Armouring solutions against high-velocity impact using 2D laminates and 3D warp interlock composites
Source abstract
Abstract
Since the emergence of the first armoured vehicles on battlefields, armour shield was mainly centred on conventional metallic materials, widespread solutions nowadays. For a long time, weight reduction in armoured protection, which represents the largest part of the vehicle’s overall weight, has been the key parameter for vehicle manufacturers looking forward to optimizing fuel consumption, thus increasing the payload and offering increased manoeuvrability to vehicles. The solution generally developed is a combination between those metallic plates and materials lighter than the current steel armour. In this context, the hybridization of some well-known ballistic alloys with textile composite materials appears to be a high-potential solution for armour-plated protection. Indeed, used as a backing, textile composite materials present some worthwhile properties such as having a very low density compared with steel and good behaviour in terms of ballistic efficiency. The use of a textile composite backing allows a reduction in the thickness of the metal plate by a few millimetres, which has a huge impact on the total protection weight. The difficulty of this hybridization is, of course, to reduce the total mass of the protection solution as cautiously as possible while ensuring the safety of the vehicle. The textile composite backing is also efficient in containing the pieces of shrapnel, which might break loose from the metal plate during impact. However, observations from today’s military theatres of operation reveal that the spectrum of armoured vehicle threats has changed over the last decade with the development of new non-conventional threats commonly referred to as ‘improvised explosive devices’. Those devices generate high-velocity projectiles (accelerated up to a few hundred or thousand metres per second), which are able to perforate most existing armour plating. Thus, performances of today’s armoured solutions are required to be upgraded, in order to provide a better protection level. This improved protection level against new threats can be achieved by developing a composite backing more efficient to stop these projectiles. This study proposes to test and compare the behaviour and efficiency of three different textile composite backings used as up-armouring solutions. Two of those textile backings are innovative composite solutions developed in our textile laboratory, and the third one is a benchmark composite generally used as armouring protection. This study deals with the overall protection, and impact tests are performed on real armour configuration with the metal plate on the front face. Nevertheless, only the impact behaviour of textile composite backings has been investigated in this study. The parameters of the metal plate such as the nature of the alloy and its thickness were defined by our vehicles’ manufacturing partner and cannot therefore be communicated. They remain constant in the three configurations tested, allowing a clear comparison.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Université Lille Nord de France, Lille, France
ENSAIT, GEMTEX, Roubaix, France
UVHC, Valenciennes, France
NEXTER SYSTEMS, Satory, Versailles, France
ISL, Saint-Louis Cedex, France
References (26)
Show source-provided references
1. Bhatnagar A · 2006
2. Gooch WA and Burkins MS. Army research laboratory, analysis of threat projectiles for protection of light tactical vehicles. Army Research Laboratory Report 89, Army Research Laboratory, December 2004.
3. Dodd B · 2009
4. Vaziri R · 2006 · 72
5. Nexter Systems, MATIED project, Internal Report, 10 Février 2001.
6. Reid SR and Zhou G. Impact behaviour of fibre-reinforced composite material and structures. An overview of the impact behaviour of fibre reinforced composites , CRC-Press, 2000, p.6, Chapter 1.10.1201/9781439822814 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2004.05.00610.1016/j.compstruct.2004.05.006 ↗
8. Ayax E. Caractérisations expérimentales et modélisation du comportement d’une plaque composite tissée en régime balistique. PhD ENSAM soutenue en Juillet, 1993, p.35. Paris: ENSAM, Art et Métiers ParisTech.
9. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.09.00210.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.09.002 ↗
10. Zukas JA · 1990
11. Lampert S and Jeanquartier R. Ballistic resistance of layered stell aramid armor at oblique impact. Presented at 20th international symposium on ballistics , Orlando, FL, 2002.
12. Hu J. 3D fibrous assemblies, properties applications and modelling of three dimensional textile structures, Cambridge, England: Woodhead Publishing, 2008, pp. 105–105.
13. 10.1177/152808371036672310.1177/1528083710366723 ↗
14. 10.1533/9781845691929.10010.1533/9781845691929.100 ↗
15. Boussu F, Legrand X and Serret A. General clustering of warp interlocks structures . In: Intelligent textiles and mass customisation international conference , Casablanca, Morocco, 2007.
16. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2006.01.01410.1016/j.compstruct.2006.01.014 ↗
17. 10.1177/109963620706713310.1177/1099636207067133 ↗
18. 10.1243/09544100JAERO45110.1243/09544100JAERO451 ↗
19. 10.1177/002199830303517810.1177/0021998303035178 ↗
20. Lefebvre M. Résistance à l’impact balistique de matériaux composites à renforts interlocks tissés—application au blindage de véhicules. PhD Thèse, Université de Valenciennes, France, 2011.
21. Bogdanovich AE · SAMPE J · 2009 · 45 · 8
22. Wilusz E · 2008
23. 10.1016/j.msea.2005.08.01910.1016/j.msea.2005.08.019 ↗
24. 10.1016/S0734-743X(98)00006-210.1016/S0734-743X(98)00006-2 ↗
25. Tong L · 2002
26. Allix O and Benzeggagh ML; Journée AMAC/CSMA coorganisée par le LG2MS de l’UTC de Compiègne. Détection et identification des endommagements lors d'un processus de délaminage. In Annales des composites . Délaminage: bilan et perspectives . Cachan le, 1995, pp.49–83.