Active tank armor. Booking modern domestic tanks What is not called combined armor
Reservation of modern domestic tanks
A. Tarasenko
Layered combined armor
In the 1950s, it became clear that a further increase in the protection of tanks was not possible only by improving the characteristics of armored steel alloys. This was especially true for the protection cumulative ammunition. The idea of using low-density fillers for protection against cumulative ammunition arose during the Great Patriotic War, the penetrating effect of a cumulative jet is relatively small in soils, this is especially true for sand. Therefore, it is possible to replace steel armor with a layer of sand sandwiched between two thin sheets of iron.
In 1957, VNII-100 carried out research to assess the anti-cumulative resistance of all domestic tanks, both serial production and prototypes. The protection of tanks was assessed based on the calculation of their shelling with a domestic non-rotating cumulative 85-mm projectile (in terms of its armor penetration it surpassed foreign cumulative shells of 90 mm caliber) at various heading angles provided for by the TTT in force at that time. The results of this research work formed the basis for the development of TTT to protect tanks from HEAT weapons. The calculations performed in the research showed that the most powerful armor protection was possessed by an experienced heavy tank"Object 279" and medium tank"Object 907".
Their protection ensured non-penetration by a cumulative 85-mm projectile with a steel funnel within the course angles: along the hull ± 60 ", the turret - + 90". To provide protection against a projectile of this type of other tanks, a thickening of the armor was required, which led to a significant increase in their combat weight: T-55 by 7700 kg, "Object 430" by 3680 kg, T-10 by 8300 kg and " Object 770" for 3500 kg.
An increase in the thickness of the armor to ensure the anti-cumulative resistance of the tanks and, accordingly, their mass by the above values was unacceptable. The solution to the problem of reducing the mass of armor specialists of the VNII-100 branch saw in the use of fiberglass and light alloys based on aluminum and titanium, as well as their combination with steel armor, as part of the armor.
As part of combined armor, aluminum and titanium alloys were first used in the design of the armor protection of a tank turret, in which a specially provided internal cavity was filled with an aluminum alloy. For this purpose, a special aluminum casting alloy ABK11 was developed, which is not subjected to heat treatment after casting (due to the impossibility of providing a critical cooling rate during quenching of the aluminum alloy in a combined system with steel). The “steel + aluminum” option provided, with equal anti-cumulative resistance, a reduction in the mass of armor by half compared to conventional steel.
In 1959, the bow of the hull and the turret with two-layer armor protection "steel + aluminum alloy" were designed for the T-55 tank. However, in the process of testing such combined barriers, it turned out that the two-layer armor did not have sufficient survivability with repeated hits of armor-piercing-sub-caliber projectiles - the mutual support of the layers was lost. Therefore, further tests were carried out on three-layer armor barriers "steel+aluminum+steel", "titanium+aluminum+titanium". The gain in mass was somewhat reduced, but still remained quite significant: the combined armor "titanium + aluminum + titanium" compared to monolithic steel armor with the same level of armor protection when fired with 115-mm cumulative and sub-caliber projectiles provided a reduction weight by 40%, the combination of "steel + aluminum + steel" gave 33% weight savings.
T-64
In the technical project (April 1961) of the "432 product" tank, two filler options were initially considered:
· Steel armor casting with ultraforfor inserts with initial horizontal base thickness equal to 420 mm with equivalent anti-cumulative protection equal to 450 mm;
· a cast turret consisting of a steel armor base, an aluminum anti-cumulative jacket (poured after casting the steel hull) and an outer steel armor and aluminum. The total maximum wall thickness of this tower is ~500 mm and is equivalent to ~460 mm anti-cumulative protection.
Both turret options resulted in over one ton of weight savings compared to an all-steel turret of equal strength. A turret with aluminum filler was installed on serial T-64 tanks.
Both turret options resulted in over one ton of weight savings compared to an all-steel turret of equal strength. A tower with aluminum filler was installed on serial tanks "product 432". In the course of accumulating experience, a number of shortcomings of the tower were revealed, primarily related to its large dimensions of the thickness of the frontal armor. Later, steel inserts were used in the design of the turret armor protection on the T-64A tank in the period 1967-1970, after which they finally came to the turret with ultraforfor inserts (balls), which was considered initially, providing the specified resistance with a smaller size. In 1961-1962 the main work on the creation of combined armor took place at the Zhdanovsky (Mariupol) metallurgical plant, where the technology of two-layer castings was debugged, various types of armor barriers were fired. Samples (“sectors”) were cast and tested with 85-mm cumulative and 100-mm armor-piercing projectiles
combined armor"steel + aluminum + steel". To eliminate the “squeezing out” of aluminum inserts from the body of the tower, it was necessary to use special jumpers that prevented the “squeezing out” of aluminum from the cavities of the steel tower. . Before the advent of the Object 432 tank, all armored vehicles had monolithic or composite armor.
A fragment of a drawing of a tank turret object 434 indicating the thicknesses of steel barriers and filler
Read more about the armor protection of the T-64 in the material - Security of the tanks of the second post-war generation T-64 (T-64A), Chieftain Mk5R and M60
The use of aluminum alloy ABK11 in the design of armor protection of the upper frontal part of the hull (A) and the front of the turret (B)
experienced medium tank "Object 432". The armored design provided protection against the effects of cumulative ammunition.
The upper frontal sheet of the hull "product 432" is installed at an angle of 68 ° to the vertical, combined, with a total thickness of 220 mm. It consists of an outer armor plate 80 mm thick and an inner fiberglass sheet 140 mm thick. As a result, the calculated resistance from cumulative ammunition was 450 mm. The front roof of the hull is made of armor 45 mm thick and had lapels - “cheekbones” located at an angle of 78 ° 30 to the vertical. The use of fiberglass of a selected thickness also provided reliable (in excess of TTT) anti-radiation protection. The absence in the technical design of the back plate after the fiberglass layer shows the complex search for the right technical solutions for creating the optimal three-barrier barrier, which developed later.
In the future, this design was abandoned in favor of a simpler design without "cheekbones", which had greater resistance to cumulative ammunition. The use of combined armor on the T-64A tank for the upper frontal part (80 mm steel + 105 mm fiberglass + 20 mm steel) and a turret with steel inserts (1967-1970), and later with a filler of ceramic balls (horizontal thickness 450 mm) made it possible to provide protection against BPS (with armor penetration of 120 mm / 60 ° from a distance of 2 km) at a distance of 0.5 km and from COPs (penetrating 450 mm) with an increase in armor weight by 2 tons compared to the T-62 tank.
Scheme technological process castings of the tower "object 432" with cavities for aluminum filler. During shelling, the turret with combined armor provided full protection against 85-mm and 100-mm HEAT shells, 100-mm armor-piercing blunt-headed shells and 115-mm sub-capiber shells at firing angles of ±40 °, as well as protection against 115- mm of a cumulative projectile at a heading angle of fire of ±35 °.
High-strength concrete, glass, diabase, ceramics (porcelain, ultra-porcelain, uralite) and various fiberglass were tested as fillers. Of the tested materials, inserts made of high-strength ultra-porcelain (the specific jet-extinguishing ability is 2–2.5 times higher than that of armored steel) and AG-4S fiberglass had the best characteristics. These materials were recommended for use as fillers in combined armor barriers. The weight gain when using combined armor barriers compared to monolithic steel barriers was 20-25%.
T-64A
In the process of improving the combined protection against the tower with the use of aluminum filler, they refused. Simultaneously with the development of the design of the tower with ultra-porcelain filler in the VNII-100 branch at the suggestion of V.V. Jerusalem, the design of the tower was developed using high-hard steel inserts intended for the manufacture of shells. These inserts, heat-treated by the differential isothermal hardening method, had a particularly hard core and relatively less hard but more ductile outer surface layers. The manufactured experimental turret with high-hard inserts showed even better results in terms of durability during shelling than with filled ceramic balls.
The disadvantage of the tower with high-hard inserts was the insufficient survivability of the welded joint between the retaining plate and the tower support, which, when hit by an armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile, was destroyed without penetration.
In the process of manufacturing an experimental batch of towers with high-hard inserts, it turned out to be impossible to provide the minimum required impact strength (high-hard inserts of the manufactured batch during shelling gave increased brittle fracture and penetration). Further work in this direction was abandoned.
(1967-1970)
In 1975, a corundum-filled turret developed by VNIITM was put into service (in production since 1970). Reservation of the tower - 115 steel cast armor, 140 mm ultra-porcelain balls and the rear wall of 135 mm steel with an angle of inclination of 30 degrees. casting technology towers with ceramic filling was worked out as a result of the joint work of VNII-100, Kharkov Plant No. 75, South Ural Radioceramics Plant, VPTI-12 and NIIBT. Using the experience of working on the combined armor of the hull of this tank in 1961-1964. The design bureaus of the LKZ and ChTZ factories, together with VNII-100 and its Moscow branch, developed variants of hulls with combined armor for tanks with guided missile weapons: "Object 287", "Object 288", "Object 772" and "Object 775".
corundum ball
Tower with corundum balls. The size of the frontal protection is 400 ... 475 mm. The stern of the tower is -70 mm.
Subsequently, the armor protection of Kharkov tanks was improved, including in the direction of using more advanced barrier materials, so from the end of the 70s on the T-64B, steels of the BTK-1Sh type were used, made by electroslag remelting. On average, the resistance of an equal-thickness sheet obtained by ESR is 10 ... 15 percent more than armored steels of increased hardness. In the course of mass production until 1987, the turret was also improved.
T-72 "Ural"
Booking VLD T-72 "Ural" was similar to booking T-64. In the first series of the tank, turrets directly converted from T-64 turrets were used. Subsequently, a monolithic tower made of cast armored steel was used, with a size of 400-410 mm. Monolithic towers provided satisfactory resistance against 100-105 mm armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles(BTS) , but the anti-cumulative resistance of these towers in terms of protection against shells of the same caliber was inferior to towers with a combined filler.
Monolithic tower made of cast armor steel T-72,
also used on the export version of the T-72M tank
T-72A
The armor of the front part of the hull was reinforced. This was achieved by redistributing the thickness of the steel armor plates in order to increase the thickness of the back plate. Thus, the thickness of the VLD was 60 mm steel, 105 mm STB and the back sheet 50 mm thick. At the same time, the size of the reservation remained the same.
The turret armor has undergone major changes. In serial production, cores made of non-metallic molding materials were used as a filler, fastened before pouring with metal reinforcement (the so-called sand cores).
Tower T-72A with sand rods,
Also used on export versions of the T-72M1 tank
photo http://www.tank-net.com
In 1976, UVZ made attempts to produce turrets used on the T-64A with lined corundum balls, but it was not possible to master such technology there. This required new production facilities and the development of new technologies that had not been created. The reason for this was the desire to reduce the cost of the T-72A, which were also massively supplied to foreign countries. Thus, the resistance of the tower from the BPS of the T-64A tank exceeded the resistance of the T-72 by 10%, and the anti-cumulative resistance was 15 ... 20% higher.
Frontal part T-72A with redistribution of thicknesses
and increased protective back layer.
With an increase in the thickness of the back sheet, the three-layer barrier increases resistance.
This is a consequence of the fact that a deformed projectile acts on the rear armor, which partially collapsed in the first steel layer.
and lost not only speed, but also the original shape of the warhead.
The weight of three-layer armor required to achieve the level of resistance equivalent in weight to steel armor decreases with decreasing thickness.
front armor plate up to 100-130 mm (in the direction of fire) and a corresponding increase in the thickness of the rear armor.
The middle fiberglass layer has little effect on the projectile resistance of a three-layer barrier (I.I. Terekhin, Research Institute of Steel) .
Frontal part of PT-91M (similar to T-72A)
T-80B
Strengthening the protection of the T-80B was carried out through the use of rolled armor of increased hardness of the BTK-1 type for hull parts. The frontal part of the hull had an optimal ratio of three-barrier armor thicknesses similar to that proposed for the T-72A.
In 1969, a team of authors from three enterprises proposed a new bulletproof armor of the BTK-1 brand of increased hardness (dotp = 3.05-3.25 mm), containing 4.5% nickel and additives of copper, molybdenum and vanadium. . In the 70s, a complex of research and production work was carried out on BTK-1 steel, which made it possible to start introducing it into the production of tanks.
The results of testing stamped boards with a thickness of 80 mm from BTK-1 steel showed that they are equivalent in terms of resistance to serial boards with a thickness of 85 mm. This type of steel armor was used in the manufacture of the hulls of the T-80B and T-64A(B) tanks. The BTK-1 is also used in the design of the filler package in the turret of the T-80U (UD), T-72B tanks. The BTK-1 armor has increased projectile resistance against sub-caliber projectiles at firing angles of 68-70 (5-10% more compared to serial armor). As the thickness increases, the difference between the resistance of the BTK-1 armor and serial armor of medium hardness, as a rule, increases.
During the development of the tank, there were attempts to create a cast turret from steel with increased hardness, which were unsuccessful. As a result, the design of the turret was chosen from cast armor of medium hardness with a sand core, similar to the turret of the T-72A tank, and the thickness of the armor of the T-80B turret was increased, such turrets were accepted for serial production from 1977.
Further reinforcement of the armor of the T-80B tank was achieved in the T-80BV, which was put into service in 1985. The armor protection of the frontal part of the hull and turret of this tank is fundamentally the same as on the T-80B tank, but consists of reinforced combined armor and hinged dynamic protection "Contact-1". During the transition to mass production of the T-80U tank, some T-80BV tanks of the latest series (object 219RB) were equipped with towers of the T-80U type, but with the old FCS and the Cobra guided weapon system.
Tanks T-64, T-64A, T-72A and T-80B According to the criteria of production technology and the level of resistance, it can be conditionally attributed to the first generation of the implementation of combined armor on domestic tanks. This period has a framework within the mid-60s - early 80s. The armor of the tanks mentioned above generally provided high resistance to the most common anti-tank weapons (PTS) of the specified period. In particular, resistance to armor-piercing projectiles of the type (BPS) and feathered armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles with a composite core of the type (OBPS). An example is the BPS L28A1, L52A1, L15A4 and OBPS M735 and BM22 types. Moreover, the development of the protection of domestic tanks was carried out precisely taking into account the provision of resistance against OBPS with an integral active part of the BM22.
But corrections to this situation were made by the data obtained as a result of the shelling of these tanks obtained as trophies during the Arab-Israeli war of 1982, the M111 type OBPS with a tungsten-based monoblock carbide core and a highly effective damping ballistic tip.
One of the conclusions of the special commission to determine the projectile resistance of domestic tanks was that the M111 has advantages over the domestic 125 mm BM22 projectile in terms of penetration at an angle of 68° combined armor VLD serial domestic tanks. This gives grounds to believe that the M111 projectile was worked out mainly to destroy the VLD of the T72 tank, taking into account its design features, while the BM22 projectile was worked out on monolithic armor at an angle of 60 degrees.
In response to this, after the completion of the ROC "Reflection" for tanks of the above types, during the overhaul at the repair plants of the USSR Ministry of Defense on tanks since 1984, additional reinforcement of the upper frontal part was carried out. In particular, an additional plate with a thickness of 16 mm was installed on the T-72A, which provided an equivalent resistance of 405 mm from the M111 OBPS at a speed of the standard damage limit of 1428 m / s.
Not less influenced fighting in 1982 in the Middle East and on the anti-cumulative protection of tanks. From June 1982 to January 1983. During the implementation of the development work "Contact-1" under the leadership of D.A. Rototaeva (Scientific Research Institute of Steel) carried out work on the installation of dynamic protection (DZ) on domestic tanks. The impetus for this was the effectiveness of the Israeli Blazer-type remote sensing system demonstrated during the hostilities. It is worth recalling that DZ was developed in the USSR already in the 50s, but for a number of reasons it was not installed on tanks. These issues are discussed in more detail in the article DYNAMIC PROTECTION. THE ISRAEL SHIELD WAS FORGED IN... THE USSR? .
Thus, since 1984, to improve the protection of tanksT-64A, T-72A and T-80B measures were taken as part of the ROC "Reflection" and "Contact-1", which ensured their protection from the most common PTS of foreign countries. In the course of mass production, the T-80BV and T-64BV tanks already took into account these solutions and were not equipped with additional welded plates.
The level of three-barrier (steel + fiberglass + steel) armor protection of the T-64A, T-72A and T-80B tanks was ensured by selecting the optimal thickness and hardness of the materials of the front and rear steel barriers. For example, an increase in the hardness of the steel front layer leads to a decrease in the anti-cumulative resistance of combined barriers installed at large structural angles (68 °). This is due to a decrease in the consumption of the cumulative jet for penetration into the front layer and, consequently, an increase in its share involved in deepening the cavity.
But these measures were only modernization solutions, in tanks, the production of which began in 1985, such as the T-80U, T-72B and T-80UD, new solutions were applied, which can conditionally be attributed to the second generation of combined armor implementation . In the design of VLD, a design with an additional inner layer (or layers) between the non-metallic filler began to be used. Moreover, the inner layer was made of high-hardness steel.An increase in the hardness of the inner layer of steel combined barriers located at large angles leads to an increase in the anti-cumulative resistance of the barriers. For small angles, the hardness of the middle layer has no significant effect.
(steel+STB+steel+STB+steel).
On the new T-64BV tanks, additional armor for the VLD hull was not installed, since the new design was already
adapted to protect against new generation BPS - three layers of steel armor, between which two layers of fiberglass are placed, with a total thickness of 205 mm (60 + 35 + 30 + 35 + 45).
With a smaller overall thickness, the VLD of the new design in terms of resistance (excluding DZ) against BPS was superior to the VLD of the old design with an additional 30 mm sheet.
A similar VLD structure was also used on the T-80BV.
There were two directions in the creation of new combined barriers.
The first one developed in the Siberian Branch of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (Institute of Hydrodynamics named after Lavrentiev, V. V. Rubtsov, I. I. Terekhin). This direction was a box-shaped (box-type plates filled with polyurethane foam) or cellular structure. The cellular barrier has increased anti-cumulative properties. Its principle of counteraction is that due to the phenomena occurring at the interface between two media, part of the kinetic energy of the cumulative jet, which initially passed into the head shock wave, is transformed into the kinetic energy of the medium, which re-interacts with the cumulative jet.
The second proposed Research Institute of Steel (L. N. Anikina, M. I. Maresev, I. I. Terekhin). When a combined barrier (steel plate - filler - thin steel plate) is penetrated by a cumulative jet, a dome-shaped buckling of a thin plate occurs, the top of the bulge moves in the direction normal to the rear surface of the steel plate. This movement continues after breaking through the thin plate during the entire time the jet passes through the composite barrier. With optimally selected geometric parameters of these composite barriers, after they are pierced by the head of the cumulative jet, additional collisions of its particles with the edge of the hole in the thin plate occur, leading to a decrease in the penetrating ability of the jet. Rubber, polyurethane, and ceramics were studied as fillers.
This type of armor is similar in principle to British armor. Burlington, which was used on Western tanks in the early 80s.
Further development of the design and manufacturing technology of cast towers consisted in the fact that the combined armor of the frontal and side parts of the tower was formed due to a cavity open from above, into which a complex filler was mounted, closed from above by welded covers (plugs). Turrets of this design are used on later modifications of the T-72 and T-80 tanks (T-72B, T-80U and T-80UD).
The T-72B used turrets with filler in the form of plane-parallel plates (reflective sheets) and inserts made of high-hardness steel.
On T-80U with a filler of cellular cast blocks (cellular casting), filled with polymer (polyether urethane), and steel inserts.
T-72B
Reservation of the turret of the T-72 tank is of the "semi-active" type.In front of the turret there are two cavities located at an angle of 54-55 degrees to the longitudinal axis of the gun. Each cavity contains a pack of 20 30mm blocks, each consisting of 3 layers glued together. Block layers: 21mm armor plate, 6mm rubber layer, 3mm metal plate. 3 thin metal plates are welded to the armor plate of each block, providing a distance between the blocks of 22 mm. Both cavities have a 45 mm armor plate located between the package and the inner wall of the cavity. The total weight of the contents of the two cavities is 781 kg.
The appearance of the T-72 tank reservation package with reflective sheets
And inserts of steel armor BTK-1
Package photo J. Warford. Journal of military ordnance. May 2002,
The principle of operation of bags with reflective sheets
The VLD armor of the T-72B hull of the first modifications consisted of composite armor made of steel of medium and increased hardness. The increase in resistance and the equivalent decrease in the armor-piercing effect of the ammunition is ensured by the flow rate at the media separation. A steel type-setting barrier is one of the simplest design solutions for an anti-ballistic protective device. Such a combined armor of several steel plates provided a 20% gain in mass compared to homogeneous armor, maybe with the same overall dimensions.
Later, a more complex booking option was used using "reflective sheets" on the principle of functioning similar to the package used in the tank turret.
DZ "Contact-1" was installed on the tower and hull of the T-72B. Moreover, the containers are installed directly on the tower without giving them an angle that ensures the most efficient operation of the remote sensing.As a result of this, the effectiveness of the remote sensing system installed on the tower was significantly reduced. A possible explanation is that during state tests of the T-72AV in 1983, the test tank was hit due to the presence of areas not covered by containers, the DZ and the designers tried to achieve a better overlap of the tower.
Starting from 1988, the VLD and the tower were reinforced with the DZ "Kontakt-V» providing protection not only from cumulative PTS, but also from OBPS.
The armor structure with reflective sheets is a barrier consisting of 3 layers: plate, gasket and thin plate.
Penetration of a cumulative jet into armor with "reflective" sheets
X-ray image showing lateral displacements of jet particles
And the nature of the deformation of the plate
The jet, penetrating the slab, creates stresses leading first to local swelling of the back surface (a) and then to its destruction (b). This results in significant swelling of the gasket and thin sheet. When the jet pierces the gasket and the thin plate, the latter has already begun to move away from the rear surface of the plate (c). Since there is a certain angle between the direction of motion of the jet and the thin plate, at some point in time the plate begins to run into the jet, destroying it. The effect of the use of "reflective" sheets can reach 40% in comparison with monolithic armor of the same mass.
T-80U, T-80UD
When improving the armor protection of tanks 219M (A) and 476, 478, various options for barriers were considered, the feature of which was the use of the energy of the cumulative jet itself to destroy it. These were box and cellular type fillers.
In the accepted version, it consists of cellular cast blocks, filled with polymer, with steel inserts. Hull armor is provided by optimal the ratio of the thicknesses of the fiberglass filler and steel plates of high hardness.
Tower T-80U (T-80UD) has an outer wall thickness of 85 ... 60 mm, the rear - up to 190 mm. In the cavities open at the top, a complex filler was mounted, which consisted of cellular cast blocks poured with polymer (PUM) installed in two rows and separated by a 20 mm steel plate. A BTK-1 plate with a thickness of 80 mm is installed behind the package.On the outer surface of the forehead of the tower within the heading angle + 35 installed solid V -shaped blocks of dynamic protection "Contact-5". On the early versions of the T-80UD and T-80U, the NKDZ "Contact-1" was installed.
For more information about the history of the creation of the T-80U tank, see the film -Video about the T-80U tank (object 219A)
Reservation of VLD is multi-barrier. Since the early 1980s, several design options have been tested.
How packages work "cellular filler"
This type of armor implements the method of so-called "semi-active" protection systems, in which the energy of the weapon itself is used for protection.
The method proposed by the Institute of Hydrodynamics of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences and is as follows.
Scheme of action of cellular anti-cumulative protection:
1 - cumulative jet; 2- liquid; 3 - metal wall; 4 - shock wave of compression;
5 - secondary compression wave; 6 - collapse of the cavity
Scheme of single cells: a - cylindrical, b - spherical
Steel armor with polyurethane (polyetherurethane) filler
The results of studies of samples of cellular barriers in various design and technological versions were confirmed by full-scale tests during shelling with cumulative projectiles. The results showed that the use of a honeycomb layer instead of fiberglass can reduce dimensions obstacles by 15%, and mass - by 30%. Compared to monolithic steel, a layer weight reduction of up to 60% can be achieved while maintaining a close dimension to it.
The principle of operation of the armor of the "split" type.
In the back part of the cellular blocks there are also cavities filled with polymeric material. The principle of operation of this type of armor is approximately the same as that of cellular armor. Here, too, the energy of the cumulative jet is used for protection. When the cumulative jet, moving, reaches the free rear surface of the barrier, the elements of the barrier near the free rear surface under the action of the shock wave begin to move in the direction of the jet. If, however, conditions are created under which the material of the obstacle moves onto the jet, then the energy of the elements of the obstacle flying from the free surface will be spent on the destruction of the jet itself. And such conditions can be created by making hemispherical or parabolic cavities on the rear surface of the barrier.
Some variants of the upper frontal part of the T-64A, T-80 tanks, the T-80UD (T-80U), T-84 variant and the development of a new modular VLD T-80U (KBTM)
T-64A tower filler with ceramic balls and T-80UD package options -
cellular casting (filler from cellular cast blocks filled with polymer)
and metal package
Further design improvements was associated with the transition to towers with a welded base. Developments aimed at increasing the dynamic strength characteristics of cast armor steels in order to increase anti-ballistic resistance, gave a significantly smaller effect than similar developments for rolled armor. In particular, in the 80s, they were developed and ready for serial production new steels of increased hardness: SK-2Sh, SK-3Sh. Thus, the use of towers with a rolled base made it possible to increase the protective equivalent along the base of the tower without increasing the mass. Such developments were undertaken by the Research Institute of Steel together with design bureaus, the tower with a rolled base for the T-72B tank had a slightly increased (by 180 liters) internal volume, the weight increase was up to 400 kg compared to the serial cast turret of the T-72B tank.
Var and turret ant of the improved T-72, T-80UD with a welded base
and ceramic-metal package, not used in series
The tower filler package was made using ceramic materials and steel of increased hardness or from a package based on steel plates with "reflective" sheets. Worked out options for towers with removable modular armor for the frontal and side parts.
T-90S/A
With regard to tank turrets, one of the significant reserves for strengthening their anti-projectile protection or reducing the mass of the steel base of the tower while maintaining the existing level of anti-projectile protection is to increase the resistance of steel armor used for towers. The base of the T-90S / A tower is made made of steel armor of medium hardness, which significantly (by 10-15%) surpasses cast armor of medium hardness in terms of projectile resistance.
Thus, with the same mass, a tower made of rolled armor can have a higher anti-ballistic resistance than a tower made of cast armor, and, in addition, if rolled armor is used for a tower, its anti-ballistic resistance can be further increased.
An additional advantage of a rolled turret is the possibility of ensuring a higher accuracy of its manufacture, since in the manufacture of a cast armor base of a turret, as a rule, the required casting quality and casting accuracy in terms of geometric dimensions and weight are not ensured, which necessitates labor-intensive and non-mechanized work to eliminate casting defects, adjustment of dimensions and weight of the casting, including adjustment of cavities for fillers. Implementation of the advantages of the design of a rolled turret in comparison with a cast turret is possible only when its projectile resistance and survivability at the locations of the joints of rolled armor parts meets general requirements in terms of projectile resistance and survivability of the tower as a whole. Welded joints of the T-90S/A turret are made with full or partial overlapping of the joints of parts and welds from the side of shell fire.
The armor thickness of the side walls is 70 mm, the frontal armor walls are 65-150 mm thick; the turret roof is welded from separate parts, which reduces the rigidity of the structure during high-explosive impact.On the outer surface of the forehead of the tower are installed V -shaped blocks of dynamic protection.
Variants of towers with a welded base T-90A and T-80UD (with modular armor)
Other armor materials:
Materials used:
Domestic armored vehicles. XX century: Scientific publication: / Solyankin A.G., Zheltov I.G., Kudryashov K.N. /
Volume 3. Domestic armored vehicles. 1946-1965 - M .: LLC "Publishing House" Zeikhgauz "", 2010.
M.V. Pavlova and I.V. Pavlova "Domestic armored vehicles 1945-1965" - TiV No. 3 2009
Theory and design of the tank. - T. 10. Book. 2. Comprehensive protection / Ed. d.t.s., prof. P. P . Isakov. - M .: Mashinostroenie, 1990.
J. Warford. The first look at Soviet special armor. Journal of military ordnance. May 2002.
You can often hear how armor compared according to the thickness of steel plates 1000, 800mm. Or, for example, that a certain projectile can break through some "n"-number of mm armor. The fact is that now these calculations are not objective. Modern armor cannot be described as equivalent to any thickness of homogeneous steel.
There are currently two types of threats: kinetic energy projectile and chemical energy. By kinetic threat is meant armor-piercing projectile or, more simply, a blank with great kinetic energy. In this case, it is impossible to calculate the protective properties armor based on the thickness of the steel plate. So, shells With depleted uranium or tungsten carbide pass through steel like a knife through butter and the thickness of any modern armor, if it were homogeneous steel, it would not withstand the impact of such shells. There is no armor 300mm thick, which is equivalent to 1200mm steel, and therefore capable of stopping projectile, which will get stuck and stick out in the thickness armored sheet. Success protection from armor-piercing shells lies in changing the vector of its impact on the surface armor.
If you're lucky, then when you hit there will be only a small dent, and if you're not lucky, then projectile will sew all armor regardless of whether it is thick or thin. Simply put, armor plates are relatively thin and hard, and the damaging effect largely depends on the nature of the interaction with projectile. In the American army to increase hardness armor used depleted uranium, in other countries Wolfram carbide, which is actually more solid. About 80% of tank armor's ability to stop shells-blanks fall on the first 10-20 mm of modern armor.
Now consider chemical impact of warheads.
Chemical energy is represented by two types: HESH (anti-tank armor-piercing high-explosive) and HEAT ( HEAT projectile).
HEAT - more common today, and has nothing to do with high temperatures. HEAT uses the principle of focusing the energy of an explosion into a very narrow jet. A jet is formed when a geometrically regular cone is surrounded on the outside explosives. During detonation, 1/3 of the energy of the explosion is used to form a jet. She's on account high pressure(not temperature) penetrates armor. The simplest protection against this type of energy is a layer set aside half a meter from the body. armor, thus dissipating the energy of the jet. This technique was used during the Second World War, when Russian soldiers surrounded the body tank netting from the beds. Israelis are doing the same now. tank Merkava, they are for protection ATGM feeds and RPG grenades use steel balls hanging from chains. For the same purposes, a large aft niche is installed on the tower, to which they are attached.
Other method protection is the use dynamic or reactive armor. It is also possible to use combined dynamic And ceramic armor(such as Chobham). When a jet of molten metal comes into contact with reactive armor the detonation of the latter occurs, the resulting shock wave defocuses the jet, eliminating its damaging effect. Chobham Armor works in a similar way, but in this case, at the moment of the explosion, pieces of ceramic fly off, turning into a cloud of dense dust, which completely neutralizes the energy of the cumulative jet.
HESH (anti-tank armor-piercing high-explosive) - the warhead works as follows: after the explosion, it flows around armor like clay and transmits a huge momentum through the metal. Further, like billiard balls, the particles armor collide with each other and thus the protective plates are destroyed. Material booking capable of flying into small shrapnel, injuring the crew. Protection from such armor similar to the one described above for HEAT.
Summarizing the above, I would like to note that protection from kinetic impact projectile reduced to a few centimeters of metallized armor, it depends protection from HEAT and HESH is to create a delayed armor, dynamic protection, as well as some materials (ceramics).
Common types of armor that are used in tanks:
1. Steel armor. It's cheap and easy to make. It can be a monolithic bar or soldered from several plates. armor. The elevated temperature treatment increases the elasticity of the steel and improves the reflectivity against kinetic attack. Classic tanks M48 and T55 used this armor type.
2. Perforated steel armor. This sophisticated steel armor in which perpendicular holes are drilled. Holes are drilled at the rate of no more than 0.5 of the expected diameter. projectile. It is clear that the weight is reduced. armor by 40-50%, but the efficiency also drops by 30%. It does armor more porous, which to some extent protects against HEAT and HESH. Advanced types of this armor include solid cylindrical fillers in the holes, made, for example, of ceramics. Besides, perforated armor placed on the tank in such a way that projectile fell perpendicular to the course of the drilled cylinders. Contrary to popular belief, initially the Leopard-2 tanks did not use Chobham armor type(type of dynamic armor with ceramics), and perforated steel.
3. Ceramic layered (Chobham type). Represents a combined armor from alternating metal and ceramic layers. The type of ceramic used is usually a mystery, but usually it is alumina (aluminum salts and sapphire), boron carbide (the simplest hard ceramic), and similar materials. Sometimes synthetic fibers are used to hold metal and ceramic plates together. Lately in layered armor ceramic matrix connections are used. Ceramic layered armor protects very well from a cumulative jet (due to defocusing of a dense metal jet), but also resists kinetic effects well. The layering also makes it possible to effectively resist modern tandem projectiles. The only problem with ceramic plates is that they cannot be bent, so the layered armor built from squares.
Alloys are used in ceramic laminate to increase its density. . This is a common technology by today's standards. The main material used is tungsten alloy or, in the case of 0.75% titanium alloy with depleted uranium. The problem here is that depleted uranium is extremely poisonous when inhaled.
4. dynamic armor. It's cheap and relatively easy way defend against cumulative projectiles. It is a high explosive, squeezed between two steel plates. When hit by a warhead, explosives detonate. The disadvantage is the uselessness in the event of a kinetic impact projectile, and tandem projectile. However, such armor is lightweight, modular and simple. It can be seen, in particular, on Soviet and Chinese tanks. dynamic armor usually used instead advanced layered ceramic armor.
5. Abandoned armor. One of the tricks of design thought. In this case, at a certain distance from the main armor set aside light barriers. Effective only against a cumulative jet.
6. Modern combined armor. Most of the best tanks equipped with this armor type. In fact, a combination of the above types is used here.
———————
Translation from English.
Address: www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1123984275/last-1124092332/Modern+Tank+Armor
Since the advent of armored vehicles, the age-old battle between projectile and armor has escalated. Some designers sought to increase the penetration ability of shells, while others increased the durability of armor. The fight continues even now. About how modern tank armor is arranged, "Popular Mechanics" was told by a professor at Moscow State Technical University. N.E. Bauman, Director for Science of the Research Institute of Steel Valery Grigoryan
At first, the attack on the armor was carried out in the forehead: while the main type of impact was an armor-piercing projectile of kinetic action, the duel of the designers was reduced to increasing the caliber of the gun, the thickness and angles of the armor. This evolution is clearly seen in the development tank weapons and armor in World War II. The constructive solutions of that time are quite obvious: we will make the barrier thicker; if it is tilted, the projectile will have to travel a longer distance in the thickness of the metal, and the probability of ricochet will increase. Even after the appearance of armor-piercing shells with a rigid non-destructive core in the ammunition of tank and anti-tank guns, little has changed.
Elements of dynamic protection (EDZ)
They are "sandwiches" of two metal plates and an explosive. EDZ are placed in containers, the lids of which protect them from external influences and at the same time are missile elements
Deadly Spit
However, already at the beginning of World War II, a revolution took place in the striking properties of ammunition: cumulative shells appeared. In 1941, the Hohlladungsgeschoss (“projectile with a notch in the charge”) began to be used by German artillerymen, and in 1942 the 76-mm BP-350A projectile, developed after studying captured samples, was adopted by the USSR. This is how the famous Faust cartridges were arranged. A problem arose that could not be solved by traditional methods due to an unacceptable increase in the mass of the tank.
In the head part of the cumulative ammunition, a conical recess was made in the form of a funnel lined with a thin layer of metal (bell forward). The detonation of the explosive starts from the side closest to the top of the funnel. The detonation wave "collapses" the funnel to the axis of the projectile, and since the pressure of the explosion products (almost half a million atmospheres) exceeds the limit of plastic deformation of the lining, the latter begins to behave like a quasi-liquid. Such a process has nothing to do with melting, it is precisely the “cold” flow of the material. A thin (comparable to the thickness of the shell) cumulative jet is squeezed out of the collapsing funnel, which accelerates to speeds of the order of the detonation velocity of explosives (and sometimes even higher), that is, about 10 km / s or more. The speed of the cumulative jet significantly exceeds the speed of sound propagation in the armor material (about 4 km/s). Therefore, the interaction of the jet and armor occurs according to the laws of hydrodynamics, that is, they behave like liquids: the jet does not burn through the armor at all (this is a widespread misconception), but penetrates into it, just like a jet of water under pressure washes sand.
Puff protection
The first defense against cumulative ammunition was the use of screens (double barrier armor). The cumulative jet is not formed instantly, for its maximum efficiency it is important to detonate the charge at the optimal distance from the armor (focal length). If a screen of additional metal sheets is placed in front of the main armor, then the explosion will occur earlier and the effectiveness of the impact will decrease. During World War II, to protect against faustpatrons, tankers attached thin metal sheets and mesh screens to their vehicles (a tale is widespread about the use of armored beds in this capacity, although in reality special meshes were used). But such a solution was not very effective - the increase in durability averaged only 9–18%.
Therefore, when developing a new generation of tanks (T-64, T-72, T-80), the designers used a different solution - multilayer armor. It consisted of two layers of steel, between which was placed a layer of low-density filler - fiberglass or ceramic. Such a "pie" gave a gain in comparison with monolithic steel armor up to 30%. However, this method was inapplicable for the tower: in these models it is cast and it is difficult to place fiberglass inside from a technological point of view. The designers of VNII-100 (now VNII Transmash) proposed to fuse ultra-porcelain balls into the turret armor, the specific flow suppression capacity of which is 2–2.5 times higher than that of armor steel. Specialists of the Research Institute of Steel chose another option: packages of high-strength hard steel were placed between the outer and inner layers of armor. They took on the blow of a weakened cumulative jet at speeds when the interaction no longer occurs according to the laws of hydrodynamics, but depending on the hardness of the material.
semi-active armor
Although it is not easy to slow down the cumulative jet, it is vulnerable in the transverse direction and can easily be destroyed even by a weak lateral impact. Therefore, the further development of the technology consisted in the fact that the combined armor of the frontal and side parts of the cast tower was formed due to an open cavity filled with a complex filler; from above the cavity was closed with welded plugs. Turrets of this design were used on later modifications of tanks - T-72B, T-80U and T-80UD. The principle of operation of the inserts was different, but used the mentioned "lateral vulnerability" of the cumulative jet. Such armor is usually referred to as "semi-active" protection systems, since they use the energy of the weapon itself.
One of the options for such systems is cellular armor, the principle of operation of which was proposed by employees of the Institute of Hydrodynamics of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The armor consists of a set of cavities filled with a quasi-liquid substance (polyurethane, polyethylene). The cumulative jet, having entered such a volume bounded by metal walls, generates a shock wave in the quasi-liquid, which, reflected from the walls, returns to the jet axis and collapses the cavity, causing deceleration and destruction of the jet. This type of armor provides a gain in anti-cumulative resistance up to 30-40%.
Another option is armor with reflective sheets. This is a three-layer barrier, consisting of a plate, a gasket and a thin plate. The jet, penetrating into the slab, creates stresses, leading first to local swelling of the rear surface, and then to its destruction. In this case, significant swelling of the gasket and the thin sheet occurs. When the jet pierces the gasket and the thin plate, the latter has already begun to move away from the rear surface of the plate. Since there is a certain angle between the directions of motion of the jet and the thin plate, at some point in time the plate begins to run into the jet, destroying it. In comparison with monolithic armor of the same mass, the effect of using "reflective" sheets can reach 40%.
The next design improvement was the transition to towers with a welded base. It became clear that developments to increase the strength of rolled armor are more promising. In particular, in the 1980s, new steels of increased hardness were developed and ready for serial production: SK-2Sh, SK-3Sh. The use of towers with a rolled base made it possible to increase the protective equivalent along the base of the tower. As a result, the turret for the T-72B tank with a rolled base had an increased internal volume, the weight increase was 400 kg compared to the serial cast turret of the T-72B tank. The tower filler package was made using ceramic materials and steel of increased hardness or from a package based on steel plates with "reflective" sheets. The equivalent armor resistance became equal to 500–550 mm of homogeneous steel.
When a DZ element is pierced by a cumulative jet, the explosive in it detonates and the metal plates of the body begin to scatter. At the same time, they cross the jet trajectory at an angle, constantly substituting new sections under it. Part of the energy is spent on breaking through the plates, and the lateral momentum from the collision destabilizes the jet. DZ reduces the armor-piercing characteristics of cumulative weapons by 50-80%. At the same time, which is very important, the DZ does not detonate when fired from small arms. The use of remote sensing has become a revolution in the protection of armored vehicles. There was a real opportunity to influence the invading lethal agent as actively as before it acted on passive armor
Explosion towards
Meanwhile, technology in the field of cumulative munitions continued to improve. If during the Second World War the armor penetration of HEAT shells did not exceed 4-5 calibers, then later it increased significantly. So, with a caliber of 100–105 mm, it was already 6–7 calibers (in steel equivalent 600–700 mm), with a caliber of 120–152 mm, armor penetration was raised to 8–10 calibers (900–1200 mm of homogeneous steel). To protect against these ammunition, a qualitatively new solution was required.
Work on anti-cumulative, or "dynamic", armor based on the principle of counter-explosion has been carried out in the USSR since the 1950s. By the 1970s, its design had already been worked out at the All-Russian Research Institute of Steel, but the psychological unpreparedness of high-ranking representatives of the army and industry prevented it from being adopted. Only the successful use of similar armor by Israeli tankers on the M48 and M60 tanks during the 1982 Arab-Israeli war helped to convince them. Since the technical, design and technological solutions were fully prepared, the main tank fleet Soviet Union was equipped with anti-cumulative dynamic protection (DZ) "Contact-1" in record time - in just a year. The installation of DZ on the T-64A, T-72A, T-80B tanks, which already had sufficiently powerful armor, almost instantly depreciated the existing arsenals of anti-tank guided weapons of potential opponents.
There are tricks against scrap
A cumulative projectile is not the only means of destroying armored vehicles. Much more dangerous opponents of armor are armor-piercing sub-caliber shells (BPS). By design, such a projectile is simple - it is a long crowbar (core) made of heavy and high-strength material (usually tungsten carbide or depleted uranium) with plumage for stabilization in flight. The core diameter is much smaller than the barrel caliber - hence the name "sub-caliber". A “dart” with a mass of several kilograms flying at a speed of 1.5-1.6 km / s has such kinetic energy that, when hit, it is able to pierce more than 650 mm of homogeneous steel. Moreover, the methods of strengthening anti-cumulative protection described above have practically no effect on sub-caliber projectiles. Contrary to common sense, the slope of the armor plates not only does not cause the sabot projectile to ricochet, but even weakens the degree of protection against them! Modern "triggered" cores do not ricochet: upon contact with the armor, a mushroom-shaped head is formed at the front end of the core, which plays the role of a hinge, and the projectile turns in the direction perpendicular to the armor, shortening the path in its thickness.
The next generation of remote sensing was the "Contact-5" system. Research Institute specialists did a great job, solving many conflicting problems: the remote sensing was supposed to give a powerful lateral impulse, allowing to destabilize or destroy the BOPS core, the explosive had to reliably detonate from a low-speed (compared to a cumulative jet) BOPS core, but at the same time, detonation from hit by bullets and shell fragments was excluded. The design of the blocks helped to cope with these problems. The cover of the DZ block is made of thick (about 20 mm) high-strength armor steel. When hitting it, the BPS generates a stream of high-speed fragments, which detonate the charge. The impact on the BPS of a moving thick cover is sufficient to reduce its armor-piercing characteristics. The impact on the cumulative jet also increases compared to the thin (3 mm) plate "Contact-1". As a result, the installation of DZ "Kontakt-5" on tanks increases the anti-cumulative resistance by 1.5-1.8 times and provides an increase in the level of protection against BPS by 1.2-1.5 times. The Kontakt-5 complex is installed on Russian production tanks T-80U, T-80UD, T-72B (since 1988) and T-90.
The latest generation of Russian remote sensing is the Relikt complex, also developed by specialists from the Steel Research Institute. In improved EDS, many shortcomings have been eliminated, for example, insufficient sensitivity when initiating low-velocity kinetic projectiles and some types of cumulative ammunition. Increased efficiency in protection against kinetic and cumulative ammunition is achieved through the use of additional throwing plates and the inclusion of non-metallic elements in their composition. As a result, armor penetration by sub-caliber projectiles is reduced by 20-60%, and due to the increased time of exposure to the cumulative jet, it was also possible to achieve a certain effectiveness for cumulative weapons with a tandem warhead.
The invention relates to the field of development of means of protecting equipment from armor-piercing bullets.
Progress in the creation of highly effective destructive weapons and the increase in the requirements for armor protection determined by it led to the creation of multilayer combined armor. The ideology of combined protection consists in a combination of several layers of dissimilar materials with priority properties, including a front layer of extra hard materials and a high-strength energy-intensive rear layer. Ceramics of the highest category of hardness are used as materials for the frontal layer, while its task is reduced to the destruction of the hardened core due to the stresses that arise during their high-speed interaction. The rear retaining layer is designed to absorb kinetic energy and block fragments resulting from the impact interaction of a bullet with ceramics.
Known technical solutions designed to protect surfaces with complex geometric relief - US patents No. 5972819 A, 26.10.1999; No. 6112635 A, 09/05/2000, No. 6203908 B1, 03/20/2001; patent of the Russian Federation No. 2329455, 20.07.2008. Common in these solutions is the use of small-sized ceramic elements in the frontal high-hard layer, as a rule, in the form of bodies of revolution, among which elements in the form of cylinders are most widely used. At the same time, the efficiency of the ceramics is increased by using convex sloping ends on one or both sides of the cylinders. In this case, when meeting lethal agent with oval surfaces of ceramics, there is a mechanism for withdrawing or knocking down a bullet from the flight path, which significantly complicates the work of overcoming a ceramic barrier. In addition, the use of small-sized ceramics in this case provides a higher level of survivability compared to the tiled version due to a significant reduction in the affected area and partial local maintainability of structures, which is very important for practice.
At the same time, the high efficiency of multilayer armor is determined not only by the properties of the materials of the main layers, but also by the conditions of their interaction during a high-speed impact, in particular, by acoustic contact between the ceramic and back layers, which makes it possible to partially transfer elastic energy to the back substrate.
Modern ideas about the mechanism of impact interaction of an armor-piercing core and combined protection are as follows. At the initial stage, when the core meets the armor, its penetration into the ceramic does not occur due to the fact that the latter has a significantly higher hardness compared to that of the core, then the core is destroyed due to the generation of high stresses in it that occur when braking against a ceramic barrier, and determined by the complex wave processes occurring in this case. The degree of core destruction is mainly determined by the time of interaction until the moment of ceramic destruction, while the acoustic contact between the layers plays a key role in increasing this time due to the partial transfer of elastic energy to the rear layer, followed by its absorption and dissipation.
A technical solution is described in US patent No. 6497966 B2, 24.12.2002, which proposes a multilayer composition consisting of a front layer made of ceramic or an alloy with a hardness above 27 HRC, an intermediate layer of alloys with a hardness of less than 27 HRC and a back layer of polymer composite material. In this case, all layers are fastened together with a polymeric winding material.
In fact, in this case we are talking about a two-layer composition of the destructive frontal layer, made from materials that differ in hardness. In the recommendations of the authors of this technical solution, it is proposed to use carbon steels in a less hard layer, while questions about the energy exchange of the front and rear layers are not considered, and the proposed class of materials cannot serve as an active participant in the transfer of elastic energy to the rear layer due to its properties.
The solution to the issues of interaction between the front and rear layers is proposed in the patent of the Russian Federation No. 2329455, 07/20/2008, which, in terms of the totality of common features, is the closest analogue to the proposed invention and is selected as a prototype. The authors propose the use of an intermediate layer in the form of an air gap or an elastic material.
However, the proposed solutions have a number of significant drawbacks. So, at the initial stage of interaction with ceramics, the elastic wave precursor of destruction reaches its rear surface and causes it to move.
When the gap collapses, the impact of the inner surface of the ceramic on the substrate can cause premature destruction of the ceramic and, consequently, accelerated penetration of the ceramic barrier. To avoid this, it is necessary either to significantly increase the thickness of the ceramics, which will lead to an unacceptable increase in the mass of the armor, or to increase the thickness of the gap, which will reduce the protection efficiency due to the separate (stage-by-stage) destruction of individual layers.
In the second version, the authors of the prototype propose to place an elastic layer between the layers, which should protect the ceramics from destruction upon impact with the rear armor. However, due to the low characteristic impedance of the elastic material, the interlayer will not be able to provide acoustic contact between the layers, which will lead to energy localization in brittle ceramics and its early failure.
The problem to be solved by the invention is to increase the armor resistance of the combined armor.
The technical result of the invention is to increase the armor resistance of the combined armor by increasing the density of acoustic contact between the layers.
The shortcomings of the prototype can be eliminated if intermediate layer will be made of a plastic material with certain properties, providing acoustic contact between the layers and the transfer of elastic energy to the rear. The above is achieved if the yield strength of the intermediate layer is 0.05-0.5 of the yield strength of the material of the back layer.
In the presence of an intermediate layer made of a plastic material with a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 of the yield strength of the material of the back layer, in the process of moving ceramics under the action of an elastic wave precursor, leaks and small gaps in the adjacent layers are eliminated due to plastic deformation of the latter. In addition, under the action of stress waves, its density increases, and hence its characteristic impedance. All this together leads to an increase in the density of acoustic contact between the layers and increases the proportion of energy transmitted and dissipated in the back layer. As a result, due to the presence of an intermediate layer made of a plastic material with a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 of the yield strength of the material of the back layer, the impact interaction energy is distributed over all layers of the combined armor, while its efficiency increases significantly, since the time of interaction before the destruction of ceramics increases, which, in turn, provides a more complete destruction of the high-hard core.
An intermediate layer with a yield strength of more than 0.5 of the yield strength of the back layer does not have sufficient plasticity and does not lead to the desired result.
Making the intermediate layer of a plastic material with a yield strength of less than 0.05 of the value of the yield strength of the material of the back layer will not lead to the desired result, since its extrusion during the impact interaction is too intense and the effect described above on the mechanics of the interaction processes does not appear.
The proposed technical solution was tested in the test center NPO SM, St. Petersburg. The ceramic layer in the prototype 200×200 mm was made of AJI-1 corundum cylinders with a diameter of 14 mm and a height of 9.5 mm. The back layer was made of Ts-85 armor steel (yield strength = 1600 MPa) 3 mm thick. The intermediate layer was made of AMC grade aluminum foil (yield strength = 120 MPa) 0.5 mm thick. The ratio of the yield strengths of the intermediate and back layers is 0.075. Ceramic cylinders and all layers were glued together with a polyurethane-based polymer binder.
The results of field tests showed that the proposed version of the combined armor protection has armor resistance 10-12% higher compared to the prototype, where the intermediate layer is made of an elastic material.
Multilayer combined armor containing a highly hard front layer of a ceramic block or elements connected by a binder into a monolith, a high-strength energy-intensive back layer and an intermediate layer, characterized in that the intermediate layer is made of a plastic material having a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 of the limit back layer fluidity.
Similar patents:
The invention relates to reactive protection systems for the protection of stationary and moving objects from damaging elements. The system is fixed or movably installed or can be installed on the side of the object to be protected (1) facing the striking element (3) and contains at least one protective surface (4) located at a certain angle (2) with respect to the direction of the striking element.
The invention relates to rolling production and can be used in the manufacture of armor plates from (α+β)-titanium alloy. A method for manufacturing armor plates from (α+β)-titanium alloy includes preparing a charge, melting an ingot of the composition, wt.%: 3.0-6.0 Al; 2.8-4.5V; 1.0-2.2 Fe; 0.3-0.7 Mo; 0.2-0.6Cr; 0.12-0.3 O; 0.010-0.045 C;<0,05 N; <0,05 Н;<0,15 Si; <0,8 Ni; остальное - титан.
The group of inventions relates to the field of transport engineering. The method of installing glasses when booking a car according to the first option is that the armored glasses are installed behind the regular ones using a frame connected to the lead-in part of the glass and repeating the shape of the glass, and fasteners.
The invention relates to armored objects, mainly to electrified tanks with dynamic (reactive) armor protection. The armored object contains a protective device of a dynamic type, which includes elements with a body and a cover installed on a part of the outer surface area of the object.
SUBSTANCE: group of inventions relates to the production of multilayer flexible armor materials for personal protective equipment. The way to counteract the movement of a multi-layered armor bullet, shrapnel consists in alternating layers of high-modulus fibers with substances that enhance resistance, which are placed in cells formed by layers of high-modulus fibers.
The invention relates to defense technology and is intended for testing facial metal barriers - the basis of heterogeneous protective structures. The method includes firing strikers at a speed greater than the impact speed, determining and measuring the depth of impact penetration of the striker with a diameter d into the metal surface h (cavity depth). In this case, the impact speed is greater or less than the expected minimum speed of continuous penetrations. Determination of the limiting (minimum) speed of continuous penetrations, above which continuous penetrations are obtained, and below - only regular penetrations, against the background of a linear dependence of small values of the cavity depth h on the impact velocity; advantages of quantized impact velocities; single-digit and small two-digit quantum numbers n for all velocities at which penetrations or caverns of increased depth are obtained. EFFECT: determining the presence and advantages of quantized impact velocities, as well as increasing the accuracy of determining the minimum speed of continuous penetrations. 4 ill.
The invention relates to military equipment, in particular to the design of armor protection designed to counter cumulative ammunition. The reactive armor contains a housing in which two parallel metal plates are located, detonators evenly spaced in the gap between the metal plates, sensors for determining the coordinates of the penetrating cumulative jet, fixed on the inner surfaces of the plates. In the gap between the metal plates there are vessels filled with liquid, inside the vessels there are rigidly fixed detonators made in the form of controlled electric dischargers, the power electrodes of which are connected by wires to the output of the electric energy storage device, and the ignition electrodes are electrically connected to the output of the ignition pulse generator, the input of which is electrically connected. with sensors for determining the coordinates of the cumulative jet. EFFECT: increased reliability of dynamic protection operation. 1 ill.
The invention relates to means of protecting equipment and crew from bullets, shrapnel and grenade launchers. The protective composite material contains a sandwich that includes at least three layers glued together. The first and second sandwich layers include at least two prepregs and titanium alloy or aluminum alloy corners. The third layer of protective composite has a honeycomb structure and is made of polyurethane. The first and second layers of the sandwich include monoliths formed from an angle profile. Shelves of the angular profile are located at an angle of 45° to the plane of the working surface of the protective composite. The titanium alloy or aluminum alloy corners are interconnected by at least two prepregs. Prepreg fibers contain corundum nanotubes on the surface of a fiber made of polyethylene filament, or glass filament, or basalt filament, or fabric, or tow, or tape. An increase in protective properties is achieved due to the design of the armor. 3 w.p. f-ly, 1 ill.
The invention relates to armored objects, mainly to tanks with dynamic armor protection, and at the same time to means of camouflaging military objects using a camouflage coating fixed on the surface of the object. The protective device of an armored military object contains camouflage square elements-modules with a camouflage pattern in a range of colors and with a choice of one or another individual four-position orientation, removable on the armor sections of the object. The device provides for dynamic protection elements distributed over the surface of the object with removable square covers, and the camouflage elements-modules are made in the form of rigid plates interchangeable with the mentioned covers of dynamic protection elements, with the possibility of quickly changing the camouflage pattern by replacing and / or rearranging two-functional ones, thus , elements-modules between elements of dynamic protection. Efficiency of replacement of camouflage means is achieved by particular application of the principle of multifunctionality of units and parts of machines to elements of dynamic protection and camouflage means. 5 z.p. f-ly, 4 ill.
The invention relates to the field of measurement technology and can be used to control the quality of composite armor barriers. A device for thermal quality control of composite armor barriers based on the analysis of the absorption energy of the projectile, including a device for firing located between the substrate and the device for firing on the flight path of the projectile, a device for measuring the flight speed of the projectile at the output of the device for firing, a substrate made of plastic material . The device is additionally equipped with a thermal imaging system, a computer system and a device for recording the start of the projectile flight. The thermal imaging system is located in such a way that the field of view of its optical part covers the point of contact between the striking element and the composite armor barrier. The input of the device for recording the beginning of the flight of the projectile is connected to the output of the device for measuring the speed of the projectile at the output of the device for firing. The output of the device for recording the beginning of the flight of the striking element is connected to the input of the thermal imaging system, and the output of the thermal imaging system is connected to the input of the computer system. The technical result is an increase in the information content and reliability of the test results. 9 ill.
The invention relates to the field of transport engineering. The energy-absorbing structure for protecting the bottom of ground vehicles consists of inner and outer layers of protection made of armor and/or structural alloys. Between the layers of protection is a layer. The interlayer is made in the form of two identical rows of U- or W-shaped energy-absorbing profiles mirrored to each other and shifted by half a step relative to each other. The end ribs of the energy-absorbing profiles of one row rest on the end ribs of adjacent energy-absorbing profiles of the opposite row. An increase in the efficiency of energy absorption during detonation is achieved. 3 ill.
The invention relates to the field of measurement technology and can be used to control the quality of composite armor barriers. The method includes installation of an armored barrier in front of a plate of plastic material, directing a striking element at a given speed to the armored barrier. Additionally, the temperature field of the surface of the composite armor barrier having minimal temperature anomalies is recorded, which is taken as anomalous, the spatial resolution is determined for registering the temperature field, based on the detection of temperature anomalies of the minimum size with a spatial period determined by the dimensions of the minimum temperature anomaly. After impact on the composite armor barrier by the striking element at a given speed, the temperature field is simultaneously measured in the area of contact between the striking element and the composite armor barrier, starting from the moment the striking element contacts the composite armor barrier and from the opposite side, in relation to the side of contact with the striking element, on based on the analysis of the temperature field recorded from two surfaces, the technical state of the composite armor barrier is determined by the vector of characteristics of the armor barrier and its absorption energy by minimizing the functional by the vector of characteristics of the controlled armor plate by solving a system of equations, and based on the analysis of the temperature field, the absorption energy of the composite armor barrier is determined. A device for bench testing of composite armor barriers is disclosed. The technical result is an increase in the information content and reliability of the test results. 2 n. and 3 z.p. f-ly, 3 ill., 1 tab.
The invention relates to a penetration-resistant article that can be used for the production of protective clothing such as bulletproof vests, helmets, as well as shields or armor elements, as well as to a method for its production. The product contains at least one woven fabric structure (3) having thermoplastic fibers and high strength fibers with a strength of at least 1100 MPa, in accordance with ASTM D-885. The high tenacity fibers are bonded together to form a woven fabric (2) of a woven fabric structure (3), and the thermoplastic fibers have a weight percentage relative to the weight of the woven fabric structure (3) of 5 to 35%. Moreover, thermoplastic fibers preferably in the form of a non-corrugated fabric (6) lie on the woven fabric (2) and are connected to the woven fabric (2) by the main thread and/or weft thread of the woven fabric (2) of high-strength fibers. There are no additional connecting threads or non-textile connecting means for connecting between the woven fabric (2) and the thermoplastic fibres. The penetration resistant article has impact protection and/or anti-ballistic properties. 3 n. and 11 z.p. f-ly, 7 ill.
SUBSTANCE: invention relates to bulletproof composite products, which are characterized by improved resistance to reverse deformation. Bulletproof product contains a vacuum panel, which consists of the first surface, the second surface and the housing. The vacuum panel limits at least a part of the internal volume in which the vacuum is created. Bulletproof product contains at least one bulletproof base, which is connected to the first or second surface of the vacuum panel. The ballistic base contains fibers and/or tapes with a specific strength of about 7 g/denier or more and a tensile modulus of about 150 g/denier or more. Also, the bulletproof base is made of a rigid material not based on fibers or tapes. Also proposed is a method for forming a bulletproof article, in which the bulletproof base is positioned so that it is on the outside of the bulletproof article, and the specified vacuum panel is placed behind the specified at least one bulletproof base in order to receive any shock wave that occurs as a result of impact. striking element on the specified bulletproof base. EFFECT: weakening of the impact of shock waves generated as a result of impact action of the striking element, reduction of the magnitude of the purl deformation, prevention or minimization of injuries from the transcendent action of bullets. 3 n. and 7 z.p. f-ly, 9 ill., 2 tables, 19 pr.
SUBSTANCE: group of inventions relates to the field of measuring technology, namely to a method for quality control of composite armor barriers made of fabric and a device for its implementation. The method includes installing a composite armor barrier in front of a plate of plastic material, directing a projectile at a given speed to the armor barrier, and determining the absorption energy of the projectile. From the moment of interaction between the armored barrier and the damaging element, two spatial fields are simultaneously recorded on the surface of the armored barrier: the temperature field of the surface of the armored barrier and the field of the video image of the surface. The video image contour is superimposed on the temperature field, a new measured temperature field is formed, and the absorption energy by the composite armor barrier is determined based on the analysis of the new temperature field. Disclosed is a device for quality control of composite armor barriers made of fabric for the implementation of the method. EFFECT: increased informative value and reliability of control results. 2 n. and 1 z.p. f-ly, 5 ill.
The invention relates to the field of development of means of protecting equipment from armor-piercing bullets. Multilayer combined armor contains a highly hard front layer of a ceramic block or elements connected by a binder into a monolith, a high-strength energy-intensive back layer and an intermediate layer. The intermediate layer is made of a plastic material having a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 of the yield strength of the back layer. An increase in the armor resistance of the combined armor is achieved by increasing the density of acoustic contact between the layers.
Scenarios for future wars, including lessons learned in Afghanistan, will create asymmetrically mixed challenges for soldiers and their ammunition. As a result, the need for stronger yet lighter armor will continue to increase. Modern types of ballistic protection for infantrymen, cars, aircraft and ships are so diverse that it is hardly possible to cover them all within the framework of one small article. Let us dwell on a review of the latest innovations in this area and outline the main directions of their development. Composite fiber is the basis for creating composite materials. The most durable structural materials currently made from fibers, such as carbon fiber or ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE).
Over the past decades, many composite materials have been created or improved, known under the trademarks KEVLAR, TWARON, DYNEEMA, SPECTRA. They are made by chemical bonding either para-aramid fibers or high-strength polyethylene.
Aramids (Aramid) - a class of heat-resistant and durable synthetic fibers. The name comes from the phrase "aromatic polyamide" (aromatic polyamide). In such fibers, the chains of molecules are strictly oriented in a certain direction, which makes it possible to control their mechanical characteristics.
They also include meta-aramids (for example, NOMEX). Most of them are copolyamides, known under the brand name Technora produced by the Japanese chemical concern Teijin. Aramids allow for a greater variety of fiber directions than UHMWPE. Para-aramid fibers such as KEVLAR, TWARON and Heracron have excellent strength with minimal weight.
High tenacity polyethylene fiber Dyneema, produced by DSM Dyneema, is considered the most durable in the world. It is 15 times stronger than steel and 40% stronger than aramid for the same weight. This is the only composite that can protect against 7.62mm AK-47 bullets.
Kevlar- well-known registered trademark of para-aramid fiber. Developed by DuPont in 1965, the fiber is available in the form of filaments or fabric, which are used as a basis in the creation of composite plastics. For the same weight, KEVLAR is five times stronger than steel, yet more flexible. For the manufacture of the so-called "soft bulletproof vests" KEVLAR XP is used, such "armor" consists of a dozen layers of soft fabric that can slow down piercing and cutting objects and even low-energy bullets.
NOMEX- another DuPont development. Refractory fiber from meta-aramid was developed back in the 60s. last century and first introduced in 1967.
Polybenzoimidazole (PBI) - a synthetic fiber with an extremely high melting point that is nearly impossible to ignite. Used for protective materials.
branded material Rayon is recycled cellulose fibers. Since Rayon is based on natural fibers, it is neither synthetic nor natural.
SPECTRA- composite fiber manufactured by Honeywell. It is one of the strongest and lightest fibers in the world. Using proprietary SHIELD technology, the company has been producing ballistic protection for the military and police units based on SPECTRA SHIELD, GOLD SHIELD and GOLD FLEX materials for more than two decades. SPECTRA is a bright white polyethylene fiber that is resistant to chemical damage, light and water. According to the manufacturer, this material is stronger than steel and 40% stronger than aramid fiber.
TWARON- trade name for Teijin's durable heat-resistant para-aramid fiber. The manufacturer estimates that using the material to protect armored vehicles can reduce armor weight by 30–60% compared to armor steel. The Twaron LFT SB1 fabric, produced using proprietary lamination technology, consists of several layers of fibers located at different angles to each other and interconnected by a filler. It is used for the production of lightweight flexible body armor.
Ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), also called high molecular weight polyethylene - class of thermoplastic polyethylenes. Synthetic fiber materials under the brands DYNEEMA and SPECTRA are extruded from the gel through special dies that give the fibers the desired direction. The fibers consist of extra-long chains with a molecular weight of up to 6 million. UHMWPE is highly resistant to aggressive media. In addition, the material is self-lubricating and extremely resistant to abrasion - up to 15 times more than carbon steel. In terms of friction coefficient, ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene is comparable to polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon), but is more wear-resistant. The material is odorless, tasteless, non-toxic.
Combined armor
Modern combined armor can be used for personal protection, vehicle armor, naval vessels, aircraft and helicopters. Advanced technology and low weight allow you to create armor with unique characteristics. For example, Ceradyne, which recently became part of the 3M concern, entered into an $80 million contract with the US Marine Corps to supply 77,000 high-protection helmets (Enhanced Combat Helmets, ECH) as part of a unified program to replace protective equipment in the US Army, Navy and KMP. The helmet makes extensive use of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene instead of the aramid fibers used in the manufacture of previous generation helmets. Enhanced Combat Helmets are similar to the Advanced Combat Helmet currently in service, but thinner. The helmet provides the same protection against small arms bullets and shrapnel as the previous designs.
Sgt. Kyle Keenan shows close-range 9mm pistol bullet dents on his Advanced Combat Helmet, sustained in July 2007 during an operation in Iraq. Composite fiber helmet is able to effectively protect against small arms bullets and shell fragments.
A person is not the only thing that requires the protection of individual vital organs on the battlefield. For example, aircraft need partial armor to protect the crew, passengers and on-board electronics from fire from the ground and striking elements of the warheads of air defense missiles. In recent years, many important steps have been taken in this area: innovative aviation and ship armor has been developed. In the latter case, the use of powerful armor has not been widely used, but it is of decisive importance when equipping ships conducting operations against pirates, drug dealers and human traffickers: such ships are now being attacked not only by small arms of various calibers, but also by shelling from hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers.
Protection for large vehicles is manufactured by TenCate's Advanced Armor division. Her series of aviation armor is designed to provide maximum protection at the minimum weight to allow it to be mounted on aircraft. This is achieved by using the TenCate Liba CX and TenCate Ceratego CX armor lines, the lightest materials available. At the same time, the ballistic protection of the armor is quite high: for example, for TenCate Ceratego it reaches level 4 according to the STANAG 4569 standard and withstands multiple hits. In the design of armor plates, various combinations of metals and ceramics are used, reinforcement with fibers of aramids, high molecular weight polyethylene, as well as carbon and fiberglass. The range of aircraft using TenCate armor is very wide: from the Embraer A-29 Super Tucano light multifunctional turboprop to the Embraer KC-390 transporter.
TenCate Advanced Armor also manufactures armor for small and large warships and civilian vessels. Booking is subject to critical parts of the sides, as well as ship premises: weapons magazines, the captain's bridge, information and communication centers, weapons systems. The company recently introduced the so-called. tactical naval shield (Tactical Naval Shield) to protect the shooter on board the ship. It can be deployed to create an impromptu gun emplacement or removed within 3 minutes.
QinetiQ North America's LAST Aircraft Armor Kits take the same approach as mounted armor for ground vehicles. Parts of the aircraft that require protection can be strengthened within one hour by the crew, while the necessary fasteners are already included in the supplied kits. Thus, Lockheed C-130 Hercules, Lockheed C-141, McDonnell Douglas C-17 transport aircraft, as well as Sikorsky H-60 and Bell 212 helicopters, can be quickly modernized if the mission conditions require the possibility of firing from small arms. The armor withstands hit by an armor-piercing bullet of 7.62 mm caliber. Protection of one square meter weighs only 37 kg.
transparent armor
The traditional and most common vehicle window armor material is tempered glass. The design of transparent "armor plates" is simple: a layer of transparent polycarbonate laminate is pressed between two thick glass blocks. When a bullet hits the outer glass, the main impact is taken by the outer part of the glass "sandwich" and the laminate, while the glass cracks with a characteristic "web", well illustrating the direction of dissipation of kinetic energy. The polycarbonate layer prevents the bullet from penetrating the inner glass layer.
Bulletproof glass is often referred to as "bulletproof". This is an erroneous definition, since there is no glass of reasonable thickness that can withstand an armor-piercing bullet of 12.7 mm caliber. A modern bullet of this type has a copper jacket and a core made of a hard dense material - for example, depleted uranium or tungsten carbide (the latter is comparable in hardness to diamond). In general, the bullet resistance of tempered glass depends on many factors: caliber, type, bullet speed, angle of impact with the surface, etc., therefore, the thickness of bullet-resistant glass is often chosen with a double margin. At the same time, its mass also doubles.
PERLUCOR is a material with high chemical purity and outstanding mechanical, chemical, physical and optical properties.
Bulletproof glass has its well-known disadvantages: it does not protect against multiple hits and is too heavy. Researchers believe that the future in this direction belongs to the so-called "transparent aluminum". This material is a special mirror-polished alloy that is half the weight and four times stronger than tempered glass. It is based on aluminum oxynitride - a compound of aluminum, oxygen and nitrogen, which is a transparent ceramic solid mass. In the market, it is known under the brand name ALON. It is produced by sintering an initially completely opaque powder mixture. After the mixture melts (melting point of aluminum oxynitride - 2140°C), it is rapidly cooled. The resulting hard crystalline structure has the same scratch resistance as sapphire, i.e. it is virtually scratch-resistant. Additional polishing not only makes it more transparent, but also strengthens the surface layer.
Modern bullet-proof glasses are made in three layers: an aluminum oxynitride panel is located on the outside, then tempered glass, and everything is completed with a layer of transparent plastic. Such a “sandwich” not only perfectly withstands armor-piercing bullets from small arms, but is also able to withstand more serious tests, such as fire from a 12.7 mm machine gun.
Bullet-resistant glass, traditionally used in armored vehicles, even scratches sand during sandstorms, not to mention the impact on it of fragments of improvised explosive devices and bullets fired from AK-47s. Transparent "aluminum armor" is much more resistant to such "weathering". A factor holding back the use of such a remarkable material is its high cost: about six times higher than that of tempered glass. The "clear aluminium" technology was developed by Raytheon and is now offered under the name Surmet. At a high cost, this material is still cheaper than sapphire, which is used where particularly high strength (semiconductor devices) or scratch resistance (wristwatch glass) is needed. Since more and more production capacities are involved in the production of transparent armor, and the equipment allows the production of sheets of an ever larger area, its price may eventually decrease significantly. In addition, production technologies are constantly improving. After all, the properties of such a “glass”, which does not succumb to shelling from an armored personnel carrier, are too attractive. And if you remember how much "aluminum armor" reduces the weight of armored vehicles, there is no doubt: this technology is the future. For example: at the third level of protection according to the STANAG 4569 standard, a typical glazing area of 3 square meters. m will weigh about 600 kg. Such a surplus greatly affects the driving performance of an armored vehicle and, as a result, its survivability on the battlefield.
There are other companies involved in the development of transparent armor. CeramTec-ETEC offers PERLUCOR, a glass ceramic with high chemical purity and outstanding mechanical, chemical, physical and optical properties. The transparency of PERLUCOR material (over 92%) allows it to be used wherever tempered glass is used, while it is three to four times harder than glass, and also withstands extremely high temperatures (up to 1600 ° C), exposure to concentrated acids and alkalis.
IBD NANOTech transparent ceramic armor is lighter than tempered glass of the same strength - 56 kg/sq. m against 200
IBD Deisenroth Engineering has developed transparent ceramic armor comparable in properties to opaque samples. The new material is about 70% lighter than bulletproof glass and can, according to IBD, withstand multiple bullet hits in the same areas. The development is a by-product of the process of creating a line of armored ceramics IBD NANOTech. During the development process, the company created technologies that allow gluing a "mosaic" of a large area from small armored elements (Mosaic Transparent Armor technology), as well as laminate gluing with reinforcing substrates made of Natural NANO-Fibre proprietary nanofibers. This approach makes it possible to produce durable transparent armor panels, which are much lighter than traditional ones made of tempered glass.
The Israeli company Oran Safety Glass has found its way into transparent armor plate technology. Traditionally, on the inner, “safe” side of the glass armored panel, there is a reinforcing layer of plastic that protects against flying glass fragments inside the armored vehicle when bullets and shells hit the glass. Such a layer can gradually become scratched during inaccurate rubbing, losing transparency, and also tends to peel off. ADI's patented technology for strengthening armor layers does not require such reinforcement while observing all safety standards. Another innovative technology from OSG is ROCKSTRIKE. Although modern multi-layered transparent armor is protected from the impact of armor-piercing bullets and shells, it is subject to cracking and scratching from fragments and stones, as well as gradual delamination of the armor plate - as a result, the expensive armor panel will have to be replaced. ROCKSTRIKE technology is an alternative to metal mesh reinforcement and protects glass from damage by solid objects flying at speeds up to 150 m/s.
Infantry protection
Modern body armor combines special protective fabrics and hard armor inserts for additional protection. This combination can even protect against 7.62mm rifle bullets, but modern fabrics are already capable of stopping a 9mm pistol bullet on their own. The main task of ballistic protection is to absorb and dissipate the kinetic energy of a bullet impact. Therefore, the protection is made multi-layered: when a bullet hits, its energy is spent on stretching long, strong composite fibers over the entire area of the body armor in several layers, bending the composite plates, and as a result, the bullet speed drops from hundreds of meters per second to zero. To slow down a heavier and sharper rifle bullet traveling at a speed of about 1000 m / s, inserts of hard metal or ceramic plates are required along with fibers. The protective plates not only dissipate and absorb the energy of the bullet, but also blunt its tip.
A problem for the use of composite materials as protection can be sensitivity to temperature, high humidity and salty sweat (some of them). According to experts, this can cause aging and destruction of the fibers. Therefore, in the design of such bulletproof vests, it is necessary to provide protection from moisture and good ventilation.
Important work is also being done in the field of body armor ergonomics. Yes, body armor protects against bullets and shrapnel, but it can be heavy, cumbersome, restrict movement and slow down the movement of an infantryman so much that his helplessness on the battlefield can become almost a greater danger. But in 2012, the US military, where, according to statistics, one in seven servicemen is female, began testing body armor designed specifically for women. Prior to this, female military personnel wore male "armor". The novelty is characterized by a reduced length, which prevents chafing of the hips when running, and is also adjustable in the chest area.
Body armor using Ceradyne ceramic composite armor inserts on display at Special Operations Forces Industry Conference 2012
The solution to another drawback - the significant weight of body armor - can occur with the start of the use of the so-called. non-Newtonian fluids as "liquid armor". A non-Newtonian fluid is one whose viscosity depends on the velocity gradient of its flow. At the moment, most body armor, as described above, uses a combination of soft protective materials and hard armor inserts. The latter create the main weight. Replacing them with non-Newtonian fluid containers would both lighten the design and make it more flexible. At different times, the development of protection based on such a liquid was carried out by different companies. The British branch of BAE Systems even presented a working sample: packages with a special Shear Thickening Liquid gel, or bulletproof cream, had about the same protection indicators as a 30-layer Kevlar body armor. The disadvantages are also obvious: such a gel, after being hit by a bullet, will simply flow out through the bullet hole. However, developments in this area continue. It is possible to use the technology where impact protection is required, not bullets: for example, the Singapore company Softshell offers sports equipment ID Flex, which saves from injuries and is based on a non-Newtonian fluid. It is quite possible to apply such technologies to the internal shock absorbers of helmets or infantry armor elements - this can reduce the weight of protective equipment.
To create lightweight body armor, Ceradyne offers armor inserts made of hot-pressed boron and silicon carbides, into which fibers of a composite material are pressed in a special way. Such a material withstands multiple hits, while hard ceramic compounds destroy the bullet, and composites dissipate and dampen its kinetic energy, ensuring the structural integrity of the armor element.
There is a natural analogue of fiber materials that can be used to create extremely light, elastic and durable armor - the web. For example, the cobweb fibers of the large Madagascar Darwin spider (Caerostris darwini) have an impact strength up to 10 times higher than that of Kevlar threads. To create an artificial fiber similar in properties to such a web would allow the decoding of the spider silk genome and the creation of a special organic compound for the manufacture of heavy-duty threads. It remains to be hoped that biotechnologies, which have been actively developing in recent years, will someday provide such an opportunity.
Armor for ground vehicles
The protection of armored vehicles continues to increase. One of the most common and proven methods of protection against anti-tank grenade launchers is the use of an anti-cumulative screen. The American company AmSafe Bridport offers its own version - flexible and lightweight Tarian nets that perform the same functions. In addition to low weight and ease of installation, this solution has another advantage: in case of damage, the mesh can be easily replaced by the crew, without the need for welding and locksmithing in case of failure of traditional metal gratings. The company has signed a contract to supply the United Kingdom Department of Defense with several hundred of these systems in parts now in Afghanistan. The Tarian QuickShield kit works in a similar way, designed to quickly repair and fill gaps in traditional steel lattice screens of tanks and armored personnel carriers. QuickShield is delivered in a vacuum package, occupying a minimum habitable volume of armored vehicles, and is also now being tested in "hot spots".
AmSafe Bridport TARIAN anti-cumulative screens can be easily installed and repaired
Ceradyne, already mentioned above, offers DEFENDER and RAMTECH2 modular armor kits for tactical wheeled vehicles, as well as trucks. For light armored vehicles, composite armor is used, protecting the crew as much as possible under severe restrictions on the size and weight of the armor plates. Ceradyne works closely with armor manufacturers to give armor designers the opportunity to take full advantage of their designs. An example of such deep integration is the BULL armored personnel carrier, jointly developed by Ceradyne, Ideal Innovations and Oshkosh as part of the MRAP II tender announced by the US Marine Corps in 2007. One of its conditions was to protect the crew of the armored vehicle from directed explosions, the use of which has become more frequent while in Iraq.
The German company IBD Deisenroth Engineering, which specializes in the development and manufacture of defense equipment for military equipment, has developed the Evolution Survivability concept for medium armored vehicles and main battle tanks. The integrated concept uses the latest developments in nanomaterials used in the IBD PROTech line of protection upgrades and is already being tested. On the example of the modernization of the protection systems of the Leopard 2 MBT, this is an anti-mine reinforcement of the bottom of the tank, side protective panels to counter improvised explosive devices and roadside mines, protection of the roof of the tower from air blast ammunition, active protection systems that hit guided anti-tank missiles on approach, etc.
BULL armored personnel carrier - an example of deep integration of Ceradyne protective technologies
The Rheinmetall concern, one of the largest manufacturers of weapons and armored vehicles, offers its own ballistic protection upgrade kits for various vehicles of the VERHA series - Versatile Rheinmetall Armor, "Rheinmetall Universal Armor". The range of its application is extremely wide: from armor inserts in clothing to the protection of warships. Both the latest ceramic alloys and aramid fibers, high molecular weight polyethylene, etc. are used.
Loading...
