes i s
absorbed i n the zone behi nd the shock front. Wi thi n reasonabl e changes of yi el d, the bl ast at the
** se B**
y+: . ; : : :
UNCLASSI HEb
&i i : i ;
. 0
9. * B
. . . 9*
9*
:a
B .. . .
B **m
B** ..
:*: B
*
B *
B
B
B:O
: . .
:9*
UNC-MSSl f l ~
B:*
B
B e :
:.
c:
shock f rent i s effecti vel y 100~ of the total energy of Me %om*B,andthe total thermal radi ati on al so
approaches 100% of the bomb. But for a very smal l bomb or one detomted i n a very rare atmos-
phere, these assumpti ons are no l onger val i d. A much l arger fracti on of the bombs energy wi l l
then appear as thermal radi ati on duri ng strong shock phases and a correspondi ng smal l er fracti on
wi l l appear as bl ast. I n thi s case, not onl y wi l l the effecti ve radi ati on i ncrease i n compari son wi th
what mi ght be expected from a nomi nal bomb fi red at sea l evel but the surface temperatures wi l l
i ncrease further because of the shorter ti me durati on of thermal pul se. The i ncreased fracti on of
radi ati on rate occurs pri or to the l i ght mi ni mum. The fracti on after the mi ni mum decreases i f the
total i s consi dered 100?&but thi s fracti on may be shortened ti durati on, or l i teral l y shi fted from
the tai l to the mai n pul se, and thereby i ncrease surface temperatures markedl y.
2.6 EFFI CI ENCY OF A NUCLEAR EXPLOSI ON
2.6.1 Waste Heat Concept
I t i s usual l y taken as common knowl edge that the effi ci ency of a nucl ear expl osi on i s con-
si derabl y l ess than that from TNT. Fuchs i ntroduced the concept of waste heat from entropy
changes, whi ch accounts for thi s reducti on. The argument i s often extended to represent i t as a
l oss i n energy, sol el y because the temperatures l eft behi nd (by entropy changes) i n a nucl ear ex-
pl osi on are, of course, enormousl y greater than those l eft behi nd by a smal l -charge expl osi on.
We i nvesti gate thi s concept more cl osel y. I n the fi r st pl ace, the anal yti c sol uti on or a di rect
i ntegrati on as i t was appl i ed to the I BM Probl em M i n Secti on 2.3.2 eval uates the hydrodynami c
energy as i t i s actual l y present wi thi n the wave. I f the energy i s so eval uated and radi ati on energy
densi ty i s smal l , there i s no meani ng to the effi ci ency because the energy present i s counted
once and for al l as hydrodynami c energy.
Next, one couI d argue wi th equal pl ausi bi l i ty that the heati ng due to the entropy change actual l y
enhances pressures at the shock front because the hi gh temperatures al so i mpl y that the speci fi c
vol umes are l arger for the materi al on the i nteri or of the shock. I f the materi al on the i nsi de oc-
cupi es a greater vol ume than i t woul d i f i t cool ed to ambi ent temperature, i t fol l ows that the ai r i n
the l ayer between the fi rebal l and the shock radi us woul d have to exi st at somewhat hi gher average
densi ty and, therefore, hi gher average pressures. Thi s means, of course, that the shock front
pressures woul d be hi gher, not l ower, because of the J P dV work done by thi s i nner core.
Another way to state the probl em i s by usi ng vari abl e gamma theory. By the ti me radi ati on
rates are near or beyond the maxi mum, the pressures on the i nteri or wi l l be effecti vel y at ambi ent
.0 B 0 B
B*. :9& : ::
B
B .0
B
:
B 0
B
B 0
.* .:**. UNCLASWI ED
k
B 9*
B ***
B **
B *.
: :O. : . :9**
. ***~
B *
B
B
B m*
B . . *
B0 :
B** .
B *
9*
::
B *.
km
B *.
B **,
a- ,
. *. *
B *9 *
B .
ITKwNwm
B:
:
B
: :
B
B
: .
9*
pressure PO. The excess i nternal energy per& i tvol u&eO#e~&e fi rebal l i s then
Po/(y 1) po/(Yo 1)
I t fol l ows that there i s no waste of energy di rectl y through the temperature because the i nternal
energy per uni t vol ume can di ffer onl y through the pressure, i f the i deal gas l aw hel d and y were
i denti cal for al l materi al wi thi n the shock front. I n thi nki ng of the energy over the bl ast wave at
l ate ti mes there i s thi s natural di sposi ti on to assume that y = yO= 1.4 when onl y l ow pressures are
i nvol ved. The resul t from the curves i n Secti on 2.2.2 i s the fai l ure of the i deal gas l aw at normal
pressure but at very hi gh temperatures. Here the val ue of y fal l s to val ues bel ow 1.2. I f the i deal
gas l aw fai l s i n such a way that y < YO,a substanti al fracti on of the bombs energy i s ti ed up i n
energy at the center of the bomb even though the pressures are returned to ambi ent. I t fol l ows
that the energy avai l abl e at the shock front wi l l be reduced, but, the hydrodynami c energy, i f
eval uated over the enti re sphere, wi l l not be smal l er than i t woul d be had the i deal gas l aw hel d.
I t i s obvi ous, however, that i f thi s hot materi al radi ates and a substanti al fracti on of energy
i s observed as thermal radi ati on beyond the shock front, then there must be a correspondi ng de-
crease i n hydrodynami c energy wi thi n the shock. The poi nt i s that the I BM run di d not al l ow the
materi al to radi ate, and energy was conserved wi thi n the shock by the adi abati c l aw; ti e di rect
i ntegrati on counted al l the energy. Even i f i t di d radi ate, the anal yti c sol uti on was appl i ed at ti mes
when the depl eti on of energy due to radi ati ve cool i ng-contracti on woul d not be mani fest at the shock
front. Whether radi ati ve cool i ng ever affects the shock front pressures wi l l be consi dered i n de-
tai l i n subsequent secti ons.
I n summary, heat i s not wasted di rectl y because of the entropy change, but may be wasted be-
cause of a fai l ure of the i deal gas l aw.
2.6.2 Effi ci ency wi th Respect to TNT
I t i s wel l known that the peak pressure vs di stance curve from a nucl ear expl osi on fal l s bel ow
what woul d have been expected from di rect scal i ng smal l -charge hi gh expl osi ves. Whi l e thi s has
general l y been attri buted to the waste heat concept, i t i s probabl y worthwhi l e to i nvesti gate thi s
compari son more cl osel y.
I n the fi r st pl ace, i t i s not cl ear, at l east to the author, what i s meant by a ki l oton of TNT. Jn
practi ce i t refers to short tons of TN~ i n Secti on 2.2.1 i t was noted that metr i c tons was meant.
The true effi ci ency of a nucl ear expl osi on wi th respect to smal l charges has l i ttl e quanti tati ve
meani ng unl ess the total energy behi nd the TNT shock wave and behi nd a nucl ear shock wave are
both known.
.0 B 0 .
B:O;l :O ; :;
B
B m
00 B *
Q .:0 :00 B
k
.00
i . uASW/ ED
: *: B B
B***: *:
B **
. *
B 9*
. 9 **O
B *
B
B *9
B*O :
B** B
9s
.00:: B **
k
B .*
B
B sg
B .
B - B
b-.. e. B
B.:
:
B
::
B * :
:.
9*
LHYCLASSFH?
Intheprevi ous secti on i t was shown that hi gher ~o~ e~&y i s requi red for a poi nt source
expl osi on to produce a gi ven pressure at the shock front because of the fai l ure of the i deal gas l aw
on the i nteri or of the wave. I n the energy i ntegrati on of the I BM Run i n Secti on 2.3.2 thi s poi nt was
tested di rectl y and i t was found that, under the assumpti on y = 1.4 throughout the wave at l ow pres-
sures, the apparent energy of the same bomb was onl y 5.5 KT i nstead of 11.5 KT, as obtai ned from
usi ng more r eal i sti c val ues of y. Now, TNT expl osi ons never reach the enormous shock pressure
reached by nucl ear expl osi ons and the resi dual temperatures i n the i nteri or are correspondi ngl y
l ower. I t i s to be expected then that even wi th the same pressure wave form for both types of ex-
pl osi ves the departures from the i deal gas l aw are much mi l der i n the case of a TNT expl osi on,
and that the total energy i mpl i ed i n the pressure wave i s, therefore, smal l er than for the same
wave on a nucl ear expl osi on. To compound thi s cl i ffi cul ty, however~ the center of a TNT expl osi on
i s hardl y ai r, but over surpri si ngl y l arge vol umes wi l l be an atmosphere composed l argel y of de-
composi ti on products from the TNT expl osi on, mostl y oxi des of ni trogen and carbon. I n eval uati ng
the energy behi nd a shock f or such an expl osi on, the equati on of state for that materi al woul d have
to be known. I t woul d be surpri si ng i f i t turned out that y = 1.4, but even more surpri si ng i f i t
agreed wi th pure ai r at these temperatures.
The descri pti on of a hi gh expl osi ve wave has been gi ven by Ki rkwood and Bri nkl ey. The author
understands that thi s work was done wi th y = 1.4 and further, that an arbi trary fi t was made of thi s
theory to empi ri cal data for TNT charges. I t i s suggested that whatever agreement occurred was
because of the chance that the average y for the decomposi ti on products of TNT was cl ose to 1.4.
Whatever fi tti ng was requi red i s evi dence that the y was not 1.4.
I t i s cl ear from the anal yti c sol uti on and the di scussi ons of parti ti on of energy that nucl ear
expl osi ons can hardl y be expected to scal e wi th TNT. These vari ati ons depend on a l arge number
of factors and shoul d be resol ved by detai l ed tests on both types of expl osi ons. I t i s not to be ex-
pected that the fai l ure of scal i ng wi l l be the same at al l pressure l evel s.
A pri ori then, the assumpti on of a constant effi ci ency of a nucl ear expl osi on i n compari son
wi th TNT i s not justi fi ed. Fortunatel y, through the I BM Run and the anal yti c sol uti on,
wi th TNT are unnecessary.
2.6.3 Parti ti on of Energy
Because of the presence of types of energy other than bl ast on nucl ear expl osi ons
compari sons
there i s a
natural di sposi ti on to assume that a natural parti ti on of energy occurs whi ch somehow di vi des the
energy of the bomb i nto a number of mutual l y excl usi ve fracti ons. Thus
.00
:0
B emm
B*. : B
,*::;;
B
B0:0 B.
B:*
B
UNO{A%X- Z
B 8:
:
: :
B ,: 0B*@
Bl ast + Thermal + Nucl ear = Total
5094 + 35% + 15% = 100%
We wi sh to consi der the concept of parti ti on more cl osel y.
As i s wel l known, not al l of the energy from fi ssi on i s rel eased promptl ~ about 11% appears
after the fi r st second i n del ayed fi ssi on products. But thi s i s not a bona fi de l oss to the shock wave
because i t occurs much too l ate, and by the conventi on stated on page 14, Effects of Atomi c Weap-
ons, i t i s not i ncl uded i n the energy val ue of the radi ochemi cal ki l oton of 1012cal . By the same
conventi on, i t was not i ncl uded i n the eval uati on of energy i n the anal yti c sol uti on nor i n the di rect
i ntegrati on of energy behi nd the wave. Some energy f rom gamma rays or neutrons coul d be behi nd
the shock front, and to thi s extent the stoppi ng process woul d contri bute to l ocal heati ng whi ch i n
turn, woul d rai se the l ocal temperature, expand the ai r and, to a l i mi ted extent, reappear as hydro -
dynami c energy. I f thi s absorpti on occurred deep wi thi n the wave, i t mi ght never make i tsel f ap
parent at the shock f rent. However, the densi ty di stri buti on behi nd the shock front contri butes
strongl y to the probabi l i ty that thi s absorbed energy wi l l be mani fest at the shock f rent, because
the shock i s a dense l ayer of ai r i n whi ch the probabi l i ty of cap?i i -re i s hi gh, and the hydrodynami c
transport of energy i s fast. The i nteri or of the bl ast wave i s l ow i n densi ty, so the probabi l i ty of
capture there i s very smal l . Li ke the absorpti on of radi ati on near the shock f rent, thi s rei nforce-
ment of the bl ast wave depends, of course, on yi el d. For smal l bombs, the neutrons and gamma
rays wi l l escape the shock compl etel y and a consi derabl e porti on of the energy can be mani fested
at l ong di stances from the bomb. For l arge bombs, al l scal ed di mensi ons i ncrease and, because of
the exponenti al mture of the absorpti on process, the trappi ng of energy behi nd the bomb may be
fai rl y compl ete. These di fferences correspond to a fai l ure of hydrodynami c scal i ng i n compari son
wi th a total yi el d.
Thermal radi ati on from the bomb rei nforces the wave from arguments si mi l ar to those ap-
pl i ed above for gamma rays and neutrons. There i s a further i mportant di fference, however, be-
cause of the substanti al l y l arger fracti on of the total energy whi ch appears as thermal radi ati on
and the ti me at whi ch i t occurs. As was di scussed previ ousl y, onl y a smal l fracti on of the thermal
energy appears pri or to the l i ght mi ni mum. Most of the thermal radi ati on appears l ong after
breakaway when the shock i s a consi derabl e di stance ahead of the fi rebal L There i s no questi on
that the radi ati on from the fi rebal l represents a bona fi de l oss i n hydrodynami c energy to the shock
wave duri ng the ti me i t i s observed wel l i n advance of the shock f rent i tsel f.
. e
BO. :
B* .*
B0::
km
:.: B
B o@
B .
( J NCLASSI R~
B *9 . . .
B ..**.
:
B**
B:
B
B
:
::
The questi on i s whether thi s radi ati ~e i o~s tan th?m:redw~ the pressures at the shock front.
Thi s questi on can be resol ved by an anal ysi s of the fi gures gi ven i n Secti on 2.4.2. Energy si gml s
are propagated behi nd a shock front wi th the vel oci ty u + c forward, and u - c backward. The ra-
di ati ve l oss to the bl ast wave, whi ch appears as thermal radi ati on wi l l resul t i n contracti l e cool -
i ng, a rarefacti on whi ch can the propagate forward wi th the vel oci ty u + c. Fr om Fi g. 2.4.2-4 one
may cal cul ate the l ocal vel oci ty u + c and determi ne the paths by whi ch si gnal s from the i nteri or
can reach the shock f rent. I t wi l l then be found that, at hi gh pressures, si gnal s wi thi n the shock
front wi l l al ways catch the shock front. Around the ti me the shock fal l s to somethi ng l i ke 40 to 50
psi , a negati ve phase begi ns to devel op i n the shock front. Thi s means that there i s al ways some
poi nt wi thi n the shock i n whi ch the vel oci ty u + c i s l ess than U. A si gnal behi nd thi s poi nt wi l l
never reach the shock front. I n the present report thi s di fference has been made the basi s for the
di sti ncti on between strong shocks and weak shocks.
The method of characteri sti cs suppl i es a si mi l ar and more powerful argument why si gnal s
wel l wi thi n a weak shock can never catch the shock. Once the negati ve phase devel ops, i t means
that two val ues of the Riemann i nvari an~ approxi matel y u + 5 c for a weak shock tn spheri cal
waves, can be found behi nd the shock front. Thi s val ue i s i nvari ant al ong the path u + c, whi ch i s
usual l y cal l ed the characteri sti c. I t i s a property of thi s method that characteri sti cs cannot cr oss
and a defi ni te val ue of the Ri emann i nvari ent i s associ ated wi th each part of the shock. I t fol l ows
then that wherever mul ti pl e val ues of characteri sti cs occur wi thi n the wave, si gnal s from both
poi nts cannot reach the shock front. Thi s poi nt wi l l be i nvesti gated i n greater detai l i n Secti on
3.7 * bug for the ti me bei ng, merel y note that thi s doubl e val ue of the Ri emann i nvari ant wi thi n the
wave occurs around 40 psi . Thi s i s about the ti me when thermal radi ati on i s ri si ng to i ts mmdmum
rate. Thi s means that the rarefacti on associ ated wi th the emi ssi on of most of the thermal radi a-
ti on wi l l be r estr i cted behi nd the negati ve phase, where i t has no chance of attenuati ng the shock
f rent, but coul d deepen the negati ve phase.
207 THE SHOCK FRONT I N FREE AI R
2.7.1 Proofs for the Exi stence of a Sharp Shock
As a prerequi si te for di scussi ons i n l ater chapters i t i s useful to exami ne whether the shock
front for free ai r i s actual l y sharp, or whether i t coul d be a sl ow ri se.
* Part ~ LA-1665.
se B e
.89 ;94 : ::
B
UNCI ASSi Fl ~~
B
. - : O
B *
B
B *
. 8 9.
. . B e, B OO B
:0
B . . B
BO..:*:*
.~; :;;
b:em
B
B e
i i i *: GLAssl
B:*0
B
:.
::
The exi stence of the fi rebal l i tsel f i s ~tr~~g &i defl cefha~tfi e shock f rent at earl y stages i s
sharp. As shown i n an earl y secti on of thi s chapter, the presence of a perfectl y sharp shock front
i s not, i n fact, a necessary condi ti on for the val i di ty of the Rmdci ne-Hugoni ot equati ons. These
equati ons are merel y a conservati on of mass, momentum, and energy across an undefi ned boundary,
whi ch coul d be qui te broad. I t i s onl y requi red that thi s boundary be quasi -stabl e i n the sense that
there i s no source or si nk of mass, momentum, or energy wi thi n i ~ i f thi s i s so, the Ranki ne-
Hugoni ot equati ons hol d across the boundary regardl ess of the vari ati ons wi thi n i t. I t fol l ows that
the entropy change wi l l resul t preci sel y as predi cte~ by the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons. I f the
shock were suffi ci entl y broad so that the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons were no l onger val i d, one
woul d requi re an approach to the adi abati c l aw as a substi tute for the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot energy
equati on. Fr om thi s i t woul d fol l ow that no entropy change occurred across the shock f rent, and
si nce subsequent changes are adi abati c, i t woul d be tantamount to the statement that the fi rebal l
does not exi st. On thi s argument, one judges that the shock f rent i s effecti vel y sharp.
More di rect evi dence i s afforded by the di rect observati on of refracti on hooks caused by
the shock wave i tsel f. Such refracti on can be observed i n a number of photographs rel eased of nu-
cl ear expl osi ons. The rocket tr ai l techni que for photographi ng thi s refracti on was suggested by,
and done at the request of, Los Al amos Sci enti fi c Laboratory a number of years ago, and has si nce
been devel oped and used extensi vel y by Naval Ordnance Laboratory.
A thi rd and l ess di rect argument for sharp shock i s based on the refl ecti on process. The re-
fl ected pressure at normal i nci dence from a shock i s, of course, a strong functi on of the i nci dent
pressure. As wi l l be shown i n detai l i n Chapter 3, LA-1665, the pressure mul ti pl i cati o~ meani ng
the rati o of refl ected pressure to i nci dent pressure, vari es from a factor of 2 at l ow pressures to
factors l i ke 12 or 13 for very hi gh pressures. Thi s fi ni te resul t i s obtai ned wi th the assumpti on of
a sharp shock. Whi l e the detai l s are too l engthy to warrant thei r i ncl usi on here, the pressure mul -
ti pl i cati on can be deri ved i n a si mi l ar fashi on by usi ng an adi abati c r i se across the shock front
i nstead of the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot energy equati ons. I t i s then found that the pressure mul ti pl i cati on
at hi gh pressures i ncreases wi thout l i mi t, rather than bei ng l i mi ted to a fi ni te val ue. Thi s woul d
mean that the pressures on the ground bel ow tower shots of nucl ear expl osi ons woul d r i se to many
mi l l i ons of atmospheres. Wi thout di scl osi ng securi ty i nformati on, i t seems cl ear from craters
I i ke Tri ni ty, that no such enormous pressures occurred. The pressures may have been many thou-
sands of atmospheres, but coul d hardl y have been mi l l i ons of atmospheres.
::. O B-* : B
~f ~;
9:*. B .
UNCLASSIFIED
B=.
B:*8
>
: ::
2.7.2 Possi bl e Perturbati on to Sharp Sho~ks
B 0 :. Be*
There are a number of other mechani sms by whi ch the shock front coul d be a sl ow r i se at hi gh
pressures. We si sh to consi der bri efl y these possi bl e effects on the val i di ty of the Ranki ne-Hu-
goni ot equati ons.
Fi r st, as i s wel l known, a nucl ear expl osi on i s accompani ed by a consi derabl e rel ease of
energy i n the form of gamma rays and neutrons. These are stopped i n ai r; eventual l y thei r energy
wi l l appear as degraded thermal energy from the producti on of secondary el ectrons. I t mi ght be
supposed that the i ncrease i n temperature from thi s decay woul d rai se the l ocal temperature and,
hence, the l ocal sound vel oci ty i n the vi ci ni ty of a nucl ear expl osi on. To some extent, thi s i ncrease
i n ambi ent sound vel oci ty ahead of the shock wi l l i ncrease the shock vel oci ty and hence the ap-
parent hydrodynami c energy. I t can be easi l y shown, however, that the temperature r i se due to
thi s heati ng, i s onl y a matter of a few degrees even cl ose to the bomb i tsel f, and i s, therefore, i n-
si gni fi cant i n affecti ng the propagati on of the shock.
The thermal radi ati on from the bomb i s a mechani sm si mi l ar to gamma rays. Here, however,
the shock front i tsel f i s the source of the thermal radi ati on. Whi l e i t i s enti rel y possi bl e to heat
the ai r i n the form of a precursor tai l i n f rent of the shock f rent, i t fol l ows that the shock front i t-
sel f wi l l be reduced i n pressure strength because of thi s radi ati ve l oss. I f thi s boundary i s smal l
enough, as i ndeed i t appears to be, then the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons are sti l l val i d across i t.
Physi cal l y thi s means that the shock vel oci ty may be i ncreased by vi rtue of rai si ng the ambi ent
sound vel oci ty just ahead of i t, but, by the same token, the shock pressure wi l l be reduced just
enough to compensate for the i ncrease i n sound vel oci ty. I t i s of further i nterest to i nvesti gate the
val i di ty of the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot energy equati ons, even under the assumpti on that such radi ati ve
l osses are occurring. The rel ati onshi p between the shock vel oci ty and the pressure i s gi ven by
u=~~)vo=~~~.
I n any case, the denomi mtor i n thi s expressi on i s a number l i ke 5/6 for y = 1.4, and wi th vari abl e
gamma more nearl y l i ke 11/12 at the very hi gh pressures where such radi ati ve l oss coul d be ex-
pected. Now, i f the radi ati ve l oss at the shock f rent were compl ete enough to l i mi t the shock tem-
perature to a fi xed val ue, then V/VO -0, and i n thi s case, the denomi nator woul d be a number
more l i ke 1. I t fol l ows that, even i f the pressure-densi ty rel ati onshi p f ol l owed an i sotherm i nstead
of the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot adi abat, the rel ati onshi p between shock vel oci ty and shock pressure
B
6* B 9 -+-
:9tt :: ::
B m
B 00.::. . .
B,. B:9 B 9* B ** B ** B
L
..:: l J NCLASSI Fl ~~
B *
, *O
. * . **
a. .
B **
. me
. o~o
B
B O
. . 0 n -
I
=::: :: GXIASSH?Et i
99B * *B * . B * . B 9* e
9
B
B .
: B .
B1::
:
woul d be affected onl y as the square rooto~ @l Z cl i ffegs~o~ ke square root of 1. Further, one
expects that the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons woul d appl y up to pressures of the magni tude of 1000
atm. The departure from the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot energy rel ati onshi p, smal l as i t i s, woul d not occur
unti l the shock pressures themsel ves were very much l arger than .1000 atm.
I n summari zi ng the present chapter, we recal l that the free ai r wave from an atomi c bomb has
been deri ved sol el y from the pri nci pl es of conservati on of mass, momentum, and energy. Thi s has
been done for a nucl ear expl osi on on i ts own mer i t through I BM Probl em M, i ndependent ei ther of
tests on smal l charges or of tests on nucl ear expul si ons themsel ves. The thermal radi ati on from
the bomb has been shown not to affect seri ousl y the apparent bl ast energy at the shock front. Fi -
nal l y, we have no reason to suspect strong departures from these equati ons because of the nature
of the shock process on nucl ear expl osi on.
PRESSURE
t
P
B z
b
B B *m B ** .
B :0.:.
::
b:
B
B
B B a :
:.:
:0 :0
UNCLASSI FI ED
Fi g. 2.1.2a The
B
B+
B
B
B
B 0 B *
B B B B
:.98: ;:
: B 0
Be*:***
B b . .
B 800 B *.
90
b : B .
B :
B:
B B 0 :
:0 :0
B
B
B
++
:e:
flplv, clT, u
Fi g. 2.1 .2b Defi ni ti ons
SPACE
I
I
I
I
I
SHOCK
FRONT
I
I
for
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
PRESSURE
% 4, vo, =o, ~o, uo=o
1
deri vi ng the Ranki ne-Hugoni ot equati ons.
e:; ::
B *..
B 99**.
B : B .
B 0 B*9
B
B *
B:
:
B B * :
:.:
:0 :0
P Uy
Fig. 2.1.3-1 The unit volume for differential conservation of mass.
r
B B
B *a O* * .
B
B
8*
B *
:
:
::
B:
B 9* :
::
:0 :0 .
UNCLASSIFW
t
Fig. 2.1.3-2 The r-t plot for a shock.
B B B 0 B * B
B8
s
B
:.lof ::
B *
:0 B B:0 :*O B
AP
B9*
B
:*
B B Bee Q
B B ** 9 B B *
9
.
.
:
*
B
0
:
9
*
O
*
-
$
:
:
:
:
B
.
.
.
B
*
9
B
*
.
.
B
:
0
.
:
.
B
.
.
:
:
*
e
m I
n
w m
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
N
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
\
l
\
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
l
)
,
1
i
z
7
T
-
I
i
i
i
i
i
I
I
k
I
I
I
l
l
I
I
I
i
\
l
1
1
*
7
.
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
l
!
l
!
l
\
~
1
1
1
u
\
A
I
\
.
\
A
\
.
I
\
(
~
\
,
g
l\
i
.
,
/
\
t
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
!
1
,
\
l
1
I
N
I
I
i
i
l
!
!
!
i
l
l
!
,
I
r
I
I
,
,
,
1
1
1
1
I
r
1
1
1
1
!
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
!
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
!
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
)
,
,
I
1
,
,
,
!
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
Y
L
t
j
l
h
.
B
O
B
8
9
B
C
F
B
*
e
B
B
*
*
B
B
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
B
B
B
B B B 00 .
B B
B m
B 9
:
::
B:
B
B B * :
::
:0 :0 .
I I I I 11111 I I l,+
i
1
11111111 I I 1111111 AIM
4
UNOLAW%D
4
, ( v
E .
/
/ I v I 1111 / 7/ I I I 11111 I I I I 1111
/
/
r A
EEEE$ #lE
1- 1 Ill 11111 I II
m
1 II /
L. I I I I I I
~
10
UNCLASSI FI E~
hlia:i::
B*00. aO **e .
B :0.:.
;;
c:
B
B
s 8* :
B 0
:C :0 .
UNOLASSIHED
Fig. 2.2.2-3
90 B B m := *
40 B B
B ,
B
B : .. 10; 0 B O
::
9* be
.* B ** B *9 *O* B ea B
UNCLASSI FI
d.m.mm ,
,, , +
I I , I I , , , , r I 1 I , , I , ,
I
II
TtiERMOUfNMIC PfWERTIES OF AIR,
I
, I 4
B-
SW3Wlffi TM HLKONIOT AND ITS
SRAMJiES FCH? REFLECllC#3 AT
VDJWJS INGIOENT PRESSURES
nur &w&
CONSTANT r
e
w: m5 wAm.x
Nm
355a
4 ! 1 1 I Ill 1 I 1 I 1
u 020
t
I I I I 1111 I I I I I
I
I t I , I ! !, , , , I I t
111111111 1111111
a
Fig. 2.2.2-4
so B B * B 0
.** B *
B *9 : q5 :0:
B *O*
B : B 0
B 0 B m B * B ** :00 B
LOG Pf
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
L
l\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
-\
\
\
\
\
\
k
_____ ____ _
+
()
F~
OG ~
()
LOG $
a
Fig. 2.2.5-1 Illustrates the cross-over point where
state compensate for changes in (W/PO) scaling.
.
B
B
0 B
:
B
e
.
.
B +
\
B
B
0
y I
n
m
b
j
k
U
N
(
!
L
A
S
S
i
F
I
E
j
:
:
r
:
-
.
.
e
.
*
m
*
B
*
B
*
*
B
e
B
0
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
I
I
II
II
,1 I
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
Fig. 2.2.5-3 Growth of a shock front in
an inhomogeneous medium.
io - G** * O* * B
B
:00 B
B0 :
B Ooo. m
BO. B
:-::
B *B ** B ** B 9* 9*O >0
B
B
:O. ::O
::
B:
B *e
B
B: :
:
::
B:o9** . .
\\
1000
\ \
-
\
000
\
\
BOO
\
\
ma
\
\
\
\
\
400
\
\
300
\
m o
\
\
FREE AIR
\
\
KIRKWWD 6WWEI
100
\
TNT , IKT
80
@
1
I I
\
\
so
\ NUCLEAR IKT
50
\ \ Fmz -
\
\
\
40
\
1
\
3G
\
\
\
\
,
\
\
m
\
<
\
\
\+
t0
\
\
B
\
6
\
m
4
\
\
s
,
\
FREE AIR PEAK OVERPRESWE
2
.s DISTANCE
HOMOGENEOUS AIR
1 KILOTON HYDRODYNAMIC YIELO [Id%)
AMSIENT PRESSURE ~. I bor
1 I I
m mu 3c94a mama
Et
loco ran
ma
1=
\\
UNCLASSYlE:
B
B
e
.
:
B
0
.
.
.
.
B
0
B
e
:
-
:
:
B
*
B
:
0
B
*
9
B
*
*
.
*
.
B
B
B
B
m
B
m
.
*
*
:
:
B
:
:
B
:
:
*
d
.
:
:
B
*
*
:
.
0
.
.

\
/
/
/
\ /
U
N
C
L
A
S
S
I
F
H
)
U
N
G
L
A
S
S
I
F
I
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
~
;
;
w
:
~
B
*
B
:
O
B
*
*
B
*
*
B
.
.
B
B
B
o
:
:
o
~
.
B
.
:
:
B
:
.
:
:
:
B
:
.
B
8
B
*
*
B
.
0
.
.
U
N
O
I
-
A
S
S
I
M
3
1
G
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
\
N
2
B
B
O
.
O
:
Q
:
B
*
*
.
o
:
~
-
:
~
B
O
B
*
*
B
*
*
B
e
e
B
0
0
.
B
.
B
B
0
:
:
0
B
:
:
.
.
O
:
:
9
B
9
B
:
:
0
B
0
:
.
:
0
*
W
x
A
$
w
.
.
5
J
.
3
3
4
W
O
E
w
o
w
3
3
N
w
l
s
K
l
.
$
I
A
B
+
:
*
0
B
;
l
*
.
.
:
:
B
B
.
*
*
.
B
B
e
*
*
*
*
k
,
,
*
B
*
*
B
.
*
*
B
.
*
*
u
N
w
-
Q
s
i
F
I
E
u
.
*
m
.
.
*
.
0
:
.
.
*
*
.
.
*
*
.
B
B
*
.
.
*
:
.
.
.
:
.
O
O
B
*
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
B
S
.
:
0
B
O
e
:
B
B
*
B
e
O
*
.
:
:
:
~
~
:
9
.
:
.
a
:
a
B
B
:
:
:
:
:
9
B
0
:
:
0
:
:
B
*
.
,
.
.
J
.
3
?
k
l
%
W
0
9
W
O
W
l
K
3
N
V
l
S
1
0
B
m
.
B
9
*
B
a
B
:
l
q
:
:
:
:
B
:
.
.
O
:
.
O
.
B
o
B .
,
B
0
0
,
:
,
Q
*
Q
B
k
.
*
*
*
*
.
*
*
.
0
0
.
0
:
.
~
F
W
L
A
S
S
l
~
!
~
~
.
*
*
.
*
:
*
.
B
B
m
.
.
9
:
.
.
.
*
e
a
*
B
O
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
B
o
s
.
.
:
C
c
;
-
:
:
B
m
.
*
*
B
B
*
B
e
a
B
.
.
.
B
B
0
B
.
B
:
:
B
:
:
:
9
B
e
:
:
0
:
.
:
:
B
U
N
(
J
A
S
S
I
F
H
X
?
\
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
I
n
0 z 0 u u i
n
E i
=
1
3
3
4
W
O
E
W
O
&
l
3
3
N
V
1
S
I
0
l
.
f
a
N +
:
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
..
i
.
\
.
\
;
.-
\
.,
,..
...
-. _
THERMAL RADIATION FuNcTDN s TIME OERIVEO FROM
_RAOIATlON RATE R
%

NOT,? Qn . 8,4x Id Callcm
EXTRAPOLATION FROM t.lseC, WITN n. 1.5
~
...
.-. _
__
B
B a.
B *..
B0 :
B0::
B=* ..*
iiimm
B *e
B 9.
B@,a
B *.
UNCLASSIF(ED
B 8* 9** B .* .
B
: .0
:
B:::
:.::
B
B * B :
:
B e
B a. . . . :e*
Fig. 2.5.1-1 Thermtil radiation function vs ti me.
TIME, SECONOS
B e B
B 0 B * B
B0000:: ::
B *m
B
Lme .:O ::. :.:
B *
.__ -
=
011
+
--. . ___ .
....... ,,
.......
====2
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
\
\
\
\
\
z o i
=
v : I
L
\
\
c
o
o
:
m
.
*
:
B
*
*
B
e
*
B
a
.
B
B
9
*
*
B
B
B
m
I
J
N
C
L
A
S
S
I
F
T
:
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
o
500 1000 1500 2000
WAVE LENGTH A
Fig. 2.5.3-2 Absorption coefficient of
2500 3000 3500
air vs wave length
1.
PIED
B*9
::
B 8
B
Be
B
B
B *
B
z
:
0
0
B
B
e
.
.
c
o
o
:
B
w
~
~
~
;
B
B
B
B
B
.
B
:
:
:
.
.
B
:
:
B
c
:
:
:
:
:
B
*
*
:
.
.
.
*
A *
U
)
S
W
;
:
J
%
~
a
~
x
Z
u
l
0
>
=
:
$
j
I
L
z =
Z
=
0
v
~
~
:
y
e
_
.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
(
f
-
.
.
.
.
.
U
N
W
W
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
9*
B **
B 0.. B e :
99* .
B *
B*.
::
B **
.iillmB
B ..
B *@,
B *.
B B *. B c . . , *
B
B
B. ::
:
B B.
B:
l J N( AMs[ f - l E
B
B: :
:
::
B *
B ** :0* B m
mwus u, m. (BEFOR5 rtiE SHOCK I
Fig. 2.5.5-1 Residual heat from space dependence R2A T vs R.
B 0 B
B e 9** 9*
Bmm B *O
B 0
B :***
B
::
:120 ::...
89 B ** B *e B 9* B a* B
R
B e
B B B**
B **
UNOMSS/ FI E~
B e*
B 8* B 9* B **
B eB ****** B
Thermal Radiation
Rate
B
B
.\
4
TIME
Fig. 2.5.5-2 Dependence of the thermal pulse shape on yield.
B O* , B
:-eB
B80.:.:
:Ml@;:;
,
B
:. 6 B .
:. . -.
c::: 8
e
B**. :
::
..0 . . . Be*
! J NCLASSI F! ED
Appen~ixA
SHOCK CONDITIONS FOR 1 KT IN FREE AIR
Ambient Conditions:
PO= 14.505 psi
CO= 1138.45 ft/sec
pO= 1.1613 x 10-s gm/cm3
Taken from IBM Problem h& the Energy of which was Deduced in Two Ways:
1. Direct evaluation of energy from the wave forms, using the equation of state in LADC-1133
(11.5 KT).
2. From evaluation with the analytic solution from the radius-time data (11.8 KT).
The value used to scale to 1 KT waa 11.5 KT.
~H?21_ASSl Fl FD
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
i
1
I
i
I
I
I
! 1
-
f
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
! I
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
I I I
~
_
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
I ~ !
.
.
-
_
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
_
_
_
! I
.
,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
, i
.
G
i
i
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
i i )
i
[
-
-
i i I
.
I i I ! \
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
I
-
~
r I
I
.
_
_
.
_
-
.
_
.
_
.
.
_
-
-
-
-
i
-
-
-
!
-
-
-
-
_
.
_
L
.
_
_
-
.
.
-
.
_
+
_
_
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L
-
-
-
-
-J
-
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
_
_
_
_
L
I
I
1
2
6
U
N
.
.
.
.
_
_
_
_
j
I
-
-
-
! I
-
+
-
-
I I
1 !
,
I
.
.
.
-
-
.
;
.
.
-
-
_
A
-..__
-----
.
.
I
2
I I
i
I
-
-
+
-
-
~ I 1
I I I 8 I
u
N
p
M
s
s
,
-
-
.
-
I
E
b
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
-
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
l
-
-
t
-
-
t
-
-
-
I
,
,
il
!
.
:
,
-
I
I
I
1
2
8
r
L
@
I
I
,
,
:
1
1
A
s
s
l
.
W
E
i
;
~
1
l
,
:
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
1
1
1
*
W
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
I
S
S
J
F
A
-
-
.
.
.
.
-
.
-
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.-
e
m
Q
S
S
I
I
.
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
.
.
-
+
-
_
_
_
.
.
.
.
.
_
+
.
_
_
_
~
_
.
_
.
.
.
_
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
.
.
-
.
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
+
.
_
.
-
.
-
-
-
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
-
.
.
-
.
-
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
+
.
.
-
-
-
_
.
.
.
.
-
_
.
-
.
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
,
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
,
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
,
.
.
I
I
I
I
-
-
-
I
.
.
.
.
_
_
.
_
.
.
.
.
_
-
_
_
.
.
.
.
+
.
~
.
+
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
I
I
1
3
2
/
-
j
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
-
.
.
.
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
I
.
J
\
/
J
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
-
.
-
-
.
-
.
.
-
-
.
.
-
.
.
b
i
~
~
.
.
.
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
.
.
.
-
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
,
i
r
1
1
[
I
1
J
I
I
i
-
-
+
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
,
.
#
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
m
.
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
F
E
D
:
H
E
t
)
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
I
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
-
-
.
I
-
.
-
.
.
-
+
-
.
.
.
,
-
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
,
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
~
.
-
.
.
.
-
I
.
.
_
_
_+
.
-
.
t
i
-
.
-
.
.
-
.
.
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
1
-
-
+
-
-
+
-
-
-
+
+
t
-
-
t
-
t
-
-
-
-
-
t
-
t
-
t
-
t
-
-
-
-
-
t
-
1
-
-
t
_
t
-
-
7
-
l
-
T
-
-
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
-
T
-
l
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
r
-
-
-
i
-
-
l
-
-
.
+
-
-
-
-
r
-
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
l
-
.
-
-
-
+
-
.
_
-
_
_
+
-
-
t
-
-
t
~
-
l
.
_
.
_
.
.
-
.
~
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
t
-
t
-
-
-
t
-
-
-
i
-
t
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
-
-
l
-
l
-
t
-
l
-.-
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
-
t
I
t
t
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
,
-
.
.
_
.
-
,
-
-
.
.
-
_
.
.
-
,
_
_
_
-
_
i
-
-
-
-
t
-
-
-
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
_
.
_
_
l
_
.
.
+
j
,
+
-
-
-
-
-
I
I
I
1
3
8
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
.-
.
m~
.
.
.
-
.
-
-
,
.
. I .
I
I
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
.
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
.
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
.
.
_
.
_
.
.
.
_
_
.
.
_
+
_
_
.
.
.
.
.
~
+
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
-
-
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
L
-
-
-
-
-
L
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
L
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
i
I
I
.
.
.
I
-
-
t
-
i
t
t
I
.
.
_
_
_
_
.
.
.
_
.
-
_
_
_.
,
.
.
_
_
.
l
-
-
.
-
-
-
t
-
-
1
-
-
-
4
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
~
-
-
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
-
-
-
-
4
~
-
.
-
-
-
-
.
l
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
_
l
_
_
_
_
_
.
.
- {
.
.
-
.
I
<
1
-
> %
0
0
0
0 .
.
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
;
-
.
_
_
f
i
_
.
.
-
-
+
~
-
~
-
-
-
T
t
.
-
.
.
.
.
1
I
-
-
T
t
t
-
-
.
.
-
.
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
t
-
-
-
-
l
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
-
-
-
-
I
-
-
-
.
.
-
-
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
-
L
-
!
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
f
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
j
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
-
-
-
-
!
.
.
.
1
.
+
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
v
B
B
<
B
9
.
.
I
E
D
.
,
8
.
A
k
l
l
:
L
,
,
L I
,
,
i
,
1
:
I ;
,
i
I
I
i
-
_
l
-
I I
1
1
.
.
.
)
B B
: : B B
M
I
A
s
,
>
T
i
l
;
1
I
J
B
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D

F
O
R

P
U
B
L
I
C

R
E
L
E
A
S
E

Burst Height of Nuclear Weapons

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Burst Height of Nuclear Weapons

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

The densi ty rati o across the shock, gi ven by p/po.

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

Você também pode gostar