Implementing Nanocomposite Shear Thickening Fluid to Improve The Impact Resistance of Polyamide Fabrics Against Intermediate Velocity Projectiles

Abstract

The novelty of this research is the synthesis and comparison of a soft liquid composite shield made from two different Shear Thickening Fluids (STFs) / Polyamide fabric composite material and choosing the best one for impact resistance based on characterization and performance. The STFs microstructural properties are characterized, and STF / Polyamide composites are prepared while testing their ballistic resistance using an air gun with intermediate velocities (<100 m/s) for energy absorption. Materials used for this purpose are fumed silica with polyethylene glycol (PEG) STF and starch with water STF based dispersions. The results confirmed the superior performance of STF to absorb energy, especially for starch and water system. The rheological properties for starch/water STF showed higher viscosity than silica/PEG reaching 523.6 Pa.s and 178.9 Pa.s respectively. Other characterization tests proved the superior performance of starch with water STF leading to more dispersion stability and obvious thickening effect at higher particle concentration leading to a greater jump in viscosity at sudden shear rate. The highest concentration of silica/PEG STF/fabric showed improvement in indentation depth by 26.9%, while the starch/water STF by 43.6%. These results show the viability of the STF/Polyamide composite material if integrated for personal protection applications.

Fabric Impregnation with Shear Thickening Fluid for Ballistic Armor Polymer Composites: An Updated Overview

“…The weight fraction of the silica particles varied between 0 to 70 wt% with a greater focus on the fractions between 20 and 50 wt%. The most adopted type of PEG fluid was the one with 200 g/mol, although higher molecular weight generally promotes a higher viscosity, as already reported in previous works [ 183 ] and tested in different papers [ 184 , 185 ]. The works of Yeh et al [ 172 ], Yeh et al [ 171 ], Chang et al [ 173 ], Zhang et al [ 176 ], Zhihao et al [ 181 ] and Katiyar et al [ 175 ] carry out what was stated.…”