Protective arrangement and procedure with active element

Abstract

The present invention relates to a working element (100) and a method for achieving active or reactive protection against arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles, wherein an arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile is detected from a threat direction (B) and an explosive foil (20) of the working element (100), arranged between a counterweight (30) and a jamming element (10) with a V- or U-shaped metal sheet arrangement, is activated upon detection of the kinetic energy projectile. This causes the jamming element (10) to be accelerated in a direction of 40° to 90° relative to a threat direction (B) of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile, wherein the jamming element (10) forms an X-, Y-, T-, I-, or M-shaped projectile through acceleration by means of the explosive foil (20).

Description

[0001] The invention relates to an active element as active or reactive protection against kinetic energy (KE) projectiles, such as large caliber (GK) arrow ammunition.

[0002] Over the past few decades, the penetration power of kinetic energy projectiles has increased to such an extent that, even with inert armor plating, heavy armored vehicles now require an almost unattainable level of surface weight. Since this trend is expected to intensify further, a number of specialized armor types offering enhanced protection compared to steel of the same mass have been under investigation for years.

[0003] In addition to the use of special protective materials, the so-called reactive armor (Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA)), which has been tested since the early 1970s, led in particular to decisive improvements in protective performance and thus to a reduction in weight per unit area. The principle is that in a sandwich structure consisting of, for example, steel sheet / explosive / steel sheet, the explosive is initiated by the impacting or penetrating projectile, and the correspondingly accelerated steel sheets (plates) produce lateral effects on the penetrating projectile (shaped charge jet or KE penetrator). Due to the very short time available, this acceleration process must not only be initiated very quickly, but correspondingly high plate velocities must also be achieved. For terminal ballistic reasons, for example,For KE projectiles in such planar configurations, a plate velocity of 15% to 30% of the projectile velocity can be achieved, depending on the angle of inclination, to provide sufficient protection. This limits the sheet thickness required for KE projectiles to just a few centimeters.

[0004] Both required conditions, ignition without significant time delay and a very high plate speed, can only be achieved in flat and simply constructed structures using explosives.

[0005] Because the point of impact of the projectile on the reactive protective element is not known with sufficient precision, and because the reactive elements must remain effective against the penetrating threat for a certain period of time, their surface area cannot be reduced arbitrarily. The lateral dimensions of such protective modules, which are already in use on a wide variety of main battle tanks worldwide, are on the order of 0.1 to 0.3 meters. 2 .

[0006] Of particular importance in this context is the so-called specific mass per unit area, or the factor of "equivalent" steel mass / actual steel mass required per unit area (Em factor). It is a measure of the efficiency (mass) of armor plating.

[0007] Another technically very difficult problem with reactive systems is limiting the detonation to a specific area without causing further damage or even a sympathetic detonation of the surrounding protective elements. This, combined with the requirement for the longest possible impact time on the projectile, determines the size of the defensive plates. The resulting very high energy of the accelerated defensive elements means that such systems are primarily applied as so-called modular reactive protective elements to the outer surface of the vehicles to be protected.

[0008] Due to the steadily increasing threat posed by more powerful penetrators with regard to impact geometry and kinetic or chemical energy (e.g., an increase from approximately 8 MJ to 15 MJ and more is conceivable for kinetic energy munitions), concepts have been developed that ensure the impact of the threat with defensive elements occurs as far away from the objects to be protected as possible. This is achieved with so-called "space-detection" protective elements. Since these space-detection protective elements must be activated a certain time before the threat impacts, they require appropriate sensors in conjunction with a control system and a triggering device.

[0009] Explosives are the primary acceleration media considered for active or standoff-based systems. When using propellant powders, a minimum ignition time of approximately 1000 µs can be expected. The efficiency of systems using propellant powders depends crucially on precise ignition and uniform ignition. That this is possible, and that velocities of several hundred m / s can be achieved with such systems, was demonstrated years ago.

[0010] Several proposals exist for using "active armor" to reduce the protective mass of vehicles and ships. These systems are fundamentally characterized by the movement of a defensive mass towards the incoming threat. A key focus of these considerations is the deployment of shaped charges (e.g., DE 977 984 B) or cutting charges (US 3 895 368 A) perpendicular to the direction of flight of the threat. Other systems employ direct explosive charges for defense (e.g., DE 9 78 036 C1).

[0011] However, it is generally true that relatively massive objects, such as kinetic energy penetrators, can hardly be affected by shaped charges, cutting charges or by the explosion of explosives and cannot be significantly destroyed.

[0012] A second type of such proposal can be summarized by the fact that, to defend against kinetic energy threats, relatively large areas (armor plates) are accelerated laterally against penetrating projectiles in relation to the penetrator diameter. Patents DE 29 06 378 C1 and DE 27 19 150 C1 serve as examples. A common feature of all such solutions is that the moving plates constitute a significant portion of the armor in terms of protective mass. Besides the fact that accelerating such large masses presents the greatest challenges, the overall protection (efficiency) is always worse than even the simplest inert armor structures when the dead mass required for such constructions is taken into account. Furthermore, when acceleration is achieved using explosives, significant plastic deformation of the impacted edges of the moving plates is unavoidable.Furthermore, it is easy to estimate that the energy or momentum imparted by such protective plates is at least on the order of the projectile's energy or momentum. If such concepts are to be used at all, they can only be deployed once, especially since, after an interaction in which only a relatively small mass fraction can be effective, the flying heavy armor plates usually have to be caught again. All these points make such concepts appear unrealistic.

[0013] Another protective device against an incoming kinetic energy projectile is known from DE 195 05 629 A1, in which the ejection plate modules are no longer directly supported by the structure of the vehicle to be protected, but rather are held in a protrusion mounted in front of the hull of a main battle tank. When the protective module is triggered, the two heavy protective plates are ejected in opposite directions, with only one of the two protective plates interacting. While this largely reduces the reaction forces on the tank structure, the mass balance is very poor due to the high dead mass (protrusion, second ejection plate).

[0014] Other well-known proposals deal with controlled, reactive armor, as demonstrated, for example, in patent DE 44 40 120 A1. Here, too, as with simple reactive arrangements initiated by the threat itself, the effect is achieved by a plate accelerated laterally across its surface against the threat. This principle fundamentally requires a larger angle of attack for the armor, combined with larger air gaps to allow for the movement of the reactive components.

[0015] Furthermore, the solution described in DE 44 40 120 A1 is also unfavorable for reactive systems because the ejected plates would require considerable counterweight. Moreover, the reactive elements are only intended to act against a projectile that has already been fragmented, which significantly reduces overall efficiency. Therefore, the effort and benefit are not in a positive proportion.

[0016] EP 0 922 924 B1 discloses a sealing and guiding device for highly dynamically accelerated, distance-effective protective elements. The cuboid, beam, cylindrical, or disc-shaped protective or defensive elements serve to defend against KE, HL, or EFP threats, as well as missiles. They are directed and guided from a container / housing and ejected at high dynamic acceleration. The mass of the protective or defensive elements, accelerated by chemically, pneumatically, or mechanically acting drive devices or by hybrid drives, is on the order of the mass of the incoming / penetrating threat. The threat is preferably impacted laterally at the optimal point(s).

[0017] To achieve effective defense with such range-based protective elements, relatively large masses of explosives (e.g., approximately 2 kg per protective element) with explosive thicknesses of 4 mm to 8 mm are required. This means that, in addition to the shock load, considerable energies or impulses are transferred to the supporting structure. In massive reactive defense systems, these are comparable to those of the incoming threat. (As a guideline: Approximately 1 kg of explosives is required for acceleration to a plate energy of about 1 MJ).

[0018] DE 10 2010 034 257 B4 discloses a reactive protective device for protecting stationary or mobile objects from threats posed by shaped charges, projectile-forming charges, or kinetic energy penetrators. The device is attached to the side of the object to be protected that faces the threat, whether fixed or movable. The protective device comprises at least one protective area arranged at an angle to the direction of the threat. This protective area consists of a front cover facing the threat and a rear cover facing away from the threat, spaced apart from the front cover, and designed as a protrusion.Between the two covers there is at least one fixed or movable reactive middle layer or reactive zone, comprising at least two reactive sub-areas, each with at least one explosion field, wherein the reactive sub-areas are completely enclosed by the limiting covers and lateral separating layers.

[0019] Furthermore, DE 690 28 323 T2 discloses a combined reactive and passive armor, wherein an element is provided by which a reactive armor can be produced that is effective against shaped charges and projectiles with kinetic energy, wherein the element has a casing having at least one reactive mass- and energy-dissipating or -absorbing arrangement of the type in which an explosive layer is arranged between two metal plates, wherein each of the reactive mass- and energy-absorbing arrangements is paired with a passive mass- and energy-absorbing arrangement having a layer of a swellable material arranged between two metal plates, wherein the reactive mass- and energy-absorbing arrangement of each pair is arranged furthest outwards.

[0020] Furthermore, DE 199 56 197 C2 discloses a reactive protection system, particularly for mounting on the outer wall of an object to be protected. This reactive system comprises at least one element consisting of several layers, with at least one layer consisting of an explosive that detonates upon impact with a firearm projectile. According to the invention, at least a second layer is formed from a highly resistant non-metallic material. This second layer produces fragments with a lower ballistic effect upon detonation.

[0021] Furthermore, EP 1 846 723 B1 discloses a reactive protective device without terminal ballistic relevant fragmentation for an object to be protected, wherein two pyrotechnic layers inclined in the area of ​​effect of the threat are arranged on both sides of a rigid or flexible, single- or multi-layered support of any shape in such a way that, after ignition of the two layers, shock waves and reaction gases are formed and accelerated at an angle at very high speed both against and in the direction of the penetrating threat in such a way that the pyrotechnic protective surface is in a dynamic equilibrium for almost the entire duration of the effect.

[0022] Furthermore, US 11 512 930 B2 reveals a reactive armor unit that has a first and a second explosion center, with the unit configured with a predetermined distance between the first and the second explosion center.

[0023] Finally, US patent 7 540 229 B2 discloses an explosive reactive armor with an impulse transfer mechanism integrated through the detonation of a reactive material with a thickness-enhancing mechanism. In this reactive armor with impulse transfer mechanism, a flying element always moves at a vertical or oblique angle to the direction of the threat, so that the momentum of the flying element is effectively transferred to the threat. This generates a shear force along the entire length of the threat, thereby destroying it. Therefore, a protective effect can always be achieved regardless of the threat's angle of impact.

[0024] The invention is based on the objective of creating a practical and simple acceleration device for distance-effective protective elements (action elements) in such a way that effective defense against the threat from kinetic energy projectiles such as KE arrows can be achieved with a reduced amount of explosives.

[0025] This problem is solved according to the invention by an active element according to claim 1, a protective arrangement according to claim 11 and a method according to claim 14.

[0026] According to the invention, the active or reactive protection element against an arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile (such as, for example, large-caliber arrow ammunition) comprises a jamming element formed from a V- or U-shaped metal sheet arrangement (which may preferably be made of armor steel); a counterweight (which may preferably be formed by the armor plating of an object to be protected); and an explosive foil arranged in a form-fitting manner between the jamming element and the counterweight for accelerating the jamming element in the direction of the thickness of the metal sheet arrangement; wherein the counterweight has at least three times the mass of the jamming element; and wherein the explosive foil has a thickness that is 30% to 100% of the thickness of the metal sheet arrangement of the jamming element.

[0027] Furthermore, the procedure includes the following steps to achieve active or reactive protection against arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles: Capturing an arrow-shaped projectile from a threatening direction; Activation of an explosive foil of a firing element arranged between a counterweight and a jamming element with a V- or U-shaped metal sheet arrangement in response to the detection of the kinetic energy projectile; Accelerating the jamming element by means of the activated explosive foil in a direction 40° to 90° to the threat direction of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile, whereby the jamming element forms an X-, Y-, T-, I- or M-shaped projectile through acceleration by means of the explosive foil.

[0028] According to an advantageous embodiment, the firing element can include an ignition device (e.g., a sensor-controlled ignition device) or an initiation plate containing an explosive for igniting the explosive foil. The initiation plate can preferably be arranged spatially separate from the firing element, e.g., in the direction of threat of the arrow-shaped projectile behind the firing element, with an angle of inclination dependent on the counterweight, which can preferably be steeper than the angle of inclination of the counterweight.

[0029] According to a further advantageous embodiment, the explosive foil can be coated with rubber, or a rubber layer can be arranged between the disruptive element and the explosive foil and / or between the explosive foil and the counterweight.

[0030] The thickness of the metal sheet assembly of the obstruction element can be 3 mm to 12 mm, preferably 6 mm to 8 mm. The width of the metal sheet assembly can be 50 mm to 300 mm, preferably 120 mm to 180 mm, and the length 100 mm to 600 mm, preferably 150 mm to 250 mm. The metal sheet assembly can consist of V-shaped or bent sheets with an opening angle of 90–120°, or be formed as a pipe cutout with a radius between 150 and 200 mm and a cutout of between 30 and 40% of the pipe circumference.

[0031] According to the invention, the protective arrangement comprises a plurality of effective elements arranged on a protective surface of an object to be protected. Preferably, the effective elements can be arranged in a housing or under a bulging plate, which is penetrated by the disruptive element when threatened by the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile.

[0032] The use of such highly effective jamming elements, as proposed by this invention, results in relatively favorable mass ratios. Firstly, only masses that directly come into effect are accelerated; secondly, the so-called dead or loss masses are comparatively low due to the small modules and the low structural loads during firing. Furthermore, the acceleration of the V- or U-shaped metal sheet arrangement by the explosive foil leads to a controlled deformation of the jamming elements, thus generating highly efficient projectiles for the effective and extremely precise manipulation of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles.

[0033] Furthermore, the reactive defense elements can be triggered by external ignition, whereby sufficiently precise information regarding the time and location of the threat to be countered can be determined by sensors and a downstream computer. If this is ensured, significantly smaller areas can be required for the defense units. Such sensor-based systems are generally referred to as active.

[0034] Furthermore, two or more defensive elements can be accelerated with still comparatively low structural loads (e.g., for redundancy or multiple engagement). In addition, the relatively small, flat-area effective elements can be well protected, for example, by means of protective elements or covers that cannot be penetrated by fragments or small projectiles.

[0035] However, even the penetration of a splinter or projectile to a certain depth does not reduce the effectiveness of the defensive elements. For example, an external ignition can decrease the sensitivity to accidental triggering.

[0036] In any case, only small defensive areas will be rendered inoperative even in the event of a partial failure, which is a key argument for the use of the smallest possible defensive elements and, in particular, for the possibility of using redundant systems.

[0037] Shock loads from the use of the explosive foil can be reduced by adding “thinning” components (inert powder, PU foam, etc.).

[0038] The proposed range-defense elements (intervention elements) are preferably positioned in front of the structure to be protected or in front of the main armor. This ensures that the interference element encounters a threat that is still largely intact (arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile) and can thus achieve optimal effectiveness. With a suitable shape of the armored vehicle or an angle of attack in the frontal or lateral area (flank angle), the range-defense element can also be positioned behind a thin dent-in device to ensure the overall armor's multi-purpose effectiveness. This additionally guarantees a high level of protection against heavy shaped charges or tandem shaped charges.

[0039] Another crucial characteristic for the quality of a protective system is its versatility in protecting various areas of the object being protected. In contrast, most existing solutions are limited to specific positions (e.g., on armored vehicles) that are capable of supporting exceptionally heavy or high-impact active or reactive protective systems.

[0040] This generally limits them to the front of the vehicle. However, this area, especially in armored vehicles of all weight classes, not only represents the smallest proportion of the armored surface, but is also particularly well suited to protection with conventional technologies, e.g., purely passive methods, due to the available space.

[0041] The present invention will now be explained in more detail with reference to preferred embodiments and the figures in the drawings. These show: Fig. 1 Perspective oblique views of an active element from the front and obliquely from the front according to an embodiment of the present invention with sketched triggering behavior; Fig. 2 a perspective view of a protective arrangement with housing and operating elements according to an embodiment of the present invention; Fig. 3 perspective oblique views of a protective arrangement from the front and obliquely from above with working elements and initiation plates according to an embodiment of the present invention; Fig. 4 a front view of an active element with armor as counterweight, according to an embodiment of the present invention; Fig. 5 a perspective oblique view of an armored vehicle with a protective surface for a protective arrangement according to various embodiments of the present invention; and Fig. 6 a perspective oblique view of a protective arrangement with active elements and overlying sheet metal cover, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0042] According to the following embodiments, a newly constructed active element is provided as active or reactive protection against arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles, such as APFSDS (Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot) ammunition.

[0043] APFSDS ammunition represents the latest development in large-caliber kinetic energy penetrators currently used by the military. This type of ammunition is typically designed as caseless ammunition for main battle tanks, with a propellant charge primarily composed of nitrocellulose. The muzzle velocity of modern APFSDS projectiles ranges from 1400 to 1800 meters per second (m / s), which is sometimes more than five times the speed of sound. An example of such a projectile is the DM 53, used on the Leopard 2 tank. In combination with the 120 mm L / 55 smoothbore gun, it achieves a muzzle velocity of up to 1750 m / s. This allows for a penetration of 810 mm of armor steel (according to RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armour), i.e., rolled homogeneous armor) at a range of 2000 m.

[0044] Fig. Figure 1 shows perspective oblique views of such an active element 100 from the front and obliquely from the front according to an embodiment of the present invention with sketched triggering behavior.

[0045] The upper arrow in Fig. Figure 1 shows a threat direction B indicating the firing direction of an arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile. The effective element 100 comprises a counterweight 30, an explosive foil 20 and a jamming element 10, which is accelerated perpendicular to the threat direction B after the explosive foil 20 is triggered.

[0046] The explosive foil 20 can be a malleable plastic explosive or an elastic sheet explosive (e.g. based on nitropenta (PETN, Pentrit, Pentaerythrityltetranitrate)).

[0047] In an optional active embodiment, a preferably sensor-controlled ignition device (in Fig. (1 not shown) with the sensor technology described above.

[0048] In a reactive protection design (as in Fig. (as shown in Figure 3) the (sensor-controlled) ignition device can also be replaced by an initiation plate, which can, for example, be designed as a very thin, classic ERA (metal / explosive foil / metal) and can only serve to activate (initiate) the explosive foil 20 of the action element 100. The actual mode of operation of the action element 100 then essentially corresponds to the sensor-controlled variant.

[0049] The interfering element 10 can be formed from two V-shaped metal sheets or a V-shaped bent metal sheet or from a sheet which represents a partial section of a tube and thus has a U-shape, wherein the open side of the V-shape or the U-shape is oriented transversely to the direction of the threat.

[0050] The counterweight 30, the explosive foil 20 and the interfering element 10 are arranged in a form-fitting manner, with optionally thin rubber layers (in. Fig. (1 not shown) can be inserted between these elements. Alternatively, the explosive foil 20 can also be surrounded by a rubber sheath (i.e., coated with rubber).

[0051] The counterweight 30 should be many times greater than the mass of the interfering element 10, with the factor being at least 3. In exemplary embodiments, the counterweight 30 can also be formed by the (base) armor of an object to be protected (e.g., an armored vehicle).

[0052] The thickness of the explosive foil 20 accelerating the interference element 10 can be 30% to 100% of the thickness of the interference element 10, wherein the interference element 10 can have a sheet thickness of 3mm to 12mm, preferably 6mm to 8mm.

[0053] For a V-shaped sheet metal structure of the obstruction element 10, an opening angle of 90-120° can be provided. For a U-shaped (pipe-cut-like) sheet metal structure of the obstruction element 10, a radius between 150 mm and 200 mm and a pipe cutout between 30% and 40% of the pipe circumference can be provided.

[0054] The plates (sheets) of the interference element can be made of armor steel, which results in a higher shear strength compared to, for example, copper or iron.

[0055] As schematically indicated by dashed lines in the upper oblique view of the effective element 100, the V-shaped jamming element 10, accelerated by the explosive foil, forms a projectile by design. This projectile initially slimmers due to the acceleration-induced folding of the leg plate components and then, depending on its design, becomes X-, Y-, T-, I-, or M-shaped (deformed). The U-shaped jamming element 10 exhibits similar behavior. The flight direction of the jamming element 10 can preferably be selected within an angle range of 40° to 90° to the threat direction (axis) B in order to achieve sufficient efficiency in disrupting (deflection, breakage, deformation, etc.) the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile.

[0056] Thus, according to the invention, due to the large initial accelerated area of ​​the jamming element 10, a thicker projectile sheet with less explosive can be accelerated with pinpoint accuracy, thereby achieving more effective defense. The change in shape of the jamming element 10 during acceleration enables a higher impulse and thus improved effectiveness of the projectile defense.

[0057] The V- or U-shaped obstruction element 10 can have a width (between the two leg ends) of 50 mm to 300 mm, preferably 120 mm to 180 mm, and a length (along the upper leg edges) of 100 mm to 600 mm, preferably 150 mm to 250 mm.

[0058] As already mentioned, the amount of explosive in the explosive foil 20 can be significantly reduced according to the invention by the large counterweight 30 and the inventive design of the jamming element 10. Despite its initial V- or U-shape, the jamming element 10 behaves more like an elongated P-charge, but without the usual amount of explosive. In principle, the proposed jamming element 10 consists of two compressed metal plates that are accelerated away from the counterweight 30 (which can be the base armor). Previous tests and simulations have shown that the proposed impact element 10 exhibits a significantly higher jamming effect than a conventional cutting charge, even with a considerably lower explosive mass.

[0059] The penetrator (arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile) is thus struck by a significantly heavier and more solid body (a jamming element 10 transformed into a projectile) than is the case with a conventional cutting charge. The momentum input relative to the explosive mass is therefore significantly optimized. Consequently, the individual explosive masses (explosive foils 20) can be reduced so drastically that application within spaced armor is also possible, thereby significantly reducing the risk to surrounding areas.

[0060] Fig. 2 a perspective view of a protective arrangement with housing and active elements according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0061] According to Fig. 2 Two active elements 100 are arranged opposite each other in a housing in conjunction with a spaced armor 50 and a base armor 54, so that the relevant interference elements are in the Fig. The two elements shown are accelerated downwards or upwards in opposite directions. To prevent mutual interference, the active elements are arranged vertically offset from the viewing direction. The housing structure has opposing housing wall sections 52, which are penetrated by the respective interfering element of the opposing active element 100 after its activation, in order to deflect an incoming kinetic energy projectile (not shown). Of course, more than two active elements 100 can also be present.

[0062] The Schottpanzerung 50 armor consists of several grades of armor steel arranged one behind the other with an air gap between them. Plates of high hardness are used on the outer surface, while plates of high ductility are used on the inner surface. The protective principle of Schottpanzerung 50 against shaped charge projectiles is based on the fact that, upon penetration of the shaped charge jet, deformations form on the inner surface of each plate, disrupting the rear portion of the jet. In this way, the diameter of the penetration channel is gradually reduced. A configuration of several thin armor plates arranged one behind the other thus offers a greater level of protection than a single thick plate.

[0063] The bulkheaded armor 50 offers the advantage over solid armor that the weight is reduced while maintaining the same level of protection. However, it requires more space due to the gaps between the individual layers.

[0064] Furthermore, the present invention can also be used as a simple reactive solution in cassette or group arrangement, as explained below by way of example.

[0065] Fig. Figure 3 shows perspective oblique views from the front and obliquely from above of a protective arrangement with active elements 100 and initiation plates 120 arranged on a base armor 140 according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0066] This allows for a simple reactive version of the protective arrangement. An optional (penetrable by the interfering elements of the active elements 100) encasement of one or more active elements 100 and associated initiation plates 120 is not shown.

[0067] The initiation plates 120 can be a very thin, conventional ERA plate with a layer sequence of metal / explosive foil / metal, serving solely to activate (initiate) the explosive foil 20 of the action element 100, the actual functioning of which corresponds to that of a sensor-controlled variant. The action element 100 and the initiation plate 120 are arranged and connected in such a way that the detonation of the initiation plate 120 is transferred to the explosive foil 20 of the action element 100.

[0068] In ERA reactive protection, a layer of explosive is sandwiched between two plates (made of metal or composite material), creating a sandwich structure as an initiation element, preferably oriented at an angle to the direction of the threat's approach. As shown in the illustration above. Fig. As shown in Figure 3, the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile from the threat direction B hits the initiation plate 120 and thereby triggers a release of the jamming element 10 of the associated action element 100, so that the kinetic energy projectile is deflected or damaged for defense purposes.

[0069] The initiation plate 120 is preferably arranged behind the associated action element 100 and is inclined depending on the angle of the base armor 140, e.g. with a steeper angle than the surface of the base armor 140.

[0070] The firing element 100 and the initiating plate 120 can be inserted into a plastic or metal cassette in pairs or groups. It would also be possible to house the firing element 100 and the initiating plate 120 in separate cassettes; a corresponding connection would, of course, have to be established in this case. An advantage of separating the firing element 100 and the initiating plate 120 would be the ability to control multiple firing elements 100 with a single initiating plate 120. This would lead to an improvement in the level of protection against flanking fire.

[0071] Fig. Figure 4 shows a front view of an active element with armor 140 as a counterweight, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Thus, the Fig. The counter mass 30 of the active element 100 shown is omitted.

[0072] The explosive material of the explosive foil 20 can be made very thin. Approximately 100g of explosive can accelerate a 1kg projectile to a speed of about 600m / s. This speed is sufficient to ensure that the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile (e.g., a kinetic energy dart) reaches the jamming element 10 quickly enough. The momentum imparted to the projectile being deflected is significantly greater than with cutting charges.

[0073] As mentioned above, an X-shaped projectile can be created from the V- or U-shaped interference element 10. A Y-shaped projectile could also be generated if, for example, the metal plates of the interference element 10 are connected at the bottom. With thicker metal plates of approximately 8 mm or more, almost I-shaped projectiles are produced.

[0074] Fig. Figure 5 shows a perspective oblique view of an armored vehicle with an exemplary protective surface 80 in a bow area of ​​the armored vehicle for the exemplary arrangement of protective arrangements according to various embodiments of the present invention.

[0075] In armored vehicles of NATO countries, the angle of the bow area can be 77° to the vertical, with the vertical height dimension covered by the protective surface being approximately 450mm.

[0076] Fig. Figure 6 shows a perspective oblique view of a protective arrangement with active elements and a bulging sheet metal cover 160 above it, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0077] Such a protective arrangement can, for example, be applied to the protective surface 80 according to Fig. 5 will be arranged.

[0078] The dent plate cover 160 can, for example, be formed from a dent plate with a layer sequence of steel / rubber / steel and a thickness of, for example, 3 mm per layer. The dent plate cover 160 can be attached to a base armor 140 of the armored vehicle by means of spacer elements 190 forming a support structure, wherein functional elements 100 according to the invention are arranged under the dent plate cover 160 and between the spacer elements 190.

[0079] The active elements 100 can be embedded in the basic armor 140, as in Fig. 4 shown. According to the illustration in Fig. 6. The active elements 100 can also be only partially embedded, with additional shape-adapted base structures 180 being attached to or on the surface of the base armor 140, which form part of the counterweight and accommodate part of the explosive foil 20.

[0080] The active elements 100 can be actively or reactively controlled, whereby the activated jamming element 10 penetrates the dented sheet metal cover 160 and deflects or damages the detected kinetic energy projectile for defense purposes.

[0081] In summary, a working element 100, protective arrangements formed with it, and a method for achieving active or reactive protection against arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles were described, wherein an arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile is detected from a threat direction B, and an explosive foil 20 of the working element 100, arranged between a counterweight 30 and a jamming element 10 with a V- or U-shaped metal sheet arrangement, is activated upon detection of the kinetic energy projectile. This accelerates the jamming element 10 in a direction of 40° to 90° relative to the threat direction B of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile, whereby the jamming element 10, through acceleration by means of the explosive foil 20, forms an X-, Y-, T-, I-, or M-shaped projectile.

[0082] The following section describes the effectiveness and reliability of the proposed protective devices based on test series and simulations regarding interaction, speeds, collisions, minimum values ​​achieved, etc., with reference to the Fig. 7, 8A-8C and 9 are explained in more detail.

[0083] Fig. Figure 7 shows an experimental setup for investigating the effectiveness of the proposed active element with the jamming element 10 for a possible active protection system against a KE arrow 70 (120mm APFSDS projectile DM53).

[0084] The effectiveness of the interference element 10 was to be determined using high-speed video and residual power plates 74. The interference element 10 was activated (triggered) by means of a trigger foil 72 and a corresponding ignition delay. The trigger foil 72 was positioned at an angle of 17.5° to the horizontal.

[0085] One in Fig. The height H shown in Figure 7 corresponds to the distance between the upper edge of the interference element 10, mounted in the action element, and the planned firing axis (the actual distance may vary due to the placement). Distances L2 between the interference element 10 and the front surface of the residual power plates 74 were set to 1000 mm and 1500 mm, respectively. Distances L1 between the interference element 10 and the trigger foil 72 were set to 1500 mm and 1000 mm, respectively.

[0086] The front upper edge of the counterweight of the active element was used as the reference point (0-point) BP for the experiments.

[0087] The ignition and triggering of the detonating element is achieved by short-circuiting two mutually insulated copper foils of the trigger foil 72. The short circuit is caused by the impact (penetration) of the trigger foil by the approaching KE arrow 70 (penetrator). An ignition box (not shown) with a system-related delay of 10 µs ignites a detonator (RP-80 EBW detonator, exploding bridge wire detonator) with a self-delay of 2.65 µs (± 0.125 µs) after a preselected delay (e.g., 67–695 µs, depending on the specifications). The preselected delay was set based on the results of the simulations described below. A video measurement system was triggered (via fiber optic cable) by a flash of light from the detonating explosive foil of the detonating element.

[0088] In each trial, the KE arrow 70 (penetrator) was hit, and the residual power of the KE arrow 70 was significantly reduced after interaction with the interfering element 10. The best trial was achieved with the greatest distance (H) between the interfering element 10 and the firing axis and medium delay (i.e., the interaction presumably occurred in the middle of the KE arrow 70).

[0089] The jamming element 10 in all tests consisted of OFE copper with a width of 300 mm and a wall thickness of 6 mm. The explosive layer was 3 mm thick and consisted of the foil explosive PISEM. Copper has the advantage over steel that the jamming element 10 deforms more uniformly and does not break apart. However, the jamming element 10 achieves a lower velocity because the material is significantly softer.

[0090] The Fig. Figures 8A to 8C show simulation results with deformations of the KE arrow 70 as a result of the interaction with the disturbance element 10.

[0091] In the example of the Fig. 8A, the interaction occurred in the last third of the KE arrow 70 at x = 526 mm, causing the last third of the KE arrow 70 to break off. This resulted in a significant upward displacement at the rear of the remaining portion of the KE arrow 70 and a pronounced tilt of the fragment. The front two-thirds of the KE arrow 70 remained undisturbed and without tilt.

[0092] In the example of the Fig. In step 8B, the KE arrow 70 broke in the middle at x=330mm, resulting in no angle in the front part. Nevertheless, the residual power (RL) was reduced to a penetration depth of 470mm into the residual power plates 74.

[0093] In the example of the Fig. In case 8C, the KE arrow 70 was deflected upwards by the interaction with the interfering element 10, which, in the case of a high impact, can lead to the KE arrow 70 exiting the upper surface of the residual power plates 74. In the present case, the entire KE arrow 70 received an angle of attack of +6° at a velocity of 1750 m / s, which reduced the residual power to 408 mm.

[0094] The test series carried out after the preliminary simulations showed a relatively large scatter but nevertheless a significantly reduced residual power of the KE arrow 70 after the interaction with the reshaped disturbance elements 10.

[0095] Fig. Figure 9 shows a bar chart with test results when using the proposed active element as a distance-effective protective element.

[0096] Each bar in Fig. Figure 9 shows, for a relevant test (tests no. 1 to 7), the residual power of the KE arrow 70 corresponding to the penetration depth into the armor after interaction with the jamming element 10. As shown from Fig. As can be seen from Figure 9, a reduction of at least 20% (65% to 80% residual power) was achieved in each trial. In trial number 6, a successive interaction with two interfering elements 10 from different active elements (double hit) occurred, resulting in a reduction of residual power of 42%.

[0097] When the proposed protective arrangement is installed in a turret of an armored vehicle ( Fig.2) Thus, for example, a reduction in the KE threat of approximately 130mm armor steel equivalent or significantly more could be achieved by two protective arrangement units with 4-5 fields above and below, with an installation mass of approximately 100kg, in the case of pre-damage to the 120mm DM 53 KE arrow 70 by the heavy BV in the tip or double interaction with the jamming element 10 from above and below.

[0098] The proposed protective arrangement can also be deployed in front of or inside the front of an armored vehicle. This could then be a solution for the MGCS system to compensate for future increases in kinetic energy (KE) performance without adding weight (with double interaction with jamming elements 10, a performance reduction of 40% would be achievable, i.e., approximately 250-300 mm with a 120 mm DM 53 ammunition). This means that with a basic protection of 650 mm, the total KE defense performance would be equivalent to approximately 900-950 mm of armor steel.

Claims

[1] Action element (100) as active or reactive protection against an arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile, in particular a large-caliber arrow ammunition, wherein the action element (100) comprises: a disturbance element (10) consisting of a V- or U-shaped arrangement of sheet metal; a countermass (30); and an explosive foil (20) arranged in a form-fitting manner between the interfering element (10) and the counter mass (30) for accelerating the interfering element (10) in the direction of the thickness of the metal sheet arrangement; wherein the counterweight (30) has at least three times the mass of the perturbing element (10); and wherein the explosive foil (20) has a thickness that is 30% to 100% of the thickness of the metal sheet arrangement of the interfering element (10). [2] Actuating element (100) according to claim 1, further comprising an ignition device, in particular a sensor-controlled ignition device, or an initiation plate (120) containing an explosive for igniting the explosive foil (20). [3] Action element (100) according to claim 2, wherein the initiation plate (120) is arranged spatially separated from the action element (100), in particular in the direction of threat (B) of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile behind the action element (100) with an angle of inclination dependent on the counterweight (30), in particular a steeper angle of inclination than the counterweight (30). [4] Active element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein a plastic or elastomer layer is arranged between the explosive foil (20) and the countermeasure (30). [5] Active element (100) according to claim 4, wherein the plastic or elastomer layer has a lateral sound velocity of less than 1000 m / s. [6] Active element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the counter mass is formed by an armor (140) of a protected object. [7] Actuating element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the thickness of the metal sheet arrangement of the interference element (10) is 3mm to 12mm, in particular 6mm to 8mm, and wherein the metal sheet arrangement has a width of 50mm to 300mm, in particular 120mm to 180mm, and a length of 100mm to 600mm, in particular 150mm to 250mm. [8] Actuating element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the metal sheet arrangement consists of V-shaped or bent sheets with an opening angle of 90-120° or is formed as a pipe cutout with a radius between 150 and 200 mm and a cutout between 30 and 40% of the pipe circumference. [9] Active element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the metal sheet arrangement of the interference element (10) is made of armor steel. [10] Active element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the metal sheet arrangement of the interference element (10) is formed from a non-ferrous metal with high density such as copper or tantalum. [11] Active element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the metal sheet arrangement of the interference element (10) is formed from a layer combination of armor steel and non-ferrous metals. [12] Action element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the jamming element (10) is designed such that it forms an X-, Y-, T-, I- or M-shaped projectile by means of the acceleration by means of the explosive foil (20). [13] Action element (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the action element (100) is designed such that the jamming element (10) is accelerated in a direction 40° to 90° to the threat direction (B) of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile. [14] Protective arrangement for active or reactive protection against arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles, wherein a plurality of effective elements (100) according to one of claims 1 to 13 are arranged on a protective surface (80) of an object to be protected. [15] Protective arrangement according to claim 14, wherein the active elements (100) are arranged in a housing. [16] Protective arrangement according to claim 14 or 15, wherein the active elements (100) are arranged behind or below a dent plate device (50; 160). [17] Methods for achieving active or reactive protection against arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectiles, comprising the steps: Detection of an arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile from a threatening direction (B); Activation of an explosive foil (20) of a firing element (100) arranged between a counterweight (30) and a jamming element (10) with a V- or U-shaped metal sheet arrangement in response to the detection of the kinetic energy projectile; Accelerating the jamming element (10) by means of the activated explosive foil (20) in a direction 40° to 90° to the threat direction (B) of the arrow-shaped kinetic energy projectile, wherein the jamming element (10) forms an X-, Y-, T-, I- or M-shaped projectile by means of the acceleration by means of the explosive foil (20).

Images