Textile Research Journal Article

Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric

Structures and their Experimental Characterization of Ballistic
Performance
A. Kadir Bilisik1
Abstract The aim of the research was to develop Erciyes University, Engineering Faculty, Department of
light and enhanced energy absorbed layered ballis- Textile Engineering, 38039 Talas-Kayseri, Turkey
tic structures. For this reason, various ballistic
structures were developed. These structures form Yildiray Turhan
two groups: multiaxially stitched and unstitched. Pamukkale University, Engineering Faculty, Department
Each group further consists of four structure types: of Textile Engineering, 20020 Kinikli-Denizli, Turkey
(i) 14-layer Kevlar 29 woven fabric; (ii) 14-layer
Kevlar 129 woven fabric; (iii) 7-layer Kevlar 29 fab-
ric and 7-layer Kevlar 129 fabric; and (iv) 12-layer
Kevlar 29 fabric oriented with respect to basic fab-
ric direction at an angle of ±45° and 2-layer Kevlar
129 fabric. The Kevlar 29 and 129 fibers were con-
sidered to have 2.9 and 3.4 GPa tensile strengths
and 70 and 99 GPa tensile modulus values, respec-
tively, and the properties of the fibers were equal-
ized in fabric form, but the Kevlar 129 fiber had a
lower unit weight fabric (g/m2). Each of the devel-
oped structures were affected by five types of threat:
0.22, 0.38 round nose, 9 mm full metal jacketed,
0.357 jacketed soft point and 7.62 full metal jack-
eted projectiles. The results show that there were no
significant energy absorption differences between
multiaxis stitched and unstitched structures. How-
ever, conical depths upon impact on the multiaxis
stitched structures were small compared to those of
the unstitched structures. This result might be use-
ful, especially in the design of soft vest applications.

Key words multiaxially stitched woven struc-

ture, unstitched woven structure, chain stitching,
ballistic woven fabric, specific energy absorption,
conical depth and diameter

Introduction soft vest are ballistic performance, providing comfort for

the user, a light weight, and cost-effectiveness. To fulfill
Protective materials gain large acceptance in defense-
related areas. One of these areas is the personal protection 1
Corresponding author: tel: +90352 437 4937/Ext. 32875; fax:
where a soft vest is used. The basic requirements for the +90352 437 5784; e-mail: [email protected].

Textile Research Journal Vol 79(14): 1331–1343 DOI: 10.1177/0040517509104275 © The Author(s), 2009. Reprints and permissions:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
TRJ 1332 Textile Research Journal 79(14)

these requirements, the important factors are high-per- hand, when increasing the number of layers of the ballistic
formance fiber, fabric formation and layered structures [1– structure, the effect of projectile geometry becomes negligi-
6]. ble [21].
The ballistic performance of material is defined as its Traditional ballistic structures are layered without
capability to absorb energy locally and to spread out stitching. However, in some applications they are stitched
energy fast and efficiently [7–9]. For this reasons, fibers with an orthogonal stitching pattern [22] or a bias stitching
demonstrate low density and high strength properties [10, (diamond) pattern [23, 24]. It has been reported that dia-
11]. The structures from these fibers could provide better mond stitching affects the ballistic properties of the lay-
energy absorption and light weight. It can be pointed out ered fabric structures [25]. Recent studies on ballistic soft
that the energy absorption rate increases with fiber modu- structures have concentrated on biaxial two-dimensional
lus but that decreased ductility at high modulus may result (2D) [26–28] and multiaxis three-dimensional (3D) struc-
in optimum fiber stiffness for transverse critical velocity [7, tures where there is no crimp inside the structures [29, 30].
8]. For instance, for fiber-based armor, the modulus and The objective of this study is to develop ballistic struc-
elongation at rupture of the fiber are important fiber param- tures where some of them are multiaxially oriented to each
eters. They are defined as the sonic velocity in the fiber (Vs other and are connected together with orthogonal and bias
= (E/ρ)0.5, where E is the material modulus and ρ is the stitching while other structures are not stitched. The devel-
material density) and the specific energy absorption capabil- oped structures are tested to find the ballistic performance
ity (Esp= 0.5σrup εrup/ρ, where σrup is the tensile breaking for further analysis.
strength and εrup is the elongation at rupture) [7, 8].
When the ballistic fabric layer structures are impacted
upon, two waves, longitudinal (in plane) and transverse
(out of plane), are generated in a fiber [12]. The transverse
Material and Method
wave results in a pyramidal shaped deformation of the
fiber which spreads out from the point of impact, and later Ballistic structures have been designed and implemented
is more conical in shape [13]. The longitudinal strain wave by using the woven fabric. Woven fabric consists of para-
propagates at a much higher velocity along the fiber and it aramid types of fibers (Kevlar® of DuPont). Two types of
reflects to the impact points [4, 14]. fibers were used: Kevlar 29 and 129. The fiber properties
Another study has shown that it is necessary to under- are given in Table 1 with other fibers generally used in bal-
stand the mechanism of yarn pull-out and the role of yarn listic areas. As we can see in the table, the tensile modulus
pull-out friction in the fabric to enhance ballistic perform- and strength of the Kevlar 129 are higher than those of the
ance. Yarn pull-out is defined as one end of the yarn pulled Kevlar 29 by about 17% and 40% respectively.
out of the fabric structure by the motion of the penetrator.
The force required to pull the yarn from the fabric structure
Ballistic Fabrics
is the sum of the frictional forces between the yarn sets at all
the intersecting points [14–17]. Two types of fabrics were used as given in Table 2. These
Gel-spun, ultrahigh molecular weight, high perform- are Kevlar 29 (style number 713) and Kevlar 129 (style
ance polyethylene (HPPE) fabric coated with elastomer number 802). Both types of fabrics were received from Du
has been analyzed and it has been claimed that multi-hit Pont de Nemours International S.A., Switzerland. Both
fire performance of the elastomer coated fabric panel was fabrics were plain weave and warp and filling yarn counts
enhanced [18]. Ballistic fabric from para-aramid (Kevlar were about 112 tex. The densities of the warp and fillings
129®, DuPont) and unidirectional structure from HPPE were about 12 and 8 ends per centimeter respectively. Both
(Dyneema SK60®, Toyobo) were impacted upon to deter- fabric unit areas weighed 280 and 190 g/m2, respectively.
mine the failure mechanism. Two types of failure mode The number of warp and filling ends per centimeter with
were observed as a transmitted stress wave and shear fail- Kevlar 129 is given in Table 2. However, the experimental
ure. At low-impact energy, para-aramid fiber failure is by fabrics were designed so that they can have the same densi-
fibrillation, and that of HPPE is by shear [19, 20]. ties (number of ends per centimeter, 12 for K29 and 8
The effect of the projectile geometry on the ballistic struc- K129) which results in lighter Kevlar 129 woven fabric
ture upon impact was also studied experimentally. When the compared to the Kevlar 29 woven fabric. It was found that
projectile speed was increased regardless of projectile geom- the tensile properties of the Kevlar 129 woven fabric was
etry (sharp pointed, semi-spherical or blunter), out-of-plane almost equal to that of the Kevlar 29 woven fabric. Water
deformation of the ballistic projectile increased. However, repellent treatment was also applied to both fabrics.
the deformation generated from the blunter projectile was
small compared to that of the other projectile geometries,
since the blunter projectile contacted more fiber during
impact and more impact energy was absorbed. On the other

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
 Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric Structures A. K. Bilisik and Y. Turhan 1333 TRJ

Table 1 Properties of high modulus fibers used in ballistic structures [7, 8].
Fibre type Fibre diameter Fibre density Tensile Tensile Elongation Melting
(µ) (g/cm3) strength modulus at rupture point (ºC)
(GPa) (GPa) (%)
Aramid

Kevlar 29®, DuPont 121. 1.43 2.91 170 41. 530

Kevlar 129®, DuPont 121. 1.45 3.41 199 3.3 530

High performance
Polyethylene-HPPE 3.8 0.97 3.51 110 3.5 150
(Dyneema SK60®, Toyobo)
Ultrahigh strength 381. 0.97 2.59 117 3.6 147
polyethylene-UHSPE
(Spectra 900®, Honeywell)

Table 2 Properties of Kevlar® fabrics.

Weave Yarn count (tex) Density (per cm) Weight (g/m2)
Fabric type type Treatment
warp filling warp filling received measured

Kevlar 29® (713) Plain 112.85 111.88 12.3 12.0 270 280 Water repellent (wrt)
®
Kevlar 129 (802) Plain 111.50 111.88 8.3 8.3 185 190 Water repellent (wrt)

Ballistic Structures oriented at 0° (warp) and 90°(filling) to each other. The last
one had the top of the structure as 12-layer Kevlar 29 ori-
The developed ballistic structures were divided into two ented ± 45° to the fabric axis and the bottom of the struc-
main groups: unstitched and stitched structures. Both struc- ture as 2-layer Kevlar 129. The structure density (weight per
tures had a further four substructures. The first two were unit area) was heaviest for the totally layered Kevlar 29 and
totally layered Kevlar 29 fabric and Kevlar 129 fabric ori- the lightest for the totally layered Kevlar 129. The other two
ented at 0° (warp) and 90°(filling) to each other. The third structures were somewhere between them. The developed
one was half layered Kevlar 29 and half layered Kevlar129 structures are presented in Table 3 and Figure 1(a).

Table 3 Physical properties of ballistic structures.

Label Number Ballistic Fiber Fabric Thickness Dimensions Weight
of layers structure type orientation (º) (mm) (width×length) (kg/m2)
Type I
TI-a 14 unstitched K29 0/90 6.0 305×305 4.27
TI-b 14 unstitched K129 0/90 3.0 305×305 2.87
TI-c 7/7 unstitched K29/K129 0/90 5.0 305×305 3.51
TI-d 12/2 unstitched K29/K129 ±45/0/90 5.0 305×305 3.91
Type II
TII-a 14 stitched K29 0/90 5.0 305×305 4.27
TII-b 14 stitched K129 0/90 2.7 305×305 2.87
TII-c 7/7 stitched K29/K129 0/90 4.2 305×305 3.51
TII-d 12/2 stitched K29/K129 ±45/0/90 4.0 305×305 3.91

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
TRJ 1334 Textile Research Journal 79(14)

Figure 1 (a) Ballistic structures;

unstitched (top) and multidirec-
tional stitched (bottom). (b) Ballis-
tic structure; stitch direction (light
line); repeated unit cell (bold line);
local undulation on structure sur-
face after stitching.

As seen in Figure 1(a), the stitched layered structures Ballistic Threat

were sewn to the warp and filling directions and the ± bias
directions as well. This is called multidirectional stitching Five types of ballistic threat were chosen to test the devel-
as seen in Figure 1(b). The distance between adjacent oped ballistic structures. They were labeled as Ia and Ib
stitching lines was 3 cm. The layers were chain stitched and (0.22 and 0.38 round nose), IIa and IIb (9 mm full metal
the stitching yarn was 200 denier nylon 6.6. jacketed and 0.357 jacketed soft point) and III (7.62 full
The stitched structure was composed of micro unit metal jacketed). The threat properties are given in Table 4.
cells where four stitching lines oriented ± bias and The projectiles based on each threat type are also shown in
orthogonal directions and the unit cells repeated to the Figure 2 before and after impact upon the ballistic struc-
structure. This unit cell was repeated along the structure tures. The projectiles were provided by Machine and
width and length as shown in Figure 1(b). Chemistry Industry (MKE) in Turkey.

Table 4 Threat types and properties according to National Institute of Justice (NIJ) standards.
Threat Label Projectile dimensions(caliber) Projectile Projectile Projectile Number of Shooting
type and ammunition types mass (g) velocity (m/s) energy (J) shots distance (m)
I Ia 0.22 12.58 315 1128 1 16
Ib 0.38 round nose 10.23 255 1332 1 16
II IIa 9 mm full metal jacketed 18.03 353 1500 1 16
IIb 0.357 jacketed soft point 10.23 419 1898 1 16
III III 7.62 full metal jacketed 2411. 760 6931 1 25

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
 Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric Structures A. K. Bilisik and Y. Turhan 1335 TRJ

Figure 2 Projectile types; before (top) and after impacted

(bottom).

Figure 4 Schematic view of the shooting places based on

projectile types on the ballistic structure (front) and clay
layer (back).

Behind the structure, clay (Roma plastilina given in NIJ

standards) was employed to detect the back face signature of
each threat on the ballistic structure after impact. The sche-
matic view of the structure and clay arrangement with their
dimensions is shown in Figure 4. The shooting tests were con-
ducted in Istanbul Etiler Police Academy shooting polygon.
The dimensions of the back face signature, i.e. the conical
Figure 3 Kinetic energy of each threat types before diameter and depth, in the clay were measured by a digital
impact. caliber which had a tolerance of ±0.05 mm for each structure.

Results and Discussion

Kinetic Energy of Threat
Ballistic Structure Results
The kinetic energy of each projectile can be calculated by
the following equation using the data presented in Table 4: The developed stitched structures were visually inspected
after stitching. It was found that around the stitching line
2 there was a local undulation as shown in Figure 1(b). This
E k = [ 0.5m p ⋅ v p ] (1)
was more visible around the structure edges.
After ballistic structures were impacted upon by the
where Ek is the kinetic energy of the projectile (J), mp is the above-defined threat types, each of the impacted structure
mass of the projectile (kg) and vp is the speed of the projec- was visually inspected and the damaged layer was identified.
tile (m/s). The energy level on each projectile before For the purpose of comparison, specific energy absorption
impact is given in Figure 3. capacities for each structure were calculated. Additionally,
conical depth and conical diameters were measured. The
results are given for unstitched and stitched structures in
Ballistic Tests Tables 5 and 6, respectively. The impacted structures and
Ballistic tests were conducted on the front of the each struc- their signature on the clay are shown in Figure 5(a). All
ture surface divided into nine regions as seen in Figure 4. All projectile types are locked by the structures except threat
threat types impacted to the structures. The shooting loca- type III.
tions of threats were top left corner for .22, top right corner The specific energy absorptions based on the damaged
for .38, bottom left corner for .357, bottom right corner for layer (SEADL) and the structural densities (SEASD) were
9mm and middle of the structure for 7.62 as seen in Figure 4. calculated by using the following relations:

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
TRJ 1336 Textile Research Journal 79(14)

Figure 5 (a) Ballistic structures

after ballistic test; penetration sur-
face (left) and back face signature
(right) for each developed struc-
ture. (b) Projectile locked in the
structure by warp and filling yarn
sets; TI(d) structure where projec-
tile (0.357) indentation seen inside
the structure (left) and crossed yarn
sets locking mechanism after
impact by the projectile (0.22) inside
the structure (right).

SEADL = kinetic energy of the threat General Results

(J)/damaged layer density (g/m2)
Specific energy absorption based on damaged layers is
SEASD = kinetic energy of the threat described for each structure and presented in Figure 6.
(J)/structure density (g/m2) The general tendency is that there is no significant differ-
ence between the unstitched and stitched structures for
It was also realized that the impact loading caused local SEADL. However, the differences depend on the fiber
density changes in the structure as seen in Figure 5(b). types and the Kevlar 129 shows better energy absorption
Local density changes can be considered as warp and fill- properties compared to those of Kevlar 29. In this case, the
ing density changes in the individual fabric in the ballistic best structure is TI-b followed by TI-d and TI-c, and the
structure. These changes sometimes bring more warp and worst is TI-a. Other structures are somewhere in between.
filling to the unit area as seen on the left-hand side of Fig- However, the structure TII-a under the threat yb shows
ure 5(b) or decrease the number of warp and filling ends in exceptionally high SEADL. This is not understood well
the structure as seen on the right-hand side of Figure 5(b). because of the nonlinear nature of the ballistic event.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
 Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric Structures A. K. Bilisik and Y. Turhan 1337 TRJ

Table 5 Ballistic test results of unstitched ballistic structures.

Ballistic Threat type Conical depth Conical diameter Number of SEADL SEASD
structure code code (mm) (mm) damaged layer (J/(g/m2)) (J/(g/m2))
xa 13 201. 11 0.45 0.03
xb 21 311. 10 1.18 0.07
ya 30 371. 12 0.89 0.11
TI-a
yb 31 401. 14 0.80 0.21
z Complete 18.9 14 >1.62 >1.62
penetration
xa 22 221. 11 0.67 0.04
xb 32 361. 10 1.74 0.11
ya 40 411. 12 1.31 0.17
TI-b
yb 44 451. 14 1.18 0.31
z Complete 101. 14 >2.41 >2.41
penetration
xa 16 221. 11 0.67 0.03
xb 24 381. 10 1.74 0.09
ya 34 401. 10 2.63 0.14
TI-c
yb 30 401. 14 1.18 0.25
z Complete 11.9 14 >1.97 >1.97
penetration
xa 15 261. 12 0.33 0.03
xb 20 361. 10 1.74 0.08
ya 30 401. 12 1.31 0.12
TI-d
yb 34 451. 12 2.36 0.22
z Complete 101. 14 >1.77 >1.77
penetration

Table 6 Ballistic test results of multidirectionally stitched ballistic structures.

Ballistic Threat type Conical depth Conical diameter Number of SEADL SEASD
structure code code (mm) (mm) damaged layer (J/(g/m2)) (J/(g/m2))
xa 10 181. 10 0.45 0.03
xb 20 281. 10 1.18 0.07
ya 28 401. 13 0.59 0.11
TII-a
yb 31 351. 11 3.20 0.21
z Complete 8.6 14 >1.62 >1.62
penetration
xa 18 151. 11 0.67 0.04
xb 27 341. 10 1.74 0.11
ya 30 391. 13 0.87 0.17
TII-b
yb 36 341. 15 0.94 0.31
z Complete 8.9 14 >2.41 >2.41
penetration

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
TRJ 1338 Textile Research Journal 79(14)

Table 6 Ballistic test results of multidirectionally stitched ballistic structures (continued).

Ballistic Threat type Conical depth Conical diameter Number of SEADL SEASD
structure code code (mm) (mm) damaged layer (J/(g m2)) (J/(g m2))
xa 14 241. 11 0.67 0.03
xb 24 301. 10 1.74 0.09
ya 37 401. 12 1.31 0.14
TII-c
yb 37 471. 15 0.94 0.25
z Complete 9.7 14 >1.97 >1.97
penetration
xa 11 211. 11 0.67 0.03
xb 20 351. 10 1.74 0.08
ya 26 441. 12 1.31 0.12
TII-d
yb 30 361. 14 0.95 0.22
z Complete 8.3 14 >1.77 >1.77
penetration

The specific energy absorption based on the structure tion. TI-d and TII-d, TI-c, and TII-c are between those
density is defined for each structure and presented Fig- structures. This also indicates that stitching does not
ure 7. Similar results are observed in which again TII-b is affect the energy absorption properties of the developed
the best and TI-b is the worst in terms of energy absorp- structures.

Figure 6 Specific energy absorp-

tion based on damaged layers of
developed unstitched and stitched
structures for all threat types except
threat z.

Figure 7 Specific energy absorp-

tion based on structural density of
developed unstitched and stitched
structures for all threat types
except threat z.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
 Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric Structures A. K. Bilisik and Y. Turhan 1339 TRJ

Figure 8 (a) Conical depth and (b)

conical diameter of unstitched and
stitched structures for all threat
types except threat z.

Figure 9 The relation between spe-

cific energy absorption based on
structural density (SEASD) and
developed ballistic structure density
for all threat types except threat z.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
TRJ 1340 Textile Research Journal 79(14)

Figure 10 For threat type ya, the

relation between specific energy
absorption based on damaged lay-
ers (SEADL) and (a) conical depth
and (b) conical diameter of
unstitched and stitched structures.
For threat type yb, the relation
between specific energy absorp-
tion based on damaged layers
(SEADL) and (c) conical depth and
(d) conical diameter of unstitched
and stitched structures.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
 Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric Structures A. K. Bilisik and Y. Turhan 1341 TRJ

Figure 11 For threat type ya, the

relation between specific energy
absorption based on structural
density (SEASD) and (a) conical
depth and (b) conical diameter of
unstitched and stitched structures.
For threat type yb, the relation
between specific energy absorp-
tion based on structural density
(SEASD) and (c) conical depth and
(d) conical diameter of unstitched
and stitched structures.

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
TRJ 1342 Textile Research Journal 79(14)

The conical depth (back face signature) of the each A similar tendency was observed with regard to SEADL
structure was drawn and presented in Figure 8(a). It can be – conical depth and diameter on stitched and unstitched
observed that the stitched structures have lowest conical ballistic structures for threat type yb. However, conical
depths compared to those of the unstitched structures diameters in the stitched structures are less than those of
regardless of fiber types. Also, the highest conical depths the unstitched structures. These results are shown in Fig-
were recorded at structures having Kevlar 129 fiber com- ures 10(c) and 10(d).
pared to those of the structures having Kevlar 29 fiber.
This indicates that stitching makes the structure stiffer
compared to that of the unstitched structure and somehow SEASD – Conical Depth and Diameter
prevents large transverse deformation. On the other hand, Relation for Threat Types ya and yb in the
reducing the structure density for Kevlar 129 woven fabric Ballistic Structures
(i.e. warp and filling ends per centimeter) results in a light Specific energy absorption based on structure density is
structure but high transverse deformation. It seems that almost the same for unstitched and stitched structures for
the same energy absorption performance is received from threat type ya. This indicates that stitching does not improve
the Kevlar 29 and Kevlar 129 fabric structures but the Kev- the ballistic performance of the structure, but conical depth
lar 129 ballistic structure has less weight. When Kevlar 129 is less in all stitched structures than that of the unstitched
woven fabric structures are multiaxially stitched, they show structures. It can be concluded that stitching absorbs the
nearly the same conical depth compared to that of the Kev- same energy compared to that of the unstitched case but
lar 29 woven fabric structures, which might be of critical prevents large deformation in a direction out of the plane
importance in some defense-related areas. of the structures as seen in Figure 11(a). On the other
In the conical diameter case, there are significant conical hand, there is no obvious relation found between conical
diameter differences in the structures between low, xa and diameter and structure types for threat type ya as shown in
xb, and high, ya and yb, level threats; low level energy threats Figure 11(b).
make deformations of small diameter in the ballistic struc- In threat type yb, a similar tendency was observed with
ture whereas high level threats make deformations of large regard to SEASD – conical depth compared to threat type
diameter in the ballistic structure as seen in Figure 8(b). ya on stitched and unstitched ballistic structures. However,
The structural density against SEASD for each threat conical diameter in the stitched structure appears to be less
type is plotted and presented in Figure 9. The lightest struc- than that in the unstitched structure. These results are
ture Kevlar 129 structure is the best for specific energy shown in Figures 11(c) and 11(d).
absorption compared to that of the Kevlar 29 structure. As
seen more closely in developed unstitched structures, coni-
cal depth is also the highest in Kevlar 129 fabric structures
compared to that of the Kevlar 29. This is improved by Conclusions
multiaxially stitching, especially for the Kevlar 129 struc-
tures. However, the wearing comfort of the multiaxially Multiaxially stitched ballistic structures have been devel-
stitched Kevlar 129 structure should be tested in a real life oped. The impact properties of these structures have been
environment. compared to those of the unstitched structures. The results
have shown that there were no significant energy absorp-
tion differences between multiaxis stitched and unstitched
SEADL – Conical Depth and Diameter structures. However, multiaxis stitched structures have low
Relation for Threat Types xa and yb in the conical depth (back face signature) compared to that of the
Ballistic Structures unstitched structures.
On the other hand, although woven fabric from Kevlar
The values of SEADL on unstitched structures are higher 129 is lighter than that of woven fabric from Kevlar 29,
than those of the stitched structures because the layers in the upon impact Kevlar 129 fabric in the layered structure has
unstitched structures change freely their positions upon a high level of conical depth compared to that of Kevlar 29
impact whereas layers in the stitched structure are locked by fabric in the layered structure. This is improved by multi-
stitching yarn in their positions. This limits the movement of axis stitching of the layered structure of the Kevlar 129 fab-
the layers upon impact. However, the conical depths in the ric which brings the results to the level of the unstitched
stitched structures are less than that of the unstitched struc- layered structure of the Kevlar 29 woven fabric. This might
tures because stitching makes the structures stiffer and be of particular importance, especially for the design of a
reduces the conical depth upon impact. On the other hand, lighter soft vest.
there is no obvious relation found between conical diameter
and structure types for threat type ya. These results are
shown schematically in Figures 10(a) and 10(b).

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015
 Multidirectional Stitched Layered Aramid Woven Fabric Structures A. K. Bilisik and Y. Turhan 1343 TRJ

Acknowledgements 15. Kirkwood, K. M., Kirkwood, J. E., Lee, Y. S., Egres, R. G.,
Wetzel, E. D., and Wagner, N. J., Yarn Pull-out as a Mecha-
The authors would like to thank Du Pont de Nemours nism for Dissipation of Ballistic Impact Energy in Kevlar KM-
International S.A. for providing the Kevlar fabrics for this 2 Fabric, Part I: Quasi-static Characterization of Yarn Pull
research work. They also appreciate their invaluable sup- Out, Army Research Laboratory ARL-CR-537 (2004).
port to Istanbul Etiler Police Academy. The authors thank 16. Kirkwood, K. M., Kirkwood, J. E., Lee, Y. S., Egres, R. G.,
Research Assistant Miss. Gaye Yolacan for helping during Wetzel, E. D., and Wagner, N. J., Yarn Pull-out as a Mecha-
preparation of the manuscript. nism for Dissipation of Ballistic Impact Energy in Kevlar KM-
2 Fabric, Part II: Prediction of Ballistic Performance, Army
Research Laboratory ARL-CR-538 (2004).
17. Mulkern, T. J., and Raftenberg, M. N., Kevlar KM2 Yarn and
Literature Cited Fabric Strength under Quasi-static Tension, Army Research
Laboratory ARL-TR-2865 (2002).
18. Rosset, W. S., Patterned Armor Performance Evaluation for
1. Bilisik, A. K., Design of Multifunctional Ballistic Structures, Multiple Impacts, Army Research Laboratory ARL-TR-3038
in “Land Force Symposium, Istanbul” (Language: Turkish, (2003).
Abstract: English), 1998. 19. Pineda, E., Hogue, C., and Goldsmith, W., Ballistic Properties
2. Yildiray, T., “Design of Ballistic Fabrics”, MSc Thesis, Ege of Zylon for Application to Firearm Projectile Protection,
University, Bornova-Izmir (Language: Turkish, Abstract: Eng- Army Research Laboratory ARL-CR-529 (2003).
lish), 1999. 20. Raftenberg, M. N., Schneider, M., Moynihan, T. J., and Smith,
3. Bilisik, A. K., Structure-property Relations to the Ballistic C. A., Plain Woven, 600 Denier Kevlar KM2 Fabric under
Structures, in “I. National Textile Symposium, Denizli” (Lan- Quasi Static, Uniaxial Tension, Army Research Laboratory
guage: Turkish, Abstract: English), 1997. ARL-TR-3437 (2005).
4. Babcock, W., and Rose, D., Composite Preforms, AMPTIAC 21. Montgomery, T. G., Grady, P. L., and Tomasino, C., The Effect
Newsletter, 5(1), 7–11 (2001). of Projectile Geometry on the Performance of Ballistic Fab-
5. Stein, W., and Zhan, H., Construction and Action of Bullet rics, Textile Res. J., 52(7), 442–450 (1982).
Resistant Vests, Melliand Textilberichte, 6, 463–468 (1981). 22. Armellino Jr., R. A., and Armellino, S. E., Ballistic Material
6. Lane, R. A., High Performance Fibers for Personnel and Vehi- for Flexible Body Armor and the Like, US Patent No. 4522871,
cle Armor Systems, AMPTIAC Quarterly, 9(2), 3–9 (2005). June 11 (1985).
7. Carr, D. J., Failure Mechanisms of Yarns Subjected to Ballis- 23. Dunbavand, I. E., Flexible Armor, US Patent No. 4608717,
tic Impact, J. Mater. Sci. Lett., 18, 585–588 (1999). September 2 (1986).
8. Hearle, J. W. S., “High Performance Fibers”, Woodhead Pub- 24. Harpell, G. A., Palley, I., Kavesh, S., and Prevorsek, D. C.,
lishing Limited and CRC Press LLC., Cambridge, UK, 2001, Ballistic-resistant Fine Weave Fabric Article, US Patent No.
p. 69. 4737401, April 12 (1988).
9. Erlich, D. C., Shockey, D. A., and Simons, J. W., Slow Penetra- 25. Karahan, M., Kus, A., and Eren, R., An Investigation into
tion of Ballistic Fabrics, Textile Res. J., 73(2), 179–184 (2003). Ballistic Performance and Energy Absorption Capabilities of
10. Jacobs, M. J., and Dingenen, J. L., Ballistic Protection Mecha- Woven Aramid Fabrics, Int. J. Impact Eng., 35, 499–510
nisms in Personal Armor, J. Mater. Sci., 36, 3137–3142 (2001). (2008).
11. Bazhenov, S., Dissipation of Energy by Bulletproof Aramid 26. Bhatnagar, A., and Parrish, E. S., Bi-directional and Multi-
Fabric, J. Mater. Sci., 32, 4167–4173 (1997). axial Fabrics and Fabric Composites, US Patent No. 6841492,
12. Roylance, D., Ballistics of Transversely Impacted Fibers, Tex- January 11 (2005).
tile Res. J., 47, 679–684 (1977). 27. Bhatnagar, A., and Tan, C. B. C., Ballistic Fabric Laminates,
13. Wilde, A. F., Photographic Investigation of High-speed Mis- US Patent No. 6846758, January 25 (2005).
sile Impact upon Nylon Fabric, Part II: Retarding Force on 28. Park, A. D., Ballistic Laminate Structure in Sheet Form, US
Missile and Transverse Critical Velocity, Textile Res. J., 44(10), Patent No. 5437905, August 1 (1995).
772–778 (1974). 29. Bilisik, A.K., Multiaxis Three Dimensional (3D) Circular
14. Wilde, A. F., Roylance, D. K., and Rogers, M., Photographic Woven Fabric, US Patent No. 6129122, October 10 (2000).
Investigation of High-Speed Missile Impact upon Nylon Fab- 30. Mohamed, M. H., and Bilisik, A. K., Multilayered Three
ric, Part I: Energy Absorption and Cone Radial Velocity in Dimensional Fabric and Methods for Producing, US Patent
Fabric, Textile Res. J., 43, 753–761 (1973). No. 5465760, November 14 (1995).

Downloaded from trj.sagepub.com at NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIV on March 18, 2015