Functionally and Geometrically Ordered Ti Armor

 

Ballistic Tests for Ti Composite Armors

1: Material Properties

Various armor configurations have been fabricated using powder metallurgy processes to combine metal and ceramic materials. Because of the flexibility of powder processing, there is essentially no limit to the complexity of structures that can be produced. The physical properties of blended and consolidated titanium and ceramic powders can vary broadly as illustrated by the following examples showing the range of hardness and elastic modulus that has been demonstrated.

Rockwell C Hardness
Effect of ceramic particle content on the hardness of titanium/ceramic composite blends

Hardness across the Interface
Effect of ceramic particle content on the hardness of titanium/ceramic composite blends

Elastic Modulus
Effect of ceramic particle content on the elastic modulus of titanium/ceramic composite blends

Shear Modulus
Effect of ceramic particle content on the shear modulus of titanium/ceramic composite blends

Bulk Modulus
Effect of ceramic particle content on the bulk modulus of titanium/ceramic composite blends

Longitudinal Wave Velocity
Effect of ceramic particle content on the longitudinal wave velocity of titanium/ceramic composite blends

Acoustic Impedance
Effect of ceramic particle content on the acoustic impedance of titanium/ceramic composite blends

2: Ballistic Tests

Ballistic testing was conducted on a variety of graded and geometrically complex armor tiles have been tested versus the .30 cal. APM2 armor piercing round.

Test Range
Test range facility

Target Plates
Target plates

The test results were compared to both conventional wrought titanium armor and monolithic powder metallurgy titanium plates. Examples of armor tiles that underwent ballistic testing are shown in the figures below. Also shown is a graphical summary of the test results for the various types of armor that were tested.

Images of Functionally Graded Plates
Macrographs of a functionally graded armor tile after ballistic testing.

Functionally graded armor tile after ballistic testing. Left: The impact surface showing spallation and Right: The exit surface showing no damage. The tile had a ballistic mass efficiency, Em, of 1.76.

Images of Plates with Complex Interfaces
Macrographs of a composite tile with geometrically complex interfaces after ballistic testing.

Composite tile with geometrically complex interfaces (see cross-section) after ballistic testing with various impact velocities. Impact surface (left) and exit surface (right). The tile had a mass efficiency, Em, of 1.67.

Comparison of the ballistic mass efficiency of various armor tile materials and structures

Mass Efficiency
Comparison of the ballistic mass efficiency of various armor tile materials and structures

 

Tests