Author Topic: Proximity Fuzes  (Read 1752 times)

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Proximity Fuzes
« on: August 13, 2012, 07:15:36 AM »
Interesting read, I thought I could share for those wondering how proximity fuzes worked.

http://www.vectorsite.net/ttwiz_05.html#m5

* Originally, the M-9 gave the gun crews the timer settings for the shell fuzes, but in a few months a new electronic miracle arrived: the proximity-fuzed shell, which included an electronic device that allowed it to explode when it came within a certain distance of a target. Unlike the SCR-584, the proximity fuze had little or nothing to do with the Rad Lab.

The British had begun research on proximity fuzes for anti-aircraft shells in 1937. The initial British work envisioned photoelectric or acoustic fuzes, but these ideas didn't work out. In the fall on 1939, William Alan Stewart Butement, a New Zealander who was one of the lead engineers in the British Army radar effort, suggested that a shell with a remote-control fuze, activated from the ground over a radio link, or a shell containing its own radio-wave sensor, might do the job. The second option quickly proved more practical and a circuit was designed, but Butement, by all evidence a very good engineer whose work was badly hobbled by the British Army indifference, had no time to pursue development.

Even before the formation of the Rad Lab, the Americans had picked up hints that the British were working on a proximity fuze. In August 1940, Carnegie Institution physicist Merle Tuve, head of the Carnegie "Department of Terrestrial Magnetism (DTM)" in Washington DC and well-known to the NRL through various collaborations, spoke with Vannevar Bush of the NDRC about proximity fuzes for shells, bombs, and rockets. Bush then helped organize NDRC Section T (for "Tuve") at the DTM to work on a proximity fuze. A section T engineer named Richard Roberts began by performing a series of increasingly rigorous experiments to show that a vacuum tube could survive thousands of gees of acceleration, as would be required if an electronic circuit were to be shot out of a gun.

Section T had been considering some of the same options for a proximity fuzing mechanism as the British had, and was coming to the conclusion that radio sensing was the best option when the Tizard mission arrived in September. Butement's research notes were included in the "Black Box" and were made available to the Americans. Butement's electronic circuit design was both elegant and practical, and threw the American proximity fuze effort well forward. Section T had a lab prototype of the circuit operating within days.

The circuit only required four vacuum tubes, including one for an oscillator, two for an amplifier, plus a gas-filled tube called a "thyratron" that operated as a switch. The oscillator was wired to an antenna, which in an operational fuze would actually be the shell casing itself, and if an object came within a few wavelengths of the antenna, its proximity affected the loading and operation of the oscillator circuit. The oscillator output was fed through an amplifier, whose output in turn was connected to the input of the thyratron. At a certain input level, the gas in the thyratron ionized and passed a large current pulse from a capacitor to trigger the shell. Calling such a simple device a "radar" was a stretch; it was really just a proximity detector.

* Although the focus of the effort was on developing proximity fuzes for antiaircraft gun shells, Section T also conducted tests with small bombs fitted with radio or optical proximity fuzes in October 1940. Tuve decided that designing a proximity fuze for a spinning shell was not quite the same job as designing such a device for a bomb or rocket, since a shell endured much higher gee forces and required different arming mechanisms. Proximity fuzes for bombs or rockets were passed on to a group at the US National Bureau of Standards (NBS) under Harry Diamond that ended up working on both radio and photoelectric proximity fuzes. Section T focused on the radio proximity fuze for shells, which was judged the highest priority.

Proximity fuze work was regarded as urgent, and Section T grew rapidly. By early 1941, components and circuit elements were being shot out of guns to determine how well they would operate, with test shots of complete fuzes beginning in the spring. By summer, tests were being conducted to calibrate the sensitivity, and so the triggering radius of the fuze, and initial service tests were conducted on the brand-new cruiser USS CLEVELAND in Chesapeake Bay in mid-August 1942. The results were astonishing, with two target drones promptly shot down by the ship's 127 millimeter (5 inch) guns. The CLEVELAND then left for the Pacific theatre, making no stateside stops to ensure that the crew didn't have a chance to talk about what they had seen.

By September 1942, Eastman Kodak and component subcontractors like Sylvania were ramping up production. A batch of 5,000 early-production fuzes was sent to the Pacific theater in November 1942. The fuze was introduced to combat on 6 January 1943, when the cruiser USS HELENA used one to shoot down a Japanese aircraft.

* About 22 million proximity fuzes would be built to the end of the war. The British had been conducting their own proximity fuze development efforts at a low priority in parallel with the American work, but with fuzes pouring out of American factories, the British effort was given up.

Section T was transferred from the Carnegie Institution to control of Johns Hopkins University, where the group was given the vague name of "Applied Physics Laboratory (APL)". APL is still in existence, with a history of a wide range of different government projects, most significantly satellites and space probes.

« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 08:04:42 AM by Noir »
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Proximity Fuzes
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2012, 07:16:47 AM »
The production proximity fuze was originally designated the "T3G Device" and then the "VT", which was suggested by the British, since it misleadingly implied "variable time" or "velocity triggered", which told snoops nothing. The fuze sent out a continuous radio signal in the range of 1.67 to 1.36 meters (180 to 220 MHz), and detonated when the shell got within a few wavelengths of a target. A backup self-destruct timer fuze destroyed the shell before it fell back to earth if it missed the target.

Building practical circuitry that could fit into an anti-aircraft shell and survive being shot out of a gun, with accelerations of thousands of gees and spinning at hundreds of revolutions per second, was a major engineering accomplishment, particularly in the days before solid-state electronics. A miniature ruggedized vacuum tube, the "T3", was developed by the Sylvania company and put into massive production. A particularly tricky issue was powering the proximity fuze, since conventional dry cells would drain away in storage.

The answer was to develop a battery that was inert until the shell was fired. The shock of firing broke a glass ampoule, flooding the electrodes with an acid electrolyte, which powered up and activated the fuze. The battery only worked for two minutes, but that was well longer than the lifetime of the shell after firing. The fact that the battery wasn't active before firing also provided an arming mechanism, since the shell wouldn't be fully powered up until a tenth of a second after it was in flight, by which time it would be hundreds of meters away. The device was called a "reserve battery" even though it was the only battery in the fuze, the derivation apparently being from the fact that it was held in reserve until firing.

However, Tuve didn't rely on this feature as the primary arming mechanism since it wasn't entirely predictable. The fuze also featured an ingenious arming mechanism activated by the shell's spin. Instead of a complicated and bulky centrifugal clutch system, the fuze was fitted with a porous cylinder offset from the center, with the core of the cylinder filled with mercury. Under normal conditions, the mercury provided a conductive path that shorted out the fuze circuitry, but when the shell was set to spinning rapidly, the mercury leaked out through the porous material, opening the circuit. The charge time of the capacitors in the circuitry also provided a safety delay.

The proximity fuze was longer than the older timed fuzes and protruded into the interior of the shell, but the greater accuracy more than compensated for the reduction in explosive charge. Although proximity-fuzed shells tended to have a high rate of misfires, for example sometimes being set off by entering heavy cloud, they were still much more effective than timed shells. They were built in a wide range of mark numbers for different types of American and British guns -- the "Mark 53", for example, was for US Navy 127 millimeter (5 inch) guns.
Mark 53 VT fuze

* The proximity fuze project was top secret, with shipments protected by armed guards and the fuzes stored under lock and key. Even when the fuzes were deployed, they were at first restricted to naval forces in the Pacific, where it was unlikely that a dud shell would be recovered by the enemy. There were worries not only that the Axis might be able to duplicate the fuze, but could even generate countermeasures against it, running a sweep of radio waves through the fuze frequency range to set the shells off prematurely. This actually happened by accident in a few cases, when the fuzes were triggered by longwave radars that happened to be on their frequency.

In the summer of 1944, the Germans began firing their "V-1 flying bombs" at London. The V-1 was a small winged missile powered by a pulsejet engine that gave it a distinctive buzzing sound in flight. It flew at high speed on a straight and level trajectory, held on course by a gyroscopic guidance system. The flying bombs did terrible damage to London at first, but fighter and ground defenses were refined and slowly managed to pick off more and more of the bombs. The Americans released SCR-584 radars and M-9 fire control systems intended for the Continent to British 94 millimeter (3.7 inch) anti-aircraft gun batteries, and also set up similar batteries with their own 90 millimeter anti-aircraft guns. The batteries were set up in a screen along the English coast.

Churchill pleaded for the proximity fuze, pointing out that the shells would only fall in the English Channel or on English soil. He got his wish, and the combination of SCR-584, M-9 director, and proximity fuze proved to be the most effective countermeasure against the flying bombs. The straight and level path of the intruders made them relatively easy targets, and after a learning curve, fewer and fewer of the V-1s got through to London. In the end, statistics showed that it took 156 proximity-fuzed shells to kill a flying bomb, which may not sound good except in comparison with the 2,800 conventional anti-aircraft shells required to accomplish the same trick. Incidentally, the proximity fuze had been designed to engage larger flying machines than the V-1, and so the fuzes supplies to the defenders were "recalibrated" following tests against a static V-1 model back in the US.

The TRE also developed a rangefinder to help fighters shoot down the flying bombs at night. It was a simple but clever device, developed on short notice. All it did was optically split the image of the bomb's orange jet exhaust and focus the images so they came together at a range of 180 meters (600 feet), providing the pilot with a glowing indicator that indicated he was in firing range.

The V-1 attacks ended as the Allies overran the launch sites in northern France. Although the Germans tried to continue attacks by air-launching the buzz bombs from Heinkel He-111 bombers, the effort proved expensive in men and airplanes and was abandoned. Unfortunately, as the V-1 flying bomb threat faded out, the Germans began launching V-2 rockets that came hurtling down from space at over 4,800 KPH (3,000 MPH). The rockets came in fast, giving little warning, and were impossible to intercept.

* Although the proximity fuze had been developed for anti-aircraft shells, of course Tuve and his people had always known it could be used for conventional artillery as well. A proximity fuze attached to ground bombardment artillery would allow the shells to burst in the air just before impact, showering the target area with fragments and leaving few places for victims to hide. Demonstrations of howitzer shells with proximity fuzes were performed to Army brass in September 1943. Although the demonstrations were characterized by a good deal of bungling, the Army was still impressed and wanted to get the proximity fuze into the hands of the field artillery as soon as possible.

Most of the field artillery used howitzers, which often used high-angle fire trajectories. That led to a problem in that sometimes small powder charges were used, resulting in low acceleration and spin that defeated the fuze arming mechanisms. Gun crews were told to use heavier powder charges with proximity-fuzed shells.

There was also the worry about the fuzes falling into enemy hands. In fact, the Germans were working on proximity fuzes themselves, mostly for rockets. One issue was that the V-2 missile tended to bury itself before detonating, reducing its effectiveness, and the Germans were also working on anti-aircraft missiles. They experimented with acoustic, optical, and radar proximity fuzes, but the effort was unfocused and went nowhere. An intact VT fuze might have helped them a great deal, but by late 1944 the Reich was obviously on its last legs. There was little chance that the Germans would have the resources or the time to duplicate proximity fuzes if they fell into their hands, and after strong lobbying by fuze advocates, their use was greatly expanded.

During the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944, proximity fuzes were installed on artillery shells for ground bombardment. A backup impact fuze detonated the shell if the proximity fuze failed. Proximity fuzed shells proved devastatingly effective, and shell-shocked German soldiers surrendered in large numbers. Allied brass worried enough about the possibility of the Germans copying the VT fuze to order the development of jamming systems that would cause proximity-fuzed shells to detonate prematurely. The jammers were built, but they were not needed. The Germans simply didn't have the time left to copy the fuze.
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9500
Re: Proximity Fuzes
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2012, 07:50:00 AM »
Thanks for that, good explanation and not at all what I had thought.

- oldman

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Proximity Fuzes
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2012, 09:35:52 AM »
I had no idea how it worked...but now I know that our prox fuses are much better than the real ones.
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Acidrain

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: Proximity Fuzes
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2012, 05:40:01 PM »
I had no idea how it worked...but now I know that our prox fuses are much better than the real ones.
the eficacy of AH prox fuses is probably adjusted to reflect the lack of sheer volume of fire seen in live combat.

Offline W7LPNRICK

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2050
      • Ham Radio Antenna Experiments
Re: Proximity Fuzes
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2012, 05:51:04 PM »
Interesting read, I thought I could share for those wondering how proximity fuzes worked.

http://www.vectorsite.net/ttwiz_05.html#m5

* Originally, the M-9 gave the gun crews the timer settings for the shell fuzes, but in a few months a new electronic miracle arrived: the proximity-fuzed shell, which included an electronic device that allowed it to explode when it came within a certain distance of a target. Unlike the SCR-584, the proximity fuze had little or nothing to do with the Rad Lab.

The British had begun research on proximity fuzes for anti-aircraft shells in 1937. The initial British work envisioned photoelectric or acoustic fuzes, but these ideas didn't work out. In the fall on 1939, William Alan Stewart Butement, a New Zealander who was one of the lead engineers in the British Army radar effort, suggested that a shell with a remote-control fuze, activated from the ground over a radio link, or a shell containing its own radio-wave sensor, might do the job. The second option quickly proved more practical and a circuit was designed, but Butement, by all evidence a very good engineer whose work was badly hobbled by the British Army indifference, had no time to pursue development.




Good info....Most of his findings were already known by ham radio operators.... just not a direct correlation. They needed to use that knowledge in a different way. Any un-grounded metal entering an RF field/lobe will change it's impedance, inductance, reactance, & resistance...all this is measurable and creates changes in the field energy. For example...if you're interested- in Mobile radio operations it is important to ensure the entire chassis is grounded together with the frame, exhaust, & engine, so the radio & tuner will see the vehicle as part of the antenna(Ground plane) and not an isolated object interfering with transmission/lobe formation. COOL.  So if the shell is tuned to believe it is the entire antenna & an ungrouded object enters the lobe/RF field, it reacts to the changing impedance & Boom! :salute



This picture show 1/2 of a typical RF field...in free space it might look much like a butterfly.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2012, 06:07:00 PM by W7LPNRICK »
WildWzl
Ft Bragg Jump School-USAF Kunsan AB, Korea- Clark AB P.I.- Korat, Thailand-Tinker AFB Ok.- Mtn Home AFB Idaho
F-86's, F-4D, F-4G, F-5E Tiger II, C-130, UH-1N (Twin Engine Hueys) O-2's. E3A awacs, F-111, FB-111, EF-111,

Offline 63tb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Re: Proximity Fuzes
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2012, 06:46:47 PM »
Didn't Julius Rosenberg give the proximity fuse design to the Russians (which went straight to their SAM program)?

63tb