Fabric armour erosion using a buried charge ejecta analog
Source abstract
Abstract
The threat posed by buried explosive charges and their explosive dispersal of environmental debris is associated with a variety of debilitating injuries. The dispersion profile of such threats includes particulate in a broad range of particle length scales, which are more destructive to ballistic fabrics than larger particles alone. Smaller particles are initially dispersed at higher speeds, degrading armour fabrics prior to the arrival of the larger penetrating particulate. In the present work, we present a low-cost industrial abrasion test method to investigate the abrasive wear in neat and polymer-coated ballistic fabrics to determine the level of degradation of the fabrics under the abrasive load. These fabrics were subjected to the impingement of an abrasive jet with average particle velocity of 187 ± 20 m/s. The results showed evidence of significant degradation and failure within the ballistic fabrics, that would certainly influence their subsequent ballistic performance. The addition of polymer coatings was able to reduce the abrasive degradation of the fabrics. The failure modes of the polymer composites are similarly described. This methodology shows promise as a means of armour material screening for this particular threat.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Traumatic Ocular and Foreign Body Injuries · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Combustion and Detonation Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
References (20)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.015110.1001/jamasurg.2019.0151 ↗
2. Serkin FB · J Trauma – Injury, Infect Crit Care · 2010 · 69
3. 10.1038/nrurol.2013.14810.1038/nrurol.2013.148 ↗
4. Mah J, Anctil B, Keown M. Damage caused by soil debris ejected from buried anti-personnel mines. In: Personal Armour Systems Symposium 2006 . September 18-22 2006, Leeds, UK, pp. 1–9.
5. 10.1063/1.274391210.1063/1.2743912 ↗
6. 10.1063/1.475187610.1063/1.4751876 ↗
7. Dwivedi AK, Dalzell MW, Long LR, et al. Continuous Filament Knit Aramids for Extremity Ballistic Protection . American Society for Composites, 2013, Vol. 28, pp. 1–11.
8. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.05.00910.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.05.009 ↗
9. Van der Jagt-Deutekom M, Westerhof T. Assessment of the secondary fragments from buried explosives. In: Personal Armour Systems Symposium 2018 . October 1-5, 2018 in Washington, DC, pp. 1–9.
10. Ouellet S, Pageau G. Development of a Simplified Torso Surrogate based on Selected Biofidelity Corridors for the Assessment of the Ballistic Performance of Soft Body Armor. In: IRCOBI Conference , September 12-14 2018, Athens, Greece, pp. 754–755.
11. 10.1080/00405000.2018.147196610.1080/00405000.2018.1471966 ↗
12. 10.12783/ballistics2019/3328810.12783/ballistics2019/33288 ↗
13. Oddy A. A study on the Ballistic and Abrasive Response of Polyurea Coatings on Ballistic Fabrics . MASc thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, 2021.
14. 10.1007/BF0264751510.1007/BF02647515 ↗
15. Thielicke W. PIVlab – particle image velocimetry (PIV) tool with GUI . 2021. See https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/27659-pivlab-particle-image-velocimetry-piv-tool-withgui [2021; accessed 11 July 2021].
16. 10.1038/s41598-020-70661-310.1038/s41598-020-70661-3 ↗
17. 10.1038/s41598-021-92663-510.1038/s41598-021-92663-5 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.jcomc.2022.10023110.1016/j.jcomc.2022.100231 ↗
19. 10.1002/pc.2620010.1002/pc.26200 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.10380110.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103801 ↗