Have you thought about how the plating would be put together? Maybe interlocking layers, it makes them hard to get apart, or break.

This isn't half bad. You guys may just get there eventually.

Hey, I haven't seen you in a while Mechanist! Where did you go?

Only if you can get a big enough box to send them in.

He's the same assclown that did this...

http://www.therlsh.net/the-lounge-f6/holy-phucktardery-batman-t1169.htm?highlight=phucktardery

Steel Fist completed testing of the batch of base materials, and got some unexpected results. All the polyethylene samples failed, even the 3/4" VHMWPE and 1/2" UHMWPE. The 1/2" polycarbonate (which I expected might fail) actually held up to the .357. This goes along with what Maple Defender found when testing body armor for the Canadian army. Polycarbonate performed very well, and UHMWPE didn't meet expectattions. 1/2" is pretty thick for body armor, but it will give us some options. Some light gauge steel will be needed for structure on the front and back anyway, so I'm going to see if that will help enough to allow a reduction in thickness.

Much heavier gauge steel will be needed for the front, but then spalling becomes a possibility, so a layer of polycarbonate over the top of that which CAN be easily penetrated will be needed to catch spall. Spalling can be fatal for the wearer of the armor and the bystanders. I believe Thanatos posted a pic of some poor bastard he found that was wearing armor but got killed by spalling from buckshot.

Once we get some good test results, I'll make 6" samples and see how they take a tight grouping, shots near the edge, and the circumstances of failure from multiple strikes.

This is going to work.

The next batch is being prepped for shipment. Thicknesses of polycarbonate varying from 3/16" to 1/2" with 22 or 16 gauge weldable steel. Some have the 22 gauge in the back as well for structural support. There is an additional layer of 1/16" polycarbonate over the front steel plate to help catch spalling. There are 1/2" polycarbonate samples with 1/4" tinted abrasion resistant layers both flush and with a gap between so I can evaluate their usefulness as goggles/face shield combinations.

I still have to add the foam backing on these. I bolted them together because it was actually much less hassle than using adhesives. The ones that fail might actually hold together well enough for shipping and hopefully won't be in pieces. Just in case they have labeled bags and go back in them for easy identification.

These are going to be subjected to .357 only, and I'm hoping Steel Fist can get some FMJ ammo to test its additional penetration. Sticking to the revolver will also be less wear and tear on his thumb. Constant reloading of clips can be a real pain.

Are you sure 1/16" is enough for the spalling?

Very helpful. Thanks.

Gadgetastic!

I don't expect much in the way of spalling, but if lateral spall does manage to tear through then I can go 1/8" on that. I've alerted Steel Fist to the fact that spalling is a possibility. Boxing the sample with boards will keep the shooter safe during testing.

also boxing it in will give another way of seeing if shrapnel does shoot off.

Ready and waiting for another shipment.

A note, With most of the testing I have done, I have noticed that most of the armor that IS getting penetrated, the round is entering the sample and then expanding. When it comes to the .357, the round was too soft to penetrate then expand, it would expand on contact.

These new plates could most likely resist a penetrating round from a lesser weapon, due to the layered steel of the sample.

Just my two cents.

Yeah, that is why I want to see some FMJ ammo used. Perhaps I can do some samples of the polyethylene materials with a steel front. Those materials suffer from 'creep' anyway so would need the structural support as well.

When you tested these materials, how were they set? Against a hard surface, balistics gel, free-hang?

Gadgetastic!

Against a dirt backing.

They also include a 3/8" dense foam backing, the same stuff I used on the arm bracer project.

I managed to get out during lunch and mail the next sample batch, as well as pick up the last ones.

Steel Fist hit it right on the head there. The polycarbonate (and perhaps other) samples had the tensile strength to ablate the total kinetic energy, but were penetrated due to the tip of the bullet being mostly intact. This is evidenced by VERY little size difference between the entry and exit on the samples.

I believe the steel reinforced samples will tell a different story. With the tip impacted and the PSI at the point of impact much lower, the total kinetic energy should be easily dealt with by a number of the samples.

I'm no expert in this field so don't laugh, but what about using d30 for the backing? It might help protect a wearer from kinetic energy, and with the materials of the plate slowing down the bullet somewhat, might provide a last ditch-probally won't work but what the hell its better then nothing-effort to stop the round.

The thing with non-Newtonian liquids is response time from impact to reaction.

Problem with them is that the bullet travels many orders of magnitude faster than a fist or bat, and simply does not have enough time to harden when the bullet strikes it.

A polyethylene glycol and silica mixture MIGHT might have response times fast enough to stop bullets, but don't quote me on that.

D30 just can't work in the area of bullet stopping.