Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Demonstrates superior ballistic resistance in two-layer armor configurations, suggesting improved design for lightweight applications.
Multi-layered armor is conventionally assumed to outperform monolithic plates of equivalent mass. This study challenges this paradigm for dimensionally constrained systems by investigating AA2024-T3 aluminum configurations where a fixed 1.74 mm envelope is progressively subdivided into two to five layers, necessarily reducing total material mass from 1.64 mm to 1.04 mm as interface count increases. Using validated Abaqus/Explicit simulations with three double-nosed projectiles, we demonstrate that the two-layer configuration (L1) consistently delivers superior ballistic resistance, achieving limits of 45.7–61.4 m/s depending on projectile geometry. Performance systematically degrades with increasing layer count: the five-layer configuration (L4) exhibits 32% lower ballistic limits despite possessing four interfaces. A critical thickness threshold of 0.34–0.51 mm was identified, below which layers fail through low-energy shear rather than energy-intensive plugging. An artificial neural network trained on 249 simulations ( R 2 = 0.98, 0.92, 0.90 for residual velocity, absorbed energy, and impact time) independently confirmed through feature importance analysis that total material mass and individual layer thickness dominate performance over interface count. For thickness-constrained applications, maintaining fewer, thicker layers proves more effective than maximizing interfaces—a finding with direct implications for lightweight armor design in aerospace and defense sectors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alhosani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: