Battleship Armour Engineering - Why is naval armour multi-layered?

Рет қаралды 115,563

Күн бұрын

Head to www.squarespace.com/drachinifel to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code DRACHINIFEL
Today we take a quick look at the underlying engineering reasons as to why naval armour consists of a brittle and a ductile layer instead of one really hard slab of metal.
00:00:00 - Intro
00:01:55 - Principles of naval armour
Naval History books, use code 'DRACH' for 25% off - www.usni.org/press/books?f%5B...
Free naval photos and channel posters - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want to talk about ships? / discord

Пікірлер: 431

@Drachinifel 7 ай бұрын

Pinned post for Q&A :)

@alessandrobarizza2339 7 ай бұрын

Did ships use other material before the metal plating in order to slow down/disrupt the incoming projectile. Something like another ductile material or some form of space armor?

@tonyennis1787 7 ай бұрын

Good stuff. Did you happen to note the amount of glass "spall" being passed through the cardboard backer in test 3? In the wild, the spall would be fast and heavy and able to do a lot of damage to wires, pipes, and carbon-based life forms.

@Drachinifel 7 ай бұрын

@@tonyennis1787 in the slow motion you can see the glass plate throws a lot of spall back from the impact site, even more went inward. Relatively little if any made it through the combined plate :)

@bkjeong4302 7 ай бұрын

Considering that the most powerful battleship guns ever built, such as the 16”/50, the 15” on the Littorios and of course the Japanese 18.1”, could penetrate most if not all belt armour ever put on a ship at most reasonable battle ranges, exactly how much belt armour of the highest quality naval steel would you need to withstand those kinds of hits?

@thehuscarl4835 7 ай бұрын

What sort of armor thickness would the Kirishima have needed to successfully resist the Washington's broadsides at Guadalcanal?

@clauderamsey9904 7 ай бұрын

As a mechanical engineer for over 20 years, one thing I've learned is that you never can know enough about metallurgy.

@m8rshall 7 ай бұрын

As a fellow mechanical engineer - I fully agree! Best choice? Just Know; that you don't know 😂

@chudleyflusher7132 7 ай бұрын

Metallurgy seems to me as one of the most complicated sciences. It includes so much math, physics, and chemistry.

@bartsanders1553 7 ай бұрын

@@chudleyflusher7132So you're telling me I love metallurgy

@ghost307 7 ай бұрын

@@m8rshall One of my Professors told us that the key to being successful in Engineering is being smart enough to know when you're out of your depth, and humble enough to ask for help.

@wierdalien1 7 ай бұрын

@@ghost307I think that's true of most sciences, medicine especially

@Colonel_Overkill 7 ай бұрын

I feel ashamed that I looked at this and thought "damn, only 20 minutes long" shout out to any other engineers who would enjoy a 8 hour seminar on metallurgical composition lol

@Shinzon23 7 ай бұрын

The difference is those guys are being paid to natter on. Whereas drach is doing this for fun and acknowledges most people are actively resisting the urge to put themselves into a Coma after 2 hours of professor talk

@Br1cht 7 ай бұрын

If you really are an engineer then you rather hold your own presentation to the doggies at home;)

@totalwar1793 7 ай бұрын

Hey, Drach explains it clearer than my Mechanics of Materials Professor

@mrsteamie4196 7 ай бұрын

@@totalwar1793do you have a young one or old one? Almost all my materials profs are dinosaurs xD

@totalwar1793 7 ай бұрын

@@mrsteamie4196 He's in his 50s

@Cbabilon675 7 ай бұрын

I like the idea of showing this practical Hands-On science. I believe it'll be a great learning tool for anybody who is a young Naval enthusiast, who is just found this channel.😊

@stevecummins324 7 ай бұрын

Not used in warships but some merchant vessels in WW2 which got labelled "plastic armour". After dunkirk it was realised some of the very old ferrys used in the evacuation had been surprising resistant to armour piercing bullets. Upon investigation the protection was found to due to decks being coated in asphalt. Asphalt being fairly hard gravel embedded in fairly soft bitumen. Admiralty wasn't happy with it being considered as amour, but it did get added to many merchant vessels and saved many lives. Might be interesting to see how pea gravel in tar stood up to BB pellet.

@TomDog5812 7 ай бұрын

Some steel body armor plates are coated with a substance similar to asphalt in order to "capture" bullet spall as well. Very interesting.

@JamesThomas-gg6il 7 ай бұрын

So asphalt is the binding material? Like is it sandwiched in between or more of a coating?.

@stevecummins324 7 ай бұрын

@@JamesThomas-gg6il the tar is largely in-between the gravel.so on impact a round would alternating between hitting very and soft material. Such Likely to cause considerable deflection of a small round. The tar would also help support/cushion rear of individual gravel lumpsl, helping the lump bleed off more of the projectiles energy before shattering.

@JamesThomas-gg6il 7 ай бұрын

@@stevecummins324 hey makes sense to me. How about sand as a buffer between two layers. Yes it would need a bunch of sand but sand bags work wonders even against full bore rifle rounds. Just an idea, not that any body that makes armor would take advice from an idiot like me.

@peterthomson4632 7 ай бұрын

I recall reading that this was researched by the British, and they found that a composite of Portland stone (very hard bluestone) and a matrix worked very well, and was of course much cheaper and quicker to produce than steel armour. Used on converted merchant carriers among other ships.

@kemarisite 7 ай бұрын

As an engineer (sort of, my work history is all environmental compliance) with a second semester of materials science, I approve of this and look forward to more. Particularly if we can ever really understand what the US was thinking when it was hardening class A armor plate for cruisers to 60-80% of the total thickness.

@bluemarlin8138 7 ай бұрын

Whatever it was thinking, US Class A armor at cruiser-grade thicknesses turned out to be the best armor in the world (along with Italian cruiser armor) against 6” and 8” shells in post-war tests. (And I haven’t ever heard anything about an 80% depth of hardening). It was only with battleship-grade thicknesses that the “thick chill” face hardening became a problem though. But US Class A battleship armor plates were hardened to more like 50-55% depth.

@kemarisite 7 ай бұрын

@@bluemarlin8138 I didn't remember the specific thickness, just that Nathan Okun had made similar comments about the extremely thick depth of hardening.

@5peciesunkn0wn 7 ай бұрын

the US had a hard-on for "SHATTER ALL THE SHELLS!" (and then making shells to try and pierce through those super hardened plates)

@shawnhamby9660 7 ай бұрын

@@5peciesunkn0wn The USN armor and gun departments were practically running a one country arms race in the 20s and 30s.

@5peciesunkn0wn 7 ай бұрын

@@shawnhamby9660 Yup lol.

@paulamos8970 7 ай бұрын

Excellent presntation Drach, I for one would be most interested in further videos on the types of materials used in Battleshipo construction. I would imagine that there are a number of differnts steels used in building a warship, as each has properties specific to the job they are required to do.

@gusty9053 7 ай бұрын

I think in his armor video he talks about the different types of steel used (like british BB armor was probably the best while american steel used in the general construction of ships meant that the american cruisers had the most protection overall for their class).

@ClimateScepticSceptic-ub2rg 7 ай бұрын

Designers of tank armour had to relearn this lesson. They found that a soft steel inner layer much reduced crew injuries from spalling off the hard outer armour.

@vibratingstring 7 ай бұрын

The Israelis wet one better--many decades ago--when they made the Mirkava double hulled with diesel in between, and a forward mounted engine to provide even more spalling protection.

@Meyer-gp7nq 7 ай бұрын

Doesn’t the Abram’s also do the nifty diesel in between thing? Or am I making that up?

@muhammadnursyahmi9440 7 ай бұрын

@@Meyer-gp7nqAbrams uses gas turbine engine, and the tank uses different compartment for ammo storage.

@LewisB3217 6 ай бұрын

@@Meyer-gp7nq yeah there is fuel in a compartment between the driver and the front hull armor

@gruntforever7437 2 ай бұрын

@@muhammadnursyahmi9440 but they do not burn gas in the Abrams (usually diesel but they can pretty much burn anything)

@TomSedgman 7 ай бұрын

Me at 8 minutes in: “ooh is he going to demonstrate glueing cardboard to glass later?” Me at 15 minutes in: “nailed it!” I love the practical demonstrations that you do Drach and would love to see more.

@obsidianjane4413 7 ай бұрын

Spoiler!!!

@lonjohnson5161 7 ай бұрын

Perhaps you mean, "glued it!"

@Kozakow 7 ай бұрын

I'm interested - Had you ever made a video about the beginnings and the development of compartmentalization? It's a pretty important concept which contributes greatly to the survivability of ships, so i hope you had covered it already.

@gusty9053 7 ай бұрын

I don't remember if it was a specific video but he makes a few points about it when he talks about the damage some german cruisers sustained at the battle of Jutland and how british cruisers had even more compartments (in some cases) despite suffering from a case of "sudden explosions" due to bad ammunition handling practices. So his Jutland specials could be of interest. Also some of the guides might have covered a specific ship ( i remember something about one of the british cruisers surviving around 20 big hits). Sorry about the vague references but the videos are rather old.

@Kozakow 7 ай бұрын

@@gusty9053I had actually recently reached the battle of Jutland episodes, but sadly the closest he got was talking about the practice of leaving blast doors open on British ships as a way to increase fire rate and the British shells being either too brittle or their fuses exploding too early to cause significant internal damage. He only mentioned things relevant to the video (something i fully understand). What i am more interested on is how people figured out the optimal size of a compartment (not that anyone had the perfect answer), the evolution of bulkheads, differences between navies and in the end - the impact of it on things ship related - from living on the ship to damage control and survivability.

@bobperrine6193 7 ай бұрын

I am 78 years old and still learning things.

@nickjohnson410 7 ай бұрын

I think it's fair to mention that the British did experiment with using a Stiff Upper Lip as light armor to much success, but found that the additional upkeep in tea and pasties was untenable at sea especially with war time shortages.

@billwit7878 7 ай бұрын

Chocolate is similar to armor plate. It gets brittle when cold and soft when warm. And it can be tempered.

@davidg3944 7 ай бұрын

But a ship armored with chocolate would rapidly find itself denuded due to the crew being somewhat peckish...

@billwit7878 7 ай бұрын

@@davidg3944 cleaning up choco bits after firing BBs at it will be more fun than cleaning up broken glass. You just need an ice cream cone....

@ditto1958 7 ай бұрын

Metallurgy is, as Yul Brynner said in The King And I, “a puzzlement.” But so is ballistics. As a curious person at the range, I’ve shot wood, rocks, bricks, watermelons and steel with rifles and handguns of various calibers. It’s always fascinating to see which ones explode melons and which ones just whiz right through, and which ones thump steel gongs hardest, which ones move the gong most and which ones actually damage the steel plates. Often the results are non-intuitive.

@TomDog5812 7 ай бұрын

mxv squared.

@mrsteamie4196 7 ай бұрын

@@TomDog5812to be fair, it's not *just* KE that matters -- a surprising amount of the terminal characteristics can be attributed to projectile shape/cross section as well as its own deformation characteristics

@webtoedman 6 ай бұрын

Which is why "Karomojo" Bell was able to drop elephants using a little Mannlicher-Schoenaur carbine chambered in 6.5 Mannlicher. That and extremely precise shot placement.@@mrsteamie4196

@scott2836 7 ай бұрын

Drach - I heartily second/ third / fourth… the comments about more of this type of presentation. It was a good “basic” explanation of a difficult subject, complete with visual demonstrations of the principles involved. I didn’t need to be a PE to understand it, and yet it didn’t feel dumbed down. Well done.

@MatthewChenault 7 ай бұрын

Will you discuss Dahlgren’s armor penetration tests and the development of the Dahlgren gun? It’s an interesting topic I briefly delved in when discussing a Royal Navy v. US Navy pertaining to ironclads.

@yumazster 7 ай бұрын

More of this? Not going to lie, it would be great!

@davidbrennan660 7 ай бұрын

Drach’s experiments always ramp up to the point the very planet is endangered ... I love this channel.

@nathanokun8801 7 ай бұрын

A few more complex points concerning the differences between homogeneous, ductile plates and hard-faced plates: (1) Hard-faced plates (Harvey, KC, Compound, Chilled Cast Iron) are penetrated mostly by velocity, not the shell weight. That is, the weight term only increases by the 0.2 power (small) but the velocity effect of increasing thickness penetrated goes up with the 1.21 power (if damage to the shell kept the same for all hits). (2) For homogeneous, ductile plates (Mild Steel, Nickel-Steel, Krupp Chromium-Nickel-Steel, RHA, Non-Cemented Armor, Class "B" Armor, Special Treatment Steel, etc.) between 0.2 and 1.1 caliber thickness, the French 1890 De Marre Nickel-Steel Penetration Formula gives rather good penetration values (again, when shell damage kept constant) at right anglesd (not as good at other angles of impact) -- intertwines US Naval Proving Ground Dr. Hershey's WWII test data) using a De Marre Velocity Coefficient of ~1.22 to change from nickel to nickel-chromium armors. (Below 0.2 the plates have large dents or "dishes" form on impact and above 1.1 the hole made is by the shell nose "wedging" the armor sideways, while in the 0.2-1.1 region the shell nose forms small dishes, only wedges near the face of the plate, and forms thick triangular backward-bent triangular "petals" ringing the back of the hole (broken off much of the time). Here the total kinetic energy of the shell using both weight and velocity work in unison. So we get penetration proportional to [(weight) x (velocity-squared)] to the 0.714 power = (W)^0.714 x V^1.43. (Note that this velocity power is exactly double the penetration increase for all face-hardened plates. Interesting.) (3) The hard face of face-hardened plates is brittle and breaks apart as it is punched through the hole and out the soft plate back shock-absorbing region. The thicker the face layer, the greater SCALING sets in to make bigger shells hitting proportionately scaled-up plates of identical properties penetrate more and more easily. Krupp originally used a 35% hard face and this had only a relatively small scaling effect weakening the thicker plates against bigger shells 9yet afain, with constant damage). Thinner faces do have less scaling, but the difference is not large. Going OVER 35% rapidly increases scaling, to the detriment of armor being hit by larger shells, though against small, cruiser-sized shells, the scaling is always small and works to make such shells penetrate better, not worse. Italy's Terni Company seems to have figured this out and had its thick plates have thinner proportional faces -- one thickness in cm -- than its thin plates. US WWII "Thick Chill" Class "A" face-hardened armor had a 55%face to try to damage the superior US WWII AP shells and this degraded this armor's resistance against the larger AP shells, though it was still stronger than US WWI-era Class "A" armor.

@vibratingstring 7 ай бұрын

I liked this--the experimental stuff was great--as well as archive fotos from Bethlehem steel! Your use of cardboard as analog for teak was good--although you did call cardboard more "ductile"--where what you meant to say was "tougher." Ductility is the mechanism to achieve toughness in metal (usually) but cardboard as well as teak achieve toughness a different way--through composite properties--strong directions and weak directions etc. Interestingly, this composite effect became of great interest well past 1910! One of my graduate school professors, Frank Ko, did a lot of Army funded research on "ballistic" composites using kevlar, spectra, and many other fibrous composite materials. And of course the Army did adopt kevlar helmets--not sure if they still do that.

@timwilliamanderson 7 ай бұрын

5:28 I thought ductile was a type of building materials used by aquatic birds for kitchens and bathrooms

@georgeburns7251 7 ай бұрын

Too funny

@-r-495 7 ай бұрын

As a fellow engineer I salute your efforts, especially under the circumstances in the UK concerning rifles 😊 Yes Drach, please do investigate this matter further!

@Kirk00077 7 ай бұрын

Oh boy, this is going to be hideously technical! Sign me up!

@markgarin6355 7 ай бұрын

15 min? Duck tile?.....hard to get them feathered suckers to stay on the hull where you put them.

@thewheelieguy 7 ай бұрын

Moar glue! A big benefit of duck tile armour is the additional buoyancy, though.

@markgarin6355 7 ай бұрын

@@thewheelieguy ah...yes, I believe your right...

@bluemarlin8138 7 ай бұрын

That’s why you attach them with duck tape.

@user-qb6rg5xr7m 6 ай бұрын

As a lifelong Pittsburgher who’s grandfather fought on Saipan and worked in the mills, rather proud to see so much Pittsburgh made iron being used. We are called iron city for a reason.

@Your.God.is.a.Delusion 7 ай бұрын

Best form of advertising is what you did at the start. Normally I avoid ads, but yours was pretty cool. That is exceptionally rare for me to say BTW. Maybe a first. Good Job.

@BuzzSargent 6 ай бұрын

104,000 views of this show about armor to me is amazing. Shows how focused your subscriber base is to your shows. Amazing! Have a Magical Day and Great 2024

@iancarr8682 7 ай бұрын

Fascinating presentation for a layman. Thank Drach.

@91Redmist 7 ай бұрын

Really enjoyed this scientific explanation of how armor works. I liked the practical demonstrations you did to help illustrate your points. So, of course I would be for more of these videos. If you get a chance to use TNT that would be a plus. 🤣

@mandowarrior123 7 ай бұрын

Timber backing is convenient for damage control, and just fixing to it generally in addition. Thank you for the demonstration.

@philliprandle9075 7 ай бұрын

Yes please more videos on this topic!!

@cedhome7945 7 ай бұрын

Fort Nelson NR Portsmouth is the home of the royal armorys cannon and big gun collection and they have a giant plate with some impressive holes in it .10inch thick about 6ft sq with lots of shots taken at it from different angles.worth a look at the whole museum as there's a battle ship cannon on the front lawn (as of a couple of years ago)

@farshnuke Ай бұрын

This genuinely taught me something. Like yes I know naff all about military history (or didn't until I started watching this channel) but this is something so simpler and so cool that I now I know and I like how you actually demonstrate things.

@guyplachy9688 7 ай бұрын

Absolutely want to see more! Keep it up, Drach!👍

@misterflibble6601 7 ай бұрын

Fascinating analogous practical demonstration of the principles of armor protection. Would definitely like too see more!

@andytrail6974 7 ай бұрын

Thanks Drach, great segment. You did a awesome job with your substituted materials. 👍👍

@WhySolSirius 7 ай бұрын

The practical demonstration was fantastic! Would love to see more in the future.

@stephenkneller6435 7 ай бұрын

Outstanding presentation Drach! Thank you.

@andrewfletcher8701 7 ай бұрын

Another great video. Great demonstration of practical material science and the complexity that exists in even the simple situation of trying to poke holes in a flat plate. More please

@dhk7986 7 ай бұрын

I, for one, would love this sort of practical and visual demonstration of the engineering behind ships. Thanks for the entertaining and educating video!

@rossswenson532 7 ай бұрын

You sir are an excellent teacher. I knew some of the reasons behind compound armour, your experiments demonstrate for even beginner's. Well done!

@OmegaTou 7 ай бұрын

I would have loved to see follow up shots with the plastic BBs on the damaged composite armor.

@motorcop555 7 ай бұрын

Absolutely fascinating presentation. Thanks for showing the process and progression of damage management.

@baalzeebub4230 7 ай бұрын

Loving the format, topic and style. Thanks, Drach!

@Vito_Tuxedo 7 ай бұрын

Brilliant, Drach! More of this type of video would be very welcome and most enlightening! 😎

@davepratt9909 7 ай бұрын

I always enjoy a practical demonstration.

@Zugh3 7 ай бұрын

Excellent video, thanks Drach

@MsSteelphoenix 7 ай бұрын

Fascinating stuff! I love practical science demonstrationsas it really helps people understand exactly what's going on in a way that descriptions can't.

@jameskilpatrick7790 7 ай бұрын

This was a very effective demonstration. Well done!

7 ай бұрын

Excellent Video. Very illustrativ to actually see it in done in the model. Thank you

@nicholasgreenway610 7 ай бұрын

Yes indeed these are some of my favorite of your videos, and please don’t hesitate to make them extremely long.

@robfromgpw5243 7 ай бұрын

Drach, loved this video! Keep them coming. Also hoping that you and yours have a lovely Christmas season

@sangomasmith 7 ай бұрын

Pedantic correction: wood (and to a lesser extent carboard) isn't ductile. It doesn't plasticly deform much at all and doesn't strain harden. Instead it bends until it breaks suddenly, like a spring. For a true ductile material (like lead or copper), you'll see the material inelastically deform by a large amount. This means that, once deformed, it doesn't come back to true. But it van deform a lot before it breaks.

@lukeueda-sarson6732 7 ай бұрын

To be even more pedantic, ductility is about tensile stress, but in talking about impacts, this shouldn't (isn't?) really be relevant; you should be talking about malleability - compressive stress. Lead isn't ductile, or at least, it isn't very ductile, but it does have considerable malleability. However, I do tend to read "ductile" all the time when I expect to see "malleable", so this is clearly a thing with engineers (I am a scientist, not an engineer!).

@Floris_VI 5 ай бұрын

I love that you showed a practical example, im famillar with the concept is pretty good detail but it was alot of fun to see tested with such an easy thing to replicate

@jonathanwoody7242 7 ай бұрын

Well Done! Eagerly await a second part.

@jasonstandlea1784 7 ай бұрын

Fascinating! I wouldn't of thought those materials would show results!

@christopherridle7670 7 ай бұрын

Yes, I did enjoy that very much. I have been familiar with the material properties of iron and steel since my university days, but it's always fun to see ballistic tests.

@MasterGardenersAssoc.ofAlberta 7 ай бұрын

I for one would very much enjoy seeing the development of armour. And thank you for explaining in both a visual and a oral manor, it helps a non-engineer understand. Thank you for all your effort.

@skyden24195 7 ай бұрын

Thanks for employing the physical demonstrations.

@Knobsterific 7 ай бұрын

Yes please, more like this!

@neilwilson5785 7 ай бұрын

I love these practical videos. I loved the age of sail food video as well!

@pauldonlin3439 7 ай бұрын

I like that the Squarespace sponsorships double as a tutorial.

@andreidescult 7 ай бұрын

Drach demonstrating naval armour technology using household items. Simply AWESOME!

@jewelhome1 6 ай бұрын

Same idea as the laminated safety glass in the front windshield in automobiles. Fascinating video.

@Chezblarger 7 ай бұрын

Yes, I like it’ll the deep dives into armor and how it works! TY

@Rob.DB. 7 ай бұрын

Love this engineering stuff!

@keithb1501 7 ай бұрын

Really enjoyed this video. I have watched many videos where they say x type of armor was used but never explained why. Very nice to finally know. Keep up the great work!

@davidbryden7904 7 ай бұрын

I really enjoyed this practical demonstration. Thanks and cheers 🍻

@mmarionz 7 ай бұрын

Really enjoyed this one !!

@rafale1981 7 ай бұрын

Great vid, would watch more of this!

@coolmarkyt 7 ай бұрын

I'm genuinely impressed at how well that cardboard/ glass demonstration worked 😀

@brennantate1901 6 ай бұрын

Brilliantly well done

@Kaipelana 6 ай бұрын

This was great! Thank you.

@GrumpyGrobbyGamer 7 ай бұрын

Thank you for this very informative and entertaining video. I will happily watch you break pain of glass with projectiles, so bring it on dude!

@geoffkeeler5106 6 ай бұрын

Great video, informative and entertaining, more like this please!

@73Trident 7 ай бұрын

Very interesting Thanks Drach.

@grugbug4313 Ай бұрын

Solid! Top KEK! Peace be with you.

@scotfield3950 7 ай бұрын

More please,well done!

@als3022 7 ай бұрын

Excellent presentation, thank you.

@JoeyC777 7 ай бұрын

Love the experiments!

@KatanamasterV 7 ай бұрын

Totally down for more of this

@jamieknight326 7 ай бұрын

Woooo! Perfect mid afternoon uplift :)

@chrisperez4694 7 ай бұрын

OKay this was interesting. Yes I liked it... it was a good explanation for armor and why there was a backing. Please continue to do these please!

@edwardpike3386 7 ай бұрын

YES THIS WAS VERY INTERESTING

@mysss29 7 ай бұрын

Excellent demonstration! I really feel like I understand the inclusion of wood backing now...turns out holding the armor plate together is a really valuable function! And it's probably much more effective at stopping splinters (rather than generating more) than I thought.

@ypaulbrown 7 ай бұрын

your channel is the greatest, cheers from Florida, Paul

@ross-t6663 7 ай бұрын

Great video, I look forward to more like it. Thanks

@arkadiuszrucinski2020 7 ай бұрын

Great video, waiting for more

@kpd3308 7 ай бұрын

Very interesting and well presented. Thank you.

@williammorgan5320 7 ай бұрын

Well done. My vote would be Yay, to continue along "anything to do with the naval experience of the era" presentations.

@charlesspringer4709 6 ай бұрын

I think you win the most words to explain something for this week.

@andrewfanner2245 7 ай бұрын

Drach does failure modes, rather better than I recall from student days!

@peterbrezniak7224 7 ай бұрын

Thank You for improving my quality of Life As always the best to you and yours. PAB

@dioniciotorres4290 7 ай бұрын

Trial and error is how we learn new things. I learned i dont know as much as i thought about metals, great video 👍

@toroon 7 ай бұрын

very informative. More please!

@sangomasmith 7 ай бұрын

Something that tank nerds talk about is triple-hardness steel (THA) - steel made from explosively bonding or rolling a very high-harness steel (~500BHN HHA) between two sheets of normal RHA. This is very tricky to do for various reasons, but can in theory create a structural steel that is much more thickness-efficient than normal RHA. The rough naval equivalent would be rolled compound armour - where cast iron was poured between two wrought iron sheets and then rolled. I think that it might also have been possible to chill the two outside sheets and get a slab of chilled/white iron between two pieces of wrought. The advantage of a triple laminate structure like this is that, if you're cunning, you can use both the front and back face to support the brittle interlayer and almost completely stop crack propagation. The disadvantages are things like complexity, cost, constraints on what sort of steel you can use (due to changes in size from quenching) and limits on the ultimate thickness that the plates can get to (from memory, modern THA can only be made about 50mm thick). All this is probably what kept the technology from being explored further in ships, and limits the use in tanks to this day.