techsolutions 14

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly
Stephanie L. Knoeller
AMMTIAC
Rome, NY

Protecting the Warfighter Recent Armor Innovations

INTRODUCTION
encounters with sharp objects, such as razor wire, broken glass, and
Global military conflicts have historically exposed the deficiencies in
other debris that can be used as weapons.[4] In an effort to satisfy
soldier and weapon system protection and conversely, the effectivethe need for a body armor that provides stab and extremity protecness of weapons. Thus, rapid advancements in
tion, the US Army Research Laboratorys (ARL)
armor technology are typically associated with
Weapons and Materials Directorate collaborated
these global conflicts. For instance, World War I
with the University of Delawares Center for
marked the beginning of a rapid evolution in
Composite Materials to create a lighter, more
armor systems. The armor during this period was
flexible armor solution.[2] This effort resulted in
restrictive, bulky, and heavy, and was not comthe development of liquid body armor: Kevlar
monly used at the time because the materials
impregnated with a shear thickening fluid
technology was not sufficiently advanced.
(STF).[2, 4]
However, by World War II, the Army began proBackground
viding its forces with body armor for protection
A shear thickening fluid is a colloidal suspension
against shrapnel and munitions fragments, but it
that behaves in a non-Newtonian manner, which
failed to protect soldiers from pistol, rifle, and
means that shear stress increases nonlinearly with
knife threats. As the war continued, soldiers were
equipped with improved protection systems; and Figure 1. Colloidal suspension of silica the increase in the rate of shear strain.[5] More
importantly, because these fluids are shear thickby the end of the war, they were being suited and ethylene glycol magnified
ening they exhibit an increase in viscosity with
40,000 times.[7]
with armor containing aluminum plates.[1]
an
increasing shear rate.[5]
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and
A
colloidal suspension is a mixture that conOperation Enduring Freedom (OEF) have also
tains
nano-sized particles larger than those of
demonstrated the need for advancements in
normal
solutes yet small enough to remain susarmor. This article covers some of the armor
pended
in the dispersing medium.[6] Liquid
technologies for soldiers and vehicles that have
body
armor
consists of silica nanobits suspendevolved since the engagement of forces in OIF
ed
in
ethylene
glycol as shown in Figure 1.[7]
and OEF as well as those that are in developWhen
concentrated
in solution, the silica
ment and use.
nanobits form hydroclusters under applied
Figure 2. STFs are filled with rigid, colLIQUID BODY ARMOR
stress.[2, 8] The hydroclusters make a solid barAlthough significant improvements have been loidal particles. At high shear rates, rier and prevent the penetration of sharp objects
shear thickening occurs as the hydromade, conventional body armor is still heavy and dynamic forces overcome the repul- and SAA upon impact. Above the critical shear
bulky and only provides protection for the head sive, inter-particle forces, and hydro- rate, shear thickening fluids often exhibit large,
and chest.[2] The current armor design for chest dynamic clusters form. As the particles sometimes discontinuous increases in the viscosthe material becomes macroprotection consists of several Kevlar* layers collide,
ity of the system due to particle dynamics.[9]
scopically more rigid and resistant to
with ceramic tile inserts. This armor design is penetration by incoming projec- This thickening process is reversible, allowing
much too restrictive to provide protection to tiles.[10]
the STF-Kevlar to return to its normal state
other body parts without inhibiting solfollowing impact.[2] Figure 2 shows the
dier agility, and thus soldier extremities
mechanics of a shear thickening fluid,
often remain unprotected.[2] The curwhile Figure 3 demonstrates how shear
rent body armor is designed to resist penthickening fluids enhance the protection
etration from small arms ammunition
of armor systems by forming a rigid sur(SAA) and typically is inadequate against Figure 3. When Kevlar is impregnated with STFs,
face.[10]
large weapons. Projectiles from ever under normal conditions the material has a high
improving weapons continue to be one flexibility; however, under the high shear rates
Production
imposed during impact, the STF becomes rigid and
of the most serious threats faced by the enhances the ballistic protection of the fabric.[10]
Ethanol solvent and the STF are comindividual soldier during daily deploybined to create the STF impregnation
ment.[3]
fluid. Ethanol enhances the ability of the Kevlar fibers to uptake the
The introduction of urban conflict in OIF and OEF has demonSTF suspension. Once combined, Kevlar or another fiber is substrated the additional need for stab and puncture resistant
merged in the STF/ethanol mixture. The fabrics fibers spontaneousarmors.[4] The close quarters that often accompany urban conflict
ly absorb the solution. The ethanol solvent is then removed using a
have exposed soldiers to direct stab assaults and to more frequent
hot convection oven.[2]
http://ammtiac.alionscience.com

The AMMTIAC Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 4

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

techsolutions 14

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

Testing
Shear thickening, fluid-impregnated fabrics have performed well
in several tests. These fabrics increase the quality and level of protection offered by neat** fabrics without compromising weight,
flexibility, or comfort.[11] One test, using a smooth bore helium
gun, demonstrated that four layers of STF-impregnated Kevlar
provided the same level of protection as ten layers of the neat
Kevlar with no weight increase.[2]
Another study demonstrated that both Kevlar and nylon when
impregnated with an STF were superior to their neat versions (of
equivalent areal densities) in stab and cut resistance. The STF
restricted fiber motion and thereby prevented the object from passing through.[8] Further testing demonstrated that the shape and
hardness of the particles used in the colloidal suspension do affect
the level of protection offered.[12] Platelet-shaped clay particles
demonstrated a marked increase in needle resistance and yarn pullout when compared to the spherical shaped silica particles, but
were inferior in ballistic tests. This
A shaped charge is defined as a
suggests that the platelet particle
cylinder of explosive with a hollow
STFs become more effective as the
cavity at the end opposite the initiasize of the threat decreases. Softer
tion train. If this cavity does not
particles were shown to be effective against spike penetration
contain a liner, it is referred to as a
while worse in ballistic protection,
hollow charge or an unlined-cavity
suggesting that particle hardness
charge. If the cavity contains a liner
plays a role in resisting higher
made from a metal, an alloy, glass,
energy ballistic impact.[13]
ceramic, wood, or another material,
STF fabrics have demonstrated
the device is termed a shaped
potential for several alternative
charge. The liner geometry may be
applications. These include bomb
conical, hemispherical, parabolic, or
blankets, suspicious package covany arcuate device. If the liner is
ers, and as ankle supports for
bow shaped it is called an explojump boots that stiffen on
sively formed penetrator (EFP).
impact.[14] Future efforts have
Shaped jets with conical, hemibeen planned to investigate the
impact of STFs on different fabspherical, or bow shaped liners
rics varying weave, type, and
collapse to form jets and/or slugs
denier. Further efforts will also
in different manners.[1]
investigate the layer sequencing
[1] Walters, W., A Brief History of
and STF-to-fabric ratio in addiShaped Charges, ARL-RP-232,
tion to increasing the target sizes
December 2008.
and projectile velocity during
testing.[10]
REACTIVE ARMOR
Reactive armor was originally developed to enhance the protection
of ground vehicles (see Figure 4) while minimizing weight and
cost. They have proved to be effective against shaped-charges and
long rod penetrators. Passive armors typically employ hard, fracture-resistant materials to defeat energetic and projectile threats,
whereas active armors counter these threats using combinations of
passive and energetic materials.[15, 16]
Originally developed to counter the ever-changing munitions

threats reactive armor has

since evolved. Several newer
types of reactive armor have
been created including
explosive reactive armor
(ERA), self-limiting explosive reactive armor (SLERA),
non-explosive reactive armor
(NxRA), and Non-Energetic
Reactive Armor (NERA).

Explosive Reactive Armor

Explosive reactive armor typically consists of two metal sheets
arranged in a sandwich configuration with a layer of explosive
material in the middle.[17, 18] ERA is used to defeat or deflect
shaped-charge anti-tank weapons including hollow charges, as well
as kinetic projectiles, small arms ammunition, and shrapnel.[18]
Upon impact by a projectile, the ERA explodes causing the metal
plates to separate, which can subsequently deflect or defeat the
threat at a small standoff distance from the vehicle the armor is
protecting. Once the armor explodes, however, that portion of the
vehicle becomes vulnerable to other attacks.[17, 19] ERA is a common add-on armor as it provides increased protection and is combat proven.[15] In terms of protecting against shaped charges, the
ERA explosion disrupts the plasma jet that is created from the
shaped-charge warhead and decreases its penetrating power.[17]
One disadvantage to ERA is that the high explosive detonates outside the protected vehicle and subjects the surrounding area to
small blast loads.[19]
Self-Limiting Explosive Reactive Armor
Self-limiting explosive reactive armor is considered a passive form
of ERA because of the low mass of explosives used.[15, 16, 18] The
explosive materials of SLERA are placed in a specific configuration
to confine the energy released to a controlled area.[16] This configuration results in decreased performance compared to ERA.
However, because SLERA has a limited and controlled explosion,
it is potentially capable of providing multi-hit protection when
applied in a modular configuration. While SLERA is not as effective as ERA, it may prove to be a more practical solution due to its
survivability characteristics.[18]
Non-Explosive and Non-Energetic Reactive Armor
Non-explosive reactive armor uses gas-generating material and
other non-explosive systems to dissipate the impact energy of
hollow-charged warheads.[16, 18] Since it is non-explosive, it is
relatively easy to integrate onto vehicles. In addition, because it does
not explode on impact, NxRA is less damaging to vehicle structures
and relatively inexpensive.[16] NxRA is similar to another form of
reactive armor, non-energetic reactive armor, in that neither form
uses energetic components nor are they consumed when hit. Both
can be applied to lightweight vehicles because they weigh less than
conventional reactive armor types and provide multi-hit protection
against chemical energy munitions.[15, 16, 18] Non-energetic reac-

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

The AMMTIAC Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 4

Figure 4. An M2A2 Bradley

Fighting Vehicle with reactive
armor. (Photo by Staff Sgt. Shane
A. Cuomo, US Air Force)

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

A D VA N C E D M AT E R I A L S , M A N U FA C T U R I N G

tive armor provides excellent survivability and greater multiple-hit

capability when compared to NxRA. These armors commonly contain an inert layer between two metal sheets that dissipates the energy from the incoming projectile.[18]
Lightweight Enhanced Reactive Armor
Lightweight enhanced reactive armor (LERA), developed for light
and medium weight combat vehicles, incorporates state-of-the-art
technologies in reactive armor along with an insensitive, high-energy explosive. LERA has been subjected to extensive qualification
testing with more than 1,500 LERA armor tiles tested. LERA has
proven to be an excellent lightweight solution as it can defeat the
shaped-charge threats associated with an urban battlefield, while
having an incident-free safety record in field operation and combat. It is currently available for integration on light and medium
combat and tactical wheeled vehicles.[20]
Electric Reactive Armor
Electric reactive armor uses an electrical current to convert a
shaped-charge or rod penetrator into plasma, vapor, and a harmless mixture of melted and pulverized debris that disperses around
the vehicle.[21] The electric current is able to convert the shapedcharge jets because it enhances the hydrodynamic instabilities
within the jet. This causes it to break into a string of particles that
cannot penetrate the armor as a continuous jet would. A similar
effect is observed when a jet is heated to its melting point.
However, when it reaches its melting point, the jet breaks apart
and expands into a series of rings that have little penetration power.
Importantly, it takes less current to melt a jet than to vaporize
it.[22] The British military has tested electric reactive armor
against rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs). The armor was
observed to provide complete protection except for a few scratches
and dents. Electric reactive armor is advantageous because it
weighs one-tenth that of conventional reactive armor while providing the same level of protection; it can thus be more easily integrated onto vehicle structures.[21]
RECENT ARMOR TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENTS
Sensors for Crack Detection in Ceramic Armor Tiles
Todays military uses ceramic body armor plates because they provide good ballistic protection at a relatively low weight. However,
once the plates are damaged they offer limited protection. Plates
are not only damaged as a result of use, but sometimes they can be
damaged during manufacturing and shipping.[23]
Research is currently underway to improve the protection of
lightweight body armors and helmets for individuals by investigating several different sensors that could be used for detecting
damage in the ceramic inserts.[24-26] Under investigation are
fiber optic strain sensors and conductive paint.[25, 26]
Testing has also been performed to determine a method for
using piezoelectric lead zirconate titanate (PZT) transducers to
characterize the vibrational modes of ceramic vehicle/body armor
support system (VBASS) plates as a way of detecting cracks. It was
found that when damaged, the plates produce a different signal
than when undamaged. This research resulted in the development
of a handheld device for crack detection. However, future work
needs to be done to develop a more robust system.[23]
http://ammtiac.alionscience.com

A MMTIAC

AND

TESTING

Carbon Nanotubes
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs)
have excellent mechanical,
electrical, and magnetic
properties.[27, 28] They
can be woven like cloth into Figure 5. Undamaged and damaged
body armors that are sever- mosaic transparent armors show the
al times stronger, tougher, importance of damage localization.
(Photo Courtesy of Lawrence
and stiffer than those cur- Livermore National Laboratory)
rently in use.[27] CNTs can
withstand multiple ballistic impacts, although research does suggest
that a minor interval is required between hits for full recovery.[28]
Mosaic Transparent Armor
Traditional transparent armors are made of layers of laminate,
transparent materials such as SiC, boron carbide (B4C), or alumina. These traditional armors impose significant costs when damaged, as the entire armor surface must be replaced. In an effort to
reduce costs, researchers have developed mosaic transparent armor
(MTA). MTA is comprised of small transparent tiles, made from
traditional transparent armor materials and held together by an
adhesive with the same refractive index as the tiles.[29]
It is thought that the mosaic tiles will restrict the damage from
a ballistic impact to a portion of the armor surface. Therefore, only
the damaged tiles need to be replaced.[29] Not only does mosaic
transparent armor localize damage, it is also lower in weight and
easier to fabricate than conventional transparent armor. Weight
savings is provided in the fact that less transparent material is
required, as the tiles are smaller and the spaces filled with an almost
negligible weight adhesive. A prototype window made of this
mosaic transparent armor is currently being developed using transparent glass and ceramic tiles.[29]
Aerogel Composites
Researchers have developed a technology that uses inorganic aerogels, such as silicon dioxide and carbon, to absorb kinetic energy.
This silica aerogel system is lightweight and low in density.
When impacted, the network collapses relatively slowly. The
crushable aerogel layer was designed for placement between two
elastomeric fabric layers. This technology has the potential for
body armor applications, as it is envisioned that the aerogel layers
would be thin and flexible with a protective composite consisting
of multiple layers.[30]
Magnesium Alloys for Lightweight Vehicle Armor
Magnesium (Mg) is the lightest structural metal; it has a density
lower than that of iron, titanium, and aluminum. Mg alloys are
therefore of high interest for lightweight armor applications.
However, before Mg alloys are employed for ground vehicle
armor, commercial scale manufacturing capability and capacity
must be demonstrated.[31]
ARL has partnered with industry to develop and establish a
commercially scalable direct chill cast Mg alloy. Two Mg alloys
were developed from this partnership: a high strength and an ultra
high strength alloy, both alloyed with yttrium and zirconium.
High strength refers to a yield strength of approximately 350 MPa,
whereas ultra high strength materials have a yield strength of
approximately 500 MPa. Yield strength is used to define the point

The AMMTIAC Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 4

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

techsolutions 14

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

at which plastic deformation begins and is important because the

higher the strength the less likely a material is to permanently
deform and eventually fracture, making it useless as an armor
material. The high strength alloy has demonstrated exceptional
ballistic performance, showing promise for application as an armor
material.[31] The ballistic properties of the ultra high strength
alloy have yet to be determined.
Composite Lightweight Adaptable Reactive Armor
Composite Lightweight Adaptable Reactive Armor (CLARA) is
under development to provide light armored vehicles protection
against shaped charges and kinetic energy penetrators. CLARA is a
metal-free, low fragment reactive armor.[32, 33] CLARA is designed
to provide protection against ammunition less than 12.7 caliber.[33]
CONCLUSION
From personal body armor to vehicle armor, innovation and
change are necessary to protect a well-equipped and agile force
during times of global conflict. This article briefly reviewed several of the advancements that have been made in body armor systems
to produce lighter weight, flexible systems which can provide the
warfighter with superior protection without compromising mobility and strength. Vehicle armor systems have also evolved into
more sophisticated, lighter weight systems. While these advances
are significant, future forces will undoubtedly require new armor
technologies to counteract even more advanced weapons and penetration threats.
NOTES & REFERENCES
* Kevlar is a registered trademark of the E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company.
Viscosity quantifies a fluids ability to resist flow. For instance, a high viscosity
fluid has a strong resistance to flow, while a low viscosity fluid flows readily.
Hydroclusters are transient aggregates that result from hydrodynamic lubricating
forces between the particles in the suspension.[2, 8]
Critical shear rate is the point at which the dynamic shear thickening is approximately equal to the steady state shear thickening. This point must be achieved in
order for the suspension to thicken.[9]
** The term neat refers to fabrics in their conventional, unaltered form.
Aerogels are highly porous, extremely lightweight solids formed by replacing
particles in a gel with a gas.
[1] Wittman, R.E. and R.F. Rolsten, Armor Of Men and Aircraft, Advances in
Structural Composites, 12th National SAMPE Symposium, October 1967.
[2] Lee, Y., E.D. Wetzel, R.G. Egres Jr., and N.J. Wagner, Advanced Body Armor
Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluids, 23rd Army Science Conference, December
2002.
[3] Poh, C.W., Investigations of New Materials and Methods of Construction of
Personal Armor, Naval Postgraduate School Thesis, December 2008, DTIC Doc.
ADA493730.
[4] Wetzel, E., R. Egres, Jr., Y. Lee, et al., Liquid Armor: Protective Fabrics
Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluids, IFAI 4th International Conference on Safety and
Protective Fabrics, October 2004.
[5] Munson, B., D. Young, and T. Okiishi, Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics,
5th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
[6] Brown, T., H. LeMay, Jr., B. Bursten, and C. Murphy, Chemistry: The
Central Science, 10th Edition, Pearson Education, Inc., 2006.

10

[7] Lee, Y.S., E.D. Wetzel, and N.J. Wagner, The Ballistic Impact Characteristics
of Kevlar Woven Fabrics Impregnated with a Colloidal Shear Thickening Fluid,
Journal of Material Science, Vol. 38, 2003, pp. 2825-2833.
[8] Wetzel, E., R. Egres Jr., M. Decker, et al., Stab Resistance of Shear Thickening
Fluid (STF)-Kevlar Composites for Body Armor Applications, 24th Army Science
Conference, 2005, DTIC Doc. ADA433286.
[9] Lee, S.Y., N. J. Wagner, Dynamic Properties of Shear Thickening Colloidal
Suspensions, Rheologica Acta, Vol. 42, No 3, 2008, pp. 199-208.
[10] Wetzel, E.D., and N.J. Wagner, Advanced Body Armor Utilizing Shear
Thickening Fluids, 23rd Army Science Conference, December 2002.
[11] Arndt, M., Body Armor Fit For A Superhero, BusinessWeek, The McGrawHill Companies, August 2006.
[12] Rosen, B., C. NamLaufer, et al., Multi-Threat Performance of Kaolin-Based
Shear Thickening Fluid (STF)-Treated Fabrics, SAMPE 2007, June 2007.
[13] Kalman, D., J. Schein, J. Houghton, et al., Polymer Dispersions Based Shear
Thickening Fluid-Fabrics For Protective Applications, SAMPE 2007, June 2007.
[14] Johnson, T., Army Scientists, Engineers Develop Liquid Body Armor, Today
in the Military, April 2004.
[15] Add-On-Reactive Armor Suits, Defense Update, No. 1, 2004.
[16] Reactive Armor Technologies under Development for Battle Tanks,
Advanced Materials & Processes, Vol. 159, No. 9, September 2001, pp. 38-39.
[17] Developing Science and Technologies List, Section 9: Ground Combat
Systems Technology, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, August 2003,
http://www.dtic.mil/mctl/DSTL/DSTLSec09g.pdf.
[18] Yael, C-A., E. Sokol-Barak, S. Friling, and M. Tzalik, Non-Explosive
Energetic Material and Reactive Armor Element Using Same, US Patent No.
7,360,479, April 2008.
[19] Held, M., Stopping Power of ERA Sandwiches as a Function of Explosive
Layer Thickness or Plate Velocities, Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics, Vol. 31,
No. 3, 2006.
[20] LERA: Lightweight Enhanced Reactive Armor, General Dynamics,
http://www.gdatp.com/files/PDF/A116_LERA.pdf, accessed 7 August 2009.
[21] Shachtman, N., U.S. Military Uses the Force, Wired, August 22, 2002.
[22] Hummer, C., Inductance of Parallel Plates in Electromagnetic Armor, Army
Research Laboratory, ARL-TR-3788, May 2006.
[23] Meitzler, T., G. Smith, M. Charbeneau, et al., Crack Detection in Armor
Plates Using Ultrasonic Techniques, Materials Evaluation, American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, June 2008, DTIC Doc. ADA493437.
[24] Serna, J., Sensing Protection Issues, Daily Pilot, January 2, 2008.
[25] Stewart, C., Ceradyne Backs Maria Fengs UCI Research on Armor Defects,
OC Register, January 4, 2008.
[26] Non-Destructive Damage Detection in Advanced Ceramic, http://
mfeng.calit2.uci.edu/Maria_Feng/Research_activities/NDE/page1_NDE.htm.
[27] Rincon, P., Super-Strong Body Armor in Sight, BBC News, October 23,
2007.
[28] Mylvaganam, K., and L.C. Zhang, Ballistic Resistance Capacity of Carbon
Nanotubes, Nanotechnology, Vol. 18, 2007.
[29] Elder, R., Mosaic Transparent Armor, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, https://ipo.llnl.gov/?q=technologies-mosaic_transparent_armor,
accessed June 25, 2009.
[30] Kinetic Energy Absorbing Aerogel Composite Structures for Use in Crash of
Impact Protection and Body or Vehicle Armor, Johns Hopkins University Applied
Physics Laboratory, June 1, 2009.
[31] Cho, K., et al., Magnesium Technology and Manufacturing for Ultra-Lightweight Armored Ground Vehicles, ARL-RP-236, February 2009.
[32] Protection, Dynamit Nobel Defence, http://www.dn-defence.com/en/index_
2.html, accessed 7 August 2009.
[33] von Kospoth, N., Closing the Gaps of Modern Military Requirements,
Defense.Professionals, July 2009, http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/359/, accessed
7 August 2009.

http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/quarterly

The AMMTIAC Quarterly, Volume 4, Number 4