Optimization of target thickness and investigation on the effect of heat treatment on the ballistic performance of aluminium alloy 7075 targets against hard steel core projectile

• Published in: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part L, Journal of materials, design and applications Journal of materials, design and applications, 2023-01, Vol.237 (1), p.131-143
• Main Authors: Praveen, Rajendran, Koteswara Rao, Sajja Rama, Kumar, Saurabh Suresh, Suresh Kumar, Sundaram
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aluminum base alloys; Antiballistic materials; Armored vehicles; Ballistic penetration; Impact response; Microhardness; Optical microscopy; Optimization; Penetration; Projectiles; Solution heat treatment; Target thickness; Terminal ballistics; Work hardening
• ISSN: 1464-4207; 2041-3076
• DOI: 10.1177/14644207221105365

Optimization of target thickness and influence of heat treatment condition on the high velocity impact response of aluminium alloy 7075 targets have been determined. Both experimental and numerical studies were conducted using a 7.62 mm hard steel core projectile. The numerical simulation used a 7.62 mm Ogival nose shaped projectile with a target thickness ranging from 20 to 26 mm. High velocity impact experiments on T651 and solution treated targets, with rolled plate thicknesses ranging from 21 to 25 mm were carried out to validate the numerical findings. The microhardness of the targets was measured using Vicker's microhardness tester and fractographs were examined using a scanning electron microscope. The projectile penetrated regions were analyzed using light microscopy. A good correlation between the numerical and experimental ballistic behaviour of aluminium alloy 7075 targets was observed and an optimum target thickness of 21 and 24 mm was observed for the T651 and solution treated targets to prevent the projectile's penetration. It was also noted that, after the projectile's impact, solution treated targets had higher microhardness compared to T651 condition targets. This is due to higher work hardening of solution treated targets near the penetration channel. Even though T651 targets have a lower depth of penetration compared to solution treated targets, ‘splintering’ failure of the T651 targets is observed. In contrast, ‘petalling’ and ‘plugging’ kinds of failures were noticed on the solution treated targets. Thus, solution treatment of ballistic targets may enhance the ballistic limit of armoured vehicles.