See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/304506225

Recent Trends in Ballistic Protection

Article  in  Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology · January 2014

DOI: 10.14355/tlist.2014.03.007

CITATIONS READS

47 5,517

4 authors, including:

Sinnappoo Kanesalingam Rajkishore Nayak

RMIT University RMIT International University Vietnam
22 PUBLICATIONS   225 CITATIONS    163 PUBLICATIONS   1,355 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Rajiv Padhye
RMIT University
157 PUBLICATIONS   1,862 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Meltelectrospinning View project

Development of artificial nerve conduits View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rajkishore Nayak on 07 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014
DOI: 10.14355/tlist.2014.03.007
Recent Trends in Ballistic Protection
L Wang1, S Kanesalingam2, R Nayak3 and R Padhye4
School of Fashion and Textiles, RMIT University, Australia
*1lijing.wang@rmit.edu.au, 2sinnappoo.kanesalingam@rmit.edu.au, 3rajkishore.nayak@rmit.edu.au,
4rajiv.padhye@rmit.edu.au
Received 10 April, 2014; Accepted 25 April, 2014; Published 25 June, 2014
© 2014 Science and Engineering Publishing Company
Abstract
There has been a tremendous improvement in the design of
ballistic protective materials, which have been in use from
time immemorial. Developments in the technology of
manufacturing high performance fibres and production
processes have enabled the production of light weight body
armour with improved protection levels. In this article we
summarise different types of body armour used for ballistic
protection and different materials and structures used for
body armour. In addition, the test methods used for the
evaluation of ballistic performance are also outlined.
Government regulations related to the manufacturing and
use of protective clothing and the methods of testing in
several countries of the world have also been described. The
future scope focuses on important materials, their selection
criteria and parameters are to be considered when designing
ballistic protective materials.
Keywords
Body Armour; Ballistic Material; Textile Structure; Technical
Fibre
Introduction
Protective armour has been used in combat for at least
five millennia. Protective armour has undergone
tremendous changes from the skins, furs and metals
used in ancient times to recent advanced materials
with enhanced performance levels. Some of the
earliest designs of textile based soft body armour for
ballistic protection used woven fabrics made from silk
(Bunning et al., 1994, Cheeseman and Bogetti, 2003),
which were later replaced by nylon 6, 6 (Prosser, 1988,
Lim et al., 2003, Brown and Egglestone, 1989). These
fibres all have high tensile strength and low elongation
required for soft body armour. Recent materials for
ballistic protection use yarns of even stronger high
performance fibres, such as aromatic polyamides
(Guoqi et al., 1992, Cheeseman and Bogetti, 2003,
Laible, 1980a, Briscoe and Motamedi, 1992, Baker,
2005), ultra high modulus polyethylene-UHMPE
http://www.tlist-journal.org
(Grujicic et al., 2008, Xu and Farris, 2007, Chabba et al.,
2007, Marissen et al., 2010, Tao and Guanxiong, 2002),
poly (para-phenylene benzobizoxazole)(PBO) (Cunniff,
1999, Holmes et al., 2009), ballistic nylon (Cunniff,
1992, Graves et al., 2004), which dissipate energy and
transfer it from the point of impact of a projectile
across the fabric layers by stretching and breaking
(Scott, 2005).
Generally, ballistic protection is needed for law
enforcement and military personnel. Ballistic
protection garments cover mainly the torso and other
essential parts of the body to resist projectiles of
various shapes, sizes and impact velocities (Adanur,
1995). Many of the materials used in ancient times for
ballistic protection were made from metals and thus
were very heavy. Advancements in textiles have made
it possible to produce armour for ballistic protection
with equivalent or better performance than their
metallic predecessors. The use of textile materials has
multiple benefits such as lower weight, improved
comfort, flexibility of body movement and ease of
manufacturing for different body sizes. Ballistic
protective clothing is designed on the basis of the type
and level of threat to be resisted (Scott, 2005). Clothing
used for ballistic protection can be somewhat heavy
and constrain body movement to some extent.
However, while designing body armour, an optimal
balance between protection and mobility should be
maintained.
In this review, we have focused on recent
developments of ballistic protective materials and the
different designs used for modern body armour.
Various types of body armour used for ballistic
protection are also highlighted. Different fibre
materials and the structures used for ballistic
protection have also been discussed. In addition, the
test methods used for the evaluation of ballistic
performance are also outlined.
37
http://www.tlist-journal.org Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014
Types of Ballistic Protective Materials
Modern body armour can be broadly divided into two
categories, which are hard body armour and soft body
armour, depending on the type of material used.
Generally, the protection level of hard body armour is
greater than that of soft body armour. However, hard
body armour is generally heavier to wear and
provides less flexibility in body movement than soft
body armour. Law enforcement officers and military
personnel may wear hard body armour when there is
a high level of threat. In general, for day-to-day use,
soft body armour is preferred as it is generally more
flexible and provides adequate protection.
Hard Body Armour
As the name indicates, hard body armour is made
from rigid materials such as ceramics, reinforced
plastics, metal plates and composites. Standard hard
body armour is made with multiple layers, commonly
including ceramic plates (to blunt and fracture
projectiles) and laminated composite panels (to stop
projectiles). Hard body armour may include an anti-
trauma layer too, which reduces the potential injury
caused by dynamic deformation of the armour into the
wearer’s body.
Hard body armour may be hard enough so that a
bullet or other high velocity fragment is deflected on
impact. Advances in ceramic/composite armour
materials have resulted in lightweight body armour
systems that provide a significant amount of
protection (Medvedovski, 2010). However, increasing
threats in the form of large calibre and armour-
piercing rounds have led to a need for increased levels
of protection. In theory, the thickness of existing body
armour could increase up to the point where an
armour piercing round would be defeated. However,
the necessary increase in the weight of the armour to
achieve the required performance level may not be
acceptable.
Hard body armour absorbs the energy of the projectile
by a plastic deformation mechanism by dissipating the
kinetic energy of the projectile through the fracture of
the hard material in the armour. Ceramics are
considered to be important materials for improved
armour. However, the amount of protection by
ceramics alone is limited. Hence, ceramic armour
hybrid systems have been developed, which consist of
a monolithic ceramic or a composite ceramic-metal
body form covered with ballistic nylon and bonded to
a high performance textile fabric. Similarly, the hybrid
38
armour systems consisting of layers of ceramics and
fabrcs bonded together have also been developed. The
layers that form the hybrid armour serve specific
purposes in preventing projectile penetration. The
function of the ceramic composite facing is to flatten or
fragment the tip of an incoming projectile, thereby
distributing the load over a large area and decelerating
the projectile.
Some hard armour can also consist of multilayers of
steel in addition to the ceramic plates and stiff fibre-
reinforced materials (Übeyli et al., 2007). The main
disadvantages of the steel containing hard body
armour remain heavyweight and inflexibility.
Soft Body Armour
Soft body armour consists of several layers of high
performance materials produced from ballistic fibres.
High-strength and low extension, i.e. high modulus,
are the most important properties of these fibres
(Dingenan and Verlinde, 1996). The fibres are formed
into advanced woven or other fabrics or similar
structures that can be sewn to make vests and other
soft clothing.
Soft body armour with adequate ballistic protection is
preferred due to their flexibility, lightweight and
comfort properties. Several researches on soft body
armour have investigated the behaviour of fibres,
yarns and fabrics during ballistic impacts (Vives, 1993,
Karahan, 2008, Bilisik and Turhan, 2009, Jin et al., 2010,
Kaufmann et al., 2003, Singletary and Bogdanovich,
2000, Sinnppoo et al., 2010). In addition to the fibre
type and its performance, the degree of ballistic
protection depends on the yarn properties, fabric
construction, and the number and type of layers used
in the structure. The type of bullet (FIG. 1), bullet
geometry, velocity and impact angle also affect the
protection level of soft body armour (Karahan, 2008,
Cheeseman and Bogetti, 2003).
FIG. 1 TYPES OF AMMUNITION (BULLETS)
(ENCYCLOPEDIA, 2014)
Textile structures used in soft body armours include
woven fabrics (Cunniff, 1992, Gu, 2003, Nilakantan et
al., Duan et al., 2006b), unidirectional fabrics (Karahan,
2008, Grujicic et al., 2008, Chabba et al., 2007),
Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014
nonwoven structures (Laible, 1972, Lin et al., 2005, Lin
et al., 2009) and fibre-reinforced composites
(Iremonger and Went, 1996, Naik and Shrirao, 2004,
Gower et al., 2008). These fabrics are used either with
or without resin matrices to enhance the performance
of a composite structure. Woven fabrics made by
interlacing warp and weft yarns are commonly used
structures for ballistic applications. Dynamic
mechanical properties of the constituent fibres and the
fabric geometry affect the ballistic performance.
Generally, densely woven square plain weaves, twill
weaves (Faur‐Csukat, 2006, Hosur et al., 2005), satin
weaves and derivatives of these (Faur‐Csukat, 2006,
Chu and Chen, 2010) are widely used for ballistic
fabrics. The plain weave structure exhibits the highest
level of fabric tightness, followed by twill and then
satin weave (Hu, 2004). In addition, the dimensional
stability of plain weave fabrics is the highest among
the three basic structures. The fabric cover factor is an
important parameter and a value in the range of 0.6–
0.95 is essential for ballistic applications (Scott, 2005).
When the fabric cover is below 0.6, the fabric is too
loose for ballistic protection and when it is greater
than 0.95, it is extremely difficult to weave the fabric.
In some instances the protection level can be improved
by increasing the density with multiple layers of the
same fabrics.
Roylance et al. (Roylance et al., 1973), investigated the
effect of fabric structure (plain and 2/2 twill weaves)
and fibre properties on ballistic performance. The
fabrics made from lower thread densities had less
ballistic resistance, as bullets did not dissipate energy
to break the yarns, instead of pushing the yarns
laterally out of the way. The effect was more severe,
when the bullet size was small and the velocity was
high (Prosser et al., 2000, Montgomery et al., 1982, Lee
et al., 1994). Zhang et al. (Zhang et al., 2008) designed
soft body armour with 28 uniform layers of woven
Kevlar fabric of 0.25 mm thickness. It was predicted
that the computed residual speed and the residual
kinetic energy of a projectile would increase with a
decrease in the ballistic testing frame size for the
armour bonded to rigid frame bars that held the
armour in place in ballistic experiments. This
indicated that the armour fixed to a smaller testing
frame had a lower V50 (the speed of a standard
projectile that has 50% estimated probability of just
perforating the armour upon normal impact) than that
of the same armour fixed to a larger testing frame. The
effect of the applied clamping pressure (to the bars of
the two- and four-bar frames) on the speed and kinetic
http://www.tlist-journal.org
energy of the residual projectile was studied. The
residual velocity of the projectile was found to
increase with an increase in the applied clamping
pressure for both the two- and four-bar frames.
In woven fabrics, yarn crimp negatively affects the
ballistic performance. The crimp refers to the amount
of bending that is done by thread as it interlaces with
the threads that are lying in the opposite direction of
the fabric. During a ballistic impact, the load from the
projectile applies some tension to the yarns. This
tension is applied in the fabric plane as well as in the
vertical direction to the fabric plane due to the crimp.
The load in the vertical direction to the fabric plane is
directed towards the back of the panel, which causes
the yarn to displace towards the back of the fabric
panel more, resulting in deeper trauma (Freeston and
Claus, 1973). The inter-yarn friction also affects the
ballistic protection (Duan et al., 2005, Duan et al.,
2006a). Higher inter yarn friction makes movement of
the yarns in the fabric plane more difficult and this
tends to slow down or stop a projectile.
The effect of crimp on ballistic performance was
investigated by Tan et al. (Tan et al., 2005) using
modelling techniques. Unidirectional structures were
postulated by placing warp and weft sets of yarns at
right angles (90°) on top of each other and these two
sets of threads were assumed to be joined by using an
adhesive polymeric film. Unidirectional structures
were also postulated by placing the warp and weft
sets at angles different from 90°. In this type of
unidirectional structure, in which there was no
interlacing and crimp, it was calculated that the
majority of the impact stress should be dissipated in
the fabric plane and a lower amount would be
transmitted to the back of the fabric layers, resulting in
reduced trauma.
During a ballistic impact, the weft yarns may break
before the warp yarns due to the selection of preferred
yarn and fabric engineering parameters. To overcome
this effect, Chitrangad (Chitrangad, 1993) used the
concept of hybrid fabrics by using higher tenacity
yarns in the weft. The hybrid fabrics delayed yarn
deformation and hence gave improved protection.
Modelling and Simulation
Computational simulation using finite element (FE)
analysis is a very useful tool to study the effect of
material and architecture on the ballistic performance
of the fabrics. The predictive capability of a FE model
for fabric can be improved by incorporating statistical
39
http://www.tlist-journal.org Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014

material data into the computational analysis (Nayak material was first commercially used in the early 1970s
and Padhye, 2011). For a given impact velocity, the to replace steel wires in racing car tyres. It has then
distribution/scatter in the residual velocity of a been used for protective clothing, especially for light-
projectile can be calculated and compared to the weight body armour. Kevlar® fibres are produced
experimental results. The performance of fabrics from poly-paraphenylene terephthalamide and consist
which comprises of different materials and structures, of long molecular chains. The high degree of
together with various types of projectiles can be allignment of the molecular chains results in its unique
investigated with FE methods, savings in time and properties, such as high tensile strength, low
costs associated with preliminary experimental testing elongation at break, high modulus, high chemical
(Nilakantan et al., Lim et al., 2003, Tan and Ching, resistance, low thermal shrinkage, high toughness,
2006, Zeng et al., 2006, Porwal and Phoenix, 2005). dimensional stability and flame resistance. In addition,
it has a high tensile strength-to-weight ratio, but low
FE models can also be used to simulate ballistic tests,
flexibility. Its comfort properties are generally poor.
and predict performance of body armour from
different designs and fabrics. Several researches TABLE 1 DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE TEXTILE FIBRES USED FOR
BALLISTIC PROTECTION
simulated the ballistic performance using the FE
model (Nilakantan et al., Lim et al., 2003, Tan and Fibre name Type Company Chemical structure
Ching, 2006, Zeng et al., 2006, Porwal and Phoenix, p-
Kevlar® DuPont
2005). In addition, computer simulation can also be aramid
used to suggest the performance of protective armours Twaron®
p- Akzo Nobel
O O
aramid (now Teijin)
in combat situations (Billon and Robinson, 2001, Zaera N N C C
p-
et al., 2000). Technora® Teijin H H n
aramid
Allied Signal
Textile Fibres used for Ballistic Protection Specta® HPPE (now H H
Honeywell) C C
As already mentioned, the introduction of new fibres DSM and H H n
Dyneema® HPPE
in 1970s created new frontiers in the production of Toyobo
bullet proof soft body armour. Subsequent N N
Zylon® PBO Toyobo
developments in high performance fibres were the O O n
driving force for achieving improved body protection Ballistic
Polya H H O O
against ballistic threats. Nylon
mide
DuPont N (CH2)6 N C (CH2)4 C
(Nylon 6-6) n
The fibres used for ballistic protection should have: Polyhy
Akzo Nobel
low density, high strength and high energy absorption droqui
(now
capability. The ballistic performance of a material none-
M5® Magellan
diimid
depends on its ability to absorb energy locally and to azopyr
Systems
distribute it across a whole structure. For textile fibres, International)
idine
the tenacity and elongation at rupture, the sonic
The first generation of bullet resistant fabrics was
velocity (the velocity of sound in textile) of the fibres
produced from Kevlar 29, which was replaced in 1988
are important parameters determining the protection
by Kevlar 129. The latter offered increased protection
that they can provide (Jacobs and Van Dingenen, 2001).
against high-energy projectiles. Some other Kevlar-
Recent body armour designs use fibres such as aramid
based products were also developed by DuPont with
(Kevlar®, Twaron® and Technora®), high
unique features, which were in use for ballistic
performance polyethylene (HPPE- Spectra® and
protection.
Dyneema®), poly(p-phenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole)
(PBO- Zylon®), and high strength nylon. TABLE 1 Twaron®: This is another para-aramid fibre like
indicates the features of the fibres currently in use for Kevlar®, but developed by Akzo Nobel (now Teijin
the production of soft body armour. Twaron) (Dobb and Robson, 1990). It has good heat-
resistance and high tensile strength. A vest made of
A brief outline of different high performance fibres
Twaron® CT microfilament is 23% lighter than its
used for ballistic soft armour is given below.
aramid counterpart. Twaron® fibres are composed of
Kevlar®: This fibre was developed by Dupont in 1965 a large number of fine microfilaments, this structure
and is the registered trademark for para-aramid (p- enhances its capacity to absorb impact in protective
aramid) fibres (Yang, 1993). This high strength fabrics.

40
Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014 http://www.tlist-journal.org

Technora®: It is also a para-aramid fibre developed by World War for airmen’s flak jackets. Ballistic nylon
Teijin (Ozawa, 1987). It is useful for applications that fabric was designed to protect wearers from flying
need high strength and chemical resistance. In debris generated by bullet or artillery shell impacts.
addition to ballistic protection, it is also used to make The fibre had a high degree of crystallinity, high
cables and ropes.This fibre also has good fatigue tensile strength and low elongation. Until recently, it
resistance, dimensional stability and high heat was still being used for ballistic applications in
resistance. combination with other high performance fibres.
Spectra®: This is an ultra-high-molecular-weight The new fibre M5® produced by Magellan Systems
polyethylene (UHMWPE) fibre, manufactured by International (USA) creates a new horizon for body
Allied Signal Inc. (now Honeywell). It is a armour. This fibre is based on diimidazo pyridinylene
thermoplastic polyethylene (PE) fibre with extremely (dihydroxy) phenylene, and can enable the weight of
long molecular chains, the molecular weights of which soft body armour to be reduced by 42% compared
range from 2×106 to 6×106 g/mol. The long molecular with Kevlar KM2®. In future, M5® may be widely
chains transfer loads more effectively to the polymer used as a reinforcing fibre in hard armour backing
backbone, and this results in a very tough material, composites.
with the highest impact strength of any of the
In addition to the above fibres, there is published work
thermoplastic fibres that are available up to now (Stein,
on the use of natural fibre composites for ballistic
1988). It has extremely low moisture absorption, low
protection (Wambua et al., 2007). However, they can
coefficient of friction and very high abrasion resistance.
not match the performance of synthetic fibres. They
UHMWPE has a specific strength, which is 40%
may be incorporated into body armour to improve
greater than that of aramid fibres.
wearing comfort because of their moisture absorption
Dyneema®: It is also a UHMWPE fibre similar to properties.
Spectra®. This fibre has an extremely high strength-to-
FIG. 2 gives a comparison of the strength and modulus
weight ratio and can float on water due to its low
of different fibres used for soft body armour. Some of
density. The other feature is its high-energy absorption
the properties of the textiles fibres used in ballistic
capability, which enables it to dissipate the shock
protection fabrics are given in TABLE 2.
waves generated by an impact faster than other
ballistic materials. The various types of Dyneema®
fibres are SK25, SK6O, SK65, SK66, SK71, SK75 and
SK76. These fibres are aligned and bonded into sheets
for personal body armour and can be arranged at
different angles to give the required strength in all
directions.
Zylon® (poly(p-phenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole, PBO)):
Zylon was developed by SRI International in the 1980s
and is now commercially manufactured by the Toyobo
Corporation. It has high tensile strength, which is 1.6
times higher than Kevlar. Zylon can be used where
very high strength combined with good thermal
stability is required. The modulus of these fibres is
almost double that of p-aramid fibres and the
decomposition temperature is about 100°C higher than
that of p-aramid fibres. Body armour made with
Zylon® is lighter, more comfortable and stronger than
products made from aramid fibres. However, the
tensile strength degrades under certain extreme
FIG. 2 COMPARISON OF STRENGTH AND MODULUS VALUES
environmental conditions, such as high ultra violet OF DIFFERENT HIGH PERFORMANCE FIBRES [SPECIFIC
radiation. TENSILE STRENGTH VS. SPECIFIC MODULUS; SPECIFIC
TENSILE STRENGTH = STRENGTH/DENSITY; SPECIFIC TENSILE
Ballistic Nylon® (Nylon 6-6): This polyamide fibre was MODULUS = MODULUS/DENSITY; DATA FROM VARIOUS
originally developed by DuPont during the Second SOURCES (Scott, 2005, Hearle, 2001)]

41
http://www.tlist-journal.org Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014

TABLE 2 PROPERTIES OF THE FIBRES USED FOR BALLISTIC PROTECTION
Tensile strength Elongation Density
Material
(MPa) (%) (g/cc)
Kevlar 29 3400 3.5 1.44
Twaron® 3600 2.5 1.44
Technora® 3100 4.4 1.39
Dyneema® SK60 2700 3.5 0.97
Spectra® 3000 3.5 0.97
Zylon® 1800 3.5 1.54
Ballistic nylon® 2100 19.0 1.14
Source: Textiles for Protection, R A Scott, Woodhead Publishing,
Cambridge (UK)
Mechanism of Protection
The principles on which the ballistic protective
materials work can be broadly divided into two
categories that are (1) absorption of impact energy and
(2) redistribution of impact energy (Karahan, 2008). A
protective material should absorb the energy of a
projectile before it completely penetrates the material.
Energy absorption is achieved by stretching,
compressing or destroying the material. In other
words, the principle on which body armour operates
is based on the rapid conversion and dispersion of the
kinetic energy from a striking bullet into strain energy
within the ballistic body armour (Cooper and Gotts,
2005). The protection provided by body armour is
achieved by three different methods namely:
i) The armour decelerates and stops theballistic
projectile by dissipating its kinetic energy
along the plane of the material impacted;
ii) The armour completely bounces the projectile,
which is very rare; and
iii) A possible combination of the above (i) and (ii).
When a bullet strikes a fabric, or a number of layers of
fabric, two waves, namely longitudinal and transverse
waves, are propagated from the point of impact on the
outer surface. The longitudinal wave travels in the
plane of the fabric and the transverse wave propagates
perpendicular to the fabric (FIG. 3). As the tensile
waves propagate away from the impact point, the
material behind the wave front moves towards the
point of impact, which is deflected in the direction of
motion by the impacting bullet. The velocities at which
the longitudinal and transverse waves are propogated
in the ballistic panel during an impact of a projectile
are dependent on the energy absorption capability of
the fabric layers. The shock wave affecting the ballistic
structure propagates at higher speeds in materials
with higher modulii and lower weights per unit area
(Laible, 1980b). The major parameters that affect the
way in which impact energy is dissipated are
dependent on the tensile strength of the fabrics and
yarns, the fabric structures and the number of layers of
fabric.
During an impact of a bullet, the fibres in the fabric
absorb and disperse the impact energy, which is
transmitted to the armour from the projectile, causing
the bullet to deform or to ‘mushroom’. Each successive
layer in the vest absorbs energy, until the bullet is
stopped (FIG. 3). The energy spreads across the
surface of the armour at a tremendous speed, which
can be up to 900 m/s.
FIG. 3 THE MECHANISM OF BULLET PENETRATION IN AN
IMPACT (Scott, 2005)
In the case of hard body armour, metal and reinforced
plastic provide protection by partially bouncing the
bullet as well as absorbing the impact energy. Upon
impact, the impact pulse on the surface of the armour
is reflected as a tensile wave. When the amount of
tensile stress exceeds the tensile strength of the armour
material, fractures occur leading to mechanical failure
of the hard body armour and the creation of a hole. If
the magnitude of the stress pulse after the fracture still
exceeds the tensile strength of the material, multiple
fractures can occur. If the material is driven beyond its
elastic limit as the applied load increases, the material
becomes plastic.
As indicated in FIG. 3, impact of a projectile produces
a cone shaped deformation in layers of protective
fabric, As an impact progresses, the radius and height
of the deformation cone increase with time and the
cone grows as the projectile moves forward resulting
in an increase in the cone height. The variation of the
cone radius on the impact surface with time was
investigated (Naik and Shrirao, 2004). In this study,
the initial transverse wave velocity increased
significantly and then attained nearly a constant value

42
Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014 http://www.tlist-journal.org

during the remaining period of the ballistic impact.
The growth of the cone surface radius was found to be
almost linear with time, whereas the increse in the
cone height was nonlinear. The rate of increase in the
cone height reduced with time, which was related to
the reduction in the velocity of the projectile during
the ballistic impact.
Ballistic armour should be able to absorb and disperse
the kinetic energy of a penetrating object. The
performance of ballistic materials has been categorised
based on the kinetic energy density, which is the
incident kinetic energy per unit area as shown in
TABLE 3 (Horsfall and Watson, 2003). The materials
used and the designs selected should ensure that the
kinetic energy of the projectile is completely absorbed
by the textile assembly to prevent injuries to the body.
TABLE 3 THREAT CLASSIFICATION BASED ON KINETIC ENERGY DENSITY
(HORSFALL AND WATSON, 2003)
describes four levels of threat and two subparts. These
threat levels range from Level I (very low velocity or
low mass projectiles) to Level IV (very high velocity,
high mass projectiles). There are several standards
used in the EU, of which the Euronorm standard
EN106 is the most widely used. Other standards
include the German standard (DIN 52290) and the
Czech standard (ČSN 395360).
The ballistic performance of armour is based on the
kinetic energy (KE = ½ mv2, where m is the mass and v
is the velocity) of a bullet at the point of impact. As the
velocity is the key factor in determining the bullet
kinetic energy, velocity is used as the primary
independent variable in ballistic testing. Fragments
usually have low mass and hence low kinetic energy.
However, the area on which they interact may also be
very small, and this provides them with good
penetrative capability.

Projectile Projectile
Kinetic Kinetic energy of a bullet decreases as the distance
Type of Area energy Armour from a target increases and it declines rapidly after
Velocity Kinetic
threat (mm2) density type
(m/s) energy (J)
(J/mm2)
hitting the target. Generally, it is difficult for light-
65
weight flexible armour to protect against specific
Handgun fragmenting munitions at close range. In addition, the
(initial) 16
bullet 450 1032 Textile
(0.357”)
254 4 mass, velocity and shape of the fragments may be
(final) varied, and this causes problems for efficient
Assault rifle
protection from the fragments.
bullet (AK 720 2050 45 45 Composite
47) Ballistic testing considers a number of factors such as
High
the armour, test backing materials, bullet type, casing,
velocity 940 1805 24 75 Ceramic
bullet (SA80) powder, primer and the gun barrel. The performance
level of ballistic fabrics is tested by using standard
Performance Evaluation Methods fragment simulating projectiles (FSP). To test soft body
armour, fabrics are mounted in special specimen
Velocity-based Measurements holders and the FSPs are fired with different test
When designing body armour, the selection of velocities. Most of tests measure the velocity at which
materials should ensure that a bullet with a specific no bullets will penetrate the armour. The pass/fail
velocity and mass is prevented by the armour from criterion is selected based on the parameter known as
penetration through the armour. The confirmatory test V50, which is the velocity at which 50% of the FSPs are
used for this purpose is called a ‘complete penetration stopped by the armour.
test’, which is a pass/fail test. In order to pass the test, V50 tests are done according to the standards STANAG
the threshold set for a body armour to stop a bullet 2920 and UK/SC/5449. The aim is to get three shots
should be exceeded. However, this test provides no that penetrate through the armour and three shots that
information about the tolerance limit above the stated are stopped by the armour. The velocities for the six
threshold which is effective in the performance of the shots can then be used to calculate the V50. Although
armour. other tests such as V0 (zero penetration velocity) and
The standards describing the effectiveness of body Vc (critical velocity) are used for the evaluation, for a
armour vary in different countries, depending on the complete pass/fail criterion, the most commonly used
end use applications. The major standards recently in method is the V50 (Zhang et al., 2008, Porwal and
use for ballistic threats are those developed in the USA Phoenix, 2005, Nilakantan et al.). The simplistic
and in the European Union (EU). The US standard approach for V0 and Vc is to measure the velocity at
drawn up by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), which no penetration will occur, as the main objective

43
http://www.tlist-journal.org Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014
to use body armour is to shield the wearer from any of
the projectiles.
Measuring the V0 must take into account the test
variability and variability in the performance of the
armour. As a result, a single penetrating shot can
reduce the V0 value substantially. Therefore, as the
number of shots increases, the V0 value reduces. The
V0 value can be rigorously set at a confidence interval
by using the variability and the calculated standard
deviation values. Various test standards define the
number of shots to be made to estimate the V0 for the
armour certification.
Other Parameter Measurements
In addition to velocity measurements, the other
parameters used for the evaluation of ballistic
performance include the back face signature (BFS)
bursting strength, tensile strength, weight, assembly
and construction of armour.
The level of protection provided by ballistic armour is
primarily important. However, the level of comfort
provided to the wearer is also an important parameter.
It should be comfortable enough to allow wearers to
perform their intended function and provide them
with ease of movement to quickly respond to any
situation while not becoming too hot because of the
heavy weight and poor ventelation provided by the
armour. The parameters that affect the comfort
properties of ballistic armour are its weight, flexibility
breathability and moisture management capability.
Legality
The rules and regulations controlling the use of
ballistic armour by ordinary citizens vary from
country to country. The prevalent rules applied in
some countries are discussed below.
Australia: In Australia, it is illegal to import or
manufacture body armour without the prior
authorisation from Australian Customs and Border
Protection Services. There are heavy penalties for the
possession or use of body armour by civilians without
a licence.
Canada: It is legal to wear and to purchase body
armour such as ballistic vests in all Canadian
provinces except for British Columbia, Manitoba,
Alberta and Nova Scotia (where legislation is passed
but not yet implemented). Under British Columbia’s
Body Armour Control Act, it is illegal to possess body
armour without a licence issued by the provincial
44
government.
United States: In most states, although the possession
of body armour is not prohibited, individuals on
probation or parole or convicted of a crime are not
allowed to possess body armour.
European Union: In the European Union (EU), import
and sale of ballistic armour are allowed, except for
special products that are developed under strict
military specifications and/or for main military usage
and provide levels of protection above NIJ level IV.
Many shops in Europe sell ballistic vests and body
armour.
Future Trends
With the advancement of technology, the types of
threats on the battlefield and in other combat
environments are changing. It is difficult to predict the
changes but the proliferation of even higher energy
weapons than currently in use seems likely. With an
increase in the weapon penetration capability, there
will be a need for new devices to be developed which
protect people against projectiles. It is perceived that
in the future the threats could be from enhanced
fragmentation munitions, and advanced body armour
should have the capability to mitigate these threats.
When designing tomorrow’s advanced body armour
for personnel protection, the criteria should be
lightweight and minimised bulk, as well as enhanced
thermo-physiological comfort, while permitting
tactical mobility. In addition, other factors to be
considered are survival in extreme conditions,
integration of functionality to achieve multi-role
protection with a minimum of layers, minimisation of
life cycle cost and the use of environmentally friendly
chemicals and processes. Recycling and/or easy
disposal of body armour without affecting the
environment is also important at the end of its life
cycle.
Recent developments in ballistic armour have focused
on the use of composites consisting of carbon
nanotubes and other nano materials. This is envisaged
to provide lighter weight body armour with enhanced
protection from high velocity projectiles. It is also
expected that body armour may integrate additional
functions, such as communication tool, power source,
etc.
Conclusions
Modern weapons are becoming more sophisticated
Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014 http://www.tlist-journal.org

and lethal whether they are designed to be used
against individuals or as weapons for mass
destruction. Hence, the designing of protective
clothing is really challenging for the developers and
researchers. No matter how sophisticated the weapons
become or how remotely they can be used, humans are
still likely to be needed in close proximity to targets,
to launch weapons, to take control and to hold
territory. In some instances, although a ballistic vest
may pass the test criteria, it may fail to prevent
projectile penetration as new threats may emerge. In
addition, other parameters such as extreme
environmental and weather conditions (cold, rain,
wind, sunlight, snow and dust) should be taken into
consideration when selecting material and designing
protective clothing. Otherwise adverse environmental
conditions could lead to causalities. The major aim of
modern ballistic armour should keep the combatants
alive and comfortable in addition to providing the
desired level of protection for their combat role.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge various sources
for giving permission to reproduce the figures and
illustrations for this review paper .
REFERENCES
ADANUR, S. 1995. Wellington sears handbook of industrial
textiles, Technomic Publishing Company Inc.
BAKER, A. J. 2005. Ballistic shield and methods of use and
formation. US Patent 6,886,446.
BILISIK, A. K. & TURHAN, Y. 2009. Multidirectional
stitched layered aramid woven fabric structures and
their experimental characterization of
performance. Textile Research Journal, 79, 1331-1343.
BILLON, H. & ROBINSON, D. 2001. Models for the ballistic
impact of fabric armour. International Journal of Impact
Engineering, 25, 411-422.
BRISCOE, B. & MOTAMEDI, F. 1992. The ballistic impact
characteristics of aramid fabrics: the influence of
interface friction. Wear, 158, 229-247.
BROWN, J. R. & EGGLESTONE, G. T. 1989. Ballistic
properties of composite materials for
protection. DTIC Document.
BUNNING, T., JIANG, H., WADE ADAMS, W., CRANE, R.
L., FARMER, B. & KAPLAN, D. Applications of silk.
ACS Symposium Series, 1994. ACS Publications, 353-353.
CHABBA, S., VAN ES, M., VAN KLINKEN, E., JONGEDIJK,
M., VANEK, D., GIJSMAN, P. & VAN DER WAALS, A.
C. 2007. Accelerated aging study of ultra high molecular
weight polyethylene yarn and unidirectional composites
for ballistic applications. Journal of Materials Science, 42,
2891-2893.
CHEESEMAN, B. A. & BOGETTI, T. A. 2003. Ballistic impact
into fabric and compliant composite laminates. Composite
Structures, 61, 161-173.
CHITRANGAD, M. V. 1993. Hybrid ballistic fabric. US Patent
5,187,003.
CHU, C.-K. & CHEN, Y.-L. 2010. Ballistic-proof effects of
various woven constructions. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern
Europe, 18, 83.
COOPER, G. & GOTTS, P. 2005. Ballistic protection. Ballistic
Trauma: A Practical Guide, 67-90.
CUNNIFF, P. The performance of poly(para-phenylene
benzobizoxazole)(PBO) fabric for fragmentation
protective body armor. Proceedings of the 18th
International Symposium on Ballistics, San Antonio, TX,
1999. 814-821.
CUNNIFF, P. M. 1992. An analysis of the system effects in
woven fabrics under ballistic impact. Textile Research
Journal, 62, 495-509.
DINGENAN, J. V. & VERLINDE, A. 1996. Nonwovens and
fabrics in ballistic protection. Technical Textiles
International, 10-13.
DOBB, M. & ROBSON, R. 1990. Structural characteristics of
aramid fibre variants. Journal of Materials Science, 25, 459-
464.
ballistic
DUAN, Y., KEEFE, M., BOGETTI, T. & CHEESEMAN, B.
2005. Modeling the role of friction during ballistic impact
of a high-strength plain-weave fabric. Composite
Structures, 68, 331-337.
DUAN, Y., KEEFE, M., BOGETTI, T., CHEESEMAN, B. &
POWERS, B. 2006a. A numerical investigation of the
influence of friction on energy absorption by a high-
strength fabric subjected to ballistic impact. International
Journal of Impact Engineering, 32, 1299-1312.
personnel
DUAN, Y., KEEFE, M., BOGETTI, T. & POWERS, B. 2006b.
Finite element modeling of transverse impact on a
ballistic fabric. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,
48, 33-43.

45
http://www.tlist-journal.org Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014
ENCYCLOPEDIA, N. W. 2014. Bullet [Online]. New World
Encyclopedia. Available:
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?titl
e=Bullet&oldid=967807 [Accessed 12 April 2014 2014].
FAUR‐CSUKAT, G. A study on the ballistic performance of
composites. Macromolecular Symposia, 2006. Wiley
Online Library, 217-226.
FREESTON, W. D. & CLAUS, W. D. 1973. Strain-wave
reflections during ballistic impact of fabric panels. Textile
Research Journal, 43, 348-351.
GOWER, H., CRONIN, D. & PLUMTREE, A. 2008. Ballistic
impact response of laminated composite panels.
International Journal of Impact Engineering, 35, 1000-1008.
GRAVES, R. R., HATFIELD, S. L. & LEVIGNE, E. C. 2004.
Modular front opening body armor. US Patent 6,698,024.
GRUJICIC, M., ARAKERE, G., HE, T., BELL, W.,
CHEESEMAN, B., YEN, C.-F. & SCOTT, B. 2008. A
ballistic material model for cross-plied unidirectional
ultra-high molecular-weight polyethylene fiber-
reinforced armor-grade composites. Materials Science and
Engineering: A, 498, 231-241.
GU, B. 2003. Analytical modeling for the ballistic perforation
of planar plain-woven fabric target by projectile.
Composites Part B: Engineering, 34, 361-371.
GUOQI, Z., GOLDSMITH, W. & DHARAN, C. 1992.
Penetration of laminated Kevlar by projectiles—I.
Experimental investigation. International Journal of Solids
and Structures, 29, 399-420.
HEARLE, J. W. 2001. High-performance fibres, Woodhead
Publishing.
HOLMES, G. A., KIM, J. H., MCDONOUGH, W. G., RILEY,
M. A. & RICE, K. D. 2009. A detailed investigation of the
mechanical properties of polybenzoxazole fibers within
soft body armor. Journal of Materials Science, 44, 3619-3625.
HORSFALL, I. & WATSON, C. H. 2003. Ballisitc and stab
protection, short course in impact and explosion
engineering. U MIST, Manchester.
HOSUR, M., ADBULLAH, M. & JEELANI, S. 2005. Studies
on the low-velocity impact response of woven hybrid
composites. Composite Structures, 67, 253-262.
HU, J. 2004. Structure and mechanics of woven fabrics, CRC
Press, Cambridge (UK).
IREMONGER, M. & WENT, A. 1996. Ballistic impact of fibre
46
composite armours by fragment-simulating projectiles.
Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 27,
575-581.
JACOBS, M. & VAN DINGENEN, J. 2001. Ballistic protection
mechanisms in personal armour. Journal of Materials
Science, 36, 3137-3142.
JIN, L., HU, H., SUN, B. & GU, B. 2010. A simplified
microstructure model of bi-axial warp-knitted composite
for ballistic impact simulation. Composites Part B:
Engineering, 41, 337-353.
KARAHAN, M. 2008. Comparison of ballistic performance
and energy absorption capabilities of woven and
unidirectional aramid fabrics. Textile Research Journal, 78,
718-730.
KAUFMANN, C., CRONIN, D., WORSWICK, M., PAGEAU,
G. & BETH, A. 2003. Influence of material properties on
the ballistic performance of ceramics for personal body
armour. Shock and Vibration, 10, 51-58.
LAIBLE, R. 1980a. Ballistic materials and penetration mechanics,
Elsevier.
LAIBLE, R. C. 1972. Nonwoven fibrous felt ballistic armor. US
Patent 3,641,638.
LAIBLE, R. C. 1980b. Ballistic materials and penetration
mechanics, Elsevier Science & Technology.
LEE, B., SONG, J. & WARD, J. 1994. Failure of Spectra®
polyethylene fiber-reinforced composites under ballistic
impact loading. Journal of Composite Materials, 28, 1202-
1226.
LIM, C., SHIM, V. & NG, Y. 2003. Finite-element modeling of
the ballistic impact of fabric armor. International Journal of
Impact Engineering, 28, 13-31.
LIN, C.-C., LIN, C.-M., HUANG, C.-C., LOU, C.-W., MENG,
H.-H., HSU, C.-H. & LIN, J.-H. 2009. Elucidating the
design and impact properties of composite nonwoven
fabrics with various filaments in bulletproof vest cushion
layer. Textile Research Journal, 79, 268-274.
LIN, J.-H., HSU, C.-H. & MENG, H.-H. 2005. Process of
preparing a nonwoven/filament/woven fabric sandwich
structure with cushioning effect of ballistic resistance.
Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe, 13, 43-47.
MARISSEN, R., DUURKOOP, D., HOEFNAGELS, H. &
BERGSMA, O. 2010. Creep forming of high strength
polyethylene fiber prepregs for the production of ballistic
Textiles and Light Industrial Science and Technology (TLIST) Volume 3, 2014
protection helmets. Composites Science and Technology, 70,
1184-1188.
MEDVEDOVSKI, E. 2010. Ballistic performance of armour
ceramics: Influence of design and structure. Part 1.
Ceramics International, 36, 2103-2115.
MONTGOMERY, T., GRADY, P. & TOMASINO, C. 1982.
The effects of projectile geometry on the performance of
ballistic fabrics. Textile Research Journal, 52, 442-450.
NAIK, N. & SHRIRAO, P. 2004. Composite Structures under
Ballistic Impact. Composite structures, 66, 579-590.
NAYAK, R. & PADHYE, R. 2011. Application of modelling
and simulation in smart and technical textiles. In:
PATNAIK, A. (ed.) Modeling and Simulation in Fibrous
Materials: Techniques and Application. NY, USA: Nova
Science.
NILAKANTAN, G., KEEFE, M., GILLESPIE JR, J. W.,
WETZEL, E. D., BOGETTI, T. A. & ADKINSON, R. An
experimental and numerical study of the impact
response (V50) of flexible plain weave fabrics:
Accounting for statistical distributions of yarn strength.
The 1st Joint American-Canadian International
Conference on Composites and the 24th Annual ASC
Technical Conference, University of Delaware, Newark,
DE 19711, USA. 15-17.
OZAWA, S. 1987. A new approach to high modulus, high
tenacity fibers. Polymer Journal, 19, 119-125.
PORWAL, P. K. & PHOENIX, S. L. 2005. Modeling system
effects in ballistic impact into multi-layered fibrous
materials for soft body armor. International journal of
fracture, 135, 217-249.
PROSSER, R. A. 1988. Penetration of Nylon Ballistic Panels
by Fragment-Simulating Projectiles1 Part II: Mechanism
of Penetration. Textile Research Journal, 58, 161-165.
PROSSER, R. A., COHEN, S. H. & SEGARS, R. A. 2000. Heat
as a factor in the penetration of cloth ballistic panels by
0.22 caliber projectiles. Textile Research Journal, 70, 709-722.
ROYLANCE, D., WILDE, A. & TOCCI, G. 1973. Ballistic
impact of textile structures. Textile Research Journal, 43,
34-41.
SCOTT, R. A. 2005. Textiles for Protection, Woodhead
Publishing. Cambridge.
SINGLETARY, J. & BOGDANOVICH, A. 2000. 3-D
View publication stats
http://www.tlist-journal.org
orthogonal woven soft body armor. Journal of Industrial
Textiles, 29, 287-305.
SINNAPPOO, K., ARNOLD, L. & PADHYE, R. 2010.
Application of wool in high-velocity ballistic protective
fabrics. Textile Research Journal, 80, 1083-1092.
STEIN, H. L. 1988. Ultrahigh molecular weight
polyethylenes(UHMWPE), ASM International.
TAN, V. & CHING, T. 2006. Computational simulation of
fabric armour subjected to ballistic impacts. International
Journal of Impact Engineering, 32, 1737-1751.
TAN, V., SHIM, V. & ZENG, X. 2005. Modelling crimp in
woven fabrics subjected to ballistic impact. International
Journal of Impact Engineering, 32, 561-574.
TAO, L. Z. Z. Q. W. & GUANXIONG, Q. 2002. A Study on
Ballistic Performance and Mechanism of UHMWPE
Fiber/LDPE Composites [J]. Fiber Composites, 4, 001.
ÜBEYLI, M., YıLDıRıM, R. O. & ÖGEL, B. 2007. On the
comparison of the ballistic performance of steel and
laminated composite armors. Materials & Design, 28,
1257-1262.
VIVES, M. 1993. Ballistic protection armor. US Patent 5,221,807.
WAMBUA, P., VANGRIMDE, B., LOMOV, S. & VERPOEST,
I. 2007. The response of natural fibre composites to
ballistic impact by fragment simulating projectiles.
Composite Structures, 77, 232-240.
XU, T. & FARRIS, R. J. 2007. Comparative studies of ultra
high molecular weight polyethylene fiber reinforced
composites. Polymer Engineering & Science, 47, 1544-1553.
YANG, H. 1993. Kevlar aramid fiber, Wiley New York.
ZAERA, R., SÁNCHEZ-SÁEZ, S., PÉREZ-CASTELLANOS, J.
L. & NAVARRO, C. 2000. Modelling of the adhesive
layer in mixed ceramic/metal armours subjected to
impact. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
Manufacturing, 31, 823-833.
ZENG, X., TAN, V. & SHIM, V. 2006. Modelling inter‐yarn
friction in woven fabric armour. International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Engineering, 66, 1309-1330.
ZHANG, G., BATRA, R. & ZHENG, J. 2008. Effect of frame
size, frame type, and clamping pressure on the ballistic
performance of soft body armor. Composites Part B:
Engineering, 39, 476-489.
47