TMKM98

Engineering Materials-Design

PROJECT ON

Material Selection for Riot Shield

Sl.
Name P-Number E-mail ID
No.
1 Arun Manavalan D 850512-3730 arudh797@student.liu.se
2 Ebin Edakkalath Thomas 830107-4236 ebied690@student.liu.se
3 Muhammad Kamrul Islam 831012-T655 muhis240@student.liu.se
4 Tomy Varghese 850420-0539 tomva593@student.liu.se
5 Vinod Nicholas M 841211-T398 vinni006@student.liu.se

Group : A6
Summary
In this project we have done a study on the materials that are currently used for riot shields, and
we try to find alternative materials that we can also use. We look into the material factors that
would affect the functional characteristics of the shield. The selection of the materials is done
with the help of the software CES EduPack 2010. Five polymers are chosen and based on the
priority of each material property; a comparative scoring system is used to rank the materials to
find a suitable alternative.

-2-|Page
List of Figures
Figure 1: Dimensions of shield .................................................................................................... - 6 -

Figure 2: Illustration of Injection Molding .................................................................................. - 18 -

List of Tables
Table 1: Calculation of Tensile Strength ....................................................................................... - 8 -

Table 2: Calculation of Impact Strength........................................................................................ - 8 -

Table 3: Material Properties....................................................................................................... - 10 -

Table 4 : Weightage for Material Properties ................................................................................ - 11 -

Table 5 : Weighted Scoring for Material Properties...................................................................... - 13 -

Table 6 : Material Ranking ........................................................................................................ - 16 -

Table 7 : Manufacturing Process Assumptions ............................................................................ - 17 -

Table 8 : Relative Cost Index..................................................................................................... - 17 -

-3-|Page
Table of Contents
Summary.................................................................................................................................. - 2 -

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... - 3 -

List of Tables............................................................................................................................ - 3 -

Table of Contents..................................................................................................................... - 4 -

1. Introduction: ......................................................................................................................... - 5 -

2. Objective: ............................................................................................................................. - 5 -

3. Design of Shield................................................................................................................... - 6 -

3.1 Dimensions of the product ................................................................................................. - 6 -

Figure 1: Dimensions of shield ............................................................................................. - 6 -

3.2 Design Constraints............................................................................................................. - 7 -

3.3 Material Selection ............................................................................................................ - 10 -

3.4 Scoring Method................................................................................................................ - 11 -

4. Discussion.......................................................................................................................... - 14 -

4.1. PEI – Polyetherimide ............................................................................................... - 14 -

4.2. PCTA - Polycyclohexylenedimethylene tere/isophthalate copolyester .................... - 14 -
4.3. PPSU – Polyphenylsulfone...................................................................................... - 15 -
4.4. PC – Polycarbonate................................................................................................. - 15 -
4.5. Polyester Liquid Crystal (PLC):................................................................................ - 16 -
5. Manufacturing Process ...................................................................................................... - 17 -

6. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... - 18 -

7. References......................................................................................................................... - 19 -

-4-|Page
1. Introduction:
Riots are perhaps one of the ugliest facets of human behavior, and often the task of dealing with
an agitated crowd is very tough without the right equipment at hand. The modern day ‘riot
shield’ has evolved from what was once a tortoise hide that was used to intercept spears and
arrows. Over the years, as warfare artillery as progressed improvements in shields have also
followed very closely. Today, Kevlar ballistic shields are made to be bullet resistant. In this
project, we look at riot shield which are used to protect police personnel from blunt or sharp
objects that may be hurled at them during a riot situation. This shield however is not meant to
intercept firearms.
We explore the possibility of using alternate materials that can be used in constructing a riot
shield. Also we look at the alternative processes that can be used to manufacture these shields. It
is our interest to compare and conclude on which material and which process would be most
suitable, keeping in mind functional constraints, material costs and manufacturability.

2. Objective:
Most of the riot shields used by police in developing countries are made of bamboo sticks or
Polycarbonate. Bamboo shields are not so effective to withstand high force, temperature and
attack from sharp weapons. Our objective of this project is to select a suitable polymer material
which can perform well taking into account the mechanical and thermal constraints of a riot
shield. The main feature which has to be taken care is the impact strength, Fracture Toughness
and high temperature.

-5-|Page
3. Design of Shield

3.1 Dimensions of the product

The height of the shield is around 90cm and the width is 50cm. A handle is also provided to hold
the shield firmly. The thickness of the shield has been taken as 5 mm.

Figure 1: Dimensions of shield

-6-|Page
3.2 Design Constraints
Riot Shields are used by police force personnel while trying to incapacitate a rioting crowd. In
order for the shield to be effective, it should satisfy the following constraints.

The properties those are required for the riot shield has been classified into the following groups.

¾ Mechanical Properties

¾ Thermal Properties

¾ Others

Mechanical Properties

1. Tensile Strength:
It is the maximum tensile stress the material can withstand before the failure to happen.
For the shield, we have done the following calculation to arrive at the required tensile
strength of the shield.
Suppose a brick of weight 2.4 kgs is thrown at the shield with a speed of 11 m/s. The
handle of the shield is being placed at the centre of the shield. The force imparted by the
stone has been calculated as shown below and by using the flexure equation; the
longitudinal stress has been computed. (Refer Table 1)

Flexure Formula

σ = M*y / I

Where

σ = Longitudinal stress on the cross section, N/m2

M = Bending moment, Nm

y = distance from neutral axis

I = Moment of Inertia of the cross section about transverse axis.

-7-|Page
 Table 1: Calculation of Tensile Strength

Force Calculation Parameter Unit

Brick Specification
mass of stone 2.4 Kg
Dimensions 217x110x66 mm
velocity 11 m/s
duration of impact 0.1 Sec
Force 264 N
kinetic Energy 168 Joules
Shield Specifications
Thickness of shield 5 mm
Width of the shield 50 cm
Bending Length 45 cm
Stress 57 MPa

Therefore the material chosen has to have a tensile strength more than 57 MPa.

2. Impact strength :
ƒ Impact is a high force subject for a very short duration of time. Even ductile
materials tend to fail in a brittle manner when subjected to high energy impact.
For a shield to serve its purpose of deployment, it should be able to fend against
the impact of high energy projectiles and blows from sticks, and stones without
shattering.
ƒ To find the impact strength of the shield, following procedure has been followed.
We have found out the impact strength required to withstand an impact by a brick.
ƒ Kinetic Energy: (1/2) x mass x velocity2
Note: - Impact strength has been calculated based on worst condition i.e. the brick
hits normal to shield surface. (Refer Table 2)

Table 2: Calculation of Impact Strength

Brick
Length 217 mm
Height 66 mm
mass 2.45 kg
velocity 7 m/s
Kinetic Energy 60 J

Impact Strength Calculation

Circumference 566 mm
Thickness 5 mm
Area 2830 mm2
Impact Strength 21 KJ/m2

-8-|Page
 3. Fracture toughness:
Fracture toughness is a measure of the ability of a material having a crack in it to resist
fracture. It is desirable to have a high value of fracture toughness. The preferred range of
fracture toughness is 2-3MPa.m0.5.
4. Young’s Modulus, Stiffness
A high Young’s Modulus would imply high stiffness. For ductile materials it is desirable
to have a high value of Young’s Modulus whereas in brittle materials it would be a
disadvantage since it would mean low fracture toughness. For the shield it is expected to
lie in the range of 1-2 GPa.
5. Density/Weight:
Since the shield is a hand held device, it should light enough for the personnel to be able
to carry it without having his mobility hindered.

Thermal Properties

6. Service Temperature:
Often times, rioters resort to torches and fire. It is therefore desirable to have a high
service temperature, which would imply a high glass transition temperature. So the shield
has to withstand a minimum temperature of 5°C maximum temperature of around 130°C.

Others

7. Optical properties:
It is advantageous to have a transparent shield since it would allow the user to see their
nemesis while intercepting them.
8. UV stabilization :
It is important that the material used doesn’t age too easily or become unstable when
exposed to environment like UV rays. This ensures that the shield has a longer service
life.
9. Other Consideration:
• Material cost
• Economy of processing and production
• Ability to retard flame
• Resistance to Acids and Alkalis.

-9-|Page
 3.3 Material Selection
With the following constraints, we ran the search in CES EduPack 2010. The following polymers
have been short listed for detailed consideration.

Table 3: Material Properties

Polyester
PCTA PPSU PC (Copolymer,
Sl No Properties PEI (Unfilled) Liquid Crystal Unit
(Unfilled) (Unfilled) High Heat)
(Unfilled)

Mechanical Properties
1 Impact Strength 3.81-4.2 9.66-17.9 90.5-99.8 11-12.2 6.55-16 KJ/m2
2 Fracture Toughness 1.99-4.03 3.05-9.16 1.89-1.97 2.65-6.08 3.83-4.6 Mpa.m1/2
3 Youngs Modulus 2.89-3.04 1.65-1.96 15-15.4 2.29-2.4 2.21-2.4 GPa
4 Density 1.27 1.21 1.41 1.295 1.16 Tonne/m3
Thermal Properties
Minimum Service
5 224-244 219-239 223-243 223-243 226-236 °K
Temperature
Maximum Service
6 434-452 513-533 430-500 441-459 401-417 °K
Temperature
7 Melting Temperature 582-703 421-431 503-569 580-664 533-623 °K
Glass Transition
8 488-490 358-372 389-397 483-503 433-478 °K
Temperature
Optical Properties
9 Refractive Index 1.65-1.67 1.55-1.57 - 1.66-1.68 1.57-1.58

10 Transparency Transparent Optical Quality Translucent Translucent Transparent

Others
Resistance to strong
11 Excellent Limited use Acceptable Acceptable Excellent
acid
Resistance to weak
12 Excellent Acceptable Excellent Excellent Acceptable
alkali
13 UV Stabilization Excellent Good Good Good Fair
Self- Self- Self- Self-
14 Flammability Slow Burning
Extinguishing Extinguishing Extinguishing Extinguishing
15 Recyclable yes yes yes yes yes
Water permeability @
16 .227-.275 .05-.1 .00428-.00473 .336-.407 .15-.2 %
24 hrs
17 Cost 669 255 1375 1400 172.5 INR/Kg
Manufacturing Cost
18 Relative Cost Index 1.09E+04 9.23E+03 1.43E+04 1.39E+04 8.89E+03
19 Weight of the shield 2.86 2.7225 3.1725 2.91375 2.61 Kg
Approximate cost for
20 1911.67 694.24 4362.19 4079.25 450.23 INR
shield material

- 10 - | P a g e
The materials considered for our study are:

• PEI – Polyetherimide:

• PCTA - Polycyclohexylenedimethylene tere/isophthalate copolyester

• PPSU – Polyphenylsulfone

• PC – Polycarbonate

• Polyester Liquid Crystal

3.4 Scoring Method

Once the short listing has been done, the selection of material was done using the procedure of
weighted average. Each property was given a weight and the value of each property was allotted
a mark based on the maximum value in each property segment. The final selection has been done
based on the weighted average of each material.

Table 4 : Weightage for Material Properties

Sl Sl
Properties Weightage Properties Weightage
No No
Mechanical Properties Others
1 Impact Strength 10 11 Resistance to strong acid 10
2 Fracture Toughness 10 12 Resistance to weak alkali 5
3 Young’s Modulus 8 13 UV Stabilization 7
Thermal Properties 14 Flammability 10
5 Minimum Service Temperature 5 15 Recyclable 5
Maximum Service
6 10 16 Water permeability @ 24 hrs 2
Temperature
7 Melting Temperature 5 17 Relative Cost Index 10
8 Glass Transition Temperature 5 18 Weight of the shield 10
Optical Properties
19 Cost of shield 10
10 Transparency 10

- 11 - | P a g e
Example:

For the material Polycarbonate:

Impact Strength = 16 Kg/m3

Percentile Impact Strength = (Impact strength of PC / Max Impact strength amongst five)
x100

= 16 / 99.8 x 100

= 16.03

Weighted Average = ∑ (Percentile for property) x (weight for property) / ∑(weightage

of all properties)

∑ (Percentile for property) x (weight for property) for Polycarbonate

= 160.3 + 502.2 + 124.64 + 483.5 + 782 + 443.1 + 475 + 666.6 +

1000 + 333.3 + 233.31 + 500 + 500 + 4.72 + 1000 + 1000+1000

= 9208.67

∑(weightage for all property)

= 10 + 10 + 5 + 5 +10 + 5 + 10 + 5 + 5 + 8 + 10 + 15 + 7 + 10 + 5
+ 2 + 10 +10 +10

= 132

Weighted Average = 9208.67/132

= 69.76

NOTE:

1. The property transparency can be opaque, translucent, transparent or of optical

quality. The above are given percentile values of 0,25,50,75 and 1 respectively.

2. The properties weight and cost of material has to minimized, hence to find their
comparative scoring is calculated based on the reciprocal of respective value for each
material.

- 12 - | P a g e
 Table 5 : Weighted Scoring for Material Properties

Polyester
PC
Sl PEI PCTA Liquid PPSU
Properties (Copolymer, Unit Weightage
No (Unfilled) (Unfilled) Crystal (Unfilled)
High Heat)
(Unfilled)
Mechanical Properties
1 Impact Strength 4.2 17.94 100 12.22 16.03 KJ/m2 10
Fracture
2 Toughness 44 100 21.51 66.38 50.22 Mpa.m1/2 10
Youngs
3 Modulus 19.74 12.73 100 15.58 15.58 GPa 8
4 Density 1.27 1.21 1.41 1.295 1.16 T/m3
Thermal Properties
Minimum
Service
5 Temperature 100 97.9 99.5 99.5 96.7 °K 5
Maximum
Service
6 Temperature 84.8 100 93.8 86.1 78.2 °K 10
Melting
7 Temperature 100 61.3 80.9 94.45 88.62 °K 5
Glass
Transition
8 Temperature 97.4 73.9 78.9 100 95 °K 5
Optical Properties
Refractive
9 Index 1.65-1.67 1.55-1.57 - 1.66-1.68 1.57-1.58
10 Transparency 66.66 100 33.33 33.33 66.66 10
Others
Resistance to
11 strong acid 100 33.33 66.66 66.66 100 10
Resistance to
12 weak alkali 100 66.66 100 100 66.66 5
UV
13 Stabilization 100 66.66 66.66 66.66 33.33 7
14 Flammability 100 100 100 100 50 10
15 Recyclable 100 100 100 100 100 5
Water
permeability @
16 24 hrs 1.7 4.7 100 1.16 2.36 % 2

- 13 - | P a g e
 Manufacturing/Cost
Relative Cost INR/Sa
17 Index 81.56 96.32 62.17 63.96 100 mple 10
Weight of
18 the shield 91.34 95.87 82.27 89.58 100.00 Kg 10
Approximate
cost for
shield
19 material 3.77 64.84 10.31 11.03 100.00 INR 10
Weighted Average 69.03 73.18 71.69 63.3 69.76

4. Discussion

4.1. PEI – Polyetherimide:

PEI is an amorphous thermoplastic which is also known commercially as Ultem.

Advantages:

¾ It has excellent heat and environment resistance and it retains a good part of its
strength even at elevated temperatures. It is used in re-usable medical devices, in
underwater connectors and for structural parts in components used at high
temperature.

¾ Transparent

Disadvantages

¾ Impact strength very low

¾ Poor hydrostability.

4.2. PCTA - Polycyclohexylenedimethylene tere/isophthalate copolyester

PCTA is high-performance thermoplastic polyester resin. PCTA are used in the

manufacturing of food trays, caps, perfume bottles.

- 14 - | P a g e
 Advantages:

¾ Best optical quality among the five materials.

¾ Best fracture toughness among the five materials.

¾ Highest service temperature among the five.

¾ Second highest Impact Strength among the five materials.

¾ Comparatively lowest weight among the five.

Disadvantages

¾ Not resistant to strong acid

4.3. PPSU – Polyphenylsulfone

PPSU is a sulphone polymer which goes by the commercial name Radel IR. They withstand
prolonged exposure to water, chemicals and heat. PPSU is used in medical equipment
because of its ability to withstand repeated steam exposure.

Advantages:

¾ Sulfone polymers in general are high-heat amorphous thermoplastics with more

toughness, strength and hydrolytic stability.

Disadvantages

¾ Translucent

¾ Highest material and processing cost among the five materials.

4.4. PC – Polycarbonate

Polycarbonate goes by the commercial name ‘Lexar’. It is the preferred for a lot of
applications because of its useful balance of thermal resistance, optical properties and
mechanical strength.

Advantages:

¾ Transparent

¾ Lowest cost among the five materials cost.

Disadvantages

¾ Does not have very good water resistance.

- 15 - | P a g e
 ¾ Processing of Polycarbonate is made difficult because it has limited flowability hence
higher temperatures are required.

¾ Slow burning, hence vulnerable to catch fire.

4.5. Polyester Liquid Crystal (PLC):

Polyester Liquid Crystals are class of aromatic polyester polymers which have very good
mechanical strength as well as chemical properties. They are made of liner copolymer of
hydroxybenzoic acid and hydroxynaphthoic acid. The partial crystalline structure of PLC
renders them with good mechanical properties like toughness. Also PLC is extremely inert to
reaction with acids, alkali and has good weatherability and flame retardant properties.

Advantages:

¾ Highest Impact strength

¾ Highest Young’s modulus.

Disadvantages

¾ Very high material cost.

¾ Cannot be processed by extrusion.

¾ Opaque.

¾ Anisotropy.

Material chosen after study:

The Table 6 shows comparative scores and respective ranks of chosen materials.

Table 6 : Material Ranking

Rank Material Score

1 PCTA 73.18

2 PLC 71.69

3 PC 69.76

4 PEI 69.03

5 PPSU 63.30

From the above table we can infer that PCTA is the most suitable material for the shield.

- 16 - | P a g e
5. Manufacturing Process
The process which has been selected for the manufacturing the shield is Injection Molding
based on the following requirements.

a) The injection molding is convenient for getting the curved shape of the shield in a single
manufacturing step. If an alternative process like extrusion were chosen, we would
require another thermoforming or bending to achieve the required sheet curvature. Since
the number of manufacturing step is one, the production cost can be minimized for a
bulk.
b) The cost of the process is comparatively low.

The comparisons of cost for injection molding of the different material have been done based on
the relative cost index. The calculation of relative cost index was done using EduPack 2010 and
the same has been included in the Table 7 & 8. The following assumptions have been taken for
the calculation of relative cost index.

Table 7 : Manufacturing Process Assumptions

Overhead Rate 4.96E+03 INR/hr

Load Factor 0.5
Capital Write off time 1.57E+08 Sec
Batch Size 1000

Table 8 : Relative Cost Index

Polyester PC
Polyetherimide
PCTA Liquid Crystal PPSU (Unfilled) (Copolymer,
(Unfilled)
(Unfilled) High Heat)

Relative
Cost Index 1.09E+04 9.23E+03 1.43E+04 1.39E+04 8.89E+03
(/unit)

The relative cost index is based on the material cost as well as weight of single unit. From the
calculations, it’s seen that the relative cost index is highest for Polyester liquid Crystals. PCTA
has low relative cost index which is almost 65% the manufacturing cost index for PLC.

The schematic of the injection molding is shown below. The die is fabricated to suit the shape of
shield with the required tolerances. The heated polymer is injected into the die under high
pressure and temperature through a single nozzle point. Then the product is cooled and the
unwanted projection is chipped off and machined to get the final product.

- 17 - | P a g e
 Figure 2: Illustration of Injection Molding

6. Conclusion
In the present scenario, the material most commonly used for riot shields are Polycarbonates and
Plexiglas. Poly methyl methacrylate (PMMA) also known ‘Plexiglas’ is often used in application
that requires shatterproof glass. However the mechanical properties of PMMA, especially impact
properties, are inferior to those of polycarbonates and polyesters. Hence PMMA is only
considered as an economical alternative to Polycarbonates when they are only required for low
load applications. Polycarbonate is preferred over other materials for this application mostly
because of their superior impact strength and also it is comparatively light weight and shatter /
splinter proof material.

The alternative material that we have chosen for the shield is PCTA. PCTA is a co-polyester of
Terephthalic acid and Isophthalic acid with cyclohexanedimethanol. It is known by the trade
name ‘Thermx’. It is used currently in electrical, automotive and other industrial and consumer
products. It has a maximum tensile strength of 77MPa which is greater than our requirement of
57MPa. It has the highest fracture toughness value among the short-listed materials and hence
can resist propagation of cracks. It also holds the advantage of being light weight and good
optical quality. Even though the material cost of PCTA is slightly more than PC, we recommend
PCTA over PC since it has superior mechanical properties and overcomes the manufacturing
difficulties of PC.

- 18 - | P a g e
7. References
¾ http://www.wikipedia.com

¾ CES EduPack 2010

¾ http://www.ptsllc.com/polcarb_intro.htm

¾ http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/cds/departments/deas/pdfs/mre-shields.pdf

¾ http://www.hpwhite.com/uploads/file/402-01.pdf

¾ http://www2.dupont.com/Automotive/en_US/news_events/article20030305f.html

- 19 - | P a g e