A NUMERICAL STUDY ON BALLISTIC PERFORMANCE OF RHA STEEL PLATE AGAINST 7.62 MM AP PROJECTILE

admin September 27, 2020

Authors:

P. Vasundhra,G. Moorthy,G. Boopathi, M. Vigneshwaran,K. Soosaimuthu,M.A. Muthu Manickam,V. Balaguru,

DOI NO:

https://doi.org/10.26782/jmcms.2020.09.00009

Keywords:

Ballistic impact, 7.62mm armour piercing projectile,high hardness steel,armour plate,finite element modelling,Johnson-Cook strength, failure,

Abstract

Rolled Homogenous Armour steel is an attractive candidate for use as armour because of its high hardness compared to other steel grades. The ballistic behavior of RHA is appraised using depth of penetration (DOP)and ballistic limit velocity V₅₀against 7.62mm armour piercing (AP) Projectile with the hardened steel core. The ballistic potency of the material is calculated by studying the influence of variation in thickness of plates and the projectile velocity. Velocity in the range of 400 to 854m/s is considered in the present analysis, based on the plate thickness. In the present study, a modified simple projectile simulation model which represents a 7.62 mm AP projectile is developed. Based on this, the DOP studies are done for three different plate thicknesses. Further, the ballistic limit velocity V₅₀ is obtained for various plate thicknessesby conducting a series of simulations using finite element based explicit dynamic solver.The obtained numerical results are compared with available benchmark experiments

Refference:

I. Banerjee A, Dhar S, Acharyya S, Datta D, Nayak N, Numerical simulation of the ballistic impact of armour steel plate by typical armour piercing projectile, Procedia Engineering 173 (2017), p. 347 – 354.

II. Binar, T., Švarc, J., Vyroubal, P., Kazda, T., Rolc, S., &Dvořák, A. (2018). The comparison of numerical simulation of projectile interaction with transparent armour glass for buildings and vehicles. Engineering Failure Analysis, 92, 121-139.

III. Buchar J, Voldrich J, Rolc S, Lisy J. Ballistic performance of dual hardness armor. Proceedings of 20th international symposium on ballistics, Orlando; 2002, p. 23–27.

IV. Chocron S., Anderson Jr. C.E., Grosch D.J., and Popular C.H. Impact of the 7.62 mm APM2 projectile against the edge of a metallic target, International Journal of Impact Engineering, 25:423–437, 2001.

V. Demir T, Ubeyli M, YıldırımRO,Investigation on the ballistic impact behavior of various alloys against 7.62 mm armor-piercing projectile, Mater Des 2008; 29, pp. 2009–16.

VI. Doig, A., 1998a, Military Metallurgy, IOM CommunicationsLtd., London, Great Britain, pp. 1123.

VII. Doig, A., 1998b, Military Metallurgy, IOM CommunicationsLtd., London, Great Britain, pp. 6166.

VIII. FarrokhniaNavid, SeyedMojtabaMovahedifar, Investigating the behavior of steel structures with honeycomb damper ‎against blast and earthquake loads, J. Mech. Cont.& Math. Sci., Vol.-14, No.-4, July-August (2019), pp 74-92.

IX. Hiba Mudhafar Hashim, Ihsan Y. Hussain, “Natural Convection Cooling of PCB Equipped with Perforated Fins Heat Sink including Inclination and Vibration Effects”, J. Mech. Cont.& Math. Sci., Vol.-14, No.-5, September – October (2019). pp 62-77.

X. Kilic N, EkiciB.,Ballistic resistance of high hardness armor steels against 7.62 mm armor piercing ammunition, Mater Des 2013, 44, pp. 35–48.

XI. Li, C., Liu, K., Guo, X. J., & Yuan, L. X. (2018, July). Experimental Study on Ballistic Performance for Multi-hole Armor Steel Plates Against the 7.62 mm Armor Piercing Projectile. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 382, No. 2, p. 022060). IOP Publishing.

XII. NamıkKılıc,SaidBedir, AtılErdik, BülentEkici, AlperTasdemirci, Mustafa Güden, Ballistic behavior of high hardness perforated armor plates against 7.62 mm armor piercing projectile, Materials and Design 63 (2014) pp. 427–438.

XIII. Niezgoda T, Morka A. On the numerical methods and physics of perforation inthe high-velocity impact mechanics. World J Eng. p. 414.

XIV. Raghaven, K. S., Sastri, A. S., and Marcinkowski,M. J., 1969, “Nature of the Work-hardening BehaviorinHadfields Manganese steel,” Transactionof American Institute of MetallurgicalEngineering,Vol. 245, pp. 1569-1575.

XV. S. Dey, T. Borvik, O.S. Hopperstad, J.R. Leinum, and M. Langseth, The effect of target strength on the perforation of steel plates using three different projectile nose shapes,Int. J. Impact Eng., 2004, 30, pp. 1005–1038.

XVI. Senthil K, Tiwari G, Iqbal M A, et al. (2013) Impact response of single and layered thin plates, Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy 79 (4), pp. 705–716.

XVII. Serjouei, A., Chi, R., Sridhar, I., & Tan, G. E. (2015). Empirical ballistic limit velocity model for bi-layer ceramic–metal armor. International Journal of Protective Structures, 6(3), 509-527.

XVIII. Stewart, M. G., &Netherton, M. D. (2019). Statistical variability and fragility assessment of ballistic perforation of steel plates for 7.62 mm AP ammunition. Defence Technology.

XIX. T. Borvik, M. Langseth, O.S. Hopperstad, and K.A. Malo, Ballistic penetration of Steel Plates,Int. J. Impact Eng., 1999, 22, p 855–886.

XX. U. S. Army Materials Technology Laboratory,1987, “Military Standard, V50 Ballistic Test forArmor, MIL-STD-662E,” Department of theNavy, Defense Printing Service, Philadelphia,PA.

XXI. U. S. Department of Defense, 1984, “MilitarySpecification: Armor Plate, Steel, Wrought, Homogeneous(for use in Combat-vehicles and forAmmunitionTesting),” MIL-A-12560G(MR),U.S. Army Materials Technology Laboratory,Watertown,MA.

View Download