The Most Expensive (DIAMOND) Armor in the World | APFSDS & Armor Penetration Simulation 

Imagine a golden sabot round, would probably just obliterate itself on impact though

graphene

How does it compare to "Plot Armor"?

a weapon to surpass metal gear

Shouldn't you first learn the very basics about the topic you are trying to speculate? For example the basic info about the gold? Its density and how ressistant it is chemicaly... How exactly the golden sabot will be obliterated when its almost as dense as uranium and contrary to uranium its not very chemicaly active(the main reason why this metal earned its special position in human history...). Carbon steel's density is about 7.84 g/cm3 and gold density is 19.3 g/cm3. So if you gonna make a sabot out of it and shot it 1800m/s then steel gonna have plenty of trouble with the whole "obliteration" theory that you presented here... and particles lost via impact you will be easly able to recover as gold do not like to oxydate/rust or create any chemical bonds with the stuff that its expected to interact with in this type of situation.

you forgot mending bro

You can use Blast Protection too

please don't propose it to wargaming

@@ilyaa2010 you cant enchant mending together with unbreaking. But agree should be mending

smh just upgrade it to netherite

Exactly.

Just add durability V an projectile protection V and youl be fine...

​@@rudolphknoetze1487sir this isn't mine-

Unless you hold it in a matrix that prevents the shards from dispersing, and at this point, the conversation becomes classified.

Did you remember that modern armor are layered for a reason right? They even use glass in them. The trick Is not stop the bullet. Its sloving It enough for the next layers to cathc it

Sounds great!! But it seems difficult to model them because their fracture mechanisms are more complicated than isotropic and homogeneous materials I've been using.

ah, a fellow children of a dead earth enjoyer

You could do more metals like titanium as a hard one, or maybe gold as a really weak one but still expensive. I would love to see those.

And what about sausages!

@@onearthonelegion bre i think it would take 200000mm thick sausages to tank average apfsds round

Yeah it shatters instead

Want to know what’s also incredibly hard 😏

Your mom?

@@petravandenberg70 Ruby is pretty hard

@@Sukulieh I hate swords, spears are much better, for CQC I prefer really sharp but small rods that can also be concealed rather easily

According to Minecraft you are correct...

@@NK-qn6pqnice NC pfp.

Strictly speaking, I took a brittle material property of concrete material and updated it to match the diamond material (diamond compressive strength).

@@militarysimulationlab wouldn't the tensile strength be more relevant in case of armor though?

@@tedarcher9120 It's a super high speed impact so toughness plays a large factor I think.

@@tedarcher9120 Tensile strength would stop the cracks propagating in the armor but the toughness is what matters for deforming and halting the projectile

Glass textolite is a thing so preventing a brittle material from shattering isn't impossible. Especially if it's sandwiched between metal plates.

Thank you for your comment 😃

Large, solid plates of polycrystalline diamond are way more expensive than any ceramic, mainly because theres no machine that can grow them. It's easy to make drill bit sized pieces of decent quality, but a full armor plate would be a feat of engineering. And while it is true a solid sheet would be useless, it's arguably the best material for that pound for pound, with extreme hardness and stuffness, low density (compared to metals) and great toughness (for a ceramic, lol). A solid sheet of anything is useless against modern projectiles... On another note, I can imagine the massive spalling after that hit lol

@@antaresmc4407 read my comment again and maybe redact this major case of WoT player syndrome.

@@osmacar5331 i have, just expanded on it and corrected or added context to some points... Anything wrong? And I don't play WoT nor know what do you mean by that, but it looks like a personal attack, to which I'd thank if discussion is kept civil and productive...

@@antaresmc4407 you didn't expand on anything.

@@Verradonairun yes the diamond is mushrooming and bending something metals would do but not at all how nonmetals act

no, you can't break a diamond with a hammer

@@Breakbrak Yes you can

@@Breakbrak easily. it's not much different from glass.

And on top of that, the immense heat would cause it to evaporate into CO2

You’d need to give it time to react with ambient air. This is happening so fast that there isn’t enough o2 to readily available for it to burn much. I think.

@@Spanky00Cheeks the heat of the round hitting the diamond would burn it, its why you need so much cooling when using diamond as a cutter.

@@Storlans you cut with a diamond for entire seconds, if not minutes or hours. This collision happens in 1/500 of a second. There isn’t time for thermal conduction, or much burning (reacting with o2). The shattered parts flying away will have hot parts, and some parts of it will “eventually” burn. Go watch a fire at this level of slow motion. Its super slow.

@@Storlans heh, nice colection of people that have no idea what they are talking about. Diamond do not gonna burn in high temperature->that is why they are used in for example high speed concrete cuting discs... They like to disolve in steel(as they are from carbon and steel is iron+carbon) when the temperature is high so if you planing to cut anything from steel with diamond then the cooling will be a very good idea.

@@Spanky00Cheeks nothing gonna "eventually" burn... diamods are not chemicaly active->carbon in diamond have no free electrons to make a bond with other elements...

Aluminium armor. Armor, that can be penetrated by a machine gun.

AIUI, they are grinding the diamonds thanks to its brittleness.

@@samuelmendoza9356 no. Diamond is resistant to grinding. That's why they use it on drills. Diamond can't handle pressure. It shatters if you try to somehow bend it's structure. You can shatter a diamond with a pretty weak smack with a hammer on it's pointy side

Diamonds are weak to sharp indentations like chisels and strong against blunt force like shells.

@@Asbestos_ like how glass is quite hard but brittle as shit

@@tatotaytoman5934 "Mohs hardness, rough measure of the resistance of a smooth surface to scratching or abrasion, expressed in terms of a scale devised (1812) by the German mineralogist Friedrich Mohs. The Mohs hardness of a mineral is determined by observing whether its surface is scratched by a substance of known or defined hardness. To give numerical values to this physical property, minerals are ranked along the Mohs scale, which is composed of 10 minerals that have been given arbitrary hardness values." The number 10 is diamond... and glass is only 5.5. And no its not very brittle the idea with smacking it with a hammer will gonna only work with some dimonds that have deffects inside, in fact i remember some story about something similar to this method that was used in old times to cheat people as someone was testing wit hammer diamonds and then claiming that the ones that broke were fake so he did not paid for them but he was gatherubg the broken parts after the seller was gone with the money that he got from diamonds that did not broke.

*terrorussia

Oh no

@@user-rs1in3ge2y hryukni

I think the simulation accounted for each of the visible cubes to be independent from each other. You wouldn't be able to make such a large block of diamond anyways.

@@Frenchfrys17 I wonder though, we can already make our own diamonds. With enough time and the right technology, it should be theoretically possible to make giant diamond slabs

​@@CrazyDutchguys Diamond has a density of 3.5 g/cm^3. That's less than half the weight of RHA steel (7.84 g/cm^3) and a bit heavier than aluminum (2.7 g/cm^3) or silicon carbide (3.2 g/cm^3). However diamond is in another league of hardness compared to silicon carbide. I suspect that diamond along with boron nitride might already be in use in modern composite armor for the latest tanks. They would be closer to the front of the armor array while a steel backplate along with interwoven mesh would be used hold the hard but brittle diamond/boron nitride in place upon impact. The goal would be to force the projectile to shatter the diamond/boron nitride in front of it to as fine of a powder as possible without the material being pushed to the side. This results in the projectile spending a tremendous amount of energy and thus shattering and slowing down itself.

@@Frenchfrys17 AMAP armor packages that are fitted to new leopard 2s are advertised as using new nano ceramics in their add on modules, so we’ve definitely got some very fancy ceramic materials in tank armor. I also remember there being rumors about the leclerc using polycrystalline diamond in its armor array, but that hasn’t been confirmed. I remember an article that described the ceramic array used in either the leopard 2 or the Abrams, and it didn’t use a interwoven support. Instead the ceramic nodules were glued and pressed into a titanium matrix in order to hold the ceramics under compression. They also talked about pressing a thin metal plate over the front to hold it compression in all axis. This ceramic array would be mounted to a stiff metal backplate via an elastic layer for shock absorption. The metal backplate was needed to prevent the ceramics matrix from seriously deforming, which would shatter the ceramics. Aluminum or titanium would be better than steel for this, simply because it’s primary role is keeping the ceramic array from being entirely destroyed upon being struck. Mounting the ceramics to a flexible woven backing can also prevent the deformation of the entire ceramic module, but you can’t easily hold the ceramics under compression when using such a support.

Also supposedly the Abrams uses steel that’s reinforced with silicon carbide fibers

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. There's no way that armour wouldn't have shattered

Active protection system left the chat

​@@omegalongdongI'm assuming you are thinking of the trophy system. Most HE and HESH projectiles are too fast for it to react.

And vulnerable to incendiary weapon (as it's just pure carbon like coal)

​@@marczhu7473 but just like it's other natural form, graphite, when solid/sufficient amount isn't all that flammable in open air and doesn't burn anything like coal. requires an oxygen rich/ or high airflow environment to burn much at all, as the CO/CO2 released as temperature increases will smother/cool it. we use graphite for crucibles and nuclear reactors for a reason.

Actually it’s horrible for protection. There’s a reason diamond tools are typically things like drill bits rather than axe blades. High energy impacts shatter diamond, but due to its hardness, diamond is excellent for cutting things. it would be useful as serrated teeth on a blade but the blade itself is still better made with steel, and having a steel tip.

it can still make for excellent composite armor though, an idea is 20mm steel -> diamond plate -> polymer lining to prevent disintegration -> 50mm steel -> rubber spall lining@@tacticalturtlez4906

Oh, a man of culture! Salute, fellow mechwarrior!

@@Tequila628 o7

Thank you for your comment. The reason is it takes a lot of time for this computation🤔 Let me include some more in the next vid.

would be also interesting how it performs as layers in a composite armor

Getting StrV 103 vibes here

Why not simulate a plate from a battletech with layers of ceramic and diamond rods going through the ceramic

Underrated idea

one knocked out tank would tank the diamond jewelry market forever hee Although I guess DeBeers would assassinate everyone involved before that could happen.

Thank you for your opinion. Could you tell me what made you think so? Let me reflect your comment in the next videos.

@@militarysimulationlab I think he's refering to diamond's fragility. Even though it's the hardest material known, same pricipal goes to ceramics and why it's not such a great material against kinetic penetrators. Diamond, glass, ceramics would break apart instantly and let the tungsten through. In personal body armor they use ceramic to break the bullet and expose the soft core, so the layer behind it (e.g. kevlar) has a better chance to catch the bullet (bigger surface area, distorted lead, etc) And those simulations have limitations, for instance, self-sharpening depleted uranium rods are not accurately simulated. Either way, nice, fun simulation, have a great day!

@@militarysimulationlab Diamond is pretty low in density and it is fragile. The closest comparison we have would be nitride and carbide ceramics that get pretty close to diamond in hardness (relatively speaking). Some of them, like boron carbide and silicon carbide, have been tested and used in armor and those would be a close comparison to diamond (as close as we can realistically get anyway). The armor simulation is still probably more accurate than the projectile one. The projectile would most certainly just shatter and disintegrate on impact. Otherwise we would likely be using things like silicon carbide in penetrators.. Instead we use tungsten and uranium. Even tungsten carbide was phased out for its hardness was actually a detriment and would often shatter on impact. Such as early Russian APFSDS with tungsten carbide plugs actually performing worse than monolithic steel penetrators. You also encounter a velocity limit with lightweight projectiles and ultimately deliver less energy on target.

but they are sand

they do not have the same properties... for example the reaction to the UV light is different, not to mention that they do not look anything like stuff that you can see in a expensive ring.

@@Bialy_1 how hard is a common metamorphic rock then? they are hard but also brittle as they are rocks right?

Thermal conductivity has nothing to do with shaped charge. They are kinetic energy penetrators and do NOT melt anything.

That depends a lot based on just about everything. Modern composite armor makes use of a very wide range of materials in order to make use of their various advantages. In general lower density materials offer better protection by mass, primarily against HEAT warheads. However in order to make the best use of this efficiency you need a higher density material (like steel) in front of the lower density material in order to erode the high speed tip of the shaped charge jet. You also need to break apart APFSDS projectiles before the low density materials can effectively stop the pieces. This is best accomplished with either high density materials in certain arrangements meant to partially deflect the projectile, or very hard materials to shatter the projectile. Then there’s reactive armors which are a whole other can of worms, and they’re used in basically every relevant tanks armor

Thank you for your nice comment. LS-dyna, ANSYS, ABAQUS are typical one.

@@militarysimulationlab Thanks a lot for your kind reply 👍