See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228465011

Novel flexible body armor utilizing shear thickening fluid (STF)

composites

Article August 2003

CITATIONS READS

10 848

9 authors, including:

Norman Joseph Wagner Keith M. Kirkwood

University of Delaware University of California, Santa Barbara
344 PUBLICATIONS 8,930 CITATIONS 18 PUBLICATIONS 349 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Molecular Simulations of the Amorphous Polymers View project

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

14th International Conference on Composite Materials

San Diego, CA
14 July 2003
 Outline

Background
Body armor
Shear thickening fluids (STFs)
STF / Kevlar composite

Experiments
Ballistic tests
Flexibility tests
Stab tests

Mechanisms of energy absorption in STF composite

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)

equilibrium shear thinning shear thickening

increasing shear rate

 Application to Body Armor
Impregnate Kevlar fabric with shear thickening fluid
At low shear rates (normal motion)
STF behaves like a liquid
High flexibility, little or no impediment to motion
At high shear rates (ballistic impact)
Relative motion of yarns / fibers within fabric deforms STF at
high rate
STF transitions to rigid phase, enhances ballistic protection of
fabric

STF

Kevlar
fabric

before impact during impact

 Materials
Shear thickening fluid
Colloidal silica particles
(avg particle size: ~450 nm or 120 nm)
Ethylene glycol (EG) or polyethylene
glycol (PEG) carrier fluid
Advantages over water carrier fluid:
Wets Kevlar moderately
Environmentally stable
200 nm
Final particle concentration: 55-65 vol%
colloidal silica particles
Kevlar
KM-2 Kevlar fabric
Style 706, 600 denier (180 g/m2)
Composite preparation
Dilute STF with ethanol
Wet diluted STF into Kevlar
Evaporate ethanol in oven (80C for 20 min)
10 m

STF-impregnated Kevlar fabric

 Ballistic Experiments
Targets
Impregnate Kevlar with varying amounts, patterns, types of STF
Encapsulate impregnated Kevlar in polyethylene film
Sandwich target between aluminum foil faces
2x2 in size
mounting adhesive
frame tape

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)

Shear rate during ballistic experiments

projectile velocity 244 m/s
= = 104-105 s-1
projectile diameter 0.56 cm
Ballistic impact should transition fluid to rigid state
 Effect of STF Impregnation
Impregnation of STF into Kevlar is critical to enhance ballistic
performance of neat fabric
20

A D
15
Penetration depth (mm)

B E
10

C F

5 Legend:
single Kevlar layer

STF fluid

4 Kevlar layers impregnated

with STF fluid
0
A B C D E F
Target geometry
 Effect of Volume of STF
Adding more STF increases energy absorption in target
Adding neat ethylene glycol (EG) or dry silica powder of equal
mass has less effect on energy absorption
95

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

8 layers Kevlar 20 layers Kevlar

% Energy dissipated

90
14 layers Kevlar

4 layers
Kevlar
10 layers Kevlar
85

6 layers Kevlar

STF (450 nm EG) in 4 layers Kevlar

80 STF (120 nm PEG) in 4 layers Kevlar
STF (120-nm PEG) in N layers Kevlar, v =83%
f
Neat 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

STF (30 nm EG-PEG) in

4 layers Kevlar, v = 38% (5.28g)
f
60
STF (30 nm PEG) in
6 layers Kevlar, v = 57% (5.20g)
f
STF (120 nm PEG) in
50 8 layers Kevlar, v = 83% (4.61g)
f
7 layers neat Kevlar (3.29g)
11 layers neat Kevlar (5.17g)

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 (%)

center edge stripe

85
Impregnation pattern has little or
no quantitative effect on depth of
Neat Kevlar penetration
80
Full STF + 4 layers Kevlar
Full STF + 6 layers Kevlar
Center STF + 6 layers Kevlar
Edge STF + 6 layers Kevlar
Stripe STF + 6 layers Kevlar

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

striped edge plain

 Mechanism of Ballistic Energy
Absorption in STF Composite
Mechanisms of energy absorption in conventional fabric armors
Yarn pullout
Fiber plastic deformation
Fiber fracture
Compare impacted targets
(4 layers of Kevlar with and without STF) first layer of Kevlar (back
three layers show
Less pullout in STF composite comparable pullout)
More fiber fracture in STF composite unimpregnated Kevlar
STF appears to be grabbing yarns, preventing inter-yarn mobility at high strain rates
2.2

Quasi-static yarn pull-out STF

2 PEG
experiments:
Normalized Pullout Energy

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

45 STF (450 nm PEG) in Kevlar

Neat Kevlar

Penetration depth (mm)

40

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