You are on page 1of 15

International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Impact Engineering


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijimpeng

Dynamic response of alumina ceramics impacted by long tungsten


projectile
Jianguo Ning a, Huilan Ren a, *, Tingting Guo a, Ping Li b
a
b

State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijng 100081, PR China
National Key Laboratory of Shock Wave and Detonation Physics, Institute of Fluid Physics, CAEP, Mianyang 621900, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 31 July 2012
Received in revised form
27 April 2013
Accepted 8 June 2013
Available online 22 June 2013

In this paper, the dynamic response characteristics of ceramic targets impacted by a long tungsten
projectile at a high speed are investigated through an improved theoretical model. The model, based on
conventional quasi-static cavity expansion theory, takes the effect of the target damage caused by
penetration on the constitutive equation into account. A few useful relations of the target resistance and
the penetration velocity are derived from the model and the stationary incompressible hydrodynamic
theory. In order to examine the dynamic damage response of alumina ceramics to projectile impact and
the theoretical model, we set up the experimental system of a high-speed, long tungsten projectile with
its sabot separation device penetrating ceramic targets with/without cover plate, carried out a series of
penetration experiments, and compared the experimental results with theoretical calculation and numerical simulation results. Theoretical and experimental results show that 1) the anti-penetration ability
of AD90 ceramic is higher than that of 45# steel, especially, in the low-speed stage of the projectile; 2)
material parameters of AD90 ceramic obtained from the numerical simulation of projectile penetration
are reasonable; 3) the cover plate covered on the front of the ceramic target can improve the antipenetration ability, while the constraint sleeve enclosed the ceramic target has little effect on the
anti-penetration ability; 4) from the numerical simulations, the damage caused by penetration in the
target with the cover plate is initiated by the tensile wave reected from the back of ceramic, while the
damage in the non-plate target is initiated by direct impact, and then develops at the target back by
tensile wave; and 5) the theoretical model presented in this paper is proven to be reasonable, can be used
to further studying on dynamic response of target materials under penetration.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Anti-penetration ability
Long rod projectile
Ceramic target
Penetration damage

1. Introduction
In a war in the future, tank is still a major military strike force,
thus many countries have been and are studying novel armour
protection materials and structures to improve its anti-penetration
ability. Recent years, brittle ceramic materials, such as Al2O3 and
AlN, have been investigated as possible substitutes for steel as tank
armour materials against kinetic energy projectiles and shapedcharge jets. Their excellent ballistic performance against penetration comes from their unique dynamic mechanical properties, such
as low density and high compressive strength. The dynamic mechanical response, dynamic damage and fracture of ceramic composite armour are also the important factors for analyzing ballistic
performance against penetration [1].

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 86 10 68913557.


E-mail addresses: 396785294@qq.com, huilanren@bit.edu.cn (H. Ren).
0734-743X/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.06.006

Studies [2e5] on penetration mechanics indicated that the


impact and penetration process included wave propagation,
elasticeplastic deformation, crack initiation and propagation,
plugging process, petal-shaped reaming, spallation, shear zone,
melting and phase transformation, fragmentation, etc. These
phenomena belong to certain different scientic elds, thus it
becomes very complicated if all these phenomena need to be
studied. Penetration theory is generally based on the phenomenon produced in the impact and penetration process, therefore
the empirical formulas are developed on the basis of a series of
simple formulas by responsible simplication. The target resistance is usually used to measure the ability of a target to resist
penetration. Cavity expansion analysis (CEA) plays a signicant
role in studying the penetration behavior of target materials like
brittle ceramics [6].
Since CEA was rst put forward in the mid-20th century, it has
been widely used in many aspects. Hill [7] proposed that the
cavity expansion pressure can be considered as the work required

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

by opening per unit volume of the cavity. Chadwick [8] solved the
spherical cavity expansion pressure of the Mohr-Coulomb materials. In 1989, Sternberg [9] applied the CEA to ceramic material
and discussed the application of cavity expansion pressure as a
strength item in the Tate equation. He also studied the inuence
of material properties on the anti-penetration resistance and
found that the constitutive relationship of ceramic above the
elastic limit could not well describe the material behaviour,
indicating that the cavity expansion model for ductile materials
can not be directly used for brittle materials. Forrestal [10]
considered the cracks of porous rock when performing CEA and
found that the theoretical results using the Mohr-Coulomb
strength criteria and the linear pressure relationship were
consistent with the experimental results. Satapathy and Bless [11]
and Forrestal and Longcope [12] extended and applied the
quasi-static cavity expansion theory to ceramic materials.
Satapathy [13] presented the dynamic cavity expansion solution
to determine the dynamic response of ceramic materials in the
cavity expansion at a constant velocity. However, CEA doesnt
take the penetration damage on target material into
consideration.
In dynamic studies, penetration into targets of ceramics,
ceramic/metal, ceramic/composite and layered ceramics generally means that the penetration of long rod of metal such as
tungsten, molybdenum, tungsten alloy, etc. into the ceramics and
the ceramic/composite target in the speed range of 1500e
5000 m/s. These experiments are generally conducted on the
one-stage or two-stage light gas gun. The most commonly conducted experiment is the direct ballistic experiment, also known
as the penetration depth method (the depth-of-penetration,
DOP) [14,15] because it can reect the anti-penetration ability
of the ceramic target by accurately measuring the residual depth
in the backup metal. The advantage of the DOP method is that
the size of the specimen is close to the actual size, while its
drawback is that the information obtained from it is too little.
Only a residual depth can be got from an experiment. In addition,
since in most cases the size of the target is big, the real-time
observation of the X-ray radiography is difcult. DOP was rst
tested by Yariv in 1986 for investigation of the ballistic performance of ceramic tiles [16] and further improved by Rosenberg
[17], Anderson [15,18], and Wooward [19]. Since then, it was
applied widely in U. S. Army and Materials Research Laboratory
and considered as a standard experiment to evaluate the antipenetration ability of the ceramic/composite target. Anderson
et al. [15] used DOP test to examine the ballistic performance of
conned Al2O3 ceramic tiles by changing the type and the
thickness of the cover plates. Kim [20] studied the relationship
between the mechanical properties (Youngs modulus, density,
hardness, exural strength, and toughness) and the ballistic
properties of AD95, AD90, AD99, hot-pressed SiC, hot-pressed
TiB2, and hot-pressed B4C, etc. U. Hornemann and A. Holzwarth
[21] conducted a series of experiments to investigate the inuences of the thickness, distance and structure of the target on
the anti-penetration ability of the ceramic/steel target against
shaped charge jet.
In this paper, based on the stationary incompressible hydrodynamic theory and spherical cavity expansion analytic method, we
present our improved CEA theoretical model. In order to examine
the dynamic damage response of alumina ceramics to projectile
impact and the theoretical model, we set up the experimental
system of a high-speed, long tungsten projectile with its sabot
separation device penetrating ceramic targets with/without cover
plate, carried out a series of penetration experiments, and
compared the experimental results with theoretical calculation and
numerical simulation results.

61

2. Theoretical model for target resistance of ceramics


2.1. Stationary incompressible hydrodynamic theory
Taking the target resistance into consideration, we use the basic
equation of the stationary incompressible hydrodynamic theory,
i.e., Bernoulli equation, to describe the penetration of a projectile at
a high velocity into a target


1 
1
r vp  u 2 Yp rt u2 Rt ;
2 p
2

(1)

where rp and rt are the densities of the projectile and target,


respectively; vp and u are the projectile velocity and its interface
velocity at which it begins to penetrate into the target, respectively;
Yp is the dynamic strength of the penetrator and Rt is the target
resistance. From Eq. (1), we nd

v
p

1  rt =rp

 1

s
!
 2R  Y 

t
p
rt =rp 1  rt =rp
:
rp v2p

(2)

2.2. Quasi-static spherical cavity expansion model with damage


In Eq. (2), vp, rp, and rt can be determined by experiments, while
Rt can only be obtained from derivation. According to the degree of
damage, the response regions in the semi-innite ceramic target
due to sudden cavity expansion are shown in Fig. 1.
Boundary conditions are as follows:
a.) sr jrb 0 (At the elastic-undisturbed interface, there is no
stress.);
b.) sq jrc sf (Radial cracks appear when the hoop stress reaches
the tensile strength.); and
c.) sr jra Y (When the radial stress in the cracked zone reaches the compressive strength of the material, the material will
be crushed.).
In the boundary conditions, r is the radius from the tip or cavity
centre, h, a, c, and b are radii of various regions, respectively, shown
in Fig. 1, sr and s are the radial and hoop stresses, respectively
(positive in tension), and sf and Y are the tensile strength and
compressive strength of target material, respectively.
2.2.1. Elastic region (c < r < b)
Since the cavity is spherically symmetric, the material in the
elastic region can be described with following equations:

sr  sq
dsr
2
0;
dr
r
r

dur
ur
; q 4
;
dr
r

Fig. 1. Response regions in the ceramic targets.

(3)

(4)

62

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

8
< r

1
E0

sr  2nsq 

:
4
q

1
E0

The radial stress can be re-written as

1  nsq  nsr ;

(5)

sr E0 1  D

where n is the Poisson ratio, E0 is the initial elastic modulus; r, ,


and 4 are the radial and hoop strains, respectively and ur is the
radial displacement. By using its boundary condition, we solve Eqs.
(3)e(5) simultaneously, and nd the radial displacement and
stresses as follows:


ur



sf
b3
b3
21  2nr 1 n 2
1 3 ;
2E0
r
2c



b3
b3
sr sf 1  3
1 3 ;
r
2c

sq sf 1

b3
2r 3


1


b3
:
2c3

(8)


ur

sr
dsr
2
0:
dr
r

(9)

Solving Eq. (9) with its boundary condition, we nd the radial


stress

sr

Ya2
:
r2

(10)

Since it is continuous at the elastic-cracked boundary, we


compare Eq. (7) with Eq. (10), and get the relation

a2
c



sf
b3
b3
1 3
1 3 :

Y
c
2c

(11)

Cavity expansion theory was initially used to study metal materials that are ductile and on which no crack area occurs easily,
while for brittle materials like ceramics, damage exists in their
radially cracked region. From the previous studies [1,19], we know
that the micro-cracks nucleation and the initial crack size are two
important parameters to describe the currant damage state of the
material. Further details are given in Appendix A. In order to
describe the weakening effect of micro-crack damage on the
strength and stiffness of the material, we dene the damage factor
D as follows:

D 1

r3
:
c3

(12)

It is clear that D is related to the crack size (r) to the third power,
and complies with the following relations

0 < D < 1; r a
D 0; r c

(13)

sf
2E0

21  2nc 1 n



Ya2 c3 1
1
:

4E0 r 4 c4

b3
c2



b3
1 3
2c

(15)

2.2.3. Comminuted region (h < r < a)


When the radial stress in the cracked region exceeds the
compressive strength of the material, the material cannot withstand shear force without conning pressure. Ceramic is modeled
as Mohr-Coulomb [22] material described by Eq. (16) after
fractured.

s lp;
2.2.2. Radially cracked region (a < r < c)
It can be seen from Eq. (8) that the hoop stress in the elastic
region is tensile stress, thus the material will radially crack when
the hoop stress exceeds the tensile strength. Assuming that the
hoop stress in the radially cracked region equals zero, the stress
state in the region is uniaxial. The equilibrium equation can be
written as

(14)

By using its boundary condition, we solve Eqs. (6), (10) and (14)
simultaneously, and nd the displacement

(6)

(7)

dur
E r 3 dur
03
:
dr
c dr

sr  sq
2

sr 2sq
;
3

(16)

where l is the pressureeshear coefcient and p is the pressure. By


using its boundary condition, we solve Eqs. (3) and (16) simultaneously, and obtain the radial stress

sr Ya=r2a ;

(17)

where a 6l/(3 4l). The target resistance is dened as


a

Rt sr jrh Ya=h2 :

(18)

2.2.4. Target resistance


According to the mass conservation equation derived by Forrestal and Longcope [4]:

r
d
r  ur 3 3r 2 :
r0
dr

(19)

Since r/r0 1, we integrate Eq. (19) from r h to r aand get

 
1 h 3
ur a

:
3 a
a

(20)

It is noticed that b / N due to the target is semi-innite. Bring


Eqs. (20) and (15) into Eq. (18), we nd the target resistance

2
6
Rt Y 4

32a=3
E0 =3Y
7
r
3
q2 5

q
1 n sf =2Y 14
 14
Y= 2sf
2sf =Y
(21)

From Eq. (21), it is obvious that the target resistance is only


related to the material properties of the target by itself.
In order to have a concept of the magnitude numbers of the
target resistance, we take AD90 ceramic as an example. Its parameters had been investigated in detail in our previous work [23].
Its elastic constants are: E0 268.9 GPa, rt 3.625 g/cm3, and
n 0.228, respectively. These parameters now used are consistent
with the parameters used in the experiments discussed in the
following. The quasi-static strength parameters are, the compressive strength, Y 2.03 GPa, and the tensile strength, sf 0.262 GPa
l 0.273, the same as those of AD995 alumina. Thus, for an innite

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

63

Fig. 2. Projectile sabot design.

target of AD90 alumina, its target resistance, Rt, is calculated as


4.548 GPa from Eq. (21).
Fig. 4. Photos of the rod projectile and ball projectile.

3. Long rod projectile penetration


3.1. Sabot separation experiment
It is very difcult to nd the relative collision velocity between
projectile and target in technology, which can only be solved in the
penetration experiment. Generally, the target is kept stationary in
the laboratory reference frame, and then the projectile is driven by
a gas gun to obtain the required high speed [24]. When the gas gun
is used to launch a projectile, a sabot made of soft material is
designed to separate the launch tube from the projectile for protecting the tube wall from the damage from the projectile. It must
be in close contact with the launch tube to stop high temperature
and pressure gas produced in launching and accelerating the projectile from leaking into the front space of the projectile. At the
same time, the projectile in ight must be kept collimated. To
ensure that the sabot would not participate in the projectile terminal effect, that is, separating from the projectile in the exterior
ballistics; after separating, the sabot should deviate from the
movement direction of the projectile. It follows from above that
sabot design is important for the gas gun experiments.
The sabot, on the one hand, must have a sufcient strength to
resist high temperature and pressure gas produced to speed up the
projectile, on the other, it should be light enough to increase the
mass ratio of the projectile to the sabot. Therefore, the materials of
high strength and low density such as polycarbonate, polyamide,
and polyimide are chosen to make sabots for their good ballistic
characteristics. In addition, sabot is requested to separate from its
projectile after ring in the long rod penetration, particle erosion,
and debris impact experiments, and isnt involved in the terminal
effects of the projectile to the target.
The commonly used methods of sabot separation are aerodynamic separation method [25] and block method [26]. The formers disadvantage is that the projectile must y a long distance
before separation. If the ratio of the length to the radius of the
projectile is big enough (L/D  10), the sabot would be easily
disturbed, which causing the projectile to depart from its

predetermined orbit direction. For the latter, the sabot after separation still remains a part attached on the projectile, with which the
projectile continues ying and impact the target. It is clear that the
remnant of sabot adds its weight onto the projectile to the disadvantage of ying. In order to overcome both the disadvantages, we
present a new aerodynamic separation method of the sabot to meet
the request of the penetration experiment.

Table 1
Parameters and the effect of the sabot separation experiments.
No. Projectile
typesa

Ination Container Amount of


pressure/ typesb
propellant/g
MPa

0.2

300

1.113

F (85e46)

0.2

340

F (80e38)

0.2

380

1.852

F (80e38)

0.2

340

0.2

340

F (60e35)

0.2

340

1.109

F (85e42)

0.3

380

1.595

F (76e40)

0.5

380

1.447

F (115e50)

0.3
0.5
0.5
0.5

300
300
350
400

1.850
1.500
1.840
2.012

F (64e45)
F (90e48)
F (150e78)
F (120e75)

0.35

420

1.715

F (200e30)

0.35

520

2.305

F (190e40)

0.4

520

2.298

F (195e35)

0.35

350

1.690

F (200e47)

0.35

470

1.910

F (190e35)

0.35

470

1.950

F (195e34)

0.35

420

1.720

F (187e38)

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Fig. 3. Sketch map of experiment set.

W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 8)
Fe ball
Fe ball
Fe ball
W rod
(L/D 8)
W rod
(L/D 10)
W rod
(L/D 10)
W rod
(L/D 10)
W rod
(L/D 10)
W rod
(L/D 10)
W rod
(L/D 10)
W rod
(L/D 10)

Projectile Separation
velocity/ rangec/mm
km s1

a
W rod represents tungsten rod projectile; Fe ball represents steel ball
projectile.
b
The length of container is 100 cm, and the length of container is 50 cm.
c
The separation range is the outer and inner diameter of the impact trace on the
witness target.

64

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

connected each other in the middle, center the projectile, a long


tungsten rod, at the same time they join with the bottom of the
sabot by sliding connection. A 10 mm diameter and 2 mm thickness
steel or aluminum sheet stops the bottom of the projectile to prevent it from cutting through the bottom of the sabot. The angle of
the windward side of the truss plates is 120 which can increase the
action area of aerodynamic drag to speed up separation. During
ight, aerodynamic drag makes the truss plates turn over, it is the
turnover of the plates that initiates dividing of the bottom of the
sabot into four parts.

Fig. 5. Photos of the witness target after impact. (a) The impact trace of the left sabot
in the rod projectile (L/D 8) penetration (No.6). (b) The impact trace of the left sabot
in the ball projectile penetration (No.9). (c) The impact trace of the left sabot in the rod
projectile (L/D 10) penetration (No.13).

3.1.2. Experimental device design


Schematic of the experimental system is shown in Fig. 3. The
gun barrel connection tube is used to collimate the system and
reduce the damage of the gun barrel caused by ring the projectile
The aerodynamic sabot separation container is actually a pressure
vessel, consisting of ange, steel tube, and inlet valve. The two ends
of the container are sealed by plastic sealing lms. Before the
experiment, helium of a certain pressure is lled into the container
as the aerodynamic source. Since the container is placed in the
target chamber which is pumped into low vacuum, the pressure
difference between internal and external pressures is about 1 atm
pressure higher than the value on the pressure gauge. Nitrogen is
lled into the container to prevent hydrogen decrepitation when
the high temperature and high pressure hydrogen in the light gas
gun barrel leaks out. At the exit of the container there is a witness
target to verify the separation effect and protect the ange. The
collimation of the container is ensured by the connection between
the positioning slot of the upper cover ange and the connection
tube, as well as their precision processing in the prior period and
assembling. The velocity measurement facility is used to measure
the average velocity of the projectile before it impacts the target.
Because the aperture of the witness target is 15 mm, a little bigger
than the diameter of the projectile is 4.5e10 mm, sometimes the
sabot separation effect is difcult to verify. However, the sabot
separation effect can also be veried by the shape of the hole
formed in the target by the projectile after penetration. The whole
equipment is installed in a dedicated bracket, which can ensure
that not all the weight of the equipment would press on the launch
barrel.

3.1.1. Sabot design


Two conditions must be met to ensure that the sabot is effectively separated, at rst, the sabot must be made of the material of
light, high strength and good sealing performance, and then, the
sabot should departure from the direction of the projectile motion
after separation. A four aps combined sabot device is designed
according to the Ref. [24], as shown in Fig. 2. Four truss plates

3.1.3. Experimental results of sabot separation


In order to examine the separation effect, three sizes of projectiles were tested, among which the sizes of two rod projectiles
were F4.5 mm  40 mm, F4.5 mm  45 mm, and the diameter of
one steel ball projectile was 10 mm. These projectiles are shown in
Fig. 4. Generally speaking, the rod projectile, especially the atnosed rod projectile, is sensitive to the aerodynamic force, while
the spherical projectile has better aerodynamic characteristics.

Fig. 6. Photos of the steel targets impacted by rod projectiles.

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

65

The projectile velocity is set at 1e2.5 km/s, because the velocity of


conventional weapons is in this range. Experiments were conducted in two kinds of containers of 0.5 m and 1 m length,
respectively. The material of the target was steel. The inuences of
the ination pressure and the projectile velocity on the separation
effect were separately studied by changing one of them and xing
the other. The results are shown in Table 1. The separation effect can
be analyzed from the traces left by the passing sabots on the witness target, as shown in Fig. 5, and the penetration holes formed
nally by the projectile on the semi-innite target, as shown in
Fig. 6.
It can be concluded from the experimental results that:
1) In the conditions of projectiles velocity range of 1e2.5 km/s
and the containers ination pressure of 0.2e0.5 MPa, the sabot
can be completely separated from the projectile. When the
ination pressure increases, the amount of propellant is xed,
the aerodynamic force reduces the rod projectile velocity by
about 10% and the ball projectile velocity by about 20%.
2) The effect of sabot separation is steady for two types of the
containers and two types of projectiles. The shapes and the
depths of penetration holes indicate that the status of the
projectile is good before impact.
3) Increasing the ination pressure causes the separation angle to
increase, but the projectile velocity to decrease. Also, increasing
the amount of propellant causes the projectile velocity to increase but the separation angle to decrease.
4) All the traces impacted and left by the ying sabots on the
witness targets are greater than 20 mm away from the axis,
indicating that the sabot would not inuence the nal impact
of the projectile into the target.
It is obvious from the experiment that the sabot separation
system designed by using the aerodynamic separation method can
effectively separate the sabot from the projectile. It can be used in
the future experiments of the ballistic characteristics of materials.
3.2. Experiment on long rod projectile penetration into targets
3.2.1. Test methods and techniques
A two-stage gas gun with a 25 mm calibre of the light gas gun
barrel is used to launch the projectile with sabot. The material of
the sabot is polycarbonate. The diameter, length and aspect ratio (L/
D) of the projectile shaped as a long, at-nosed tungsten rod are
4.5 mm, 45 mm and 10, respectively. The target materials are steel
and ceramic-composite targets, respectively. The layout of the
experiment is shown in Fig. 5. After ring, the projectile is separated with the sabot in the aerodynamic container before impact,

Fig. 8. The crater prole of the steel target.

and then it ies through the projectile velocity measuring device,


and nally impacts and penetrates into the ceramic-composite
target.
3.2.2. Ceramic composite target
In the experiment of the projectile penetration into the ceramiccomposite target, the projectile velocity is in the range of 1.5e
2.5 km/s, the sizes of the ceramic tiles are F97 mm  6 mm,
F97 mm  12 mm, and F97 mm  24 mm, respectively. The
alumina ceramic consists of 89.8% Al2O3, 7.8% SiO2, 2.2% CaO and
0.2% other phases. In the present experiment, the outer diameter of
the constraint sleeve is 180 mm, which completely meets the
constraint criteria [7]. The structure of the ceramic-composite
target is shown in Fig. 7. The material of the cover plate, the
constraint sleeve, and the witness target are 45# steel.
3.2.3. Experiment results
3.2.3.1. Flat-nosed tungsten rod penetrating into steel target.
The depth-of-penetration (DOP) experiment with the tungsten rod
penetration into a semi-innite thick steel target was done as a
reference to evaluate the anti-penetration ability of AD-90 ceramic.
Four DOP experiments were conducted. The longitudinal cross
section of an impacted borehole by the projectile into the steel
target cut along the axis direction of the target is shown as Fig. 8,
the diameter H and the depth P0 of the crater were measured.
From Table 2, the linear relationship between P0/L and wf can be
obtained by the least square method: P0/L 0.546 0.47wf.
According to this relationship, for any velocity between 1.715 km/s
and 2.313 km/s, the corresponding P0/L can be calculated. It is
possible to make a comparison between the penetration results of

Table 2
Results of the penetration of at-nosed rod into semi-innite 45# steel target.

Fig. 7. Structure of the ceramic composite.

No.

wf/km s1

P0/mm

H/D

P0/L

613a
618a
705a
706p

1.715
2.305
1.950
2.313

61.0
73.2
64.5
73.6

2.30
2.67
2.56
2.70

1.356
1.627
1.433
1.636

66

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

Table 3
Results of the penetration of long rod into AD90 ceramic-composite target.
No.

PCOVER/ tc/mm
wf /
km s1 mm

Pr/mm Hcp/mm Pw/mm

619
620

2.310
2.298

10.2
10.3

41.7
41.0

16e20
16e18

621
622
627
703
704a
704p
706a

2.312
2.300
2.319
1.720
1.690
1.910
2.315

10.2
10.2
0.0
10.2
10.2
10.3
10.2

39.0
50.0
55.0
26.8
31
42.1
29.2

20e22
15e16
e
13e14
11e12.5
15e17
24e26

12.1
18.2
(6 12.2)a
24.2
5.75
12
12.15
12.1
12.1
29.9
(5.8 24.1)a

80 (50 30)a
80 (30 20 30)a
80
100
110
110
100
80
80

(50
(50
(50
(50
(30
(20
(30

30)a
20
30
30
20
30
20

30)a
30)a
30)a
20 30)a
30)a
30)a

The values of the thickness of each ceramic tile are in the bracket.

the semi-innite steel target and the ceramic-composite target.


Thus the experimental result about the long rod tungsten penetrator penetrating into the steel target can be used to compare and
evaluate the anti-penetration ability of a ceramic-composite target.
3.2.3.2. Flat-nosed tungsten rod penetrating into ceramic-composite
target. The ceramic tiles with same 97 mm diameter and
different thickness were used in the experiments. Nine DOP experiments were carried out. The experimental conditions are listed
in Table 3, where Pcover is the thickness of the cover plate, tc is the
thickness of the ceramic tile, Pr is the depth of the sabot penetrating
the witness plate, Pw is the thickness of the witness plate, and Hcp is
the hole diameter of the cover plate. Table 4 shows the normalized
penetration depth PT/L (PT Pcover tc Pr) and the impact velocity
wf, where DP P0 e (PCOVER Pr), so the ratio, DP/tc, can be used to
evaluate the anti-penetration ability of the ceramic tile or target.
The relationship between the normalized penetration depth PT/L
and the impacting velocity wf is shown in Fig. 9, the solid line is the
experimental results of the tungsten penetrator into the steel
target, while the experimental data of ceramic target are scattered
with small squares. It is obvious from Fig. 9 that the penetration
depth of the projectile into the ceramic-composite target is smaller
than that into the steel target, which means that the ceramic target
has higher protection ability than 45# steel. That the antipenetration ability of the ceramic-composite target is superior to
that of 45# steel target is higher in the low speed range of the
penetrator than in the higher-speed range of it.
Fig. 10 shows the relationship between the thicknesses of
ceramic tiles and the contribution of the ceramic tiles at the projectile velocity of about 2.3 km/s. It is found that the contribution of
ceramic per unit thickness decreases with the thickness of ceramic
tiles increasing at 2.3 km/s. However, when the thickness of
ceramic tiles increases to a certain value (about 22.0 mm), DP/tc
reaches a stable value (0.95). The value is less than 1, meaning that

Fig. 9. PT/L of ceramic composite target and steel target vs wf.

the anti-penetration ability of ceramic-composite targets is lower


than that of 45# steel target. However, taking the density and the
cost into account, ceramic is a good substitute for a part of steel
target. It can be also found that the anti-penetration ability of the
ceramic-composite target with the cover plate is higher than that
without the cover plate.
Examining carefully the photos of overturned cover plates, as
shown in Fig. 11, we can nd that the radius of the borehole, the
width of the cracks around it, and the turnover of the cover plate
increase with the thickness of the ceramic tiles increasing: such as
when tc 5.75 mm, the outer diameter is about 15.5 mm; when
tc 29.9 mm, the outer diameter is about 25.0 mm. The reason may
be that the radius of the crater in the ceramic target increases with
the thickness of the ceramic tiles increasing; on the other hand, the
amount of the ceramic particles sputtered due to impact also increases with the thickness of the ceramic tiles increasing, therefore,
the amount of the ceramic particles eroding the projectile and
moving toward the opposite direction of the projectile increases.
Thus the thicker the ceramic tile, the severer the cover plate is
damaged and deformed. which indicates that the cover plate prevents the ceramic particles from sputtering off and increases the
erosion action, causing the projectile to become thinner and shorter
during penetration.

Table 4
Results of the anti-penetration test of AD90.
No.

wf/km s1

Pr/mm

PT/L

P0/La

DP/tc

619
620
621
622
627
703
704a
704p
706a

2.310
2.298
2.312
2.300
2.319
1.720
1.690
1.910
2.315

64.0
69.5
73.4
65.95
67.0
49.15
53.3
65.56
69.26

1.422
1.544
1.631
1.465
1.489
1.092
1.184
1.457
1.539

1.631
1.626
1.632
1.627
1.635
1.354
1.340
1.443
1.539

1.778
1.202
1.002
2.264
1.552
1.969
1.579
0.951
0.998

The value of P0/L is calculated by the relationship between P0/L and wf.

Fig. 10. Plot of DP/tc versus tc.

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

67

Fig. 11. Photos of recovered cover plates.

According to the mechanism of anti-penetration, the impact of


the long rod projectile on the ceramic target is similar to that of the
shaped charge jet on ceramic target. However, since the long rod
projectile is coarser than the jet, there is some ceramic debris
around the ceramic target ablated or sputtered by the impacting
projectile. Thus a high constraint is applied on the ceramic target.
From dynamical point of view, it is just because the constraint
enhances the effective shear strength of ceramic debris that results
in more serious projectile ablation.
4. Numerical simulation of long rod projectile penetration
into ceramic target
4.1. Calculation model
The penetrations of tungsten long rods into single layer ceramic
and multi-layer ceramic-composite targets are numerically

Table 5
JH-2 parameter of AD90 ceramic.
Parameters

AD-90

r0, density(g/cm3)

3.625
0.88
0.28
0.007
0.60
0.64
0.262
5.3
109.7
228.6
191.4
111.5
1.0
0.02
0.83

A, intact strength constant


B, fracture strength constant
C, Strain Rate Constant
M, Fractured Strength Exponent
N, Intact Strength Exponent
T, Hydro Tensile Limit (GPa)
HEL, Hugoniot Elastic Limit (GPa)
G, shear modulus(Gpa)
K1, pressure (EOS) constant (GPa)
K2, pressure (EOS) constant (GPa)
K3, pressure (EOS) constant (GPa)
Beta, Bulking Constant
D1, damage constant
D2, damage constant

68

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

Table 6
Parameter of 45# steel and tungsten.
Parameters

45# steel

Tungsten

r0, density (g/cm3)

7.85
5.06
1.73
1.67
77
1.40
0.51
0.26
0.014
1.0
273
477
1793

19.2
5.22
1.268
1.54
160.4
0.92
0.177
0.12
0.016
1.0
273
134
1723

co, Bulk sound speed (km/s)


l, Slope in Us versus Up diagram
g, Grneisen coefcient
G, Shear modulus (GPa)
A, Static yield limit (GPa)
B, Strain hardening modulus (GPa)
n, Strain hardening exponent
C, Strain rate coefcient
p0, Plastic strain rate threshold (1/s)
T0, Reference temperature (K)
Cv, Specic heat (J/kg K)
Tm, Melting temperature (K)

Table 7
Comparison between simulated and experimental results.
No.

wf/(km/s)

dcover/(mm)

tc/(mm)

PTE/(mm)

PTS/(mm)

1
2
3
4

2.310
2.298
2.312
2.315

10.2
10.3
10.2
10.2

12.1
18.2
24.2
29.9

64
69.5
73.4
69.3

57.6
62.7
71.7
64.9

simulated with AUTODYN-2D. The structure model of the target is


shown in Fig. 7, but only half of the structure model is used in
numerical simulations for its symmetry. It is depicted by Lagrange
method. Erosion strain is used to control when the grid should be
deleted. The geometric parameters of the model are as follow: The
diameter and length of the at-nosed projectile are 4.5 mm and
45 mm, respectively; the outer diameters of the ceramic tile and the
steel sleeve are 97 mm and 180 mm, respectively; the thicknesses
of the steel cover plate and the witness target are 10 mm and
100 mm, respectively. The calculation model is established as a
two-dimension axisymmetric model. Considering the model size is
small, the model is meshed as ne as possible. Since the deformation is relatively small, the whole model is meshed with
Lagrange grids with size of 0.33  0.33 mm2 The damage of ceramic
material is dened by JH-2 model, and when the geometric strain of
the Lagrange grids exceeded the critical value, the grid would be
deleted.
Ceramic target is AD90, another structure model of JH2 is
designed for studying the behavior of brittle material. Table 5
shows the parameters of ceramics. In the simulation of penetration process, some very high strain rates may be attained at which
the ow stress exhibits a strong rate-sensitivity. For long tungsten
rod and steel targets, Johnson-Cooks constitutive model with the
yield stress is used. The materials of the cover plate and the witness
target are 45# steel. The material parameters are listed in Table 6

Fig. 12. Damage status of the single-layer ceramic-composite target with cover plate.

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

4.2. Simulation results


4.2.1. Ceramic-composite target with cover plate and constraint
sleeve
Four experiments No.619, 620, 621, and 706a on the penetration
of tungsten projectile into ceramic-composite target were simulated with AUTODYN-2D. The comparisons between the simulated
and the experimental results are listed in Table 7, where wf is the
initial velocity of the projectile, dcover and tc are the thicknesses of
the steel cover plate and the ceramic tile, PTE and PTS are total
penetration depths in the experiment and the simulation. From
Table 7, it can be seen that the simulated results are consistent with
the experimental ones, which proves that the material parameters
and the control parameters used in AUTODYN-2D are reasonable.
Fig. 12 shows the development of damage caused by the penetration of the long at-nosed tungsten rod at 2.3 km/s initial velocity into ceramic-composite target with cover plate. When
t 3 ms, slight damage (the red part) occurs at the back of the
ceramic (Fig. 12-(a)); when t 8 ms, the damage occurs throughout
the entire thickness (Fig. 12-(b)); the damage region extends with
penetration (Fig. 12-(c), (d), (e) and (f)); when the projectile exhausts, penetration stops (Fig. 12-(f)).
From Fig. 12-(a), it is clear that damage initiates from the back of
the ceramic, behind which lies the reason that the compressive

69

strength of ceramic material is higher than its tensile strength.


When the projectile impacts into the composite target, the shock
wave induced by impact propagates through the thickness direction of the target. It is a compressive wave before it reaches to the
back interface of the ceramic. However, it becomes a tensile wave
when the shock wave is reected back from the back interface of
the ceramic tile. Thus damage initiates from the back interface
where the tensile wave reaches rst. Damage extends in the
thickness and the radial direction when the tensile wave propagates from the back to the front of the ceramic tile. Thus damage is
more severe at the back than that at the front in the radial direction,
as seen in Fig. 12-(b), (c), (d), and (e). At the later stage of penetration, damage extends throughout the whole ceramic tile, as
shown in Fig. 12-(f).
The penetration of the at-nosed tungsten rod into a three-layer
ceramic-composite target is numerically simulated. The thickness
of each of three ceramic tiles is 12 mm, and the interval each other
is 5 mm. The thickness of the cover plate is 10 mm. The materials of
the cover plate and the witness plate are 45# steel. The projectile
velocity is still 2.3 km/s. The penetration process is shown in Fig. 13.
Similar to Fig. 12, it is seen from Fig. 13 that damage initiates at
the back of each layer of three ceramic tiles before the projectile
pierces deeply each ceramic tile, as shown in Fig. 13. So we can
conclude that damage in the three-layer ceramic-composite target

Fig. 13. Damage status of the three-layer ceramic-composite target with cover plate.

70

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

Fig. 14. Damage status of the ceramic-composite target without cover plate.

with cover plate is initiated by the tensile wave induced by


impacting. The similar conclusion holds for the single-layer
ceramic-composite target with the cover plate.
4.2.2. Ceramic-composite target without cover plate
The damage status in the ceramic tile without the cover plate is
shown in Fig. 14. The difference between both damage statuses of
ceramic targets with and without the cover plate is where the
damage initiates. When the ceramic tile is protected by the cover
plate, the shock wave has enough time to propagate to the back of
the ceramic tile before the projectile pierces there, thus damage

happens due to reection of the tensile wave from the back (Fig. 12(a)). When the ceramic tile has no the cover plate, the shock wave
has not enough time to reach the back of the ceramic tile to reect a
tensile wave before the impact, thus damage occurs from the front
caused by direct impact, as seen in Fig. 14-(a). When the shock wave
reaches the back and reects as a tensile wave, damage develops
from the target back by the tensile wave, as seen in Fig. 14-(b).
Because the speed of shock wave is higher than the projectile velocity, the damage happens from the back is quicker than that from
the front. That is why the damage in the back of the target at the
earlier stage of impact is more severe, as seen in Fig. 14-(b) and (c).

Fig. 15. Damage status of the ceramic target without constraint sleeve.

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

71

Although both target structures are different, the penetration


depths are similar for the targets with the constraint sleeve and
without the constraint sleeve. Here the reason may be that the
diameter of the ceramic target is much bigger than the diameter
of the projectile, so that the ceramic tile can be approximately
considered as a semi-innite plane in the radial direction. When
the targets diameter is big enough, there are the similar
impacting effects on the targets without and with the constraint
sleeve.
5. Theoretical model verication by simulation

Fig. 16. Structure of the ceramic target.

The ceramic tile without the cover plate bulges in the reverse direction of impacting, while the ceramic tile with the cover plate
does not behave so.
The penetration depth of the ceramic-composite target without
the cover plate is 62 mm, which is a little bigger than that of the
ceramic-composite target with the cover plate. The reason is that
the cover plate can constrain the ceramic particles so that they can
only move in the radial direction, and erodes the projectile to
weaken its penetration ability. While the ceramic particles of the
composite target without the cover plate can move in any direction, the particles eroding the projectile are much less than those
of the target with the cover plate. Thus the cover plate can
improve the anti-penetration ability of the ceramic-composite
target.
4.2.3. Ceramic-composite target without constraint sleeve
The penetration of the at-nosed tungsten rod into the singlelayer ceramic-composite target without the constraint sleeve is
numerically simulated, as shown in Fig. 15. The thickness and the
diameter of the ceramic tile are 12 mm and 180 mm, and the
thicknesses of the cover plate and the witness plate are 10 mm and
100 mm, respectively. The materials used in simulations are the
same as the previous model in this context.
The penetration process is shown in Fig. 15. From the gure, it
is obvious that the damage status of the composite target without
the constraint sleeve is similar to that of the target with
constraint sleeve (Fig. 12). It proves that the damage occurs due to
reection of the tensile wave from the back of the ceramic again.

In this section, numerical simulations are presented to validate


the model. The structure of pure AD90 ceramic target is shown in
Fig. 16. The projectile velocities of 0.7 km/s, 1.5 km/s, 2.31 km/s,
3.5 km/s and 4.5 km/s are chosen respectively. The material density
and strength of the tungsten rod are rp 19.2 g/cm3 and
Yp 2.452 GPa, respectively.
For the pure AD90 ceramic target, we can nd the penetration
velocity of the projectile by bringing Eq. (21) into Eq. (2). The relationships of the penetration velocities found from the theoretical
model and the numerical simulation to the projectile velocity are
shown in Fig. 17 (a). By comparison between the theoretical and
numerical results, it is clear that the penetration velocity found by
the theoretical model is smaller than that by the numerical simulation, which means that the damage calculated by this model is
still smaller than the real damage. In other words, it is feasible to
use the damage to assess the anti-penetration of the ceramic target.
It is also clear from Fig. 17(b) that the difference between the
theoretical and numerical results becomes smaller with the projectile velocity increasing, which indicates that at lower projectile
velocity, the effect caused by the impacting projectile at a lower
velocity on the target resistance is bigger than that at a higher
velocity.
6. Conclusions
The investigation is aimed at determining the dynamic mechanical properties of alumina ceramic targets impacted by high
velocity projectiles from the point of view of the target resistance.
Although CEA method could calculate penetration resistance of
brittle materials, it did not consider the damage inuence on the
constitutive equation, thus cant be directly applied. In this paper,

Fig. 17. Comparison between simulated results and theoretical results. a. Penetration velocity vs. projectile velocity. b. Difference between the theoretical results and the numerical
results.

72

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

we present a new quasi-static spherical cavity expansion theoretical model, which takes the effect of penetration damage on the
elastic module into consideration. Based on the model, we derive
the analytical expression of target resistance, and further calculate
the penetration velocity according to the stationary incompressible
hydrodynamic theory.
In order to examine the dynamic damage response of alumina
ceramics penetrated by a projectile at a high speed and our theoretical model concerning penetration damage, we set up the
experimental system of a high-speed, long tungsten projectile with
its sabot separation device penetrating alumina ceramic targets
with/without cover plate, carried out penetration experiments, and
compared experimental results with theoretical calculation and
numerical simulation results.
Theoretical and experimental results show that 1. as the target
material, the anti-penetration ability of AD90 ceramic is higher
than that of 45# steel, especially, in the low-speed stage of the
projectile; 2. Material parameters of AD90 ceramic obtained from
the numerical simulation of projectile penetration are reasonable;
3. The cover plate covered on the front of the ceramic target can
improve the anti-penetration ability, while the constraint sleeve
enclosed the ceramic target has little effect on the anti-penetration
ability; 4. From the numerical simulations, the damage caused by
penetration in the target with the cover plate is initiated by the
tensile wave reected from the back of ceramic, while the damage
in the non-plate target is initiated by direct impact, and then develops at the target back by tensile wave; 5. The theoretical model
presented in this paper is proven to be reasonable and can be used
to further study the dynamic response of target materials under
penetration.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (11032002, 11172045)
Appendix A
Under quasi-static or dynamic loading, micro-cracks in some
solids may nucleate either at in homogeneity such as inclusions and
reinforcements or at defect such as micro-cracks and pores within
the sintered ceramics. Many experimental researches indicated
that the nucleation, growth, and interaction of micro-cracks are the
predominant forms of damage induced in solids under dynamic
loading or shock loading during their failure.
The micro-mechanism of compressive damage is very complicated. Because the distribution of heterogeneous micro-cracks in
solid can be either random or in the preferred orientation, the
stress distribution within the microstructures can be extremely
complex. However, it has been observed that brittle materials
subject to axial compression fail in the axial splitting when the
conning pressure is zero or very small, or in the shear failure when
the conning pressure is moderate whereas still below the brittlee
ductile transition pressure [27]. To study the mechanism of
compressive damage, a row of suitably oriented model aws is
considered. It can be shown that tension wing cracks nucleate at
the tips of the previous model aw and grow with the compression
increasing and nally become parallel to the direction of the
maximum far-eld compression.
Denition of damage
The effect of damage is assumed to be a reduction in the
elastic modulus of the material. The constitutive relation of the

ceramic subject to uniaxial compressive loadings, is written as


follows

s 1  DE

(A.1)

where s is the stress, is the strain, E is the elastic modula, D is the


damage factor. Differentiating Eq. (A.1), we get the time-dependant
increment of stress

_ D_
s_ E_  E D

(A.2)

Based on the microscopy examination, the development of


cracks is stochastic due to grains random orientation and
the formation of a second phase on some interfaces [28]. The
damage, measured in terms of a dimensionless parameter, is
dened by

D Na3

(A.3)

where N is the number of cracks per unit volume, a is the size of


the optimal crack. During micro-cracks nucleating and extending, D changes with both the size and number of cracks
increasing. For an isotropic damage, D varies from 0 to 1, D 0
means that the original material has no damage, while D 1
means it is completely destroyed, other values tells it is partially
damaged.
Damage growth model
In general, the damage evolution in solids consists of (1) the
nucleation of micro-cracks of some initial density; (2) the growth of
micro-cracks; (3) the coalescence of the micro-cracks when their
size is above some critical values.
Cracks grow either with the compression they suffer increasing
or the cracks themselves nucleating. The nucleation of cracks is
assumed to satisfy the Weibull distribution [29,30]

N km

(A.4)

where k and m are the parameters of the concerned material.


From the differentiating Eqs. (A.3) and (A.4), we get the damage
rate

_ Na
_ 3 3N aa
_ 2 kmm1 _ a3 3km aa
_ 2
D

(A.5)

Rewriting Eq. (A.2) and Eq. (A.5), the damage rate and strain rate
are represented by stress rate as follows
m1 a3 s
_ 2 1  D
_ =E 3km aa
_ km
D
1  D  kmm a3

_ 2
s_ =E 3km1 aa
1  D  kmm a3

(A.6)

(A.7)

From the above, we know, when D(a,tf) 1, the material


suffers no damage. However, from Eq. (A.6), we can see that, as
_
before D(a,tf) 1, indicating that once
D kmma3 / 1, D/N,
the tension cracks nucleate and grow, the damage evolve so fast
that the material is destroyed. Therefore, the failure criterion
D(a,tf) 1is unsuitable here and has to be replaced by
D(a,tf) / N.
At that time t tf,

 

sf s tf :

(A.8)

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

73

Sliding crack model for tensile wing crack


Nemat-Nasser and Horri analyzed the crack growth under
compression [27], they found that tensile wing cracks initially grow
at a large angle with the direction of axial compressive stress and
then rapidly grow parallel to the applied stress. The approximate
expression to estimate the crack growth derived by Horri and
Nemat-Nasser is adopted here. The schematic of crack growth is
shown as in Fig. A1. For simplicity, two factors are neglected in the
following analysis: (1) the orientation distribution of all initial
cracks, in other words, it is assumed that the angles between all
initial cracks and the axial compressive stress are 45 ; (2) the interactions between cracks. Assume that micro-cracks growth is
governed by a critical stress intensity factor and the growth would
be sustained provided that
D
KID KIC
;

(A.9)

D is the dynamic
where KID is the dynamic stress intensity factor, KIC
fracture toughness that is assumed to be independent of the strain
rate.
The stress intensity factor KID that drives wing cracks of the
length to grow is a function of the current length of some crack a
_ that is,
and the velocity of its growth a,

_ kaK
_ 1 a; 0;
KID a; a

(A.10)

where

_
ka


1

a_
CR


1

a_
2CR

1

(A.11)

in which K1(a,0) is the stress intensity factor of a stationary crack.


Under a biaxial compressive loading, the model I stress intensity
factor at the tip of each of the tension cracks is given by Ref. [31].

F sin q
K1 a; 0 q  s2
*
p
w sin aa
w

r
pa
;
2w tan
2w

(A.12)

where

F 2cs* ;

s*

1
1
s  s2 sin 2 q  ms1 s2 s1  s2 cos 2 q;
2 1
2
(A.13)

in which s* is the shear stress driving the crack to slide, 2c is the


original size of pre-crack, m is the ctional coefcient, 2w is the
space of pre-cracks, q is the angle of initial crack measured from the
axial compressive stress, s1 s1(t) and s2 s2(t) are external
loadings.
Combining Eqs. (A.9), (A.10) and (A.12), we obtain the cracks
velocity

a_ CR

D
KI a; 0  KIC
D =2
KI a; 0  KIC

(A.14)

_ the
For a given stress pulse s(t), the wing crack growth rate a,
_ and the strain rate _ can be obtained from
damage rate D,
Eqs. (A14), (A6) and (A7), respectively, their corresponding values,
the crack length a, the damage D and the strain can then be
calculated.

Fig. A1. The model of wing crack.

References
[1] Ren HL, F Shu X, Li P. Numerical and experimental investigation of the
fracture behavior of shock alumina. Sci China Phys Mechanics Astron
2010;53:244e52.
[2] Herrmann W, Wilbeck JS. Review of hypervelocity penetration theories. Int J
Impact Eng 1987;5(1e4):307e22.
[3] Zukas JA. High velocity impact dynamics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.;
1990.
[4] Backman ME, Goldsmith W. The mechanics of penetration of projectiles into
targets. Int J Eng Sci 1978;16(1):1e99.
[5] Johnson W. Impact strength of materials. London: Edward Arnold; 1972.
[6] Chen XW, Z Chen Y. Review on the penetration/perforation of ceramic targets.
Adv Mech 2006;36(1):85e102.
[7] Hill R. The mathematical theory of plasticity. London: Oxford University Press;
1950.
[8] Chadwick P. The quasi-static expansion of a spherical cavity in metals and
ideal soil. Quart Journ Mech Appl Math 1959;12(Part 1).
[9] Sternberg J. Material properties determining the resistance of ceramics to high
velocity penetration. J Appl Phys 1989;65(9):3417e24.
[10] Forrestal MJ. Penetration into dry porous rock. Int J Solids Structures
1986;22(12):1485e500.
[11] Satapathy S, Bless S. Calculation of penetration resistance of brittle material
using spherical cavity expansion analysis. Mech Mater 1996;23:323e30.
[12] Forrestal MJ, Longcope DB. Target strength of ceramic materials for highvelocity penetration. J Appl Phys 1990;67(6):3669e72.
[13] Satapathy S. Dynamic spherical cavity expansion in brittle ceramics. Int J
Solids Struct 2001;38:5833e45.
[14] Grace FI, Rupert NL. Analysis of long rods impacting ceramic targets at high
velocity. Int J Impact Eng 1997;20:281e92.
[15] Anderson CE, Royal-Timmons SA. Ballisitic performance of conned 99.5%Al2O3 ceramic tiles. Int J Impact Eng 1997;19(8):703e13.
[16] Yaziv D, Rosenberg G, Partom Y. Differential ballistic efciency of appliqu
armor. In: . 9th International symposium on ballistic, vol. 2. Shrivenham:
Royal Military College of Science; 29 Aprile1 May 1986. p. 315e9.
[17] Rozenberg Z, Yeshurun Y. The relation between ballistic efciency and
compressive strength of ceramic tiles. Int J Impact Eng 1988;7(3):357.
[18] Anderson CE, Morris BL. The ballistic performance of conned Al2O3 ceramic
tiles. Int J Impact Eng 1992;12(2):167e87.
[19] Woodward RL, Gooch Jr WA, ODonnell RG, Perciballi WJ, Baxter BJ, Pattie SD.
A study of fragmentation in the ballistic impact of ceramics. Int J Impact Eng
1994;15(5):605e18.
[20] Kim CS, Kim CW. Study on the relation between mechanical and ballistic
properties of some ceramics [J]. Int J Mod Phys B 2008;22(9e11):1201e8.
[21] Hornemann U, Holzwarth A. Shaped charge penetration in alumina targets [J].
Int J Impact Eng 1997;20(1e5):375e86.
[22] Satapathy S, Bless SJ. Cavity expansion resistance of brittle materials obeying a
two-curve pressure-shear behavior. J Appl Phys 2000;88(7):4004e12.
[23] Ping Li. Dynamic response and the mechanism of ceramic against long rod
penetration[D]. Beijing: Beijing Institute of Technology; 2002 [in Chinese].
[24] Stilp AJ, Hohler Y. Experimental method for terminal ballistics and impact
physics, in high velocity impact dynamics. New York: John Wiley &.Sons, Inc;
1990. p. 515.
[25] Cayzac R, Carette E, de Roquefort T Alziary. Crewther IR, editor. Proceedings of
19th Int. Symp. on ballistics. Switzerland: Interlaken; 2001. p. 297.
[26] Wang JG. The technology of separation of projectile from its seat in hypervelocity impact study. Chin J High Press Phys 1993;7(2):143e7.

74

J. Ning et al. / International Journal of Impact Engineering 62 (2013) 60e74

[27] Nemat-nasser S, Horri H. Compression-induced micro-crack growth in


brittle solids: axial splitting and shear failure. J Geophys Res 1985;B4:
3105e25.
[28] Espinsoa HD, Raiser G, Clifton RJ. Experimental observation and numerical
modeling of inelasticity in dynamically loaded ceramics. J Hard Mater
1992;3(3e4):285e313.

[29] Huang CY. A dynamic damage growth model for uniaxial compressive
response of rock aggregates. Mech Mater 2002;34:267e77.
[30] Rajendran AM, Kroupa JL. Impact damage model for ceramic materials. J Appl
Phys 1989;66(8):3560e5.
[31] Ravichandran G, Subhash GA. Micromechanical model for high strain rate
behavior of ceramics. Int J Solid Struct 1995;32:2627e46.

You might also like