This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
abrams doesnt have integrate spall liners and this has been proven
however the crew where given kevlar vest or “spall vest” which is a modifcation ingame. Under the heli modifications name spall vest
2 Likes
ok vlaka
Doesn’t change the fact that the T-90M isn’t good.
4 Likes
Sure, it’s not a Liner by the conventional definition, but there are elements that perform a similar Spall reduction function.
Chobham, of which the initial NERA array that the M1’s use is based off. Includes plastic element(s) in the Composite matrix? Further why are each of the special armor composite elements in the Cross-sections all composed of three distinct layers, let alone referred to as a “tri-plate element” by the document itself?
Where exactly? I’ve presented evidence to the contrary above. I’d love to see a proper explanation, of it’s contents.
2 Likes
You can ask people that has been in service of the Abrams that actually serve in it
you can @ Conte_Barraca if you want
1 Like
In game spall is msot of the time only calculated from the back plate, so the composite matrix doesnt generate spall at all.
1 Like
They could still replicate the impact that it would have by reducing the critical angle of the cone of spalling that is generated, and by changing the ratio of the size of fragments to reduce the quantity of small fragments.
Or by simply adding a coefficient that controls the overall damage spread that can be done by any particular fragment
2 Likes
Still shouldnt change how it behaves after it hits the back plate, aside from the reduction of penetration that experiences before the backplate, as all the spalling that would be generated in this nera array doesn’t have an impact in the game to begin with, also larger fragments that have a higher angles are generated at the interior surface of the plate, where they actually break of due to shear stress and does not desintegrate from the abrasion of the round itself forming smaller higher velocity particles.
And if we are honest this nera arrays would actually increase the fragmentation when they impact thinner backplates as they tip of the rounds gets deformed and they have a affects a larger area overall.
1 Like
Only because of concessions to the game engine and to avoid edge cases where many interior elements are struck causing cascading fragment generation events, and anyway if that were the case why are regular spall liners modeled in the first place, after all it’s the exact same thing occurring, just that the very last layer is air instead of yet more metal.
Function based on excess penetration, caliber, and thickness of the plate penetrated.
And if it was all DU rounds would practically be guaranteed one-shots due to its pyrophoric characteristics and subsequent after-armor incendiary effects instantaneously causing fires in the penetrated compartment.
What are you smoking? and comparing it to what exactly; a monolithic Block of RHA, ERA (of what form)? and they would be equivocated by same, Weight? Volume? RHAe against KE /CE? Cost? The number of backplates?
They effectively reduce spalling in a few ways;
Each subsequent layer limits the transfer of impact stresses to following element by repeatedly changing the density of the medium thus effectively forcefully dissipating additional energy from the impact by generating reflection boundaries internal to each composite element that the penetrator traverses.
Compounds the angle of attack of the penetrator forcing it to penetrate more material during transit as it deforms and is acted upon due to transverse shock of the repeated impacts, and growing misalignment between the two bending the penetrator
They control the upper limit of generated (torn out) fragment size, as it is a function of plate thickness as internal stress will be maximized at a boundary approximating the ratio of the speed of sound to the thickness of the monolithic element.
Depending on the specific properties of the backing layer selected they can significantly retard the energy imparted to generated spall as it is required to overcome the material’s Resilience & Ductility in order to continue on to the next layer, removing particles that have lower levels of imparted kinetic energy (either low mass or velocity)
Sure mushrooming of the penetrator increases the diameter of the tip but also reduces the stresses imparted to the plate significantly as the effected cross section scales with r^2 , thus less energy is retained per penetrated layer of composite if for example comparing W vs DU variants of a similar construction.
2 Likes
“Still shouldnt change how it behaves after it hits the back plate, aside from the reduction of penetration that experiences before the backplate”, the only thing that would affect the previous nera elements to the backplate would be the decrease of penetration, and in a more realistic scenarion the integrity of the round proper
Not a thing exclusive to DU, it may have self ignite with higher larger particles, but even thanks of the heat form the impact they can still produce fires in the inside, also the smaller diameter particles of both tungsten and steel can self ignite aswell, sure du may be better but tungsten heeps having incendiary properties.
The higher misalignment on a round capable of penetration the array, the larger the area that it is going to affect said backplate, and on a thinner ones the leger area would without a doubt produce far more spall than the same bacplate againt a intact one.
The reduction of stress due to the larger area also proliferate the detachment spalling of a larger size that proyects at even have even higher angles, as im talking about full penetrations
I lterally said it, nera elements with thin backplate, the best example of this, although they are not tecknically nera, are the russian arrays, would without a doubt increase the spall compraed to ones with larger backplates or with monolithic arrays on a full penetration due to the much larger diameters of the actual penetration,
1 Like
But that is the point, as things are currently implemented, internal ballistics processes occurring within the NERA array are not modeled at all and treated as a single impact.
If the internal (not interior) spall liner functionality were to be implemented, there would be less excess energy, thus reduced after armor effects of the penetrator going though the backplate as additional energy would be removed before entering the fighting compartment in comparison to current modeling would reduce it’s post-penetration capacity to damage modules.
I never said it was, but we do have evidence that for example DM53A1 replaces the tracer with an incendiary module so After-Armor effect is obviously something that was felt to be sufficiently lacking in comparison solely relying on W’s inherent properties, or potentially as future proofing (potentially against insensitive propellant’s propagation into threat systems).
But commensurately spreading the spalling over a larger area and so doesn’t actually increase it’s prevalence so ignoring literal “edge cases”, and increasing the angle of incidence improves plate performance.
And as such, if Energy is required to defeat the plate is held constant the spall comparatively has a lower velocity since the ejected mass increases, and so is more readily stopped by subsequent layers.
Or additional energy is transferred from the penetrator into the plate and so it has less energy for subsequent to penetrate elements resulting in less energy available upon penetrating the backplate, doing less damage.
With either assertion, a lower sectional, density decreases a projectile’s energy efficiency.
Well, NERA is more so a family of composite armor schema, that is designed around dynamic elements (that do not involve explosives) so they are fairly similar in that sense, that they tend to outperform monolithic RHA in most cases.
It’s not really a fair comparison as the shear difference in density of both solutions should make obvious that you get much more protection per meter of depth out of Western designs simply because of both greater mass budget dedicated to armor, and a much higher weight limit for the respective tanks. After all, it is nearly twice the weight (~40 ton vs ~75) and as such with a constant energy penetrator the conclusion should be obvious, that the solution with more mass per area tends to perform better.
Where do the various tanks lie on that continuum though? It’s not as if the Abrams has a small backplate ( about ~100mm), and that doesn’t account for subsequent elements that the penetrator may pass though like the fuel tanks, or dual-hardness structural bulkheads that should also limit spalling internally, but are modeled as regular RHA in game, but don’t benefit from the thin plate modifier (internal bulkheads of less than 8mm RHAe don’t spall) due to being 19mm thick, and as such would undo much of the work that these change would do.
Cross-Sections
2 Likes
It doesn’t have the curtain-style liners, yes. It does have spall liners integrated into the armor package that work by reducing the amount of spall generated by a penetration.
Not true, the spall liner absorbs parts of the shockwave generated by the penetration, which then lowers the force on the innermost plate and therefore lowers the amount of spall generated and the angle at which it is ejected from the armor.
Stress is a function of force and area. If the force remains the same and the area increases, the stress experienced by whatever the penetrator hits is lessened.
???
As far as I know, this isn’t actually true. In the case of a full penetration, a thicker armor plate will have more mass for the penetrator to pull along with it (and additionally the angle of material from the armor taken along for the ride is larger).
1 Like
Ha.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
No. Either uptier it or leave it where it is.
Cute flag. I’m still 9000% right.
Exept this doest applies to apfsds, this would only really affects to hesh or large he, where where it actually generates a large shock at the very other end of the plate where this claimed integrated spall liner would be, apfsds are continuosly producing a force trough the material, this integrated era wouldnt really hace any effects form the stress that the, lets say, 30 mm of the material from a 100 mm plate would experience, as the initial “shock” that the apfsds could theoretically produce is long gone by the time tha round actually gets close to that area, and the potential initial “shocks” of an apfsds isnt rally close to produce any kind of spalling at at the other side of the plate.
Exept the force isnt really the same… due to the lager area the round would decelerate much faster, it might not be a linear correlation with the area, but the force isnt the same, also im talking about thin pates, where this larger area would produce a physically larger penetration, as the parts that are misaligned can still penetrate the armor by themselves, on larger plates this doesnt happens as the plate would be enough to stop does, and only the “aligned” parts of the round would make a full penetration.
Apfsds doesnt reelly “pull” any material for most of its travel, it does"push" material at the very end, as most of the material that is in the way gets abrased, rallistically after a certain point, they would produce around the same spall, granted that the round still have some sustancial energy left, sure very thin plates will generate much less spall, but after a certain point the they the spalling will flatline, compared to thickness.
The APFSDS round penetrating and moving through the armor creates a shockwave as it either pushes material out of the way or pushes/pulls material along with it (depending on the shape of the fragments of the armor and/or penetrator). The shockwave caused by the APFSDS would be lessened as it comes into contact with the integrated spall liner, which would lower the area of effect the shockwave would have on the innermost plate (and therefore reduce the amount of spall generated).
As a plate’s angle increases the area of the plate that would be pushed outwards by the penetrator is larger, but thinner plates spall less because there is less material to be pushed and/or pulled along with the penetrator. Basically, as the thickness of a plate increases the amount of spall will increase (assuming the round penetrates).
It depends on what you mean by “push” and “pull,” where I’m saying that “pulling” is any material that isn’t directly in the path of the projectile. An example of the extra material “pulled” along is here: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA507994.pdf
The amount of spall generated increased as the thickness of the plate increased, as did the size of the spall ring (and therefore the spall cone behind the plate).
1 Like
Where exaclty are you placing this integrated spall liner?
The thing is that im comparing two plates with the same thickness, one with a nera composite array before it and other without it, on the plates that it’s hitt by a misaligned round would generate more spall that the other plate with the thickness with a round intact, as long as the plate isnt thick enough where they only part of that actually penetrates is the part intact
The thing is that a lot of the mass that in the isnt directly in the way of the rod isnt really pulled by the round but they go “away” form the round and some of it is proyected backwards, while a lot of the material that is directly on the way is eroded by the round itself, also in that same document shows how a lot of the spall is generated by the last bit of travel like i was saying which is the ones that actually forms larger size fragments.
Also im not saying that thinner plates would generate more spall, rather at some point the amount of spall generated will flatline, aka that they dont follow a linear progression with thickness, what i mean is that for example a 500 mm plate would likely generate a similar spall than a 600 mm plate granted a similar residual velocity of the proyectile
Red is the outer composite, green is the integrated spall liner, yellow is the innermost plate (which is basically just used to weld things to it):
It would potentially create more spall within the armor array itself, but most of the fragments of the armor broken off in the armor array would just get stuck inside the armor array (and never get into the crew compartment or go very far from their original position in the array).
The bits that get pulled along are in the accompanying image to that one, where the green parts at the top and bottom get tugged along even though they aren’t directly hit by the penetrator.
1 Like
The thing is, in that array would the Yellow area would represent the backplate?, if so i dont see how the Integrated spall liner would have affect in game, as the penetration is calculated just by the last plate already, so it wouldnt really be able to “absorbe” any shock that is generated in that plate itself.
The absorption IRL would have the effect of lessening the amount of spall generated, and in game this could be implemented by lowering the number of spall fragments generated and lowering the angle of the spall cone (maybe not as much as the curtain liners, since there isn’t anything I could find on the comparative effectiveness of the Abrams’ specific liner to the traditional style, but a lowering in general would be accurate).
1 Like