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.'"

59 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 BarryNorton · · Score: 4, Funny

      So how would this have protected his Sergeant's groin?

      "What are you doing, soldier?"

      "Painting my groin, sir..."

    2. Re:Video link by Agent00Wang · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That video is pretty neat. Maybe there could be an application on rigid surfaces like reinforced windows and such.

      --
      NINJA SPIRIT - The Ancient Art of Insanity
    3. 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. ;-)

    4. Re:Video link by AndersOSU · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not really, polyetylene glycol (PEG) != ethylene glycol.

      But anyway, both PEG, and sand are really cheap, so depending on what is published you should be able to make this at home if you are so inclined.

      I'd also expect the DuPont company to try to bring this to market - maybe in their auto paints? I'd be willing to bet they provided significant funding based on the fact that the demo utilized kevlar, and that the research was done at the university of delaware.

      I wonder how simple this really is, while PEGs vary greatly in molecular weight, and there is an infinite span of concentrations, really, knowing only what the video told us, anyone with an interest should be able to figure it out.

    5. Re:Video link by CaseyB · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, because when they say "bounce off", they obviously mean that it reflects the bullets away perfectly at their original speeds. Hence, they are *doubling* the energy of the impact in the perfectly ideal billiard-ball reaction that happens every time a bullet hits the armour in real life.

      Of course, they also have the benefit that whenever someone shoots at the armour, the bullet is bounced directly back down the barrel of their gun, possibly killing them.

    6. Re:Video link by kkwst2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your logic is indeed false. First, it is arriving with a velocity and an associated momentum, not a force. Force is imparted on the bullet to change it's momentum and direction. Thus if it's really bouncing in the opposite direction, then twice the energy is required to stop it is imparted to the armor. See the sarcastic reply under yours for why this is unlikely the case. Most fo the time it would likely be deflecting off, requiring less energy than that required to stop the bullet. However, this still tells you nothing of the force. The peak force imparted to the bullet will be determined by the interaction of the bullet with the armor and contact time of the bullet with the armor. However, it's not even the force that you care about, it's the pressure imparted to the tissue. This will be determined by how the force is distributed over the armor. The force will be much greater if it's distributed over a 1 cm^2 area as opposed to a 1 m^2 area. To sum up, it's complicated and you can't draw conclusions of the performance of this armor by whether it "bounces off" or not.

    7. 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.
    8. Re:Video link by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I'd also expect the DuPont company to try to bring this to market - maybe in their auto paints?
      Sorry? What use is a paint that stays liquid until struck by a sharp blow?
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. 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.
    10. Re:Video link by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can we ... PLEASE... stop talking about groin shots?!??

      Thanks.

  2. Other Applications by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ok, forget the bulletproof vests, because I'll never need one. But how much would it cost to coat your car in this stuff? And would it give extra protection?

    1. Re:Other Applications by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But how much would it cost to coat your car in this stuff? And would it give extra protection?

      Nope, not if it's your safety you're worried about, rather than the cars. You want the car to deform, so your decelleration slows down. Just like a helmet, you want it to break so you don't.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    2. Re:Other Applications by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True story: I had a neighbour who just could not grasp this concept. They'd heard about a modern car which had crumpled really badly in a relatively minor accident, writing it off. They'd therefore decided that older cars built like brick outhouses were far "better", because you might still have a car after the accident.

      Try as I might, complete with diagrams and models, I could not get across the idea that this was a good thing, and that had the car not done the crumpling, the passengers would have - and who cares if the car's repairable when everyone in it's dead?

    3. Re:Other Applications by mobby_6kl · · Score: 3, Funny

      > Ok, forget the bulletproof vests, because I'll never need one.

      Never say never!

    4. Re:Other Applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Try as I might, complete with diagrams and models, I could not get across the idea that this was a good thing, and that had the car not done the crumpling, the passengers would have - and who cares if the car's repairable when everyone in it's dead?

      This is a common fallacy when people have just a rudimentary understanding of physics and no other applicable knowledge. A car that crumples well is only definitely better when it's car vs much more massive stationary solid object (e.g., a rock face). When it's two cars, however, it's more like the game theory example of the prisoner's dilemma. If both cars crumple well, then it's fairly good for both. If, however, one vehicle is both more rigid and more massive—something common to older cars—then the situation is greatly weighted in that vehicle's favor. An extreme example of this would be an M1 Abrams vs a small Toyota.

      Thus, if you don't give a shit about the other guys as long as your kids are safe, and you're not a drunk/wreckless driver that is likely to slam into a building/rock face/telephone pole/whatever, the safest option may well be the biggest, heaviest vehicle with a strong frame that you can possibly find.
    5. Re:Other Applications by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Funny

      if ... you're not a drunk/wreckless driver that is likely to slam into a building/rock face/telephone pole/whatever

      I would think it very unlikely that a driver reckless enough to be likely to slam into buildings or rock faces would remain wreckless for long.

    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:Other Applications by AndersOSU · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The real selling point of this stuff in car finishes wouldn't be that your car is now bullet proof (although that would make a good bullet point in the brochure.)

      Consider this:

      We drove this new Ford(TM) Mustang(TM) with DuPont(TM) Protectoguard(TM) coating on the Jersy turnpike, for 200 miles, in construction, behind a Peterbuilt(TM) dumptruck. We recorded 390 discrete stone strikes. But thanks to the Miricles of Science (TM) there isn't a single paint chip in the finish. Blah Blah Blah. Now that's a BOLD move.(TM)

    9. Re:Other Applications by GalacticCmdr · · Score: 4, Funny
      A couple of friends of mine ran into a M60A2 tank with volkswagen beatle, and I can assure you that any car has plenty of crumple zone when it hits a tank weighing 60-70 tons! Actualy they were quite lucky and both was thrown through the winshield and woke up on top of the tank rather than under it like their car.

      Did these "friends" of yours also happen to have a car full of explosives and yelling "God is Great" when they hit the tank.

      --
      Programming: Its not just a job - its an indenture.
    10. Re:Other Applications by hawg2k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You could try explaining it in dollars and cents, so to speak. I'm sure your insurance companies claims department could explain how medical costs and bodily injury/death related lawsuits tend to cost much more than repair and property damage related lawsuits do.

      Some people don't speak physics, so you just have to find their "language".

      Just a thought.

  3. Okay what the fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    First the military is developing something called an "ultrasonic tourniquet", now somebody is making bulletproof peanut butter?? Fuck this shit, the universe is just too weird right now. I am going to bed.

  4. "a polymer found in laxatives" by Riktov · · Score: 5, Funny

    "it's a mix of polyethylene glycol, a polymer found in laxatives..."

    As if having a gun fired at you isn't enough to make you shit your pants...

  5. Magic Chocolate by dustpuppy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ... they found that the materials worked best when painted on Kevlar in ultrathin coats. By holding the fibers tight like a flexible glue, the compound spreads out the impact of a blow better than fibers alone.
    Imagine the practical jokes you could play with this stuff ... smear a thin coating on eggs and watch as your housemate tries to crack them in the morning. Or smear it on a trampoline ... the more they try and jump up and down, the less bounce they get. Or if you could blow bubbles with this stuff ... would you be able to pop them?
    1. Re:Magic Chocolate by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm wondering if you could effectively immobilize someone wearing this armor by shooting them with a sonic canon.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. 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
    3. Re:Magic Chocolate by FirienFirien · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'd need to have a high enough amplitude and frequency to cause the goop to shear against itself from the sound; I'm not quite sure, but gut feel says you wouldn't need to immobilize them since you'd be doing horrible things to their skin and organs already.

      --
      Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
    4. Re:Magic Chocolate by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but (a) the rigid armor is "flexible" in terms of the joints between the plates, and (b) doesn't cover the whole body - whereas presumably this would be shirt, trousers, the lot. The parent's question was whether they could run in the liquid armor... IE the video states that the liquid solidifies when agitated - are the forces of running enough to trigger the solidification? What about with full battle kit slapping around on your back? Or when you slip in what's left of your buddy's intestines and land flat on your face? Or (as another poster put it) some other applied force may be sufficient to trigger it - sound waves, a blast of air, a sonic boom from a low-flying jet. If the stuff doesn't de-solidify in a hurry then the enemy could have a field day among the now "statuesque" soldiers...

  6. Gloves by Joebert · · Score: 4, Interesting
    While liquid armor seems tailor-made for combat personnel or police, the company is initially targeting prisons because the fabric resists punctures. That means it can protect guards from stabbings, something even a top-of-the-line bulletproof vest can't do.

    Can they produce gloves able to stand up to shark bites ?
    How about gloves for butchers ?
    Would they be cheaper to produce than the steel-ring gloves used today ?
    Are they water proof ?
    How do they react to heat; could they be used in motorcycle clothing ?
    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    1. Re:Gloves by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Funny

      Can they produce gloves able to stand up to shark bites ?

      Thereby forcing sharks to evolve frickin' lasers on their heads.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. 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.

  7. Re:Wolverine by Flounder · · Score: 4, Funny

    But could it stop a lightsaber? Cause you know there's scientists in North Korea working on lightsaber technology. Mr. President, we cannot allow a lightsaber gap!

    --

    No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

  8. Custard by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So basicly they're making military use custard (being gentle will let you penetrate it, but use force and you bounce off). Buug how will this stand up against a knife or a bayonet? I know in the modern era this is more or less mute, but it's still something I'd personally wonder about.

    --
    I like muppets.
    1. 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.
    2. Re:Custard by FST777 · · Score: 4, Funny
      being gentle will let you penetrate it, but use force and you bounce off
      You're sure you're talking about custard?
      --
      Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
    3. Re:Custard by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Where on earth did you grow up that old wives talk about knife-fighting while wearing kevlar?

      --
      I hate printers.
  9. Re:Shear-thickening by Alaria+Phrozen · · Score: 5, Funny

    Product Announcement! New, glistening panty-hose. Shimmering as if they're wet. Catches eyes. Attracts only the daring. Promotes celibacy and abstinence!

    In the heat of the moment, you push her against the wall and kiss. Heat. Fire. Desire. You reach down below her skirt, and trying to be spontanious, rip at her pantyhose... but wait! No satisfying tear or gasp escape from her lips... ... humiliation as you try again and again, unable to even stretch the panty-chasty-hose. The situation goes... limp.

    "Liqui-hose, helping you dodge a bullet every night."

  10. 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.

    1. Re:Oobleck by tumbleweedsi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I saw a thing on Brainiac where they filled a swimming pool full of cornflour and water and got a guy to walk on it... it was ok so long as he kept moving but as soon as he stopped he sank pretty quickly.

      Getting out was pretty hard as the more he pulled the more it turned like concrete... pretty scary if you start sinking in this stuff and have nothing to hang on to!

      --
      Be nice, sponsor me: http://jailbreak.ragabonds.org.uk
  11. Re:First real users will be... by cnettel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You'll still get an impact from the energy alone. You're not thrown back, but certainly hit. I imagine that hundreds of bullets would be enough to cause some quite significant effects anyway. (The total heating alone could be "interesting".)

  12. A Similar idea by 07734 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem is not only the bullet's ability to pierce the armour, but the energy it transfers through the armour. This company : http://www.d3o.com/ use a similar technique but instead of leaving it as liquid, they treat it in a way which turns it into a foam structure. I beat the crap out of a friend's elbows and knees with a shovel while he was wearing d30 stuff, and he didn't feel a thing. It's quite amazing.

  13. ...the slow blade penetrates the shield by ElHorrendo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but look down. We'd have joined each other in death.
        --Dune

  14. 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
  15. Damn, now I'll have to respec by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Funny
    This material (the liquid is only one component, anyway) is protecting against piercing, not crushing.


    Darn. Now I'll have to respec my Rogue to use maces instead of daggers.
    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  17. Re:Gotchas by Frightening · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I stand corrected. View the very nice clicky post at the beginning of the comments to understand how it really works.

    The question is, can it be used (in sufficiently thick amount?) without hard-to-get materials like kevlar? I am really asking if you can make this at home. From the brief vid, it looked like point 5) above is very possible.

  18. Snow Crash by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Sounds like the stuff that Hiro Protagonist wears to deliver pizza..

    "Sintered Armorgel ; feels like gritty jello, protects like a stack of telephone books"

    Maybe they should ask Neal Stephenson about using that as an ad slogan.

  19. 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
  20. Re:You ever notice that in Starship Trooper, the g by codegen · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You ever notice that in Starship Trooper, the guns were basically 20th century? They have these huge space-faring ships and bunch of sooped-up M16s ?

    That was my objection to the movie. If you read the book, they all had mobile armour (and not soft, liquid armour either) with jetpacks and were spread about 100 yards apart when in combat. The only thing in that movie had in common with Heinlien's work was the title

    --
    Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
  21. Re:American SUV? by Fishead · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nice stereotyping.

    What if the prime reason for my big SUV with the big tires, and the skookum bush bar on the front is so I can say, go offroad? I grew up in a remote town, but now due to work I have to live in the city. I drive my bush beast on the road not to intimidate as you say, but rather for my own reasons. I like to throw my boat on the roof and go where few can go. My friends and I found a sweet de-activated logging road one day with trees growing in the middle of the road that were 2 meters tall. Sorry, but your honda civic can stay in the city. There was nobody around for prolly 15km. When I got back to work the next week, I was much less stressed out and misserable. Something about tossing a new propane cylinder in a fire puts a nice close to a sweet adventure! I believe in low impact offroading, but when the trees are in the middle of the road... fair game I say.

    Now, thos SUV's with the low profile tires and chrome bush bars... I agree with you on that.

  22. Re:American SUV? by Skater · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yep, and there are plenty of people that need an SUV for work or whatever. Most anti-SUV people I know don't have a problem with people that actually need something like that. The Chevy Suburban has existed since the 30s or something, LONG before the SUV moniker and hatred appeared, and they've sold models every year they made them.

  23. Re:One Question... by budgenator · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well because it's shear-thickening liquid, the more violent the impact, the more it locks up and spreads out the impact. One market that they are initially targeting is prison guards because the threat to them is from stabbing rather than gunshot or shrapnel, which the liquid armor stops yet remains flexable unlike plate armor that is rigid. The thing that will always annoy you when wearing armor is weight, heat build up and lack of flexability; this stuff should put a dent in all three.

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  24. Re:American SUV? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What if the prime reason for my big SUV with the big tires, and the skookum bush bar on the front is so I can say, go offroad?



    If this is really what you bought it for (and actually do), Congratulations. You are one of the 0.5 % of SUV owners who actually should own an SUV. Unfortunately, 99.5 % of them are owened by soccer moms and men who need to overcompensate for something, and are just endangering us all on the roads, and burning very excessive amounts of gasoline.

  25. Gloves... by waferhead · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Everyone has forgotten their classic SciFi.

    Nice pair of Deerskin gloves with a layer of this inside would make brass knuckles so obsolete...

  26. 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!

  27. 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
  28. 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.