Bullet test results
May 25, 2024
1. The impact of the single-layer density of the composite target plate on the anti-fragment and bulletproof capabilities
The test results on the influence of the single-layer density of the fabric-reinforced laminate on the overall bulletproof performance of the target plate are shown in Table 5.
Table 5 Effect of single layer density on target plate anti-fragment and anti-bullet performance
| Target sample | CTS736 laminate | CTS709 laminate |
| Fragment V50(M/S) | 630 | 598 |
| Lead core bullet V50(M/S) | 545 | 555 |
| Fabric single layer density (g/㎡) | 410 | 200 |
| Overall surface density of target plate (kg/㎡) | 7.27 | 7.11 |
| fabric layers | 16 | 28 |
| Average number of fibers per unit area of the target plate (fibers/c㎡) | 2621440 | 1710198 |
It can be seen from Table 5 that for anti-fragment sheets, under the same surface density conditions, the V50 with high single-layer density is higher than the V50 with low single-layer density. For bullet protection, the V50 target plate with low single-layer density is higher. Most literature indicates that fiber deformation is the dominant energy absorber for individual ballistic composites with high fiber content. The calculated average number of fibers per unit area of the target plate shows that the average number of fibers in the CT73G fabric laminated composite target plate is higher than that of the CT709 fabric laminated composite target plate. This is the main reason why the former's anti-fragment V50 value is higher than that of the latter. For lead-core bullets, due to the oval shape of the bullet, there is slippage of the fibers from the surface of the projectile during the process of the projectile penetrating the target plate, resulting in a decrease in fiber absorption energy. As a result, the bullet V50 value of the CT709 fabric laminated composite target plate is higher than that of the CT736 fabric composite target plate.
2. Effect of mixing on the fragmentation resistance of fabric-reinforced composite laminates
Table 6 shows the comparative results of anti-fragment performance of hybrid composite laminates between CT736 fabric and glass fiber fabric layers. The glue content of the fabric is about 15%, and the slight difference in surface density of the target plate is caused by the non-uniformity of the matrix during the hot pressing process.
Table 6 Anti-fragment properties of glass fiber fabric and CT736 fabric hybrid composite laminates
| compound method |
Target surface density (kg/㎡)
|
Anti-fragment V50 (m/s)
|
| glassfiber 12/CT736 9 | 9.44 | 574.4 |
| glassfiber 9/CT736 9/glassfiber 3 | 9.12 | 542.8 |
| glassfiber 6/CT736 9/glassfiber 6 | 8.96 | 553.5 |
| glassfiber 3/CT736 9/glassfiber 9 | 9.76 | 504.6 |
| CT736 fabric 9/glassfiber 12 | 8.96 | 486.7 |
| CT736 6/glassfiber 12/CT736 3 | 8.48 | 489.1 |
| CT736 3/glassfiber 12/CT736 6 | 9.44 | 542.2 |
From Table 6, it can be clearly seen that the combination of glass fiber in the front and para-aromatic polyamide in the back has the best anti-fragment performance. For para-aromatic polyamide and glass fiber spacer laminates. The structural combination of para-aromatic polyamide on the inside and glass fiber on the outside can achieve a higher anti-fragmentation V50 value than the structural combination of para-aromatic polyamide on the outside and glass fiber on the outside. The reason is the same as the order of combination of white and yellow films.






