Jump to content

HerrTom

Members
  • Content Count

    682
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by HerrTom

  1. There's always JoneSoft Generic Mod Enabler (JSGME) Here is a thread from the DCS forums that explains how to use it (in the context of DCS, but it's fairly straightforward to work with CM) http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=98607
  2. No, panzersauerkrautwerfer, you're completely right. I'm honestly not that experienced with explicit dynamics simulations like above, my area of expertise is only rocket science! My work involves fluid dynamics, combustion and heat transfer, a far cry from this. There are a number of things here that are probably affecting the result: 1) I don't really know what steel the tip is made of, so I took an assumption it was a form of tool steel. This may not be right. 2) The exact geometry is only an approximation from the picture. The tip roundness may be wrong, as well as the ogive shape of the tip, which I imagine also greatly affect the results. 3) From the above, the deflection of that steel tip causes the uranium rod to fail as it passes through the first layer, causing it to essentially shatter on the next layer. 4) The size of the finite element mesh also is a big factor here. It's relatively big and coarse for those animations since I'm impatient and don't want my computer's resources hogged for 300+ hours! If I get a more realistic looking result though, I'll post it.
  3. So I ran it with friction, and the result is pretty much the same. It did a slightly better job penetrating, but the steel tip still just doesn't dig in. Though, admittedly, the rod is pretty oblique, and at these ranges would likely be coming in at a larger angle than straight on, as I have it. This is all for me, for now, since these take quite a while to do, and I have other (probably better) things to do with my time. I hope at least some of the information was useful! John Kettler, nice find on the papers there. They're quite the interesting read.
  4. Ah, I thought it didn't look quite right. Probably because I set all body interactions to frictionless, which in retrospect is probably not the case in this high angle situation. I'll run it again with that change and then stop spamming this thread with my dumb animations. Anyway, the takeaway I'm getting from what I've seen is that these penetrators get really messed up when they go through things. I don't think it's very likely you'll be KO'ing multiple T-90s with a single round. Thin APC armour on the other hand is a different story. The rods (and even the steel tip, to an extent) cut through thin armour like that as if it were paper, which I hope is no surprise to anyone!
  5. Unfortunately, I don't know how to model explosives very well in the software yet. I agree, it would be pretty interesting. I redid it with 68 degree slopes, and increased the range to around 2 km (using -10% energy per km). The shot failed to penetrate, though. I may have an incorrect steel as the M829's tip, which I'm using S-7 tool steel. I also got rid of the antiradiation liner, since I honestly don't really know what it's made of. Not that it mattered here. I also realise that the colouring in the last video may be a little confusing, so I changed it to just the body colours. An interesting thing you don't really think about is that at these energies, metals start to behave like viscous liquids. It's very cool.
  6. Sorry about the big image. I can't seem to make it smaller. Thank you for the fantastic information, BTR! Being an engineer, I naturally wanted to see what was going on, so I took an M829A3 penetrator and put it against the T-90's armour. I wouldn't call this 100% gospel by any means, especially due to a couple of errors I made in the model and simplifications I made so it took less than 24 hours to run, but I think the from gist of it you can see that the penetrator at relatively close range against unangled armour pretty much cuts through it like butter. The DU as a whole doesn't lose all that much energy as it passes through the armour. So, given the following situation, I think it may be reasonable for a penetrator to go through and through, and possibly KO another tank: M1A2 is within ~800 m of the target, and up against a 90 degree angle of armour. It's a tanker's dream, I'm sure. The only stipulation is that the rod may shatter upon reaching another tank since the steel tip is toast by now. (Please ignore the radiation lining ruining everything at the end, I screwed up the material properties on it and broke the simulation at the end, exploding a lot of elements!)
  7. So, in terms of pure kinetic energy, a monstrous 200kg shell travelling at 1.2 km/s has an energy of 144 megajoules. That's just (1/2 m u²). According to Wikipedia, the M829 shell weighs 18.64 kilograms, and has a muzle velocity of 1,670 m/s. That gives a muzzle energy of 25.74 megajoules. If all of that energy is released from the impact, being hit by an M829 at point blank is like having 5 kilograms of TNT go off on the outside of your tank. That may be hard to miss. I read that Chobham armour is typically about 5cm thick, which means that the reaction force from the shell decelerating in that thickness is 5.1 giganewtons, which would give a nice jolt, even if it's only applied for a tiny fraction of a second. Anyway, I'm not sure what this all means in terms of a chunk of metal hitting another big chunk of metal/ceramics/composites or whatever. But those are the numbers. I do know for sure that I'd rather not be in a tank that's shot by one of these in really any circumstances!
×
×
  • Create New...