WO2006074685A1

WO2006074685A1 - Reactive protective device

Info

Publication number: WO2006074685A1
Application number: PCT/EP2005/000142
Authority: WO
Inventors: Wolfgang Fucke; Jan Hampel; Hans-Jürgen RÖMER; Günter WEIHRAUCH; Gerd Kellner
Original assignee: Geke Technologie Gmbh
Priority date: 2005-01-10
Filing date: 2005-01-10
Publication date: 2006-07-20
Also published as: CA2592760A1; PL1846723T3; KR101194295B1; EP1846723A1; DK1846723T3; US20060162539A1; DE502005009843D1; CA2592760C; ATE472712T1; EP1846723B1; ES2347797T3; NO338962B1; NO20074016L; IL166873A; KR20070098805A

Abstract

The invention relates to a reactive protective device that does not cause end-ballistically relevant splintering for an object to be protected, characterized in that two pyrotechnic layers (2, 3) slanted in the active area of the threat are placed on both sides of a rigid or flexible, single layer or multilayer support (4) of any shape so that shock waves and reaction gases are formed once both layers are ignited and these shock waves and reaction gases are accelerated at a very high speed at an angle both against as well as in the direction of the penetrating threat in such a manner that the pyrotechnic protective surface is in a dynamic balance for almost the entire active time.

Description

REACTIVE PROTECTION DEVICE

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1 . Field of the invention

The present invention relates to a pyrotechnic protection, and more particularly to a shatterproof reactive protection device against shaped charge threats.

2. Technical background

Due to their very high penetration power equipped with a hollow charge warhead antitank arms (PzAbwHWa) pose a high threat, especially for light to medium armored vehicles. Increasingly proves to be the Russian PG 7 in Out of Area - missions as a fundamental battlefield threat to be considered as this weapon system is widely distributed worldwide.

The protection of light and medium armored vehicles against such antitank handguns is only very limited or no longer possible with conventional reactive and especially passive protection systems, because the payload of the vehicles is limited and necessary for the protection of the surface weight of the armor is too high. The lighter vehicles have only thin wall thicknesses, as the basic vehicle protection is usually designed only for small-caliber armor-piercing ammunition in caliber to 14.5 mm. Therefore, various reactive, i. explosive protection systems have been developed to reduce the basis weight required for protection.

For example, the HL-protection of medium armored vehicles with a basic protection of about 30-50 mm armor steel equivalent with passive protection systems requires an additional basis weight of the order of 500 kg / m ² and with previously known, already powerful reactive protection systems still an additional basis weight in of the order of magnitude of 300 kg / m ² against the threats of PzAbwHWa. Since the beginning of the 1970s, arrangements have been known both for shaped charges (HL threat) and for anti-aircraft missiles (KE threat) in which pyrotechnically accelerated elements cause a lateral disturbance of the incoming or penetrating threat and thus a reduction of the threat Breakdown power occurs. Upon initiation by the impending threat, such devices are referred to as reactive protection, with controlled ignition as active armor. For the most part, reactive arrangements are a single-layer or multi-layer, one-sided or two-sided coating of the explosive with mostly metallic plates. Such arrangements are effective with appropriate dimensioning both against shaped charges and against KE projectiles and as protection modules worldwide in many armored vehicles in use.

Plate accelerating reactive systems have the distinct disadvantage that more or less large masses must be accelerated to speeds of several 100 m / s, which burden both the environment and the supporting structure. Therefore, reactive armor is primarily designed as modules (surface elements) in box construction. For lighter objects to be protected or thinner structures, the use of reactive components, especially because of the load imposed by the system itself, is severely limited or not possible. This applies in particular to orders against KE threats, since their power reduction requires relatively large masses to be accelerated. In reactive arrangements against shaped charges, the required perturbation masses are indeed significantly lower, but much higher speeds are needed to reach the incident with up to 10 km / s hollow charge jets still with laterally acting perturbation masses.

Arrangements are also known which interfere with hollow charge jets during penetration directly by means of explosive layers or by electric fields, deflect them and thus bring about a reduction in performance. Such devices are in the case of the use of explosives associated with the use of considerable explosive thicknesses to maintain over a longer period (due to the interfering beam length) jamming conditions. explosive layers Although they ignite very quickly when hollow charge jets penetrate, they nevertheless do not cause directional lateral jet disturbance, particularly in the front region, in the case of conventional sandwich arrangements, even with a greater inclination against the penetrating jet. This is only achieved if there is an inclined, quasi-free explosive surface, which is optionally combined with a supporting (damming) wall. Pure, relatively thick powder or explosive layers or explosive sheets applied to a panel or wall are found in a number of known applications. These are basically reactive arrangements of conventional construction with one-sided explosive occupancy.

Although in the case of shaped charges the detonation of the explosive takes place very rapidly, a certain period of time is still required for the construction of a pressure field, since the target particles which have been hit are initially accelerated away from the penetrating jet tip mechanically roughly in the form of hemispherical particles. This initially creates a cavity through which a more or less large part of the particularly effective, because very fast tip portion of the beam can pass undisturbed. However, this area is decisive for the residual effect of the HL threat and thus determines the efficiency of the defense or the effort required for a reduction in performance.

Corresponding considerations apply to the occupation of the explosive layer with plates to be accelerated. These need not only be accelerated by shock waves and gas forces, but they must also bridge the crater formed by the jet tip in order to reach the passing beam laterally. The structure of the arrangement and in particular its angle to the penetrating threat are the determining parameters here. Multilevel and sometimes highly inclined reactive protective structures attempt to minimize the adverse effects of cratering, as described above, in a number of known embodiments. In general, however, this leads to structures with a lot of explosives or modules with a small effective protection area and in relation to the covered area of great depth. Furthermore, this results in negative marginal influences and insufficient overlaps. In addition, the proportion of design-related dead mass increases. Such, the protection performance is not direct Serving masses represent in all previously known reactive protective devices constitute a significant proportion of the required basis weight and accordingly reduce the protection efficiency.

There are also reactive protective devices are known, which are connected upstream of the structure to be protected and have the aim to reduce by suitable explosive occupations, the negative mechanical or end ballistic accompaniments to the environment. Such, usually multi-layered and usually complex structures have a difficult to see action sequence of the individual components and their interaction. Although they have proved to be quite effective against shaped charges, but are subject in principle to the above-mentioned effect limitations and evaluation criteria.

High-performance reactive protection systems known hitherto can not completely prevent the HL threat even through the use of considerable surface masses, since only a certain proportion of the shaped charge jet can be influenced by the disruptive measures. Therefore, usually about 20 to 30 percent of the power of the shaped charge ammunition must be compensated as a residual power from the base armor of the vehicle.

The weight advantages of reactive devices over passive protection devices are faced with a number of disadvantages. Conventional reactive protection systems, for example, predominantly function by means of the principle of flying plates, which once seriously endanger the environment of the armored vehicle and, on the other hand, act on the structure with the plate flying toward the vehicle wall. This is especially important for light armored vehicles.

There are a number of such armor known. The accelerated plates preferably consist of steel, as described for example in EP 0 379 080 A2. According to this disclosure, the reactive protection is combined with additional passive protection to compensate for the portion of the shaped charge jet which is not sufficiently dissipated by the reactive protection. In US-A-5,824,951 a reactive armor is described in which the inert plates surrounding the explosive consist of different materials. The accelerated against the shaped charge jet plate is made of glass, which with the beam zufichten on the vehicle to be protected plate of steel. Behind the jet flying disk there is a cavity to not interfere with its movement for the period of interaction with the shaped charge jet.

In US-A-4,741,244 a reactive armor is described in which a cavity is provided behind the board flying against the vehicle. In this disclosure, it is stated that the protective effect of the rear plate is greater than that of the plate on the jet. This steel reverse-flying plate moves at a very high speed, so that a correspondingly heavy basic protection must be mounted on the vehicle, so that the vehicle wall is not penetrated by parts of the reactive protection.

In DE 37 29 21 1 C1, a reactive protection is described in which obliquely arranged sandwich structures in the vehicle direction with a layered structure of explosives and brittle materials such. Glass to be combined. The structure should act against the front part of the shaped charge jet, which penetrates the upstream reactive protection almost unhindered due to the inertia of the inert sheets. In the described arrangement also takes a high load by the incident on the vehicle parts.

In DE 199 56 297 C2, a reactive protection against shaped charges is described, in which layers arranged obliquely to the direction of the bombardment explosive bombardment surface is occupied with interference layers made of fiber composite material to avoid hard splinters. At least one interference layer is formed from a high-strength fiber composite material in the form of a textile fabric of artificial or renewable raw materials or their combination.

DE 1 99 56 1 97 A describes a classic reactive armor, in which only the usual metallic component to avoid structural and environmental damage by a non-metallic plate (preferably made of fiber composite material) is replaced. The protective effect against HL and KE threats is protected by the Achieving acceleration of one or more such plates, wherein the reactive assembly is disposed in a non-metallic housing. The described function of an additional, called Beulblech plate is incomprehensible.

US-A-5,637,824 is a classical reactive composite armor having an explosive layer and a metallic plate accelerated in the direction of the threat. Due to the detonation, the HL beam is reduced in its performance in a layer of the explosive layer following, relatively thick, dynamically acting and dammed back by means of a metallic plate layer by jet disturbance. The dynamic effect of the intermediate layer can be enhanced by a layer introduced into the active zone and by a further explosive layer in front of the rear metallic plate. The arrangement is based on the so-called "collapse effect" described in the literature, and virtually all liquid, metallic or non-metallic materials are mentioned as materials for the production of this effect, most of which, however, do not produce such a physical effect It is also described the case that the front dam is formed by only a non-metallic protective layer, which then requires an increased explosive thickness to produce the internal pressure required for a dynamic effect After detonation of the first foil, the structure reverts to conventional reactive armor with an explosive layer on both sides. In addition, both the environment and in particular the structure are burdened.

In DE 37 29 21 1 C is a classic reactive sandwich arrangement (metallic plate with an explosive intermediate layer), which is embedded in a special way in hard foam. This first active layer is followed by an explosive layer with subsequent brittle body structure (glass body) with separating layers of explosive. The entire complex arrangement is located in a metallic housing. In principle, therefore, the arrangement described is a relatively thick Vorpanzerung with inclined introduced reactive sandwiches from explosive-accelerated steel plates, wherein the spaces are filled with hard foam. The known by such arrangements practically undisturbed passing, powerful beam tip is to be intercepted in the subsequent layer of a dynamically dammed glass body structure.

Also in WO-A-94/2081 1 is a conventional reactive arrangement with two mutually inclined, bilaterally occupied explosive layers in a solid metallic housing. The subject matter of the invention was not the classical reactive sandwich arrangement with metallically accelerated plates, which was assumed to be known, but the nature of its arrangement in a solid housing. This setup has provided protection against both HL and KE threats. Such structures are used in a number of armored vehicles of Soviet origin.

A fundamental problem with the reactive sandwich protection arrangements, in particular against KE threats, is the initiability of the explosives used with relatively thin coating thicknesses, which are necessary for reasons of the required low energy density because of the shock loads on the protective or housing structures. The arrangement described in DE 33 13 208 C therefore has the aim of effecting a jet disturbance comparable to that of the so-called crater breakdown by means of a porous or foamed layer with incorporated explosive component used in a conventional reactive armor. This layer is covered in particular on both sides with metal plates for protection against KE threats and thus represents again a reactive sandwich of conventional design.

DE 102 50 1 32 A relates to protective arrangements against blast-producing and projectile-forming mines, but not against shaped charges. The protective effect is carried out via containers with a filler of a liquid or a flowable medium. Basically, this is a dynamic protective structure, but not a reactive device to ward off HL threats.

From the comments on the state of the art for reactive protection systems outlined above, it can be deduced that the previously known reactive systems are still relatively heavy and have relatively high basic protection for compensation require the residual power. For PzAbwHWa this still corresponds to a required basic protection in the order of 60 to 80 mm armor steel equivalent.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The problem underlying the invention is to protect medium-weight and even only slightly armored vehicles with correspondingly low basic protection against shaped charges, in particular against medium-sized shaped charge projectiles such as PG-7 without causing additional ballistic effective

Splinters arise. Such HL protection for light armored vehicles requires: a very high effectiveness of the protection arrangement, a low basis weight while minimizing residual power; the vehicle wall must not be subjected to undue force or penetration by the threat or parts of the protection system; there must be no fragmentation of the vehicle environment due to the protection system; the mobility of the vehicle must not be restricted; parts of the protection system may need to be installed or removed during the mission; the respective road traffic licensing regulations (for example in Germany: StVZO) must be met; there must be no danger beyond the protection system due to the explosive on the vehicle, i. in Germany e.g. Classification 1 .4 according to the Dangerous Goods Ordinance (GGVS); with mounted protection, fast access to flaps and storage spaces must be possible.

According to the present invention, this object is achieved in that at least two layers of a pyrotechnic material of the same or different proportions and / or thicknesses are arranged at a distance from each other freely or in a housing made of a non-metallic material such as rubber at an angle to the direction of bombardment , Advantageous embodiments and modifications of the invention are the subject of the dependent claims. In a preferred embodiment, this pyrotechnic protective structure consists of a carrier of any shape inclined in the area of impact or impact of the threat onto which pyrotechnic layers are applied on both sides. By igniting both layers, shock waves and reaction gases are formed and accelerated both against and in the direction of the penetrating threat. As a result, both the front, high-performance radiation elements and a crucial part of the total beam length are disturbed in shaped charges and thus lose their breakdown power. The pyrotechnic structure is at least approximately in a dynamic equilibrium over the entire time of action and exerts no end ballistisch relevant or destructive influences on its environment, ie neither on the outside nor on the structure to be protected itself. The size of the required salaried area results from simple kinematic considerations of the penetration process.

It is a very simple and basic arrangement, which is basically subject to no limitations or restrictive technical specifications. This leads to a level of innovation that is not achieved by any previously known reactive device. In addition, the proposed pyrotechnic protection surface is suitable for effecting a large increase in the level of protection in a number of known armor both by an upstream circuit as well as by integration.

In principle, pyrotechnic protective surfaces can be easily combined with arrangements against KE threats. In any case, protective optimizations against several types of threats require little or no dead mass.

Of course, despite the generally unrestricted freedom of action, a reasonable ratio of the few parameters involved must be maintained. In conventional reactive armor, the effectiveness is critically dependent on sizing requirements. In contrast, in the present invention, in principle, only a few prerequisites have to be taken into account, which, moreover, still apply to all reactive arrangements. These include, for example, the minimum explosive thickness for ensuring initiation or continuous detonation. An exception is the desired deflagration, as far as this is not to be achieved via the composition of the pyrotechnic layer. Further prerequisites arise from the geometric relationships and from the relation between threat and protective surface dimensioning. Here, the materials used, such as the type of explosive or corresponding admixtures up to the number of protective surfaces are taken into account.

Due to the high efficiency of a pyrotechnic protective surface according to the invention, the amount of explosive per unit area to be used compared to previously known reactive armor be significantly lower, taking into account the above limitations up to 50%. As a guideline for the design, the thickness of the explosive coverings can be about 50% of the mean beam diameter at an angle between the defense area and the threat above 30 °.

Fundamental considerations on the achievable speeds of free and occupied explosive surfaces can be made using the Gurney equation for plane pyrotechnic surfaces:

V ₁ = (2 E) ^{α 5} - ((1 -A + A ² ) / 3 + bA ² + a) ^{α5 where} a = Mi / C and b = Ivk / C and A = (1 + 2-a) / (1 + 2-b);

M / C: ratio of the mass of wall and explosive;

Index 1: front surface, index 2: back surface;

(2-E) ⁰ ' ⁵ : Gurney factor (here assumed to be 2,800 m / s);

V2 = A V1.

With quasi one-sided assignment, a or b becomes zero.

In the following table some dimensions are calculated, which underline the fundamental considerations. It does not depend on the absolute amount, but on the clear confirmation of the consideration in connection with the present invention (D: thickness, M: mass, S: sandwich). D1 rhol MI DC rhoC MC D2 rho2 M2 MS MSLos from A vi v2 cm g / cm3 kg / m2 cm g / cm3 kg / m2 cm g / cm3 kg / m2 kg / m2 kg / m2 1 1 1 m / sm / s

0.01 2.8 0.3 0.2 1, 5 3.0 0.01 2.8 0.3 0.8 1, 6 0.09 0.09 1, 00 3883 3883

0.1 2.8 2.8 0.2 1, 5 3.0 0.1 2.8 2.8 8.4 16.0 0.93 0.93 1, 00 1888 1888

0.1 2.8 2.8 1 1, 5 15.0 0.1 2.8 2.8 8.4 16.0 0.19 0.19 1, 00 3331 3331

0.1 2.8 2.8 2 1, 5 30.0 0.1 2.8 2.8 8.4 16.0 0.09 0.09 1, 00 3883 3883

0.1 2.8 2.8 3 1, 5 45.0 0.1 2.8 2.8 8.4 16.0 0.06 0.06 1, 00 4138 4138

0.1 2,8 2,8 0,5 1, 5 7,5 0,2 2,8 5,6 1 1, 2 21, 3 0,37 0,75 0,70 2796 1958

0.1 2.8 2.8 0.5 1, 5 7.5 1 2.8 28.0 33.6 64.0 0.37 3.73 0.21 3109 641

0.1 2.8 2.8 0.5 1, 5 7.5 2 2.8 56.0 61, 6 117.3 0.37 7.47 0.1 1 3204 351

0.1 2.8 2.8 0.5 1, 5 7.5 3 2.8 84.0 89.6 170.6 0.37 11, 20 0.07 3242 242

0.1 2.8 2.8 0.5 1, 5 7.5 15 2.8 420.0 425, (810.2 0.37 56.00 0.02 331 1 51

0.01 2.8 0.3 1 1, 2 12.0 1 7.85 78.5 79.1 150.5 0.02 6.54 0.07 4604 342

0.01 7.85 0.8 1 1, 2 12.0 1 7.85 78.5 80.1 152.4 0.07 6.54 0.08 4340 348

0.10 7.85 7.9 1 1, 2 12.0 1 7.85 78.5 94.2 179.3 0.65 6.54 0.16 2649 434

0.01 1, 5 0.2 0.5 1, 2 6.0 0.01 1, 5 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.03 0.03 1, 00 4522 4522

0.10 1, 5 1, 5 0.5 1, 2 6.0 0.1 1, 5 1, 5 4.5 8.6 0.25 0.25 1, 00 3067 3067

0,10 4,5 4,5 0,5 1, 2 6,0 0,1 4,5 4,5 13,5 25,7 0,75 0,75 1, 00 2068 2068

With a larger explosive material thickness (DC) and a relatively thin carrier layer, theoretically speeds of the order of magnitude of the windrow speed of more than 4 km / s are obtained. The free surface or a small occupancy of the explosive surface decides on an approximation to the theoretically achievable speeds.

With very thin coatings (protection of the film surface) in the order of 0.1 mm, very high surface speeds (over 3 km / s) are achieved even with very small explosive film thicknesses (eg 2 mm - the minimum thickness is determined by the ignition properties) , Already with very small allocations (for example 1 mm AI), the surface speed drops back below 2 km / s. However, it is still very high compared to traditional sandwiches.

With one-sided or quasi one-sided coverage, average explosive thickness and relatively massive wall (eg for KE protection or for system reasons) results in realistic dimensions and very high unilateral speed wall speeds in the order of only 50 m / s. Such a small one Speeds can still be controlled by mechanical means. This results in this limit range of interpretations according to the invention particularly interesting combinations in which a high level of protection efficiency with the lowest depth and without burden of environment and structure are combined.

The following basic arrangements are considered to be exemplary in the context of designs of the carrier according to the present invention (see Fig. 4 and Fig. 5):

Fig. 4A: Symmetrical assignment by means of pure explosive films. Of course, this also includes films with surface treatment or surface protection. This results in a first approximation simultaneous detonation. The "dynamic dam" by the detonation gases increases the effective damming mass and results in a maximum surface velocity of the order of the swath velocity The wall itself, by definition, does not experience acceleration The velocity of the reaction gases can be significantly affected by the film design and the selected explosive In the case of an occupancy of the explosive layer with a massive layer, as is predominantly the case with classic sandwich structures, this possibility of influence is severely restricted.

4B and 4C: Different explosive substance occupancy. This results in a resulting speed of the partition or of the carrier. With a suitable design and a suitable choice of material, this basically does not limit the range of use. An almost complete symmetry of the entire reactive arrangement is then achieved by a symmetrical arrangement of two surfaces. As an approach for a rough estimation of the resulting acceleration of the supporting layer or of the connecting layer either in the direction of the threat or against the threat, the differential thickness between the two explosive films can be considered as a first approximation. Fig. 5A: Between the pure explosive films there is a more extensive wall (eg very low density of the order of 0.1 g / cm ³ ). This wall can be designed dynamically relatively hard even with high compressibility.

FIGS. 5B and 5C: The explosive films in the structure corresponding to FIG. 5A are coated with a very thin layer either on the wall side (support side) or on the outside (threat side and object side). Thereby, according to the Gurney considerations above, an adjustment of the desired swath propagation speed on this page is made possible. Thus, for example, in the area of low surface occupancy, an extension of the duration of engagement with respect to the threat can be achieved.

Of course, the explosive films or the assignments may have varying thicknesses. Thereby, e.g. the effectiveness of a sub-area, such as to compensate for different depths of protection or employment, are influenced.

In conjunction with the interception of the fast beam portions by sufficiently high speeds of free film surfaces can be on the appropriate surface coverage very wide-acting arrangements with high overall efficiency. As a limiting case, a one-sided occupancy of the explosive film with an accelerated sheet of classical dimensioning can then be considered. However, this applies only to this subcomponent of a reactive structure, but not to a reactive arrangement within the meaning and with the claim of the present invention.

A thicker supporting layer or a separating layer between the explosive films with additional physical properties, for example with respect to the dynamic behavior or specific properties with respect to shock waves, may be advantageous because the engagement depth is increased, ie several jet particles or a larger beam length remains engaged there , Known explosive dynamically compacted glass body work on this basis. However, these are relatively difficult not least because of the required thicknesses in the mass balance of an armor. In reactive armor, the influence of element size on the dam, and thus on the speeds achievable by the accelerated components, is of great importance. It is easy to see that small element sizes and larger explosive thicknesses as well as higher element masses reduce the speed. The speed of a small-area element is reduced all the more, the thicker (more massive) the coverage and the thicker the explosive layer is. This speed reduction can be on the order of 50%, so this influence can greatly override other target-specific parameters. At very low occupation masses or at pure explosive layers this influence of the element size becomes correspondingly smaller. In the first approximation he has no influence on the velocity of the gas bubbles. This results in a further advantage in arrangements according to the present invention. In particular, the very important design criteria such as module size and impact in peripheral zones are positively influenced.

By a multi-layer structure of the carrier, this can also serve as a control element for the energy and signal transfer between the explosive films. A design criterion for this is the acoustic impedance of the used _:

Materials.

The explosive layers required for pyrotechnic protective surfaces according to the invention pose only minor demands with regard to manufacturing tolerances and surface quality and thus the manufacturing process. This greatly increases the latitude in designing the surface of a protective element.

A further improvement results from the basically known method of coating the surfaces of the pyrotechnic layers with materials of different densities. Advantageously, for the assignments of lower or higher density materials, brittle, decomposing or delaminating materials such as glass, composites, ceramics or shock-resistant, but at relatively low deformation velocities soft materials such as rubber is used, which with its high inertia after a relatively long response over a longer period of time dissipate or erode the middle and back portions of the shaped charge jet. Suitable materials of low density are, for example, metallic or non-metallic metallic foams. In the case of free explosive surfaces, air as ambient medium achieves a short response time and very high acceleration for dispersing the fast parts from the front region of the shaped charge jet because of its low inertia.

By applying the model rules introduced in ballistics, in particular the Cranz model law, which was originally formulated for the detonation of explosives and later extended to the entire end ballistics, geometrical changes can be made within wide limits. Thus, a proven in practice construction by means of physical and geometric mapping rules can be transferred within a very wide limits to comparable applications. Further sizing tools are provided by numerical simulations.

The high efficiency of an arrangement according to the invention is in principle not bound to a housing. Containers, housings or covers are used primarily for fixing or protecting the active layers, also in conjunction with protective components to be combined and against external influences.

In practice, it is advantageous to combine the operation of the protective arrangement according to the invention with constructive specifications of the object to be protected. This can range from simple juxtaposition to complementary protection structures. The inert materials of the front and / or back of the housing of one or more layers can also be optimized in terms of effectiveness against KE projectiles.

In a preferred embodiment, the layers of explosive and inert materials are placed in prefabricated pockets of the protection module, whereby a simple and production-appropriate adaptation of the reactive protection to the vehicle to be protected can be made.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The figures characterizing the invention and explanations of the processes in the case of incident and penetrating threats are listed in the following list: Fig.1 Basic structure of a pyrotechnic protective surface according to the invention. 2 effect of the pyrotechnic protective surface of FIG. 1 at a relatively early time of the penetration and Durchdringprozesses. 3 effect of the pyrotechnic protective surface of FIG. 1 at a later time of the input and Durchdringprozesses. 4 examples of pyrotechnic protective surfaces according to FIG. 1 with thin

Carriers. 5 examples of pyrotechnic protective surfaces according to FIG. 1 with extended

Carriers.

Fig.6 Example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with two free explosive layers.

Fig.7 Example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with internal dam.

Fig.8 Further example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with Beulsandwich.

Fig. 9 example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with container / housing.

10 shows another example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with container /

Casing. Fig. 1 1 'further example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with container /

Casing.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESENTLY PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The above and other features and advantages of the invention will become more apparent from the following description of preferred, non-limiting examples, with reference to the accompanying drawings. Thus, Fig. 1 shows the basic structure of a pyrotechnic protective surface according to the invention with the incident shaped charge jet or the impending threat 1, the pyrotechnic assignments 2 and 3 and the carrier therebetween. 4

FIG. 2 shows the state or mode of operation of the pyrotechnic protective surface according to FIG. 1 at a relatively early point in time of the penetration and penetration process. The initiation of the front (threat facing) pyrotechnic occupancy 2 takes place at the point of impact from 1 to 2 (small circle 5). The detonation front propagates in FIG. 2 at a speed which is on the order of magnitude of the average beam penetration speed in the part of the shaped charge jet to be defended (symbolized by the arrows 6). In the case of a relatively thin carrier, initiation takes place in the rear pyrotechnic coating 3, both by the shock waves propagating from 5 in a hemispherical manner and by the penetrating beam tip at the impingement point of 1 to 3 (small circle 5A). For the propagation of the detonation front in 3, the same conditions apply as for 2 (arrows 6A). Due to the geometric conditions and in particular also the embodiment of FIG. 4, an asymmetry in the control space (large circle 7) which is applicable for the time considered can result for the force and thus the overall dynamics. However, this has no influence on the basic properties of the arrangement described. The detonation fronts propagating against the threat from accelerated reaction gases (and possibly accelerated surface layers) are symbolized by the expanding pressure field 9.

In the case of free or only slightly occupied surfaces of 2 and 3, high propagation velocities of the detonation front and the reaction gases in the direction of the penetrating or penetrating jet result (arrow field 8). The speed is also significantly increased by the damming property of the surfaces 4 and 3 (static before ignition due to the inertial mass, after ignition of 3 due to the pressure field forming) relative to the explosive layer 2. As a result, beam parts are loaded laterally in the tip region and thus deflected or destroyed. In the case of shaped charge particles, which are very sensitive especially in the tip region, exposure to low energy is sufficient for a large power reduction (destruction) of these parts.

However, due to the penetration mechanism described above, the foremost beam parts still pass through the front pyrotechnic layer 2. They are intercepted in the rear pyrotechnic covering 3. Because of the prevailing physical conditions, the geometric conditions and the occurring velocities in connection with the short response times, the foremost beam peak is reached in the rear zone, so that a total of full load, deflection and thus destruction of a large part of the shaped charge jet including the foremost particles takes place.

These relationships are shown in Fig. 3. Part of the pyrotechnic coating 2 has already been converted into a wider pressure field 9A. The control room symbolized by the large circle 8A for the overall dynamics with the corresponding arrow fields 8 and 10 of the reaction surfaces of 2 and 3 shows both a good approximate balanced overall picture of the forces and the load of the foremost beam tip in the marked by a smaller circle 1 1 Area of the interference field 1 2 formed by 3.

4 shows examples of symmetrical or asymmetric pyrotechnic protective surfaces with carriers positioned therebetween. These can be both protection-relevant (for example as KE protection or protection against flat-cone charges) or extremely light in design. Corresponding reactive arrangements may be formed from a single (planar or curved or arbitrarily shaped) element or may be combined to form a surface by the combination of two or more elements. This makes it possible to adapt the reactive protection according to the invention to the threat.

FIG. 5 shows some examples of pyrotechnic protective surfaces (here symmetrically arranged) with extended carriers or inner surfaces (FIGS. 4A, 4B, 4C). As described, these may consist of extremely lightweight materials or, at the same time, serve as internal volumes (e.g., containers) for other purposes. Of course, the design of these inner regions have no limits, as far as the mode of action of the reactive components is not unduly limited.

As shown in design examples (see Figures 6 to 11) and experiments carried out, one and / or two-sided assignments of the explosive surfaces in the inner and / or outer region (13, 1 3A, 14, 14A) are in particular for the overall efficiency An armor of great importance and also for the distribution of the still necessary protection against the remnant penetration depth of the threat. For an optimum protective effect of reactive arrangements according to the invention, the one- or two-sided dam of one of the explosive layers can be advantageous for the overall balance of the protective effect or in conjunction with design specifications. Such a dam of the explosive to increase the overall protective effect is advantageously carried out with disintegrating materials such as surfaces of metallic or non-metallic films, GRP, ceramic or glass or liquids and gels.

According to the above explanations, the materials of the dams in quantity and density are advantageously to be selected such that in combination with the pyrotechnical layers one or more of the Dämämmungsschichten are set in motion as early as possible in order to disturb the front fast parts of the shaped charge jet and one or more damming materials are set in motion more slowly so that they can interfere with the slower central and rear portions of the shaped charge jet.

The explosive layers may be embedded in one or more low density metallic or non-metallic materials (1- 5-30 kg / m ³ ) and high compressibility as a matrix (see Figure 6).

The design of the carrier 4 is completely free. It is therefore shown in Fig. 1 as a curved surface. What is needed is a sufficient bias towards the threat in the area of impact. Due to the high efficiency of the pyrotechnic coating, the minimum angle is 10 ° to 1 5 ° lower in the arrangement proposed here compared to known reactive structures. Since a minimum inclination angle of 45 ° is assumed for sandwiches of conventional construction, with the present arrangement a mean angle between threat and defense of 30 ° to 40 ° is sufficient. The angle between the defense surface and the threat can be formed by the employment of the entire surface or by geometric modifications by technical or constructive measures. Thus, for example, even with respect to a threat to a sufficient effect too low inclined surface, the required inclination can be achieved for example by corrugation, bending or lamination. The different embodiments of the pyrotechnic protective surface can be a form a continuous surface or consist of individual modules with gaps or other separations (eg area segments, blinds, separate or interlocking modules).

The technical design of the carrier is in principle not subject to any restrictions (for example metallic, non-metallic, structured, single-layer or multi-layered). The carrier may be rigid or deformable / movable and its thickness may range from film thickness to a solid plate or thicker structure. Furthermore, it may consist of an inert material or of a chemically / pyrotechnically reactive substance. This can be built in this carrier by the detonation of the pyrotechnic assignments and an inner high-pressure field.

The performance of a protection arrangement is generally judged as the ratio of the reference mass (performance of the ammunition in armor steel equivalent) to the mass of the protection arrangement itself by two factors:

1 . Em factor, formed by: Em = mref / (mS + mRL), with mref as the equivalent mass of the threat, mS as the applied protection mass and mRL as the residual power in equivocal mass; such as

2. Fm factor, formed from Fm = (mref - mRL) / mS.

The Em-factor serves as a criterion for assessing the quality of a total protection. For a partial protection measure, i. in the case of residual power still remaining, the assessment of the individual protection arrangements is usefully carried out via the Fm factor in order to be able to evaluate their quality comparatively.

The achievable Fm values in the current state of the art are in the range of 5 for passive protection arrangements and in the range of 8 to 10 for reactive arrangements.

An arrangement according to the invention fundamentally requires the use of pyrotechnic substances with a dynamic corresponding to the application, ie, reactivity. The handling of the pyrotechnic required here Elements and the associated safety precautions and other operational requirements are significantly improved by the fact that the necessary technical requirements for the support structure or the vehicle due to the described advantages can be conceived very low. Furthermore, the duration of use of an effective pyrotechnic coating can be minimized by appropriate precautions.

Fig. 6 shows a basic structure according to Fig. 5A. The hollow charge is positioned at a distance of 1 5 before the reactive protection arrangement. This consists in the simplest form of the inclined to the beam axis 1 explosive layers 1 6 and

1 7. The pure fixation of the explosive layers 16 and 17 serve the layers

18, 19 and 20. These layers 18, 19 and 20 can also serve as very light dams. However, the required propagation speed of the surface must not be significantly restricted.

The protection arrangement according to FIG. 6 was tested experimentally at 45 ° with a PG 7 type experimental charge at a distance (15) of about 2.5 calibers. The protective structure consisted of foam / explosive / foam / explosive / foam, the basis weight was at a density of the foam of about 1 5 kg / m ³ less than 30 kg / m ² in LoS (Line of Sight). The experimentally determined residual power was about 30% of the power of the shaped charge in armored steel. This results in an extraordinarily high Fm value of over 70. Furthermore, as in the following examples, end-ballistic relevant parts are not generated either in the direction of the threat or in the direction of the object to be protected.

It was thus confirmed that such an extremely light arrangement according to the invention is suitable as a general protection in connection with objects to be generally protected, as additional armor and in particular as protection for almost all vehicles. For vehicles with a high level of protection, such as battle tanks, such an arrangement is also well suited to protect the side and the rear against the threat of PzAbwHWa.

In another experiment, the front explosive layer 16 was dammed with a relatively thin layer of medium density material. At a Surface weight of the reactive protection arrangement of about 100 kg / m ² , the residual power was only about 10%. This gives an Fm value of over 25.

If one compares these experimentally determined performances with values of known reactive protective arrangements, the difference with the protective arrangement according to the invention becomes clear both with respect to residual power (10% compared to about 30%) and weight per unit area (-100 kg / m ² compared to 300 kg / m ² ).

In a further experiment, both the front explosive layer 16 and the rear explosive layer 1 7 on the side of the carrier were dammed with a medium density brittle material (20, 20A) (Figure 7). Because of the relatively thin inner layer of foam 19, this is a particularly flat protective structure according to FIG. 5B. At a basis weight of the reactive protection arrangement of less than 90 kg / m ² , the residual power was less than 10%. This gives an Fm value of over 30.

The residual power of the shaped charge must be compensated by ballistically effective materials. Since even materials such as armored steel, high-strength duralumin or titanium only achieve efficiencies up to 1, 5, the special performance of this protection arrangement according to the invention is particularly evident in terms of use in light systems. The extremely low residual power achieved confirms that the use of such a reactive protection arrangement according to the invention for medium and even light armored vehicles is made possible.

This was confirmed by an experiment with a reactive protection device shown in FIG. In this combination of the arrangements shown in FIGS. 5 and 6 (front occupancy: thin layer of medium density 21), a buckling device 22 was arranged on the target side after an explosive layer 17 embedded in foam 19, 20. At a basis weight of the entire protection arrangement of about 1 70 kg / m ² , the residual power was only about 1% to 2%.

A comparison of the absolute values of this reactive protection arrangement according to the invention with reactive protection systems according to the prior art illustrates this significant level of innovation. Conventional reactive protection systems with a basis weight of 300 kg / m ² achieve in the best case residual power values of 20% of the reference power of the threat, ie at the threat of PzAbwHWa with a capacity of 300 mm to 400 mm armor steel equivalent, a residual power of 60 mm to 80 mm armored steel. This corresponds to a basis weight of 480 kg / m ² to 640 kg / m ² . In the best case, this results in a total basis weight for the required armor protection of 780 kg / m ² . If the area of an object to be protected is, for example, 6 m ² (eg side protection), then a total protective weight of 4680 kg is required. In contrast, the residual power of the reactive protection arrangement according to the invention is only at a maximum of 10 mm armor steel equivalent, corresponding to a basis weight of 80 kg / m ² . In addition to the weight per unit area of this protective arrangement according to the invention, this results in a total area weight for the required armor protection of 250 kg / m ² . This means for the object to be protected with a protective area of 6 m ² a total protective weight of only 1 500 kg, ie the weight saving compared to reactive protection systems according to the prior art would be 3.1 80 kg. Thus, with a reactive protection arrangement according to the invention, only about 32% of the protective mass of conventional reactive protection arrangements is needed.

The pyrotechnic coating of the protective surface may consist of a coating, a fixed or applied explosive film, an applied reactive mixture (for example metallic admixtures to increase the efficiency of interference) or else a rigid or deformable container (bag) containing a pyrotechnic active agent. However, its walls must be designed in such a way that the described mode of action of the pyrotechnic protective surface is not impaired. However, this is ensured with thicknesses of the components in the order of tenths of a millimeter. The metallic or non-metallic shell of such a container or the surface of the explosive film may also result from the manufacturing process. In addition, such casings or surfaces may also be required for protection against handling and application stresses as well as environmental influences. Pyrotechnic protective surfaces can be easily combined to achieve the necessary deflection effect, for example, against relatively severe threats. Thus, for example, the interconnection of two relatively thin pyro-technical protective surfaces creates a new, highly effective protective surface whose total explosive thickness is still lower than that of the known reactive armor. Thus, even with the use of two pyrotechnic protective surfaces due to the further reduced residual power nor these high efficiency values are achieved or even larger shaped charges are very effectively intercepted. This is especially true for tandem arrangements.

Known reactive protective devices must be used to derive or transmit all possibilities relating to the ignition of the pyro-technical surface. This includes the triggering by a direct admission or over Zündhilfen up to a controlled spark ignition. Likewise, all options concerning the cladding or sheathing of the pyrotechnic surface shall be deduced or transferred. This includes the incorporation (or packaging) in a pure protective film (for example, against weathering, for shock or Abriebsicherung during transport or to color the surface).

Further advantages and possibilities of embodiment, which are derived from known reactive protective devices without special knowledge or transfer, relate to the execution of a housing and fasteners including the disassembly and thus interchangeability and mobility (insertion, rotation, tilting). This also applies to the positioning at a distance in front of the object to be protected by fastening elements or intermediate layers. Of course, these must not affect the function. For example, intermediate layers or spacers may be thin structures, very low density materials, or air chambers. Further points relate, for example, to modular structures, multilayer arrangements, changes in the thickness of the substrate and pyrotechnic coatings and the variation of the active components involved. Of course, any layers or structures (for example, curved, wavy or angled surfaces) may be occupied on one or both sides with a pyrotechnic protective surface. The highly efficient reactive protection devices or protective surfaces according to the invention also largely eliminate the use of highly complex and highly failure-prone active protection techniques. Such systems should provide a further increase in protection against classic reactive protection systems, especially where the threat of the object itself with powerful known reactive devices is no longer fending off or the object to be protected itself would be too much burdened or even destroyed by the reactive armor ,

But even where active protection systems are provided, the reactive surfaces according to the invention can provide a decisive advantage in that such modules with the lowest surface masses and even with arbitrarily shaped or very small element size provide high protection performances. This is particularly useful in actively accelerated protective elements to bear, since they require only relatively low energies according to the very low masses for their acceleration.

The following are basic advantages of pyrotechnic protective surfaces or protective devices:

The pyrotechnic protection device or protective surface has a minimum basis weight.

The pyrotechnic protection device or protective surface requires a minimum depth.

The pyrotechnic protective surface is basically a free element and therefore not bound to any other technical equipment.

The pyrotechnic protection device has an optimal overall efficiency in terms of mass and depth of protection.

There is no limit to a planar structure both in terms of shaping and the depth of protection. Extremely flat constructions (magnitude: 20% to 30% of the HL reference perforation power in armored steel) are thus possible. It can be realized very small element sizes, since the edge influence (eg on the dam) compared to conventional reactive armor is much lower.

The arrangement is arbitrarily adapted to the angle of inclination of the surface to be protected.

The pyrotechnic surface can be arbitrarily positioned as a module, e.g. As a single or multi-layered armor, as active areas in conjunction with aprons or directly as an apron.

There is a load of the HL beam in two different directions with minimal reaction time and at the same time high temporal extension. Apart from a mostly unproblematic blast pressure, no structural loads occur. This deformation of the support structure can be avoided.

There are no encumbrances of the entire environment by end ballistic relevant masses.

The pyrotechnic protection surface can be arbitrarily shaped and can be adapted to any surface or internal structure.

The pyrotechnic protective surface may be rigid or deformable / movable. The pyrotechnic protective surface can be attached to existing surfaces in any manner fixed or detachable.

The pyrotechnic protective surface can be suspended or clamped as a rigid or movable curtain in a frame or loosely in front of an object to be protected.

Pyrotechnic protective surfaces can occupy any layers or structures on one or both sides.

It is an arbitrary structure of technically independent protection areas and their combination possible. Thus, e.g. also parallel or mutually inclined pyrotechnic protection surfaces are combined. The pyrotechnic surface can be used as a standalone device or combined with other armor (for example, against KE and FK threats).

The pyrotechnic protection device can be effectively combined with bellows arrangements because it can withstand the high jet speeds degrades and thus increases the effectiveness of Beulblechanodnungen (Beulsandwichs).

Pyrotechnic surfaces can be used as the most efficient multi-layered sheet modulus, e.g. be used against threats relatively large caliber mono-shaped charges or HL-tandem threats.

The pyrotechnic protective surface does not require any sophisticated technical requirements (for example with regard to manufacturing processes, manufacturing tolerances and homogeneity of the explosive).

In relation to the protective power achieved, the manufacturing costs of the protection area are low.

With pyrotechnic protective surfaces, there are many possibilities for retrofitting existing structures, vehicles or other surfaces to be protected (also as additional armor for existing inert or reactive armor).

When using or by the exchange of reactive components results in a variety of known examples of reactive protective devices, a technical improvement of the overall structure.

Pyrotechnic protective surfaces can be adapted to the state of the art without much effort.

Even with different coating thicknesses or element masses can be made by appropriate design or dimensioning of the other components a dynamic balance.

The carrier of a pyrotechnic protection device may consist of an inert material or of a hollow or filled structure. The support of the pyrotechnic protective surface can be minimized as a mere mounting or mounting surface or, depending on the design (for example multi-layered or as a technical structure), meet ballistic or technical additional requirements within wide limits. And this without reduction or disturbance of the basic performance of the arrangement.

For the housing or the attachments of the pyrotechnic surface all known advantages of such devices apply.

If necessary, the side, roof and bottom surfaces of a housing or container can be covered with pyrotechnic protection surfaces. By means of pyrotechnic protective surfaces according to the invention, a highly effective protection against HL threats in light vehicles or unarmored facilities is also possible for the first time.

By means of pyrotechnic protection devices according to the invention, highly effective protection against large-scale HL threats in medium armored vehicles (e.g., SPz) is also possible for the first time. Pyrotechnic protective surfaces can be used as a supplement and / or as an active component in active armor. Pyrotechnic protective surfaces can be used for active armor both signal transmission (detonation transmission) and as active surfaces.

In the reactive protection device, the respective explosive layers may optionally be enclosed by one or more chambers provided with fillers or air. Further embodiments of the invention, in particular with regard to their use and operational capability in light vehicles or means of transport will be briefly listed below.

Particularly advantageous is a flexible housing, of which the explosive layers are not or partially dammed surrounded by the housing. The housing (see Fig. 9 to 1 1) may consist of an elastic, metal-free, no splinter-forming material such as elastomers, thermoplastics or thermosets. Furthermore, from resilient materials such as foams or sintered materials, fiber composite materials, a material of renewable resources, wood or synthetic wood, an organic material (paper, leather), a textile material or a combination of these materials. In a complete integration of one or both explosive layers in the housing walls is a dynamic dam of the detonating explosive. This can lead to a further increase in the protective effect. Furthermore, the explosive layer facing the battlefield can additionally be protected with a composite armor especially against small-caliber ammunition.

To illustrate the almost unlimited design options of containers or housings serve the three following arrangements. 9 shows an example of a pyrotechnic arrangement 23, in which the housing 28 has a vertical position. right rear wall has. Behind the thin front cover 24 lies the front pyrotechnic layer 25, followed by an intermediate layer 27 consisting of air or a medium of very low density. Between 27 and the rear (filled or free) volume 29 is another pyrotechnic layer 26th

The reactive protection can be applied with or without housing directly or at a distance on a vehicle-side bulge. The buckling structure consists of a front metallic or non-metallic layer, a dynamically acting functional layer, such as rubber, and a rear metallic or non-metallic layer, which may, for example, constitute an outer wall of the vehicle train (e.g., storage box, etc.).

FIG. 10 shows such an example of a pyrotechnic arrangement with a subsequent Beulsandwich 30. Here, the pyrotechnic layers 31, 33 are employed differently. The front explosive foil 31 is embedded in the front of the housing. The inclined rear wall 36 of the housing has different strengths. The space 32 is empty here in order to allow the film 33, which is covered with the thin layer 27, to have the highest possible surface speed. Behind the medium of low or very low density 34 is a Beulplattensandwich 35. The space located behind 37 is either empty or filled with a medium of very low density.

1 1 shows an example of a pyrotechnic arrangement 38 with a housing 39 which is open on the rear side and which is placed directly on the wall 40 of the object to be protected. The assembly 38 has a continuous front pyrotechnic surface 41, while the inner pyrotechnic surface is divided into two components 45, 46, e.g. can be separated by an intermediate wall 44. The chambers 42 and 43 and 47 and 48 may be filled with air or with media of the same or different, very low density.

In a preferred embodiment, the layers of explosive and inert materials are introduced into prefabricated pockets of the container or housing, whereby a simple and production-appropriate adaptation of the reactive protection to the to be protected vehicle can be made. An exchange of components, eg a replacement of pyrotechnic by inert modules, is possible in a simple manner. Likewise, several reactive partial surfaces can be combined to form a protective surface.

Depending on the material, the housing can be made by vulcanization, casting, gluing, pressing or machining. Also conceivable are all combinations of said production methods. Furthermore, the housing may include a Vorpanzerung or represent themselves. The housing may contain one or more cavities of the same or different size, in which the inert and explosive materials of the pyrotechnic protection structure are inserted, inserted, cast or pressed. The wall thickness may be uniform or have a different thickness. The latter is advantageous if the housing is part of one of the protective layer or even represents an inert protective dam. The housings can be designed so that they can be assembled into a solid or flexible contour. This arrangement of the structure prevents the tearing out of protection modules in collisions of the vehicle with obstacles or / and during firing. Individual segments of this wall can be moved, bent away or rolled up to access vehicle areas behind it. The segments of the wall can be removed or added in a few simple steps.

In a suitable embodiment, the housing is designed so that it overlaps at the edge areas with adjacent housings. This ensures that enough insulation material is also available for hits in the edge area or directly at the edge of the housing. It is particularly advantageous if the housing wall has a wall thickness in the region of adjacent housings which reliably prevents sympathetic detonations of the explosive layers of adjacent modules if a hit occurs outside the overlapping area on the module.

The fasteners can be vulcanized, poured, glued or hung on the housing. Preferably, the fasteners of a splinter-forming material having a high toughness, so in a Detonation of adjacent modules, the non-detonated modules remain on the vehicle. The fixings may be reinforced by high strength fibers and / or high strength polymer or steel inlays.

The housing walls are to be designed for longer-lasting thermal loads (fire, radiant heat) yielding. The maximum internal pressure at longer load periods can be limited by constructive measures on the housing, so that an insensitive explosive can burn without detonating implement.

In the housing, one or more separate chambers may be arranged, which are bounded by the explosive layers, the respective matrix material and the housing material each alone or in combination. These chambers may be filled with disintegrating substances that do not form effective splinters, such as, for example, gases, solids, liquids, gels, crystals, fibers or bulk material. The cavities in the wall or in the housing can be used as a container for supplies, liquids or as storage space, for example for equipment. These cavities of the housing can also be pressurized with gases or liquids to move the reactive HL protection according to the invention of the space-saving transport position in the defensive position.

The enclosures may be arranged to form contiguous columns that are rolled up or collapsed one by one or more for maintenance on the vehicle. The housing or parts of the housing can also be configured at the same time as packaging of the explosive for storage, handling, driving on the vehicle and transport in the sense of GGVS. To avoid a critical for the implementation of the explosive internal pressure and defined membranes or pressure relief valves to limit the internal pressure in the housing may be included. The body material and housing shape must be optimized for decontamination.

From the descriptions and explanations as well as the basic advantages of the pyrotechnic protection device according to the invention or Protective surface follows that this not only has not yet reached technical performance levels, but can also be interpreted within very wide limits. This results in a virtually unlimited application bandwidth and modularity. This extends to armored vehicles from all-round protection including movable or fixed aprons to the roof protection. Likewise, a protection of ground surfaces against corresponding threats is conceivable. In addition, pyrotechnic protective surfaces also represent a highly effective protection of containers or structures.

While the present invention has been described above with reference to various possible embodiments, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that numerous changes and modifications may be made thereto without departing from the scope of protection defined by the claims.

Claims

1 . Reactive protection device without end ballistic relevant fragmentation for an object to be protected, characterized in that two inclined in the effective range of the threat pyrotechnic layers are arranged on both sides on a rigid or flexible, single or multi-layer support of any shape such that after ignition of the two layers shock waves and Reactive gases are formed and accelerated at a very high speed both against and in the direction of the penetrating threat such that the pyrotechnic protection surface is in a dynamic equilibrium almost the entire time of action.

2. Reactive protective device according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the pyrotechnic layers has a free surface, or one or both sides is only slightly dammed, such as by foam or a thin metallic or non-metallic layer.

3. A reactive protective device according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the pyrotechnic layers are embedded in one or more metallic or non-metallic materials of very low density and high compressibility as a matrix.

4. Reactive protection device according to claim 3, wherein the matrix is completely or partially filled with materials such as liquids, gels or bulk material.

5. Reactive protection device according to one of claims 1 to 4, wherein two or more structures are arranged one behind the other with or without spacing parallel or at an angle to each other on the object to be protected.

6. Reactive protective device according to claim 1, wherein two or more pyrotechnic layers are fixed or movable, fixed or detachable in a housing.

7. Reactive protection device according to claim 6, wherein the housing consists of a no ballistic splinter-forming material.

8. A reactive protective device according to claim 6 or 7, wherein in the housing one or more separate, empty or filled with no splinter-forming substances chambers are arranged.

9. Reactive protection device according to claim 8, wherein in the housing one or more chambers with dispersing, no effective splinter-forming fillers, such as gases, solids, liquids, gels, crystals, fibers or bulk material are filled.

10. Reactive protection device according to one of claims 6 to 9, wherein the housing can be reduced or increased by under- or overpressure, controlled by means of mechanical devices, gases or liquids manually or via sensors in thickness.

1 1. Reactive protection device according to one of claims 1 to 10, wherein the vehicle-side pyrotechnic layer is deposited with a buckling device directly or at a distance.

12. Reactive protection device according to claim 1, wherein the protection modules are integrated into an active armor.