Novel body armors are designed to protect against ballistic threats in the most vulnerable organs within the thorax and abdomen. Decreasing the armor weight without affecting its total integrity after the impact is one of the most challenging tasks. In this study, we combine advanced numerical simulations and experimental tests to investigate the ballistic performance of multilayered armor systems (MAS) consisting of laminated alumina (Al2O3) ceramic plates with multi-curve form and a hybrid composite backing. The ballistic trauma absorption and ceramic fracturing morphology are considered evaluation criteria. The investigation provides enough data on the measured trauma and the results are compared to advanced monolithic ceramics. The ballistic tests showed that bonding three or two ceramic plates with polymeric interlayer decreases considerably the eroded ceramic mass in comparison to monolithic ceramic tiles. Furthermore, the layup of two thin Al2O3 tiles with frontal confinement gives the same trauma-weight index as monolithic silicon carbide and reaction-bonded boron carbide plates. The combination of K129 and KM2 aramid weave fabrics decreases the composite backing weight by 33% and increases its ballistic performance in comparison to homogeneous aramid fabrics. Numerical simulations that involve the use of solid Lagrange and adaptive solid/smooth particles hydrodynamics (SPH) numerical approaches with detailed 3D models of the bullet and the MAS are presented in this work. Based on the statistical analysis, a better prediction of the back face deformation and bullet residual length is obtained by the adaptive solid/SPH method, which is found more suitable for the simulation of multilayered armor impact scenarios.
MedvedovskiE. Ballistic performance of armour ceramics: influence of design and structure. Part 1. Ceram Int2010; 36: 2103–2115.
2.
JiustiJKammerEHNeckelL, et al.Ballistic performance of Al2O3 mosaic armors with gap-filling materials. Ceram Int2017; 43: 2697–2704.
3.
MedvedovskiE. Ballistic performance of armour ceramics: influence of design and structure. Part 2. Ceram Int2010; 36: 2117–2127.
4.
TanP. Finite element simulation of the behaviours of laminated armour systems against blast wave and projectile dynamic impacts. Proc IMechE, Part L: JMaterials: Design and Applications2013; 227: 2–15.
5.
RoederBASunCT. Dynamic penetration of alumina/aluminum laminates: experiments and modeling. Int J Impact Eng2001; 25: 169–185.
6.
RaoMPSanchez-HerenciaAJBeltzGE, et al.Laminar ceramics that exhibit a threshold strength. Science1999; 286: 102–105.
7.
OrlovskayaNAdamsJSankarJ, et al.Design and manufacturing B4C-SiC layered ceramics for armor applications. Ceramic Armor Armor Syst2006; 151: 59–70.
8.
BatraRCPydahA. Impact analysis of PEEK/ceramic/gelatin composite for finding behind the armor trauma. Compos Struct2020; 237: 111863.
9.
ZhangRHanBLiL, et al.Influence of prestress on ballistic performance of bi-layer ceramic composite armors: experiments and simulations. Compos Struct2019; 227: 111258.
10.
ShenZHuDYangG, et al.Ballistic reliability study on SiC/UHMWPE composite armor against armor-piercing bullet. Compos Struct2019; 213: 209–219.
11.
RashedAYazdaniMBabaluoA, et al.Investigation on high-velocity impact performance of multi-layered alumina ceramic armors with polymeric interlayers. J Compos Mater2016; 50: 3561–3576.
12.
TepeduzuBKarakuzuR. Ballistic performance of ceramic/composite structures. Ceram Int2019; 45: 1651–1660.
13.
KrishnanKSockalingamSBansalS, et al.Numerical simulation of ceramic composite armor subjected to ballistic impact. Compos B, Eng2010; 41: 583–593.
14.
LeeMYooYH. Analysis of ceramic/metal armour systems. Int J Impact Eng2001; 11: 819–829.
15.
ChakrabortySIslamMRIShawA, et al.A computational framework for modelling impact induced damage in ceramic and ceramic-metal composite structures. Compos Struct2017; 164: 263–276.
16.
LucyLB. A numerical approach to the testing of the fission hypothesis. Astron J1977; 82: 1013.
17.
LiuGRZhouCEWangGY. An implementation of the smoothed particle hydrodynamics for hypervelocity impacts and penetration to layered composites. Int J Comput Methods2013; 10: 1350056.
18.
ScazzosiRGiglioMManesA. FE coupled to SPH numerical model for the simulation of high-velocity impact on ceramic based ballistic shields. Ceram Int2020; 46: 23760–23772.
19.
CrouchIG. Laminated materials and layered structures. In: The science of armour materials. Victoria, Australia: Elsevier, 2017, pp. 167–201.
20.
CrouchIG. Body armour – new materials, new systems. Defence Technology2019; 15: 241–253.
21.
BreezeJLewisEAFryerR. Determining the dimensions of essential medical coverage required by military body armour plates utilising computed tomography. Injury2016; 47: 1932–1938.
22.
Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor NIJ Standard-0101.06. 89.
23.
Kadir BilisikATurhanY. Multidirectional stitched layered aramid woven fabric structures and their experimental characterization of ballistic performance. Text Res J2009; 79: 1331–1343.
24.
ChengMChenWWeerasooriyaT. Mechanical properties of kevlar® KM2 single fiber. J Eng Mater Technol2005; 127: 197–203.
25.
NilakantanG. Filament-level modeling of Kevlar KM2 yarns for ballistic impact studies. Compos Struct2013; 104: 1–13.
26.
BerthelotJ-M. Matériaux composites comportement mécanique et analyse des structures. 2012.
RenardJ. Elaboration, microstructure et comportement des matériaux composites à matrice polymère. Hermes, https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00160397(2005, accessed 12 November 2019).
29.
López-PuenteJAriasAZaeraR, et al.The effect of the thickness of the adhesive layer on the ballistic limit of ceramic/metal armours. An experimental and numerical study. Int J Impact Eng2005; 32: 321–336.
30.
DreschABVenturiniJArcaroS, et al.Ballistic ceramics and analysis of their mechanical properties for armour applications: a review. Ceram Int2021; 47: 8743–8761.
31.
GuoGAlamSPeelLD. An investigation of the effect of a Kevlar-29 composite cover layer on the penetration behavior of a ceramic armor system against 7.62 mm APM2 projectiles. Int J Impact Eng2021; 157: 104000.
32.
SarvaSNemat-NasserSMcGeeJ, et al.The effect of thin membrane restraint on the ballistic performance of armor grade ceramic tiles. Int J Impact Eng2007; 34: 277–302.
33.
HarrisAVaughanBYeomansJ, et al.Surface preparation of alumina for improved adhesive bond strength in armor applications. Adv Ceram Armor VIII Ceram Eng Sci Proc2013; 33: 149–160.
34.
MonteiroSNLouroLHLGomesAV, et al.How effective is a convex Al2O3–Nb2O5 ceramic armor?Ceram Int2016; 42: 7844–7847.
35.
de Oliveira BragaFda LuzFSMonteiroSN, et al.Effect of the impact geometry in the ballistic trauma absorption of a ceramic multilayered armor system. J Mater Res Technol2018; 7: 554–560.
36.
O’DonnellRG. An investigation of the fragmentation behaviour of impacted ceramics. J Mater Sci Lett1991; 10: 685–688.
37.
MedvedovskiE. Alumina ceramics for ballistic protection. PT. 1. Am Ceram Soc Bull2002; 81: 27–32.
38.
QuinnJBQuinnGD. Hardness and brittleness of ceramics. In: 20th Annual Conference on Composites, Advanced Ceramics, Materials, and Structures-A: Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings. 2009, p. 59.
39.
ChenWWRajendranAMSongB, et al.Dynamic fracture of ceramics in armor applications. J Am Ceram Soc2007; 90: 1005–1018.
40.
AghajanianMKMorganBNSinghJR, et al.A new family of reaction bonded ceramics for armor applications. Ceram Trans2002; 134: 527–539.
ShockeyDAMarchandAHSkaggsSR, et al.Failure phenomenology of confined ceramic targets and impacting rods. Int J Impact Eng1990; 9: 263–275.
43.
CrouchIGAppleby-ThomasGHazellPJ. A study of the penetration behaviour of mild-steel-cored ammunition against boron carbide ceramic armours. Int J Impact Eng2015; 80: 203–211.
44.
JohnsonGRHolmquistTJ. An improved computational constitutive model for brittle materials. In: AIP conference proceedings. AIP, 1994, pp. 981–984.
45.
JohnsonGRHolmquistTJ. Response of boron carbide subjected to large strains, high strain rates, and high pressures. J Appl Phys1999; 85: 8060–8073.
46.
SerjoueiAChiRSridharI, et al.Empirical ballistic limit velocity model for bi-layer ceramic–metal armor. Int J Protect Struct2015; 6: 509–527.
47.
LiNJuC. Mode-Independent and mode-interactive failure criteria for unidirectional composites based on strain energy density. Polymers2020; 12: 2813.
48.
WangZWZhaoJPZhangX. Finite element analysis of composite laminates subjected to low-velocity impact based on multiple failure criteria. Mater Res Express2018; 5: 065320.
49.
HallquistJO. LS-DYNA theory manual. Livermore Software Technology Corporation2006; 3: 25–31.
50.
ChangF-KChangK-Y. A progressive damage model for laminated composites containing stress concentrations. J Compos Mater1987; 21: 834–855.
51.
ShaoJRLiuNZhengZJ. Numerical comparison between Hashin and Chang-Chang failure criteria in terms of inter-laminar damage behavior of laminated composite. Mater Res Express2021; 8: 085602.
KumarSDurgaSGSinghI, et al.Behavior of Kevlar/epoxy composite plates under ballistic impact. J Reinf Plast Compos2010; 29: 2048–2064.
54.
GuoqiZGoldsmithWDharanC. Penetration of laminated Kevlar by projectiles—I. Experimental investigation. Int J Solids Struct1992; 29: 399–420.
55.
LiYQLiXGGaoX-L. Modeling of advanced combat helmet under ballistic impact. J Appl Mech2015; 82: 111004.
56.
BrescianiLMManesARuggieroA, et al.Experimental tests and numerical modelling of ballistic impacts against Kevlar 29 plain-woven fabrics with an epoxy matrix: macro-homogeneous and meso-heterogeneous approaches. Compos B, Eng2016; 88: 114–130.
57.
BørvikTHopperstadOSBerstadT, et al.A computational model of viscoplasticity and ductile damage for impact and penetration. Eur J Mech-A/Solids2001; 20: 685–712.
58.
CockcroftMGLathamDJ. Ductility and the workability of metals. J Inst Metals1968; 96: 33–39.
59.
TriaDETrębińskiR. Methodology for experimental verification of steel armour impact modelling. Int J Impact Eng2017; 100: 102–116.
60.
ChocronSNichollsAEBrillA, et al.Modeling unidirectional composites by bundling fibers into strips with experimental determination of shear and compression properties at high pressures. Compos Sci Technol2014; 101: 32–40.
61.
WanDHuDNatarajanS, et al.A linear smoothed quadratic finite element for the analysis of laminated composite Reissner–Mindlin plates. Compos Struct2017; 180: 395–411.
62.
National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Testing Armor Materials for Use by the U.S. Army. Testing of body armor materials: phase III. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press, 2012.
