Numerical simulation and experimental verification of ballistic performance of SiC ceramic/hybrid fiber composite armor structure

Unidirectional (UD) sheet composite materials are key materials for high-performance structural components in fields such as ballistic protection, aerospace, and new energy vehicle components, owing to their high strength, low weight, and excellent fatigue resistance. Among these application trends, ballistic protection materials are evolving towards lightweight design, high strength, superior ballistic resistance, and excellent environmental adaptability. However, the comprehensive advantages of ultra-high strength, light weight and modular structure have not been fully exploited. In this project, a novel ballistic composite material was designed and manufactured, featuring a ceramic unit-spliced structure as the front panel and an ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene fiber (UHMWPE)/basalt fiber (BF) hybrid composite material as the back panel. The influence of the fiber hybrid effect and UD laminate stacking configuration on ballistic performance was investigated via a combination of ballistic impact tests and finite element simulation. Furthermore, finite element simulations were performed to analyze the ballistic composite materials under high-energy and high-speed impact loads. The results indicated that the anti-penetration behavior of composite materials could be divided into four stages: the ceramic abrasion stage, the backplate compressive damage stage, the backplate shear damage stage, and the backplate tensile damage stage. The hybrid structure between fibers could effectively enhance the ballistic penetration resistance of the composite materials. Compared with UHMWPE composites, the hybrid fiber composites exhibited a reduced depth of back-face deformation depth of 1–4 mm after penetration. The numerical simulation results were in good agreement with the experimental results, and the established numerical simulation model exhibited a certain degree of reliability. Specifically, the relative error between the predicted results from the numerical simulation and the actual experimental test results ranged from 1.27% to 16%, with all deviations lower than 16%.