Reservation of modern domestic tanks
A. Tarasenko
Multi-layer combined armor
In the 50s, it became clear that further improvement in tank protection was not possible only by improving the characteristics of armored steel alloys. This was especially true for protection against 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, steel armor can be replaced with a layer of sand sandwiched between two thin sheets of iron.
In 1957, research was carried out at VNII-100 to assess the anti-cumulative resistance of all domestic tanks, such as serial production, and prototypes. The assessment of tank protection was carried out based on the calculation of their firing by a domestic non-rotating cumulative 85-mm projectile (in its armor penetration it was superior to foreign cumulative projectiles of 90 mm caliber) at various heading angles provided for by the TTTs in force at that time. The results of this research formed the basis for the development of TTT to protect tanks from cumulative weapons. Calculations performed in the research and development work showed that the most powerful armor protection was possessed by the experimental heavy tank Object 279 and the medium tank Object 907.
Their protection ensured non-penetration by a cumulative 85-mm projectile with a steel funnel within the heading angles: along the hull ±60", turret - + 90". To ensure protection from this type of projectile for the remaining tanks, 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.
Increasing the thickness of the armor to ensure the anti-cumulative resistance of tanks and, accordingly, their mass by the above values was unacceptable. The specialists of the VNII-100 branch saw a solution to the problem of reducing the weight of armor in the use of fiberglass and light alloys based on aluminum and titanium in the armor, as well as their combination with steel armor.
As part of combined armor, aluminum and titanium alloys were used for the first time in the design of armor protection for a tank turret, in which a specially designed 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(due to the impossibility of ensuring a critical cooling rate when hardening an aluminum alloy in combined system with steel). The “steel + aluminum” option provided, with equal anti-cumulative resistance, a reduction in the weight of armor by half compared to conventional steel.
In 1959, the bow of the hull and 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 in the event of repeated hits from armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles - the mutual support of the layers was lost. Therefore, in the future, tests were carried out on three-layer armor barriers “steel + aluminum + steel”, “titanium + aluminum + titanium”. The weight gain decreased somewhat, but still remained quite significant: 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 technical project(April 1961) of the “product 432” tank, two filler options were initially considered:
· Steel armor casting with ultraviolet inserts with an initial base horizontal thickness of 420 mm with equivalent anti-cumulative protection of 450 mm;
· cast turret, consisting of a steel armor base, an aluminum anti-cumulative jacket (poured after casting the steel hull) and outer steel armor and aluminum. The total maximum wall thickness of this tower is ~500 mm and is equivalent to an anti-cumulative protection of ~460 mm.
Both turret options provided more than one ton of weight savings compared to an all-steel turret of equal strength. Production T-64 tanks were equipped with a turret filled with aluminum.
Both turret options provided more than one ton of weight savings compared to an all-steel turret of equal strength. The serial “product 432” tanks were equipped with a turret filled with aluminum. As experience accumulated, a number of shortcomings of the turret were revealed, primarily related to its large dimensions and thickness of the frontal armor. Subsequently, 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 initially considered version of the turret with ultra-forex inserts (balls), providing the specified durability with a smaller overall 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, and various variants of armor barriers were tested. Samples (“sectors”) were cast and tested with 85-mm cumulative and 100-mm armor-piercing shells
combined armor “steel+aluminum+steel”. To eliminate the “squeezing out” of aluminum inserts from the body of the turret, it was necessary to use special jumpers that prevented the “squeezing out” of aluminum from the cavities of the steel turret. The T-64 tank became the world’s first production tank to have a fundamentally new protection adequate to new weapons . Before the advent of the Object 432 tank, all armored vehicles had monolithic or composite armor.
Fragment of a drawing of the tank turret object 434 indicating the thickness of steel barriers and filler
Read more about the armor protection of the T-64 in the material - Protection of 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 for the upper frontal part of the hull (A) and the front part of the turret (B)
experimental medium tank "Object 432". The armored design provided protection from the effects of cumulative ammunition.
The upper frontal sheet of the “product 432” body 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 estimated resistance from cumulative ammunition was 450 mm. The front roof of the hull was made of armor 45 mm thick and had flaps - “cheekbones” located at an angle of 78 ° 30 to the vertical. The use of fiberglass of the selected thickness also provided reliable (exceeding TTT) anti-radiation protection. The absence of a back plate after the fiberglass layer in the technical design shows the complex search for the correct technical solutions for creating an optimal three-barrier barrier, which developed later.
Later, this design was abandoned in favor of a simpler design without “chines”, 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 the turret with steel inserts (1967-1970), and later with a filler of ceramic balls (horizontal thickness 450 mm) made it possible to provide protection from BPS (with armor penetration 120 mm/60° from a range of 2 km) at a distance of 0.5 km and from KS (piercing 450 mm) with an increase in armor weight by 2 tons compared to the T-62 tank.
Scheme technological process castings of the “object 432” turret with cavities for aluminum filler. When fired, the turret with combined armor provided complete protection from 85-mm and 100-mm cumulative shells, 100-mm armor-piercing blunt-headed shells and 115-mm subcapular shells at firing angles of ±40°, as well as protection from 115- mm of a cumulative projectile at a heading angle of ±35°.
High-strength concrete, glass, diabase, ceramics (porcelain, ultra-porcelain, uralite) and various fiberglass plastics were tested as fillers. Of the tested materials, the best characteristics were found in liners made of high-strength ultra-porcelain (the specific blast-extinguishing ability is 2-2.5 times higher than that of armor steel) and AG-4S fiberglass. These materials were recommended for use as fillers in combined armor barriers. The weight gain when using combined armor barriers compared to monolithic steel ones was 20-25%.
T-64A
In the process of improving the combined turret protection using aluminum filler, they abandoned it. 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. Jerusalemsky developed a tower design using high-hard steel inserts intended for the manufacture of projectiles. These inserts, subjected to heat treatment using the method of differential isothermal hardening, had a particularly hard core and relatively less hard, but more plastic outer surface layers. The manufactured experimental turret with high-hardness inserts showed even better resistance results during shelling than with filled-in ceramic balls.
The disadvantage of a turret with high-hard inserts was the insufficient survivability of the welded joint between the support sheet and the turret support, which, when hit by an armor-piercing discarding projectile, was destroyed without penetration.
In the process of manufacturing a pilot batch of turrets with high-hard inserts, it turned out that it was impossible to ensure the minimum required impact strength (high-hard inserts from the manufactured batch resulted in increased brittle fracture and penetration during shell fire). Further work in this direction was abandoned.
(1967-1970)
In 1975, a turret with corundum filler developed by VNIITM was adopted for service (in production since 1970). The turret is armored with 115 cast steel armor, 140 mm ultra-porcelain balls and a rear wall of 135 mm steel with an inclination angle of 30 degrees. Casting technology towers with ceramic filler was developed 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 plants, together with VNII-100 and its Moscow branch, developed hull options with combined armor for tanks with guided missile weapons: “Object 287”, “Object 288”, “Object 772” and "Object 775".
Corundum ball
Tower with corundum balls. Frontal protection dimensions 400…475 mm. Turret rear -70 mm.
Subsequently, the armor protection of Kharkov tanks was improved, including in the direction of using more advanced barrier materials, so from the late 70s on the T-64B, BTK-1Sh type steels made by electroslag remelting were used. On average, the durability of an equal-thickness sheet obtained by ESR is 10...15 percent greater than that of armor steels of increased hardness. During mass production until 1987, the turret was also improved.
T-72 "Ural"
The armor of the T-72 Ural VLD was similar to that of the T-64. The first series of the tank used turrets directly converted from T-64 turrets. Subsequently, a monolithic turret made of cast armor steel was used, with a dimension of 400-410 mm. Monolithic turrets provided satisfactory resistance against 100-105 mm armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles(BPS) , but the anti-cumulative resistance of these towers in terms of protection against projectiles of the same calibers 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 frontal part of the hull was strengthened. This was achieved by redistributing the thickness of the steel armor plates to increase the thickness of the rear plate. Thus, the thickness of the VLD was 60 mm steel, 105 mm STB and a back sheet 50 mm thick. However, the booking size remains the same.
The turret armor has undergone major changes. In mass production, rods made of non-metallic molding materials, fastened before pouring with metal reinforcement (so-called sand rods), were used as filler.
T-72A turret with sand rods,
Also used on export versions of the T-72M1 tank
photo http://www.tank-net.com
In 1976, at UVZ there were attempts to produce turrets used on the T-64A with lined corundum balls, but they failed to master such technology. This required new production capacities 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 turret from the BPS of the T-64A tank exceeded that of the T-72 by 10%, and the anti-cumulative resistance was higher by 15...20%.
Frontal part of T-72A with redistribution of thicknesses
and an increased protective back layer.
As the thickness of the back sheet increases, the resistance of the three-layer barrier increases.
This is a consequence of the fact that a deformed projectile acts on the rear armor, partially destroyed in the first steel layer
and lost not only speed, but also the original shape of the head part.
The weight of three-layer armor required to achieve the level of resistance equivalent to the weight of steel armor decreases as the thickness decreases
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 anti-ballistic resistance of a three-layer barrier (I.I. Terekhin, Research Institute of Steel) .
Frontal part 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 thickness ratio of three-barrier armor similar to that proposed for the T-72A.
In 1969, a team of authors from three enterprises proposed a new anti-ballistic armor of the BTK-1 brand with increased hardness (dot = 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 begin introducing it into tank production.
The results of testing stamped sides 80 mm thick made of BTK-1 steel showed that they are equivalent in durability to serial sides 85 mm thick. This type of steel armor was used in the manufacture of the hulls of the T-80B and T-64A(B) tanks. BTK-1 is also used in the design of the filler package in the turret of the T-80U (UD), T-72B tanks. BTK-1 armor has increased projectile resistance against sub-caliber projectiles at firing angles of 68-70 (5-10% more compared to serial armor). With increasing thickness, the difference between the resistance of 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 made of high-hardness steel, which were unsuccessful. As a result, a turret design was chosen from cast armor of medium hardness with a sand core similar to the turret of the T-72A tank, while the thickness of the armor of the T-80B turret was increased; such turrets were accepted for mass production in 1977.
Further strengthening 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 mounted 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 turrets similar to the T-80U type, but with the old control system and complex guided weapons"Cobra".
Tanks T-64, T-64A, T-72A and T-80B Based on the criteria of production technology and level of durability, it can be conditionally classified as the first generation of combined armor for domestic tanks. This period ranges from the mid-60s to the early 80s. The armor of the tanks mentioned above generally ensured high resistance against the most common anti-tank weapons (ATWs) of the specified period. In particular, resistance against armor-piercing projectiles of the type (BPS) and feathered armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles with a composite core of the type (OBPS). An example would be projectiles of the BPS L28A1, L52A1, L15A4 type and OBPS type M735 and BM22. Moreover, the development of the protection of domestic tanks was carried out precisely taking into account ensuring resistance from OBPS with the integral active part of the BM22.
But adjustments to this situation were made by data obtained as a result of shelling of these tanks obtained as trophies during the Arab-Israeli war of 1982, OBPS type M111 with a monoblock tungsten-based 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 range at an angle of 68° combined VLD armor of serial domestic tanks. This gives reason to believe that the M111 projectile was tested primarily to destroy the VLD of the T72 tank, taking into account its design features, while the BM22 projectile was tested against monolithic armor at an angle of 60 degrees.
In response to this, upon completion of the “Reflection” development work on tanks of the above types, during a major overhaul at the repair plants of the USSR Ministry of Defense, additional reinforcement of the upper frontal part was carried out on tanks since 1984. In particular, an additional 16 mm thick plate was installed on the T-72A, which provided an equivalent resistance of 405 mm from the M111 OBPS at a speed limit of 1428 m/s.
No less influential fighting in 1982 in the Middle East and on anti-bulking protection of tanks. From June 1982 to January 1983 During the implementation of the Kontakt-1 development work under the leadership of D.A. Rototaev (Steel Research Institute) carried out work on installing dynamic protection (RA) on domestic tanks. The incentive for this was the effectiveness of the Israeli Blazer-type remote sensing system demonstrated during combat operations. It is worth recalling that remote sensing 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 ISRAELI SHIELD WAS FORGED IN... THE USSR? .
Thus, since 1984, to improve tank protectionT-64A, T-72A and T-80B measures were taken within the framework of the OCR “Reflection” and “Contact-1”, which ensured their protection from the most common PTS foreign countries. During mass production, the T-80BV and T-64BV tanks already took these solutions into account 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 the selection of optimal thicknesses and hardness of the materials of the front and rear steel barriers. For example, an increase in the hardness of the steel face layer leads to a decrease in the anti-cumulative resistance of combined barriers installed at large design angles (68°). This occurs 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 whose production began in 1985, such as the T-80U, T-72B and T-80UD, new solutions were applied, which can conditionally classify them as the second generation of combined reservation implementation . The design of VLDs began to use a design with an additional inner layer (or layers) between a non-metallic filler. Moreover, the inner layer was made of steel of increased hardness.An increase in the hardness of the inner layer of steel composite 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 does not have a significant effect.
(steel+STB+steel+STB+steel).
On the new T-64BV tanks, additional hull VLD armor was not installed, since the new design was already in place
adapted for protection against new generation BPS - three layers of steel armor, between which are placed two layers of fiberglass, with a total thickness of 205 mm (60+35+30+35+45).
With a smaller overall thickness, the VLD of the new design was superior in resistance (without taking into account the explosive damage) against BPS to the VLD of the old design with an additional 30 mm sheet.
A similar VLD structure was used on the T-80BV.
There were two directions in creating new combined barriers.
The first developed at the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences (Lavrentiev Institute of Hydrodynamics, V. V. Rubtsov, I. I. Terekhin). This direction was a box-shaped (box-type slabs filled with polyurethane foam) or a cellular structure. The cellular barrier has increased anti-cumulative properties. Its principle of counteraction is that, due to phenomena occurring at the interface between two media, part of the kinetic energy of the cumulative jet, which initially turned into the head shock wave, is transformed into the kinetic energy of the medium, which re-interacts with the cumulative jet.
The second proposed by the Steel Research Institute (L.N. Anikina, M.I. Maresev, I.I. Terekhin). When a cumulative jet penetrates a combined barrier (steel plate - filler - thin steel plate), a dome-shaped bulging of the thin plate occurs, the top of the convexity moves in the direction normal to the rear surface of the steel plate. The indicated movement continues after breaking through the thin plate during the entire time the jet passes behind 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 penetration ability of the jet. Rubber, polyurethane, and ceramics were studied as fillers.
This type of armor is similar in its principles to British armor " Burlington", which was used on Western tanks in the early 80s.
Further development of the design and manufacturing technology of cast turrets consisted in the fact that the combined armor of the frontal and side parts of the turret was formed due to a cavity open at the top, into which a complex filler was mounted, closed on top with 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 filled with 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 (polyetherurethane), and steel inserts.
T-72B
The turret armor of the T-72 tank is of the “semi-active” type.In the front part 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 package of 20 30mm blocks, each consisting of 3 layers glued together. Block layers: 21 mm armor plate, 6 mm rubber layer, 3 mm metal plate. 3 thin metal plates are welded to the armor plate of each block, ensuring 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.
External view of the T-72 tank armor package with reflective sheets
And inserts of steel armor BTK-1
Photo of the package J. Warford. Journal of military order. May 2002
Operating principle of bags with reflective sheets
The VLD armor of the T-72B hull of the first modifications consisted of composite armor made of medium and high-hardness steel; the increase in durability and the equivalent reduction in the armor-piercing effect of the ammunition is ensured by the flow of the jet at the media separation. A steel inlaid barrier is one of the simplest design solutions for a projectile protective device. Such a combined armor of several steel plates provided a 20% gain in weight compared to homogeneous armor with the same overall dimensions.
Subsequently, a more complex version of the reservation was used using “reflective sheets” on a principle of operation similar to the package used in the tank turret.
The Kontakt-1 remote sensing device was installed on the turret and hull of the T-72B. Moreover, the containers are installed directly on the tower without giving them an angle that provides maximum effective work DZ.As a result, the effectiveness of the remote sensing system installed on the tower was significantly reduced. A possible explanation is that when conducting state tests T-72AV in 1983, the tank being tested was hit due to the presence of areas not covered by containers, the DZ and designers tried to achieve better coverage of the tower.
Since 1988, the VLD and the tower have been reinforced with the 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: a plate, a spacer and a thin plate.
Penetration of a cumulative jet into armor with “reflective” sheets
X-ray image shows lateral displacements of jet particles
And the nature of the plate deformation
The jet, penetrating into the slab, creates stresses, leading first to local swelling of the back surface (a), and then to its destruction (b). In this case, significant swelling of the gasket and thin sheet occurs. When the jet pierces the gasket and the thin plate, the latter has already begun to move away from the back surface of the plate (c). Since there is a certain angle between the direction of movement 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 using “reflective” sheets can reach 40% compared to 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 peculiarity 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 ensured by optimal the ratio of the thicknesses of fiberglass filler and high-hardness steel plates.
The T-80U (T-80UD) tower has an outer wall thickness of 85...60 mm, a rear wall thickness of up to 190 mm. In the cavities open at the top, a complex filler was installed, which consisted of cellular cast blocks filled with polymer (PUM) installed in two rows and separated by a 20 mm steel plate. Behind the package there is a BTK-1 plate 80 mm thick.On the outer surface of the tower forehead within the heading angle + 35 installed solid V -shaped dynamic protection blocks "Contact-5". Early versions of the T-80UD and T-80U were equipped with the Kontakt-1 NKDZ.
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)
The VLD reservation is multi-obstacle. Since the early 1980s, several design options have been tested.
The principle of operation of packages with "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 was proposed by the Institute of Hydrodynamics of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences and is as follows.
Scheme of operation of cellular anti-cumulative protection:
1 - cumulative jet; 2- liquid; 3 - metal wall; 4 - compression shock wave;
5 - secondary compression wave; 6 - cavity collapse
Scheme of single cells: a - cylindrical, b - spherical
Steel armor with polyurethane (polyester urethane) filler
The results of studies of samples of cellular barriers in various design and technological designs were confirmed by full-scale tests when fired with cumulative projectiles. The results showed that the use of a cellular layer instead of fiberglass makes it possible to reduce the overall dimensions of the barrier by 15% and the weight by 30%. Compared to monolithic steel, a reduction in layer mass of up to 60% can be achieved while maintaining a similar size.
The principle of operation of "spall" type armor.
In the back part of the cellular blocks there are also cavities filled with polymer material. The principle of operation of this type of armor is approximately the same as cellular armor. Here, the energy of the cumulative jet is also used for protection. When the cumulative jet, moving, reaches the free rear surface of the obstacle, the elements of the obstacle at the free rear surface, under the influence of the shock wave, begin to move in the direction of the jet movement. If conditions are created under which the obstacle material moves toward the jet, then the energy of the obstacle elements flying from the free surface will be spent on destroying the jet itself. And such conditions can be created by manufacturing hemispherical or parabolic cavities on the rear surface of the barrier.
Some options for the upper frontal part of the T-64A, T-80 tank, a variant of the T-80UD (T-80U), T-84 and the development of a new modular VLD T-80U (KBTM)
T-64A turret filler with ceramic balls and T-80UD package options -
cellular casting (filler made of cellular cast blocks filled with polymer)
and metal-ceramic package
Further improvement of the design 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 projectile resistance have given a significantly less effect than similar developments on rolled armor. In particular, in the 80s, new steels of increased hardness were developed and ready for mass production: SK-2Sh, SK-3Sh. Thus, the use of towers with a rolled base made it possible to increase the protective equivalent of the tower base without increasing the mass. Such developments were undertaken by the Steel Research Institute together with design bureaus; the turret 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 ant turret of the improved T-72, T-80UD with a welded base
and metal-ceramic package, not used as standard
The tower filler package was made using ceramic materials and high-hardness steel or from a package based on steel plates with “reflective” sheets. Options for towers with removable modular armor for the frontal and side parts were being studied.
T-90S/A
In relation to tank turrets, one of the significant reserves for enhancing their anti-ballistic protection or reducing the mass of the steel base of the turret while maintaining the existing level of anti-ballistic protection is to increase the durability of the steel armor used for the turrets. The base of the T-90S/A turret has been manufactured made of medium hard steel armor, which significantly (by 10-15%) exceeds medium-hard cast armor in terms of resistance to projectiles.
Thus, with the same mass, a turret made of rolled armor can have higher projectile resistance than a turret made of cast armor and, in addition, if rolled armor is used for a turret, its projectile resistance can be further increased.
An additional advantage of a rolled turret is the ability to ensure higher precision in its manufacture, since in the manufacture of the cast armor base of the 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. Realization of the advantages of a rolled turret design 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 the general requirements for projectile resistance and survivability of the tower as a whole. The welded joints of the T-90S/A turret are made with full or partial overlap 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, and the turret roof is welded from individual parts, which reduces the rigidity of the structure during high-explosive exposure.Mounted on the outer surface of the forehead of the tower V -shaped dynamic protection blocks.
Options for turrets with a welded base T-90A and T-80UD (with modular armor)
Other materials on armor:
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 “Tseykhgauz”, 2010.
M.V. Pavlova and I.V. Pavlova “Domestic armored vehicles 1945-1965” - TV No. 3 2009
Theory and design of the tank. - T. 10. Book. 2. Comprehensive protection / Ed. Doctor of Technical Sciences, Prof. P. P . Isakova. - M.: Mechanical Engineering, 1990.
J. Warford. The first look at Soviet special armor. Journal of military order. May 2002.
All protective structures of armored clothing can be divided into five groups, depending on the materials used:
Textile (woven) armor based on aramid fibers
Today, ballistic fabrics based on aramid fibers are the base material for civilian and military body armor. Ballistic fabrics are produced in many countries around the world and differ significantly not only in names, but also in characteristics. Abroad, these are Kevlar (USA) and Tvaron (Europe), and in Russia - a whole range of aramid fibers, noticeably different from American and European ones in their chemical properties.
What is aramid fiber? Aramid looks like thin yellow web fibers (other colors are very rarely used). Aramid threads are woven from these fibers, and ballistic fabric is subsequently made from the threads. Aramid fiber has very high mechanical strength.
Most experts in the field of armored clothing development believe that the potential of Russian aramid fibers has not yet been fully realized. For example, armor structures made from our aramid fibers are superior to foreign ones in the “protection characteristics/weight” ratio. And some composite structures in this indicator are no worse than structures made from ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE). At the same time, the physical density of UHMWPE is 1.5 times less.
Ballistic fabric brands:
- Kevlar ® (DuPont, USA)
- Twaron ® (Teijin Aramid, Netherlands)
- SVM, RUSAR® (Russia)
- Heracron® (Colon, Korea)
Metal armor based on steel (titanium) and aluminum alloys
After a long break since medieval armor, armor plates were made of steel and were widely used during the First and Second World Wars. Light alloys began to be used later. For example, during the war in Afghanistan, body armor with elements made of aluminum and titanium armor became widespread. Modern armor alloys make it possible to reduce the thickness of panels by two to three times compared to panels made of steel, and, therefore, reduce the weight of the product by two to three times.
Aluminum armor. Aluminum is superior to steel armor, providing protection against armor-piercing bullets of 12.7 or 14.5 mm caliber. In addition, aluminum is provided with a raw material base, is more technologically advanced, welds well and has unique anti-fragmentation and mine protection.
Titanium alloys. The main advantage of titanium alloys is considered to be a combination of corrosion resistance and high mechanical properties. To obtain a titanium alloy with predetermined properties, it is alloyed with chromium, aluminum, molybdenum and other elements.
Ceramic armor based on composite ceramic elements
Since the early 80s, ceramic materials have been used in the production of armored clothing, which are superior to metals in terms of “degree of protection/weight” ratio. However, the use of ceramics is only possible in combination with ballistic fiber composites. At the same time, it is necessary to solve the problem of low survivability of such armored panels. It is also not always possible to effectively realize all the properties of ceramics, since such an armored panel requires careful handling.
The Russian Ministry of Defense outlined the task of high survivability of ceramic armor panels back in the 1990s. Until then, ceramic armor panels were much inferior to steel ones in this regard. Thanks to this approach today Russian troops have a reliable design - armor panels of the Granit-4 family.
The bulk of body armor abroad consists of composite armor panels, which are made from solid ceramic monoplates. The reason for this is that for a soldier during combat operations, the chance of being hit repeatedly in the area of the same armor panel is extremely small. Secondly, such products are much more technologically advanced, i.e. less labor-intensive, which means their cost is much lower than the cost of a set of smaller tiles.
Elements used:
- Aluminum oxide (corundum);
- Boron carbide;
- Silicon carbide.
Composite armor based on high-modulus polyethylene (laminated plastic)
Today, the most advanced type of armored clothing from classes 1 to 3 (in terms of weight) are considered to be armor panels based on UHMWPE fibers (ultra-high modulus polyethylene).
UHMWPE fibers have high strength, catching up with aramid fibers. Ballistic products made from UHMWPE have positive buoyancy and do not lose their protective properties, unlike aramid fibers. However, UHMWPE is completely unsuitable for making body armor for the army. In military conditions, there is a high probability of body armor coming into contact with fire or hot objects. Moreover, body armor is often used as a bedding. And UHMWPE, no matter what properties it has, still remains polyethylene, the maximum operating temperature of which does not exceed 90 degrees Celsius. However, UHMWPE is excellent for making police vests.
It is worth noting that a soft armor panel made of a fiber composite is not capable of providing protection against bullets with a carbide or heat-strengthened core. The maximum that a soft fabric structure can provide is protection from pistol bullets and shrapnel. To protect against bullets from long-barreled weapons, it is necessary to use armor panels. When exposed to a bullet from a long-barreled weapon, a high concentration of energy is created in a small area, moreover, such a bullet is a sharp destructive element. Soft fabrics in bags of reasonable thickness will no longer hold them. That is why it is advisable to use UHMWPE in a design with a composite base of armor panels.
The main suppliers of UHMWPE aramid fibers for ballistic products are:
- Dainima® (DSM, Netherlands)
- Spectra® (USA)
Combined (multilayer) armor
Materials for combined type body armor are selected depending on the conditions in which the armored clothing will be used. NIB developers combine the materials used and use them together - in this way they have been able to significantly improve the protective properties of armored clothing. Textile-metal, ceramic-organoplastic and other types of combined armor are now widely used all over the world.
The level of protection of armored clothing varies depending on the materials used in it. However, today a decisive role is played not only by the materials themselves for body armor, but also by special coatings. Thanks to advances in nanotechnology, models are already being developed whose impact resistance is greatly increased while significantly reducing thickness and weight. This possibility arises due to the application of a special gel with nanoparticles to hydrophobized Kevlar, which increases the resistance of Kevlar to dynamic impact by five times. Such armor allows you to significantly reduce the size of the body armor while maintaining the same protection class.
Read about the classification of PPE.
Future war scenarios, including lessons learned in Afghanistan, will create asymmetrical and mixed challenges for soldiers and their equipment. 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 in one short article. Let us take a look at the latest innovations in this area and outline the main directions of their development. Composite fiber is the basis for creating composite materials. The strongest structural materials today are 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 chemically bonding either para-aramid fibers or high-strength polyethylene.
Aramid - a class of heat-resistant and durable synthetic fibers. The name comes from the phrase “aromatic polyamide”. In such fibers, chains of molecules are strictly oriented in a certain direction, which makes it possible to control their mechanical characteristics.
These also include meta-aramids (for example, NOMEX). The majority are copolyamides, known under the Technora brand, produced by the Japanese chemical concern Teijin. Aramids allow a greater variety of fiber directions compared to UHMWPE. Para-aramid fibers such as KEVLAR, TWARON and Heracron have excellent strength at minimum weight.
High tenacity polyethylene fiber DYNEEMA manufactured by DSM Dyneema, is considered the most durable in the world. It is 15 times stronger than steel and 40% stronger than aramids for the same weight. This is the only composite capable of protecting against a 7.62 mm AK-47 bullet.
KEVLAR- a well-known registered trademark of para-aramid fiber. Developed by DuPont in 1965, the fiber is produced in the form of threads or fabrics that are used as a base in the creation of composite plastics. At the same weight, KEVLAR is five times stronger than steel, while being more flexible. For the manufacture of so-called “soft body armor”, KEVLAR XP is used; such “armor” consists of a dozen layers of soft fabric that can slow down piercing objects and even low-energy bullets.
NOMEX- another DuPont development. Fire-resistant meta-aramid fiber was developed back in the 60s. last century and was first introduced in 1967.
Polybenzoimidazole (PBI) - a synthetic fiber with an extremely high melting point that is virtually impossible to set on fire. Used for protective materials.
Branded material Rayon is a recycled cellulose fiber. 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 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 - a trade name for durable heat-resistant para-aramid fiber manufactured by Teijin. According to the manufacturer, the use of the material to protect armored vehicles can reduce the weight of armor by 30–60% compared to armor steel. 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 filler. It is used to produce 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 DYNEEMA and SPECTRA brands are extruded from the gel through special dies that give the fibers the desired direction. The fibers consist of ultra-long chains with a molecular weight reaching 6 million. UHMWPE is highly resistant to aggressive environments. 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 and non-toxic.
Combined armor
Modern combined armor can be used for personal protection, armor Vehicle, naval vessels, airplanes and helicopters. Advanced technologies and low weight make it possible to create armor protection with unique characteristics. For example, Ceradyne, which recently became part of the 3M concern, signed a contract worth $80 million with the Corps Marine Corps USA for the supply of 77 thousand highly protected helmets (Enhanced Combat Helmets, ECH) as part of a unified program to replace protective equipment in the US Army, Navy and Marine Corps. 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, but thinner than, the Advanced Combat Helmet currently in service. The helmet provides the same protection from bullets small arms and fragments, as the previous samples.
Sergeant Kyle Keenan shows dents from close-range 9mm pistol rounds on his Advanced Combat Helmet sustained in July 2007 during a mission in Iraq. A helmet made of composite fiber can effectively protect against small arms bullets and shell fragments.
Man is not the only thing that requires the protection of individual vital organs on the battlefield. For example, aircraft require partial armor to protect the crew, passengers and on-board electronics from fire from the ground and damaging elements of air defense missile warheads. IN last years Many important steps have been taken in this area: innovative aircraft and ship armor have been developed. In the latter case, the use of powerful armor has not become widespread, but is crucial when equipping ships conducting operations against pirates, drug traffickers and human traffickers: such ships are now subject to attacks not only from small arms of various calibers, but also to shelling from hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers.
TenCate's Advanced Armor division manufactures protection for large vehicles. Its aircraft armor series is designed to provide maximum protection at a minimum weight for installation on aircraft. This is achieved by using the TenCate Liba CX and TenCate Ceratego CX armor lines - the lightest existing materials. 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 can withstand multiple hits. The design of armor plates uses various combinations of metals and ceramics, reinforcement with aramid fibers, high molecular weight polyethylene, as well as carbon and fiberglass. The range of aircraft using TenCate armor is very wide: from the lightweight multifunctional turboprop Embraer A-29 Super Tucano to the Embraer KC-390 transport aircraft.
TenCate Advanced Armor also manufactures armor for small and large warships and civilian vessels. Critical parts of the sides, as well as ship premises, are subject to armor: weapons cellars, captain's bridge, information and communication centers, weapons systems. Recently the company 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 improvised firing point or removed within 3 minutes.
LAST aircraft armor kits from QinetiQ North America follow the approach used in ground vehicle mounted armor. Parts aircraft, requiring 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 upgraded if mission conditions require the possibility of small arms fire. The armor can withstand hits from 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 reservation 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, and the glass cracks into 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 called "bulletproof". This is an erroneous definition, since there is no glass of reasonable thickness that can withstand a 12.7 mm armor-piercing bullet. A modern bullet of this type has a copper shell 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., so 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 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. It is known in the market under the brand name ALON. It is produced by sintering an initially completely opaque powder mixture. After the mixture melts (the melting point of aluminum oxynitride is 2140°C), it is sharply cooled. The resulting hard crystal structure has the same scratch resistance as sapphire, meaning it is virtually scratch-resistant. Additional polishing not only makes it more transparent, but also strengthens the surface layer.
Modern bulletproof glass is made of three layers: on the outside there is a panel made of aluminum oxynitride, then there is tempered glass, and the whole thing ends with a layer of transparent plastic. Such a “sandwich” not only perfectly withstands hits from armor-piercing bullets from small arms, but is also capable of withstanding 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 his exposure to fragments from improvised explosive devices and bullets fired from an AK-47. Transparent “aluminum armor” is much more resistant to such “weathering”. A factor limiting the use of such a wonderful material is its high cost: approximately six times higher than that of tempered glass. The technology for producing "transparent aluminum" was developed by Raytheon and is now offered under the name Surmet. Despite its high cost, this material is still cheaper than sapphire, which is used where particularly high strength (semiconductor devices) or scratch resistance (glass) is needed. wristwatch). Since more and more production capacity is used to produce transparent armor, and equipment allows the production of sheets of an ever larger area, its price may ultimately decrease significantly. In addition, production technologies are constantly being improved. After all, the properties of such “glass”, which does not succumb to machine gun fire 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 the armored vehicle and, ultimately, its survivability on the battlefield.
There are other companies developing transparent armor. CeramTec-ETEC offers PERLUCOR, a glass ceramic with high chemical purity and outstanding mechanical, chemical, physical and optical properties. The transparency of the 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) and exposure to concentrated acids and alkalis.
Transparent ceramic armor IBD NANOTech is lighter in weight than tempered glass of the same strength - 56 kg/sq. m versus 200
IBD Deisenroth Engineering has developed transparent ceramic armor comparable in properties to opaque samples. New material It is approximately 70% lighter than armored 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 make it possible to glue a “mosaic” of a large area from small armored elements (Mosaic Transparent Armor technology), as well as laminate the gluing with reinforcing substrates made of proprietary Natural NANO-Fibre nanofibers. This approach makes it possible to produce durable transparent armored panels, which are much lighter than traditional tempered glass.
The Israeli company Oran Safety Glass has found its way into the technology of manufacturing transparent armor plates. Traditionally, on the inner, “safe” side of the glass armored panel there is a reinforcing layer of plastic, which protects against glass fragments flying into the armored vehicle when bullets and shells hit the glass. Such a layer can gradually become covered with scratches due to careless wiping, losing its transparency, and also tends to peel off. ADI's patented technology for strengthening armor layers does not require such reinforcement while complying with all safety standards. Other innovative technology from OSG - ROCKSTRIKE. Although modern multi-layer transparent armor is protected from impacts from armor-piercing bullets and shells, it is susceptible 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 hard objects flying at speeds of up to 150 m/s.
Protection of infantrymen
Modern body armor combines special protective fabrics and hard armor inserts for additional protection. This combination can even protect against 7.62 mm rifle bullets, but modern fabrics are already capable of stopping a 9 mm 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’s speed drops from hundreds of meters per second to zero. To slow down a heavier, sharper rifle bullet traveling at speeds of about 1000 m/s, inserts of hard metal or ceramic plates are required along with the fibers. Shield plates not only dissipate and absorb the bullet's energy, but also dull the bullet's tip.
The problem with using 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, the design of such body armor must provide protection from moisture and good ventilation.
Important work is also being carried out in the field of ergonomics of body armor. Yes, body armor protects against bullets and shrapnel, but it can be heavy, bulky, restrict movement and slow down the infantryman's movement so much that his helplessness on the battlefield can become almost a greater danger. But in 2012, the US armed forces, where, according to statistics, one in seven military personnel is female, began testing body armor designed specifically for women. Before this, female soldiers wore men's "armor". The new product has a reduced length, which prevents chafing on the thighs when running, and is also adjustable in the chest area.
Body armor using ceramic composite armor inserts from Ceradyne is on display at the 2012 Special Operations Forces Industry Conference
The solution to another drawback - the significant weight of the body armor - can occur with the beginning of the use of the so-called. non-Newtonian fluids as “liquid armor”. A non-Newtonian fluid is one whose viscosity depends on the gradient of its flow velocity. 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. If they were replaced with containers with non-Newtonian fluid, this would both lighten the design and make it more flexible. At different times, different companies developed protection based on such a liquid. The British branch of BAE Systems even presented a working example: bags with a special Shear Thickening Liquid gel, or bulletproof cream, had approximately 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 protection from impact, rather than bullets, is required: for example, the Singaporean company Softshell offers ID Flex sports equipment, which saves from injury and is based on a non-Newtonian fluid. It is quite possible to use such technologies for the internal shock absorbers of helmets or elements of infantry armor - this can reduce the weight of protective equipment.
To create lightweight body armor, Ceradyne offers armor inserts made from hot-pressed boron and silicon carbides, into which composite fibers are pressed and oriented in a special way. Such a material can withstand 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 - spider web. For example, the fibers of the web of the large Madagascan Darwin spider (Caerostris darwini) have an impact strength that is up to 10 times higher than that of Kevlar threads. The creation of an artificial fiber similar in properties to such a web would be possible by deciphering the genome of spider silk and creating a special organic compound for the production of super-strong threads. We can only hope that biotechnology, which has been actively developing in recent years, will one day provide such an opportunity.
Armor for ground vehicles
The security of armored vehicles continues to improve. One of the common and proven methods of protection against anti-tank grenade launcher shells is the use of an anti-cumulative shield. The American company AmSafe Bridport offers its own version - flexible and lightweight Tarian meshes that perform the same functions. In addition to light weight and ease of installation, this solution has another advantage: in the event of damage, the mesh can be easily replaced by the crew, without requiring the use of welding and metalwork in the event of failure of traditional metal gratings. The company has entered into a contract to supply the United Kingdom Ministry of Defense with several hundred such systems to units currently in Afghanistan. The Tarian QuickShield kit, designed for rapid repair and sealing of gaps in traditional steel lattice screens of tanks and armored personnel carriers, works in a similar way. QuickShield is supplied in vacuum packaging, minimally occupying the habitable volume of armored vehicles, and is also currently being tested in “hot spots”.
AmSafe Bridport's TARIAN anti-cumulative screens can be easily installed and repaired
The Ceradyne company already mentioned above offers modular armor kits DEFENDER and RAMTECH2 for tactical wheeled vehicles, as well as trucks. For light armored vehicles, composite armor is used, maximizing the protection of the crew under strict restrictions on the size and weight of armor plates. Ceradyne works closely with armored vehicle manufacturers, giving its designers the opportunity to take full advantage of their developments. An example of such deep integration is the BULL armored personnel carrier, a joint development of Ceradyne, Ideal Innovations and Oshkosh as part of the MRAP II tender announced by the command of the US Marine Corps in 2007. One of its conditions was to ensure the protection of the crew of the armored vehicle from directed explosions, the use of which has become more frequent while in Iraq.
German company IBD Deisenroth Engineering, specializing in the development and manufacture of facility protection equipment military equipment, developed the Evolution Survivability concept for medium armored vehicles and main battle tanks. The comprehensive concept leverages the latest developments in nanomaterials used in the IBD PROTech line of protection upgrades and already being tested. Using the example of modernization of the protection systems of the Leopard 2 MBT, these are mine-resistant reinforcement of the tank bottom, side protective panels to counter improvised explosive devices and roadside mines, protection of the turret roof from air blast ammunition, active protection systems that destroy guided anti-tank missiles on approach, etc.
The BULL armored personnel carrier is 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 in the VERHA series - Versatile Rheinmetall Armour, “Rheinmetall Universal Armour”. The range of its application is extremely wide: from armored inserts in clothing to the protection of warships. Both the latest ceramic alloys and aramid fibers, high molecular weight polyethylene, etc. are used.
In an age when the partisan, armed hand grenade launcher, can destroy everything with a shot, starting from the main one battle tank and to the truck with the infantry, the words of William Shakespeare “And the gunsmiths are now held in high esteem” could not be more relevant. Armor technologies are being developed to protect all combat units, from the tank to the foot soldier.
Traditional threats that have always driven the development of vehicle armor include high-velocity kinetic projectiles fired from enemy tank guns, HEAT warheads from ATGMs, recoilless rifles and infantry grenade launchers. However, the combat experience of counterinsurgency and peacekeeping operations conducted by the armed forces showed that armor-piercing bullets from rifles and machine guns, along with the ubiquity of improvised explosive devices or roadside bombs, have become the main threat to light combat vehicles.
As a result, while many of the current armor developments are aimed at protecting tanks and armored personnel carriers, there is also growing interest in armor schemes for lighter vehicles, as well as improved types of body armor for personnel.
The main type of armor equipped with combat vehicles, is a thick sheet of metal, usually steel. In main battle tanks (MBT), it takes the form of a katana homogeneous armor(RHA - rolled homogeneous armour), although some lighter vehicles, such as the M113 armored personnel carrier, use aluminum.
Perforated steel armor consists of plates with a group of holes drilled perpendicular to the front surface and having a diameter less than half the diameter of the intended enemy projectile. The holes reduce the weight of the armor, while in terms of the ability to withstand kinetic threats, the reduction in armor performance in this case is minimal.
Improved steel
The search for the best type of armor continues. Improved steels make it possible to increase security while maintaining the original weight or, for lighter sheets, to maintain existing levels of protection.
The German company IBD Deisenroth Engineering worked with its steel suppliers to develop a new high-strength nitrogen steel. In comparative tests with existing Armox500Z High Hard Armor steel, it showed that protection against small arms ammunition caliber 7.62x54R can be achieved by using sheets having a thickness of about 70% of the thickness required when using the previous material.
In 2009, the British Defense Science and Technology Laboratory DSTL, in collaboration with Coras, announced armor steel. called Super Bainite. Manufactured using a process known as isothermal hardening, it does not require expensive additives to prevent cracking during the manufacturing process. The new material is created by heating steel to 1000°C, then cooling it to 250°C, then holding it at that temperature for 8 hours before finally cooling to room temperature.
In cases where the enemy does not have armor-piercing weapons, even a commercial steel plate can serve well. For example, Mexican drug gangs use heavily armored trucks equipped with steel plate to protect them from small arms fire. Given the widespread use of so-called "vehicles" in low-intensity conflicts in the developing world, trucks equipped with machine guns or light cannons, it would be surprising if armies did not come face to face with such armored "vehicles" during future unrest.
Composite armor
Composite armor, made up of layers of different materials such as metals, plastics, ceramics or air, has proven to be more effective than steel armor. Ceramic materials are fragile and when used alone provide only limited protection, but when combined with other materials they form a composite structure that has proven effective protection vehicles or individual soldiers.
The first composite material to become widely used was a material called Combination K. It was reported to consist of fiberglass between inner and outer sheets of steel; it was used on Soviet tanks T-64, which entered service in the mid-60s.
British-designed Chobham armor was originally installed in the British experimental tank FV 4211. It is classified for now, but, according to unofficial data, it consists of several elastic layers and ceramic tiles, enclosed in a metal matrix and glued to a base plate. It was used on the Challenger I and II tanks and on the M1 Abrams.
This class of technology may not be needed unless the attacker has sophisticated armor-piercing weapons. In 2004, a disgruntled American citizen equipped a Komatsu D355A bulldozer with a proprietary composite armor made from concrete sandwiched between steel sheets. The 300mm thick armor was impenetrable to small arms fire. It's probably just a matter of time before drug gangs and rebels equip their vehicles in a similar way.
Add-ons
Instead of equipping vehicles with ever thicker and heavier steel or aluminum armor, armies began to adopt various shapes hinged additional protection.
One well-known example of mounted passive armor based on composite materials is the Mexas modular expandable armor system (Modular Expandable Armor System). Developed by the German IBD Deisenroth Engineering, it was manufactured by Chempro. Hundreds of armor kits were produced for tracked and wheeled armored fighting vehicles, as well as wheeled trucks. The system was installed on the Leopard 2 tank, M113 armored personnel carrier and wheeled vehicles, such as the Renault 6 x 6 VAB and the German Fuchs vehicle.
The company has developed and began delivering its next system - Amap (Advanced Modular Armor Protection). It is based on modern steel alloys, aluminum-titanium alloys, nanometric steels, ceramics and nanoceramic materials.
Scientists from the aforementioned DSTL laboratory have developed an additional ceramic protection system that could be hung on cars. After this armor was developed for mass production by the British company NP Aerospace and received the designation Camac EFP, it was used in Afghanistan.
The system uses small hexagonal ceramic segments, the size, geometry and placement of which in the array were studied by the DSTL laboratory. The individual segments are held together by cast polymer and placed in a composite material with high ballistic characteristics.
The use of hinged reactive armor panels (reactive armor) to protect vehicles is well known, but the detonation of such panels can damage the vehicle and pose a threat to nearby infantry. As its name suggests, Slera (self-limiting explosive reactive armor) limits the spread of the effects of an explosion, but pays for it with slightly reduced performance. It uses materials that can be classified as passive; they are not as effective as fully detonable explosives. However, Slera can provide protection against multiple hits.
NERA (Non-Explosive Reactive Armor) takes this concept further and, being passive, offers the same protection as Slera, plus good characteristics protection against repeated damage against cumulative warheads. Non-Energetic Reactive Armor (non-energetic active-reactive armor) has further improved characteristics to combat cumulative warheads.
The invention relates to the development of means of protecting equipment from armor-piercing bullets.
Progress in the creation of highly effective lethal weapons and the resulting increase in requirements for armor protection led to the creation of multi-layer combined armor. The ideology of combined protection consists of a combination of several layers of dissimilar materials with priority properties, including a front layer made of extra-hard materials and a high-strength, energy-intensive back layer. Ceramics of the highest hardness category are used as materials for the front layer, and its task is reduced to the destruction of the hardened core due to the stresses arising during their high-speed interaction. The rear retaining layer is designed to absorb kinetic energy and block fragments formed as a result of the impact interaction of a bullet with ceramics.
There are known technical solutions designed to protect surfaces with complex geometric relief - US patents No. 5972819 A, 10.26.1999; No. 6112635 A, 09/05/2000, No. 6203908 B1, 03/20/2001; RF patent No. 2329455, 07/20/2008. What these solutions have in common is the use of small-sized ceramic elements in the frontal high-hard layer, usually in the form of bodies of revolution, the most common of which are elements in the form of cylinders. At the same time, the efficiency of ceramics is increased through the use of convex sloping ends on one or both sides of the cylinders. In this case, when meeting lethal weapon With oval ceramic surfaces, there is a mechanism that diverts or knocks down a bullet from its flight path, which significantly complicates the work of overcoming a ceramic barrier. In addition, the use of small-sized ceramics in this case ensures a higher level of survivability compared to the tiled version due to a significant reduction in the affected area and partial local repairability 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, the acoustic contact of the ceramic and back layers, which provides the possibility of partial transfer of elastic energy to the rear substrate.
Modern ideas about the mechanism of impact interaction between an armor-piercing core and combined protection are as follows. At the initial stage, when the core meets the armor, it does not penetrate into the ceramics 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 arise when braking against a ceramic barrier, and determined by the complex wave processes occurring during this process. The degree of destruction of the core is mainly determined by the interaction time until the ceramic is destroyed, 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 with its subsequent absorption and dissipation.
The technical solution is known, set forth in US patent No. 6497966 B2, December 24, 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 polymer winding material.
Essentially, in this case we're talking about about a two-layer composition of a destructive front layer, made of materials that differ in hardness. The recommendations of the authors of this technical solution propose using 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, due to their properties, serve as an active participant in the transfer of elastic energy to the rear layer.
A solution to the issues of interaction between the front and rear layers is proposed in the RF patent No. 2329455, July 20, 2008, which in its entirety common features is the closest analogue to the proposed invention and was chosen 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. Thus, at the initial stage of interaction with ceramics, an elastic wave precursor of destruction reaches its back surface and causes its movement.
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 effectiveness of protection due to the separate (phased) destruction of individual layers.
In the second option, the authors of the prototype propose placing an elastic layer between the layers, which should protect the ceramics from destruction when hitting 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 localization of energy in the fragile ceramics and its premature destruction.
The problem to be solved by the invention is to increase the armor resistance of combined armor.
The technical result of the invention is to increase the armor resistance of combined armor by increasing the density of acoustic contact between the layers.
The disadvantages of the prototype can be eliminated if the intermediate layer is made of a plastic material with certain properties, ensuring 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 back layer material.
In the presence of an intermediate layer made of a plastic material with a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 from the yield strength of the material of the back layer, in the process of moving the ceramic under the action of an elastic wave precursor, leaks and small gaps in the adjacent layers are eliminated due to the plastic deformation of the latter. In addition, under the action of stress waves, its density increases, and therefore 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 rear layer. As a result, due to the presence of an intermediate layer made of plastic material with a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 of the yield strength of the material of the back layer, the energy of impact interaction is distributed over all layers of the combined armor, while the efficiency of its operation increases significantly, since the interaction time before ceramic destruction increases, which, in turn, ensures more complete destruction of the high-hardness core.
An intermediate layer with a yield strength greater than 0.5 of the yield strength of the back layer does not have sufficient ductility and does not lead to the desired result.
Making an intermediate layer from a plastic material with a yield strength 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 occurs too intensely and the effect described above does not have on the mechanics of the interaction processes.
The proposed technical solution was tested in the testing center of NPO SM in St. Petersburg. The ceramic layer in the 200x200 mm prototype was made from AJI-1 grade corundum cylinders with a diameter of 14 mm and a height of 9.5 mm. The back layer was made of armor steel grade Ts-85 (yield strength = 1600 MPa) with a thickness of 3 mm. The intermediate layer was made of aluminum foil of the AMC brand (yield strength = 120 MPa) with a thickness of 0.5 mm. The ratio of the yield strengths of the intermediate and back layers is 0.075. The ceramic cylinders and all layers were glued together with a polyurethane-based polymer binder.
The results of full-scale tests showed that the proposed version of the combined armor protection has an armor resistance 10-12% higher compared to the prototype, where the intermediate layer is made of elastic material.
Multilayer combined armor containing a high-hard front layer of a ceramic block or elements connected by a binder into a monolith, a high-strength energy-intensive rear 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 fluidity of the back layer.
Similar patents:
The invention relates to reactive defense systems for protecting stationary and moving objects from damaging elements. The system is fixedly 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) relative 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, smelting an ingot of composition, wt.%: 3.0-6.0 Al; 2.8-4.5 V; 1.0-2.2 Fe; 0.3-0.7 Mo; 0.2-0.6 Cr; 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 glass when booking a car according to the first option is that the armored glass is installed behind the standard glass using a frame connected to the leading 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 dynamic type protective device, which includes elements with a body and a cover installed on a portion of the outer surface area of the object.
The group of inventions relates to the production of multilayer flexible armor materials for personal protective equipment. The method of multilayer armor to counteract the movement of a bullet or fragment is to alternate layers of high-modulus fibers with substances that enhance the resistance, which are placed in cells formed by layers of high-modulus fibers.
The invention relates to defense technology and is intended for testing front metal barriers - the basis of heterogeneous protective structures. The method includes firing the 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 solid penetrations. Determination of the maximum (minimum) speed of continuous penetrations, above which continuous penetrations are obtained, and below which only regular penetrations are obtained, against the background of the linear dependence of small values of the cavity depth h on the impact speed; benefits of quantized impact speeds; single-digit and small double-digit quantum numbers n for all speeds at which penetrations or cavities of increased depth were obtained. Achieved is the determination of the presence and benefits of quantized impact velocities, as well as increasing the accuracy of determining the minimum speed of solid penetrations. 4 ill.
The invention relates to military equipment, in particular to the design of armor protection designed to counteract cumulative ammunition. Dynamic protection contains a housing in which two parallel metal plates are located, detonators evenly spaced in the gap between the metal plates, and sensors for determining the coordinates of a penetrating cumulative jet mounted on the inner surfaces of the plates. In the gap between the metal plates there are vessels filled with liquid; detonators are rigidly fixed inside the vessels, made in the form of controlled electrical spark gaps, the power electrodes of which are connected by wires to the output of the electrical energy storage device, and the igniting 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. An increase in the reliability of dynamic protection is achieved. 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 comprising at least three layers glued together. The first and second layers of the sandwich include at least two prepregs and titanium alloy or aluminum alloy corners. The third layer of the protective composite has a honeycomb structure and is made of polyurethane. The first and second layers of the sandwich include monoliths formed from an angular profile. The corner profile shelves 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 connected to each other by at least two prepregs. Prepreg fibers contain corundum nanotubes on the surface of a fiber made of polyethylene thread, or glass fiber, or basalt thread, or fabric, or tow, or tape. An increase in protective properties is achieved due to the design of the armor. 3 salary 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 attached to the surface of the object. The protective device of an armored military object contains camouflage square elements-modules with a camouflage pattern in an assortment of colors and a choice of one or another individual four-position orientation that are removably attached to sections of the object’s armor. The device provides dynamic protection elements distributed over the surface of the object with removable square covers, and camouflage module elements are made in the form of rigid plates, interchangeable with the mentioned dynamic protection element covers, with the ability to quickly change the camouflage pattern by replacing and/or rearranging the dual-function ones, thus , module elements between dynamic protection elements. The efficiency of replacing camouflage means is achieved by specifically applying the principle of multifunctionality of machine components and parts to elements of dynamic protection and camouflage means. 5 salary 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 analysis of the absorption energy of a striking element is claimed, including a firing device located between the substrate and the firing device on the flight path of the striking element, a device for measuring the flight speed of the striking element at the output of the firing device, 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 flight of the striking element. The thermal imaging system is located in such a way that the field of view of its optical part covers the point of contact of the striking element and the composite armor barrier. The input of the device for registering the start of flight of the striking element is connected to the output of the device for measuring the speed of the striking element at the output of the firing device. The output of the device for registering the start 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 to increase the information content and reliability of test results. 9 ill.
The invention relates to the field of transport engineering. The energy-absorbing structure for protecting the underbody of ground vehicles consists of inner and outer layers of protection made of armor and/or structural alloys. There is a layer between the layers of protection. The layer is made in the form of two identical rows of U- or W-shaped energy-absorbing profiles, mirror-facing each other and shifted by half a step relative to each other. The end ribs of 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 installing an armored barrier in front of a plate made of plastic material and directing a striking element at the armored barrier at a given speed. Additionally, the temperature field of the surface of a composite armor barrier having minimal temperature anomalies is recorded, which is taken as anomalous, and the spatial resolution for recording the temperature field is determined based on the detection of minimal temperature anomalies with a spatial period determined by the size of the minimum temperature anomaly. After impact on a composite armor barrier with a striking element at a given speed, the temperature field is simultaneously measured in the area of contact of the striking element with the composite armor barrier, starting from the moment the striking element comes into contact with the composite armor barrier and on 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 condition of the composite armor barrier is determined according to the vector of characteristics of the armor barrier and its absorption energy by minimizing the functional along 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. The device for bench testing of composite armor barriers is disclosed. The technical result is to increase the information content and reliability of test results. 2 n. and 3 salary f-ly, 3 ill., 1 table.
The invention relates to a penetration-resistant product that can be used for the production of protective clothing, such as body armor, helmets, and shields or armor elements, as well as a method for its production. The article 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) woven fabric structure (3), and the thermoplastic fibers have a weight percentage relative to the weight of the woven fabric structure (3) ranging from 5 to 35%. Moreover, the thermoplastic fibers, preferably in the form of non-corrugated fabric (6), lie on the woven fabric (2) and are connected to the woven fabric (2) by the warp thread and/or weft thread of the woven fabric (2) made 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 fibers. The penetration resistant product has impact protection and/or anti-ballistic properties. 3 n. and 11 salary f-ly, 7 ill.
The invention relates to bulletproof composite products characterized by improved resistance to reverse deformation. The bulletproof product includes a vacuum panel, which consists of a first surface, a second surface and a housing. The vacuum panel limits at least part of the internal volume in which a vacuum is created. The bulletproof product includes at least one bulletproof base that is connected to the first or second surface of the vacuum panel. The bulletproof base comprises fibers and/or tapes having a tenacity of approximately 7 g/denier or greater and a tensile modulus of approximately 150 g/denier or greater. Also, the bulletproof base is made of a rigid material not based on fibers or tapes. Also provided is a method for forming a bulletproof article, wherein a bulletproof base is positioned to be on the outside of the bulletproof article, and said vacuum panel is positioned behind said at least one bulletproof base to absorb any shock wave that occurs as a result of the impact. striking element against the specified bulletproof base. EFFECT: weakening of the impact of shock waves generated as a result of the impact of the striking element, reducing the amount of back deformation, preventing or minimizing injuries from the extreme action of bullets. 3 n. and 7 salary files, 9 ill., 2 tables, 19 pr.
The group of inventions relates to the field of measurement 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 made of plastic material, directing a striking element at a given speed to the armor barrier, and determining the absorption energy of the striking element. From the moment of interaction between the armored barrier and the striking 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 video image field of the surface. The contour of the video image is superimposed on the temperature field, a new measured temperature field is formed, and the energy of absorption by the composite armor barrier is determined based on the analysis of the new temperature field. A device for quality control of composite armor barriers made of fabric for implementing the method is disclosed. An increase in the information content and reliability of control results is achieved. 2 n. and 1 salary f-ly, 5 ill.
The invention relates to the development of means of protecting equipment from armor-piercing bullets. Multilayer combined armor contains a high-hard front layer of a ceramic block or elements connected by a binder into a monolith, a high-strength energy-intensive rear layer and an intermediate layer. The intermediate layer is made of a plastic material having a yield strength of 0.05-0.5 from the yield strength of the back layer. An increase in the armor resistance of combined armor is achieved by increasing the density of acoustic contact between the layers.
