Dragon Skin

[Hellfish6]

At the risk of dipping one of my toes into something that I know little about...

 

I saw this episode too. One of the impressions I got was that you could have Dragon Skin covering more of your torso than a ballistic insert plate could. Am I mistaken? As I understand it, the Interceptor and most other armor systems have significant unprotected areas (under the arms, the lower torso/upper waist) whereas Dragon Skin could (or does) protect those areas.

[jwduquette1]

At the risk of dipping one of my toes into something that I know little about...

 

I saw this episode too. One of the impressions I got was that you could have Dragon Skin covering more of your torso than a ballistic insert plate could. Am I mistaken? As I understand it, the Interceptor and most other armor systems have significant unprotected areas (under the arms, the lower torso/upper waist) whereas Dragon Skin could (or does) protect those areas.

 

I havent done any measuring of the thing either, but I'd bet you're right.

Edited January 30, 2007 by jwduquette1

[TTK Ciar]

Those don't seem like plain-jane ceramic to me. Suspecting they're either coated with a metallic layer, or are metal/ceramic composites (ceramic granules suspended in metallic matrix), like Exote.

 

A mix of 90% SiC + 10% Ti/Al/Mo/V would have a density of 3.2 g/cc (vs 3.1 g/cc for pure SiC, so not significantly heavier). 90% BC + 10% Ti/Al/Mo/V would come to 2.7 g/cc (vs 2.5 g/cc for pure BC).

 

-- TTK

[jwduquette1]

Those don't seem like plain-jane ceramic to me. Suspecting they're either coated with a metallic layer, or are metal/ceramic composites (ceramic granules suspended in metallic matrix), like Exote.

 

A mix of 90% SiC + 10% Ti/Al/Mo/V would have a density of 3.2 g/cc (vs 3.1 g/cc for pure SiC, so not significantly heavier). 90% BC + 10% Ti/Al/Mo/V would come to 2.7 g/cc (vs 2.5 g/cc for pure BC).

 

-- TTK

 

like a cermet? could be. seems to me they mentioned Ti during the television show -- i'd have to take another peak to hear the context again.

 

in the grenade sequence you can see several naked scales flop out of the vest. they are pretty much white -- alot lighter than the ceramic scale Paul shows on pg1 of this thread. but i assume the discoloration in Paul's image is related to the bullet impact.

[dfs]

watched the show. the armor seemed impressive although that show (future weapons) makes everything they talk out to be the greatest widget ever invented. i noticed that all shots were fired at the vest straight on. i wonder if it can still protect when the shooter is at an angle to the vest. is there a possibility of the rounds slipping between the tiles?

[Burncycle360]

Earlier today, I was wondering how much a PASGT flak vest would weigh if you replaced the 23 doron plates with Level III steel stand alone single curve plates (5.5" x 5.5" x .25" each) and replaced the soft areas with level IIIa soft armor

 

After some quick calculations, I estimated it would weigh around 56 lbs (steel) + the weight of the rest of the vest! Ceramic would reduce the weight a little bit, but the thicker the plates are the more difficult it is to maintain the flexibility, which was the whole point of going for multiple overlapping plates to begin with.

 

Weight aside, the setup would be quite inefficient I think. The overlapping plates are great for freedom of movement, but it means that in many areas you'd have a level III plate backed by another level III plate, which is obviously redundant. Yet, you cannot compensate by making each plate a little thinner because one plate won't always overlap the other significantly depending on your body position - in other words, in some places you can be covered by several overlapping plates, while in others only one may stand in between you and the round.

 

So... at first I thought the overlapping plates on Dragonskin wouldn't be a particularly good solution, but apparently they've been able to provide great protection while keeping the weight to a reasonable level and providing at least some flexibility improvement over regular armor. Nice.

[jwduquette1]

Those don't seem like plain-jane ceramic to me. Suspecting they're either coated with a metallic layer, or are metal/ceramic composites (ceramic granules suspended in metallic matrix), like Exote.

 

A mix of 90% SiC + 10% Ti/Al/Mo/V would have a density of 3.2 g/cc (vs 3.1 g/cc for pure SiC, so not significantly heavier). 90% BC + 10% Ti/Al/Mo/V would come to 2.7 g/cc (vs 2.5 g/cc for pure BC).

 

-- TTK

 

The narrators words are: "Ceramic and titanium composite disk". So probably not a cermet as I was surmizing -- way too heavy.

 

Maybe TiB2 -- which is has the best ballistic mass effectiveness of most common ballistic ceramic -- better than B4C, SiC, AIN, or Alumina. But TiB2 is also the most expensive ballistic ceramics in this list. TiB2 is also one of the heavier ceramics -- densities I have seen run around 4.4 to 4.5g/cm^3

[120mm]

There is currently a thread on this at Lightfighter.net where both the Dragon Skin Inventor, and some materials/ballistics scientists as well as end-users describe the body armor.

 

Here is my understanding, based on reading that thread.

 

1. DragonSkin is basically medieval ring scale armor with modern materials. The disk overlap results in superior trauma absorption and impenetrability. It also results in higher armor weight than rigid plates, just like in the old days.

2. DragonSkin body armor does not meet the army's weight spec due to the army not considering "coverage vs. weight".

3. During initial testing, DragonSkin vests failed because the adhesive they use to keep the discs from migrating in the vests failed at higher temperatures.

4. DragonSkin claims to have fixed that problem.

5. Dragon Skin's founder and inventor is extremely paranoid about the Army's testing, has called into question the people in the process and appears to want testing to go forward on their terms.

 

Having made and worn medieval armor, and having worn modern armor vests, I feel qualified to make the following observations:

 

Flexible armors are good for "one size, fits all" armor solutions. Rigid armor, fitted properly, is almost always more flexible and lighter than comparable flexible armor. (sounds counterintuitive, but it's generally true.) The problem is, it's more expensive, generally per sq. in. of comparable protection.

 

Dragon Skin has negated this advantage by making their armor 10X the price of normal armor.

 

In the end, DS is 10 times the price, has 20 percent more coverage, at 10 percent more weight. And it "might" have problems.

[jwduquette1]

There is currently a thread on this at Lightfighter.net where both the Dragon Skin Inventor, and some materials/ballistics scientists as well as end-users describe the body armor.

 

Here is my understanding, based on reading that thread.

 

1. DragonSkin is basically medieval ring scale armor with modern materials. The disk overlap results in superior trauma absorption and impenetrability. It also results in higher armor weight than rigid plates, just like in the old days.

2. DragonSkin body armor does not meet the army's weight spec due to the army not considering "coverage vs. weight".

3. During initial testing, DragonSkin vests failed because the adhesive they use to keep the discs from migrating in the vests failed at higher temperatures.

4. DragonSkin claims to have fixed that problem.

5. Dragon Skin's founder and inventor is extremely paranoid about the Army's testing, has called into question the people in the process and appears to want testing to go forward on their terms.

 

Having made and worn medieval armor, and having worn modern armor vests, I feel qualified to make the following observations:

 

Flexible armors are good for "one size, fits all" armor solutions. Rigid armor, fitted properly, is almost always more flexible and lighter than comparable flexible armor. (sounds counterintuitive, but it's generally true.) The problem is, it's more expensive, generally per sq. in. of comparable protection.

 

Dragon Skin has negated this advantage by making their armor 10X the price of normal armor.

 

In the end, DS is 10 times the price, has 20 percent more coverage, at 10 percent more weight. And it "might" have problems.

 

Interesting take 120mm. Thanks for your insights.

 

Only one question -- why when and where were you wearing medieval armor? Plate sort of stuff; or chainmail; or scale armor? (sorry -- that's two questions).

Edited January 31, 2007 by jwduquette1

[120mm]

I started out in SCA, then, being somewhat handy and actually historically minded, I started studying armor with empirical experience in mind. I studied under an armorer by the name of Matthew Rutz for awhile.

 

I've made and worn chain mail, scale mail, coat of plates and plate armor. Most people would be shocked at how light a well-built and fitted suit of plate armor (1400s to early 1600s) can be. I owned a replica late-15th century Landshut pattern gothic plate suit at one time, but I donated it to a NG unit, from which it was stolen.

 

On the other hand, chain, scale and coat of plates tend to be heavy and do not ride evenly on the body, causing all sorts of binding, etc..

[Akhe100]

Well to be honest i've given up entirely on listening to the armor on the performance of anything new, as they've shown themselves pretty inept at deciding what new tech is useful and what isn't, they didn't even like the garand when it was on the design board, and look at how that turned out!

[jwduquette1]

I started out in SCA, then, being somewhat handy and actually historically minded, I started studying armor with empirical experience in mind. I studied under an armorer by the name of Matthew Rutz for awhile.

 

I've made and worn chain mail, scale mail, coat of plates and plate armor. Most people would be shocked at how light a well-built and fitted suit of plate armor (1400s to early 1600s) can be. I owned a replica late-15th century Landshut pattern gothic plate suit at one time, but I donated it to a NG unit, from which it was stolen.

 

On the other hand, chain, scale and coat of plates tend to be heavy and do not ride evenly on the body, causing all sorts of binding, etc..

 

Sounds like an intersting experiance.

 

I don't suppose you have any experiance with French Cuirassier armor -- circa 1805 -- 1815. I am interested in tracking down accurate information on plate thickness for the Cuirass.

[gewing]

I wonder how the term "panel" would be applied to the scales - clearly, each scale is too small to allow for this kind of definition to apply to it directly, and a scale is unlikely to have been degraded by impacts on previous scales anyway.

 

David

 

 

 

I wonder if this was one of the issues that "baffled" the guy running the military tests?

 

 

When I was watching the show, I kept wondering if a round could slip between the discs if it hit from iirc the left side?

 

I wondered if two layers of thinner disks overlapped in opposite directions might counter that.

 

Another thought was that thinner disks on a backing plate or plates to further spread the impact might do even better.

Edited February 2, 2007 by gewing

[mcantu]

One other thing...the disks are on top of Level IIIA soft armor inside the carrier

[jwduquette1]

One other thing...the disks are on top of Level IIIA soft armor inside the carrier

 

So it is equivelent to NIJ level-IV armor -- yes?

(i.e. scales\disks + the soft level-III)

[mcantu]

So it is equivelent to NIJ level-IV armor -- yes?

(i.e. scales\disks + the soft level-III)

 

There are 2 models right now. One that is Level III and one that is Level IV. The owner of Pinnacle says that each will stop higher threat rounds than what they are rated for as well...