• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    The ballistic performance of the bombard Mons Meg

    2016-04-18 08:23:03IanLEWTASRachaelMCALISTERAdamWALLISCliveWOODLEYIanCULLIS
    Defence Technology 2016年2期

    Ian LEWTAS,Rachael MCALISTER*,Adam WALLIS,Clive WOODLEY,Ian CULLIS

    QinetiQ,F(xiàn)ort Halstead,Sevenoaks,Kent T N14 7BP,UK

    The ballistic performance of the bombard Mons Meg

    Ian LEWTAS,Rachael MCALISTER*,Adam WALLIS,Clive WOODLEY,Ian CULLIS

    QinetiQ,F(xiàn)ort Halstead,Sevenoaks,Kent T N14 7BP,UK

    The bombard Mons Meg,located in Edinburgh Castle,with a diameter of 19 inches (48 cm),was one of the largest calibre cannons ever built. Constructed in 1449 and presented to King James II of Scotland in 1454,Mons Meg was used in both military and ceremonial roles in Scotland until its barrel burst in 1680.This paper examines the history,internal,external and terminal ballistics of the cannon and its shot.The likely muzzle velocity was estimated by varying the propellant type and the cannon prof i le was investigated to identify weak spots in the design that may have led to its failure.Using the muzzle velocity calculated from the internal ballistics,simulations were performed with granite and sandstone shot for varying launch angle and ground temperature.The likely trajectory and range of the cannonballs are described.The internal and external ballistics informed the initial conditions of the terminal ballistic impact scenarios.The performance of the cannonball against both period and modern targets,in the form of a pseudo-castle wall and a monolithic concrete target,respectively,were simulated and are presented and discussed.

    Analytical;Hydrocode;Muzzle velocity;Cannon barrel design;Trajectory;Castle brick target

    1.Introduction

    As one of the larger and well documented surviving medieval cannons,Mons Meg stands in pride of place at Edinburgh Castle and in its history (Fig.1).Constructed around 1449 in Mons,part of what is now modern day Belgium,at the request of Duke Philip the Good of Burgundy [2],the bombard was intended as a wedding present to King James II of Scotland,who,in 1457 married Duke Philips’great niece,Mary of Gueldres.

    Customs records date Mons Meg’s f i rst arrival on Scottish shores around 1457 [3],seemingly f i rst taking place in battle at the siege of Roxburgh Castle in 1460,although this is not yet backed up in any way other than stories from the time [3].The earliest written record of her active role in service is during the 10 day bombardment of Norham Castle in 1513 [4]during which she is reported to have destroyed both the castle’s inner and outer wall.Her last use as a defensive weapon was during the Lang Siege 1571-73,after which she was only used for ceremonial duties.

    One of the most famous stories about the bombard was the two month siege of Threave Castle by James II.The story goes that the f i rst cannonball f i red at the keep passed straight through the wall and severed the hand of Margaret Douglas as she was drinking inside.

    Once retired from active military service she found a new role as a display piece at Edinburgh Castle.However,on 30 October 1680,to celebrate the visit of James Duke ofYork and Albany to Edinburgh,the barrel burst,effectively ending her operational life.

    This paper investigates and discusses the internal,external and terminal ballistics of the cannon.The internal ballisticscalculates the likely muzzle velocity of the cannon and analyses the possible reasons for the barrel bursting.The external ballistics uses the results from the internal ballistics to analyse and predict the cannonball trajectory and likely f i nal velocity and impact angles.This is used to investigate its terminal performance against modern targets and period,castletype targets.

    Fig.1.Mons Meg at Edinburgh Castle.Licensed under creative commons attribution-share alike 2.0 generic license [1].

    2.The cannon

    Mons Meg is constructed of wrought iron,sometimes called charcoal iron,a highly variable iron,both in chemical composition and slag content.However it is a very ductile metal and the levels of slag have made the iron extremely resistant to corrosion [5].It measures over 4 m in length,with a bore of 50 cm and weighing over 6000 kg [3],easily making it one of the largest (by calibre)stone f i ring cannons in history.

    It is divided into 2 distinct parts,the powder chamber,and the barrel.The powder chamber measures 1.16 m in length,and varies from 0.59 to 0.53 m in diameter (Fig.2).It is likely that the powder chamber is constructed from one billet of iron which has been hammer-beaten on a mandrel to achieve the correct inner dimensions.The barrel measures 2.88 m in length externally,and varies from 0.63-0.75 m in diameter.It is constructed from 25 staves running the length of the barrel which are covered and held in place by 33 hoops.These would have been heated in a furnace and placed over the staves,as these cooled they would tighten to hold the barrel together and fasten the staves to the powder chamber.

    Mons Meg f i red cannonballs roughly 490 mm in diameter. During Mons Meg’s operation lifetime in the 15th and 16th centuries,iron shot was not available and the cannonballs were made from local stone.There are records [7]which indicate both sandstone and granite shot was used to give mass ranges of 130-140 kg and 160-170 kg for the different stone,respectively.

    Black powder was used as the propellant charge for the bombard but there is no specif i c data about the amount used for Mons Meg.A minimum and maximum likely propellant mass[7]of 29.5 kg and 34 kg,respectively,was assumed.

    Fig.2.External and cross-sectional view of Mons Meg [6].

    Table 1Pressured produced by period black powder compositions [7].

    3.Internal ballistics

    3.1.Muzzle velocity

    To calculate the muzzle velocity of Mons Meg,the analytical code Proteus was used.Proteus is a 1 dimensional,lumped parameter code used to solve for combustion of gases and internal pressures;it is similar to IBHVG2 [8],and internal studies have shown the predictions of both codes to be comparable.

    There were three likely black powder compositions in use during Mons Meg’s operation lifetime and one from when the barrel burst,each with a different range of pressure produced. Proteus matched these shot pressures to calculate the muzzle velocities.The results shown in Table 1 average the propellant mass and pressure range,whilst assuming a 160 kg granite cannon ball,to produce a single muzzle velocity for each composition.

    As there is no def i nite source for which type of powder was used in Mons Meg,an average of the 14th and 16th century powders (its operational timespan)was used as the expected muzzle velocity of the cannon,315.0 m/s.This value was taken forward to be used in the external ballistics section.

    The above value of 315.0 m/s was reached after several ref i nements to the model.An initial value of 319.1 m/s was previously calculated and used in both the external and terminal ballistics work as the research was running in close to parallel due to time and resource limits.

    3.2.Internal pressure and the bursting of the barrel

    As mentioned above in 1680,the barrel of Mons Meg burst during ceremonial duties.This section investigates whether the amount or type of powder could explain the manner and location of failure.

    Following research from various sources,agreed values for the key dimensions of the cannon were used in the QinetiQ Barrel Design Software (QQ-BDAS).Although the method of manufacture of Mons Meg is different from that assumed in QQ-BDAS,it was decided that this software would give suff iciently representative pressure limits.

    QQ-BDAS is a QinetiQ proprietary code and thus has not been referenced in open literature,although it was developed using the gun design calculation methods outlined in “Textbook of Ordnance and Gunnery”[9]authored by William H Tschappat,and “Vickers and Sons Maximum Ltd-Their works and manufacturers”[10]by Alex Richardson.

    The cannon prof i le input in QQ-BDAS is show in Fig.3.

    Fig.3.External and internal prof i les of Mons Meg used in QQ-BDAS.

    An output from QQ-BDAS is a graph showing pressures along the barrel;this is shown in Fig.4.In this case the key information is the Safe Maximum Pressure which is shown in red,and the Margin of Safety shown in black.

    QQ-BDAS does not use the internal pressure calculated in Proteus but uses the propellant impetus.This was set as a standard value for all the black powder compositions so they could not be individually compared.This does however show any “weak” points in the weapon using a black powder propellant.

    The Safe Maximum Pressure is the theoretical maximum pressure that the cannon can contain,without sustaining damage,predicted by QQ-BDAS.The Maximum Internal Pressure Weald Hills (W/H)shows the theoretical propagation of gas pressure along the prof i le.The Margin of Safety is calculated as the ratio between the Safe Maximum Pressure and Maximum InternalWeald Hills Pressure.It is evaluated at every point along the cannon and varies from 1.3 to 9.6.A safety factor of 1.3 does not allow much room for error;this drop in safety occurs between 1.36 m and 1.74 m along Mons Meg,and extends roughly between hoops 3 and 7 from the breech end. This drop in factor of safety is caused by the internal diameter of the cannon increasing dramatically where the powder chamber opens out to accommodate the cannon ball.

    Fig.4.QQ-BDAS output compared Mons Meg failure location.

    Fig.5.A comparison of black powder energetic potential [7].

    The Margin of Safety Minimum Requirement is only relevant in modern weapons during strength of design investigations,but it gives a good reference point to show how safe Mons Meg was likely to have been to f i re.

    By comparison between the graph and the location of failure along the cannon,shown in Fig.4,the damaged portion of Mons Meg,from the 1680 f i ring lines up very closely to the predicted drop in safe pressure from QQ-BDAS.This shows that the modern model of the cannon is a valid representation of the actual item and correctly predicts the area of failure.

    Calculations from the Journal of the Ordnance Society [7]suggest that based on the mode of construction and the quality of iron used,the maximum permissible pressure within Mons Meg before damage starts to occur is 87 MPa.The same article states that a pressure of 110 MPa and over would be enough to destroy the barrel.

    The pressure ranges of the black power compositions (as well as an earlier,weaker powder and a composition created after the bursting)compared to the two pressure limits above is show in Fig.5.This indicates the use of a more powerful powder,unavailable during Mons Meg’s operational lifetime,as the possible cause of the cannon’s failure in 1680.It cannot be ruled out that other factors may have assisted in the failure of the barrel;an inferior quality powder could have been used,which may have led to unstable def l agration,causing pressure waves to propagate along the barrel and in its worst form,this could lead to a minor detonation.Although it cannot be stated,with certainty,to be the cause of the barrel burst,we can show that the damage occurred at a weak point in the barrel’s construction.

    4.External ballistics

    4.1.Drag and pressure

    The most important factor to consider when determining the trajectory of a fast moving projectile is drag.Drag refers toforces acting opposite to the relative motion of any object moving with respect to a surrounding f l uid and it is therefore used to calculate the deceleration of an object.Below is the drag equation

    whereFD=drag force;ρ=mass density of the fl uid (air in the case of Mons Meg);u= fl ow velocity relative to the object;CD=drag coef fi cient;A=reference area.

    As can be seen from Eq.(1),the drag force will increase as the velocity increases.The drag coef fi cient is a function of the Reynolds number and is therefore not constant meaning it will change for different velocities.There is no set formula to calculate it as it can only be approximated using experimental data and changes with numerous variables.The Reynolds number,Re,is a dimensionless quantity which is used to help predict similar fl ow patterns in different fl uid fl ow situations and incorporates several of these variables.

    whereL=characteristic linear dimension (the diameter of the cannonball in this case);μ=dynamic viscosity of the fl uid.

    Eq.(2)indicates thatReincreases with velocity.Air density and viscosity also affect the Reynolds number and how this is calculated will be discussed later.All ranges of Reynolds number have been included in the calculation of the drag coeffi cient but in reality only high velocity ranges will be needed as the projectile will still be travelling at over 100 m/s when it reaches its trajectory end point.

    The Reynolds number relating to the drag on a sphere can be separated into fi ve separate categories [11]

    1)Ideal or attached fl ow:Re<1,

    2)Separated fl ow:1 <Re<10,

    3)Unsteady oscillating fl ow:10 <Re<105,

    4)Laminar boundary layer fl ow:105<Re<106,

    5)Turbulent boundary layer fl ow:Re>106.

    The most important stages when considering the Mons Megs cannonball trajectory are the fourth and f i fth stages as the projectile would remain within these f l ow stages for the duration of its f l ight due to the high velocity at which it would be travelling.

    In the fourth case,a laminar boundary layer with a wide turbulent wake,the boundary layer on the windward side of the sphere is laminar and orderly and the chaotic wake is initiated as the f l ow turns onto the leeward side of the sphere [11].

    The f i fth case is a turbulent boundary layer with a narrow turbulent wake.The boundary layer transitions to chaotic turbulent f l ow with vortices of many different scales being shed in a turbulent wake from the body.The separation point is initially slightly downstream from the laminar separation point,so the wake is initially slightly smaller and the drag is less than the corresponding laminar drag (stage 4)[11].In normal atmospheric conditions this equates to a velocity of around 250 m/s for the Mons Meg cannon ball.This velocity would be a lot higher if the projectile were smaller.The effect of Reynolds number on the drag coeff i cient is shown in Fig.6.

    Fig.6.Relative change in drag coeff i cient with respect to Reynolds number[12].

    4.2.Trajectory program

    To calculate the trajectory of the cannonball,an analytical computer program was written in MATLAB.The program requires the user to de fi ne ground temperature,muzzle velocity,angle of the cannon with respect to the horizon and the mass of the projectile.The program calculates an initial air viscosity and density and resolves the velocity into x and y components.

    The Mons Meg trajectory model calculates new air densities and viscosities as it steps through time.This is calculated from an initial ground temperature (i.e.wheny=0).At the beginning time step,a new temperature is calculated using the lapse rate,the rate at which the temperature decreases with increasing altitude and is equal to 6.4 °C/km under normal atmospheric conditions [13].Using this temperature the air density and viscosity can be calculated with the functionsρ(T)andη(T). These functions are polynomial interpolations of tables containing air density and viscosity as a function of temperatures[14].The main portion of the program is the loop which recalculates the velocity and maps the trajectory intoxandyarrays every 0.01 seconds,taking into account both drag and gravity. A time step of 0.01 seconds was used as a smaller time step does not affect the trajectory but does signi fi cantly increase the computation time of the program.This runs until the trajectory reaches ground level (y=0).

    The drag model used in the program is taken from [15]and the trajectory model has been validated with data from [16].

    4.3.Results

    Initially the Mons Meg trajectory model was used to investigate the effect of changing the air temperature,initial angle and muzzle velocity has on the range of the bombard.Unless it is the variable being varied,the initial conditions of the program were a muzzle velocity of 300 m/s,initial angle of 15°,ground temperature of 15 °C and a projectile mass of 149 kg.This refers to a cannonball made from sandstone.

    Table 2 shows that increasing the temperature from 0 °C to 30 °C increases the range of the cannon but only by 2.77%.This relationship is the lower air densities at higher temperatureswhich,when substituted into Eq. (1),will produce a slightly lower drag forces.Table 3 shows how range varies with initial cannon angle including percentage increase from 10°result.

    Table 2Table showing how range varies with ground temperature including percentage increase from 0 °C result.

    Table 3Table showing how range varies with initial cannon angle including percentage increase from 10°result.

    Table 4Table showing how range varies with muzzle velocity including percentage increase from 210.8 m/s result.

    Again,intuitively the range will increase as the initial angle is raised to 45°;however,this relationship is not linear.This is because the ranges are converging to a maximum which occurs at 45°.This was to be expected as can be seen in the experimental results found in [17].A 45°initial inclination would mean the muzzle of the cannon would be 2.86 m off the ground which is infeasible considering the mass of the cannon.It was agreed that a 15°inclination would be used for future trajectory calculations.

    It is interesting to note that between 10°and 30°the terminal velocity decreases.This is because the projectile is spending longer in f l ight and is therefore affected by more drag.However,between 30°and 45°the terminal velocity increases again.This is because the projectile is reaching a higher altitude so the acceleration due to gravity is having a greater effect.Table 4 shows how range varies with muzzle velocity including percentage increase from 210.8 m/s result.

    As to be expected,the higher muzzle velocities produced a signif i cantly greater range.The muzzle velocity range tested was suggested by the internal ballistics.

    Two specif i c muzzle velocities were also tested,319.1 m/s and 315.0 m/s.These are the pre and post ref i nement predictions for the expected muzzle velocity of Mons Meg using period black powder.Table 5 shows the Mons Meg trajectory model results for the two calculated muzzle velocities.

    Table 5Table showing the Mons Meg trajectory model results for the two calculated muzzle velocities.

    Simulations have also been run using alternative methods,for example,using different atmosphere models and different drag models.However,the results showed that there were little differences in the predicted f i nal velocities and ranges,and the numbers stated in the paper represent typical values from the study.

    5.Terminal ballistics

    5.1.Background

    Fig.7.Modern day Threave Castle.Licensed under creative commons attribution-share alike 2.0 generic license [18].

    One of the most famous stories about the bombard was the two month siege ofThreave Castle (Fig.7)by James II in 1455.The story goes that the f i rst cannonball f i red at the keep passed straight through the wall and severed the hand of Margaret Douglas as she was drinking inside.Although historians have discredited this account,this work investigated whetherthiswas possible.

    This section also looks at the terminal ballistics of the cannon against modern targets,specif i cally a reinforced,monolithic concrete target.The impact conditions have come from the internal and external ballistics simulations discussed earlier.

    Both analytical equations and hydrocode modelling were used to assess the capability of Mons Meg against period and modern targets.The cannonball was modelled as a 160 kg,490 mm diameter granite sphere and the target designs are described later.Several assumptions were made in this work,importantly the cannonball ball was assumed to behave as a rigid body.This was both a prerequisite of the analytical equations and necessary due to the lack of validated failure data for the material model used for the cannonball.

    5.2.Analytical investigation

    There is very little validation data for granite cannonball impacts.Anecdotal historical evidence exists for period,castletype targets but there is nothing in open literature for performance of a granite sphere impacting a modern concrete target. Therefore an analytical investigation was undertaken to provide data points from which to compare the hydrocode simulations for the modern target.

    The analytical equations used are only valid for normal impacts so two different impact speeds were analysed,the muzzle velocity and fi nal velocity.These values provided the full range of possible depths of penetration for the cannon.

    The analytical model used here was derived [19]from the Forrestal Spherical Cavity Expansion model.Forrestal et al. developed the empirical equations for predicting the penetration depth of projectiles into concrete and earth-type targets based on cavity expansion theory,taking into account the dimensions of the projectile (including nose shape),impact velocity and target properties [20].

    Initially,an open-form analytical equation for penetration depth was used to estimate the depth of penetration [21].This split the penetration process into two regimes,a cratering phase(when the penetrator was less than two diameters into the targets)and a tunneling phase after that.The depth of penetration,P,equation for this is shown below

    where the projectile has massm, radiusa,nose factorNbased on the calibre radius head,striking velocityVsand initial tunnel region velocityV1.The target is de fi ned by density,ρ,compressive strength,fc′ ,and a dimensionless empirical constant that multiplies the compressive strength,S.

    However,the large calibre of the projectile,0.24 m for the cannonball,pushed the equations into non-realistic regimes withV1becoming imaginary.This is obviously unusable and therefore an earlier form of the spherical cavity expansion model was used [20].These equations were non-ideal and closed-form as several of the constants in the equations were derived from speci fi c target sets.Forrestal et.al.looked at the sensitivity to certain constants and found the difference to be negligible.However,the analytical equations for this study are mainly to provide added con fi dence to the hydrocode simulations and do not need to be precise.It was therefore decided that these equations would be suf fi cient to guide the hydrocode modelling and assumed that they hold valid for these scales of problem.

    Here a spherical cavity is expanded at a constant velocity and produces a plastic response immediately surrounding the cavity and an incompressible elastic region around that.If the striking velocity is high enough,the plastic region can be represented by a locked hydrostat.As the velocity of the penetrator decreases,there is a transition velocity,Vt,where the linear hydrostat is a better approximation [19,20].This is governed by target material properties,speci fi cally the density and yield stressY.

    The perpendicular force acting on a projectile is de fi ned in[20]

    Here,Eis the Young’s Moduψlus,η*is the locked volumetric strain,taken as 0.04 [20],andis the calibre radius head of the projectile.In the case of a sphere or spherical noseψ=12;for a cannonball,this therefore reduces Eq. (5)to

    Forces from both hydrostats can be written in the same form

    Allowing the depth to be calculated from

    Depth of penetration is then calculated for the locked hydrostat and then added to the linear hydrostat solution [20].

    Table 6Depth of penetration values from analytical equations for maximum and minimum velocities.

    The internal and external ballistics calculations provided the maximum and minimum impact velocities.The standard modern target was set as a 50 MPa monolithic concrete target.

    The values in Table 6 show a penetration depth of less than a radius of the cannonball for both impact velocities.The Muzzle Velocity impact is calculated from both hydrostats;however,the Final Velocity impact is already belowVtand therefore is drive solely by the linear hydrostat solution.

    The analytical model predicts a modern target standing up very well to a large calibre cannonball.These values for penetration depth were used as sanity checks and comparisons to make sure the hydrocode simulations were producing sensible results.

    5.3.Hydrocode simulations

    Simulations were performed using the Lagrangian hydrocode DYNA3D which has a proven capability of predicting depth of penetration into different types of targets. DYNA3D includes advanced material models as well as advanced interface and fracture routines.

    The granite cannonball was modelled using a simple elastic material model with aYoung’s Modulus of 50 GPa and a Poisson’s Ratio of 0.17 [22].This was modelled as a rigid body with no failure or fracture.This presented the “best-case” in terms of penetration where the cannonball itself does not deform or break up and would therefore have a deeper penetration depth than if it did fracture.

    Two targets types were modelled,a 2 m thick,semi-inf i nite 50 MPa concrete target (replicating the analytical work)and a castle-type target.Depending on the impact conditions the scenarios were either simulated in quarter or half symmetry to reduce the computational load and run time.

    The castle target was designed to be similar to Threave Castle,famously linked with Mons Meg.There is little available information about the exact properties of the stone and mortar that was used to construct Threave Castle but the stone was most likely taken from the surrounding land and held together with a lime mortar [23].

    Fig.8.Quarter symmetry examples of modern and three layer castle targets.

    The majority of the stone found in the moorland of Dumfries and Galloway,the location of the castle,is granite.As there was no validated failure and fracture model for granite available,a concrete model with a compressive strength of 200 MPa,granite’s minimum compressive strength [22],was used.The lime mortar was not explicitly modelled but simulated as interface between the individual bricks with a break stress of 1.5 MPa. Values for the strength of the lime mortar varied from 0.58 MPa to 2.37 MPa [24],therefore,1.5 MPa was used as the rounded median value.The castle target was simulated as a series of interlocking bricks in several layers with a steel surround to help conf i ne the bricks.Fig.8 shows the hydrocode set-up for the two target types.

    5.3.1.Modern targets

    Guided by the analytical equations and the results above,the 50 MPa concrete target was 2 m thick to provide a semi-inf i nite target to properly predict depth of penetration.It was also over 20 times the cannonball radius in diameter in order to remove edge effects.Three impact scenarios were simulated to investigate the range of possible penetration depths and any effect of ricochet.

    Similar to the analytical modelling,the hydrocode predicted penetration depths less than the radius of the cannonball.

    Fig.9 below shows the f i nal state of the hydrocode modelling for the normal impacts.Table 8 and Fig.10 show the data and compares it to the analytical results.

    The larger difference seen for the f i nal velocity impact simulation is most likely due to the analytical model relying on the linear hydrostat equations which may not be valid at the scales involved.

    The f i nal velocity from the external ballistics exercise was also simulated with the angular impact(Table 7).This required the simulation to be performed in half symmetry due to the asymmetrical impact conditions.The f i nal state of the hydrocode simulation for this angled impacts in shown in Fig.11.

    The hydrocode simulations are in close agreement with the analytical modelling,within 6%for the higher velocity impacts,giving added conf i dence to the hydrocode results.There is very little difference between the normal and angled impacts for the 209.2 m/s impact velocity.There is not enough engagement for the angle of attack of the cannonball to have any pronounced effect.

    Fig.9.Maximum depth of penetration for normal impacts at (a)319.1 m/s and (b)209.2 m/s.

    The data above shows that modern defensive structures would hold up very well against a 13th century siege weapon. Even at point blank range the cannonball will,at most,leave a small dent in the concrete and most likely ricochet or bounce off the target.

    Table 7Impact conditions for modern target hydrocode simulations.

    Table 8Maximum depth of penetration for hydrocode and analytical modelling and the difference between them.

    Fig.10.Graph of maximum depth of penetration in the hydrocode model compared to the analytical model.The angled impact condition only has the hydrocode result due to the analytic model being limited to normal impacts only.

    5.3.2.Period castle targets

    Castle construction often used stones and rock that were locally sourced and simply picked up from the ground which meant that there is a wide range of stone sizes in most castle walls.It is,however,diff i cult,complicated and time consuming to replicate this construction in the simulations so the targets were designed with separate layers of interlocking bricks,with breakable “slideline”interfaces (described previously)between both the bricks and the separate layers.

    Threave Castle keep is described as being 3 m thick but the number of bricks,cells and interfaces required to model this size target is beyond the capability of DYNA3D to run in any sensible timeframe.Therefore this investigation looked at the penetration and perforation trend when the number of layers and the thickness of the bricks in a 3 layered target are increased.This data was then extrapolated into the penetration performance of Mons Meg.

    Fig.11.Maximum depth of penetration for 21.3°,209.2/s impact.

    Table 9Table summarizing the exit velocities and depths of penetration (DoP)against varying period targets.The estimates of the exit velocity were necessary as the cannonball had not completely cleared the target.

    Thebricksused in thisinvestigation wereinitially 260 mm × 260 mm × 520 mm.The target width and height was over 10 times the diameter of the cannonball to remove edge effects in the simulation.For targets with multiple layers,the brick layout in the rows was staggered alternatively between layers so there was not a single interface failure path through the thickness of the target.The number of cells in the simulations,proportional to the computational load,was the limiting factor for the number of layers,restricting it to three.Each layer of bricks added roughly 635,000 cells,pushing the three layer target close to 2 million cells in quarter symmetry.

    Due to the concern of the number of computational cells mentioned above,the simulations were limited to the “best penetration”case,a muzzle velocity of 319.1 m/s normal impact,allowing the modelling to be performed in quarter symmetry.

    Table 9 shows the results for the period castle targets modelled.The size of the bricks used and the number of layers is compared to the exit velocity and,if the cannonball was arrested by the target,their f i nal depth of penetration.

    Fig.12 shows the impact against a single layer brick target. There are two different failure mechanism occurring:(i)the brick along the central axis is simply pushed out of the way once the 1.5 MPa failure stress of the slideline is reached and is then free to move and (ii)the cannonball “tears”through the other bricks as it passes through the wall.Mons Meg could easily perforate a 260 mm thick single layer brick wall and has an exit velocity of 162 m/s.

    Fig.12.Pre and post impact images of single layer brick target impacted normal at the muzzle velocity of Mons Meg.

    Fig.13.Pre and post impact images of double layer brick target impacted normal at the muzzle velocity of Mons Meg showing brick interface issues.

    The two layer target unfortunately encountered some numerical instability along the brick to brick interfaces which cause the simulation to crash before completion.It did however run long enough for some initial conclusions to be made. Fig.13 shows the bricks in the second layer in the path of the cannonball,and central axis brick of the f i rst layer,have already been pushed out and are travelling with a velocity greater than the cannonball at the last time,implying they will have no further effect on the result.

    The velocity prof i le of the cannonball has also plateaued at roughly 60 m/s.All the bricks along the shot line,having failed break interfaces,are moving out of the way.This is thus assumed to be the predicted exit velocity of the cannonball with the caveat of qualitatively larger error bounds for this result.

    The impact against the three layer target was very similar in response to that seen in the two layer target.The velocity prof i le of the cannonball plateaued at roughly 24 m/s.Fig.14 shows the initial and f i nal state of the hydrocode modelling.

    If these three results are extrapolated,assuming a linear decreasing trend of exit velocity as the number of layers of bricks are increased,to stop the cannonball the wall requires at least four layers of 260 mm thick bricks.

    Fig.14.Pre and post impact images of triple layer brick target impacted normal at the muzzle velocity of Mons Meg showing brick interface issues.

    Fig.15.Graph showing cannonball velocity prof i le through three layered targets of differing thickness of brick.

    The thickness and size of the individual bricks in the three layer target were also increased in increments of 20 mm thickness,as shown in Table 9.Fig.15 presents the velocity prof i les of the simulations and the results show that the 320 mm and 340 mm thick bricks stop the cannonball in the target.

    6.Conclusions and recommendations

    Internal ballistics codes and calculations provided an average expected muzzle velocity of 315.0 m/s for black powder available during Mons Meg’s operational lifetime.The following external ballistics works investigates trajectory of the cannonball using this muzzle velocity.A value of 319.1 m/s was also examined in the external and terminal ballistics sections due time constraints.

    QQ-BDAS also correctly predicts the weak point in the cannon where it failed and postulates that the use of a more modern,powerful black powder could have been the cause of the barrel bursting.

    The Mons Meg trajectory model was used to investigate the effect of varying air temperature,initial angle and muzzle velocity.

    The f i nal speed and trajectory of the internal ballistics’expected muzzle velocities was also calculated and carried forward to investigate the cannon’s terminalballistic performance.

    This section began talking about the siege of Threave Castle and whether Mons Meg could break through the keep walls with enough residual velocity to remove the hand of a person inside.The hydrocode modelling has shown that,even with ideal conditions in terms of impact velocities,target design and rigid projectile material,the cannonball would fail to break through a 1.0 m period castle wall,let alone the 3 m thick keep walls of Threave Castle.This agrees with the lack of cannon damage to the keep,which is still standing to this day.Mons Meg is also predicted to have very little effect on modern concrete targets.

    These attempts to simulate period weaponry and castle targets have provided many lessons learnt.To accurately model the scenarios in the hydrocode,material tests will be needed to def i ne the material models and failure criteria.This would mean failure in the cannonball could be implemented which may dramatically affect the results.The design of the target can be made more representative of the “real life”structure by explicitly including the mortar between the stones and rocks.The size and distribution of the stones can also be improved including have larger rocks spanning several layers.It would also be interesting to model the castle-type target for an angled impact. This would remove the mechanism of the bricks along the axis simply being pushed out the back.

    [1]Wikipedia.Mons Meg-wikipedia [Online]. <https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Mons_Meg>;2015 [accessed 15.09.2015].

    [2]Gaier C.The origin of Mons Meg.J Arms Armour Soc 1967;5(12):425-31.

    [3]Smith RD,Brown RR.Bombards:Mons Meg and her sisters.London:Trustees of The Royal Armouries;1989.

    [4]Kinard J.Artillery:an illustrated history of its impact.ABC-CLIO;2007.

    [5]Birchon D.Dictionary of metallurgy.London:Newnes;1965.

    [6]Mallet R.On the physical conditions involved in the construction of artillery.1856.

    [7]Gillet C,Lefebvre M,Galloy J.A technological success in the 15th century:Jehan Gambier’s Mons Meg.J Ordinance Soc 2004;16:16-25.

    [8]Anderson RFK.IBVHG2.U.S.Army Ballistic Research Laboratory;1987.

    [9]Tschappat WH.Text-book of ordnance and gunnery.John Wiley;1917.

    [10]Richardson A.Vickers and Sons Maxim Ltd-their works and manufacturers.Strand:Off i ces of “Engineering”;1902.

    [11]Falkovich G.Fluid mechanics.Cambridge University Press;2011.

    [12]NASA.Drag of a sphere [Online]. <http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/ k-12/airplane/dragsphere.html> [accessed 15.09.15].

    [13]Jacobson MZ.Fundamentals of atmospheric modelling.2nd ed. Cambridge University Press;2005.

    [14]Dry air properties [Online].<http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/dry-air -properties-d_973.html> [accessed 15.09.15].

    [15]Subramanian RS.Drag on spherical particles and steady settling velocities[Online]. <http://web2.clarkson.edu/projects/subramanian/ch301/notes/ dragsphere.pdf> [accessed 08.12.15].

    [16]McCoy RL.Modern exterior ballistics.Atglen,PA:Schiffer Publishing Ltd.;2012.

    [17]Sedat Biringen C-YC.An introduction to computational f l uid mechanics by example.John Wiley&Sons;2011.

    [18]Wikipedia.Threave Castle-wikipedia [Online]. <https://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/Threave_Castle> [accessed 15.09.15].

    [19]Forrestal MJ,Luk VK.Dynamic spherical cavity-expansion in a compressible elastic-plastic solid.J Appl Mech 1988;55(2):275-9.

    [20]Forrestal MJ,Luk VK.Penetration into semi-inf i nite reinforced concrete targets with spherical and ogival nose projectiles.Int J Impact Eng 1987;6:291-301.

    [21]Forrestal MJ,Altman BS,Cargile JD,Hanchak SJ.An empirical equation for penetration depth of ogive-nose projectile into concrete targets.Int J Impact Eng 1994;15(4):395-405.

    [22]Stone RL.Strength and deformation properties of granite,basalt,limestone and tuff at various loading rates.Vicksburg,Mississippi:U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station;1969.

    [23]Mackenzie W,Symson A.This history of Galloway:from the earliest period to the present time.Kirkcudbright:John Nickolson;1841.

    [24]Pavia S,F(xiàn)itzgerald B,Treacy E.An assessment of lime mortars for masonry repairs.In:Concrete research in Ireland colloquium.Dubline:2005.

    Received 28 September 2015;revised 30 November 2015;accepted 1 December 2015 Available online 23 December 2015

    Peer review under responsibility of China Ordnance Society.

    *Corresponding author.Tel.:+44 1959514029.

    E-mail address:ramcalister@qinetiq.com (R.MCALISTER).

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2015.12.001

    2214-9147/? 2016 China Ordnance Society.Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.All rights reserved.

    ? 2016 China Ordnance Society.Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.All rights reserved.

    国产成人福利小说| av天堂在线播放| 黄色日韩在线| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 亚洲色图av天堂| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 国产成人一区二区在线| 尾随美女入室| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看| 午夜视频国产福利| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 联通29元200g的流量卡| 色综合婷婷激情| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 国产综合懂色| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 禁无遮挡网站| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| aaaaa片日本免费| 麻豆av噜噜一区二区三区| 久久草成人影院| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 一级av片app| 91精品国产九色| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| avwww免费| 内射极品少妇av片p| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看 | 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲 | 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 精品一区二区免费观看| 日本五十路高清| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 欧美潮喷喷水| 久久久久久久久久久丰满 | 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 色视频www国产| 国产精品一区www在线观看 | 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 97碰自拍视频| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 搞女人的毛片| 99热精品在线国产| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产 | 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av| 国产色婷婷99| av黄色大香蕉| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 国产一区二区三区视频了| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 看黄色毛片网站| 国产高清三级在线| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办 | 免费av不卡在线播放| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 日本黄色片子视频| 久99久视频精品免费| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 岛国在线免费视频观看| or卡值多少钱| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 国产不卡一卡二| 美女大奶头视频| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 一本久久中文字幕| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 国产 一区精品| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 永久网站在线| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 两个人的视频大全免费| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 在线天堂最新版资源| 免费av不卡在线播放| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 精品久久久噜噜| 成人综合一区亚洲| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 成年免费大片在线观看| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 国产美女午夜福利| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 欧美性感艳星| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 色综合站精品国产| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 日本免费a在线| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 两个人视频免费观看高清| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6 | 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 午夜激情欧美在线| 韩国av在线不卡| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 高清在线国产一区| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 久久人妻av系列| 国产高清三级在线| 亚洲无线观看免费| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 精品久久久久久,| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 丰满的人妻完整版| 97超视频在线观看视频| 天堂动漫精品| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| a级毛片a级免费在线| 夜夜爽天天搞| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 国内精品宾馆在线| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 如何舔出高潮| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 联通29元200g的流量卡| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 免费看a级黄色片| 国产 一区精品| 在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲av成人av| 色综合站精品国产| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 国产成人影院久久av| 久9热在线精品视频| 直男gayav资源| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 不卡一级毛片| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| av国产免费在线观看| 1000部很黄的大片| 午夜福利欧美成人| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 久久久久性生活片| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 老师上课跳d突然被开到最大视频| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 草草在线视频免费看| 99久久精品热视频| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 日本一二三区视频观看| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| av在线蜜桃| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 日日撸夜夜添| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 免费看av在线观看网站| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 成人欧美大片| 亚洲最大成人中文| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| av天堂在线播放| 黄色女人牲交| 极品教师在线免费播放| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 少妇的逼水好多| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 88av欧美| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区 | 99久久成人亚洲精品观看| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 久久热精品热| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 最近在线观看免费完整版| 一夜夜www| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 国产高潮美女av| 国产黄片美女视频| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 99热6这里只有精品| 日本三级黄在线观看| netflix在线观看网站| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 亚洲内射少妇av| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 国产视频内射| 国产高清三级在线| 黄色一级大片看看| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 欧美国产日韩亚洲一区| 中文资源天堂在线| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 91精品国产九色| 一区二区三区激情视频| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 91精品国产九色| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 久久久久久久久久久丰满 | 看十八女毛片水多多多| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 午夜福利18| 日本 av在线| 亚州av有码| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 久久久久久久久久久丰满 | 日韩国内少妇激情av| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 香蕉av资源在线| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 51国产日韩欧美| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| av.在线天堂| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看 | 一区二区三区四区激情视频 | 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| netflix在线观看网站| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 国产av在哪里看| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 少妇的逼水好多| 国产午夜精品论理片| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 亚洲无线在线观看| 97热精品久久久久久| 在线看三级毛片| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 在线天堂最新版资源| 搡老岳熟女国产| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 国内精品宾馆在线| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 一区福利在线观看| 变态另类丝袜制服| 97热精品久久久久久| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 小说图片视频综合网站| 亚洲 国产 在线| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 我要搜黄色片| 简卡轻食公司| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 午夜福利高清视频| 久久6这里有精品| 国产精品野战在线观看| 美女免费视频网站| 性色avwww在线观看| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 欧美成人a在线观看| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 精品久久久久久成人av| 亚洲 国产 在线| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 夜夜爽天天搞| 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| 国产高潮美女av| 丰满乱子伦码专区| av黄色大香蕉| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 亚洲内射少妇av| 久久亚洲真实| 一本精品99久久精品77| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 国产精品一区www在线观看 | 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| av在线蜜桃| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 很黄的视频免费| 久久久久久久久久成人| 久久这里只有精品中国| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 99热精品在线国产| 午夜福利在线在线| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看 | 在线观看舔阴道视频| 搡老岳熟女国产| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 午夜福利高清视频| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 99久国产av精品| 九九在线视频观看精品| 色综合站精品国产| 一级av片app| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| xxxwww97欧美| 婷婷亚洲欧美| 亚洲av免费在线观看| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 91在线观看av| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 午夜福利在线观看吧| av在线老鸭窝| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区 | 伦精品一区二区三区| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 搞女人的毛片| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 午夜激情欧美在线| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 欧美极品一区二区三区四区| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 久久6这里有精品| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 88av欧美| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 国产成人福利小说| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲在线观看片| 午夜福利欧美成人| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 久久香蕉精品热| 亚洲无线在线观看| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 热99re8久久精品国产| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 69av精品久久久久久| 欧美日本视频| 久久久久久久久大av| 99久国产av精品| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 国产午夜精品论理片| 国产精品,欧美在线| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 久久精品人妻少妇| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 亚洲色图av天堂| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 成年版毛片免费区| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 99久久精品热视频| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 成人国产麻豆网| 在线免费十八禁| 国产老妇女一区| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 中文资源天堂在线| 有码 亚洲区| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 99久久精品热视频| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 很黄的视频免费| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 窝窝影院91人妻| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 成人无遮挡网站| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 99热网站在线观看| 一级av片app| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 国产色婷婷99| 最新中文字幕久久久久| bbb黄色大片| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 国产色婷婷99| 热99在线观看视频| 一级黄片播放器| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 一进一出抽搐动态| 日本成人三级电影网站| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| 成人国产麻豆网| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 亚洲av美国av| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 黄色女人牲交| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 久久久久国内视频| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 成人特级av手机在线观看| av在线老鸭窝| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| videossex国产| 亚洲最大成人中文| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 亚洲精品456在线播放app | 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 免费看光身美女| a级毛片a级免费在线| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 午夜福利18| 很黄的视频免费| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| a级毛片a级免费在线| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 在线观看一区二区三区| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区 | 亚洲午夜理论影院| 床上黄色一级片| 天堂网av新在线| 亚洲精品色激情综合| av黄色大香蕉| www.色视频.com| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 日日啪夜夜撸| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 1000部很黄的大片| 亚洲四区av| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 俺也久久电影网| av.在线天堂| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 97热精品久久久久久| av福利片在线观看| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 干丝袜人妻中文字幕| 午夜a级毛片| 91麻豆av在线| 在线观看一区二区三区| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 久久草成人影院| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 校园春色视频在线观看| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 成人三级黄色视频| 极品教师在线视频| 美女大奶头视频| 老司机福利观看| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 日本黄色片子视频| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看 | 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看 | 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| eeuss影院久久| 韩国av在线不卡| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看 | 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产 | 国产真实乱freesex| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 97碰自拍视频| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看|