Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 37

This article was downloaded by: [Indian Institute of Technology - Delhi]

On: 01 November 2013, At: 11:48


Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Mechanics of Structures and Machines
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lmbd19
PREDICTING THE PENETRATION AND PERFORATION
OF TARGETS STRUCK BY PROJECTILES AT NORMAL
INCIDENCE*
H. M. Wen
a
a
Laboratory for Mechanical Behavior and Design of Materials , University of Science and
Technology of China , Hefei, Anhui Province, 230027, P.R. China
Published online: 26 Apr 2007.
To cite this article: H. M. Wen (2002) PREDICTING THE PENETRATION AND PERFORATION OF TARGETS STRUCK BY PROJECTILES
AT NORMAL INCIDENCE*, Mechanics of Structures and Machines, 30:4, 543-577, DOI: 10.1081/SME-120015076
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/SME-120015076
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
PREDICTING THE PENETRATION AND
PERFORATION OF TARGETS STRUCK BY
PROJECTILES AT NORMAL INCIDENCE*
H. M. Wen
Laboratory for Mechanical Behavior and
Design of Materials, University of Science and
Technology of China, Hefei,
Anhui Province 230027, P.R. China
E-mail: hmwen@ustc.edu.cn
ABSTRACT
Engineering models are presented in this paper to predict the
penetration and perforation of a range of targets struck
normally by projectiles with dierent nose shapes over a
wide range of impact velocities. The projectiles are either
rigid or eroding and the targets are made of metallic materials
as well as other materials such as bre-reinforced plastics and
concrete. The approach is based on the assumption that the
mean pressure oered by the target materials to resist the
projectiles can be decomposed into two parts. The rst is a
cohesive quasi-static resistive pressure due to the elastic
plastic deformation of the target materials. The second is a
MECHANICS OF STRUCTURES AND MACHINES
Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 543577, 2002
543
DOI: 10.1081/SME-120015076 0890-5452 (Print); 1525-612X (Online)
Copyright & 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. www.dekker.com
*Communicated by Z. Mroz.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
dynamic resistive pressure dened as a velocity-dependent
enhancement factor applied to the quasi-static resistance.
Equations are obtained for predicting the depth of penetra-
tion in the targets and the ballistic limits in the case of
perforation. It is shown that the model predictions are in
good agreement with available experimental data in the case
of rigid missiles and that, in the case of eroding projectiles, the
model correlates well with the experimental results for the
nondimensional parameter (,/o
y
)
1/2
V
i
ranging from 3 to 7,
which corresponds to initial impact velocities ranging from
1 km/s to 2.5 km/s, approximately.
Key Words: Penetration; Perforation; Ballistic limit; Projec-
tiles; Target; Metals; FRP laminates; Concrete
I. INTRODUCTION
The penetration and perforation of targets by projectiles involve
highly complex processes which have been investigated experimentally for
more than two centuries and analytically mainly during the last few decades.
Accounts of this work can be found in the reviews by Backman and
Goldsmith,
[1]
Zukas,
[2]
Anderson and Bodner,
[3]
and Corbett et al.
[4]
Depending on impact velocity, the material, and geometric properties of
both the projectile and the target, several theoretical models (analytical
and numerical) have been proposed over the years to predict the level of
penetration in thick targets or the impact conditions for the perforation of
plates, as can be seen from these reviews. However, many of the analytical
models are single-mechanism models that have so far enjoyed limited
applications. Numerical simulations have been successful in predicting the
response of targets to projectile impact but, unfortunately, they still require
considerable resources in terms of computing time (CPU). On the other
hand, from the engineering point of view there is considerable interest in
the development of empirical or semi-empirical laws for the penetration and
perforation of plates, as noted in Refs. 1, 4, and 5.
In this paper, simple analytical equations are derived for the penetra-
tion and perforation of thick metal targets by rigid projectiles with conical,
at, ogival, and spherical noses as well as eroding long-rod penetrators.
The formulation is based upon the assumption that the average pressure
provided by the target materials to resist the projectiles can be divided into
two parts. One part is the cohesive static resistive pressure applied normally
to the projectile surface due to the elasticplastic deformations of the target
544 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
materials, and the other is the dynamic resistive pressure arising fromvelocity
eects. This latter is simply expressed as a velocity-dependent enhancement
factor applied to the static pressure term. Correlations between the equations
and experimental data are presented and discussed. The basic approach is a
pragmatic one which seems to have broad applications. The model can be
used to predict the penetration and perforation of targets struck transversely
by rigid projectiles with dierent nose shapes as well as eroding long-rod
penetrators over a wide range of impact velocities. It is shown that the
model predictions are in good agreement with experimental data for metallic
targets as well as for bre-reinforced plastics and concrete.
II. FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM
A. Assumption About the Resistive Pressure
It is assumed that the mean pressure (o) applied normally to the sur-
face of a projectile provided by a target material to resist penetration and
perforation by the projectile consists of two parts: one part is the cohesive
static resistive pressure (o
s
) due to the elasticplastic deformations of the
target material, and the other is the dynamic resistive pressure (o
d
) arising
from velocity eects. Thus
[6]
o o
s
o
d
1
If it is further assumed that o
s
oo
s
and o
d
is a function of the param-
eter (,
t
/o
t
)
1/2
V
i
and is taken to be o
d
[(,
t
/o
t
)
1/2
V
i
o
t
, then Eq. 1 can be
rewritten as
o o [

,
t
o
t
_
V
i
_ _
o
t
2
where o
t
is a measure of the quasi-static target material strength and ,
t
and V
i
are the density of the target material and the initial impact velocity
of the projectile, respectively. o, [ are constants which are determined either
theoretically or experimentally.
The resistive pressure is generally expected to be a function (usually a
polynomial function) of the penetration velocity, as noted in Refs. 1 and 7.
In Eq. 2, the mean pressure provided by the target material to resist the
penetrator is simply taken as a linear function of the initial impact velocity.
o in Eq. 2 represents the constraining eect of the material surrounding the
projectile, which inhibits the owof the target material as it is displaced by the
projectile during penetration. It may be determined theoretically by spherical
or cylindrical cavity expansion analysis
[8]
for elasticplastic materials such as
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 545
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
metals and concrete. For bre-reinforced plastics it has been observed in
static indentation tests
[9]
that the rst term of Eq. 2 is related to the static
strengths of FRP laminates in compression in the two principal directions,
through the thickness and in-plane, and, to a rst approximation, is taken to
be the elastic limit in through-thickness compression.
[6]
On the other hand,
[ in Eq. 2 is basically a projectile nose shape factor, which has been evaluated
experimentally for FRP laminates using a curve-tting technique.
[6]
The same
technique will also be applied to evaluate the values of [ for targets made of
other materials such as metals and concrete.
B. Penetration of Semi-innite Targets
Figure 1 shows the geometries of rigid projectiles with conical or
ogival noses. The projectiles* are assumed to have density ,
p
and mass G
with diameter d (or radius a). L and L
N
are the lengths of the shank and nose
respectively for both conical and ogival penetrators. Figure 1(a) shows the
ogive prole as the arc of a circle that is tangential to the projectile shank.
It is also common to dene the ogive in terms of calibre-radius-head, viz.
CRH
S
2a
[ 3
where S and a are dened in Fig. 1(a).
Figure 2 shows the impact of a rigid projectile with a conical nose on a
uniform target at normal incidence with an impact velocity V
i
. Two situa-
tions may arise, as shown in Fig. 2. One scenario is that the nal depth of
penetration has not reached the shoulder of the projectile and the other is
that the nal depth of penetration is larger than the nose length. Similar
situations may occur for rigid projectiles with spherical or ogival noses
impacting a target. Equations are derived in the following for the depth
of penetration into targets by rigid projectiles with dierent nose shapes.
1. Conical-Nosed Projectiles
a. Case I, PL
N
For a rigid conical-nosed projectile, the motion and the nal depth of
*If a rigid projectile has a complex conguration (e.g., it is hollow or has a sabot
system) the projectile still can be described as one of those depicted in Fig. 1 but with
an eective density (
e
p
) which is taken to be the ratio of the projectile mass to the
volume of the basic conguration as shown in Fig. 1.
546 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
penetration can be calculated if the resistive forces are known. The resistive
force of a conical-nosed projectile penetrating a metal target at normal
incidence, as shown in Fig. 2(I), can be written as
F oA 4
where F is the resistive force and o is the mean resistive pressure provided by
the target material and is dened by Eq. 2. A is the instant cross-sectional
area and can be determined from the geometrical conguration depicted in
Fig. 2(I), i.e.
A P
2
tan
2

2
5
Figure 1. Projectile geometries: (a) ogival nose; (b) conical nose.
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 547
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
in which and P are the cone angle and the depth of penetration, respec-
tively. Substituting Eqs. 2 and 5 into Eq. 4 gives
F P
2
tan
2

2
o
t
o [

,
t
o
t
_
V
i
_ _
6
From energy conservation, one obtains
E
k

_
p
0
F dP 7
Figure 2. Schematic diagrams of a conical-nosed projectile impacting on semi-
innite targets: (I) PL
N
; (II) P>L
N
.
548 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
where E
k
is the initial kinetic energy of the projectile. Substituting Eq. 6 into
the above equation yields
E
k

P
3
A
0
o
t
3L
2
N
o [

,
t
o
t
_
V
i
_ _
8
after using tan,2 a,L
N
. Here A
0
a
2
(a is the penetrator radius) and
is the cross-sectional area of the projectile shank. Substituting E
k

1,2GV
2
i
into Eq. 8 and rearranging gives
P
L L
N
,3

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
t
1
2,3 o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
i
_ _
P, L
N

2
9
after using G A
0
L L
N
,3,
p
.
b. Case II, P>L
N
As shown in Fig. 2(II), the penetration process can be divided into two
stages. The rst stage, when PL
N
has been described in the previous section.
For the second stage, when P>L
N
, the resistive force (F) can be written as
F A
0
o A
0
o
t
o [

,
t
o
t
_
V
i
_ _
10
after using Eq. 2. From energy consideration, one obtains
E
k

_
LN
0
F dP
_
p
LN
F dP 11a
Substituting Eqs. 6 and 10 into Eq. 11a and rearranging yields
E
k
P
2
3
L
N
_ _
A
0
o
t
o [

,
t
o
t
_
V
i
_ _
11b
Substituting E
k
1,2GV
2
i
into the above equation and using G
A
0
L L
N
,3,
p
gives the nal depth of penetration
P
L L
N
,3

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
t
1
2 o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
i
_ _
2
3L,L
N
1
12
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 549
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
2. Flat-Nosed Missiles
A at-nosed missile can be seen as the special case of a conical-nosed
projectile with 180

. Hence, Eq. 12 can be rewritten as


P
L

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
t
1
2 o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
i
_ _ 13
3. Ogival-Nosed Projectiles
Similarly, Eqs. 14 and 15 can be obtained for the nal depth of pene-
tration into a target by a rigid projectile with an ogival nose.
a. Case I, PL
N
,
p
L 8[
3
jaV
2
i
16[
3
ao cos
1
3
cos
3

1
2
sin 2
_ _
sin
0
_
sin
2

0
cos
0

2
sin
0
j
_
14a
P

4[ 1
_
2[cos
_ _
a 14b
in which is dened in Fig. 1(a) and the mean resistive pressure o is deter-
mined by Eq. 2.
0
and j are evaluated by the following equations:

0
sin
1
2[ 1
2[
_ _
14c
j

2
sin
0
cos
0

1
3
cos
3

0

0

1
2
sin 2
0
_ _
sin
0
sin
2

0
cos
0
14d
b. Case II, P>L
N
P
L 8[
3
ja

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
e
1
2 1 o

,
t
,o
e

_
V
i
_ _

4[ 1
p
8[
3
j
_ _
a
L 8[
3
ja
15
550 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
4. Hemispherical-Ended Projectiles
A hemispherical-ended projectile can be seen as the special case of an
ogival-nosed missile with [0.5. Hence, the corresponding equations can
be recast into the following:
a. Case I, Pa
P
L 2,3a

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
t
1
2 o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
i
_ _
P,a 1,3P,a
2

_ _
16
b. Case II, P>a
P
L 2,3a

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
t
1
2 o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
i
_ _
1
3L,a 2
17
C. Perforation of Finite Plates
The ballistic limit condition for a plate with nite thickness struck
transversely by a rigid projectile with a conical, at, ogival, or hemispher-
ical nose can be estimated by the energy balance method. Generally
speaking, a fraction of the plate material on the distal side will be ejected
due to surface eects such as spalling or adiabatic shear plugging, depend-
ing on the plate material and the test conditions. In other words, the
eective thickness H
e
of the plate will be smaller than the original plate
thickness H, i.e.
H
e
H d 18
where 0, which is to be determined empirically. There are three phases of
penetration for a rigid projectile with conical nose impacting on a nite
plate: rst, the nose enters the plate, second, the nose is fully embedded,
and nally, the nose exits the plate. The same arguments can also apply to
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 551
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
rigid penetrators with spherical or ogival noses. Following the energy bal-
ance method and the procedure outlined in Ref. 6, it is easy to show that
E
k
a
2
H do
t
o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
c
_ _
19a
Substituting E
k
1,2GV
2
c
into the above equation and rearranging yields
V
c

[

,
t
o
t
p
d
2
H d
4G
1

1
8oG
[
2
,
t
d
2
H d
_ _ _
19b
where V
c
is the critical impact velocity or ballistic limit.
III. CORRELATION WITH TEST DATA
AND DISCUSSION
The equations derived in Section II can be compared with experi-
mental data for the penetration and perforation of targets struck normally
by rigid projectiles with dierent nose shapes. The values of the various
parameters in the equations have been obtained either theoretically (for
example, using the cavity expansion analysis
[7]
) or empirically and are
given for targets made of metallic materials, FRP laminates, and granular
materials (concrete and soil) in Tables 13, respectively. The value of in
Table 1 for at-ended missiles for metallic targets and those in Table 3 for
Table 1. Values of Parameters for Metallic Targets
o [ o
t

Conical-nose
1
2
1 ln
2E
5 4vo
y
_ _
2 sin

2
o
y 0
Flat-nose
1
2
1 ln
2E
5 4vo
y
_ _
2
o
y
Ogival-nose
2
3
1 ln
E
31 vo
y
_ _
3
4[
o
y 0
Hemispherical-nose
2
3
1 ln
E
31 vo
y
_ _
3
2
o
y 0
Eroding penetrators
2
3
1 ln
E
31 vo
y
_ _
3
2
o
y 1
552 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
conical and at-nosed projectiles for concrete targets remain to be deter-
mined because of lack of experimental data. E and v in Tables 1 and 3 are
Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio, respectively. It is interesting to note
that the values of [ are the same for a given missile nose shape irrespective
of target material.
A. Conical-Nosed Projectiles
1. Metal Targets
Figure 3 shows a comparison of the theoretical predictions with the
experimental data for 6061-T651 aluminum alloy targets (o
y
380 MPa)
Table 3. Values of Parameters for Concrete and Soil Targets
o [ o
t

Conical-nose
1
2
1 ln
2E
5 4vY
_ _
2 sin

2
Y
Flat-nose
1
2
1 ln
2E
5 4vY
_ _
2 Y
Ogival-nose
2
3
1 ln
E
31 vY
_ _
3
4[
Y 2
Hemispherical-nose
2
3
1 ln
E
31 vY
_ _
3
2
Y 2
Table 2. Values of Parameters for FRP Laminates
o [ o
t

Conical-nose 1
2 sin

2
o
e
0
Flat-nose 1 2 o
e
0
Ogival-nose 1
3
4[
o
e
0
Hemispherical-nose 1
3
2
o
e
0
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 553
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
struck transversely by a 7.1 mm diameter conical-nosed projectile with a
mass of 23.5 g and 38.75

reported in Ref. 10. The solid and broken


lines in the gure are the theoretical predictions by Eqs. 12 and 9 respec-
tively. It is seen from Fig. 3 that the model predictions (Eqs. 9 and 12) are in
good agreement with the experimental data in terms of the nal depth of
penetration.
Figure 4 shows a comparison between the theoretically predicted bal-
listic limits and the experimental observations for 5083-H131 aluminum
armor (o
y
276 MPa) struck normally by an 8.31 mm diameter conical-
nosed projectile with a mass of 26 g and 32.54

.
[11,12]
It is evident from
Fig. 4 that Eq. 19b with 0 is in good agreement with the experimental
data in terms of the ballistic limit.
Figure 3. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for
the penetration of 6061-T651 aluminum alloy targets struck by a 7.1 mm
conical-nosed projectile with a mass of 23.5 g and 38.75

.- - -: Eq. 9; : Eq. 12;


m experiments.
[10]
554 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
2. FRP Laminates
Figure 5 shows a comparison of the model predictions with the experi-
mental data for GRP (S2-glass/phenonic) laminates impacted by a 7.5 mm
diameter conical-nosed missile with a mass of 47 g which was examined in
Ref. 9. In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
2200 kg/m
3
, o
e
755 MPa, and
90

. The solid and broken lines in Fig. 5 are the theoretical predictions
by Eqs. 12 and 9 respectively. It is seen from Fig. 5 that the model predic-
tions are in correlation agreement with the experimental data in terms of the
nal depth of penetration.
Figure 6 shows a comparison between the theoretically predicted bal-
listic limits and the experimental observations for GRP (E-glass/polyester)
Figure 4. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of 5083-H131 aluminum alloy plates struck by an 8.31 mm diameter
conical-nosed projectile with a mass of 26 g and 32.54

. : Eq. 19b with 0;


f experiments.
[11,12]
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 555
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
laminates struck transversely by a 10.5 mm diameter conical-nosed missile
with a mass of 18.7 g.
[13]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
1650 kg/m
3
,
o
e
225 MPa, and 90

. It is clear from Fig. 6 that the model predictions


by Eq. 19b with 0 are in good agreement with the experimental data.
Figure 7 shows a comparison between the model predictions (Eq. 19b)
and the experimental data for the perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester)
laminates struck transversely by 7.6 mm diameter conical-nosed missiles
with masses of 6 g and 12 g.
[14]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
1650 kg/m
3
,
o
e
225 MPa, and 90

. It is evident from Fig. 7 that the theoretically


predicted ballistic limits (Eq. 19b with 0) are in good agreement with the
experimental data.
Figure 8 shows the comparison between Eq. 19b and the test results
for the perforation of KFRP (Kevlar 29/polyester) laminates impacted
normally by a 12.7 mm diameter conical projectile with a mass of 28.9 g.
[15]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
1231 kg/m
3
, o
e
145 MPa, and 60

.
It is seen from Fig. 8 that Eq. 19b with 0 is in good agreement with the
experimental results.
Figure 5. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
penetration of thick GRP (S2-glass/phenolic) laminates struck normally by a
7.5 mm diameter conical-nosed projectile. - - -: Eq. 9; : Eq. 12; m experiments.
[9]
556 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
B. Flat-Ended Missiles
1. FRP Laminates
Figure 9 shows a comparison between the theoretically predicted bal-
listic limits and the experimental observations for GRP (E-glass/polyester)
laminates struck transversely by a 10.5 mmdiameter at-faced projectile with
a mass of 20.4 g.
[14,16,17]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
1650 kg/m
3
,
o
e
225 MPa. It is seen from Fig. 9 that Eq. 19 with 0 is in good agree-
ment with the experimental data.
Figure 10 shows a comparison between the model predictions (Eq. 19b)
and the experimental data for the perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester)
laminates struck transversely by 7.6 mm diameter at-faced missiles with
masses of 6 g and 12 g.
[14]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
1650 kg/m
3
,
o
e
225 MPa. It is evident from Fig. 10 that the theoretically predicted
Figure 6. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by an 18.7 g,
10.5 mm diameter conical-nosed missile. : Eq. 19b with 0; f experiments.
[13]
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 557
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 7. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by an 7.6 mm
diameter conical-nosed missile.
[14]
: Eq. 19b with 0; (a) G6 g; (b) G12 g.
558 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
ballistic limits (Eq. 19b with 0) are in good agreement with the
experimental data.
C. Ogival-Nosed Projectiles
1. Metal Targets
Good agreement is also obtained between the theoretical predictions
and the experimental data in Figs. 11(a) and 11(b) for the nal depth of
penetration of 6061-T651 aluminum alloy targets (o
y
380 MPa)
[10]
and
high-strength steel plates (o
y
950 MPa)
[18]
struck by ogival-nosed projec-
tiles with [3 and [1.5, respectively. The solid and broken lines in
Figs. 11(a) and 11(b) are those predicted by Eqs. 15 and 14, respectively.
Figure 8. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for
the perforation of KFRP (Kevlar 29/polyester) laminates struck transversely
by a 28.9 g, 12.7 mm diameter conical-nosed missile. : Eq. 19b with 0;
f experiments.
[15]
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 559
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 12 shows a comparison of Eq. 19b with the test results for
the perforation of mild steel plates impacted normally by an ogival-nosed
AP projectile with [1.5. Equation 19b with 0 is seen to be in good
agreement with the experimental data, which were reported in Ref. 19.
2. FRP Laminates
Figure 13 shows a comparison between the theoretical predictions and
the experimental data for the perforation of GRP (E-glass/phenolic) lami-
nates struck normally by a 6 mm diameter ogival-nosed AP projectile with a
mass of 5 g.
[20]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
2200 kg/m
3
, o
e
755 MPa,
and [2. It is seen from Fig. 13 that Eq. 19b with 0 is in good
agreement with the experimental data.
Figure 9. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by a 20.4 g,
10.5 mm diameter at-faced missile. : Eq. 19b with 0; f experiments.
[14,16,17]
560 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 10. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by a 7.6 mm
diameter at-faced missile.
[14]
Eq. 19b with 0; (a) G6 g; (b) G12 g.
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 561
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 11. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
penetration of targets struck by ogival-nosed missiles. (a) 6061-T651 aluminum
alloy,
[10]
[3; m experiments; (b) RHA steel,
[18]
[1.5; ^, g, and m represent
the data obtained for steel plates with thicknesses of 20 mm, 40 mm, and 80 mm,
respectively. - - -: Eq. 14, : Eq. 15.
562 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
3. Concrete and Soil Targets
Figures 14 and 15 show comparisons of the theoretical predictions
with the experimental results for the penetration and perforation of concrete
targets struck by ogival-nosed missiles,
[2123]
while comparison is made in
Fig. 16 between the model predictions and the test data for the penetration
of soil targets.
[24]
The concrete targets had unconned compressive strengths
of 3440 MPa
[2123]
and the shear strength Y for the concrete targets inves-
tigated is taken to be 95 MPa, as reported in Ref. 21, whereas the shear
strength Y of the soil targets examined in Ref. 24 is taken to be 10 MPa. It is
clear from Figs. 1416 that the theoretical predictions (Eq. 15 and Eq. 19b
with 2) are in good agreement with the experimental observations in
terms of the nal depth of penetration and the ballistic limit.
Figure 12. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental results for the
perforation of mild steel plates struck by an AP projectile. : Eq. 19b with 0;
f experiments.
[19]
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 563
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
D. Hemispherical-Ended Missiles
1. Metal Targets
Comparisons are made in Figs. 17 and 18 between the theoretical
predictions and the experimental data for metal targets struck by rigid
projectiles with a spherical nose. The solid and broken lines in Fig. 17 are
respectively the theoretical lines predicted by Eqs. 17 and 16 whereas the
solid line in Fig. 18 represents Eq. 19b with 0. Equation 17 is seen to be
in good correspondence with the experimental results for the nal depth of
penetration of 6061-T651 aluminum alloy targets (o
y
380 MPa) struck by
rigid hemispherical-ended projectiles as reported in Refs. 10 and 25 and
shown in Fig. 17. Furthermore, Eq. 19b with 0 is seen to correlate
well with the experimental observations for the perforation of mild steel
plates (o
y
327 MPa)
[26]
as shown in Fig. 18.
Figure 13. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for
the perforation of GRP (E-glass/phenolic) laminates struck transversely by a 5 g,
6 mm diameter ogival-nosed AP projectile. : Eq. 19b with 0; f experiments.
[20]
564 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 14. Comparison of the theoretical predictions with the experimental results
for the penetration of concrete targets struck by ogival-nosed missiles. (a) [1.5;
m and f represent the data obtained from full and one-tenth scale penetration tests
on the concrete targets, respectively
[21]
; (b) [2; m experiments
[22]
; : Eq. 15.
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 565
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
2. FRP Laminates
Figure 19 shows a comparison between the theoretically predicted bal-
listic limits (Eq. 19b with 0) and the experimental data for the
perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by
a 10.5 mm diameter hemispherical-ended projectile with a mass of
17.9 g.
[14,16,17]
In the theoretical calculation, ,
t
1650 kg/m
3
, o
e
225 MPa.
It is clear from Fig. 19 that Eq. 19b with 0 is in good agreement with the
experimental observations.
Figure 20 shows a comparison between the model predictions
(Eq. 19b) and the experimental data for the perforation of GRP (E-glass/
polyester) laminates struck transversely by hemispherical-ended projectiles
with diameters of 10 mm and 7.6 mm and masses of 6 g and 12 g.
[14]
In the
theoretical calculation, ,
t
1650 kg/m
3
, o
e
225 MPa. It is evident from
Fig. 20 that the theoretically predicted ballistic limits (Eq. 19b with 0)
are in good agreement with the experimental data.
Figure 15. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of concrete targets struck by an ogival-nosed projectile. : Eq. 19b with
2; f experiments.
[23]
566 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
IV. ERODING PENETRATORS
The procedure described in Sections II and III may also be adapted to
predict the penetration and perforation of armor (such as RHA) plates
struck by high-speed (eroding) long-rod KE penetrators. It has been
observed experimentally
[27,28]
that the nose of a projectile mushrooms
upon penetrating into a target and that the mushroom head maintains its
diameter and is of nearly hemispherical shape throughout the primary
quasi-steady penetration stage. Therefore, the equations derived for the
penetration and perforation of targets impacted by a rigid projectile with
a spherical nose may be applied to the problem of RHA plates struck by
eroding long-rod penetrators by replacing the projectile diameter (or radius)
with an eective penetration diameter (or radius), i.e.
P
L 2,3a

,
p
,
t
_ _
,
t
V
2
i
o
t
_ _
a
a
e
_ _
2
1
2 o [

,
t
,o
t

_
V
i
_ _
a, a
e

3L,a 2
20
Figure 16. Comparison of theoretical predictions with test data for the penetra-
tion of soil targets struck by an ogival-nose projectile with [3. : Eq. 15;
m experiments.
[24]
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 567
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
and
V
c

[

,
t
o
t
p
d
2
e
H d
4G
1

1
8oG
[
2
,
t
d
2
e
H d
_ _ _
21
where d
e
(or a
e
) is the eective penetration diameter (or radius), empirically
taken to be 1.6d for steel armor as compared with a value of 1.55d used
in Ref. 29.
Figure 21 shows a comparison between Eq. 20 and the experimental
data obtained for the penetration of RHA armor struck by high-speed
eroding long-rod penetrators. The solid, half-solid, and open symbols
represent the experiments reported in Refs. 27 (o
y
1207 MPa), 30
(o
y
1000 MPa), and 29 (o
y
780 MPa), respectively. It is seen from Fig. 21
Figure 17. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental results for the
penetration of 6061-T651 aluminum alloy targets struck by hemispherical-ended
projectiles. - - -: Eq. 16; : Eq. 17; m experiments.
[10,25]
568 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
that Eq. 20 with d
e
1.6d is in good agreement with the experimental results
for the nondimensional parameter (,/o
y
)
1/2
V
i
ranging from 3 to 7, which
corresponds to initial impact velocities ranging from 1 km/s to 2.5 km/s,
approximately. For the nondimensional parameter less than 3 or greater
than 7, equation 20 predicts less well, as can be seen from Fig. 21. However,
it is expected that the accuracy of the theory (Eq. 20) should be improved if the
actual penetration diameter is used in the calculation, especially for higher
velocity impacts.
Comparisons are made in Fig. 22(a) between the theoretical predic-
tions (Eq. 21) and the experimentally obtained ballistic limits for RHA
armor plates (o
y
1200 MPa) struck by an eroding long-rod penetrator,
[31]
whereas Fig. 22(b) compares the model predictions with the test data
obtained for HHA armor plates (o
y
1400 MPa) impacted by a high-
speed long-rod penetrator.
[28]
It is demonstrated from Figs. 22(a) and
22(b) that Eq. 21 with d
e
1.6d and 1 is in reasonably good agreement
with the experimental observations.
Figure 18. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of mild steel plates struck by hemispherical-ended projectiles. : Eq. 19b
with 0; f experiments.
[26]
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 569
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
V. CONCLUSIONS
Engineering models have been obtained in this paper for the penetra-
tion and perforation of targets struck normally by projectiles with dierent
nose shapes over a wide range of impact velocities. The projectiles are either
rigid or eroding and the targets are made of metallic materials as well as
other materials such as bre-reinforced plastics and concrete. The formula-
tion is based on the assumption that the mean pressure provided by the
target materials to resist the projectiles can be decomposed into two parts.
One part is the cohesive static resistive pressure due to the elasticplastic
deformations of the target materials; the other is the dynamic resistive
pressure arising from the velocity eects.
It has been shown that the model predictions are in good agreement
with experimental observations for the nal depth of penetration as well as
Figure 19. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for
the perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by a
17.9 g, 10.5 mm diameter hemispherical-ended missile. : Eq. 19b with 0;
f experiments.
[14,16,17]
570 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 20. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for
the perforation of GRP (E-glass/polyester) laminates struck transversely by
hemispherical-ended missiles.
[14]
: Eq. 19b with 0; (a) d 10 mm, G6 g;
(b) d 7.6 mm, G12 g.
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 571
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Figure 21. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
penetration of RHA steel targets struck by high-speed (eroding) long-rod
penetrators. ^, g, and m represent the test data reported in Refs. 27, 30, and 29,
respectively. : Eq. 20.
Figure 22. Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental data for the
perforation of steel plates struck by high-speed (eroding) long-rod penetrators.
(a) RHA armor
[31]
; (b) HHA armor.
[28]
: Eq. 21 with 1; f experiments.
572 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
the ballistic limits for target plates made of a wide range of dierent
materials struck normally by missiles with conical, at, ogival, or hemi-
spherical noses, provided that the missiles remain rigid during impact.
It has also been shown that by introducing an eective penetration diameter
the equations derived for a rigid hemispherical-ended projectile impacting a
uniform target can be adapted to predict reasonably well the penetration
and perforation of steel armor plates struck by high-speed long-rod KE
penetrators, provided that the nondimensional parameter (,/o
y
)
1/2
V
i
ranges from 3 to 7, which corresponds to initial impact velocities ranging
from 1 km/s to 2.5 km/s, approximately.
NOMENCLATURE
a projectile radius
a
e
eective penetration radius
A
0
cross-sectional area of projectile shank
d projectile diameter
d
e
eective penetration diameter
Figure 22. Continued.
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 573
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
E Youngs modulus
E
k
initial impact energy of a projectile
F mean resistive force
G projectile mass
H plate thickness
H
e
eective plate thickness
L projectile shank length
L
N
projectile nose length
P depth of penetration
S dened in Fig. 1(a)
V
i
impact velocity of a projectile
V
c
critical impact velocity; ballistic limit
Y shear strength of concrete or soil target
o constant, dened in Eq. 2
[ constant, dened in Eq. 2
constant, dened in Eq. 18
j constant, evaluated by Eq. 14d
cone angle of a conical projectile
v Poissons ratio
,
p
projectile density
,
e
p
equivalent projectile density
,
t
target density
o mean resistive pressure
o
e
elastic limit of FRP laminates in through-thickness
compression
o
y
static yield stress
o
t
measure of target strength, dened in Eq. 2
dened in Fig. 1(a)

0
dened by Eq. 14c
[ calibre-radius-head, dened by Eq. 3
REFERENCES
1. Backman, M.E.; Goldsmith, W. The Mechanics of Penetration of
Projectile into Targets. Int. J. Eng. Sci. 1978, 16, 199.
2. Zukas, J.A. Penetration and Perforation of Solids. In Impact Dynamics;
Zukas, J.A., et al., Eds.; John Wiley: New York, 1982; 155214.
3. Anderson, C.E., Jr.; Bodner, S.R. Ballistic Impact: The Status
of Analytical and Numerical Modelling. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1988, 7, 935.
574 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
4. Corbett, G.G.; Reid, S.R.; Johnson, W. Impact Loading of Plates and
Shells by Free-Flying Projectiles: A Review. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1996,
18 (2), 141230.
5. Wen, H.M.; Jones, N. Semi-Empirical Equations for the Perforation of
Plates Struck by a Mass. In Structures Under Shock and Impact II;
Bulson, P.S., Ed.; Computational Mechanics Publications: Southampton
and Boston, and Thomas Telford: London, 1992; 369380.
6. Wen, H.M. Penetration and Perforation of Thick FRP Laminates.
Compos. Sci. Technol. 2001, 61, 11631172.
7. Johnson, W. Impact Strength of Materials; Edward Arnold: London,
1972.
8. Hill, R. The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity; Oxford University
Press: Oxford, 1950.
9. Reid, S.R.; Reddy, T.Y.; Ho, H.M.; Crouch, I.G.; Greaves, L.J.
Dynamic Indentation of Thick Fibre-Reinforced Composites. In High
Strain Rate Eects on Polymer, Metal and Ceramic Matrix Composites
and Other Advanced Materials; Rajapakse, Y.D.S., Vinson, J.R., Eds.;
AD-Vol. 48, ASME, 1995; 7179.
10. Forrestal, M.J.; Okajima, K.; Luk, V.K. Penetration of 6061-T651
Aluminium Targets with Rigid Long Rods. J. Appl. Mech. 1988, 55,
755760.
11. Forrestal M.J.; Rosenberg, Z.; Luk, V.K.; Bless, S.J. Perforation of
Aluminium Plates with Conical-Nosed Rods. J. Appl. Mech. 1987, 54,
230232.
12. Luk, V.K.; Amos, D.E. Dynamic Cylindrical Cavity Expansion of
Compressible Strain-Hardening Materials. J. Appl. Mech. 1991, 58,
334340.
13. Wen, H.M.; Reddy, T.Y.; Reid, S.R.; Soden, P.D. Indentation
Penetration and Perforation of Composite Laminates and Sandwich
Panels under Quasi-Static and Projectile Loading. Key Eng. Mater.
1998, 141143, 501552.
14. Mines, R.A.W.; Roach, A.M.; Jones, N. High Velocity Perforation
Behaviour of Polymer Composite Laminates. Int. J. Impact Eng.
1999, 22, 561588.
15. Zhu, G.; Goldsmith, W.; Dharan, C.K.H. Penetration of Laminated
Kevlar by ProjectilesI. Experimental Investigation. Int. J. Solids
Struct. 1992, 29 (4), 399420.
16. Reddy, T.Y.; Wen, H.M.; Reid, S.R.; Soden, P.D. Penetration and
Perforation of Composite Sandwich Panels by Hemispherical and
Conical Projectiles. J. Pres. Ves. Technol. 1998, 120, 186194.
17. Reid, S.R.; Wen, H.M.; Soden, P.D.; Reddy, T.Y. Response of Single
Skin Laminates and Sandwich Panels to Projectile Impact. In
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 575
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
Composite Materials for Oshore Operation2; Wang, S.S., Williams,
J.J., Lo, K.H., Eds.; American Bureau of Shipping, 1999; 593617.
18. Dikshit, S.N.; Sundararajan, G. The Penetration of Thick Steel Plates
by Ogive Shaped ProjectilesExperiment and Analysis. Int. J. Impact
Eng. 1992, 12 (3), 373408.
19. Gupta, N.K.; Madhu, V. Normal and Oblique Impact of a Kinetic
Energy Projectile on Mild Steel Plates. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1992,
12 (3), 333343.
20. Siva Kumar, K.; Balakrishna Bhat, T. Response of Composite
Laminates on Impact of High Velocity Projectiles. Key Eng. Mater.
1998, 141143, 337348.
21. Luk, V.K.; Forrestal, M.J. Penetration into Semi-Innite Reinforced
Concrete Targets with Spherical and Ogival Nose Projectiles. Int. J.
Impact Eng. 1987, 6 (4), 291301.
22. Forrestal, M.J.; Cargile, J.D.; Tzou, R.D. Penetration into Concrete
Targets. In Advances in Numerical Simulation Techniques for
Penetration and Perforation of Solids; Chen, E.P., Luk, V.K., Eds.;
AMD-Vol. 171, ASME, 1993; 916.
23. Brown, S.J. Energy Release Protection for Pressurized System. Part II.
Review of Studies into Impact/Terminal Ballistics. Appl. Mech. Rev.
1986, 39 (2), 177201.
24. Forrestal, M.J.; Luk, V.K. Penetration into Soil Targets. Int. J. Impact
Eng. 1992, 12 (3), 427444.
25. Forrestal, M.J.; Brar, N.S.; Luk, V.K. Penetration of Strain-Hardening
Targets with Rigid Spherical-Nose Rods. In Computational Techniques
for Contact, Impact, Penetration and Perforation of Solids; Schwer,
L.E., et al., Eds.; AMD-Vol. 103, ASME, 1989; 215222.
26. Corbett, G.G.; Reid, S.R. Quasi-Static and Dynamic Local Loading of
Monolithic Simply-Supported Steel Plates. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1993,
13 (3), 423441.
27. Luk, V.K.; Piekutowski, A.J. An Analytical Model on Penetration of
Erosive Long Rods into Metallic Targets. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1991,
11 (3), 323340.
28. Anderson, C.E., Jr.; Hohler, V.; Walker, J.D.; Stilp, A.J. Time-
Resolved Penetration of Long Rods into Steel Targets. Int. J. Impact
Eng. 1995, 16 (1), 118.
29. Ravid, M.; Bodner, S.R.; Holcman, I. A Two-Dimensional Analysis of
Penetration by an Eroding Projectile. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1994, 15 (5),
587603.
30. Cullis, I.G.; Lynch, N.J. Performance of Model Scale Long Rod
Projectiles Against Complex Targets over the Velocity Range
17002200 m/s. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1995, 17, 263274.
576 WEN
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
31. Grace, F.I. Long-Rod Penetration into Targets of Finite Thickness at
Normal Impact. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1995, 16 (3), 419433.
Received April 2001
Revised February 2002
PENETRATION AND PERFORATION BY PROJECTILES 577
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc.
MARCEL DEKKER, INC. 270 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10016
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
I
n
d
i
a
n

I
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

o
f

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

-

D
e
l
h
i
]

a
t

1
1
:
4
8

0
1

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3