National Academies Press: OpenBook

Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications (2011)

Chapter: Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials

« Previous: Appendix G: Failure Mechanisms of Ballistic Fabrics and Concepts for Improvement
Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×

Appendix H

Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials

TITANIUM AND TITANIUM ALLOYS

Titanium is a hexagonally close-packed metal with a density of 4,950 kg/m3; it can have a specific strength (the ratio of the yield strength to the density) that is greater than that of some (but not all) steels. Commercially pure titanium has a yield strength of about 400 MPa, with strong strain hardening and substantial rate sensitivity at high strain rates.1 Strengths of this magnitude are not sufficient to provide significant benefit in comparison to that of rolled homogeneous armor (RHA) for protection material applications, given the density of titanium. However, titanium alloys can have much greater strengths, and in particular the Ti-6Al-4V alloy has a strength approaching 1 GPa in the solution treated and aged condition. As a consequence, there is at least one specification of Ti-6Al-4V for armor applications,2and there are several specific components of military vehicles in which this titanium alloy has been substituted for steel, with significant weight savings.3 Titanium alloys have good corrosion resistance, offer good ballistic protection with some weight savings, and can be welded.

The primary obstacles to the expanded use of titanium as protection materials are twofold. First, and most important, is cost: the extraction, processing, and forming of titanium all result in a final component that is significantly more expensive than a component made of steel. Second, titanium alloys, like many hexagonally close-packed metals, have a relatively high susceptibility to adiabatic shear localization. These factors have resulted in the greater use of aluminum and aluminum alloys as substitutes for steels.

ALUMINUM AND ALUMINUM ALLOYS

Aluminum and aluminum alloys were developed early in the twentieth century, and beginning around the time of World War II, they were pressed into service to reduce the weight of protective materials (beginning with armor for aircraft). The introduction in the late 1950s of the T113 (later M113) personnel carrier using an aluminum alloy structure resulted in the deployment of a significant amount of aluminum alloys to the armored fleet. Whereas pure aluminum is very soft, conventional aluminum alloys can have yield strengths that easily compete with the simpler steels. Specific approaches such as solid solution strengthening and age hardening have been developed to strengthen aluminum alloys. Note that the range of strengths attainable with steels is very large, and there are no conventional aluminum alloys that can compete with the highest-strength steels in terms of yield strength. However, when one considers the specific strength (that is, the strength per unit weight, or sy/r), some of the commercial aluminum alloys can be very competitive.

FIGURE H-1 shows the typical specific strengths and specific stiffnesses of many metals and ceramics—the specific stiffnesses are of interest when deflection-limited design is important, as with some ceramic tiles, whereas specific strength is important for some strength-limited applications. Ceramics generally have higher specific strengths than metals and metal alloys, and ceramics indeed have a major role to play in protection material systems. The figure shows, among the metals, the relative locations of RHA and one aluminum alloy (Al 5083, which is 4.4 wt percent Mg, 0.7 wt percent Mn, and 0.15 wt percent Cr; the balance is Al). This alloy is commonly used in military vehicles such as personnel carriers.

A critical question for metals that meet both structural and armor roles in vehicles involves weldability, since this has a large impact on both production cost and maintenance. The welding of steels is a finely developed technology, but the weldability of aluminum alloys is much more variable.

______________

1Meyers, M., G. Subhash, B. Kad, and L. Prasad. 1994. Evolution of microstructure and shear-band formation in α-hcp titanium. Mechanics of Materials 17(2-3): 175-193.

2MIL-T-9046J.

3Montgomery, J., M. Wells, B. Roopchand, and J. Ogilvy. 1997. Low-cost titanium armors for combat vehicles. Journal of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society 49(5):45-47.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
image

FIGURE H-1 Specific stiffness versus specific strength of various materials, including metals and ceramics. The position occupied by rolled homogeneous armor is identified, as is the conventional aluminum alloy 5083. Note the substantially greater specific strength that can be obtained by using aluminum-based nanocrystalline matrix composites such as the so-called trimodal aluminum materials. SOURCE: Zhang, H., J. Ye, S. Joshi, J. Schoenung, E. Chin, G. Gazonas, and K. Ramesh: Superlightweight nanoengineered aluminum for strength under impact. Advanced Engineering Materials. 2007. 9. 335-423. Copyright Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Reproduced with permission.

Those aluminum alloys that are easily weldable are therefore preferred in these applications, even if some penalty is paid in terms of strength and ballistic performance. The trade-offs between weight, structural performance, ballistic performance, ease of production, and ease of maintenance (including resistance to corrosion) play a very significant role in the choice of alloy for vehicular applications. Because most of these alloys are used as rolled plate, work-hardening alloys such as the 5000 series (Al 5083 being the prime example) have some advantages. Aluminum alloys used as armor in Army vehicles also include Al 2024, Al 2519, Al 5059, Al 6061, Al 7039, and Al 7075. Promising new commercial alloys include Al 2139, which is a commercial alloy with significant strength (around 600 MPa at high strain rates) and reasonable ductility.

There is significant potential for the development of novel aluminum-based materials with very high strengths through alloying approaches, the development of nanostructured systems, and the development of aluminum-based composites. The nanostructured aluminum approach is exemplified by the so-called trimodal aluminum material developed by Li and Zhao and their coworkers.4 This aluminum-based material exhibits a very high strength (950-1,000 MPa) when loaded at high strain rates, although the ductility (as of 2009) is relatively low. The material achieves dramatic mechanical properties at impact rates of deformation through a combination of three microstructural approaches:strengthening through a nanocrystalline core architecture; additional strengthening through length-scale-dependent reinforcement with micron-size ceramic particles; and enhanced ductility through the incorporation of a certain volume fraction of micron-scale grains. The resulting trimodal aluminum-based material achieves high specific strengths under very high rates of deformation and shows promise as a protective material, although the ductility remains a major concern. The material is produced by cryomilling Al 5083 aluminum powders with boron carbide ceramic particulates. This composite powder is then degassed and blended with microscale Al 5083. This trimodal composite powder is then consolidated with conventional powder metallurgy techniques such as cold isostatic pressing plus extrusion to generate a bulk trimodal aluminum-based composite.

FIGURE H-2 presents stress versus strain curves obtained on a trimodal aluminum alloy at strain rates of 3,200 s–1 and 11,000 s–1 using a compression Kolsky bar. Strength levels of this magnitude are remarkable for an aluminum-based material. The mechanical response of the most common current armor steel (RHA) measured at similar strain rates is also shown in Figure H-2—note that this steel is nearly three times as dense as the aluminum alloy. The specific strength of the trimodal material is also shown in Figure H-2.

Mechanical milling, temperature and consolidation lead to a peculiar microstructure for this material; as a result its strength is derived from, in addition to the normal load transfer characteristics of the composite, four strengthening mechanisms. They are (1) grain boundary strengthening, via the refinement of grain size, (2) particle-size strengthening through ceramic reinforcement, (3) dispersoid strengthening, and (4) work-hardening owing to prior plastic work from extrusion and cryomilling. This material can be considered to be a sophisticated alloy, a nanostructured material, or a specific metal-matrix composite—the value is in the use of all of the associated strengthening mechanisms.

Advanced aluminum-based materials of this type, including wrought alloys such as Al 2139 and aluminum-based metal-matrix composites, discussed below, show promise of dramatic improvements as protection materials in terms of mass efficiency. The key research questions in terms of the utility of such advanced materials are those concerning the failure processes within the material: ductility, resistance

______________

4Li, Y., Y.H. Zhao, V. Ortalan, W. Liu, Z.H. Zhang, R.G. Vogt, N.D. Browning, E.J. Lavernia, and J.M. Schoenung. 2009. Investigation of aluminum-based nanocomposites with ultra-high strength. Materials Science and Engineering: A 527(1-2): 305-316.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
image

FIGURE H-2 High-strain-rate compressive response of a trimodal aluminum alloy, in comparison with that of rolled homogeneous armor at similar strain rates (103 s–1). Curve 4 represents not experimental data but the prediction of a model based on composite micromechanics. SOURCE: Zhang, H., J. Ye, S. Joshi, J. Schoenung, E. Chin, G. Gazonas, and K. Ramesh: Superlightweight nanoengineered aluminum for strength under impact. Advanced Engineering Materials. 2007. 9. 335-423. Copyright Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Reproduced with permission.

to crack growth, resistance to spall, and resistance to shear band development.

MAGNESIUM AND MAGNESIUM ALLOYS

Magnesium has a remarkably low density of 1,700 kg/m3 (in comparison, the density of Al is 2,800 kg/m3, that of Ti is 4,950 kg/m3 and those of steels are 7,800 kg/m3). The density of magnesium approaches that of polymers. Magnesium and magnesium alloys, which are among the lightest structural metals, are becoming increasingly important in the automotive and hand-tool industries. The rapid growth in the commercial use of magnesium is intimately tied to the increasing cost of energy. The low density makes these materials very attractive for defense applications, but magnesium alloys historically have had relatively low strengths (in the range 250-300 MPa) in comparison to aluminum alloys. There has also been lingering (and somewhat exaggerated) concern about the flammability of magnesium and about the relative ease with which these alloys can be corroded in severe environments. However, these potential problems are relatively easily mitigated by proper design and the appropriate protocols for maintenance.

A substantial effort was begun over the past decade to generate high-strength magnesium alloys using a variety of approaches, including solid solution strengthening and precipitation strengthening. Commercial magnesium alloys

that can substitute for some aluminum alloys include AZ315 and ZK60, and several alloys containing rare earths show promise. Most of the innovation in this area is currently occurring outside this country, particularly in China and Japan, which may present a long-term risk for the United States. A recent workshop at the Johns Hopkins University on the potential of magnesium and magnesium alloys as protection materials highlighted a variety of opportunities. One of the more promising strengthening approaches appears to be the development of ultra-fine-grained or nanostructured magnesium alloys through severe plastic deformation. A major research effort in developing a fundamental understanding of strengthening mechanisms in magnesium alloys promises to be fruitful, and the opportunities presented by low-density alloys should not be missed.

Since magnesium is a hexagonally close-packed material, the plastic deformation of this metal is much more complex than that of cubic metals like aluminums and steels. Two features of the plastic deformation are particularly important: the development of deformation twins and the development of strong textures. Both topics require careful investigation in order to increase the utility of magnesium-based materials as components of protection material systems.

______________

5Mukai, T., M. Yamanoi, H. Watanabe, and K. Higashi. 2001. Ductility enhancement in AZ31 magnesium alloy by controlling its grain structure. Scripta Materialia 45(1):89-94.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×

CERMETS

The term “cermet” describes a structure that is a composite mixture of a metal phase and a ceramic phase. The combination of ceramic and metal in cermets works synergistically to improve the toughness of the composite material: The ceramic phase is a strengthening (a “hard” material) phase with the function of breaking or eroding the penetrator, and the ductile metal phase inhibits failure. The metals usually used are aluminum, magnesium, and titanium. Because of the synergism between the two materials, which in concert can defeat an incoming kinetic energy penetrator, cermets have a significant potential for expanded use in lightweight armor development. Cermets can be divided into two subgroups: ceramic-matrix composites and metal-matrix composites (MMC), depending on whether the ceramic is in continuous or matrix phase. Figure H-3 shows a micrograph of an MMC with a dispersed SiC phase in an aluminum matrix.6

A number of metal-matrix composites show potential for protective material applications. Typically these materials consist of ceramic particulate or ceramic fiber reinforcements within a ductile metal matrix, with the volume fractions of the reinforcements ranging from 5 to 50 percent. The typical result of incorporating a ceramic reinforcement into a metallic matrix is enhanced strength and some loss of ductility. Most of the MMCs used commercially are aluminum-based and ceramic-reinforced,7 and these have been investigated thoroughly. However, there is also potential for magnesium-based systems and steel-based systems. Such MMCs could also lead to the development of functionally graded materials that have microstructures graded to provide optimum resistance to a specific threat. The high-strain-rate mechanical properties and dynamic failure processes in MMCs (see, for example, Li and Ramesh, 1998,8 and Li et al., 20009) have not been investigated in detail, and further work in this area is likely to be very useful in the development of armor packages in which the MMC may be used as a backing for a ceramic material.

The conventional method for fabrication of MMCs is to compress a porous compact of ceramic powder to approximately 65 percent of its theoretical density, leaving an open and continuous pore phase, which can be readily infiltrated with molten metal, usually aluminum. Finally, the compact undergoes a heat-treatment process at a somewhat more elevated temperature, causing a reaction between the aluminum metal and the ceramic, forming a strong interphase bond. In situ processes for making cermets—such as Lanxide’s PRIMEX process, Martin Marietta’s XD process, self-propagating high temperature, and reactive gas injections—have also been developed.10,11,12,13The PRIMEX process involves cermet fabrication under a pressureless condition, in which a spontaneous infiltration of molten aluminum into a porous ceramic preform in the presence of magnesium and nitrogen occurs without using vacuum or externally applied pressure.14 A cermet material in the form of silicon carbide-aluminum was produced by Lanxide Armor Products and was employed to protect against artillery fragments and small arms. It has largely been replaced, however, by an improved material developed by M Cubed Technologies, in which the SiC+C and B4C+SiC are infiltrated with molten silicon to form a tough SiC bonding phase that provides superior performance as a cermet armor protection material. A lightweight cermet material was also developed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, using boron carbide for the ceramic compact, backfilled with aluminum metal, and sub-

image

FIGURE H-3 Optical micrograph of Al-SiC cermet. Aluminum is the light-gray matrix, with discrete silicon carbide particles. SOURCE: Unpublished research. Permission granted by K.T. Ramesh.

______________

6Uribe, Y., and H. Sohn, unpublished research.

7Lloyd, D. 1994. Particle reinforced aluminum and magnesium matrix composites. International Materials Reviews 39(1):1-23.

8Li, Y., and K. Ramesh. 1998. Influence of particle volume fraction, shape, and aspect ratio on the behavior of particle-reinforced metal–matrix composites at high rates of strain. Acta Materialia 46(16): 5633-5646.

9Li, Y., K. Ramesh, and E. Chin. 2000. The compressive viscoplastic response of an A359/SiCp metal-matrix composite and of the A359 aluminum alloy matrix. International Journal of Solids and Structures 37(51): 7547-7562.

10Mortensen, A., and I. Jin. 1992. Solidification processing of metal matrix composites. International Materials Review 37: 101-128.

11Ibrahim, A., F. Mohamed, and E. Lavernia. 1991. Particulate reinforced metal matrix composites—A review. Journal of Materials Science 26(5): 1137-1156.

12Koczak, M., and M. Premkumar. 1993. Emerging technologies for the in situ production of MMC’s. The Journal of the Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society 45(1): 44-48.

13Asthana, R. 1998. Reinforced cast metals: part I solidification microstructure. Journal of Materials Science 33(7): 1679-1698.

14Aghajanian, M., A. Rocazella, J. Burke, and S. Keck. 1991. The fabrication of metal matrix composites by a pressureless infiltration technique. Journal of Materials Science 26(2): 447-454.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×

subsequently heat-treated to form a delta phase chemical bond between the ceramic and the metal. The processing of B4C and Al composites, especially when the B4C content is high (above 55 vol percent), faces the problem of poor wettability of the aluminum on B4C at b temperatures, especially near the melting point of aluminum (660°C). Aluminum begins to wet the B4C surface at temperatures just above 1000°C, which results in an increase in the driving force of chemical reactions. The high temperatures (1000°C to 1200°C) used for improved infiltration increase the wettability of the materials, but at the same time, chemical reactions between Al and B4C can result in the formation of intermediate phases, such as binary AlB2, b-AlB12, AlB10, borides, and ternary Al-borocarbides AlB24C4, Al3B48C2, and Al3BC.15 Al3C4 is also formed. It has been reported that about 30 vol percent of new phases are formed from initially 38 vol percent aluminum and 62 vol percent B4C.16 Al4C3 is the most undesirable phase because of its hygroscopic nature and pure mechanical properties. Some products of the interfacial reactions are not desirable and can cause premature failure and poor ballistic performance, while other interphases are desired and even required to form a good interfacial bond and bring significant strengthening and high tensile strength of the cermet.

It is understood, however, that for an armor cermet material to be of high quality, a clean metallurgical interface between the ceramic reinforcement and metal matrix is highly desirable, since it allows a more effective strengthening from the reinforcement.17To avoid formation of intermediate interphases, low-temperature cryomilling was developed to synthesize a composite powder with clean metallurgical interfaces and without voids.18 In addition, to increase the ductility, which is always sacrificed when strength is increased, a trimodal Al-B4C cermet was developed, in which coarse-grained aluminum was introduced into the nanocrystalline Al reinforced with B4C particles.19A trimodal composition with 10 wt percent B4C, 50 wt percent coarse-grained Al 5083, and the remainder nanocrystalline Al 5083 exhibited 1,065 MPa yield strength under compressive loading while still showing 0.04 true strain deformation.

As noted by Chin,20 in addition to particulate-reinforced cermets with excellent work-hardening characteristics under dynamic loading, the functionally graded armor composites (FGACs) were developed. In FGACs, ballistic space and mass efficiency of cermets were enhanced by tailoring the through-thickness incorporation and distribution of various reinforcement morphologies, sizes, and chemistries to mitigate shock damage. The idea of improving FGAC performance is to disrupt the shock wave in order to minimize collateral damage during a ballistic event. The FGAC structure is composed of a series—a hard (ceramic) layer interspersed with a high strain-to-failure material such as aluminum. The hard outer surface is usually designed to be the ballistic impact layer, and behind this layer is a thin-bonded layer of the ductile material. The design feature is such that in successive layers going toward the back surface, the volume fraction of the ductile material is increased and the volume fraction of the hard layer is decreased. Thus, the strain-to-failure ratio is increased as the depth of the penetration increases. The perturbations will be tailored throughout the microstructural design, which prolongs projectile-through-target-material dwell time. The extended dwell time promotes the breaking up of the projectile prior to the occurrence of complete penetration or unacceptable collateral damage of the armor material.21 There is a clear realization of the importance of and need for a better understanding of the character of the interfaces in FGAC because of the softening of the material due to interfacial and particle damage from high-rate loading.

The self-propagating high-temperature synthesis methodology is another important technique used to produce metal-matrix composites where dissimilar phases (metal and ceramics) are integrated through a self-propagating exothermic reaction.22 The development of nanoscale, multilayer, self-propagating exothermic reaction foils, which can be ignited by a simple electrical spark, is important for joining FGACs to a wide range of structural surfaces as well as for modular armor repair.

In summary, cermet materials exhibit light weight and excellent ballistic properties suitable for personnel armor use. However, cermets have not been extensively utilized in armor protection applications, in part due to high fabrication costs but also because the optimal composite properties have not always been fully realized, owing to poorly understood interfacial bonding and properties. The field of armor cermets is, therefore, ripe for exploitation using combinations of the common refractory ceramic materials (alumina, silicon carbide, boron carbide) and light metals such as magnesium, titanium, and aluminum. Cermets have been successfully

______________

15Lee, K., B, Sim, S. Cho, and H. Kwon. 1991. Reaction products of Al-Mg/B4C composite fabricated by pressureless infiltration technique. Journal of Materials Science and Engineering A 302(2): 227-234.

16Beidler, C., W. Hauth, and A. Goel, 1992. Development of a B4C/Al cermet for use as an improved structural neutron absorber. Journal of Testing and Evaluation 20(1):57-60.

17Lloyd, D. 1992. Particle reinforced aluminium and magnesium matrix composites. International Materials Reviews 39(1): 1-23.

18Schoenung, J., J. Ye, J. He, F. Tang, and D. Witkin. 2005. B4C reinforced nanocrystalline aluminum composites: Synthesis, characterization, and cost analysis. Pp. 123-128 in Materials Forum Volume 29. J.F. Nie and M. Barnett, eds. Institute of Materials Engineering Australia Ltd.

19Ye, J., B. Han, Z. Lee, B. Ahn, S. Nutt, and J. Schoenung. 2005. A trimodal aluminum based composite with super-high strength. Scripta Materialia 53(5): 481-486.

20Chin, E. 1999. Army focused research team on functionally graded armor composites. Materials Science and Engineering A 259(2): 155-161.

21Ibid.

22Michaelsen, C., K. Barmak, and T.Weihs. 1997. Investigating the thermodynamics and kinetics of thin film reactions by differential scanning calorimetry. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 30(23): 3167-3186.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×

used in armor protection applications because of their ruggedness and ability to withstand impact, but the best properties of each component phase are often not fully realized in the composite structure. Cermets can be fabricated in a relatively straightforward manner and in a wide variety of forms, but most MMCs, like aluminum, have been developed with relatively low-melting metal phases. For higher-temperature components, special fabrication techniques are needed. Mechanistic research on high-temperature ceramic-metal bonding in cermets, the fabrication of these structures, and their relationship to projectile defeat and armor performance can productively be researched.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Appendix H: Metals as Lightweight Protection Materials." National Research Council. 2011. Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13157.
×
Page 147
Next: Appendix I: Nondestructive Evaluation for Armor »
Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $41.00 Buy Ebook | $32.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Armor plays a significant role in the protection of warriors. During the course of history, the introduction of new materials and improvements in the materials already used to construct armor has led to better protection and a reduction in the weight of the armor. But even with such advances in materials, the weight of the armor required to manage threats of ever-increasing destructive capability presents a huge challenge.

Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications explores the current theoretical and experimental understanding of the key issues surrounding protection materials, identifies the major challenges and technical gaps for developing the future generation of lightweight protection materials, and recommends a path forward for their development. It examines multiscale shockwave energy transfer mechanisms and experimental approaches for their characterization over short timescales, as well as multiscale modeling techniques to predict mechanisms for dissipating energy. The report also considers exemplary threats and design philosophy for the three key applications of armor systems: (1) personnel protection, including body armor and helmets, (2) vehicle armor, and (3) transparent armor.

Opportunities in Protection Materials Science and Technology for Future Army Applications recommends that the Department of Defense (DoD) establish a defense initiative for protection materials by design (PMD), with associated funding lines for basic and applied research. The PMD initiative should include a combination of computational, experimental, and materials testing, characterization, and processing research conducted by government, industry, and academia.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!