I would love to see a comparison between homogenous titanium armor and steel armor! Back when I was a metal worker titanium was the most brutally unpleasant substances to machine we worked with. I imagine its gumminess and heat resistance would make for an interesting simulation. Both vs APFSDS and full caliber shot

@0MoTheG

2 жыл бұрын

It will not be much better than Aluminum. AR Steel is also terrible to machine but isn't any better in this case. Most of the result for rod penetration can be explained with density alone.

@h2o2go141

2 жыл бұрын

@@0MoTheG Maybe. I'm aware density plays a major role in long rod resistance. In which case we should see the titanium armor preform roughly twice as well, given the density is roughly twice that of aluminum. Of course hardness is also a massive consideration in long rod performance, as is specific resilience, specific toughness, and specific strength. All are relevant to the performance of armor. Titanium is a really weird metal, and it would be interesting to see how those factors affect armor penetration in a more advanced context than general wisdom and speculation.

@antaresmc4407

2 жыл бұрын

@@h2o2go141 Ive seen some claims and tests in which high grade titanium alloys beat armor steel slightly even before accounting for the lower weight. It was on a body armor context and not really rigurous enough to quote anyway tbh, I just went off a tangent and found it... It does have very weird and sometimes extreme properties going on different directions though, so I doubt there's much point trying to predict without at least some serious math... Id be mostly sure it'll be better than steel per weight, simply 'cause many properties are similar and specific strength/toughness and variants are so much higher, but who knows if or how much....

@hibahprice6887

2 жыл бұрын

@@0MoTheG But if you combine titanium, tungsten and RHA

@oisnowy5368

2 жыл бұрын

Funny, I was immediately wondering about titanium as well. Would love to see it too.

Could you do this again but with armor plates with equivalent mass? I think it'd be cool to see how much that makes a difference.

@twandepan

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah the tungsten would suffer big time

@ausburnesdumbaltaccount9676

2 жыл бұрын

that and the impact of sloped and spaced armour would be cool too i'd ask for also combining various materials but that might take took long to model and render

@user-tk5jx4ih4g

2 жыл бұрын

@@twandepan Depleted uranium density is; 19,050 kg/m3, Tungsten is 19,450 kg/m3, that's not a suffer big time that's a marginal difference

@twandepan

2 жыл бұрын

@@user-tk5jx4ih4g what about RHA

@toddkes5890

2 жыл бұрын

@@twandepan About 7.84 kg/m^3 The fun part is imagining how big the tank's silhouette with aluminum or RHA would be using the same mass as the Tungsten or depleted uranium

Dear Viewers, This video is prepared based on request from viewer, It present the comparison of various armor materials against the APFSDS-T, thanks.

@rakeshpatil3723

2 жыл бұрын

Another Great video ! Depleted uranium is most effective compare to other armor materials.

@matthayward7889

2 жыл бұрын

It would be interesting to see the same thing, but the depth of material is adjusted so they all have the same mass.

@elmariachi5133

2 жыл бұрын

But against which type of APFSDS-T? The Tungsten or the Uranium type?

@somerandomdude9657

2 жыл бұрын

I keep wondering how do you do a armor simulation?

@a_person5660

2 жыл бұрын

@@rakeshpatil3723 good luck making armour out of it though!

At 1:30 the graphic states that the projectile penetrated 329 mm in the DU armor, but only 324 mm in the TA alloy, yet in the next graphic at 1:38 it shows that the projectile only penetrated to a depth of 46% in the DU and 47% in the TA. Am I missing something here?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, Correctly noticed. It is typo mistake and mentioned in the description of the video.

@timtarbet4594

2 жыл бұрын

@@extremeengineeringsimulati5627 Sorry. I thought I'd checked the description, but apparently I missed it.

@ngt84

2 жыл бұрын

Also the penetration looks less in Tungsten at the simulation. So the 324mm looks correct for the tungsten

Note that this is 70cm of armor and almost any armor hit by this would've likely been penetrated in practice. This just goes to show how incredible modern projectiles are.

@righthandman620

Жыл бұрын

Uh, actually APFSDS is A modern projectile type but the one in the video is not. Modern APFSDS rounds have a much higher velocity.

Tungsten proving to be very effective armor, this had made my day,

@skirnir-atf

2 жыл бұрын

Yep Density of Tungsted 19.3 Uranium almost same Steel ~8.6 Weight of armor important too

What would the penetration depth be compared to the mass of the armor be? One could lugg around far more aluminium for the equal weight in DU. Thanks for an awesome simulation.

@iansysoev9462

2 жыл бұрын

Well you can just compare the density

@larsbe7200

2 жыл бұрын

@@iansysoev9462 For sure! But don't you think it would be a far more visually interesting video if the aluminium slab was 7 times longer than the DU one?

@kennethferland5579

2 жыл бұрын

Yea thought the same thing, the armor density here has nearly an order of magnitude variance.

@toddkes5890

2 жыл бұрын

Imagine how big the tank with aluminum armor would be. Very easy to spot, harder for the crew to get around, harder to fit the gear around, etc

@larsbe7200

2 жыл бұрын

@@toddkes5890 There is that... it would be somewhat bloated =D BUT! Not all armor is frontal and for MBTs so showing the effect / density would explain why Alu is used for armor in some cases

Interesting. The penetration depth v.s the mass of the plate would be in favor of aluminium. I see that 80% of the penetrators' length is eaten up in the aluminum, but it is 3 times as light as the steel plate. The M113 hull is welded from 7020 Alloy, sligthly stronger than 6082. Conclusion? protection v.s weight?

@nescopahe

2 жыл бұрын

Aluminium offers some of the best protection per ton of any material out there, hence why its used on light vehicles as it gives you the best bang for your buck. On heavier tanks however, the bulk makes it infeasible to use.

@louisvanrijn3964

2 жыл бұрын

@@nescopahe That's correct, Sir.

@ycplum7062

Жыл бұрын

The weight savings between armor and steel is almost nonexistent. Aluminum is roughly 3 time lighter than steel, but requires 3 time the thickness for the same protection. This was studied when teh M113 was designed. However, aluminum was chosen because the thicker aluminum plates provided more rigidity, resulting in a 10% total weight savings when factoring the needed structural elements to frame and stiffen the thinner steel plates. If you look ina M113, they don't have framing or stiffeners. However, if you go into a Soviet light armored vehicle, they have steel stiffeners. I served on the M113 and even got to drive a MT-LB at NTC. It was interesting examining the differences and similarities.

@louisvanrijn3964

Жыл бұрын

@@ycplum7062 Thanks for the stiffners exlanation, it is valid. The simulation shows, if correct, (!) that the aluminium plate would be 1,5 - 1.6 times more thicker than showed, to stop the penetrator. The steel plate is penetrated for, say, 70%. That means theoretically a 2,2-2.4 times thicker aluminium structure...that is in fact a little less heavy. A little only, may be 10-15%? The M113 could swim, but is submerged for say 80% and cannot withstand waves....did that have any meaning in the design? Aluminium is costly, more costly per kilogram compared to steel; there must be some design-driver.

@ycplum7062

Жыл бұрын

@@louisvanrijn3964 During an excersize where we swam out M113 in a pond, the top hatch was open and we all sat near the top with life vests. We had between six inches top a foot of freeboard. We were all nervous, even in a pond on a sunny day with variable light breeze and no ripple in the water. However, the wake from the vehicle made us nervous. With regards to cost, aluminum also costs more to manufacture. It requires more specialized welding. Of course, we are talking about the United States, whose military budget was larger than the next ten countries combined back in the 1960s/70s. I think this was true until the rise of China.

This one is really cool 👍 It would be neat to see this with a few additional materials and thickness of each armor required to prevent 50% penetration.

Could you try a 30mm Depleted Uranium Rod like those fired from the Gau-8 Cannon sometime? I feel like the Depleted Uranium being resistant to Mushrooming could produce some interesting results

I would really like to see how a penetrator would fare against a theoretical osmium armor

@apricotcharms4126

Жыл бұрын

What about an adamantium or vibranium armor

Try same material and same projectile with different velocities (1x ,2x ,4x , 8x). Measure depth and hole size.

I didn't think Tungsten could get similar results than the DU

@GiantJanus

2 жыл бұрын

To be fair, we do not know what this simulation takes into effect; such as is it just looking at density, hardness, shear strength, etc

@MeatVision

2 жыл бұрын

@@GiantJanus yeah, I thought so. Pretty interesting tho

@Crosshair84

2 жыл бұрын

The two are very similar. The advantage DU has is that it's cheap compared to Tungsten.

@Blei1986

2 жыл бұрын

afaik tungsten is very close to DU. DU is afaik just cheaper as a waste product AND overall a bit better in 'performace' still surprised how well RHA did

@jonny2954

2 жыл бұрын

Tungsten alloys are actually more capable than DU at penetrating modern multi layered composite armor arrays. But they're expensive. DU performs better at semi-infinite targets (or used to in the 80s, metallurgy has since catched up).

Do one where it is all the same target material (RHA for example) and vary the impact velocity for each from Point Blank stepping down to the expected velocity as max range. Does the depth of penetration correspond to the kinetic energy at impact?

The aluminum alloy produces a vapor spit-back that ignites flowing past the tail irw.

Yeah my boy tungsten coming in clutch

What kind of software do you use to simulate this?

We use Depleted Uranium as a shield around our gamma camera's at work. It's a beast, and it's also heavy

What software is this? What material properties were used for each?

Can you tell us the volume of hole created in DU and TA ?

Very good

Interesting

Could you do it by weight? Logically the more dense materials weigh more… would be cool to see a comparisons for metals at lets say 50 or 100 kilograms each.

Can you simulate more exotic materials like ceramic/metal matrix composites?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Will try but it is difficult to get exact material properties.

@Coecoo

2 жыл бұрын

You should be very careful about thinking that these simulations are even remotely realistic. While the math behind them might be good, it's basically just impossible to code in accurate characteristics of any given material.

@yukarifloof8267

2 жыл бұрын

@@Coecoo well at the end of it, its a simulation to see the possible reaction, its not a full 100% "this is what will happen", because at the end of the day with ballistics, you can only go so far before you get to "its just a probability that this is what can happen." essentially, projectiles do weird things that we cant exactly predict

Damn depleted uranium realy is waaaaay better then RHA. 1/3 more effective armor? That is insane.

@troller9838

2 жыл бұрын

Yes but it is also way heavier.

@jakobc.2558

2 жыл бұрын

@@troller9838 and way more expensive. But still that is totaly worth it, especialy considering that modern MBTs usualy have over 1200 horsepower and suspension systems capable of carrying over 70 tons of weight.

@adriandumitrascu4292

2 жыл бұрын

:) sure is like 19g/cm^2 and rha 7.85g/cm^2 for RHA for same weight you can double thickness of your armor and still be lighter and more protective, but you will end up with a pretty dam huge machine.

Makes me wonder if you used a lower melt material and poured in diamond shaped denser material into the liquid metal of the lesser and had it cool if that would shave down the penatrator round faster as it hit the denser diamond mixture inside

War Thunder devs: IlL tAkE yOuR eNtIrE sToCk!

Could you do this with the layout of the composite of the m1a2 abrams from war thunder? (with the uranium turret cheeks)

Thanks.

So cost wise it would be ok to use DU and RHA composite along some additive layerd then.

Many good comments!

seems just a few percent difference in 4340 steel and the RHA, very surprising.

can you demonstrate repeated impacts of 40mm bofors versus a panther Upper frontal plate? armor degredation theory!

What made you assert that the Depleted Uranium was best when the Tungsten Alloy had a projectile penetration of 324 mm whereas the Depleted Uranium had a projectile penetration of 329 mm?

@jannegrey593

2 жыл бұрын

in description it was noted as typo and that it is reverse.

@Archangel657

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannegrey593 Ahh I see

What is the comparison for the same _weight_ of each material? Aluminium is a whole lot lighter than depleted uranium and so you can afford to have a whole lot more of it.

@skirnir-atf

2 жыл бұрын

Looks like it penetrate same MASS of material

Remember boys, percentage error IRL might change this, because bullet’s tip face up and down but goes near straight by revolving

What about Lead I wonder if it's high density will stop projectile better than aluminum...

DU works very well but the fine white powder that stays behind afterwards is highly toxic. Even when scrapping the leftovers.

@dr_birb

2 жыл бұрын

I'd imagine inhaling any vaporized metal powder left from the hit would be toxic...

@wekker090

2 жыл бұрын

@@dr_birb sure thing.

@mistersebaa6245

2 жыл бұрын

Cocaine?

To me it looks like the tungsten is a tad better than the Depleted uranium, and it gives sense as well sins tungsten is slightly denser than DPU

Shoot at sand, concrete, cement mortar, cement, gravel and clay to see what happens and how much it takes to stop the projectile.

Given the nearly identical performance between tungsten and depleted uranium, it seems crazy to even consider using depleted uranium, with the added Hazard of its extreme toxicity

@gabjf0706

2 жыл бұрын

Because depleted uranium is pyrophoric, while tungsten is not. This gives depleted uranium incendiary effect. Also it has a "self-sharpening" property which is generally better at penetrating armor.

@FuImaDragon

2 жыл бұрын

That is the point of its use tho. destroy the tank and now you got a radioactive hotspot in your country. all about inflicting as much damage as you can in a war.

@josefptacek113

2 жыл бұрын

@@FuImaDragon depleted uranium is as radioactive as light bulb

@zohan90210

2 жыл бұрын

@@FuImaDragon DU is effectively stable, hence why it can be used in armor in the first place. the toxicity comes from it being a heavy metal that can build up in the body when consumed.

@majonezreborn8332

2 жыл бұрын

nato used a lot of du rockets back in the day, I'm sure they have some that they want to get rid of, probably with the help of ukranians. As for the other great powers, I don't know but they most likely did use them as well.

Also good video

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you !

What software to make this simulation?

how is the tungsten penetration 5mm less than uranium, yet said to be 1% more penetrated?

In these penetration studies 3 things have to be observed: 1. The mass v.s. protection, (not only the penetration depth) 2. Obtainability in large quantities, 3. Reliable joining technique of thick plates and workability Remarks: Aluminium 7020 can be welded maintaining 85-90% of its strength, steels can do that too. Titanium has to be welded in an Argon 5 atmosphere, and is more difficult to weld. Obtainability is a problem , USSR was a larger titanium producer. (titanium = unobtanium here) Tungsten? How to join?

Interesting to see that tungsten & uranium are equal. I wounder what the wight & cost difference is.

Reactive armor is the way to go now, you shatter the projectile before it manages to penetrate. Then comes the spaced armor, for example the Leopard 2A4 on paper has 70mm of frontal turret armor(6-7 sheets of armor with a couple cm gaps, if I’m not mistaken the gaps are also filled with some unreactive gas, but I might have misheard with something else) but it can withstand around 700mm penetration kinetic projectiles and around 1300mm penetration chemical rounds(HEATFS, ATGMs) Leopard 2A6 then gets even more enhanced as it has a mixture of reactive armor on the outside sticking very far from the main armor of the turret, and then behind this you have the same armor of the leopard 2A4 turret… once the reactive armor gets knocked off sure it gets weaker but still… modern tanks. Half the time people watch videos they think the tank is knocked out, in reality it is a safety precaution to leave the vehicle when hit, in case of ammunition blow up, but the tanks that don’t physically lose their turret can still be used after some repairs.

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

We will further updated simulation with suggestion given by all viewers, thanks.

What "Tungsten Alloy" is it? There are so many.

Maybe there would be next like different types of ammo againts same matter?

Very interesting and enlightening, tho I confess that making armour out of tungsten or DU isn't something anyone is going to be crazy enough to try. Seeing how poor the aluminium fares compared to even steel is fascinating.

@sherdil3717

2 жыл бұрын

I thought abrams had DU armour?

@thesqartenprogram

2 жыл бұрын

They do have DU inserts yes

@silvergreydragon

2 жыл бұрын

Oh boy do I have news for you

@michaelreece3937

2 жыл бұрын

As plates and inserts, definitely a good idea I know a few modern tanks use them. what I was referring to is full on tank armour made of DU. Or God forbid making body armour plates out of the stuff, unless your gunna make those inserts on the body armour super thin

@thesqartenprogram

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelreece3937 ah I see what you mean that makes more sense then

What about compressed Aluminum and Alumina? What about Boron?

Is this Marc? Or Dytran?

what kind of fences are war thunder fences made of? they destroy apfsds moving at 1600m/s according to gaijin

Depleted uranium, got it

And this is how we made tank baby .

Do graphene next!

How heavy would a chunk of DU that's 700mm thick actually weigh? It's over twice as dense as Lead!

I wonder what is the weight of the armor for comparison.

@frost8077

2 жыл бұрын

and cost

@darethrylls9747

2 жыл бұрын

Heaviest to lightest: Depleted Uranium: Density 19.05g/cm^3 Tungsten Alloy: 15.8-18.7g/cm^3 Both RHA and 4340 steel: ~7.85g/cm^3 Aluminum Alloy: ~2.8g/cm^3 The actual weight of each piece of armor is of course gonna be the volume multiplied by the density (above).

@frost8077

2 жыл бұрын

@@darethrylls9747 That's a huge difference. RHA seems like the best option.

@darethrylls9747

2 жыл бұрын

@@frost8077 Hence why it is still the standard in most armor composites! Most tanks have multiple layers of RHA steel "sandwhiches" with rubber in the middle and spaced apart, usually angled pretty steeply (as long rods shatter at oblique angles). It saves weight at the cost of volume. The other metals and ceramics are usually put in certain patterns along the armor to help disrupt the chemical warheads and to assist with the shattering of long rods. Other options like tungsten are extremely expensive. Depleted Uranium is rather cheap, but is also pretty brittle and needs additional treatment to make safe for crew.

@apex_blue

2 жыл бұрын

@@frost8077 depleted uranium which due to being a byproduct of Uranium enrichment (basically I don’t believe there is any major industrial usage of depleted uranium) sois actually pretty cheap considering they have stockpiles of that stuff which won’t be used anywhere else and also the storage costing money to maintain.

I'm no expert but it's fun how we use a radioactive element as Armour, even depleted, it releases more radiation than normal armour

While depleted uranium is the most dense (sorta stablish metal with half life of billions of years) it lacks the hardness of tungsten and therefore they come out the same, is that correct?

@PepsiMagt

2 жыл бұрын

Tungsten is slightly denser than uranium. Tungsten itself is hard, but not harder than certain types of high hardness martensitic steel. The extremely high hardness Tungsten used in tools and such, is tungsten-carbide cemented with nickel or cobalt. But that would not be efficient for armour because of the weight. The ceramics used gir armour are alumina, silicon carbide or boron carbide.

What is the projectile made of?

Any chances of APFSDST vs 750mm Boron Carbide?

APFSDS - Armour piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot... Took me quite a while to figure out the shell combination, war thunder player lmao

What if you made “catching layers”. Sorta place like a 2” thick layer of one of the better performers followed by 4” of lesser performers filled by 2” followed by 4” and so forth. Of course those thicknesses are just examples but maybe the better performers will spread the load across a bigger area of the weaker stuff and allow it to slow down? Idk. Just discovered this stuff. 😂

So many more materials I would like to see, titanium, carbon allotropes (diamond, carbonado, graphene, nanotubes, etc), ceramics, etc.

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Noted!

Wonder if the temperatures of the impact zone.

Do me an experiment 76mm tungsten in a sandwich between 127mm rha and 152 mm rha 127/76/152mm layout and angle it to 75 degrees vertical. I do believe that configuration should be able to stop the effective equivalent to 600mm of standard NERA armour

How would a DU penetrator change the simulation? (Because DU does not suffer from head deformation, but keeps the nose geometry iff build correctly)

@jonny2954

2 жыл бұрын

Modern tungsten alloy penetrators do the same.

@mgeb101

2 жыл бұрын

@@jonny2954 oh nice! Any pointer to some publication where this is discussed? (Because I really could not find anything in that regard)

wow steel is impressive, its 2.45 times lighter but was only about 21% worse at stopping penetration.

What is the weight of each of those thicknesses penetrated? Who cares how deep the round penetrates, but how heavy is the armor?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Please check the description of the video. All armor weight details are mentioned.

What about Titanium?

How come there is no cope cage?

My dad worked as a tank crew member in Afghanistan

what alluminium alloy have you used in yiur simulation? 6061 T6? 6082T6? 2017A T4? 2024 T3? 2024 T4? 5083? (with wich hardening?) 5059? 7049? 7075 T6? ABT 101? ABT 102? because not all allu alloys have the same properties

@adriandumitrascu4292

2 жыл бұрын

if i am not wrong is should not matter since due to high friction penetrating road will melt thru rather then force thru. and aluminum has low melting point no matter the grade.

@gamecubekingdevon3

2 жыл бұрын

@@adriandumitrascu4292 i am not sure that, at such speed, that the melting will have time to properly occur

разве уран не мягок как железо и сплавы с ним?

who the hell is playing drums on cookware in background?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Noise corrected !

Ah yes the freebrams with depleted uranium armor

How about Nanolaminate armor?

W alloy are no differ than DU. But DU is free element , it's waste from nuclear reactor. If one want to do penetrator with such poisoning as DU, he would made W-alloy with aft part being blend waste U238 or Pu.

what about titanium?

What about comparing the same weight of armor? What about Aluminium oxynitride?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Will try one more simulation.

How the crew survive from uranium exposure when their tank using depleted uranium as armor?

@Reactordrone

2 жыл бұрын

It's depleted, so almost all U238 which is mostly an alpha emitter. The paint can stop the radiation.

What software do you use??

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

ANSYS !

@KingMidas281

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you I’m new to this

@KingMidas281

2 жыл бұрын

Is it the Ansys Discovery 3D Simulation Software

So what's the difference in weight to penetration between these

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Will measure and mention in the description.

how does tungsten have a higher penetration percentage with a lower penetration depth of 5mm compared to depleted uranium

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Hi ! Please check the description for type error details.

@DJ_GrimDark

2 жыл бұрын

@@extremeengineeringsimulati5627 ah I see

Depleted uranium is still dangerous for humans, right? If so, where cpuld it be used as armor?

@warcrimemenace6292

2 жыл бұрын

Modern tanks already use it, including the m1a2 abrams, theres a lot of ways to handle the radiation

Song?

i want this as a game.

How is it it pentrated 329mm of uranium and 324mm of tungsten but it penetrated 47% of the tungsten andc46% of the uranium?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Please check the description for typo error details.

Tungsten is 7x more dense but 2.16x more resistant. If weight is a factor then wouldn't aluminum make more sense?

Tungsten actually performed the best if you look closely interesting

Why is depleted uranium better than tungsten alloy? A tungsten alloy with a little bit of iron and nickel is the strongest metal on earth yet it loses to uranium?

Why does it say uranium is most effective when it goes through more of it than the tungsten?

@extremeengineeringsimulati5627

2 жыл бұрын

Please check description for typo error

Is ceramic armor used in tanks?

@Reactordrone

2 жыл бұрын

Yes. Chobham and Dorchester armour use ceramic composites.

Now do mithril, adamantium and vibranium.

Having the sabot disintegrate inside the armor is convenient for the viewers but that's definitely not what would happen to it. It would simply slow down and stop inside the armor in a badly deformed shape that is far different from its original one.

@Blox117

2 жыл бұрын

no way, we thought it would fly into narnia

do a test with titanium

It always frustrates me how these programs can never correctly simulate the self sharpening qualities of depleted uranium apfsds

@matthiuskoenig3378

2 жыл бұрын

120mm l23a1 is a tungsten alloy round not not a DU penatrator. So your comment is irrelevant to the topic

@themadlad5913

2 жыл бұрын

@@matthiuskoenig3378 my bad I was under the assumption that it was depleted uranium. Would it be possible that you could run a test with something like… 120mm m885?

Challenger 2 has Tungsten in it's armour makeup.

@jonny2954

2 жыл бұрын

Also a 70 mm steel-only lfp lol

Hmm yes uranium armour