International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Dynamic penetration of alumina/aluminum laminates:

experiments and modeling
B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun*
School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907-1282, USA
Received 22 October 1999; received in revised form 4 May 2000

Abstract

The e!ects of structural layering and thermal residual stresses on impact resistance of alumina/aluminum
laminated structures were investigated. Two multilayered structures of di!erent layer thicknesses were
manufactured. Two di!erent bonding techniques were used to bond these laminates producing four di!erent
structures. One bonding process was cured at room temperature, and the other was cured at a high
temperature to induce thermal residual stresses in the alumina layers. Laminates were impact tested between
100 and 300 m/s. Dynamic impact experiments showed that the thick layer laminates allowed less penetra-
tion than the thin layer laminates. The e!ect of thermal residual stresses on impact performance was minor.
Finite element models using ABAQUS/Explicit successfully simulated the impact, and several parametric
studies were completed. The performance of the laminates was highly dependent on the yield strength of the
aluminum layers. At increased velocity the thick layer laminate continued to outperform the thin layer
laminate in the "nite element simulations.  2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Impact; Alumina/aluminum laminates; Layering; Thermal residual stresses; Finite element method

1. Introduction

Composite armor is a term used to generalize the use of two or more materials in a structure
intended to defeat projectiles. More speci"cally, it normally consists of a ceramic outer layer and
a metallic or composite backing. There has been signi"cant study of two layer alumina and
aluminum armor systems [1}9]. These studies all combine alumina on the outer surface with
a layer of aluminum as the backing.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: #1-765-494-5130; fax: #1-765-494-0307.

E-mail address: sun@eccn.purdue.edu (C.T. Sun).

0734-743X/01/$ - see front matter  2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 7 3 4 - 7 4 3 X ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 3 1 - 2
170 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Many studies have looked at the e!ects of con"ning the brittle material. Rapacki et al. [10]
showed that ballistic performance of ceramic armor is extremely dependent on how well it is
supported. Shockey et al. [11] found that lateral and rear con"nement restricted the #ow of
damaged ceramic and improved the performance of the armor. A study by Anderson and Morris
[12] showed that various measures of armor performance are constant with varied thickness for
well con"ned ceramic tiles. Perhaps the best study on the e!ects of con"nement on alumina tiles
was conducted by Sherman and Ben-Shushan [13]. They were able to experimentally control the
amount of compressive stress in the tile and found that the addition of con"ning stress signi"cantly
changed the cracking behavior of the alumina.
The e!ects of structural layering on impact resistance has also been a topic of previous
literature. In a study by Woodward and Cimpoeru on aluminum laminated structures, the number
of layers had a large e!ect on ballistic performance [14]. Impact experiments performed by
Radin and Goldsmith with laminates of aluminum and polycarbonates have shown that structures
with a greater number of layers performed worse under impact loading [15]. Wilkins has shown
that in alumina/aluminum laminated armor structures a single thick layer of ceramic on the face
performs better than two thin layers of equal thickness [1]. An analytical study by Hetherington
attempted to perform an optimization of a two-layer aluminum/alumina laminated armor struc-
ture [3].
Signi"cant research has been accomplished in modeling ballistic impact of armor materials and
structures. A survey of ballistic modeling has been completed by Anderson and Bodner [16]. Two
recent studies have attempted analytical modeling of two layer armor systems [6,17]. Three other
models have been developed for modeling ceramic armor: The Florence Woodward and the den
Reijer Models [18,2,19]. The Woodward and the den Reijer models were developed and validated
against alumina/aluminum laminates.
Creating a valid material model for ceramic has been of major importance for many researchers.
Usually, these models are equations of state type models for modeling high or hypervelocity
impact. These models generally use a complex formulation for the compressive behavior of ceramic
based on friction of crushed particles. Cortes has found that the impact performance of ceramic
armor can be insensitive to internal friction [4]. However, Rosenberg and Yeshurun have shown
that the impact resistance of ceramic increased with elevated compressive strength [20].
The lightweight materials aluminum and aluminum oxide (alumina) were used in this study. Two
methods of improving the impact performance of these materials in a structure are explored. The
"rst method is layering. Aluminum and alumina are combined to form a layered medium or
laminated structure. The second method is con"nement of the brittle material. Alumina is con"ned
by bonding with the aluminum at high temperature. Di!ering coe$cients of thermal expansion
cause compressive stresses in the ceramic when the structure is cooled.
There were two goals for this research. The "rst goal was to discover the e!ect of layer thickness
on the impact resistance to penetration of multi-layered alumina/aluminum laminates. The second
goal was to "nd how much bene"t is gained by utilizing thermal residual stresses to con"ne the
brittle material.
Dynamic impact experiments were performed on the laminates. The dynamic experiments were
modeled with "nite elements. These simulations were used to better understand the impact
performance of these structures. Experimental and numerical simulation results show the e!ects of
layering and thermal con"nement on impact resistance.
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 171

2. Materials and fabrication of specimen

Alumina was purchased from Coors Ceramic and designated AD 998. Alloy 6061-T651 was used
for the aluminum layers of the laminates. Material properties for the two materials are shown in
Table 1 [21,22].
Two laminated structures of aluminum and alumina (shown in Fig. 1(a) and (b)) were manufac-
tured for impact testing. Both structures were discs 76 mm in diameter and 12 mm thick. The
di!erence between the two structures was the number of layers; however, both have the same
volume fraction of alumina and aluminum.
These two structures were bonded in two ways to make four unique laminates. One bonding
process was a high-temperature cured bond that induced thermal con"ning stress in the alumina.
The other, a room temperature cured process, was used to bond the materials without thermal
stresses.
The high-temperature bond utilized FM1000 "lm adhesive (Cytec Fiberite, Inc., Havre de Grace,
MO), cured at 1773C. The room temperature bond used HTR212 epoxy (Resin Services, Inc.,
Sterling Heights, MI). Bond thicknesses were on the order of 0.05}0.1 mm.
A third structure was manufactured for the measurement of thermal residual stresses (Fig. 1(c)).
This structure was also a laminate, except that it was unsymmetric which induced bending after
high-temperature bonding. The bending deformation of this two-layer unsymmetric laminate was
used to "nd the thermal con"ning stress in the three-layer and nine-layer high-temperature bonded
laminates.

3. Thermal residual stresses

Materials with mismatched coe$cients of thermal expansion induce stresses in one another after
cooling down from high bonding temperature. These stresses must be quanti"ed since they are
needed to accurately model the structure.
A simple test was used to determine the stress-free temperatures for the specimens. After the
unsymmetric two-layer laminate was bonded, it developed a curvature as a result of thermal
residual stresses. The curvature of the beam was compared to an elastic plate solution for the

Table 1
Material properties

Alumina Aluminum

Density 3900 kg/m 2700 kg/m

Elastic modulus 350 GPa 68.2 GPa
Poisson's ratio 0.22 0.35
Yield strength N/A 276 MPa
Ultimate (bending) strength 360 MPa 310 MPa
Compressive strength 2400 MPa N/A
Coe$cient of thermal expansion 8.2;10\3C\ 24.3;10\3C\

Alumina properties correspond to those reported for AD998.

172 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Fig. 1. Structure of the three-layered laminate (a), nine-layered laminate (b) and unsymmetric two-layer laminate for
measuring thermal stresses (c).

unsymmetric laminate [23]. This comparison gave a value for the e!ective bonding temperature
change. The e!ective bonding temperature change is de"ned as the temperature change necessary
to induce the measured deformation in the beam. The average value for the e!ective bonding
temperature change was !113.43C.
An elastic plate solution for the symmetric three-layer and nine-layer laminates was used to
calculate thermal residual stresses. The laminate stresses were !148.5 MPa for the alumina layers
and 148.5 MPa for the aluminum layers in both the three-layer and the nine-layer laminates based
on the e!ective bonding temperature change. The results were veri"ed by using the commercially
available "nite element analysis package ABAQUS/Standard (Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen,
Incorporated, Pawtucket, RI).

4. Impact

Impact experiments utilized a single-stage, light gas gun. The projectile used to impact the
laminates was 14.0 mm in diameter with a hemispherical head and had an overall length of
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 173

Fig. 2. Laminate with backing plate clamped in the target "xture.

28.1 mm. The projectile was machined from A-2 Drill Rod Steel and heat treated to achieve
a hardness of Rockwell C 62. It had a mass of approximately 31 g.
For the impact tests, the laminates were bonded to an aluminum backing plate 12.6 mm in
thickness. The laminate with a backing plate was clamped in a "xture for testing (Fig. 2). The
outside of the laminate was clamped in the circular holder such that there was a 50 mm diameter
exposed surface on the front of the laminate and on the rear of the backing plate.

4.1. Impact experiment results

A total of 15 laminates were impact tested. Four of each of the four laminate types were tested
except for the room temperature bonded nine-layer specimen for which only three laminates were
tested. All laminates remained intact after impact. The laminates were tested over the incident
velocity range of 100-300 m/s. A depth of penetration was measured for each laminate. Depth
of penetration was de"ned as the depth of the permanent cavity left in the laminate. Speci"cally,
this was the vertical distance from the undamaged surface of the laminate to the deepest part of the
cavity.
Results of the impact tests are presented in Fig. 3. The three-layer laminates (RT-3, HT-3)
allowed less penetration than the nine-layer laminates (RT-9, HT-9) for the entire velocity range.
There was little di!erence between the performance of the room temperature bonded and
the high-temperature-bonded laminates. At lower velocities ((200 m/s), the room-temperature-
bonded laminates allowed slightly less penetration; at higher velocities ('200 m/s) high-temper-
ature-bonded laminates allowed slightly less penetration. However, these di!erences are small and
are probably within experimental scatter.
Damage in high-temperature-bonded laminates was localized. Fig. 4 shows two nine-layered
laminates that were impacted at approximately 200 m/s. There was a signi"cant di!erence in the
amount of damage to the top layer of ceramic. Residual stresses induced by high-temperature-
bonding minimized the amount of damage away from the point of impact. In the high-temper-
ature-bonded laminate (HT-9), there was little cracking away from the initial point of impact. The
room-temperature-bonded laminate (RT-9) had extensive cracking in the entire top layer of
ceramic all the way to the clamped boundary.
174 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Fig. 3. Impact test results.

Fig. 4. Damage localization due to high-temperature curing. On the left is a nine-layer room-temperature-bonded
laminate (RT-9) and on the right is a nine-layer high-temperature bonded laminate (HT-9).

Inspection of the projectiles after impact yielded another e!ect that the number of layers had on
the performance of the laminate. Projectiles which impacted three-layer laminates had a slight
#attening of their nose. There was no noticeable permanent deformation in projectiles which
impacted nine-layer laminates.
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 175

The alumina directly beneath the projectile in the three-layered laminates displayed unexpected
permanent deformation. The deformation was noted in both room- and high-temperature-bonded
laminates. The alumina seemed to deform plastically on the top surface of the laminate to take the
shape of the projectile tip. This was obviously not a true plastic deformation. The extreme pressures
involved in the penetration process reconsolidated the crushed alumina into a solid that took the
shape of the projectile tip.

4.2. Impact modeling

The commercially available analysis package ABAQUS/Explicit (Hibbitt, Karlsson and Soren-
sen, Incorporated, Pawtucket, RI) was used to model the experiments. ABAQUS/Explicit utilizes
an explicit time integration scheme designed speci"cally to model nonlinear dynamic problems
[24]. It also has the ability to reduce the sti!ness of elements that reach a failure criterion.
The model consisted of 2604 four-node reduced integration axisymmetric elements and 2750
nodes. Speci"cally, the projectile, the laminate and the backing plate used 704, 1600 and 300
elements, respectively. The mesh used for this stimulation can be seen in Fig. 5, the arrows indicate
displacement constraints. Material in the region between the clamps was not included in the model
because studies showed that the removal of this area did not signi"cantly a!ect the results. The
"nite element model was constrained in the one- and two-directions on the outside vertical surface
of the laminate and backing plate. The back surface of the backing plate was unconstrained to
match experimental conditions. The centerline of the laminate and projectile was also constrained

Fig. 5. Finite element mesh used for impact simulations.

176 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Table 2
Material properties used in impact models

Steel Alumina Aluminum

Density (kg/m) 7770 3900 2700

Modulus (GPa) 210.0 350.0 68.2
Poisson's ratio 0.30 0.22 0.35
Plasticity (p(MPa), e ) 1500.0, 0.000 2400.0, 0.000 276.0, 0.000

1800.0, 0.100 290.0, 0.006
310.0, 0.116
Tensile strength (MPa) 360.0 310.0

in the one-direction for the axisymmetric solution. An initial velocity was imparted on all nodes of
the projectile to simulate the incident velocity. Contact was de"ned between the outer surface of the
projectile and the nodes in the laminate. The simulations were solved for 100 ls which was enough
time to stimulate the stop and rebound of all projectiles. Explicit integration time steps in the order
of 10.0}0.1 ns were chosen automatically.
Material properties used for steel, aluminum and alumina are shown in Table 2. The steel was
not allowed to fail. Aluminum, modeled as elastic}plastic, failed in tension at a stress of 310 MPa.
When this limit was reached, the material would undergo ductile failure. In ABAQUS/Explicit,
ductile tensile failure is modeled by limiting the pressure stress to the hydrostatic cuto! stress and
leaving the deviatoric stress components una!ected [25]. Alumina was modeled to fail at a tensile
stress of 360 MPa; at this value of stress the material underwent brittle failure. ABAQUS/Explicit
models brittle tensile failure by setting the deviatoric stress components to zero, and the pressure
stress is required to be compressive [25]. Elastic perfectly plastic behavior was assumed for
compressive behavior of the alumina. The Von Mises yield criterion and the Rankine failure
criterion were used in the ABAQUS models.
The thermal residual stress state for high-temperature bonded laminates was modeled by
imparting an initial stress state on the model. Alumina layers were given 150 MPa of compressive
stress in one and three-directions based on Fig. 5. Tensile stress of 150 MPa was imparted on one
and three-directions of the aluminum.
In the experiments, alumina directly below the projectile tip crushed and reformed into
a solid that took the shape of the projectile tip. To model these deformations, a small number
of alumina elements directly below projectile were not allowed to fail in tension. The material
models available in ABAQUS/Explicit also limited the material modeling choices. The size
of this zone was scaled such that the width would not extend outside the area of the laminate
directly in contact with the projectile (Table 3). The depth of the zone was always two elements
thick. The addition of an area of no tensile failure greatly improved the stability of the
solutions.
Through the 100 ls solution, data were recorded in 100 intervals. The displacement of the
projectile tip and centerpoint of the top surface of the laminate were tracked throughout the
solution. The velocities of the projectile nodes were also recorded.
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 177

Table 3
Size of the no tensile failure zone used in impact models

Velocity (m/s) 50 100 150 200 250 300

Size (elem. wide;elem. deep) 2;2 4;2 6;2 8;2 10;2 12;2

4.3. Impact model results

The depth of penetration taken from "nite element simulations was de"ned slightly di!erently
from that taken from experiments. It was intended that the steady state value of the centerpoint on
the top surface of the laminate would be used for the depth of penetration measurement. Due to the
failure of elements surrounding this area, the bottom of the impact crater did not have a steady
state value of displacement. The maximum displacement of the projectile tip was used as the value
of the depth of penetration for the "nite element simulations. In models where both the maximum
displacement of the projectile and the steady state displacement of the top of the laminate could be
found, these two values were very similar.
Results of the "nite element model of impact are shown in Fig. 6. Results from models for the
three-layered laminates matched the experimental data well over the entire velocity range.
The nine-layered models predicted a slightly lower depth of penetration when compared to the
experimental results. However, these results still fell near the lower bound of the data for
the nine-layered laminates.
Fig. 7 shows the deformed shape of the mesh and locations of tensile failed alumina elements and
yielded aluminum elements at 50 ls for a 200 m/s impact. Blunting of the projectile was much more
severe in the impact of the three-layer laminate. In the nine-layer solution, failed elements on the
upper surface were moving away from the laminate. This roughly simulated the ceramic being
broken away on the top surface. There is little di!erence in the amount of failed or yielded elements
between the two laminates. The jagged deformations on the tip of the projectile impacting the
nine-layer laminate are due to contact noise problems from distorted elements in the mesh.
Fig. 8 shows a magni"cation of the deformation plots of two laminates at 2 ls. At 2 ls there was
already blunting of the projectile impacting the three-layer laminate (RT-3) (Fig. 8). This blunting
qualitatively matches what was observed in the experiments.
The process by which the laminates were penetrated was identi"ed from the "nite element
simulation results. Blunting of the projectile was the "rst stage of the penetration process. This
stage was much more pronounced in impact of the three-layer laminates. Cracking or defeat of the
ceramic was the next stage of impact. The thicker top layer of ceramic in the three-layer laminates
was much stronger than the thin top layer of the nine-layer laminates and was much more di$cult
to defeat. Failure of the ceramic layers caused loads to be transferred to the aluminum. With the
load transferred to the aluminum, yielding/#ow of the metal was the major penetration process.

4.4. Discussion

The "nite element model for impact provided a very good prediction of the experiments
considering the complexity of the problem and the simplicity of the model. Simulations and
178 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Fig. 6. Impact model and experimental results.

Fig. 7. Deformed mesh at 50 ls for 200 m/s impact.

experiments showed that three-layered laminates were signi"cantly more resistant to penetration
than nine-layered laminates. The main reason for this is the thickness of the top ceramic layer. This
axisymmetrical model also had several weaknesses: the inability to model radial cracking, the
absence of adhesive layers, and the use of a crude model for alumina compressive behavior.
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 179

Fig. 8. Deformed mesh at 2 ls for 200 m/s impact magni"ed to show blunting of the projectile.

Three-layered laminates were able to dissipate the projectile's energy with a lower depth of
penetration. A thin top layer of alumina caused the nine-layer laminates to have a lower resistance
to penetration. Under impact loading, the thin layer of alumina quickly failed. Loads were
transferred to the aluminum, which promptly yielded and pushed away from the projectile allowing
for a large penetration. With three-layered laminates, the thick outside layer required higher loads
to fail. Since these layers were able to take higher loads before they failed, they delayed the transfer
of loads to the weaker alumina layers causing smaller penetrations. The thicker layers of alumina
on the surface of the laminate caused the three-layered laminates to perform better than the
nine-layered laminates.
The bene"t of the thicker ceramic layers was evident in the plastic deformation of the projectiles.
This result was captured in both the experiments and the models. Contact stresses in the impact of
three-layer laminates were high enough to cause permanent deformation to the projectiles. The fact
that impact of three-layer laminates caused permanent deformation to the projectiles and impact of
nine-layer laminates did not, agrees with the conclusion that thicker ceramic tiles take a much
higher load before they fail.
Thermal residual stresses in the laminates showed little in#uence on the resistance of the
structure to penetration. This was observed in both the experiments and the modeling. The
magnitude of the residual stresses might not be high enough to cause signi"cant e!ects.
The orientation of the projectile at impact can have a signi"cant e!ect on the performance of
armor. Use of a hemispherical head helped reduce the dependence of depth of penetration on yaw
180 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

angle for these experiments. The experimental equipment was unable to measure yaw prior to
impact. Inspection of the projectiles and targets after impact showed little evidence of yawing. All
projectiles had scratch patterns on the tips that would support normal incidence.

5. Parametric study of impact modeling

Following the experiments and the simulations, e!ects of layering and thermal stresses on the
impact performance on the laminates were not completely clear. A parametric study using the
established "nite element impact model was performed to explain the performance of the laminates
in greater detail.

5.1. Sensitivity studies

Yielding of the aluminum was a major damage mode during penetration. Studying the sensitivity
of the penetration to yield stress will lead to an optimal selection among aluminum alloys.
Sensitivity of the impact model to a change in the aluminum yield strength is shown in Fig. 9.
Independent of the yield strength, the three-layer laminate (RT-3) allowed less penetration than the
nine-layer laminate (RT-9). Both laminates lost signi"cant penetration resistance with a decrease in
yield strength and gained penetration resistance with an increase in yield strength.
Fig. 10 shows the sensitivity of the model to a change in the compressive strength of the alumina.
The three-layer laminate (RT-3) always allowed less penetration than the nine-layer laminate
(RT-9). The nine-layer laminate showed little change in its penetration from a change in the
alumina compressive strength. The three-layer laminate showed slightly increased penetration
resistance from an increase in alumina compressive strength.

Fig. 9. Sensitivity to aluminum yield strength for 200 m/s impact.

 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 181

Fig. 10. Sensitivity to alumina compressive strength for 200 m/s impact.

In the models presented in this study a small group of ceramic elements directly below the
projectile tip were not allowed to fail in tension. This assumption was used to simulate the
reconsolidation of the alumina underneath the projectile and to stabilize the solution.
Sensitivity of the model to a change in the size of the no tensile failure zone is shown in Fig. 11.
Nine-layer laminates (RT-9, HT-9) and the three-layer high-temperature-bonded laminate (HT-3)
were found to be insensitive to a change in size or removal of the no tensile failure zone. The
three-layer room-temperature-bonded laminate (RT-3) was also insensitive to a change in size of
the no tensile failure zone, but was a!ected greatly by its removal. Removing the no tensile failure
zone caused an increase in penetration depth to nearly the level of the nine-layer laminates for the
three-layer room-temperature-bonded laminate.

5.2. Higher velocity impact

The depth of penetration results for a 450 m/s incident velocity were 13.19 mm and 14.13 mm for
three-layer and nine-layer laminates, respectively. Even at higher velocities, the three-layer lami-
nate (RT-3) still allowed less penetration than the nine-layer laminate (RT-9). The di!erence in
performance between the two laminates occurred almost entirely in the "rst 10 ls.

5.3. Ewect of thermal residual stresses

In the dynamic testing and modeling, little di!erence was noted between the performance of
room- and high-temperature-bonded laminates. The question remains: how much con"ning stress
is needed to have an a!ect on the depth of penetration? Previous studies have shown that con"ning
stresses of 250 MPa would a!ect the impact performance of an alumina plate [13].
182 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

Fig. 11. Sensitivity to the no tensile failure zone size for 200 m/s impact.

The previous simulations were compared to two new simulations. A total of four di!erent
prestress boundary conditions were compared. The "rst case was the standard room-temperature-
bonded simulation, which had no prestress in the laminate. The second was the standard
high-temperature-bonded simulation, which imparted a compressive stress in the alumina of
150 MPa and a tensile stress in the aluminum of equal magnitude. These stresses were in the radial
and hoop directions. The third simulated a high-temperature bond that would take place at
a temperature much higher than 1773C and would induce 300 MPa of compressive stress in the
alumina and 300 MPa of tensile stress in the aluminum. This is the highest amount of stress
a thermal bond could create with the present material system. The fourth condition simulated
mechanical compression of the alumina layers. To achieve this stress state in reality, a mechanical
system would compress only the alumina. The ceramic was given an initial compressive stress of
1000 MPa. Depth of penetration values for these cases were investigated for impact velocities of
100, 200 and 300 m/s.
Fig. 12 compares the depth of penetration values for di!erent boundary conditions and
laminates. There was very little di!erence in penetration performance between stress free, 150 MPa
thermal stress and 300 MPa thermal stress cases. With 1000 MPa of prestress in the alumina, the
depth of penetration was decreased between 10 and 30%. The three-layer laminate impacted at
300 m/s showed greatest improvement with 1000 MPa of prestress.

5.4. Ewect of layering

Experimental results and modeling clearly show that three-layer laminates out-perform nine-
layer laminates for this material system. It is of interest to study how a laminate with "ve layers
would perform.
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 183

Fig. 12. E!ect of residual stresses on the depth of penetration (DOP).

Fig. 13. Five-layer simulation compared to the three and nine layers.

The depth of penetration results for impact of a room-temperature-bonded "ve-layer laminate

(RT-5) are shown in Fig. 13 together with the results for three-layer room-temperature-bonded
(RT-3) and nine-layer room-temperature-bonded (RT-9) laminates. The depth of penetration
184 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185

results for a "ve-layer laminate were slightly less or the same as those in the nine-layer laminate. Near
the middle of the curves (150}200 m/s) the "ve- and nine-layer performance was nearly the same.

5.5. Discussion of the parametric study

Sensitivity studies revealed that penetration was dominated by yielding of the aluminum.
Changing the yield strength of the aluminum could greatly a!ect the performance of the laminate.
Use of an alloy with a higher yield strength in the layered system would signi"cantly increase the
laminates' penetration resistance.
Simulations were fairly insensitive to a change in the compressive strength of the alumina. The
use of perfect plasticity to simulate the compression strength of the brittle alumina probably had
little e!ect on the model results.
Use of the no tensile failure zone in the top layer of ceramic had a signi"cant e!ect on the model.
Removal of the zone caused a change in the depth of penetration for three-layer room-temperature-
bonded laminates. It is also possible that this assumption masked the e!ects of the residual stresses
in the alumina. Restricting the tensile failure behavior of the elements would have the same e!ect as
con"nement. However, the use of this zone allowed for higher-velocity solutions of the model.
Without this assumption, the higher-velocity solutions diverged.
Results of higher-velocity modeling indicated that the three-layer laminate allowed a smaller
depth of penetration than the nine-layer laminate. This di!erence was almost entirely during the
"rst 10 ls of the impact. The "rst few microseconds of impact di!erentiated the performance of the
three- and nine-layer laminates. In the three-layer laminates, blunting of the projectile and delayed
failure of the "rst layer of ceramic caused lower depth of penetration.
Finite element simulations showed that thermal residual stresses produced by bonding at
elevated temperature yielded little or no bene"t, unless the level of prestress in the alumina exceeds
1000 MPa which would decrease the depth of penetration by up to 30%.

6. Summary

The goal of this work was to "nd the e!ect of structural layering and thermal residual stresses on
impact resistance of layered structures. Dynamic impact experiments showed that alumina/alumi-
num laminates consisting of thick constituent layers allowed less penetration than the laminates
comprised of thin layers. The e!ect of thermal residual stresses on impact performance was minor.
Finite element models using ABAQUS/Explicit successfully simulated the impact response. The
modeling showed that for increased velocities the laminate of thick laminae continued to
outperform the laminate of thin laminae. Unrealistically increasing the prestress in the alumina was
found to increase the penetration resistance of all structures.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Army Research O$ce MURI Grant CDAAH04-96-1-0331 to
Purdue University.
 B.A. Roeder, C.T. Sun / International Journal of Impact Engineering 25 (2001) 169}185 185

References

[1] Wilkins ML. Mechanics of penetration and perforation. Int J Eng Sci 1978;16:793}807.
[2] Woodward RL. A simple one-dimensional approach to modeling ceramic composite armour defeat. Int J Impact
Engng 1990;9(4):455}73.
[3] Hetherington JG. The optimization of two component composite armours. Int J Impact Eng 1992;12(3):409}14.
[4] Cortes R, et al. Numerical modelling of normal impact on ceramic composite armours. Int J Impact Engng
1992;12(4):639}51.
[5] Woodward RL, et al. A study of fragmentation in the ballistic impact of ceramics. Int J Impact Engng
1994;15(5):605}18.
[6] Zaera R, Sanchez-Galvez V. Analytic modelling of normal and oblique ballistic impact on ceramic/metal light-
weight armours. Int J Impact Engng 1998;21(3):133}48.
[7] Fellows NA, Hezell PJ, Hethrington JG. A note on the behind armour e!ects from perforated aluminum targets. Int
J Impact Engng 1998;21(7):589}95.
[8] Mayseless M, et al. A note on the behind armour e!ects from perforated alumina/aluminum targets. J Appl Mech
1987;54:373}8.
[9] Woodward RL, et al. Energy absorbtion in the failure of ceramic composite armours. Mater Forum
1987;13:174}81.
[10] Rapacki EJ et al. Ceramics for armors * a material system perspective. In 7th Annual TARDEC Ground Vehicle
Survivability Symposium, Monterey, CA, 26}28 March 1996.
[11] Shockey DA, et al. Failure phenomenology of con"ned ceramic targets and impacting rods. Int J Impact Engng
1990;9(3):263}75.
[12] Anderson CE, Morris BL. The ballistic performance of con"ned Al O ceramic tiles. Int J Impact Engng
 
1992;12(2):167}87.
[13] Sherman D, Ben-Shushan T. Quasi-static impact damage in con"ned ceramic tiles. Int J Impact Engng
1998;21(4):245}65.
[14] Woodward RL, Cimpoeru SJ. A study of the performance of aluminum laminate targets. Int J Impact Engng
1998;21(3):117}31.
[15] Radin J, Goldsmith W. Normal projectile penetration and perforation of layered targets. Int J Impact Engng
1988;7(2):229}59.
[16] Anderson CE, Bodner SR. Ballistic impact: the status of analytical and numerical modeling. Int J Impact Engng
1988;7(1):9}35.
[17] Chocron Benloulo IS, Sanchez-Galvez V. A new analytic model to simulate impact onto ceramic/composite
armors. Int J Impact Engng 1998;21(6):461}71.
[18] Florence AL. Interaction of projectiles and composite armor. Internal Report, US Army, March 1969.
[19] den Reijer PC. Impact on ceramic faced armour. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands,
1991.
[20] Rosenberg Z, Yeshurun Y. The relationship between ballistic e$ciency and compressive strength of ceramic tiles.
Int J Impact Engng 1988;7(3):357}62.
[21] Department of Defense, Washington, District of Columbia. Military standardization handbook: metallic materials
and elements for aerospace vehicle structures, June 1987.
[22] Coors Ceramic Company, Golden, Colorado. Material Property Standard 990.
[23] Jones RM. Mechanics of composite materials. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. p. 239}284.
[24] Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorenson, Inc., Pawtucket, Rhode Island. ABAQUS Theory Manual, Version 5.8, 1998.
[25] Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorenson, Inc., Pawtucket, Rhode Island. ABAQUS/Explicit User's Manual, Version 5.8,
1998.