Laminated aluminum armor from the Research Institute of Steel: what kind of beast is this

66
Source: interpolitex.ru

A few years ago, the Research Institute of Steel, as the main developer of protective structures for equipment and infantry, announced the creation of a new armor on aluminum alloys, which may be used in advanced light combat vehicles. We are talking about aluminum layered plates, which are able to withstand shelling not only from heavy machine guns, but also from automatic guns. In this material, we will talk about what this armor is on the example of the Soviet PAS-1, which became the ancestor of this type of protection.

All information used in writing the article was taken from open sources and is not classified as "secret".



ABT-101 and ABT-102


What is aluminum armor for? The answer to this question is quite simple: to provide the required level of protection for the combat vehicle with minimal impact on its mass. Indeed, a case assembled from armored aluminum will always weigh lighter than a body of equal strength made of steel. Sometimes this difference can reach several tons - it all depends on the requirements for protection.

In the Soviet Union, there were two of the most popular aluminum alloys: ABT-101 and ABT-102. Their composition - in different percentages - included pure aluminum, zinc and magnesium. With proper heat treatment, they both showed armor properties, but their mechanical characteristics were strikingly different from each other.

ABT-101, from which, for example, the cases of the BMD, which has already become the talk of the town, were made, stood out for its increased hardness, which reached (according to Brinell) up to 160 HB. For armored steel of medium hardness, of course, the figure was twice as high, but for aluminum this was the limit - above it, the alloy began to turn into a kind of glass, splitting from bullet impacts.

An example of using the ABT-101 alloy: BMD-1 airborne combat vehicle. Source: vitalykuzmin.net
An example of using the ABT-101 alloy: BMD-1 airborne combat vehicle. Source: vitalykuzmin.net

Due to their hardness, ABT-101 boards show good results in bullet resistance, but at the same time they reveal their drawback in the form of relatively low impact strength. This manifests itself in the appearance of cracks and spalls on the back of the sheet at the moment a bullet or other striker hits. Based on this, we can conclude that part of the inner layers of the armor plate is simply switched off from the process due to a violation of its integrity.

However, one should not think that even shelling from a pistol will shower the people sitting behind the armor with a hail of fragments. This happens only when the energy of the bullet exceeds the calculated one for the armor plate of a specific thickness. Although it happens that something much more powerful arrives: for example, an anti-tank grenade, the fragmentation flow of which we wrote about here.

Alloy ABT-102 has slightly different characteristics. Its hardness is about 10% lower than that of ABT-101, but the impact strength is increased by more than half. Thanks to this, the "102nd" is less prone to cracks and spalls, and therefore the thickness of the armor plate made from it acts on the penetrating body (bullet) more fully, extinguishing its energy. These properties of the alloy are actively used in the manufacture of relatively thick armor, which, unlike the "101st", copes better with heavy machine guns and even shells. An example here is the BMP-3, the hull and turret of which are made of ABT-102.

BMP-3, the main armor of which is made of ABT-102 alloy. Source: vitalykuzmin.net
BMP-3, the main armor of which is made of ABT-102 alloy. Source: vitalykuzmin.net

Is it possible to combine the hardness of ABT-101 and the impact strength of ABT-102 in one armor plate? After all, such heterogeneity could significantly increase the resistance of the armor. This question was asked in the 80s at the Research Institute of Steel.

Laminated aluminum plate PAS


The solution found was quite simple in meaning, although somewhat complex in execution. It consisted in the fact that they decided to build the armor on the principle of a sandwich. For this, two plates of the required thickness were taken and installed one above the other. One of them was made of ABT-101 alloy, and the second one was made of ABT-102. Moreover, the sheet from the “101st” was front, that is, when assembling the armored hull of the vehicle, it should be turned outward.

Between these plates there was a layer of commercially pure aluminum. They also made lining in the form of a U-shaped profile from it, which literally sealed this “sandwich” from all sides. Further, this design was pressed in a rolling machine and subjected to machining, as a result of which layered aluminum armor appeared, which received the PAS-1 index.

Armor plate PAS-2B. The protective layers are clearly visible. Source: niistali.ru
Armor plate PAS-2B. The protective layers are clearly visible. Source: niistali.ru

The manufacturing process of this product was, of course, labor intensive. Here, of course, it is time to remember that the armored parts from ABT-101/102 themselves turned out to be expensive: the complex process of making the alloy, its processing, and so on. And in our case, these operations were supplemented by the preparation of plates for rolling, the preparation of the desired structure from multi-alloy layers, the rolling itself, and so on. However, the result of the labors was still evident.

Experimental shelling of PAS-1 armor plates showed that their durability is on average 10–15% higher than that of homogeneous aluminum armor plates. At the same time, the weight gain, if, again, compared with monoalloy aluminum plates, was 7–10%. But how did these figures come about?

It must be understood that aluminum alloy, even in the best characteristics, is not armored steel. Steel armor destroys the attacking body (bullets, shells), but the "aluminum" is not able to do this simply because its density and hardness are lower than that of what pierces it. Therefore, the damping of the energy of the impactor penetrating into the aluminum layers comes to the fore. It, of course, breaks due to its own kinetic energy, but not as actively as in a steel mass.

PAS-1 fully complied with this rule. The front layer, made of ABT-101, due to its increased hardness and low impact strength, had the greatest stopping effect on the bullet, slowing down its progress, and at the same time providing a destructive effect on it. From the formation of spalls, which have already been mentioned above, the layer of the "101st" was protected by a substrate in the form of a layer of aluminum and the underlying layer of ABT-102, in which the bullet lost speed completely and got stuck.

Armor plate PAS-2B. Source: topwar.ru
Armor plate PAS-2B

We can say that PAS-1 has become a pioneer in the radical improvement of the characteristics of domestic aluminum armor. Later, using the results achieved during the development of PAS-1, a more advanced PAS-2 was created, which differed in a different composition and mechanical characteristics.

To date, the Research Institute of Steel has presented the most modern version of layered aluminum armor - PAS-2B. Due to the fact that it uses new armor alloys of different hardness and viscosity, as well as a different arrangement of layers, the durability of the novelty has increased by more than 15% compared to its ancestor in the face of PAS-1. If we compare it with homogeneous plates from ABT-101/102, then the increase in durability can even exceed 25%.

In general, we can say that the prospects for this development are, and very large. The use of PAS-2B as the basis for the hulls and turrets of future armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles can seriously increase their protection against heavy machine gun fire and automatic cannon shells without significantly affecting their combat weight. And we are talking not only about the frontal projection, but also about the sides. Here, as they say, there would be money and a corresponding order.
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    30 August 2022 04: 46
    Well, as they say, there would be money and a corresponding order.

    For starters, you need to have a desire.
    1. +4
      30 August 2022 05: 44
      Quote: Amateur
      For starters, you need to have a desire.

      First you need to find those specialists, fans of their work. capable of dealing with multilayer armor. This is where developments in nanotechnology would come in handy. Probably, some kind of pressed-in reinforced layer can improve the quality of the armor plates.
      Undoubtedly, the armoring of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles (BMD) cannot be compared with the armoring of tanks, only the tasks for these armored vehicles are different.
      But in general, patience and work will grind everything.
      We wish success to our defenders.
      1. +2
        30 August 2022 10: 43
        Probably, some kind of pressed-in reinforced layer can improve the quality of the armor plates.

        I heard about a composite made of steel mesh "baked" in aluminum powder for a long time. Yes, something is wrong with metallurgists. And it would be so simple - I threw scraps of thin molybdenum threads into a boiler with aluminum, rolled it - and rejoice.
    2. +1
      30 August 2022 18: 21
      Problems with the rental of aluminum. alloy into the fact that after welding in the HAZ crist. the grate is already losing its shape and size, and then it is necessary to restore them along the way of heat treatment .... just do a hell of a lot.
      And about the repair of such an armored plate which has already received some kind of damage and the word cannot be beaten.
      A steel GKB can always be repaired somehow, including in field conditions, and get a good result, but this aluminum with its microcracks ....
      In order to make a machine suitable for production and repair, it is necessary to make a steel frame and already sheathe it with these plates, and the meaning is not lost a lot.
      for me, these armored plates make sense only in aviation, but there they are also not very relevant, because no one conducts air battles with cannon fire, and strike aircraft / attack / reconnaissance helicopters and aircraft are morally obsolete, in the presence of modern UAVs.

      Probably some light ships / boats can use this armor. or light cars for special forces such as "buggies".
      1. +1
        1 September 2022 11: 53
        Quote: Bulgarian_5
        These armored plates have a meaning only in aviation, but there they are also not very relevant there, because no one conducts air battles with cannon fire,
        In modern aviation, cannon battles are rare, but the vast majority of air defense missiles have high-explosive fragmentation warheads. Therefore, our aircraft that are working on the battlefield (Su-25, Su-34) have cockpits and the most important components covered with armor. For the same Su-25, the weight of titanium armor is 0,5 tons, for the Su-34 it reaches 1,5 tons.
        1. 0
          1 September 2022 13: 51
          This is clear to me and I am well acquainted with this, but why can’t you just remove the pilot (the average is 80-90 kg) + the entire seat with a catapult + the weight of the life support system, and put in its place a filling that turns the plane into an UAV?
          The Su 25 can be easily converted to an UAV, there you can put a turret with gyro-stabilization sensors below the cockpit, it will be better than the experimental modification of the Su25T.

          Su 34 can be left manned, it has a good jamming package and security.
          su 24 also needs to be redone for UAVs, it is also originally made as a front-line bomber, and in Syria they were used from 2000-3000 meters, they were afraid of militants from MANPADS.
          If converted to a UAV, he will be able to fly low, and exert great psychological pressure on enemies. And if they shot down - PX, there is nothing inside!
        2. 0
          7 October 2022 13: 46
          The weight of the rook survivability aids increased from 755 kg to 1100 from the 1st to the 8th series
          Su-25 is a single-seat attack aircraft of a small class (a pioneer of attack aviation since 1955), it is not logical to compare it with a high-speed su-34 fighter, which should fly as high and as fast as possible, and not try to sit on two chairs, I have armor that will certainly be less than that of an attack aircraft of its weight category, while not reaching the speeds of "clean" fighters of the same Su-34 weight category
          By the way, judging by the very tangible losses of Rooks on the battlefield of modern wars, one can only conclude his extremely limited reservation, unable to protect younger aircraft from weapons of destruction for 40 years, for this you need to use heterogeneous multi-layer armor, at the same time on much larger areas
  2. +2
    30 August 2022 04: 49
    Is it possible to include at least titanium fractions in the inner layer?
    1. +7
      30 August 2022 05: 11
      Quote: depressant
      Is it possible to include at least titanium fractions in the inner layer?

      Expensive!
      More promising is the use of ceramics in the "sandwich". Although in the case of an infantry fighting vehicle, a heavy version is needed, with protection against anti-tank missiles in a circle. The lives of crews and troops are more valuable than any money.
      Regarding the outer and inner layers of armor of different viscosity. It has been used in armored vehicles for a long time, including by countries such as Brazil. Truth based on steel.
      1. +9
        30 August 2022 06: 22
        From ATGMs in a circle, even the tank is not protected recourse
      2. +4
        30 August 2022 09: 17
        It is expensive to sell titanium to the Americans, but there is nothing to save the lives of our soldiers.
        1. +1
          1 November 2022 15: 47
          I do not understand why we still have some business with their government.

          Per aspera
    2. +6
      30 August 2022 05: 29
      Quote: depressant
      Is it possible to include at least titanium fractions in the inner layer?

      The point here is not even the price, but I suppose that it is the technological impossibility of keeping these "fractions" in aluminum, no matter how they themselves turn into secondary damaging elements.
      I think that the lining of ballistic fabrics is both simpler and more reliable.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    3. 0
      30 August 2022 11: 24
      I think it's primarily a matter of price. Secondly, the question of the physical properties of titanium itself, perhaps in thin armor plates inside multilayer armor, its physical qualities are not fully manifested and the gain in durability is not so significant.
    4. +1
      31 August 2022 04: 40
      Very expensive. Much cheaper to include a thin layer of high hardness steel.
      1. 0
        1 November 2022 15: 49
        Welded mesh with a cell of 1x1mm.

        The text of your comment is too short and in the opinion of the site administration does not carry useful information.
  3. -6
    30 August 2022 05: 42
    Made from al. alloys may not be as expensive as steel as it seems. The melting temperature of aluminum alloys is several times lower than that of steel, correspondingly, welding is cheaper (auto disks, car trunks and boats are welded in every garage), machining is much simpler.

    Bicycle manufacturers, it seems to me, are just being cunning and selling fashionable aluminum frames to the consumer. Which are most likely just cheaper to manufacture. At the same time, their strength is lower. However, the strength of the good old steel chrome-molybdenum frames was largely redundant.
    1. +5
      30 August 2022 06: 10
      Is aluminum welding cheaper? The main price is the cost of argon.
    2. AUL
      +1
      30 August 2022 08: 33
      Quote: VicktorVR
      Made from al. alloys may not be as expensive as steel as it seems.

      The described alloys have a very complex production technology. And very expensive. After all, first each sheet of the package must be straightened (or maybe milled), assembled the package, pressed, cut to shape, prepare the sidewalls, assemble the package ... There are a lot of operations, therefore, very expensive and long. And who among us, at the top, will go for a significant increase in the cost of mass production? Yes, "women are still giving birth, but we have a plan and profitability"! So I doubt very much that this development will be implemented soon. Will be shown in "Serving Russia!" and forget.
    3. +2
      30 August 2022 09: 55
      As a cyclist, I will say right away: you are mistaken in many ways))
      A good aluminum frame is less durable than steel, but it is lighter. And the price tag is also explained by the difficulties associated with lightening the frames, without loss of strength, using injection molding (to give a certain shape to pipes and variable thickness of pipe walls). But aluminum also has disadvantages: aluminum does not spring like steel, but cracks under a certain load and does not dampen vibrations.

      Complicated aluminum alloys are expensive!
    4. 0
      30 August 2022 13: 30
      Quote: VicktorVR
      ... Bicycle manufacturers, it seems to me, are simply disingenuous and sell fashionable aluminum frames to the consumer. Which are most likely just cheaper to manufacture. At the same time, their strength is lower. However, the strength of the good old steel chrome-molybdenum frames was largely excessive ...

      The aluminum frame has higher rigidity, so it works more efficiently with shock absorbers. And the weight is much lower than that of chrome-molybdenum. And the weight for the bike is still very, very important.
  4. -1
    30 August 2022 06: 16
    Financing should be at the level that Russia provides the whole world with talented scientists.
  5. +7
    30 August 2022 06: 18
    Raise armor resistance by 15% by doubling the price of manufacturing? Do you spend money so "effectively" at home? Why aluminum? Why light armored vehicles? To swim? What for? Do you understand that the word "armor" and "light" logically contradict each other? And where the LIFE of a soldier prevails over the COMPLETION OF THE TASK set by a stupid moron, there the word "armor" prevails over "light". Why is OUR Soviet light armored vehicles still waiting for pontoons and crossings! Didn't think?!!! A little nuance - GET OUT OF THE WATER TO THE SHORE, even in IDEAL CONDITIONS is not an easy task !!!! ... How many lives were lost by ordinary soldiers because of LIGHT armor !!!!. Light armor is a terrible evil of OUR TANK BUILDING !!!!
    1. +1
      30 August 2022 07: 24
      Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
      where the LIFE of a soldier prevails over PERFORMANCE OF THE TASK

      What kind of war does this happen?
      1. +1
        30 August 2022 11: 05
        You cut off the quote and distorted its meaning. In a decent society, this is not the way to discuss.
        1. +3
          30 August 2022 11: 58
          Dear, the verdict is at the end of my speech. Put aluminum armor on planes and helicopters - it is IMPORTANT there, because EVERY GRAM is important! There is no place for LIGHT ARMOR in ground vehicles !!!!
          1. +3
            30 August 2022 14: 36
            Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
            There is no place for LIGHT ARMOR in ground vehicles !!!!

            You are partially right. Heavily armored vehicles - should not be made of aluminum - but they are.

            But there is a technique, the main purpose of which is - mobility (sometimes - buoyancy) - a not fire contact. This is a wheeled and light-tracked vehicle used as a chassis for various weapon modules (air defense, anti-tank systems, SAO, electronic warfare, reconnaissance, communications, ....), for the transportation of types of food, the delivery of personnel (armored vehicles), ... Here aluminum not only reduces the weight of armor, but also significantly reduces the size and weight of the engine, suspension, tanks - which reduces excess armor or increases interior space with the same mass. This proportionally reduces the overhead costs for maintenance and fuel - the economy has always been the first point of any war.
        2. 0
          30 August 2022 13: 38
          Quote: DenVB
          You cut off the quote and distorted its meaning. In a decent society, this is not the way to discuss.

          You have set an example of how to behave inappropriately.

          A quotation is an exact repetition of a statement with an indication of the author or a verbatim excerpt from a passage of text.

          I quoted the exact passage from the comment without distorting the general context.
          At the same time, he did not give his own assessment of the quoted fragment.
          What did I distort?
          Maybe instead of teaching others, it would not hurt you to learn the rules of the discussion yourself?
          1. -1
            30 August 2022 13: 47
            Quote: Flood
            What did I distort?

            There was a comma, after which there was a participial phrase, specifying what kind of tasks it was. And you omitted this part of the quote, after which it began to look like it was about performing any tasks.
            1. +2
              30 August 2022 13: 59
              whole sentence

              Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
              where the LIFE of a soldier prevails over the COMPLETION OF THE TASK set by a stupid moron, there the word "armor" prevails over "light".

              The first part of it is meaningless, because ANYWHERE and NEVER the life of a soldier will be valued above a combat mission.
              Otherwise there would be no wars.
              That is, the first part of the sentence makes sense of the second part.
              Because it sets the condition.

              That is why my question is correct.

              Quote: Flood
              What kind of war does this happen?

              Yes, at the same time, I omitted the phrase about "stupid moron" as not directly related to the issue of booking.
              If you insist that the essence of the commentary is "a task set by a stupid moron", then our argument all the more loses its meaning.
              We will not consider the degree of reservation of equipment, depending on the degree of debility of the commander.
              1. -3
                30 August 2022 14: 06
                Quote: Flood
                Yes, at the same time, I omitted the phrase about "stupid moron" as not directly related to the issue of booking.

                I think it's pointless to continue this discussion.
              2. -2
                30 August 2022 20: 04
                About debility and command tasks. My late grandfather in Finland, being a T26 mechanic driver, received shrapnel in the stomach during another regular attack of a pillbox in the forehead on the Karelian Isthmus .. I'm talking about armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles .... Why not a single army in the world rides ON ARMOR, what about the armor? Why count as ARMOR, then what SOLDIER DOES NOT COUNT WITH ARMOR?
                1. 0
                  30 August 2022 20: 32
                  Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
                  I'm talking about armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles .... Why does not a single army in the world go ON ARMOR, but for armor?

                  But I'm not talking about that.
                  Technique is developed for the task.
                  The landing force and the crew must be provided with sufficient armor protection, if the tasks so require.
                  Nobody argues with you about such obvious things.
                  Why so many letters?
                  1. -2
                    30 August 2022 23: 09
                    It’s a shame. People don’t have blood, I didn’t say .... mistakes in the leadership, as now with the UAV in Mazepia, are paid with blood and lives NOT THOSE WHO ARE MISTAKEN!
                2. +1
                  1 September 2022 10: 44
                  In general, they ride under armor - there are Israeli intentions, for example, they also ride in MCIs, well, I haven’t seen American soldiers riding ravings.
      2. -2
        30 August 2022 11: 51
        Generally happens.
        1. +1
          30 August 2022 13: 45
          Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
          Generally happens.

          1. The task.
          2. Means and ways to achieve it with the least losses

          But not vice versa.
          You can't put the cart before the horse.
          It is impossible to imagine a war without losses.
          1. -4
            30 August 2022 23: 04
            No need for sophistry. As in ANY PROFESSION, so in command. Failures in fundamental decisions !!!! For example, as now with drones! Am I making myself clear?
            1. +1
              30 August 2022 23: 10
              Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
              No need for sophistry.

              Well, stop piling letters on top of each other.
              In my understanding, it is you who are being sophisticated in sophistry.

              Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
              The conversation is not about losses, but about STUPID LOSSES!

              I can only read what is written.
              If you misunderstood your point, correct yourself.
              But do not blame anyone for not being able to read between the lines of the unsaid.

              Quote: Anatoly Proskurin
              Am I making myself clear?

              As soon as you understand and adopt my wishes.
    2. 0
      30 August 2022 11: 33
      I agree with the thesis itself (the ability to swim for armored vehicles of the Russian Federation is not a priority, we will not land on Taiwan) I agree. But with its expansion to "light armor is not needed" - no. Mobility is needed, it also means survivability, saved lives. Light armor can be installed where heavy armor cannot be pulled by the carrier, not instead of steel, but instead of no protection at all! Do not think about a parachute BMD, but imagine a solution like the same lightweight 777 howitzers with titanium elements, some kind of armored UAZ, and only partially with aluminum armor.
      1. -2
        30 August 2022 11: 59
        Dear, the verdict is at the end of my speech. Put aluminum armor on planes and helicopters - it is IMPORTANT there, because EVERY GRAM is important! There is no place for LIGHT ARMOR in ground vehicles !!!!
  6. +1
    30 August 2022 06: 19
    Aluminum has one huge drawback. When heated above 250 degrees, the mechanical properties and hardening disappear.
    There are a lot of photos from the M113, BMD, BMP-3 after the fire. Flattened to the state of flounder.
    1. +3
      30 August 2022 11: 01
      Yes, it is not suitable for battles on the planets of the solar system...
    2. +2
      30 August 2022 11: 51
      If the car has heated up to 250 degrees, then it no longer matters to the crew ..
      1. 0
        30 August 2022 16: 22
        How to say. The defeat of the MTO, fire, its extinguishing on a piece of iron ends with the replacement of damaged parts. M113 or BMP-3 are decommissioned.
        1. 0
          30 August 2022 16: 37
          Come on, the lost armor is full of such defeats, EVERYTHING is there for write-off.
          1. 0
            31 August 2022 02: 43
            Quote: max702
            if the MTO burned out, then write-off clean.


            It makes sense to try to look specifically for MTO and ammunition racks for effective methods of ultra-fast fire extinguishing. For example, explosion extinguishing, which is used in oil and gas wells, or powder dust and gas generators that displace oxygen by combustion products. Once upon a time, active tank protection units were also called "explosives around the tank."
            In the end - at least pyrobolts in the lid of a high-pressure nitrogen or carbon dioxide cylinder located in the MTO or in the charger.
            1. +1
              31 August 2022 08: 19
              It’s all there, but it doesn’t cope with the tasks, alas, you can’t deceive physics
  7. +1
    30 August 2022 07: 27
    Aluminum will not save you from RPG-7, and there are few brave ones to shoot BMPs from a machine gun.
  8. +6
    30 August 2022 07: 27
    In general, we have big problems with the developments in the systematization and exchange of "knowledge"! At one time he worked at VSMPO, where the scientific and technical center developed an extremely cheap technology for producing foamed titanium, which has a very good rate of quenching the cumulative jet, VSMPO is literally 30 km away. from UVZ, all my attempts to reach at least some leadership of UVZ stopped at the level of "manicured village Glash" with the words "write to e-mail", which, by the way, gave out a non-existent mailbox.
  9. KCA
    0
    30 August 2022 08: 58
    I did not graduate from MISIS, but what is technically pure aluminum? Chemically pure, I know, but technically? How is this?
    1. +4
      30 August 2022 09: 31
      Quote: KCA
      What is technically pure aluminum?

      Aluminum alloys of the 1xxx series are commercially pure aluminum with its content of at least 99,00%. This aluminum is often referred to as “unalloyed aluminum” or “technical aluminum”

      And more:

      According to GOST (11069-74), there are aluminum grades: A, AE, AO, A5, A6, A7, A8, A85, A95, A97, A99, A999 and A995. Grades A to A85 contain no more than 2% impurities и called technical grade aluminum

      In general - how much is twice two? Well, fifth, sixth ... but not this (s).
    2. 0
      31 August 2022 04: 45
      Alloys based on aluminum, containing magnesium, zinc, etc.
  10. +3
    30 August 2022 09: 24
    Thanks for the article. I couldn’t understand that aluminum is armor! hi
    1. 0
      4 September 2022 18: 52
      aluminum is not armor.
      Armor is aluminum-based alloys with alloying, plasticizing and similar additives that have undergone special heat treatment.
  11. -1
    30 August 2022 11: 15
    Thanks, it was interesting! It is possible to add an intermediate layer of coarse particles of increased strength bound by a compound of increased viscosity would also give a good increase in the overall resistance of such armor.
  12. 0
    30 August 2022 11: 17
    Heterogeneous aluminum armor is the day before yesterday. Today's day of protection of light armored vehicles is armor with ceramic plates. Aluminum oxide (corundum), boron carbide, silicon carbide. Expensive but much more efficient.
    1. +2
      30 August 2022 11: 59
      Yes, and high molecular weight polyethylene is interesting as a layer because it resists high-speed striking elements very well ..
  13. -1
    30 August 2022 12: 37
    And if a steel mesh is pressed onto the surface of the inner layer? Of course, this will not stop the bullet, but the number and speed of internal chips can be reduced radically. I think so.
  14. +1
    30 August 2022 14: 39
    I liked it very much. Publicly accessible and understandable even for a signalman. laughing laughing good
  15. -1
    30 August 2022 20: 38
    All information used in writing the article was taken from open sources and is not classified as "secret".

    and what, in open sources there is infa with the signature stamp "soviet secret" ...
    however, here one has already been accused of "collecting classified information", they say he went and collected ...
    so, such an "epigraph" will not be superfluous ... :)
  16. 0
    30 August 2022 20: 50
    considering that the enemy is already putting a bushmaster -3 with a 35mm cannon on their "bmp", it is necessary to develop armor not from machine guns and autocannons 30mm, but already from 35mm at least ...
  17. -1
    30 August 2022 21: 29
    And if you experiment with several layers of Kevlar and aluminum armor? Kevlar has a viscosity, like a polymer, and you can try to install it outside and inside, and install aluminum armor between?
  18. 0
    30 August 2022 23: 31
    I'm still for steel armor, not aluminum. this is not serious and the aluminum does not hold the temperature well, it's more show-off
  19. +1
    31 August 2022 01: 12
    Aluminum armor is good, especially when there is high hardness steel in front of it, which will break the cores, and a good anti-fragmentation lining from the inside.
  20. -1
    1 September 2022 20: 37
    In my opinion, it is necessary to make the supporting body of the tank / infantry fighting vehicle / armored personnel carrier and vehicles based on them from aluminum armored alloys only as a power frame, but the armor is hinged, modular, multi-layered with a combined filler and with remote sensing, then you can create equipment that meets modern field requirements fight.