Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228465011
CITATIONS READS
10 848
9 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Norman Joseph Wagner on 01 October 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
Novel Flexible Body Armor
Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluid
(STF) Composites
(1513)
Dr. Eric D. Wetzel Prof. Norman J. Wagner
ewetzel@arl.army.mil 410-306-0851 wagner@che.udel.edu 302-831-8079
Keith Kirkwood
Army Research Laboratory Young Sil Lee
John Kirkwood
Ron Egres
Composites and Lightweight Structures Branch Phil Matthews
Bldg. 4600, AMSRL-WM-MB
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5069
University of Delaware
Dept. of Chemical Engineering and
Center for Composite Materials
Newark, DE 19716
Background
Body armor
Shear thickening fluids (STFs)
STF / Kevlar composite
Experiments
Ballistic tests
Flexibility tests
Stab tests
Continuing work
Body Armor
Conventional body armor
20-40 layers of neat Kevlar
Rigid ceramic inserts for high threat situations
Torso protection only
Extremities protection
Extremities: arms, legs, neck
*Sources: D. Brown. Washington Post. May 4 2003; R. L. Mabry. J. Trauma. v49 n3 2000; F.
Battlefield statistics* Reister. Battlefield Casualties and Medical Statistics: U. S. Army Experiences in the Korean
War. 1973; M.E. Carey. J. Trauma. v40 n3 1996.
PASGT Vest
% of soldiers with % of soldiers Kevlar 29
non-fatal injuries (NFI) with NFI due to % of NFI due to
Conflict located on extremities frag / shrapnel bullets
WWII 70% 58% 38%
Korea 71% - -
Somalia 75% 43% 42%
Desert Storm 64-87% 95% 5%
Iraqi Freedom 73% 32% 32%
Currently no armor for extremities
Conventional materials (i.e. neat Kevlar) too bulky, stiff
Material requirements
Flexible Interceptor Vest
Low bulk Kevlar KM2
Lightweight
Minimum protective level: frag / shrapnel protection
Shear Thickening Fluid (STF)
Rheology of ethylene glycol based STF
10
6
Liquid phase highly filled with
=0.62
10
5
=0.57 rigid, colloidal particles
4
10
At high shear rates, hydro-
viscosity
(Pa s)
10
3
dynamic forces overcome
10
2
repulsive interparticles forces,
10
1
and hydroclusters form
10
0
Particles collide, material
200 nm -1
10 becomes macroscopically rigid
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
.
shear rate
(1/s)
STF
Kevlar
fabric
target
Ballistic tests clay witness
0.22 cal FSP
Velocity ~ 825 fps
Target set in frame,
not clamped
Clay witness
Quantify ballistic performance in terms of depth of penetration
Use clay ballistic curves to relate penetration depth to energy
absorbed by target
STF Rheological Properties
Shear thickening transition at shear rate of ~ 101-103 s-1
Rheology of ethylene glycol based STF
6
10
5
=0.62
10
=0.57
4
10
(Pa s)(Pa s)
3
10
viscosity
2
10
1
10
0
10
-1
10
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
.
shear rate
(1/s) (s-1)
A D
15
Penetration depth (mm)
B E
10
C F
5 Legend:
single Kevlar layer
STF fluid
90
% Energy dissipated
85
All targets 4 layers of Kevlar,
various matrix materials:
STF (450 nm EG)
80 STF (120 nm PEG)
Dry silica
Ethylene glycol
75
70
65
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
2
Areal density (g/cm )
Absorbed Energy
Energy Dissipation (%) = 100
Initial Impact Energy
Comparison of STF Kevlar with Neat
Kevlar
At high fabric loadings, STF-Kevlar composites require lower areal
density than comparable neat Kevlar
At high fluid loadings, STF-Kevlar composites require fewer
Kevlar layers than comparable neat Kevlar
20 layers Kevlar
95
14 layers Kevlar
90
14 layers Kevlar
4 layers
Kevlar
10 layers Kevlar
85
6 layers Kevlar
4 layers Kevlar
75
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
2
Areal density (g/cm )
Flexibility / Bulk of STF-Impregnated
Kevlar
STF-impregnated Kevlar targets are lighter, thinner and more flexible
than neat Kevlar targets with comparable ballistic performance
=13o
=50o
=50o
10-layer Kevlar:
20 g weight Thickness: 3.0 mm
Weight: 4.7 g
4-layer Kevlar: Ediss: 86.7% 0.25 mL STF (120 nm)
Thickness: 1.4 mm impregnated 4-layer Kevlar:
Weight: 1.9 g Thickness: 1.4 mm
Ediss: 76.7% Weight: 2.3 g
Ediss: 87.2%
High Velocity Performance
All targets reach critical velocity above which ballistic performance
drops off drastically
Increasing the number of fabric layers
Velocity (fps)
increases the high velocity
492 656 820 984 1148 1312
performance
STF-Kevlar at high fabric loadings
90
offers superior high velocity
performance to neat Kevlar
% Energy dissipated
80
70
40
100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Velocity (m/s)
Effect of STF Patterning
Compare fully-impregnated Kevlar with pattern-impregnated Kevlar
All patterns with 6 layers of Kevlar
95
90
Energy Dissipation (%)
75
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
2
Areal Density (g/cm )
Effect of STF Patterning (contd)
Pattern of STF fundamentally influences the failure pattern /
mechanism in target
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
STF addition first layer of Kevlar (back
increases pull-out energy three layers show little
pullout, no fracture)
1
0.8
STF-impregnated Kevlar
0 5 10 15 20 25
% Liquid Impregnation
Stab Resistance of STF-Kevlar
Composite
STF-Kevlar is highly stab resistant
Conventional Kevlar fabric is relatively easy to puncture
50
35
30
25
20
15
0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13
2
Areal density (g/cm )
neat Kevlar
NIJ Standard-0115.00
3.153 kg weighted knife
blade, 24 J impact STF-Kevlar
Effect of Particle Anisotropy
Anisotropic CaCO3 particles with aspect ratio of 5:1
Less particle loading required to achieve shear thickening
3
10
95
2 = 0.51
10
(Pa s)
90
% Energy dissipated
1
10
All targets 4 layers of Kevlar,
various STF matrices:
85
STF (450 nm EG)
STF (120 nm PEG) 0
STF (5:1 anisotropic EG)
10 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 . 10 10
(1/s)
80 Potential benefits
Lower nominal viscosity easier
processing and wearability
75
Shear thickening effect without
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 particles approaching close-
2
Areal density (g/cm ) packing easier to fabricate
View publication stats
Continuing Work
Material and Target Design
Materials
STF material
Particle anisotropy
Particle size
Possibility for enhanced energy absorption mechanisms at
very small particle sizes
Particle material -> polymeric, rubber particles
Lower density particles for reduced target weight
Softer particles for modification of energy absorption
mechanisms
Particle surface energy
Fabric Architecture
Denier Patterning / STF-to-fabric ratio
Weave Layer sequencing
Fiber type
Test configuration
Larger target sizes
Higher velocities