Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Improvement in ballistic impact resistance of a transparent

bulletproof material laminated with strengthened soda-lime silicate
glass
Gyu-In Shim a, Seong-Hwan Kim a, Hyeng-Woo Eom a, Deok-Lae Ahn a, Jong-Kyoo Park b,
Se-Young Choi a, *
a
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-ku, Seoul 120-749, Republic of Korea
b
Agency for Defense Development, Bugyuseong daero 488 beon gil, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-152, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study evaluates the ballistic impact resistance of soda-lime silicate glass strengthened by ion ex-
Received 14 October 2014 change for application in lightweight and thin bulletproof materials. The maximum flexural strength
Received in revised form values of the strengthened glass with thicknesses of 3, 4, 8, and 10 mm were 0.63, 0.68, 0.73, and
6 March 2015
0.77 GPa, respectively, values that were 3.5 times higher than that of the parent glass. By laminating
Accepted 8 March 2015
Available online 17 March 2015
polycarbonate and multilayer defense film with the strengthened glass, we achieved a ballistic limit
velocity of 973.8 m/s, which was 16% higher than the standard. Also, the transmittance satisfied the
standard for bulletproof windows.
Keywords:
A. Glasses
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
B. Mechanical properties
B. Optical properties/techniques
E. Autoclave

1. Introduction preventing penetration by plastically forming a bulge. Walley et al.

Glass/polymer-laminated bulletproof materials are widely used
for windows or windshields of military vehicles, battleships, and
warplanes because it is lightweight, transparent in visible light, and
it exhibits good performance. However, the ballistic impact resis-
tance of glass/polymer materials is frequently lower than that of
metal (steel, aluminium alloy, etc.) and ceramic (aluminium oxide,
silicon carbide, boron carbide, etc.) materials because of its low
density [1e5]. Therefore, it is necessary to develop thin, light-
weight, and transparent bulletproof materials that have higher
ballistic resistance and improved operational ability in order to
protect human life and valuable equipment.
Traditionally, transparent bulletproof windows are manufac-
tured by laminating elastomer-like polycarbonate (PC) on mono-
lithic glass using polyurethane (PU) and by connecting the various
thicknesses of the glass using polyvinyl butyral (PVB) [6e8].
Although the glass is shattered after absorbing the impact energy of
a projectile, the PC decreases the rotation speed of the projectile,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ82 2 2123 2851; fax: þ82 2 312 5375.
E-mail address: sychoi@yonsei.ac.kr (S.-Y. Choi).
[9] investigated crack and spall formation within the PC during
impact. They reported ways of preventing penetration and crack
propagation by varying the glass/PC laminate construction.
The development of improved transparent bulletproof windows
by considering laminate design, interlayer bonding technologies,
polymer composites, and sandwich structure is actively being
researched. Sabet and Bobaru [10,11] studied the ballistic impact
resistance of sandwich panels of glass/polymer laminates of vary-
ing densities, and they discussed the influence of parameters such
as impact energy, density, and ballistic limit. Grujicic and Gu [12,13]
investigated the effect of cracks on the glass during impact. By
analyzing the ballistic resistance of transparent armor glass using
finite element analysis, they confirmed that flaws existing inside
the glass and cracks that occurred during the cutting and grinding
process promoted damage of the bulletproof material and a
decrease in ballistic resistance. Rouxel and Sellappan [14,15] carried
out important research on enhancing the surface cracking resis-
tance for various glass compositions using standard single-edge
notched bending fracture toughness measurements.
These results can be related to several important factors that
influence ballistic resistance, such as relative density, laminate
design, and fracture stress. Although the relation between the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.03.035
1359-8368/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
170 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178
density of the glass and polymer (i.e., PC, PVB, PU) and the ballistic
limit velocity (V50) as a function of the stacking sequence has been
researched to improve protection performance [16e18], there are
only a few studies on the fracture behavior and protection perfor-
mance of strengthened soda-lime silicate (SLS) and borosilicate
glass. Various parameters have to be considered in order to deter-
mine the ballistic impact resistance as a function of the various
properties of glass. However, determining the impact resistance
becomes complicated owing to the additional machining, polish-
ing, and strengthening that occur before lamination of the mate-
rials. Also, it is very difficult to strengthen large sizes of glass
(310  310 mm) such that the glass satisfies the standards outlined
by the National Institute of Justice Standard (NIJ-STD-0108.01) on a
smaller laboratory scale. However, the mechanical properties,
including Vickers hardness, fracture toughness, and flexural
strength, are important factors in terms of ballistic performance,
and they influence crack initiation and crack growth resulting from
ballistic impact.
There are various methods for strengthening glass, such as hy-
drofluoric acid etching [19], heat treatment [20], crystallization
[21], and ion exchange [22,23]. In general, the optical and me-
chanical properties are affected by the quality of the glass surface.
In the case of hydrofluoric acid etching, flaws and cracks on the
glass surface are eliminated, thus improving the mechanical
properties, but the resulting increase of surface roughness will
decrease the transmittance of light owing to the increase of
reflectance. Crystallization forms crystal-phase precipitates inside
the glass, thus reinforcing the glass by increasing its density.
However, increased light scattering may occur as a result of the
increased crystal size, thus decreasing transmittance in the visible
range. The ion exchange method, in which the glass is dipped in a
potassium nitrate powder and tempered in order to exchange po-
tassium ions having a large atom radius with sodium ions inside the
glass, thus creating compressive stress inside the glass, is the most
reasonable method of strengthening glass because the resulting
glass exhibits excellent mechanical properties with a short process
time. In addition, it is possible to control the penetration depth of
the potassium ions, thus decreasing optical transmittance loss after
forming the compressive layer.
Many kinds of glass materials have been used for transparent
bulletproof windows, such as SLS, borosilicate glass, sapphire
windows, etc. [12,24]. Generally, sapphire windows have
outstanding mechanical properties but they are difficult to fabri-
cate, expensive, and impossible to chemically strengthen by ion
exchange owing to the absence of alkali ions. Also, it has been re-
ported [23] that ion exchange is difficult to carry out with boro-
silicate glass because of its low alkali content (4 mol% Na2O) and it
is a lengthy process. On the other hand, SLS glass is well suited for
ion exchange because it has a higher alkali content (14 mol% Na2O).
It is also less expensive as compared to other materials. Therefore, if
an optimum depth of penetration can be obtained, the ion ex-
change method can be applied to fabricating transparent bullet-
proof materials.
In this study, we evaluated the ballistic limit velocity, impact
absorption energy, and specific energy absorption of bulletproof
materials laminated with strengthened SLS glass and a polymer
film as a function of thickness, areal density, and stacking sequence.
The standard used was NIJ-STD-0108.01 for an incident 5.56 mm
M16 bullet with a speed of 850e980 m/s. The purpose of this
study was to suggest a laminate design that would increase the
ballistic resistance of bulletproof materials. In a pre-experiment
[21,25], we obtained a V50 of 851 m/s by manufacturing a bullet-
proof material with a thickness of 28.83 mm, a weight of 5.76 kg,
and an areal density of 63.98 kg/m2 by using a parent SLS glass. In
addition, we manufactured a bulletproof material with a thickness
of 21.25 mm, a weight of 3.71 kg, an areal density of 41.22 kg/m2,
and a V50 of 898.4 m/s by laminating strengthened borosilicate
glass [26]. The effect of substituting strengthened SLS glass for
parent SLS glass and strengthened borosilicate glass on the me-
chanical and optical properties and ballistic resistance of the
bulletproof material was evaluated. The bulletproof material
composed of strengthened SLS glass was also evaluated in terms of
its thickness and weight by considering its conformance to the NIJ
level III (V50: 838 ± 15 m/s) bulletproof criteria [27]. In addition, the
transmittance of light was measured in the visible light range to
determine whether this glass could be used in transparent bullet-
proof materials.
2. Experimental procedures
2.1. Preparation of strengthened glass
To fabricate a lightweight and thin bulletproof material, SLS
glass was strengthened by ion exchange. The composition of the
SLS glass (Hankuk Glass Industries, Inc., Seoul, Korea) was
73SiO2e14Na2Oe8.7CaOe0.15Al2O3e0.03K2Oe4MgOe0.02TiO2e
0.1Fe2O3 (mol%). SLS glass samples with thicknesses of 3, 4, 8, and
10 mm and dimensions of 310  310 mm were prepared and the
edges of the samples were polished using silicon carbide paper.
The surfaces of the glass samples were covered with KNO3 pow-
der (Extra-pure, Ducsan Pure Chemicals Ltd., Korea) in an alumina
tray. The glass samples with KNO3 powder were heat treated in an
electric furnace at 480  C for 10e20 min.
In order to confirm the penetration depth of potassium ions
inside the ion-exchanged glass, the selected surface was polished in
order to remove material of the strengthened surface up to a depth
of approximately 0.5 mm. An electron probe microanalyzer (EPMA;
JXA-8900, JEOL Ltd., Japan) was used to measure the penetration
depth of the potassium ions and to calculate the mean and standard
deviation values of three specimens with various thicknesses.
2.2. Lamination of bulletproof materials
The properties of the glass and polymer films used in the
experiment are shown in Table 1. PVB (Saflex® 3G, Solutia Inc., USA)
film was used to laminate the glass and PU (Tecoflex AG-8451,
Noven Inc., USA) was used to laminate the glass and PC. Multi-
layer defense (MD) film (SH40, SKC Inc., Korea) and PC sheet
(Makrolon, Bayer Inc., Germany) play an essential part in reducing
the impact energy and rotation speed of the incident bullet. A
polyester (PET) film (Armorcoat™ 14 Mil, Berkaert, USA) was also
applied owing to its high density and fine mechanical properties. It
was added as the last layer of the bulletproof materials in order to
avoid scratches on the surfaces of the PC sheets and to verify
whether the incident bullet went through the bulletproof material
or not. An autoclave (Autoclave KYL-15, Italmatic, Italy) was used to
laminate the layers. The autoclave was preheated to 90  C for 1 h.
The bulletproof materials were then laminated in the autoclave at
130  C for 3 h.
Table 2 shows the stacking sequence of the bulletproof mate-
rials. The first number of the specimen code is the thickness of the
bulletproof material, and the capital letters indicate which mate-
rials were used in what sequence, beginning with the side facing
the test weapon. We prepared four bulletproof materials 28 mm
thick and three bulletproof materials 23 mm thick with various
areal densities. The 28-mm-thick specimens were fabricated using
the parent and strengthened SLS glass with both the MD film
(28GMGG) and PC sheet (28GGPG). All of the 23-mm-thick
bulletproof materials were fabricated using strengthened SLS glass.
Two kinds of PC sheets (GGPG or GGGP) were added individually in
 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178 171

Table 1
Mechanical and physical properties of materials used.

Properties Parent SLS Strengthened SLS PVB MD PU PC PET

Thickness, t (mm) 3, 4, 8, 10 3, 4, 8, 10 0.7 0.2 0.1 2, 5 0.35

Density, r (g/cm3) 2.53 2.54 1.07 1.38 1.08 1.22 1.39
Poisson's ratio, n 0.23 0.21 0.44 0.38 0.45 0.37 0.38
Young's modulus, E (GPa) 74 70 1.93 3.60 0.05 2.40 4.5
Tensile strength, st (MPa) 33 77 26 206 41 75 199
Flexural strength, sf (GPa) 0.15e0.16 0.63e0.77 0.07 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.08
Vickers hardness, HV (GPa) 5.08e5.48 5.92e6.70 e 0.65 e 0.44 0.86
Fracture toughness, KIC (MPa m1/2) 0.72e0.73 0.75e0.78 e 0.28 e 0.21 0.35
Refractive index, n 1.520 1.538 1.485 1.575 1.496 1.584 1.640
Glass transition temperature, Tg ( C) 564 564 62 69 60 147 70
Coefficient of thermal expansion, a (106 K1) 9 9 211 70 110 65 17

Note: PVB is polyvinyl butyral film, MD is multilayer defense film, PU is polyurethane film, PC is polycarbonate sheet, and PET is polyester film.

Table 2
Stacking sequence of bulletproof windows consisted of parent and strengthened SLS glass.

Specimen code Stacking sequence from plane-of-incidence of bullet and thickness of materials (mm) Thickness (mm) Weight (kg) Areal density
(kg/m2)

Parent glass [21]

G PVB MD PVB G PVB G PET
28GMGG 10 0.7 0.2 0.7 8 0.7 8 0.35 28.65 6.20 68.85
G PVB G PU PC PU G PET
28GGPG 10 0.7 8 0.1 5 0.1 4 0.35 28.25 5.70 63.29
Strengthened glass
G PVB MD PVB G PVB G PET
28GMGG 10 0.7 0.2 0.7 8 0.7 8 0.35 28.65 6.20 68.85
G PVB G PU PC PU G PET
28GGPG 10 0.7 8 0.1 5 0.1 4 0.35 28.25 5.70 63.29
G PVB G PVB G PU PC PET
23GGGP 10 0.7 4 0.7 3 0.1 5 0.35 23.85 4.63 51.43
G PVB MD PVB G PVB G PU PC PU PC PET
23GMGGPP(8) 8 0.7 0.2 0.7 4 0.7 4 0.1 2 0.1 3 0.35 23.85 4.51 50.06
23GMGGPP(10) 10 0.7 0.2 0.7 3 0.7 3 0.1 2 0.1 3 0.35 23.85 4.51 50.06

Note: G is the parent SLS glass or strengthened SLS glass with optimized ion exchange conditions.

back of the 23-mm-thick specimens and the sheets were compared
with each other. In addition, we controlled the face thickness of the
front glass to 8 mm and 10 mm and evaluated the bulletproof
properties as a function of the face thickness with the MD film and
two PC sheets such as 23GMGGPP(8) and 23GMGGPP(10). The
stacking sequences of the bulletproof materials were arranged in
consideration of three factors: decreasing the weight and thickness
of the bulletproof material such that V50 of the strengthened ma-
terial is more than that of the parent SLS glass, the stacking
sequence of PC sheets and MD films, and the effect of the
strengthened SLS glass.
distance of 1.0 m. 15 cm behind the bulletproof material, we placed
a 0.5-mm-thick Al witness plate to verify whether the bulletproof
material was penetrated (Fig. 1(a)) or not (Fig. 1(b) and (c)) and to
determine the ballistic limit velocity.
To identify the ballistic resistance, the ballistic limit velocity was
measured as that at which 50% of the projectiles penetrated the
material (V50) and as compared to that at which 0% penetrated the
material (V0). On the basis of NIJ-STD-0108.01, the V50 value must
be above 838 ± 15 m/s as evaluated from a distance of 15 m using an
M16 bullet. The energy absorption of bulletproof materials as a
function of areal density was calculated using the following for-
mula [30]:

2.3. Ballistic impact test 1
2  1

The ballistic resistance test was conducted based on NIJ-STD-
0108.01 [27] and a schematic is shown in Fig. 1. The impact speed
of an M16 bullet (5.56  45 mm) was confirmed to be from 720 to
980 m/s by regulating the amount of the firing charge (1.0e1.6 g), as
shown in Fig. 2. In order to exceed the NIJ level III (V50: 838 ± 15 m/
s), we used a firing charge of 1.4 g. The incident bullet speed was
measured by using an IR velocity detector (SPU-3DA, Sugawara Lab.
Inc., Japan), which can evaluate velocities from 50 to 2000 m/s and
also sense an object more than 5 mm in diameter. This system uses
a planar sensor (500 mm  300 mm) with a long-wavelength IR
beam, which is capable of detecting an incident bullet in more
detail [28,29]. To confirm whether the incidence bullet was
perpendicular to the surface of the bulletproof material, an inci-
dence angle detector was placed in front of the material at a
E¼ m Vi  Vr2 ¼ mV50 (1)
2 2
where E is the energy absorption, m the mass of the projectile, Vi
the initial impact velocity, Vr the projectile residual velocity, and V50
the ballistic limit velocity.
2.4. Mechanical properties and transmittance
A Vickers microhardness tester (MXD-CX3E, Matsuzawa, Japan)
was used to measure the Vickers hardness (HV) and fracture
toughness (KCeIFT) of the surfaces of the parent and strengthened
SLS glass. The applied loading time was 30 s with a maximum load
of 4.9 N (0.5 kgf). For each glass, 10 indentations were marked and
the mean and standard deviations were calculated. The Vickers
hardness was calculated from Refs. [14,15].
172 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178
Fig. 1. A graphic illustration of the ballistic testing device according to the NIJ standard. Definition of protective levels based on damage in the Al witness plate: (a) failure protection,
(b) protection, and (c) full protection.
P
HV ¼
2a2
where P is the indentation load and a is half the diagonal length of
the marked indentation. By using the formula below [14,15], the
apparent indentation fracture toughness (KCeIFT) was computed as
a function of the propagated crack length from the corner of the
indentation.
pffiffiffi    
HV a Ef 2=5 l 1=2 c used to measure the light transmittance of the ion-exchanged glass
KCIFT ¼ 0:035 for < 2:5
f HV a a and bulletproof material. The wavelength range was from 200 to
where HV is Vickers hardness, a the half length of the diagonal
indentation, f the constraint factor (f z 3), E the Young's modulus,
l the length of the corner crack, and c the diagonal half-length plus
the corner crack length.
A universal testing machine (H10K-C, Hounsfield, UK) was used
to measure the three-point flexural strength. Various thicknesses of
rectangular (4 mm wide and 45 mm long) parent and strengthened
glass samples were prepared. A minimum of 6 specimens were
tested and the mean and standard deviations were calculated. The
Fig. 2. Projectile velocity calibrations with varying amounts of firing charge.
flexural strength (sf) was determined using ASTM standard
(2) (C1161e13) [31].
 
3PL
sf ¼ (4)
2wt 2
where P is the value of the breaking load (N), L the outer span
(40 mm), w the specimen width (4 mm), and t the thickness of the
glass specimen (3, 4, 8, 10 mm).
A UV/VIS/NIR spectrophotometer (V-570, JASCO Ltd., Japan) was
(3)
800 nm with a scan speed of 400 nm/min. According to NIJ-STD-
0108.01, the required transmittance in the visible range for 28-
mm-thick bulletproof material must be above 74% and that of 23-
mm-thick bulletproof material must above 77%.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Properties of strengthened SLS glass
Fig. 3(a)e(c) show the Vickers hardness, fracture toughness, and
flexural strength values, respectively, of the parent and ion-
exchanged SLS glass with thicknesses of 3, 4, 8, and 10 mm as a
function of ion exchange duration. The maximum Vickers hardness
values at the same load level (4.9 N) of ion-exchanged glass with
thicknesses of 3, 4, 8, and 10 mm were 5.92 ± 0.22, 6.18 ± 0.24,
6.44 ± 0.25, and 6.70 ± 0.17 GPa, respectively, values that
were higher than that of the parent glass by approximately 16,
18, 19, and 22%, respectively. The values of maximum fracture
toughness of strengthened glass with thicknesses of 3, 4, 8, and
10 mm were 0.752 ± 0.010, 0.759 ± 0.015, 0.769 ± 0.010, and
0.776 ± 0.008 MPa m1/2, respectively, values that were higher than
that of the parent glass by approximately 5%. The maximum values
of the flexural strength of strengthened glass with thicknesses of 3,
4, 8, and 10 mm were 0.630 ± 0.017, 0.681 ± 0.019, 0.731 ± 0.024,
and 0.774 ± 0.018 GPa, respectively, values that were approximately
3.5 times higher than that of the parent glass. The mechanical
properties as a function of the penetration depth of potassium ions
need to be measured because the values could decrease owing to
stress relaxation [22,23]. As shown in Fig. 3, the ion exchange times
 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178
Fig. 3. Mechanical properties of ion-exchanged SLS glass at 480  C with different holding times: (a) Vickers hardness, (b) fracture toughness, and (c) flexural strength.
of 10, 12, 15, and 17 min resulted in maximum mechanical property
values for SLS glass with thicknesses of 3, 4, 8, and 10 mm,
respectively. In addition, we found that the thickness of the glass
was proportional to the mechanical properties values. There are
many reports that the fracture resistance increases proportionally
with the increasing thickness of glass [17,18]. Fig. 4 shows micro-
graphs of the indentation and crack size when the strengthened
(Fig. 4(a)) and parent (Fig. 4(b)) 10-mm-thick glass were loaded at
4.9 N. As shown in Fig. 4(a), only slight shear fault lines appeared in
the strengthened glass, and the size of indentation is smaller than
that of the parent glass. On the other hand, the parent SLS glass
exhibited shear fault lines and lateral and radial cracks, as shown in
Fig. 4(b). This is because the optimal depth of the compressive
stress layer formed on the surface during the ion exchange process
suppresses the spread of cracks. Fig. 5 and Table 3 show the
penetration depth of potassium ions of the SLS glass (3, 4, 8, and
10 mm) for various ion exchange times. The upper left insert shows
a schematic of the surface after polishing; the upper middle insert
shows the stress distribution of the ion-exchanged glass. A
compressive stress layer was formed on the glass surface; the
compressive stress consistently decreased with increasing pene-
tration depth of the potassium ions until reaching zero. Tensile
stress was generated inside the glass once potassium ions no longer
penetrate the glass. With increasing holding time from 10 to
17 min, the penetration depth of potassium ions increased from 16
to 41 mm because ion exchange in a glass is a diffusion process [22].
The mean ion exchange rate of SLS glass with various thicknesses
was 2.04 ± 0.05 mm/min at 480  C. Therefore, the optimal condi-
tions and rate of ion exchange that results in maximum mechanical
property values and avoids stress relaxation are useful data for
strengthening SLS glass.
Fig. 4. Micrographs of indents at a load of 4.9 N on (a) strengthened and (b) parent SLS glass surfaces.
173
3.2. Light transmittance of strengthened glass
The light transmittance of the parent and strengthened SLS glass
is shown in Fig. 6(a) and (b), respectively, for glass thicknesses of 3,
4, 8, and 10 mm. As the thickness of the SLS glass increased from 3
to 10 mm, light transmittance slightly decreased owing to the
increased length of the optical path according to the LamberteBeer
law [32]. In addition, increasing the ion exchange time slightly
decreased the transmittance because the penetration depth of the
potassium ions increased and, as a result, a compressive stress layer
was formed, which increased the index of refraction according to
the Fresnel law [33]. Nevertheless, because the light transmittance
of the strengthened glass was more than 88%, it can be applied to
transparent bulletproof materials.
3.3. Ballistic impact resistance of bulletproof materials
Fig. 7(a)e(d) show the areal density, ballistic limit velocity, en-
ergy absorption, and specific energy absorption, respectively, as a
function of the laminating sequence of glass with polymer film and
the thickness of the bulletproof material. As shown in Fig. 7(a), the
28GGPG bulletproof material laminated with a PC sheet (5 mm
thick) and glass had a lower areal density (63.29 kg/m2) than the
28GMGG bulletproof material (68.85 kg/m2) composed of a 0.2-
mm-thick MD film and glass. Furthermore, in order to confirm
the effect of strengthened glass, bulletproof material of 3 types
consisted of strengthened glass and PC sheet was prepared, and its
thickness was 23.85 mm and its areal density ranged from 50.06 to
51.43 kg/m2.
We expected that the PC sheet laminated on the parent glass
would reduce the rotation speed of the bullets. However, as seen
174 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178

The V50 of the 28GMGG bulletproof material increased from

846.2 m/s for the parent glass to 950.2 m/s for the strengthened
glass, an increase of 12%. The V50 of 28GGPG also increased from
851.0 m/s for the parent glass to 978.7 m/s for the strengthened
glass, an increase of 15%. The 28GGPG bulletproof material lami-
nated with strengthened glass had a V0 value of 978.7 m/s for the
three bullets used for evaluation of ballistic impact resistance, even
though the material consisted of a PC sheet between the glass. Fig. 8
shows the front, back, and Al witness plate of 28-mm-thick
bulletproof materials laminated with strengthened glass after the
ballistic performance test. As shown in Fig. 8(a) for the 28GMGG
type, fragments of the third bullet with a speed of 951.9 m/s
penetrated the material, showing as ruptures in the Al witness
plate. In case of the 28GGPG bulletproof material shown in Fig. 8(b),
there was no damage to the test layer and only relatively minor
spall on the back face. This phenomenon can be explained by
observing the impact region and the spread of cracks upon bullet
impact, as shown in Fig. 9. The schematic diagram in Fig. 9(a) shows
that as the bullet hits the bulletproof material, an impact region is
Fig. 5. The penetration depth of the potassium ions in the glass at 480  C with various
formed. The impact energy spreads, and this brings about the for-
holding times. The upper left insert shows a schematic of the strengthened and pol-
ished surfaces of the ion-exchanged glass. The upper middle insert shows the residual mation of various shapes of cracks. The impact region formed after
stress profile of the polished surface (CS: compressive stress, TS: tensile stress). bullet impact is affected by the flexural strength and Vickers
hardness of the glass at the impact site. Therefore, because the
strengthened glass has 3.5 times larger flexural strength as
in Fig. 7(b), the V50 of the bulletproof materials consisting of the MD compared to the parent glass, as shown in Fig. 3(c), the resistance to
film (28GMGG) and PC sheet (28GGPG) were 846.2 and 851.0 m/s, the incidence bullet increased, reducing the size of the impact re-
respectively. Therefore, we confirmed that there is no difference in gion (white circle) even when the incident velocity increased from
ballistic resistance between these two materials. A recent study 852.6 to 928.7 m/s, as shown in Fig. 9(b). Bundled radial cracks
also reported [17] that if the PC sheet is arranged between the glass, (blue (in the web version) circle) indicate the boundary of the crater
spall can easily arise and distribute the impact energy across a on the front face, then fan cracks (red (in the web version) circle)
wider area than PC laminated behind the glass. Consequentially, the appear owing to branching of the bundled radial cracks. Also,
use of a PC sheet between the glass can decrease the ballistic impact coarse radial cracks occur because the individual cracks connect
resistance of a bulletproof material. Therefore, to improve the with each other and spread from the fan cracks. As shown in
protection performance and decrease the weight of the bulletproof Fig. 9(b) and (c), the propagation length of all the cracks decreased
material, the PC sheet was arranged behind the glass in the case of slightly for the bulletproof material using strengthened glass
the 23-mm-thick bulletproof material laminated with strength- because the mean fracture toughness of the strengthened glass was
ened glass. increased by approximately 5%, as shown in Fig. 3(b). In particular,
the fracture toughness of the 10-mm-thick strengthened SLS glass
increased from 0.7310 ± 0.007 to 0.7760 ± 0.008 MPa m1/2, which
Table 3
Ion exchange rates of potassium ions in the SLS glass with various holding times.
was higher than that of the parent SLS glass (0.72e0.73 MPa m1/2)
by approximately 6.2%.
Thickness (mm) Holding time (min) Potassium ion Ion exchange
Fig. 10 shows photographs of the front, back, and Al witness
depth (mm) rate (mm/min)
plate of the 23-mm-thick bulletproof materials laminated with
3 10 16.0 ± 0.4 1.60 ± 0.04 strengthened SLS glass after the ballistic impact test. As seen in
4 12 24.2 ± 0.8 2.01 ± 0.06
8 15 32.5 ± 0.6 2.13 ± 0.04
Fig. 10(a), the V50 of the 23GGGP bulletproof material was 916.1 m/s.
10 17 41.0 ± 1.2 2.41 ± 0.07 One PC (5 mm) film was added to the back of the bulletproof

Fig. 6. Light transmittance with various thicknesses of (a) parent and (b) strengthened SLS glass at the optimized ion exchange conditions.
 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178 175

Fig. 7. Properties of bulletproof materials with various thicknesses: (a) Areal density, (b) ballistic limit velocity, (c) energy absorption, and (d) specific energy density.

Fig. 8. Photographs of bulletproof materials (28 mm) consisting of strengthened SLS glass after ballistic resistance test: (a) 28GMGG and (b) 28GGPG specimens.
176 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178
Fig. 9. (a) Schematic diagram showing the crack propagation in the strike face. Pho-
tographs of the ballistically impacted material of the (b) 28GMGG and (c) 28GGPG
specimens.
material, and we confirmed the rupture points on the Al plate by
fragments of the final bullet. The 23GGGP (23.85 mm, V50: 916.1 m/
s) material showed improved ballistic resistance as compared to
the parent SLS glass (28.83 mm, V50: 851 m/s) or strengthened
borosilicate glass (21.25 mm, V50: 898.4 m/s). As shown in Fig. 10(b)
and (c), the bulletproof materials consisted of one MD film and two
PC sheets, in the order of GMGGPP, with an areal density of
50.06 kg/m2. The difference between these two specimens was the
thickness of the strengthened glass laminated on the front; one
specimen had a glass thickness of 8 and that of the other was
10 mm. The ballistic impact test showed that the ballistic limit
velocity increased from 960.9 to 973.8 m/s as the thickness of the
front glass increased from 8 to 10 mm. A V0 value was also obtained
for the 23GMGGPP(10) sample because it was not penetrated, as
shown in the Al witness plate of Fig. 10(c). As shown in Fig. 7(c), this
bulletproof material has an energy absorption similar to that of the
28GGPG sample, regardless of the 18.5% decrease in thickness from
28.25 to 23.85 mm. Fig. 7(d) shows the specific energy absorption,
which is lightweight barometer of bulletproof material. The energy
absorption of the 10-mm-thick bulletproof material with a lami-
nate order of 23GMGGPP(10) was as much as 588.7 J/g, an
approximately 65% increase from that of the GGPG laminated
parent glass. Therefore, we confirmed that the thickness of
23GMGGPP(10) was decreased to 23.85 mm by controlling the
laminate sequence and glass strength. Therefore, we were able to
fabricate a lightweight, thin bulletproof material (23GMGGPP(10),
23.85 mm, 50.06 kg/m2, V0: 973.8 m/s) by laminating two PC sheets
(2 and 3 mm, respectively), one MD film (0.2 mm), and strength-
ened glass. Furthermore, this bulletproof material satisfied the V50
criteria of NIJ-STD-0108.01 (838 ± 15 m/s), exhibiting a superior
value in comparison with a V50 of 889.4 m/s for bulletproof material
manufactured with strengthened borosilicate glass.
3.4. Light transmittance of bulletproof materials
Fig. 11 shows the light transmittance of bulletproof material
composed of strengthened SLS glass. To satisfy the transmittance
criteria, 28-mm-thick bulletproof materials must have a trans-
mittance above 74%; 23-mm-thick materials must be over 77%. On
the whole, the PC sheet-inserted bulletproof materials exhibited
lower light transmittance because the absorption peak occurred at
wavelengths of 670e680 nm. However, the average transmittance
of 28GMGG and 28GGPG were 81.8% and 79.3%, respectively, thus
satisfying the above criteria. In addition, the mean transmittance of
23GGGP, 23GMGGPP(8), and 23GMGGPP(10) were 81.4, 82.9, and
83.0%, respectively, and they also met the criteria. Although many
kinds of bulletproof windows meet the NIJ-STD-0108.01 criteria,
the use of a PC sheet decreases transmittance owing to absorption
in a specific wavelength range, and this optical property must be
considered when designing bulletproof materials.
4. Conclusions
To manufacture lightweight, thin bulletproof material, SLS glass
was strengthened by ion exchange at 480  C for 10e20 min. Po-
tassium ions penetrated into SLS glass with thicknesses of 3, 4, 8,
and 10 mm to depths of approximately 17, 21, 30, and 37 mm,
respectively, resulting in increases in Vickers hardness and fracture
toughness of 22% and 5%, respectively, as compared to the parent
glass. Flexural strength also increased up to 3.5 times under optimal
ion exchange conditions. The transmittance of the strengthened
glass was a minimum of 88%, and so it can be applied to transparent
bulletproof materials. With the 23GMGGPP(10) sample using
strengthened glass, the thickness of the glass decreased from 28.65
to 23.85 mm and the areal density decreased from 68.85 to
50.06 kg/m2. The 23GMGGPP(10) material had a V0 of 973.8 m/s,
which met the ballistic limit velocity of NIJ-STD-0108.01 (V50:
838 ± 15 m/s). The V0 value was 14% higher than that of bulletproof
materials fabricated with the parent SLS glass (V50: 851 m/s). Also,
the protection performance was 10% higher than that of bulletproof
material strengthened with borosilicate glass (V50: 889.4 m/s).
Consequently, we were able to fabricated a bulletproof material
with improved protection performance by using strengthened SLS
glass. Finally, the transmittance of the bulletproof material
strengthened with SLS glass was more than 83.0%, which satisfies
the NIJ-STD-0108.01 criteria (77%).
 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178 177

Fig. 10. Photographs of bulletproof materials (23 mm) consisting of strengthened SLS glass after ballistic resistance test: (a) 23GGGP, (b) 23GMGGPP(8), and (c) 23GMGGPP(10)
specimens.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the Defense Nano Technology

Application Center (DNTAC, grant number: UD140021GD).

References

[1] Wu Z, Liu W, Wang L, Fang H, Hui D. Theoretical and experimental study of

foam-filled lattice composite panels under quasi-static compression loading.
Compos Part B Eng 2014;60:329e40.
[2] Krell A, Strassburger E. Order of influences on the ballistic resistance of armor
ceramics and single crystals. Mater Sci Eng A Struct Mater Prop Microstruct
Process 2014;597:422e30.
[3] Chen Y, Chen P, Hong C, Zhang B, Hui D. Improved ablation resistance of
carbon-phenolic composites by introducing zirconium diboride particles.
Compos Part B Eng 2013;47:320e5.
[4] O'Brien DJ, Parquette B. Polymer toughness transfer in a transparent inter-
penetrating glassepolymer composite. Compos Sci Technol 2012;73:57e63.
[5] Feih S, Boiocchi E, Mathys G, Mathys Z, Gibson AG, Mouritz AP. Mechanical
properties of thermally-treated and recycled glass fibres. Compos Part B Eng
2011;42(3):350e8.
[6] Hazell PJ, Edwalds MR, Longstaff H, Erskine J. Penetration of a glass-faced
Fig. 11. Light transmittance of bulletproof materials consisting of strengthened SLS transparent elastomeric resin by a lead-antimony-cored bullet. Int J Impact
glass. Eng 2009;36(1):147e53.
178 G.-I. Shim et al. / Composites Part B 77 (2015) 169e178
[7] Xu J, Li Y, Liu B, Zhu M, Ge D. Experimental study on mechanical behavior of
PVB laminated glass under quasi-static and dynamic loadings. Compos Part B
Eng 2011;42(2):302e8.
[8] Alcock B, Cabrera NO, Barkoula N-M, Wang Z, Peijs T. The effect of tempera-
ture and strain rate on the impact performance of recyclable all-
polypropylene composites. Compos Part B Eng 2008;39(3):537e47.
[9] Walley SM, Field JE, Blair PW, Milford AJ. The effect of temperature on the
impact behaviour of glass/polycarbonate laminates. Int J Impact Eng
2004;30(1):31e53.
[10] Nasirzadeh R, Sabet AR. Study of foam density variations in composite
sandwich panels under high velocity impact loading. Int J Impact Eng
2014;63:129e39.
[11] Hu W, Wang Y, Yu J, Yen CF, Bobaru F. Impact damage on a thin glass plate
with a thin polycarbonate backing. Int J Impact Eng 2013;62:152e65.
[12] Grujicic M, Pandurangan B, Coutris N, Cheeseman BA, Fountzoulas C, Patel P,
et al. A ballistic material model for starphire®, a soda-lime transparent-armor
glass. Mater Sci Eng A Struct Mater Prop Microstruct Process 2008;491(1e2):
397e411.
[13] Sun B, Liu Y, Gu B. A unit cell approach of finite element calculation of ballistic
impact damage of 3-D orthogonal woven composite. Compos Part B Eng
2009;40(6):552e60.
[14] Rouxel T, Sellappan P, Ce
larie

F, Houizot P, Sangleboeuf J-C. Toward glasses
with better in dentation cracking resistance. C R Mec 2014;342(1):46e51.
[15] Sellappan P, Guin J-P, Rocherulle J, Celarie F, Rouxel T, Riedel R. Influence of
diamond particles content on the critical load for crack initiation and fracture
toughness of SiOC glassediamond composites. J Eur Ceram Soc 2013;33(4):
847e58.
[16] Do J, Jeon C, Song YB, Lee S. Ballistic impact properties of mixed multi-layered
amorphous surface alloyed materials fabricated by high-energy electron-
beam irradiation. Mater Sci Eng A Struct Mater Prop Microstruct Process
2014;598:224e35.
[17] Galuppi L, Royer-Carfagni G. The effective thickness of laminated glass:
inconsistency of the formulation in a proposal of EN-standards. Compos Part B
Eng 2013;55:109e18.
[18] Sikarwar RS, Velmurugan R, Gupta NK. Influence of fiber orientation and
thickness on the response of glass/epoxy composites subjected to impact
loading. Compos Part B Eng 2014;60:627e36.
[19] Li X, Lu J, Feng Z. Effect of hydrofluoric acid etching of glass on the perfor-
mance of organiceinorganic glass laminates. Compos Part B Eng 2013;52:
207e10.
[20] De
riano S, Rouxel T, Malherbe S, Rocherulle
J, Duisit G, Je

ze

quel G. Mechanical
strength improvement of a soda-limeesilica glass by thermal treatment under
flowing gas. J Eur Ceram Soc 2004;24(9):2803e12.
[21] Shim GI, Kim CY, Choi SY. Strengthening of borosilicate glass by controlled
crystallisation for lightweight bulletproof materials. Int J Nanotechnol
2013;10(8):632e42.
[22] Jannotti P, Subhash G, Ifju P, Kreski PK, Varshneya AK. Influence of ultra-high
residual compressive stress on the static and dynamic indentation response of
a chemically strengthened glass. J Eur Ceram Soc 2012;32(8):1551e9.
[23] Nordberg ME, Mochel EL, Garfinkel HM, Olcott JS. Strengthening by ion ex-
change. J Am Ceram Soc 1964;47(5):215e9.
[24] Forde LC, Proud WG, Walley SM, Church PD, Cullis IG. Ballistic impact studies
of a borosilicate glass. Int J Impact Eng 2010;37(5):568e78.
[25] An YK, Joo BY, Chung DT, Choi SY. Finite element simulation of brittle fracture
of bulletproof glass system. J Mech Sci Technol 2014;28(1):73e80.
[26] Shim GI, Eom HW, Kim SH, Park JK, Choi SY. Fabrication of lightweight and
thin bulletproof windows using borosilicate glass strengthened by ion ex-
change. Compos Part B Eng 2015;69:44e9.
[27] NIJ standarde0108.01. Ballistic resistant protective materials. 1981.
[28] Harizi W, Chaki S, Bourse G, Ourak M. Mechanical damage assessment of glass
fiber-reinforced polymer composites using passive infrared thermography.
Compos Part B Eng 2014;59:74e9.
[29] Wang Z, Tian H, Lu Z, Zhou W. High-speed axial impact of aluminum hon-
eycombeExperiments and simulations. Compos Part B Eng 2014;56:1e8.
[30] Alia RA, Cantwell WJ, Langdon GS, Yuen SCK, Nurick GN. The energy-
absorbing characteristics of composite tube-reinforced foam structures.
Compos Part B Eng 2014;61:127e35.
[31] ASTM Designation C1161. Standard test method for flexural strength of
advanced ceramics at ambient temperatures. 1999.
[32] Schulz H, Burtscher P, Ma €dler L. Correlating filler transparency with inorganic/
polymer composite transparency. Compos Part A Appl S 2007;38(12):2451e9.
[33] Armaly BF, Ochoa JG, Look DC. Restrictions on the inversion of the Fresnel
reflectance equations. Appl Opt 1972;11(12):2907e10.