Influence of interfacial bonding conditions on the anti-penetration performance of ceramic/metal composite targets
Source abstract
Abstract
This study analyzes the influence of bonded and unbonded interface conditions on the anti-penetration performance of a ceramic/metal composite target and determines the associated mechanism. The 3D finite element and 3D smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulation results revealed that a bonded ceramic/metal target exhibited better anti-penetration performance than an unbonded target, and the associated mechanism was determined. Notably, the bond strength between the ceramic and metal backplate plays an important role in the formation of the ceramic conoid, and the ceramic conoid that formed in the bonded target effectively consumed the kinetic energy of the projectile, thereby improving the anti-penetration performance of ceramic composite armor. To verify this conclusion, we also compare and analyze the anti-penetration performance of interface bonded and unbonded metal/metal composite targets. The results show that due to the absence of the ceramic conoid, the interfacial bonding conditions have little influence on the anti-penetration performance of a metal/metal composite target.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Electromagnetic Launch and Propulsion Technology · Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (21)
Show source-provided references
1. Anderson Jr., C.E., Johnson, G.R., Holmquist, T.J.: Ballistic experiments and computations of confined 99.5% Al2O3 ceramic tiles. In: Mayseless, M., Bodner, S.R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Ballistics, vol 2, Jerusalem, Israel, pp. 65–72 (1995)
2. Cronin, D.S., Bui, K., Kaufmann, C. et al.: Implementation and validation of the Johnson–Holmquist ceramic material model in LS-DYNA. In: Proceedings of the 4th European LS-dyna users conference, vol. 1, pp. 47–60 (2004)
3. Den Reijer, P.C.: Impact on ceramic faced armour [D]. Delft University of Technology, Delft (1991)
4. Fellows, N.A., Barton, P.C.: Development of impact model for ceramic-faced semi-infinite armour. Int. J. Impact Eng. 22(8), 793–811 (1999)10.1016/S0734-743X(99)00017-2 ↗
5. Florence, A.L., Ahrens, T.J.: Interaction of projectiles and composite armor. Final Report, US Army, pp. 135 Ä(1967)10.21236/AD0652726 ↗
6. Grujicic, M., Pandurangan, B., D’Entremont, B.: The role of adhesive in the ballistic/structural performance of ceramic/polymer–matrix composite hybrid armor. Mater. Des. 41, 380–393 (2012)10.1016/j.matdes.2012.05.023 ↗
7. Johnson, G.R., Cook, W.H.: A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Ballistics, pp. 541–547 (1983)
8. Johnson, G.R., Holmquist, T.J.: An improved computational constitutive model for brittle materials. High pressure science and technology. AIP, New York (1994)
9. Johnson, G.R., Holmquist, T.J.: Response of boron carbide subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high pressures. J. Appl. Phys. 85(12), 8060–8073 (1999)10.1063/1.370643 ↗
10. Kaufmann, C., Cronin, D., Worswick, M., et al.: Influence of material properties on the ballistic performance of ceramics for personal body armour. Shock Vib. 10(1), 51–58 (2003)10.1155/2003/357637 ↗
11. Lee, M., Yoo, Y.H.: Analysis of ceramic/metal armour systems. Int. J. Impact Eng. 25(9), 819–829 (2001)10.1016/S0734-743X(01)00025-2 ↗
12. López-Puente, J., Arias, A., Zaera, R., 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 Eng. 32(1–4), 321–336 (2005)10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2005.07.014 ↗
13. Madhu, V., Ramanjaneyulu, K., Bhat, T.B.: An experimental study of penetration resistance of ceramic armour subjected to projectile impact. In: International Symposium on Impact Engineering ISIE (2004)
14. Nemat-Nasser, S.: Phenomenological theories of elastoplasticity and strain localization at high strain rates. Appl. Mech. Rev. 45(3S), S19 (1992)10.1115/1.3121388 ↗
15. Subramani, K., Vinoth Kanna, I.: Numerical simulation of high velocity impact on composite targets using advanced computational techniques. Innovative Design, Analysis and Development Practices in Aerospace and Automotive Engineering (I-DAD 2018), pp. 399–413. Springer, Singapore (2018)
16. Tepeduzu, B., Karakuzu, R.: Ballistic performance of ceramic/composite structures. Ceram. Int. 45(2), 1651–1660 (2019)10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.10.042 ↗
17. Tian, Chao, An, Xuanyi, Sun, Qitian, Dong, Yongxiang: Experimental and numerical analyses of the penetration resistance of ceramic-metal hybrid structures. Compos. Struct. 211, 264–272 (2019)10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.12.021 ↗
18. Übeyli, M., Yıldırım, R.O., Ögel, B.: Investigation on the ballistic behavior of Al(2)O(3)/Al2O24 laminated composites. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 196(1–3), 356–364 (2008)10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.050 ↗
19. Woodward, R.L.: A simple one-dimensional approach to modelling ceramic composite armour defeat. Int. J. Impact Eng. 9(4), 455–474 (1990)10.1016/0734-743X(90)90035-T ↗
20. Yi, R.C., Yin, L.K., Wang, J.R., et al.: Study on the performance of ceramic composite projectile penetrating into ceramic composite target. Def. Technol. 13, 299 (2017)
21. Zaera, R., Sánchez-Gálvez, V.: Analytical modelling of normal and oblique ballistic impact on ceramic/metal lightweight armours. Int. J. Impact Eng. 21(3), 133–148 (1998)10.1016/S0734-743X(97)00035-3 ↗