Slashdot Mirror


Liquid Armor the New Bulletproof Vest

kjh1 writes "Armor Holdings Inc. plans to start selling their 'liquid armor' next year. The new armor, originally envisioned to be spread on like peanut butter, is instead sprayed onto Kevlar in ultrathin coats. From the article: 'it's a mix of polyethylene glycol, a polymer found in laxatives and other consumer products, and nanobits of silica, or purified sand. Together they produce a "sheer-thickening liquid" that stiffens instantly into a shield when hit hard by an object. It reverts to its liquid state just as fast when the energy from the projectile dissipates.'"

16 of 629 comments (clear)

  1. Video link by skurk · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's a video on break.com where you can see the liquid armor in action - it's pretty amazing:
    clicky

    --
    www.6502asm.com - Code 6502 assembly or.. DIE!!
    1. Re:Video link by corychristison · · Score: 4, Informative

      Great....

      So I have the choice of one DRM infested video, or another DRM infested video wrapped in a Flash Movie. Thank you. :-P

      I was forced to see it in a slightly different version of the DRM infested video wrapped in a Flash Movie. ;-)

    2. Re:Video link by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're right. The only "extra" energy is elastic recoil from the material, and that is not amplified. Getting "extra" force off an impact would violate conservation of energy.

      The real reason it's better to have it bounce off is that the energy of impact is distributed over a wider area. Sure, getting shot in the nuts with no protection but this armor is going to put your childbearing days to an end, but it's probably not going to kill you, as opposed to the massive tissue damage that would result in getting shot with no protection. the bullet might go all the way through (thus imparting less energy) but everything between the point where it entered and the point where it exited would be hamburger, and an area in diameter proportional to the caliber of the bullet would suffer serious shock damage.

      The way this stuff will end up being used, is over certain strategic pieces of hard armor, so the problem with transferring more energy to a delicate area will be minimized, and the type of protection can change from heavy plates (which have to be able to stop a bullet themselves) to kinetic padding to distribute impact. The advantage of being able to wear full body armor that is light and breathable cannot be overstated. Currently you can only wear very little armor because of the weight, which increases casualties from things like shrapnel which would be little more than a nuisance to someone wearing a suit of this stuff.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:Video link by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

      No no, didn't you read the grandparent? When the bullet hits your nuts, your nuts punch back with twice the force of impact doubling the energy of the equation, which means the bullet flies off at between 4600 and 6000fps with no deflection (of course), so it's almost certain to blow a hole the size of (conservatively) a bowling ball in the unlucky terrorist who decided unwisely to try and take on your nuts.

      Unfortunately the doubled energy of the equation causes your nuts to collapse into a singularity which is at least as bad as getting shot in the nuts with no armor, and maybe even worse. //Not sure what it is about people and Newtonian physics...Your post made me laugh out loud.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  2. Re:Custard by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Informative

    If the clothing is loose enough the knife/point object would still penetrate the skin, it just would be taking the fabric along for the ride.

    I read awhile back (old wives tale maybe?) that being stabbed while wearing kevlar isn't always going to protect you as the knife does not have to penetrate the kevlar to penetrate the skin, especially cavity areas.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  3. Oobleck by david.given · · Score: 3, Informative

    This stuff sounds like a dilatant.

    Kitchen experiment: take some cornflour and some water. Mix one part of water to about two parts of cornflour until you get a thick paste. Play with it.

    If you apply gentle pressure, it behaves like a fluid. If you apply strong pressure, it abruptly solidifies. Scoop up a handful and throw it at something, and it'll bounce. Drop something heavy into a bucket of it and it'll sink.

    Beach sand also manifests this behaviour, under certain situations; occasionally you can find a patch of heavily waterlogged sand that's rock hard when you walk across it, but if you stand still you slowly find yourself sinking in.

    Disclaimer: cornflour almost certainly does not make good body armour.

  4. Re:Better armor = better weapons by Detritus · · Score: 3, Informative

    Armor-piercing bullets tend to create less damaging wounds than soft bullets that are designed to expand upon impact and dump all of their energy quickly.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  5. Re:Magic Chocolate by FirienFirien · · Score: 5, Informative

    The eggs one won't work, because the eggshell is rigid, and so provides no shear force on the coating. The trampoline one should work, but the effect you'd feel is negligible - this stuff works well at the speed of bullets, but at that small thickness you'd get little effect at the speed of a person's bounce. If you could get bubbles to work, then they'd still pop - they'd just pop slowly, since as the sides pull away from the initial point of zero thickness they'd cap their own speed.

    Yeah, I did projects on this stuff. You can make some yourself with 1 part water and 1.44 parts cornflour; put it in at 1:1.3, then continue to add the rest of the flour while pouring. It'll get difficult to mix (don't do it in a machine, you'll break the machine, it's like stirring rocks at that speed) but a minute of perseverance will give you something you can bounce your thumb off or sink your finger in. Good fun. Kids love it, and it's easy to clean off; if it gets onto clothes then it just rinses out.

    --
    Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
  6. Re:Other Applications by klaun · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is a common fallacy when people have just a rudimentary understanding of physics and no other applicable

    example of this would be an M1 Abrams vs a small Toyota.

    heaviest vehicle with a strong frame that you can possibly find.

    Your example relies on a signficant difference in mass as well as overall rigidity of the two vehicles in question. Deformable frames being about absorbing energy (and momentum, being an inelastic collision) in an impact. An M1 brings way more Kinetic Energy to the impact than can be absorbed by a deforming frame of a Toyota.

    The safety of the passengers is dependent on how quickly the vehicle passenger compartment decelerates, as that will determine with what force they impact the interior of the vehicle (the so-called "second impact"). The M1 will not decelerate very much, but it is because of the mass disparity, not that it is rigid.

    Obviously a crumple zone cannot absorb an unlimited amount of energy, but up to the amount it can absorb it is definitely good for you, whether you are hitting something rigid or not.

  7. Re:Other Applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, this is not true. I've got some friends who do car safety analysis all the time and they say that a modern crumple zone + rigid passenger egg is safer than a rigid car or light truck in a collision - the crumple zone absorbs most of its car's energy and the rigid car flips over.

    There are many dead SUV drivers to disprove your claim.

  8. Re:First real users will be... by Broken+scope · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except 3 rounds from a 45. planted square on his chest will either A: Knock him on his ass. B: Bruise his chest and wind him C: If your lucky pop his sternum D: All of the above Body armor just makes it so the round doesn't kill you. It still hurts like hell. Your body is still absorbing the energy of the round.

    --
    You mad
  9. Re:Gloves by im_mac · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've actually played with some of this stuff (I know the people who developed this, and by the way, there's no hyphen in Delaware, despite what BusinessWeek thinks) and yes, I don't see why they couldn't make butchers' gloves out of it. One of the easy demos they do is give you an ice pick and two pieces of kevlar and ask you to puncture each sheet. You can stab the ice pick through the normal kevlar but not through the shear-thickening fluid treated one. That should provide some protection against sudden knife slips that butchers might experience.

  10. Non-Newtonain Fluids by florescent_beige · · Score: 4, Informative

    I became suspicious when I read the phrase "nano bits of silica". Nano technology my big toe: that's a marketing flourish.

    The article mentions that this is a sheer thickening fluid, what they probably mean is shear thickening. That would be a fluid where the coefficient of viscosity increases with increasing strain rates, instead of remaining the classically Newtonian constant. In this case it's probably because the glycol tangles around the silica particles and can't untangle quickly.

    While it's quite possible the material can become a semi-solid for the brief duration of a dynamic impact there is no reason to believe, and lots of reasons to not to believe, it becomes a particularly strong solid. In a particulate reinforced composite, which this is in its pseudo-solid state, the matrix (the ethylene glycol) is important to the strength and being a simple organic molecule it's strength must be on the same order of, say, polyethylene.

    TFA itself infers this, noting the original idea of using the material itself (in peanut-butter mode) didn't work out. Instead it is employed as the matix in a conventional fiber composite using Kevar or Spectra or something like that as the workhorse.

    As in all conventional fiber composites, the fiber bears the load, the matrix supports the fiber. In this case the support, I conjecture, amounts to preventing the fibers from displacing away from the impact point, probably allowing fewer layers of fiber to absorb a given impact energy.

    Whle this is innovative and a good idea, it's hardly liquid armour. What I would hope for and maybe expect is better performance against pointy, hard, teflon-coated projectiles of the cop-killer variety which work by nosing the fibers out of the way.

    --
    Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
    1. Re:Non-Newtonain Fluids by technococcus · · Score: 5, Informative

      Teflon-coated bullets are teflon coated to reduce barrel wear, not to provide any performance increase with respect to penetrative capabilities. Other lubricants are often used, but teflon works very well even with high velocity projectiles. Handloaders who shoot USPSA/IPSC handgun competitions often lube their bullets to decrease wear on their 1000USD high-polish barrels. "Cop-killer" is a sensationalist name first applied to Teflon-coated bullets and later to Jacketed Hollow Points when that term was all the rage in the liberal media. Remember, only YOU can prevent the spread of FUD!

  11. What about Ringworld? by spun · · Score: 3, Informative

    Larry Niven's Known Space series has armor exactly like this, that stiffens on impact. The only thing the armor has in common with Dune is that a slow impact gets through, IIRC in Dune they used some kind of force field. Larry describes what it's like to try to run in a suit like this while being peppered with automatic gunfire. Kinda funny. I don't think the Dune force fields stiffened up and made you fall over while being shot...

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  12. Energy, yes. Momentum, not so much... by khayman80 · · Score: 3, Informative
    You're right about energy transfer. A bullet bouncing off really DOES carry away its kinetic energy, rather than depositing it in the armor as heat or deformation or pressure waves. Momentum, on the other hand, is a different story...

    Point #1: Momentum is a vector quantity. This means that a bullet approaching a person from the left and a bullet leaving said person, heading right, have totally different momentum vectors.

    Point #2: In situations where outside forces can be ignored (such as a bullet impact), momentum is said to be "conserved". This means that any momentum change the bullet experiences has to be equal and opposite to the momentum change the person experiences. A bullet of mass "m" which is travelling to the right at speed "v" has momentum "mv" (taking the direction "right" to be positive). Similarly, the same bullet travelling to the left at speed "v" has momentum "-mv". Therefore, a bullet which ricochets off at its initial speed has TWICE the momentum change compared to a bullet which simply stops. As a result, the person has to experience double the momentum change as well.

    This means that a ricochet imparts MORE momentum to the target than an embedded bullet would, which is (as another poster remarked) why solar sails are reflective.