Sandwiched between two hard rods

Sandwiched between two hard rods

Journals
Books
Databases

From the journal:
Soft Matter

Tara
Drwenski ,
* a

Patrick
Hooijer a
and

René
van Roij a

Please wait while we load your content...

Something went wrong. Try again?

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1039/C6SM00736H

First published
09 Jun 2016

BibTex
EndNote
MEDLINE
ProCite
ReferenceManager
RefWorks
RIS

rsc.org

Journals, books & databases

Home
About us
Membership & professional community
Campaigning & outreach
Journals, books & databases
Teaching & learning
News & events
Locations & contacts
Careers
Awards & funding
Advertise
Help & legal
Privacy policy
Terms & conditions

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube

© Royal Society of Chemistry 2022 Registered charity number: 207890

Journals

Current Journals

Archive Journals

All Journals

Books

New Titles

All

Bookshop

Pick and Choose

Databases

Literature Updates

ChemSpider

The Merck Index*

MarinLit

More

For Members

For Librarians

Subscribe

RSS Feeds

Blogs

Chemistry World

Education in Chemistry

Open Access

Historical Collection

Got a spare 5 minutes to help us improve our website?

*

Corresponding authors

a

Institute for Theoretical Physics, Center for Extreme Matter and Emergent Phenomena, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, The Netherlands

E-mail:
t.m.drwenski@uu.nl

We use Onsager theory and the local density approximation to study sedimentation-diffusion equilibrium density profiles of binary mixtures of thick and thin hard rods. We construct stacking diagrams for three diameter ratios, and find that even a simple spindle-shaped phase diagram with only isotropic–nematic demixing can lead to counter-intuitive stacking sequences such as an isotropic phase sandwiched between two nematic phases. For the most complex phase diagram considered here, we find sixteen distinct stacking sequences, including several with five sedimented layers. By adding sedimentation paths to composition–pressure and density–density phase diagrams and calculating density and composition profiles, we show that conclusions about bulk phase diagrams of binary mixtures on the basis of sedimentation-diffusion equilibria should be drawn warily.

* Exclusive of taxes

This article contains 9 page(s)

T. Drwenski, P. Hooijer and R. van Roij,
Soft Matter , 2016, 12 , 5684

DOI: 10.1039/C6SM00736H

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the
Copyright Clearance Center request page .

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission
provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures
and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article
in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required)
please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

Fetching data from CrossRef.
This may take some time to load.

The euro-sd.com (Mittler Report Verlag) website uses cookies to personalise content and ads, provide social media features, and analyse traffic to our website. We also share information about your use of our website with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. Our partners may combine this information with other data that you have provided to them or that they have collected in the course of your use of the Services. As the website user, please make your individual settings as to which types of cookies you wish to be allowed when using our website. Please note that based on your settings, not all functionalities of the site may be available. You can revoke your consent in accordance with Art. 7 of the German Data Protection Act (DSGVO) at any time.

You can find further information and decision-making options in our privacy policy.
Herzlich willkommen! Melde dich in deinem Konto an
Herzlich willkommen! Melden Sie sich an
Start Articles Active And Reactive Vehicle Protection Systems
Sponsored Content Coastal Surveillance: How panoramic thermal imaging technology provides smart and scalable maritime protection Countries with a maritime domain are faced with multiple challenges to protect their domain, borders, naval bases, offshore infrastructure, coasts and more. continue...
Sponsored Content New Generation Wheeled Armoured Combat Vehicles: PARS 6x6 & 8x8 The PARS vehicle family, designed for the low and high-intensity combat situations, has become a reference for tactical wheeled armoured vehicles today with its unique features of 4x4, 6x6 and 8x8 vehicles that incorporate today's most advanced technologies and the operational advantages. continue...
Mittler Report Verlag GmbH Beethovenallee 21 D-53173 Bonn Phone +49 228 3500 870 Fax +49 228 3500 871 Contact us: info(at)mittler-report.de
© 2019 Copyright Mittler Report Verlag „A company of TAMM MEDIA“
As anti-armour weapons have become more powerful, armies have reacted by increasing the thickness and resilience of vehicle armour. Modern ammunition, however, destroys even the strongest armour, forcing armies to develop reactive and active protection systems.
The advent of potent shaped-charge warheads and kinetic-energy penetrators (KEPs) capable of defeating very thick armour forced armed forces to rethink their approach to vehicle protection, especially since thicker – and heavier – armour impedes mobility, increases fuel consumption and imposes significant strain on the power train and suspension.
Reactive armour (RA) is designed to neutralise the impact of shaped-charge warheads and kinetic penetrators. It can be integrated into the vehicle’s primary armour or employed as modular or applique armour attached over the vehicle’s organic armour. Reactive armour was first patented in West Germany in 1970, but Israel was the first nation to introduce it operationally, deploying RA-equipped M-60 tanks during the Lebanon War of 1982.
There are various categories of reactive armour, including Explosive RA (ERA), Non-Explosive RA (NERA), and Electric/Electromagnetic RA.
ERA is composed of high-explosive sandwiched between two armour plates. When a shaped charge strikes the ERA, the warhead’s energy causes the sandwiched explosive to detonate, neutralising the warhead’s energy before it reaches the vehicle’s organic armour. Similarly, the ERA’s explosive force deflects KEPs such as sabot rounds, preventing their penetration of the main armour; heavy ERA can even break the kinetic rods.
Modern anti-tank missiles (ATM) often employ a tandem shaped charge warhead; this consists of a smaller explosive charge at the warhead’s tip, which has the sole purpose of tripping the ERA and exposing the underlying organic armour, and a larger main charge intended to attack the now exposed organic armour. In addition to this vulnerability, explosive armour has the disadvantage that it creates shrapnel, forcing dismounted infantry to remain at a safe distance from the vehicle rather than sheltering in its vicinity.
In place of the high-explosive, NERA employs an inert material such as rubber as liner between the armour plates. The basic principle behind its function – dissipating the warhead’s energy prematurely – is the same as that of ERAs, but non-explosive reactive armour is generally less effective than explosive plates. On the other hand, NERA is lighter and cannot be defeated by tandem warheads.
Electric or Electromagnetic RA is a comparatively recent concept. It consists of two metal plates separated by a nonconductive buffer. The plates are under a high-voltage charge, forming a capacitor. When a warhead or KEP strikes the outer plate, it penetrates the nonconductive buffer, bringing the two charged plates into contact. The capacitor releases its accumulated energy, repelling or weakening the projectile’s blast or kinetic energy.
Reactive armour is deployed worldwide, especially on heavier armoured vehicles capable of carrying extra weight. Because of the various negative factors – including the burden imposed by the additional weight – it is normally mounted only in high-threat scenarios, such as operations against forces deploying sophisticated anti-tank weapons or IEDs.
The US Army provides a prime example. The organic armour on the ABRAMS M1 MBT is considered among the best in the world, eliminating the need for add-on protection in many cases. However, reactive armour was mounted on ABRAMS tanks as extra protection against IEDs during stabilisation operations in Iraq. In 2017, ERA kits were also sent to armoured units in Germany in reaction to rising tensions with Russia.
The US Army maintains two different ERA systems for the M1; both are designated as ARAT (ABRAMS Reactive Armour Tile) and supplied by GDLS. The brick-like M19 ARAT 1 was introduced in 2006 and is mounted horizontally to defend against vehicle-mounted and man-portable weapons such as RPGs. The M32 ARAT 2 was introduced in 2008 and resembles ceramic roof tiles. The curved shape is better suited to deflecting high-energy ordnance. Unlike the M19, the M32 can be mounted at a downward or upward angle to optimise defence against IEDs or against altitude-launched weapons. The M19 can be mounted alone. Alternately, the M32 can be placed directly over the M19, creating a two-layer ERA system. Importantly, ARAT is designed to only react to high-energy explosive or kinetic weapons; small arms fire will not set off the tiles, so enemies cannot strip a tank of its RA through machine gun fire.
GDLS, in conjunction with Rafael, also supplies separate ERA systems for the M2 BRADLEY Fighting Vehicle System (BFVS Armour Tiles) and for the STRYKER family (STRYKER Reactive Armour Tiles – SRAT II). Introduced in 2014, these rectangular tiles use an insensitive high-energy explosive to counter shaped charge threats, and are lighter than previous ERA applique systems. The BFVS Armoured Tiles are rated against all shoulder-fired and most tube-launched AT-weapons, while SRAT II is optimised for urban settings.
Several European firms are refining their reactive protection systems, hoping to improve performance while minimising negative aspects.
Dynamit Nobel Defence GmbH has developed CLARA (Composite Lightweight Adaptable Reactive Armour), also known under the German designation HL-Schutz Rad/Kette (“shaped charge defence for wheeled and tracked vehicles”). By utilising composite fibre materials rather than metal or ceramic plates, CLARA reduces the threat posed by shrapnel from detonating ERA blocks. Several variants are produced, with aerial density – defined as the weight of the armoured panel (in grammes per square metre) divided by the protection area of the panel – varying between 70 and 270 kg per square metre. The lowest-density segments provide protection against RPGs, while the strongest variant can stop 30mm sabot rounds. CLARA has deployed on German Army PUMA IFVs and been tested on the MARDER IFV as well as the BOXER APC variant. In late 2017, the United Arab Emirates News Agency released images of UAE LECLERC MBTs equipped with the CLARA system.
Swiss company RUAG has also developed a composite-based ERA. The SidePRO-CE applique armour is applied to the flanks of armoured vehicles to defend against high-energy anti-tank systems (including those with tandem warheads) as well as against KEPs. According to RUAG, the ERA’s explosive reaction is confined to a minimal area, reducing the potential for collateral-inducing shrapnel. Customers include Jordan (M60 PHOENIX MBT).
Poland has improved its original ERAWA (Explosive Reactive Armour – Wiśniewski, Adam, named to honour its developer) by introducing the ERAWA 2. The ERAWA 2 contains two explosive charges and is specifically designed to neutralise tandem warheads. There is also a limited capability against KEPs. ERAWA and ERAWA 2 plates are smaller than most ERAs, with each block measuring 15×15 centimetres. This allows for a very tight fit, with minimal gaps between blocks. ERAWA is suitable for medium to lightweight armoured vehicles.
Russia’s third-generation RELIKT ERA introduced in 2006 is deployed on the T-72B, T-80B and T-90AM MBTs as well as the BMPT RAMKA/TERMINATOR fire support vehicle. It consists of a 2 kg explosive tile sandwiched between two metal plates; an inert buffer between the ERA and the organic armour provides additional protection for the tank body. Rectangular ERA boxes protect the flanks and back of the tank, while trapezoidal ERA kits are arrayed around the turret. The manufacturer NII Stali describes RELIKT as twice as effective against shaped charges as the Soviet-era, second-generation Kontakt-5 ERA. It also reduces sabot penetration by 50%.
With the advent of the ARMATA armoured vehicle series, Russia has introduced a fourth-generation ERA designated as MALACHIT. The precise composition of the ERA is not publicly known; Western experts speculate that the plates might be composed of a laminated cer
Lüsterne Brünette masturbiert und lässt sich bedienen
Eine geile Blondine bumsen
Feuchtes Luder tief in den Hals gefickt

Sandwiched between two hard rods

Report Page