Ballistic performance of nanocrystalline and nanotwinned ultrafine crystal steel
Source abstract
Abstract
Because of their remarkable mechanical properties, nanocrystalline metals have been the focus of much research in recent years. Refining their grain size to the nanometer range (<100 nm) effectively reduces their dislocation mobility, thus achieving very high yield strength and surface hardness—as predicted by the Hall–Petch relation—as well as higher strain-rate sensitivity. Recent works have additionally suggested that nanocrystalline metals exhibit an even higher compressive strength under shock loading. However, the increase in strength of these materials is generally accompanied by an important reduction in ductility. As an alternative, efforts have been focused on ultrafine crystals, i.e. polycrystals with a grain size in the range of 500 nm to 1 μm, in which “growth twins” (twins introduced inside the grain before deformation) act as barriers against dislocation movement, thus increasing the strength in a similar way as nanocrystals but without significant loss of ductility. Due to their outstanding mechanical properties, both nanocrystalline and nanotwinned ultrafine crystalline steels appear to be relevant candidates for ballistic protection. The aim of the present work is to compare their ballistic performance against coarse-grained steel, as well as to identify the effect of the hybridization with a carbon fiber–epoxy composite layer. Hybridization is proposed as a way to improve the nanocrystalline brittle properties in a similar way as is done with ceramics in other protection systems. The experimental campaign is finally complemented by numerical simulations to help identify some of the intrinsic deformation mechanisms not observable experimentally. As a conclusion, nanocrystalline and nanotwinned ultrafine crystals show a lower energy absorption than coarse-grained steel under ballistic loading, but under equal impact conditions with no penetration, deformation in the impact direction is smaller by nearly 40%. This a priori surprising difference in the energy absorption is rationalized by the more important local contribution of the deviatoric stress vs. volumetric stress under impact than under uniaxial deformation. Ultimately, the deformation advantage could be exploited in the future for personal protection systems where a small deformation under impact is of key importance.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Microstructure and mechanical properties · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Metal and Thin Film Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (67)
Show source-provided references
1. Rack · Mater Sci Eng · 1970 · 6 · 32010.1016/0025-5416(70)90068-6 ↗
2. Morris Jr J. In: Takaki S, Maki T, editors. International symposium on ultrafine grained steels. Tokyo (Japan): Iron and Steel Inst.; 2001. p. 34–41.
3. Arifvianto · Mater Chem Phys · 2011 · 125 · 41810.1016/j.matchemphys.2010.10.038 ↗
4. Hall · J Mech Phys Solids · 1953 · 1 · 22710.1016/0022-5096(53)90002-7 ↗
5. Petch · Prog Met Phys · 1954 · 5 · 110.1016/0502-8205(54)90003-9 ↗
6. Gleiter · Prog Mater Sci · 1989 · 33 · 22310.1016/0079-6425(89)90001-7 ↗
7. Jérusalem · Modell Simul Mater Sci Eng · 2009 · 17 · 02500110.1088/0965-0393/17/2/025001 ↗
8. Schiøtz · Science · 2003 · 301 · 135710.1126/science.1086636 ↗
9. Lu · Science · 2003 · 323 · 60710.1126/science.1167641 ↗
10. Zhang · Acta Mater · 2003 · 51 · 187110.1016/S1359-6454(02)00594-3 ↗
11. Chen · Scr Mater · 2005 · 52 · 103910.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.01.023 ↗
12. Lin · Acta Mater · 2006 · 54 · 559910.1016/j.actamat.2006.08.014 ↗
13. Dao · Acta Mater · 2007 · 55 · 404110.1016/j.actamat.2007.01.038 ↗
14. Schiøtz · Nature · 1998 · 391 · 56110.1038/35328 ↗
15. Yip · Nature · 1998 · 391 · 53210.1038/35254 ↗
16. Swygenhoven · Phys Rev B · 1999 · 60 · 2210.1103/PhysRevB.60.22 ↗
17. Schiøtz · Phys Rev B · 1999 · 60 · 1197110.1103/PhysRevB.60.11971 ↗
18. Yamakov · Nat Mater · 2002 · 1 · 110.1038/nmat700 ↗
19. Lund · Phys Rev B · 2004 · 69 · 01210110.1103/PhysRevB.69.012101 ↗
20. Lund · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 319310.1016/j.actamat.2005.03.023 ↗
21. Bringa · Science · 2005 · 309 · 183810.1126/science.1116723 ↗
22. Lu · Science · 2009 · 324 · 34910.1126/science.1159610 ↗
23. Lu · Science · 2004 · 304 · 42210.1126/science.1092905 ↗
24. Lu · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 216910.1016/j.actamat.2005.01.031 ↗
25. Shen · Scr Mater · 2005 · 52 · 98910.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.01.033 ↗
26. Dao · Acta Mater · 2006 · 54 · 542110.1016/j.actamat.2006.06.062 ↗
27. Shen · Scr Mater · 2006 · 55 · 31910.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.04.046 ↗
28. Jérusalem · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 464710.1016/j.actamat.2008.05.033 ↗
29. Thama · Int J Impact Eng · 2008 · 35 · 30410.1016/j.ijimpeng.2007.03.008 ↗
30. Folgar F, Scott B, Walsh S, Wolbert J. 23rd International symposium on ballistics, Tarragona; 2007.
31. Armellino RA. US Patent 3971072 – lightweight armor and method of fabrication; 1976.
32. Pinnacle Armor, Dragon Skin; 2010. .
33. C · 2010
34. Report · Mater Des · 1993 · 14 · 13310.1016/0261-3069(93)90008-J ↗
35. Ipson · J Appl Mech · 1963 · 30 · 385
36. Ipson · Exp Mech · 1975 · 15 · 24910.1007/BF02318057 ↗
37. Corran · Int J Impact Eng · 1983 · 1 · 310.1016/0734-743X(83)90010-6 ↗
38. Awerbuch · Int J Solids Struct · 1974 · 10 · 67110.1016/0020-7683(74)90050-X ↗
39. Awerbuch · Int J Solids Struct · 1974 · 10 · 68510.1016/0020-7683(74)90051-1 ↗
40. Ben-Dor · Appl Mech Rev · 2005 · 58 · 35510.1115/1.2048626 ↗
41. Sierakowski R, Nevill Jr G, Ross C, Jones E. Follow-on studies on the ballistic impact of composite materials. AFATL-TR-70-87. Air Force Armament Laboratory, Eglin Air Force Base; 1970.
42. López-Puente · Int J Solids Struct · 2006 · 44 · 283710.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.08.022 ↗
43. López-Puente · Composites Part A · 2009 · 40 · 122310.1016/j.compositesa.2009.05.008 ↗
44. López-Puente · Composites Part A · 2008 · 39 · 37410.1016/j.compositesa.2007.10.004 ↗
45. Abrate · Appl Mech Rev · 1991 · 44 · 15510.1115/1.3119500 ↗
46. Abrate · Appl Mech Rev · 1994 · 47 · 51710.1115/1.3111065 ↗
47. Dean · Int J Impact Eng · 2009 · 36 · 125010.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.05.002 ↗
48. Arias · Compos Struct · 2003 · 61 · 15110.1016/S0263-8223(03)00038-2 ↗
49. Lopes · Compos Sci Technol · 2009 · 69 · 92610.1016/j.compscitech.2009.02.009 ↗
50. Lopes · Compos Sci Technol · 2009 · 69 · 93710.1016/j.compscitech.2009.02.015 ↗
51. Vicente JF, Jérusalem A, Zhang Y, Dao M, Lu J, Gálvez F. Ballistic testing of nanocrystalline hybrid plates. In: 26th International symposium on ballistics event; 2011.
52. Tao · Acta Mater · 2002 · 50 · 460310.1016/S1359-6454(02)00310-5 ↗
53. Lu J, Lu K. US Patent 7,147,726 – mechanical method for generating nanostructures and mechanical device for generating nanostructures; 2006.
54. Wang · Scr Mater · 2003 · 48 · 158110.1016/S1359-6462(03)00159-3 ↗
55. Zhu · Acta Mater · 2004 · 52 · 410110.1016/j.actamat.2004.05.023 ↗
56. Chen · Acta Mater · 2011 · 59 · 369710.1016/j.actamat.2011.03.005 ↗
57. Wua · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 68110.1016/j.actamat.2004.10.021 ↗
58. Zhang · Z Metallkd · 2003 · 94 · 114310.3139/146.031143 ↗
59. Johnson · Eng Fract Mech · 1985 · 21 · 3110.1016/0013-7944(85)90052-9 ↗
60. Zerilli · J Appl Phys · 1987 · 61 · 181610.1063/1.338024 ↗
61. Johnson G, Cook W. In: Proceeding of the seventh international symposium on ballistics, vol. 541; 1983.
62. Borvik · Int J Impact Eng · 1999 · 22 · 85510.1016/S0734-743X(99)00011-1 ↗
63. Gupta · Int J Impact Eng · 2006 · 32 · 19210.1016/j.ijimpeng.2005.06.007 ↗
64. Hancock · J Mech Phys Solids · 1976 · 24 · 14710.1016/0022-5096(76)90024-7 ↗
65. Dabboussi · Int J Mech Sci · 2005 · 47 · 128210.1016/j.ijmecsci.2005.01.015 ↗
66. SIMULIA. Abaqus explicit; 2010.
67. Sarron · J Trauma · 2004 · 57 · 23610.1097/01.TA.0000133575.48065.3F ↗