In the present research, numerical simulations are performed to find the effect of layering and stacking sequence on the ballistic performance of the hybrid Al2O3 95%-Kevlar 29/epoxy composite targets. A three-dimensional simulation model incorporating Al2O3 95% ceramic, Kevlar 29/epoxy, and deformable 4340 steel projectiles is validated by comparing its predictions of projectile residual velocity and target damage patterns against experimental results from ballistic impact tests. Subsequently, the validated simulation model is employed to assess and compare the ballistic response of different bi-layer and multi-layer configurations of Al2O3 95%-Kevlar 29/epoxy targets subjected to impact by an ogive-nosed cylindrical projectile. In addition, energy dissipation and absorption by different system components are compared for each target configuration. The finite element analysis also depicts the progressive damage mode of different target configurations. It is found that the ballistic performance of the target is a function of its different layer arrangements. The use of multiple layers in a ceramic-composite target is less effective in stopping an ogive-nosed projectile compared to a bi-layer ceramic-composite target of the same total thickness.
SorensenBRKimseyKDSilsbyGF, et al.High velocity penetration of steel targets. Int J Impact Eng1991; 11: 107–119.
2.
HetheringtonJG. The optimization of two component composite armours. Int J Impact Eng1992; 12: 409–414.
3.
ChiRSerjoueiASridharI, et al.Ballistic impact on bi-layer alumina/aluminium armor: a semi-analytical approach. Int J Impact Eng2013; 52: 37–46.
4.
SerjoueiAChiRZhangZ, et al.Experimental validation of BLV model on bi-layer ceramic-metal armor. Int J Impact Eng2015; 77: 30–41.
5.
BiswasKDattaD. Numerical simulation of ballistic impact on multilayer ceramic backed fibre reinforced composite target plate. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl2022; 236: 1527–1540.
6.
BiswasKDattaD. Effect of projectile’s nose shape on ballistic performance of ceramic/composite armour: a numerical study. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci2024; 238: 1080–1093.
7.
BiswasKDattaD. Oblique impact on ceramic–composite armor system: a numerical study. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl2024; 238: 1256–1267.
8.
CorranRSJShadboltPJRuizC. Impact loading of plates—an experimental investigation. Int J Impact Eng1983; 1: 3–22.
9.
Ben-DorGDubinskyAElperinT. Effect of air gaps on ballistic resistance of targets for conical impactors. Theor Appl Fract Mech1998; 30: 243–249.
10.
WoodwardRLCimpoeruSJ. A study of the perforation of aluminium laminate targets. Int J Impact Eng1998; 21: 117–131.
11.
DeySBørvikTTengX, et al.On the ballistic resistance of double-layered steel plates: an experimental and numerical investigation. Int J Solids Struct2007; 44: 6701–6723.
12.
RadinJGoldsmithW. Normal projectile penetration and perforation of layered targets. Int J Impact Eng1988; 7: 229–259.
13.
DengYZhangWCaoZ. Experimental investigation on the ballistic resistance of monolithic and multi-layered plates against ogival-nosed rigid projectiles impact. Mater Des2013; 44: 228–239.
14.
ZukasJASchefflerDR. Impact effects in multilayered plates. Int J Solids Struct2001; 38: 3321–3328.
15.
GuptaNKIqbalMASekhonGS. Effect of projectile nose shape, impact velocity and target thickness on the deformation behavior of layered plates. Int J Impact Eng2008; 35: 37–60.
16.
YunfeiDWeiZGuanghuiQ, et al.The ballistic performance of metal plates subjected to impact by blunt-nosed projectiles of different strength. Mater Des2014; 54: 1056–1067.
17.
YunfeiDWeiZYonggangY,et al.The ballistic performance of metal plates subjected to impact by projectiles of different strength. Mater Des2014; 58: 305–315.
18.
GuptaYMDingJL. Impact load spreading in layered materials and structures: concept and quantitative measure. Int J Impact Eng2002; 27: 277–291.
19.
RobbinsJRDingJLGuptaYM. Load spreading and penetration resistance of layered structures—a numerical study. Int J Impact Eng2004; 30: 593–615.
20.
HollandCCGambleEAZokFW, et al.Effect of design on the performance of steel–alumina bilayers and trilayers subject to ballistic impact. Mech Mater2015; 91: 241–251.
21.
SinghDKBanerjeeADattaD. Numerical investigation of ballistic impact on multilayered ceramic/metal target plate with or without air gap. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl2023; 237: 1416–1428.
22.
NiaAAKazemiM. Analytical study of high velocity impact on sandwich panels with foam core and aluminum face-sheets. Modares Mech Eng2015; 15: 231–239.
23.
KazemiM. High velocity impact on sandwich panels with graded foam-cored and aluminum face-sheet: numerical and experimental assessment. Modares Mech Eng2019; 19: 1039–1047.
24.
NiaAAKazemiM. Experimental study of ballistic resistance of sandwich targets with aluminum face-sheet and graded foam core. J Sandw Struct Mater2020; 22: 461–479.
25.
KazemiMGhahri SaremiTGhahri SaremiT. Resistance of cylindrical sandwich panels with aluminum foam under blast loading. Teh Vjesn2023; 30: 765–770.
26.
WangQChenZChenZ. Design and characteristics of hybrid composite armor subjected to projectile impact. Mater Des2013; 46: 634–639.
27.
TepeduzuBKarakuzuR. Ballistic performance of ceramic/composite structures. Ceram Int2019; 45: 1651–1660.
28.
GregoriDScazzosiRNunesSG, et al.Analytical and numerical modelling of high-velocity impact on multilayer alumina/aramid fiber composite ballistic shields: improvement in modelling approaches. Compos Part B Eng2020; 187: 107830.
29.
FeliSYasMHAsgariMR. An analytical model for perforation of ceramic/multi-layered planar woven fabric targets by blunt projectiles. Compos Struct2011; 93: 548–556.
30.
GamaBAGillespieJWJrMahfuzH, et al.Effect of non-linear material behavior on the through-thickness stress wave propagation in multi-layer hybrid lightweight armor. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Comp Engineeering and Science, Los Angeles, CA, 2000, vol. I, pp. 157–162.
31.
GamaBAGillespieJWBogettiTA, et al.Innovative design and ballistic performance of lightweight composite integral armor. SAE Technical Paper, 2001.
32.
GrujicicMPanduranganBd’EntremontB. The role of adhesive in the ballistic/structural performance of ceramic/polymer–matrix composite hybrid armor. Mater Des2012; 41: 380–393.
33.
PrakashARajasankarJAnandavalliN, et al.Influence of adhesive thickness on high velocity impact performance of ceramic/metal composite targets. Int J Adhes Adhes2013; 41: 186–197.
34.
TasdemirciATunusogluGGüdenM. The effect of the interlayer on the ballistic performance of ceramic/composite armors: experimental and numerical study. Int J Impact Eng2012; 44: 1–9.
35.
HolmquistTJTempletonDWBishnoiKD. Constitutive modeling of aluminum nitride for large strain, high-strain rate, and high-pressure applications. Int J Impact Eng2001; 25: 211–231.
36.
HayhurstCJLivingstoneIHGCleggRA, et al.Ballistic limit evaluation of advanced shielding using numerical simulations. Int J Impact Eng2001; 26: 309–320.
AnsariMMChakrabartiA. Impact behavior of FRP composite plate under low to hyper velocity impact. Compos Part B Eng2016; 95: 462–474.
39.
JohnsonGRCookWH. A computational constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strain, high strain rates and high pressures. Proc 7th Int Symp Ballist1983; 541–547.
40.
JohnsonGRCookWH. Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech1985; 21: 31–48.
41.
BiswasKDattaD. Experimental and numerical analysis of ballistic impact and material characterization of GFRP and Kevlar 29/epoxy composite laminate. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl2025; 239: 603–616.
42.
LeeMYooYH. Analysis of ceramic/metal armour systems. Int J Impact Eng2001; 25: 819–829.
