Finite element analysis of armor piercing bullet penetrating aluminum plate

Armor piercing bullet penetrating an aluminum plate from an intial angle of 60 degrees. Only half the bullet and plate is shown.

This simulation was done as part of a scientific study to validate our numerical code, IMPETUS Afea Solver. Experiment were done in a lab and compared with the numerical simulations, with very good correspondence. At an initial angle of 60 degrees, the bullet behaved like in the video.

Reference:
T. Børvik, L. Olovsson, S. Dey, M. Langseth:
Normal and oblique impact of small arms bullets on AA6082-T4 aluminium protective plates. International Journal of Impact Engineering, Vol 38/7, pp. 577-589 (2011)

For more information, go to http://impetus-afea.com/.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• impetus
• impetus afea
• Armor piercing bullet
• FEA
• FEM
• Finite element
• Aluminum

[DreadX10]

Were these bullets not spinning (spin stabilisation)?

True armor piercing bullets should dig into the material and not being deflected by a material that is almost 3 times lighter (assume penetrator to be steel).

But hey if the code replicates the experimental data than I guess you're doing something right.

[IMPETUSAfea]

@DreadX10 It depends on the angle. If you are interested in the details, see the paper from this study.

T. Børvik, L. Olovsson, S. Dey, M. Langseth:

Normal and oblique impact of small arms bullets on AA6082-T4 aluminium protective plates. International Journal of Impact Engineering, Vol 38/7, pp. 577-589 (2011)

[DreadX10]

@IMPETUSAfea Have read the abstract now.

The bullet is fired from a smooth bore gun. So there is no gyroscopic stabilisation and no ability for the bullet to dig in.

Seems like a waste of research, to find the critical angle of an unspun projectile which is normally fired with spin-stabilisation and therefore experiences different effects during penetration.

As for validating the code: Was the mass of the bullet also measured before and after? What was the main problem with the soft bullet?

[IMPETUSAfea]

@DreadX10 There is no mass loss for the AP bullet. As for the soft lead core bullet, the bullet completely disintegrates during the test.

The effect of spinning projectiles in oblique impact has yet to be investigated. The advantage of a non-spinning projectile is that we can use a half-model for the code validation, which reduces simulation time.

[DreadX10]

@IMPETUSAfea No mass loss in the penetrator you mean, because the simulation shows the jacket being stript. I understand 'not spinning' takes less time to simulate because you can use symmetry but are you confident that your code will hold up with a spinning bullet? With 'yet to be investigated' I assume, you mean by you, because it has been done before.

[IMPETUSAfea]

@DreadX10 This study was done in cooperation with a university, NTNU in Norway. They have the equipment to do the experiments, we create the software. Our main focus in that study (from our point of view) was to get confidence in the accuracy of the Solver. One of the main advantages of our Solver is unique higher order solid elements, which is very accurate even with extreme deformations. If you are interested, feel free to contact us by mail. You will find contact information on our website.

[wolfy9005]

@KRAUSER0130 You could probably break aluminium foil with your bare hands, lol. Now, go and get a piece of aluminium 30-40mm square and try again.

[ALAPINO]

Wow-- with enough energy anything acts like goo.

[IMPETUSAfea]

@puttz2 The bullet path? Because of the steep angle, it didn't completely perforate the plate, nor did it stop inside the plate. The same was seen in the lab experiment. For other angles the bullet path was different.