An optimization scheme for a multilayer armour module against 7.62 mm armour piercing projectile

Abstract

This study presents a methodology to find the optimal sequence and thicknesses of individual material layers in a multilayer armour module. The methodology is demonstrated with application to three different metal alloys: Armox-500T, Ti-6Al-4V and Al-2024. Numerical simulations are performed first to study the ballistic impact behaviour of these three materials using AUTODYN-3D code. The results of numerical simulations are compared with experimental results for validating the numerical models. Thereafter, a three-layer armour module consisting of these three materials is optimized to defeat 7.62 armour piercing projectile with minimum weight. The optimization process involves carrying a set of numerical simulations based on the design of experiment approach to generate a response surface for the ballistic performance of a composite module. A new ballistic performance parameter is introduced to measure the ballistic response of the module by combining depth of penetration and residual velocity of the projectile to bring uniformity between two cases of partial and complete penetration. The proposed parameter provides more information on ballistic performance. The response surface for ballistic performance parameter is generated in terms of thicknesses for six possible combinations of three material layers. The adequacy of the proposed optimization scheme is confirmed with ballistic experiments. The sequence Armox-500T/Ti-6Al-4V/Al-2024 with thicknesses 5.5, 8.5 and 13 mm, respectively, is found to be the best against 7.62 mm armour piercing projectile. Furthermore, the performance of each individual material is compared with an optimized three-layer armour module. The composite module is found to be weight efficient over Armox-500T, Al-2024 and provides better thickness efficiency over Al-2024. The weight efficiency and thickness efficiency of Ti-6Al-4V are found to be comparable to the composite module. This study emphasizes the necessity of developing new procedures to provide reliable estimates of design parameters for a multilayer armour module.

Evaluation of superior layer configuration of titanium Ti-6Al-4V and aluminium 2024-T3 against soft projectiles

“…The higher specific energy absorption of Al back layer results in higher ballistic resistance as compared to back Ti plate. The effect of using hard front layer effectively reduced the penetration capabilities of lead projectile whereas superior ductility of back Al plate converts the failure mechanism from localized shear defamation to global membrane stretching, hence promoting the energy absorption phenomenon in superior layer configuration (Paman et al, 2020).…”

“…The delamination of the multilayer metal-intermetallic target takes place due to the fracture of intermetallic layers in shock waves and the formation of main cracks in these layers. Paman et al (2020) performed ballistic tests on individual Armox-500T, Ti-6Al-4V and Al2024 target and multi-layer modules with different combinations of Armox-500T, Ti-6Al-4V and Al2024. It was observed that the combination Armox-500T/Ti-6Al-4V/Al2024 was found to be the best against 7.62 mm armour piercing projectiles.…”

A Review on Processing Routes, Properties, Applications, and Challenges of Titanium Metal Matrix Composite

“…Hrudayanjali Pathi, Tapan Kumar Mishri, et al  Layered composite material armor for helicopters has been developed with Titanium Alloy-Ceramics-Polymerbased lightweight composites which protect ammunitions to critical parts of the helicopters [77].…”

Optimisation of ballistic protection systems based on impact test/simulation correlation

“…Protection systems optimisations based on a numerical approach have successfully been performed by several authors. For example, Park et al [3] optimised thicknesses of a steel-aluminium two-layered armour impacted by a steel sphere based on finite element calculations; Paman et al [4] went further by numerically optimising a multi-layered armoured (steel, titanium, aluminium) based on layering order and layers thicknesses. However, these works are mostly limited to metallic materials or/and by initial assumptions, viz.…”