(SM1) 3-1

Composite Materials & New Modelling Techniques for Lighter AFVs

Mark A. French Land Systems Sector, Vehicle Concepts Department Building 124 Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) Chertsey Chobham Lane Chertsey, Surrey KT16 0EE, England

1.0

ABSTRACT

The requirement to provide light weight armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) structures while maintaining or increasing the survivability of these structures has increased the need to develop new materials and design processes. One way to address this problem is to use composite materials to increase the structural and ballistic efficiency of the hull. Composite materials offer a number of advantages including weight reduction by the elimination of the spall liner and integral stealth protection leading to signature reductions. DERA in partnership with Vickers Defence Systems, have produced a full-sized composite demonstrator AFV called the Advanced Composite Armoured Vehicle Platform (ACAVP). With a bare hull weight of around 6,000 kg, the ACAVP hull is one of the largest and possibly the thickest high performance resin transfer mouldings (RTM) produced in Europe. The aim of the ACAVP programme is to identify where composite materials can be best utilised in the production of future AFVs. This will be achieved by quantifying the advantages that composite materials offer compared to traditional materials used to manufacture AFVs. To obtain the maximum benefit from new materials new modelling techniques are also being developed by DERA. These techniques will increase the accuracy of the structural analysis used in the design of future AFV structures and also provided additional information to assist in the design and integration of sub components which include the main armament and vehicle suspension systems. The ACAVP demonstrator is being used to validate the models that have been developed by DERA. This paper provides details on the design and manufacture of the ACAVP demonstrator, which employs the composite hull as a combined structural and ballistic structure, as well as a brief summary of the research undertaken on composite materials for AFVs on other programmes. The paper also describes new modelling techniques and identifies the potential advantages that these techniques offer. 2.0 INTRODUCTION

The use of composite materials in AFVs has been proposed for a number of years, but their use has been limited to date, to spall liners and a limited number of components such as ammunition bins. One of the reasons for this reluctance to use composite materials is that they dont fit well into conventional metals-based platforms or their production methods. The incompatibilities of composite materials with metals includes different design (e.g. isotropy and homogeneity), manufacture (processability, dimensional control, cycle times, temperature tolerance, and assembly methods), and performance (coefficients of thermal expansion, electrical conductivitys and ballistic efficiency). While substituting individual metal units with composite replacements

Paper presented at the RTO AVT Specialists Meeting on Low Cost Composite Structures, held in Loen, Norway, 7-11 May 2001, and published in RTO-MP-069(II).

(SM1) 3-2

can lead to both weight and cost reductions plus improved durability, the design of the composite components must conform to existing component designs in order to allow interchangeability between units. This situation may, however, lead to a less than optimum design for the composite component. In order to achieve the maximum advantage from composite materials, the complete vehicle design strategy must be re-evaluated to optimise the advantages offered by composite materials. Composites must be applied as a whole system, such as a complete hull and this is the approached used by the ACAVP programme. Moving from incremental, part-by-part substitutions to whole platforms, shifts the emphasis from making composites compatible with metals to exploiting composites unique benefits for solving system issues (e.g. hull weight, hull stiffness and cost per hull), 2.1 Driver for the use composite materials

The increasing emphasis for the rapid deployment of forces is proving very difficult to address with conventional AFV design solutions. In order to meet this requirement new materials must be utilised together with improved design tools and this has been the aim of the current work being conducted by the Advanced Structures Research team at DERA Chertsey. The Advanced Composite Armoured Vehicle Platform (ACAVP) is a materials demonstrator that is being used to confirm that composite materials can be used both as a structural material capable of carrying the loads imposed from the running gear and associated equipment, and as a ballistic material to provide the required ballistic protection. The ability to rapidly deploy an AFV has been addressed in the ACAVP vehicle by using metal appliqu armour in combination with the composite hull. The appliqu does not form part of the vehicles load bearing structure and can be easily removed to allow the vehicle to attain the weight limit imposed by the load carrying capacity of a C130 aircraft. 2.2 Review of composite AFV programmes

The development of composite materials for military vehicles has been predominantly undertaken by just two countries, the United States and the United Kingdom. Both countries have been evaluating the use of composites for over 25 years and a summary of both countries programmes is described below. The US Army Research Laboratory Materials Directorate in conjunction with a number of industrial companies such as United Defence have been conducting research programmes on the use of composite materials since the 1970s. The early programmes included composite components for the AAV7 family of amphibian assault vehicles and the M113 armoured personnel carrier. A complete M113 composite hull was constructed as a sandwich structure with skins produced from E-glass with a polyurethane foam core. In September 1983 a programme was initiated to produce a fibre reinforced plastic turret for the M2/M3 vehicle which used S-2 glass and a wet polyester resin. The turret retained an aluminium base plate, bulkhead, gun and tow trunnions, and the front and left side turret shell plates. A single composite structure replaced the roof, right side, and rear sections of the turret. In this hybrid structure, the composite material was acting more as shielding material than as a fully structural material, since the major loads were carried by the metal structure. The second major composite programme in the US was the Composite Infantry Fighting Vehicle (CIFV) programme which had three phases. The first phase was to identify materials to manufacture a composite vehicle based on the Bradley M2A1 and provide a materials data base. This programme concentrated on the use of preimpregnated S-2 woven roving polyester prepreg. The second phase of the programme was to produce the CIFV vehicle. This vehicle incorporating a composite hull and advanced ceramic armour was reported to demonstrate a 25% weight saving over an aluminium and steel construction, while utilising 65% composite materials by weight. The hull was produced in three pieces. The upper hull structure consisted of two halves with the join line running along the centre of the hull. The hull also included an aluminium box beam subframe

(SM1) 3-3

and an aluminium turret cage. The subframe was used to diffuse the running gear loads into the composite hull. The hull floor consisted of a single composite moulding, bolted to the subframe. A novel feature of this demonstrator was the use of ceramic tiles to provide ballistic protection, rather than tradition metallic armour. The third phase of the programme was called the Demonstration Composite Hull Programme which was started in September 1986 and addressed the advantages of composites for a 55 ton combat vehicle. This vehicle used both S-2 glass/polyester resin and E-glass/epoxy resin prepreg materials, with a steel weldment structure consisting of a front and rear steel structure, inner and outer rails to which the composite components were attached, and a steel bulkhead frame. The demonstrator can be seen as being a hybrid between a space frame and a monocoque, since the entire roof section was a single composite moulding. The Composite Armoured Vehicle (CAV) programme was awarded to United Defence (FMC) in 1994, to provide a 22 ton concept which incorporated the armour into the structure. Unlike the CIFV vehicle which substituted composites into a pre-existing vehicle, the CAV vehicle was designed to optimise the use the use of composites. The CAV vehicle does not have a metal subframe, but still incorporates metal components into the structure as detailed below. Both aluminium and titanium components are used as primary structural materials and armour in the hull. The metal components used to provide both local stiffening and to react suspension loads. The use of metal components in the structure does not allow the vehicle to fully demonstrate the ability of composite materials to carry typical suspension loads in isolation, however it does potentially offer one of the most weight efficient solutions. Due to the use of metal components the maximum thickness of any composite component for the CAV hull was ~16mm. A large number of composite components have been used in the structure of the CAV-ATD, and this has allowed the programme to evaluate different materials and manufacturing processes, though the conclusion of this work indicates that vacuum assisted resin transfer moulding is the most likely manufacturing process for future studies (VARTM). The hull is mostly manufactured using epoxy thermosetting resins because of their superior mechanical performance, where as previously in the composite Bradley CIFV vehicle polyester resins had been used due to their increased ballistic performance compared epoxies. The upper hull has been manufactured by a process called automatic fibre placement (AFP), which is a hybrid process developed from filament winding and automatic prepreg tape laying. Its advantages are that once the AFP computer has been programmed, the process is fully automatic removing the need for skilled labour and increasing the quality of the component. However, the equipment used to perform AFP is very expensive and this has been a major drawback in the use of AFP. It is therefore doubtful that the production quantities for composite hulled AFVs would off-set the set-up costs associated with the AFP manufacturing process. The use of S-2 glass polyphenylsulphide (PPS) thermoplastic composite material has been demonstrated for the lower hull sides which are attached to the lower hull tub structure. The sides are used principally for providing abrasion resistance to the tub sides and also to form the sponson floors with inherent abrasion resistance. To provide an EM shield for the vehicle, an aluminium mesh is attached to the inside surface of the hull with a covering of S-2 glass epoxy prepreg. An aluminium mesh is not used in the ACAVP hull because it is difficult to conform the mesh to the complex curves of the composite hull. The CAV hull is predominately produced from flat intersecting surfaces where the problem of conforming the mesh to hull shape is relatively simple. The prepreg material is modified to exhibit good fire resistance, and low smoke and toxic evolution in the presence of a fire. The bulkheads and part of the tub floor are sandwich constructions. The bulkheads use end grain balsa wood as the sandwich filling.

(SM1) 3-4

The use of the VARTM process for the CAV hull has been limited to relatively small components associated with the crew capsule. The success of these components has led to the specification of VARTM for future programmes.

2.3

Production vehicles

The first vehicles to utilise composites as part of the external structure of the vehicle were the Hagglunds Bv 206 and the .Coutalds Aerospace Composite Armnoured Vehicle (CAMAC CAV100). The CAV 100 is based on the 3,5 tonne Land Rover Defender chassis on to which is built a composite body manufactured from S2-glass phenolic resin. This body provides protection against small arms including 7.62 Nato ball, and is manufactured from bonded composite mouldings. The vehicle is designed for a range of roles including peacekeeping, and by eliminating metallics from the hull it minimises the effects of spall and other damaging secondary blast effects. Composite materials are used for the hull body of the Hagglunds amphibious Bv 206 vehicle which started production in 1981. This vehicle did not use composites to provide any ballistic protection with the hull being produced from a sandwich construction. The follow on vehicles the Bv 206S and BvS10 vehicle use an all welded steel hull to provide protection against 7.62 ball and shrapnel. Unlike metals, composite materials do not corrode, a particular advantage in salt water conditions. This has led to composite materials being evaluated for amphibious vehicles, where a weight reduction is also an advantage, since the lower the vehicle weight the higher the water speed. The US Armoured Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV) programme has looked at the use of composite materials to aid vehicle weight reduction for amphibious assault vehicles. The latest General Dynamics Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle which is nearing the completion of prototype testing is believed to include composites in conjunction with ceramics for part of the armour solution. Similarly, the United Defense LP 155mm Crusader self-propelled howitzer and resupply vehicle which are being designed for production in 2006, use composite armour in the hull of both of these vehicles. 2.4 UK - ACAVP Programme

The programme is a partnership between DERA and Vickers Defence Systems (VDS), Leeds who are providing a financial input into the programme. In addition there are two associate partners Hexcel Composites/CIBA and Perkins Engines who, by making a contribution to the programme, will have access to the data generated on their materials or equipment. The hull has been designed by DERA and VDS, and was manufactured by Vosper Thornycroft using a vacuum infusion moulding (VIM) process. The vehicle has been assembled by VDS and trialing by DERA began in early March 2000. 3.0 3.1 ADVANTAGES OF COMPOSITE MATERIALS Weight

The advantages offered by composite materials are now quite well known, but it is worth reiterating that the main driver for the utilisation of composite materials in military vehicles is the ability of composite materials to reduce vehicle hull and armour weights. One way that this can be achieved is by the elimination of parasitic mass in the form of a separate spall liner, from a composite vehicle. This is achieved by the composite hull acting both as a spall liner material and as a structural material capable of carrying all the operational loads associated with the vehicle. However, a major design problem preventing composite materials from significantly reducing hull weight is the opposing needs to provided the vehicle with both ballistic protection and mechanical structural performance. The level of ballistic protection provided normally correlates to the weight

(SM1) 3-5

of the vehicles hull and armour. Consequently, reducing hull weight can lead to a reduction in ballistic protection, unless the weight reduction is converted in additional armour mass. 3.2 Other advantages of composites

GRP composite is a poor transmitter of sound, its damping capacity being attributed to the fibre matrix interface. A reduction in radiated noise leads to lower crew fatigue [1], and a lower acoustic signature for the vehicle. Further work is required in this area before the full advantage offered by composites can be quantitatively assessed, and this is a subject that is being actively tackled by the modelling being conducted at Chertsey and will be described later in this paper. A summary of the additional advantages of composite materials compared to traditional materials used for AFVs are: increased ballistic protection against small arms; reduced behind armour damage; reduced parts count. As discussed above, the use of composite materials in military vehicles is not new to the British army, since it already operates the CAV 100 and the Bv206 vehicles. However, in both these vehicles a metal chassis carries the structural loads from the running, whereas in the case of ACAVP the composite hull carries all the running gear loads. 4.0 4.1 ACAVP DEMONSTRATOR DESIGN Vehicle description

The ACAVP demonstrator is based on a future scout reconnaissance vehicle with a battle weight in the range of 18 - 25 tonnes (figure 1). Armour appropriate to meet typical light armoured vehicle ballistic threat requirements has been designed together with the required armour fixings. The engine is situated at the rear of the vehicle which, together with radar absorbing materials and IR paints, will reduce the vehicles signature. The vehicle has mobility at least equal to Warrior IFV and the hull has been designed to allow for transportation in a Hercules aircraft. The demonstrator is designed to accommodate a mission module in the centre of the vehicle and two men sitting abreast at the front. The vehicle is designed to demonstrate complete electrical compatibility including radio and EMI features. 4.2 Vehicle design

The demonstrator concept was developed using solid modelling techniques, which facilitate the rapid generation and modification of geometry. Finite element (FE) models were generated directly from the solid model data enabling structural design and analysis activities to be integrated. The design of the ACAVP hull is shown in figure 2 and consists of two mouldings, a top moulding that includes the glacis and pannier side walls, and a bottom moulding incorporating the floor, toe plate and lower side walls. The thickness of the hull walls is determined by the required ballistic and structural performance. The two mouldings are joined using a bolted joint design that does not utilise the attached metallic armour as part of the loading bearing structure. The ability to produce a hull from two components rather than combining a number of component parts together, can lead to a reduction in the manufacturing cost of the assembly, by reducing associated manufacturing time and labour costs. The placement of the two hull bulkheads beneath the turret race ring enables the static and dynamic loads generated from the turret to be transferred into the hull sidewalls and floor. This has led to the torsional stiffness of the hull also being increased. The covers provided for the protection of the torsion bar suspension, are incorporated into the vehicle's structure and react the bending loads induced in the hull by the running gear. Closing off the space behind the panniers

(SM1) 3-6

using inner walls, which act as two longitudinal box beams enhances the rigidity of the vehicle. The vehicle has been designed to have the same torsional stiffness as the Warrior IFV. It was decided that the structure of the ACAVP vehicle would not use the attached metallic armour as part of the load bearing structure to allow the vehicle to operate with or without the appliqu. The concept of a purely composite hull suitable for use with or without appliqu armour enables the suitability of a family of composite vehicles to be demonstrated, including variants such as logistics, ambulance, command and communication roles etc. Such vehicles operate away from the direct fire zone and hence require lighter armour for indirect fire (IDF) threat only. Vehicles used in the IDF zone are often high value targets and should incorporate vehicle signature reduction techniques including both radar and acoustic where ever possible. This feature is being demonstrated in the ACAVP vehicle by incorporating stealth materials into the hull structure. The ACAVP programme has been shown that the inclusion of stealth and electromagnetic shielding materials in the composite hull does not reduce the mechanical performance of the hull or impede the hull manufacturing process, while gaining the elimination of parasitic mass normally associated with stealth materials. 4.3 Structural analysis design tools

Structural analysis of ACAVP was carried out using finite element models of the vehicle structure, which were continuously updated and refined throughout all phases of the design process. The models were generated and analysed using SDRC IDEAS Master series on Silicon Graphics Indigo2 workstations. Two dimensional shell elements were used to represent the composite hull in the Concept and Scheme phases of the programme. Loads were derived from a number of different sources including UK industry standard cases, and the results of ride and handling models. The most severe loading conditions applied to ACAVP were found to result from the running gear impacting terrain as the vehicle travels cross-country. However, reliable loading data is extremely difficult to obtain. General load conditions such as full vehicle weight on each wheel tend to be very conservative as ride models show the distribution of load between each wheel station can vary greatly with the front two and rear stations exposed to the maximum loads. Many vehicle ride models only model the system in two dimensions, assuming symmetry between the loads along each track. Techniques are currently being developed by DERA Chertsey looking at integrating a mechanical system analysis package called ADAMS with the finite element analysis packages to model the complete vehicle system in a three dimension environment. This will lead to more accurate prediction of vehicle loads enabling the vehicle structure to be optimised to minimise weight and improve system performance. The ADAMS simulation software enables users to produce virtual prototype models of vehicles, realistically simulating the full-motion behaviour of the mechanical system. The models can be used to provide data on displacement, velocity, acceleration and force outputs, for subsequent analysis by FE systems. The ACAVP vehicle has been modelled using ADAMS and the computer model will be validated by obtaining relevant data during the ACAVP trials programme. As well as being able to predict loads and accelerations for a vehicle concept, ADAMS can be used to investigate the vibration performance of the hull. This is achieved by identifying the natural frequencies of vibration of the hull using the FE software. This data is subsequently feed into the ADAMS/FLEX software programme which can then predict the vibration levels experienced by the hull, as the vehicle traverses across the computer generated landscape. Not only can this information assist in identifying vibration at the crew seat; it can also identify the vibration levels at sight locations, which may influence the performance of the sights. Variations in the turret and hull interface geometry and related traversing power requirements during fire on the move can also be investigated. The work on vibration is still at an early stage but the potential of this work is enormous especially as it should also lead into identify the influence of hull structure on vehicle noise.

(SM1) 3-7

A significant amount of analysis and testing was carried out to determine the mechanical properties of the composite hull material and to validate FE modelling techniques. The size of some of the sub-components and thickness of the composite material often required the use of large scale testing equipment. Further information about the performance of the structure and quality of the composite material in the vehicle hull will be gained by monitoring the structure during trials. 5.0 5.1 DEMONSTRATOR HULL MANUFACTURE Materials

Material selection for any component is a compromise between a number of factors such as mechanical performance, chemical resistance, cost and processability. The number of factors is increased when the component is designed for ballistic performance. Studies [3] have shown that a weak interface between the reinforcement matrix can improve the ballistic performance of composite materials against certain ballistic threats. A weak interface however, leads to low mechanical performance, which is unacceptable in a vehicle that utilises the composite as a structural material. To achieve a strong interface a fully compatible epoxy chemical sizing for the glass fibre finish was selected to provide the optimum mechanical performance for the ACAVP demonstrator. Both Kevlar and S2 Glass have been shown to exhibit superior ballistic performance over E-glass against low energy ballistic threats [4, 5]. Unfortunately both of these fibres are considerably more expensive than E-glass as shown in table 1, and Kevlar suffers from the disadvantage of relatively low compression strength compared to the glass materials. Kevlar fibre is also more difficult to machine than glass fibre, though special techniques have been developed. It was decided that in view of the above points and because the ACAVP vehicle is designed to meet ballistic threats higher than those at which Kevlar and S2 Glass have demonstrated a significant ballistic advantage, the vehicle would be produced from E-glass. The reinforcement is being utilised in the form of a quasi-isotropic non-crimp fabric (NCF). This material has a number of advantages over woven roving material, these being: reduced lay-up times due to the fabric being already orientated in the required directions; increased mechanical performance resulting from the negation of crimp in the fibres; and improved resin infiltration into the fabric as a consequence of the fabrics architecture. 5.2 Process Selection for Vehicles

Production quantities have a strong influence on selection of processing method, since low volume or one off component quantities can be economically manufactured using simple hand lay-up techniques, which require both a low investment in process machinery and tooling costs. However for large production quantities automation of the manufacturing process to achieve a faster processing cycle with mouldings of a consistent quality control is generally desirable. This however, requires more robust tooling and investment in process machinery. In choosing a manufacturing process, the following parameters also have to be addressed: Component tolerance & quality control; Maximum component operating temperature; Thickness of component. Required fibre volume fraction; For optimum mechanical performance for a composite a fibre volume in the region of 55 to 60% is required. The mechanical properties of a composite are also dependent on void content, fibre matrix interface and state of matrix cure.

(SM1) 3-8

Thick-section composites also have a number of unique problems associated with their manufacture. These are: for RTM processing the requirement for a very long processing window for the resin to allow complete resin infiltration; excessive resin exothermic temperatures during cure; poor resin/fibre consolidation leading to high levels of voids, especially for prepreg processing. All the above must be controlled to ensure a low void content (<2%). This has been achieved for the ACAVP demonstrator by using a development programme to identify the optimum processing conditions for the process selected to manufacture the hull, which for ACAVP is vacuum infusion moulding (VIM). VIM offers a more consistent, higher quality product than that produced by hand laminating methods, while providing manufacturing costs below those associated with prepreg manufacture. For production of the thick (greater than 10 mm) composite hulls for the ACAVP demonstrator VIM was selected due to the following advantages materials costs similar to compression and hand laminating costs, lower than for prepreg materials; superior dimensional & quality control than that possible by hand laminating manufacture; thicker fabrics can be processed than that possible for hand laminating; VIM materials do not have the limited storage/shelf life problems associated with prepreg materials. Both of the ACAVP hull mouldings have been successfully manufactured using VIM, and subsequently machined and assembled, prior to vehicle assembly and vehicle trials. 6.0 6.1 BALLISTIC CONSIDERATIONS Composite armour

Composite laminates have been shown to be particularly effective in resisting hard steel fragments produced by artillery shells and spall fragments [6]. Field trials have shown that composite materials display a reduction in behind-armour effects (BAE) against high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rounds compared with metallic structures. Although the jet of a shaped charge is very hot, it is unlikely to ignite a composite hull because it penetrates the material in a fraction of a millisecond, providing insufficient time for the surrounding material to become ignited. Against AP projectiles, composites provide lower ballistic protection compared with metallic armour. However, when composites are combined with other materials such as steel or ceramic tiles an effective system against AP projectiles can be produced. The steel or ceramic positioned on top of the composite presents a hard face to the projectile, which erodes or shatters, the resulting fragments being absorbed by the backing composite. The selection of the hard face material has many implications on the design of the vehicle. Ceramic tiles are usually positioned on top of a composite structure, below an outer thin spall layer of composite material. The use of composite material combined with ceramic tiles can produce a significant reduction in hull weight for comparable ballistic performance, compared with current monolithic aluminium hull vehicles. However, if the requirement for a vehicles armour is to withstand a multi-hit threat, the use of composite ceramic armour materials will be limited because of the brittle nature of ceramics. Reduced weight savings will be achieved if the multi-hit capability is increased by using a composite/metal armour. However, by attaching metal armour to a composite vehicle, the armour can be easily removed or replaced, producing a modular vehicle design.

(SM1) 3-9

Methods to attach armour to a composite hull have been evaluated and have included the use of metal inserts that are screwed into the composite hull. The use of this type of insert has also been successfully evaluated for the attachment of components to the composite hull. 6.2 Relationship between weight saving and ballistic threat

The potential weight saving for a composite vehicle compared to a metallic vehicle is very dependent on the threat level imposed on the vehicle. Studies based on the ACAVP concept with varying degrees of protection against medium calibre threats have shown that the weight saving for a composite hull and armour system of equal ballistic performance as an aluminium hull and comparable armour system can vary between 6 and 15%. This is due to the higher threats requiring greater levels of armour mass which reduces the relative contribution of the weight saved from hull by the elimination of the spall liner. To overcome the limitations placed on the composite material to provide optimum ballistic performance at the loss of structural efficiency, the use of crew capsule design for the vehicle has obvious advantages. The superior specific mechanical properties (i.e. mechanical properties divided by density) displayed by composite materials are detailed in table 2. By using the composite hull to carry the structural loads from the running gear and provide the necessary hull torsional stiffness, without the need to provide the ballistic protection to the crew, this being achieved by a highly armoured capsule, allows the lightest structural design to be used. It also introduces the ability to use carbon fibre composites, whose use has been limited to date due to poor ballistic performance and cost. The possible use of carbon fibre for AFVs has also been enhanced by a dramatic reduction fibre cost, with the cost of certain grades of carbon fibre now being comparable with that for S2-glass. Further research is necessary however, before the use of carbon fibre composites can be said to be entirely feasible, but the advantages in terms of reduced weight could be very significant. The disadvantage of the crew capsule approach in vehicle design is the increased probability of sustaining a mobility kill for the vehicle. The decision on the applicability of a crew capsule design is consequently dependent on the military strategy and doctrine of the end user. 7.0 SUMMARY OF ACAVP PROGRAMME

Hull production has shown that thick section composite materials can be produced which include both stealth materials and materials to provide the required electro magnetic shielding performance. The successful trialing of the vehicle has demonstrated the applicability of using composites in vehicles without the need for metallic supporting components. Techniques to attach both armour and components to the composite hull have been evaluated and are utilised in the vehicle. In view of the findings of the ACAVP programme to date, it is possible to state that composite materials can offer a weight saving over conventional vehicles for future armoured fighting vehicles. This weight saving is dependent on the ballistic protection defined for the vehicle and the design of the vehicle in terms of traditional monocoque or crew capsule designs. Further reductions in weight could be achieved by the use of carbon fibre composite materials. The ability to model the structure of tracked AFV concepts and in service vehicles has been demonstrated. This modelling has the potential to lead to increased accuracy in the design load cases for future AFVs leading optimised structural designs and reductions in vehicle weight. The ability to model the flexibility of the hull and attached components will allow the AFV designers to identify vibration problems at a much earlier stage in the design of vehicles. This will help to prevent vibration related crew problems from occurring in the finished vehicle and should increase the performance of subsystems influenced by hull vibration.

(SM1) 3-10

8.0

FUTURE

The future design of armoured fighting vehicles is difficult to predict but there is a strong desire to reverse the ever increasing weight of AFVs, though predictions of a twenty tonne vehicle operating in the same role as a conventional sixty tonne MBT will be difficult to achieve without the use of both new material options and improved modelling techniques. Any drive to reduce vehicle weight is obviously good news for the advocates of composite materials but composites are not the answer to every question posed by the already diverse and ever increasing requirements predicted by military doctrine. Composites must be combined with both synergistic materials and vehicle designs if the weight restrictions stated are to be met. It must also be realised that benefits do not come without costs by financial and operational. Due to the relatively low AFV production numbers, it is doubtful that the manufacturing costs for composite vehicles will ever be as low as for metallic hulls. Similarly, the cost of composite materials while significantly lower compared to their cost just ten years ago, will not be as cheap as for metallic materials, if only due to the huge difference in raw material production volumes. It is however, important to put these cost increases in context with the over all cost of an AFV, where the price for a hull can be less than 10 percent of the over all cost of the vehicle. An increase of even of 20% in the hull cost is still only an increase of 2% for the AFV, but with the potential increase in performance being much greater than 2%. In terms of operational cost, the use of a crew capsule design which maximises the structural benefits offered by composite materials obviously leads to an increased risk of mobility kills. Until sufficient OA studies have been conducted which can compare the increased vehicle mobility against a reduction in vehicle survivability, the benefits of the crew capsule design will continue to be an area for intense debate. Finally, where can the use of composites best be demonstrated. As discussed above, the benefit of using composite materials is dependent on the ballistic protection defined for the vehicle and the design of the vehicle in terms of traditional monocoque or crew capsule designs. It is my opinion that a vehicle designed for protection against 14.5mm AP threat or less using the combination of a composite hull, possible made from carbon fibre, with an uncoupled undercarriage as demonstrated by the Krauss Maffei Puma development programme [2], and a band track would be an ideal vehicle to display the capabilities of composite materials. For higher threat levels and in particular vehicles limited to only a small number of crew, then the use of a crew capsule with a composite hull optimised for structural performance, maybe the only way the proposed 20 tonne MBT like vehicle will be possible. 9.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Grateful thanks go to all the members of the ACAVP teams at MoD, DERA and Vickers and for the support of Perkins Engines (Shrewsbury) and Vantico/Hexcel Composites. 10.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 REFERENCES R M Ogorkiewicz, Armoured vehicles of composite materials, International Defense Review, 1989, Vol.22/7. Janes Defence Weekly 17 June 1995, pp31-32. A Vasudev & M J Mehlman, A comparative study of the ballistic performance of glass reinforced plastic materials, SAMPE Quarterly, Vol.18, No.4, July 1987, pp 43-48. T P Stuart & I G Crouch, Ballistic performance of resin transfer moulded GFRP panels with integral and machined metallic fixings, DRA Report Unpublished. F Macianica, Ballistic technology of lightweight armour, AMMRC, 1981. M A French Advanced Composite Armoured Vehicle Platform (ACAVP),Lightweight Armour Systems Symposium: RMCS, Shrivenham, June 1995

(SM1) 3-11

Figure 1 ACAVP Demonstrator Vehicle

Figure 2 ACAVP Hull Mouldings

(SM1) 3-12

Table 1 : A comparison of material costs Fibre type Cost /kg E-glass 3.0 S2-glass 11 Kevlar 20 Steel 3.0 Aluminium 1318B 4.6

Table 2 : Properties of engineering materials at 20C Material Density kg/m

3

Tensile Strength Absolute MPa Specific (t/) MPa/ ( kg/m3) 0.10 0.16 0.18 0.15

Youngs Modulus Absolute GPa Specific (E/) MPa/ ( kg/m3) 25.8 25.5 25 10.0

Carbon Steel Aluminium 7039 Titanium GRP Vf 0.6 Quasi-isotropic (0/-45/90/+45) CRP Vf 0.6 Quasi-isotropic (0/-45/90/+45)

7750 2750 4400 2010

775 430 800 300

200 70 110 20

1600

368

0.23

50

31.0

Vf = the volume fraction of fibres in the composite material. (The numbers in brackets indicate the principle fibre angles)

British Crown Copyright 2001/MOD Published with the permission of the Controller of her Britannic Majestys Stationary Office

(SM1) 3-13

QUESTION/ANSWER FORM LOW COST COMPOSITE STRUCTURES

Name of Author Paper Number Name of Discusser

M French 3 Alexander Feldly, FFI, Norway

Question:

Have you considered the challenge from the emerging hypervelocity kinetic energy weapons? Question after presentation.

Answer:

The future ballistic armour solutions to defeat such weapons will not rely on passive armour systems, rather we will be looking to the technologies based on both hard and soft kill defensive. The structure will have passive aid systems armour for the lower threats

ONCE THIS FORM HAS BEEN DULY COMPLETED PLEASE RETURN TO THE AVT PANEL ASSISTANT THANK YOU

This page has been deliberately left blank

Page intentionnellement blanche