WO2005033615A1 - Combined protective arrangement - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention relates to an adaptable and/or integratable multi-purpose, inert and reactive protective combination in a total protective arrangement, which is largely independent of the angle of impact of a threat and which protects against hollow charges, flat-cone charges, kinetic energy projectiles and fragments. The total protective arrangement (1 A, 1 B, 1 C) is comprised, in the final completion stage, of protective zones: A (front reactive protective zone (3)); B (inert homogeneous or dynamically active inner protective zone (4)), and; C (rear protective zone / inert or reactive remaining active zone (5)), that are adjacent to a protective structure D (2) (supporting component), whereby the individual components, on their own, depict high-performance protective zones. The protective zones act in a combined manner so that the front reactive zone A (3), in conjunction with the rear reactive or inert protective zone C (5), perform an action with regard to the operation of the total protection during the reactive process whereby minimizing the vehicle-side structural stresses and battleground burdens by actions that, in the dynamics thereof, work in the opposite direction. Protective zones A (3) and C (5) simultaneously exert a relative motion onto dynamic protective zone B (4), which is located therebetween, by the reactive process, and protective zone B (4) has a corresponding dynamic structure necessary for transferring energy according to the invention.

Description

 COMBINED PROTECTION ARRANGEMENT

The invention relates to an overall protection arrangement against threats, and in particular to a hybrid polyvalent reactive overall protection arrangement against the entire spectrum of possible threats, according to the preamble of patent claim 1.

In the simplest case, all previously known protective structures against both shaped charge (HL) and balancing projectile (KE) threats consist of a protective element that is effective against both types of threat (e.g. a high-strength homogeneous armor plate or a sandwich arrangement) or a sequence of two layers, in which each layer is assigned a special effectiveness against one or the other threat. From a strategic and operational point of view, the highest possible protection of lighter and light armored vehicles (especially air-loading systems) up to pure transport vehicles is of particular interest.

The focus of reactive measures continues to be on the defense against HL projectiles. The increase in protection efficiency is achieved both directly against the incident threat and constructively through the free spaces following the interference surface (dissipation zone). Upstream interference surfaces, which determine the protective depth, i.e. the distance between the entry of the beam or the projectile into the protective zone and the vehicle wall, are usually inert-dynamic flat buckling plate arrangements or buckling plate blinds, sandwich arrangements or reactive modules. In the context of the present invention, an inert-dynamic component is understood to mean an inert protective component which does not contain a pyrotechnic medium and which is accelerated directly by the impact process or in conjunction with a medium which builds up pressure through the impact energy (for example buckling plate sandwich). In the case of previously known approaches to improving the protection performance via introduced deflection sections, special protection against KE threats is generally provided permanently installed, ie firmly connected to the object to be protected or the vehicle wall.

A variety of reactive armor has become known in the past thirty years and has also been used in a number of armored vehicles worldwide. However, these are predominantly protective arrangements against shaped charges. Their effect is usually based on the fact that when a projectile is hit by a pyrotechnic agent (explosive foil), one or more metallic plates, which form an angle with respect to the threat, are accelerated towards or with it, by touching the accelerated plates laterally with the threat of reducing their efficiency by destroying or deflecting the beam or penetrator. In the patent DE 1 99 56 1 97 C2, some examples are given for this.

Furthermore, there are examples in which one or more elements with the mode of operation described above are arranged in a housing. This can be used, for example, to build up a multilayer reactive protection, or a plurality of reactive elements can be used in a planar arrangement with or without intermediate damping layers to form a protective surface. Questions of operational / constructive use play a role here, as does the protection of the structure of the vehicle and the environment against the effects of detonation of the explosives and the protective components accelerated to speeds of more than 300 m / s (e.g. thin steel sheets). The patent DE 199 56 1 97 C2 also gives some examples of this.

Furthermore, a number of polyvalent protective arrangements are known which repel shaped charges as well as balancing projectiles with different effectiveness. They can be designed as passive or reactive armor. Some of the types of training of such protection modules are explained for example in the publications EP 0 922 924 B1 and EP 0 379 080 B1 as well as DE 41 14 809 C2 and DE 1 95 09 899 C2.

It is also known that glass in particular has the property of penetrating an HL jet due to its specific high pressure properties and the associated spontaneous volume changes to cause beam disturbances and thereby reduce its penetration depth. Furthermore, it is known that this effect of the radiation disturbance can be considerably increased by dynamically compressing the glass volume during the penetration of an HL steel by means of one or more explosive layers or explosive bodies (eg so-called pills). A similar, reinforcing effect also occurs with a strong lateral dam. Such arrangements, however, require very large lateral masses, which mainly represent dead masses.

Furthermore, a number of proposed solutions for avoiding battlefield pollution are known, in which the accelerated sheets or disruptive bodies are not accelerated in the direction of the incident, but rather parallel to the surface of the object to be protected. Such arrangements, however, require a sensor system with a triggering device to ensure a suitable ignition timing.

Patent document DE 1 99 56 1 97 C2 describes a multilayer reactive protective element, in particular for the protection of lighter vehicles, which detonates when a projectile hits. On the shelling side, this arrangement is provided with a high-strength fiber composite material to avoid hard splinters. The protection unit is arranged in parallel or at a predetermined angle to the outer wall of the object to be protected. A characteristic feature of this invention is that (apart from a possible metallic casing of the explosive foil) no metallic protective plates are used. The use of fiber composite material is also intended to provide protection against ballistic projectiles of smaller caliber (machine gun).

Patent specification DE 1 99 56 1 97 C2 also describes that a buckling plate can be arranged between the outer wall of the object to be protected and the explosive layer nearby. In the event of a detonation, this is hurled against the outer wall of the object to be protected, but no metallic splinters get into the surroundings. In fact, arrangements such as those described in the patent specification DE 1 99 56 1 97 C2 have the advantage of achieving good beam disturbances against hollow charge jets with sufficient angles of inclination in relation to the penetrating threat and thus considerable reductions in performance. However, since the reactive non-metallic substances have only a low density with a correspondingly low mechanical strength, their potential for interference is limited or explosive foils with a corresponding thickness must be used to ensure the lateral radiation interference. In addition, a noteworthy protective effect against KE penetrators is limited to the range of small calibers, since such arrangements cannot build up sufficiently large transverse forces to deflect or destroy KE penetrators. But even then, large target thicknesses or plate thicknessπ are required, since the protective performance of the materials mentioned against metal sheets is very much lower. Arrangements, such as those described in the patent DE 1 99 56 1 97 C2, can advantageously be applied as additional armor (add-on armor) in front of a KE protection, in order, for example, to achieve the high penetration capacity of shaped charges of the order of more than To compensate 300 rnm in the middle caliber range, which can extend up to load diameters of 80 mm.

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a hybrid polyvalent reactive total protection arrangement with the lowest possible total mass against HL, FK and KE threats, which offers a higher protection potential against any type of the said threat than a protection arrangement oriented only to one type of threat. Here, with a high level of inert basic protection, in particular with a reactive mode of action against all types of threats, high overall protection performances are to be provided and at the same time inadmissible battlefield loads and structural damage to the object to be protected are to be avoided. The overall protection arrangement should also be adaptable and / or integrable on all surfaces to be protected or particularly exposed, such as in the tower, side and frontal areas, including the chain apron.

To solve this problem, the inventor first started from the following general considerations. The performance of ballistic protection is usually derived from its effectiveness against a specific threat, such as shaped charges or KE penetrators, in comparison to a reference or reference armor. A homogeneous steel plate of certain strength is a good reference. However, a comparative assessment can also be made with any other armor. Two sizes have been introduced to characterize the quality of armor: the ratio of penetrated mass in the reference armor to penetrated mass in the armor under consideration, i.e. the so-called mass effectiveness factor (Em), and the ratio of the corresponding construction depths, ie the so-called space effectivity factor (Es). A criterion for the quality of a protective structure can then be the product of both factors. Since, in particular for lighter or light armored vehicles, the mass available for protection or its limitation is decisive and a greater depth of protection (based on the entire arrangement including vehicle-specific components) is generally more available, a weighting is expediently between To make em and it.

The increase in performance of purely reactive armor against balancing projectiles is, in contrast to hollow charges, relatively low compared to powerful inert armor. In addition, the masses or thicknesses of the reactively accelerated sheets to be used are considerably larger than in the case of shaped charges. The plates require lateral velocities of several 1 00 m / s to ward off penetrators that hit quickly. This not only creates a considerable load on the battlefield (such plates can fly several hundred meters), but also the structural loads on the vehicle increase accordingly. For this reason, the use of materials such as glass, ceramics or glass-fiber-like substances in reactive protection has been proposed, which break down or delaminate into more or less small parts when detonated. It has already been mentioned that such protection against KE or FK threats is only possible to a very limited extent.

Another, albeit only limited, solution is the area detonation, which is also known and in which the explosive layer does not detonate and thereby only accelerates part of a plate or urgent process of the threat is deformed sufficiently quickly. In this way, no plates are accelerated against the next structure or into the battlefield. Protective arrangements existing on a detonation area are technically very demanding and it will not be possible in the foreseeable future to guarantee reliable ignition in the event of different threats.

Protective factors for the mass of 6 to 8 are known in the reactive defense against precision hollow charges. With less sensitive loads, i.e. Loads with more massive and continuous beam formation, the achievable values are lower and are in the order of 4 to 5. With KE penetrators, these factors are only between 1, 5 and 3.0 depending on the threat. In the case of shaped charges, the product of mass and space effectiveness factors can achieve values in excess of 10, in the case of balancing bullets which are relatively insensitive to lateral disturbances, only values between 2.0 and 4.0.

Another crucial for the system criterion for evaluation of ballistic protection is like the inert Schutzver ^', so its performance in non detonation of the explosive foil or with dismantled reactive institution or disconnected ignition aid. In the case of special armor against hollow charges, this is up to 3.5, but in the case of KE protective superstructures at most 2.0.

With overall protection arrangements according to the invention, not only should the previously known efficiency values or protection factors of special reactive designs be exceeded, but in particular the inert protection performances should also be at the best values that could be achieved so far. In addition, technological advances or further developments in partial areas should be transferred directly to the individual components, so that an overall protection arrangement must always be implemented in accordance with the latest technological possibilities. And this against both the entire present and the range of threats to be expected in the foreseeable future, because when designing polyvalent armor, the development potential of possible threats should also be taken into account. In the area of hollow charges, tandem loads are more likely even with medium calibers, and projectile extensions are to be expected in the area of flat cone loads. This would result in a new type of threat that has to be considered in overall protection orders. These are quasi short, but relatively thick and therefore much less sensitive to conventional high-power beams, shaped charge beams, which can still be in the speed range of known, stretched beams (7 to 8 km / s). In the case of KE penetrators, increasingly aerodynamically stabilized projectiles are also to be considered in the medium caliber range (20 to 60 mm). Since there is an increase in performance primarily from the degree of slenderness or the length of the penetrator, the increase in the penetration rate also increases the sensitivity of such projectiles, in particular to cross interference.

In the case of protective arrangements, those of particular interest are those which are effective both against all known and against the types of threats to be expected in the foreseeable future in the foreseeable future. All previously known solutions in the field of reactive protection ^detachments' which are to be used in medium-duty and light vehicles in particular, provide relatively high protection benefits only against shaped charges. The previously known polyvalent reactive armor is based on more or less massive, explosive-accelerated metallic plates with the corresponding loads on both the environment and the structure of the vehicle itself.

It follows from all of these criteria that according to the prior art to date, polyvalent protection that is equally effective against HL, FK and different KE threats is not known.

According to the present invention, the above object is now achieved by an overall protection arrangement with the features of claim 1. Advantageous refinements and developments of the invention are the subject of the dependent claims.

The invention relates to a fixed or detachable or integrated in a vehicle structure or in general on a structure to be protected Combined overall protection arrangement against shaped charges, flat cone charges, swirl and aerodynamically stabilized balancing projectiles and splinters. The total ^¬ protection arrangement is in its highest reactive stage of two reactive protective zone and an intermediate inert or inert-dynamic protective inner zone. Dab ei has the side of the front protection zone facing the threat, a reactive structure primarily to ward off ^shaped charge threats. FK and KE threats should be pre-disturbed as far as possible in this front protection zone or the direction of action or performance should already be fanned out or at least a corresponding fault should be initiated. The inner protection zone (also with dynamically effective facilities) primarily serves to ward off KE threats. The rear, vehicle-side protection zone is designed in the highest stage of development as a reactive device for intercepting the residual power of shaped charge beams and penetrating KE projectiles. The rear protection zone can also advantageously consist of an inert, dynamically acting or structured / multi-layered zone or only represent a passive residual armor. On the other hand, the inner protection zone can also contain a reactive component.

Basically, the overall protection arrangement in its final stage consists of three already powerful components or protection zones: a front, reactive protection zone, a second, inner inert or inert-dynamic protection zone (non-reactive modules, buckling plate arrangements, solid, layer-like or structured protective layers) and a third, rear inert, inert-dynamic or also reactive protection zone. The individual protection zones complement each other in an optimal way and together with the object wall form an adapted overall protection or, by integrating the supporting structure, a structure-optimized overall protection. The hybrid polyvalent overall protection arrangement can be used both as turret or weapon protection, side and frontal protection and as protection of the chassis (chain apron).

When the reactive protection mechanism is triggered, the front and the (if provided) rear reactive protection zone are triggered or fired at a time interval by means of the penetrating threat. With similar mass or mass acceleration ratios, with a compliant one or thickness-variable dynamic intermediate structure with maximum reactive protective deployment, a vehicle load that is greatly reduced compared to conventional reactive armor structures can be achieved. In the case of reactive protection arrangements attached directly to the object or vehicle wall, the energy acting on the wall or the transmitted impulse corresponds to the energy or the impulse of the protection modules acting forward in the direction of the threat. Longer energy dissipation paths (increasing the depth of protection without significant increase in mass) to reduce this effect or to stretch the load over time and thus reduce the peak values are not only associated with a considerable increase in the protective structure, but also against KE threats because of their more compact and thus less sensitive construction is only effective to a limited extent.

In the case of reactive protective structures, a minimized battlefield exposure should generally be aimed for. In the case of a protective structure according to the invention, the front, reactive component can be accelerated more harmlessly than the other reactive protective structures without a loss of performance for the structure if a dynamically flexible / depth-variable design of the inner, inert-dynamic protective zone takes place. In addition, in order to reduce or avoid battlefield pollution, it is advantageous to produce the front reactive protection zone, for example in the manner described in patent specification DE 1 99 56 1 97 C2, from a material that breaks down into fine particles or an atomizing or delaminating material.

Basically, the three protection zones mentioned are connected in series. However, they can also be partially or completely combined. This will be necessary especially if the available depth is limited. The rear protection zone minimizes the impact or shock loads acting on the vehicle and the effects of impacting upstream protection components. It can be connected upstream of the vehicle structure, combined with it or integrated directly into it.

The aim of effective overall protection in the overall protection arrangement described is effective over several, in particular in combination Protection zones reached. It is essential that in the case of a protective arrangement according to the invention, the type of interconnection or interaction of the three defined protective zones results in an increase in the protective performance level. In principle, each of the protection zones is effective in itself, but the maximum protection performance is only brought about by the lateral loads that occur on the entering and penetrating KE or FK penetrator or HL beam when the reactive process is triggered, at least in the front area of the overall protection arrangement , A suitable protective structure enables reactive pre-interference with subsequent penetration deflection or erosion even in the case of strong KE threats.

The figures, graphical representations and explanations of the invention which characterize the invention and which occur in the different examples of overall protection arrangements in the event of entering and penetrating threats are compiled in the following list. These examples of basic overall protection arrangements according to the invention and their possible combinations are highly simplified schematic diagrams. The figures show:

1 shows a basic structure of a hybrid polyvalent reactive armor and its range of threats;

1 A shows a first approximation of a vertical arrangement with the three protection zones A, B and C in front of the remaining armor or residual power zone D;

1B shows an inclined arrangement corresponding to FIG. 1A;

1 C shows the range of threats to the overall protection arrangement;

Fig. 2 is a side view and a plan view of an armored vehicle (here

Tracked vehicle) with the primary areas to be protected;

3 shows the directions of action of a reactive sandwich; 4 positioning and construction options for reactive components in connection with an inert armor or load-bearing structure;

5 lateral possibilities of interference of the individual components of a reactive sandwich: front active component and effects on the threats;

FIG. 6 lateral interference possibilities of the individual components of a reactive sandwich: rear component and effects on the threats;

Fig. 7 the directions of action of inert dynamic (buckling plate) arrangements on

Example of the penetration of an APFSDS projectile corresponding to FIG. 1C;

Fig. 8 examples of horizontal and vertical buckling plate arrangements;

9 shows the reduction in the penetration power of a shaped charge jet in glass-like targets due to the effect of the crater collapse;

10A beam disturbance and eruption crater corresponding to FIG. 9 if the target thickness is too small;

10B shows a protective structure corresponding to FIG. 10A with a supporting subsequent layer;

FIG. 1 A shows a pressure field corresponding to FIG. 9 when a P-charge projectile penetrates;

1 1 B shows a pressure field corresponding to FIG. 9 when an arrow projectile penetrates;

1 2A shows the lateral disruption due to an inclined explosive layer (large film area) introduced into a homogeneous or layer-like target;

1 2B lateral disturbances caused by an inclined explosive layer: subdivided / multi-stage foils (small foil surfaces); Fig. 1 3 examples of structures of reactive or inert-dynamic sandwiches;

Fig. 1 4 examples of assignments of reactive sandwiches;

Fig. 1 5 examples of disassembly properties or disassembly mechanisms (only the front component is considered);

Fig. 1 6 examples of one- or multi-layer or multi-part explosive populations of reactive sandwiches;

1 7 exemplary embodiments for the front protective component corresponding to FIG. 1 A / 1 B, wherein FIG. 1 7A shows a pyrotechnic coating embedded in A, 1 7B shows a rear pyrotechnic coating of A, FIG. 7C shows a pyrotechnic coating inserted at A at an angle, and FIG. 1 7D shows a modification example for A corresponding to FIG. 1 shows 7C;

Fig. 1 8 embodiments for the inert or inert-dynamic acting

Protection zone B corresponding to Fig. 1A / 1B, Fig. 1 8A showing a homogeneous layer, Fig. 1 8B showing a sandwich construction, Fig. 1 8C showing a buckle plate blind, and Fig. 1 8D a tandem buckle plate blind shows;

1 9 further exemplary embodiments for the protection zone B corresponding to FIG. 1 A / 1 B in the form of inert homogeneous, layered and inert dynamically acting solutions, FIG. 1 9A showing parallel, inert dynamically acting buckling plates and antiparallel outer surfaces, FIG. 1 9B one Blind-type inert dynamic buckling plate structure and anti-parallel outer surfaces, and Fig. 1 9C shows parallel inert-dynamic buckling plates and a subsequent buckling plate blind and anti-parallel boundaries of B; 20A modifications of the protective structure corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B, the protective zone B being followed by a residual power zone D;

FIG. 20B shows a reactive hybrid protection corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B in the form of a protection zone B as the first (threat-side) protection zone, followed by a protection zone C with outer surfaces that are inclined at very different angles;

21 shows a further arrangement corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B with a protective zone B designed as a reactive module with KE-active materials and a buffer layer in C;

22 shows a reactive hybrid overall protection arrangement corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B with inert pre-armoring, formed from zones A and a combination of zones B / C / D in a protective component;

23 shows a reactive hybrid overall protection arrangement corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B with an upstream / integrated triggering (contact) grating / detection device, ignition device for the explosive foils, and a damping layer between zones B and the combined zone C / D, which also serves as a carrier plate;

Fig. 24 is a Gesamterschutzan arrangement corresponding to Figure 1 A / 1 B with reactive, disassembling Vorsan wich, damping layer and subsequent buckling panel blind.

25 shows an overall protection arrangement corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B as an insert in a corresponding chamber / mounting device and fanning option / possibility of changing the distance for the individual components; and

26 shows an overall protection arrangement corresponding to FIG. 1A / 1B with insertable interchangeable / exchangeable modules (protection zones) and (here) an integrated supporting structure. Fig. 1 shows the basic structure of a hybrid polyvalent reactive overall protection arrangement according to the invention both in a primarily vertical arrangement (Fig. 1A) and in an inclined design (Fig. 1B) with the corresponding threat spectrum (Fig. 1C). 1A shows an overall protection arrangement 1A (formed from the protection zones A, B, C and the supporting structure D) with a solid, layer-like or structured KE defense zone B (4) in front of a vehicle or another structure to be protected D (2), which can also take over the function of intercepting any remaining power. The KE defense zone 4 is located between two delimiting, placed or installed protection zones A (3) and C (5), with at least protection zone A, with the highest configuration also protection zone C and with special structures also the inner protection zone B with a particular reactive device effective against shaped charges are provided.

For a better understanding of the sometimes complex arrangements, the overall protective arrangement in the different figures is provided with a dashed frame which separates the actual protective arrangement according to the invention from the residual power zone in the sense of a structure to be protected (usually bearing), for example an armored vehicle. demarcates.

Due to the different design options, which include both vertical or at least in a first approximation vertical to angled or oblique arrangements of the protection zones, the adaptable and / or integrable polyvalent, inert, inert-dynamic and / or reactive overall protection arrangement is based on the angle of impact of a threat to be interpreted largely independently.

However, in particular with regard to a simple or space-saving construction or for mounting on inclined surfaces, it can be advantageous to design an overall protection arrangement according to the invention in a construction that is inclined to the threat. FIG. 1B shows such an overall protection arrangement in the complete configuration with all three protection zones corresponding to FIG. 1A in an angled position (measured on the vehicle wall). 1C, the threat types are shaped charge (HL) 6, flat cone charge (FK) 7, aerodynamically stabilized balancing bullets 8, spin-stabilized bullets 9 and splinters 10 are put together.

In the arrangements in Fig. 1 A and 1 B, the reactive equipped protection ^¬ support zones 3 and optionally 5 on the side acting as a dam KE-defensive zone 4, and thus achieve a high pyrotechnic efficiency, wherein the front and rear reactive protective zone 3 and 5 in the intermediate inner protection zone (KE defense zone B) 4 by creating a dynamic pressure field in this protection zone an additional dynamic effect (for example a relative movement of structural parts or a pressure build-up in a quasi-homogeneous medium).

The reactive areas are preferably covered with structures and / or materials which disassemble or delaminate when the explosive film is detonated in order to reduce structural loads and to avoid danger to the battlefield (cf. FIG. 15). Alternatively, in order to avoid battlefield loads, they can consist of a material or be covered with a material which itself can achieve no or only a slight end ballistic effect.

The rear protection zone C can also be designed to be inert and / or inert-dynamic. This supports both the demand for a high feature protection and in particular the demand for a high inert protection (inert basic protection) as well as the desire for the lowest possible structural load. Basically, the reactive component (s) together with the inert component (s) represent a protective combination that is largely independent of the direction of impact of the threat and is also highly effective.

2 shows the side view and the view from above of an armored vehicle (here tracked vehicle) with the surfaces to be primarily protected. The polyvalent hybrid overall protection arrangement according to the invention offers the advantage of great variability and adaptability through modularity, as illustrated, for example, by the design examples in FIGS. 20, 21, 22 and 24 to 26. In this way, the overall protection arrangement can be optimally adapted to the respective protection zones of the vehicle (side surfaces, bow, chain apron, turret, weapon) or can be integrated. 3, 5 - 9 and 1 2 - 1 5 the essential aspects in the defense against both HL, FK and KE threats are shown by means of reactive and inert dynamic (buckling) arrangements. Further protection options are discussed in FIGS. 9-1 1. In addition, in some cases very simplified Dar ^¬ the basic defense mechanisms are position as described, which is based ying l of the present invention and a technical realization can be supplied from this in an optimal manner. In addition to this, FIGS. 4, 1 0, 1 1 and 1 6 - 1 9 show both structure-specific, parametric and material-specific possibilities of influence. This makes it clear that the present invention can be used universally with regard to the possibilities of adapting it both to the threat scenario and to system-related requirements.

Fig. 3 shows the basic directions of action of a reactive sandwich 1 3 in the usual construction of accelerated protective layers / explosive-accelerated plates / layers. The threat direction, the front 1 4 and rear occupancy 1 5 of the protective structure 1 3 and the pyrotechnic / reactive zone / explosive layer 1 6 are shown. The arrows 1 7 and 1 8 symbolize the direction of movement of the components 1 4 and 1 5 and thus the lateral cause of failure of the projectile entering the protection zone after initiation of the reactive process.

A similar structure is shown by buckling plate arrangements in which a dynamically pressure-building material such as rubber is used instead of the explosive (cf. FIG. 7). The major difference is that in the case of inert-dynamic buckling plates, the pressure field in the intermediate layer, which is initiated solely by the penetrating threat, remains relatively limited, depending on the material used, with primarily the rear-facing assignment in the direction of the threat coming into effect, while the reactive one The explosives layer accelerated the sandwich panels in both directions more or less extensively to a technically adjustable speed. As a result, with perfect ignition and a detonating film, lateral exposure to the penetrating threat is guaranteed by both the rear and the front component. It goes without saying that the parameters such as covering thickness or density, inclination, element size and explosive material thickness must be designed so that the longest possible interaction is ensured.

4 shows examples of the positioning options for both reactive and inert-dynamic (buckling) sandwich structures in combination with a load-bearing protective structure 20, which here also represents the essential KE component. In the construction of FIG. 4A, a reactive protection module 21 is upstream of the structure 20, in the construction of FIG. 4B, two reactive protection modules 21 are shown as an example of multi-stage upstream structures with an intermediate layer 23. The number of sandwich arrangements results from the desired reduction in performance or the design options. The efficiency of the individual sandwiches decreases with increasing position number. Basically, at least two reactive or inert-dynamic or mixed passages of high efficiency should be aimed for in an overall protection arrangement.

In the construction of Fig. 4C, two protection modules 21 and 21 C are positioned on both sides at a distance of 20. Between the modules 21 and 21 C and the structure 20 there is a structure or a material 23 which is used for fixing

21 and 21 C serves, but does not affect the dynamic mode of action. This intermediate layer 23 can be designed in such a way that it opposes an increasing resistance when the components 21 and 21 C approach the structure 20. Shock absorption can thus be achieved and the load on the structure 20 by 21 and 21 C can be reduced. For the layer 23, for example, metallic foams, lattice-like arrangements, metallic and non-metallic substances with defined cavities, foamed materials, plastics such as PE with or without inserts, fabrics and layer structures with different densities and strengths come into question.

In the construction of FIG. 4D, a protective module 22 is directly connected to the surface 20 or placed on it or integrated into it. It is obvious that this is a particularly space-saving arrangement. 4E shows, as the last example, a load-bearing protective structure 20 with reactive coverings on both sides or, in particular in the rear part of the structure, also inert-dynamic coverings

22 and 22A in flat, mounted or integrated connection. A row exemplary arrangements according to the invention are based on the principles set forth in Figures 4D and 4E.

FIG. 5 shows lateral interference possibilities of the front components of a reactive sandwich (cf. FIG. 3). The arrow 24- symbolizes the direction of movement or action of the front components 14-. The types of threats HL beam 6A, balancing projectile / arrow projectile 8 and core 9 are shown in each case before entry into the reactive protection zone 1 4 and after the interaction with the accelerated protection component 14. In this case, a speed addition of these reactively accelerated components 1 4 and a takes place threats 6A, 8 or 9 take place. In the case of an HL beam 6A, a lateral disturbance / a laterally disturbed beam section 27 occurs especially in the central region, since the front beam parts 26 have penetrated the protective component before the onset of a lateral beam disturbance due to the high beam speed. A slender arrow floor becomes when entering the. The protective zone in the middle shaft area is subjected to a pressure force from below and later from above due to the reactive module accelerated upwards / forwards (see symbolized active arrows 24 and 24A), so that the front part undergoes a change in direction, which leads to a deflection up to the axis leads to shearing. The same change in direction is experienced by a core, which generally does not break due to its compact structure. In the case of massive lateral loads, however, it can also be broken down into at least several fragments. In the case of inert dynamic structures, this direction of action can only be realized to a limited extent, since a sufficiently high pressure field with corresponding acceleration of these components is generally only built up with penetrating HL rays (cf. FIG. 7).

It should already be pointed out here that in the case of balancing projectiles in general, significant lateral disturbances can only be brought about with sufficient plate masses (thicknesses or densities). For example, in the case of steel as the accelerated component, the thickness of the plate should be over 0.5 of the penetrator diameter. In contrast to HL rays, reaction gases from the explosive recordings cannot disturb a penetrator. 6 shows lateral interference possibilities of the individual components of a reactive (or else inert-dynamic) sandwich when using a rear active component 15 with the movement arrow 28A, the projectile malfunction in the case of shaped charge jets 6A and cores 9 being carried out in the opposite way to that in FIG. 5 In addition, two possibilities for the projectile malfunction are shown for arrow projectiles 8. Since the rear component is accelerated in a relative movement away from the threat, the penetration speed of the projectile is reduced by speed subtraction, which may lead to a deflection of part of the projectile body 8D, since in this case the body can no longer penetrate the protective device ( example below). When the reactive module penetrates through the projectile 8, part of the penetrator 8C is sheared off according to FIG. 5, but in a different direction. The remaining part 8B of the floor 8 remains undisturbed in this case.

In addition to the above statements in connection with FIGS. 3, 5 and 6, FIG. 7 shows, by way of example, a buckling plate arrangement 28, formed from the front layer 29, the rear layer 30 and the intermediate layer 31, which generates a dynamic pressure, with a penetrating layer Deflected arrow segment 8E. The arrow 34 symbolizes the force that acts on the penetrator from below from the front component 21 of the buckling sandwich 28, while the arrow 34A illustrates the force that the rear component 30 exerts on the penetrator from above.

The effects of reactive and to some extent also inert-dynamic buckling plates on a penetrating threat were explained in FIGS. 5-7. Fig. In addition to this, 8 presents different buckling plate positions. In arrangement 8A, the HL, FK and KE protection is provided by a single-stage buckling sandwich 21. Arrangement 8B represents a tandem buckling plate sandwich with a double arrangement in the axial direction (two complete buckling sandwiches). Of course, in addition to the number, all buckling plate parameters can be varied. Also, as shown in FIG. 4, an intermediate layer corresponding to FIG. 4, arrangement 4B or 4C can be located between the buckling plate arrangements. Arrangement 8C stands for buckling plate arrangements inclined towards one another or for mixed arrangements of any impact angle. Arrangement 8D shows a basic example of a (here) two-stage buckling plate arrangement with a louver-like structure made of sandwiches 21 and spacer / damping layer 23.

9 illustrates the reduction in the penetration capacity of shaped charges in targets by means of the known effect of a so-called crater collapse or a crater explosion. The illustration shows this mechanism, which is known in a more pronounced form in glass and glass-like materials and which is explained in a special feature of the corresponding Hugoneot curve. Part 9A shows the beginning of crater 36 and the expanding pressure field boundary 37 with the corresponding pressure arrows 39A when a shaped charge jet 6A penetrates protective material 38, which is assumed to be semi-infinite. Partial image 9B shows the inwardly deformed crater 36A, which appears at a later point in time, and the further spreading pressure field boundary. Due to the described properties of the material, a force (symbolized by the arrows 40) is exerted on the edge of the collapsing crater 36A, which laterally accelerates parts of the material 38 into the penetrating beam 6A and thus deflects the individual particles with a corresponding reduction of the overall performance.

The described effect and thus its efficiency are tied to a sufficient external back pressure and thus to an adequate material casing. And this particular the supporting back ^'side of a protective layer. For example, FIG. 10A shows beam disturbances at a lower target thickness than the penetration depth to be achieved in such glass-like materials 38A. In the case of free rear surfaces of 38, a relatively large crater eruption occurs due to the target thickness being too small, symbolized by the arrows 41. The penetrating HL-beam 6A is disturbed in the front area by the lateral intervention, the middle and the rear part (plunger) penetrating unhindered due to the erosion of the protective material. This leads to a significant reduction in the protection performance. As shown in FIG. 10B using an arrangement 42 as an example, such a reduction in performance can be prevented by supporting the protective material 38 on the back by means of a support layer 43. This fact is basically taken into account in the present invention. In addition, layer 43 reducing property assigned due to material-specific data or design features according to the invention.

Fig. 1 A A illustrates the resulting pressure field corresponding to Fig. 9 / partial image 9A when penetrating a P-charge projectile 7A. Due to the somewhat lower speed of the penetrating threat and the larger displaced crater diameter, the effect of the crater collapse is no longer sufficient to reach the penetrating projectile 7A by means of the collapsing crater wall 36B or to significantly disrupt it laterally.

When a KE threat penetrates, for example through an arrow projectile 8 into a glass-like material 38, shown in FIG. 1 1 B, the effect of the crater collapse no longer occurs because the penetration speed is low in comparison to shaped charge jets, a large primary crater 36C is formed, the pressure zone 39 spreads widely according to the time available and the pressure generated in the protective material is much lower.

Special defense effects of quasi-homogeneous target structures against HL, FK as well as KE threats can be achieved in that the effectiveness of a medium that is already effective in end-ballistics is considerably increased by the introduction of pyrotechnic elements. As shown in FIG. 1 2A using the example of a penetrating HL beam 6A, this can be done, for example, by introducing an explosive layer 45 which is set to the direction of penetration into a homogeneous or quasi-homogeneous target or target components 44. The material lying in front of the pyrotechnic layer 45 is denoted by 47, the material lying behind it by 47A. In the case of HL threats in the case of glass or glass-like materials, the effect of the crater collapse with a lateral pressurization caused by an explosive layer (symbolized by the arrows 48 or 48A) with a corresponding acceleration of the target particles from 47 and 47A against the penetrating beam combined.

The one hitting the velocity v and the velocity u, which roughly approximates between 50% and 60% of the materials used here Impact velocity v lies, penetrating HL beam 6A ignites the obliquely introduced film 45 at the contact point 45B. The detonation front in the film spreads at a speed which is in the order of magnitude of the HL beam speed and is symbolized by the arrows 45A. A pressure surface is thus built up sufficiently quickly in the material 47 or 47A in order to laterally load the penetrating beam 6A by means of the target material accelerated in the direction 48 and 48A in connection with the detonation gases and thus deflect it from the axis.

This lateral acceleration within a homogeneous or quasi-homogeneous material at an angle to the continuous layer of explosives introduced is of course not limited to glass or glass-like materials. This means that materials can also be used that have a good effect against KE and FK threats. The front and back can also be made of different materials. Layer-like structures are also conceivable which, in addition to a high lateral load due to a different material or speed behavior, cause a particularly effective unsteady load of the threat.

The fact that the mechanism of action described in FIG. 1 2A should not be limited to shaped charges is also expressed in the example of an arrow projectile 8 penetrating into a target structure 49 with inserted pyro-technical surfaces 46 according to FIG. 1 2A shown in FIG. 1B. The arrangement 49 shows a structure that consists of a blind with limited explosive areas 46. This is an example from the multitude of possibilities for introducing such pyrotechnic agents into a protective layer or a protective arrangement. This can consist both of a quasi-homogeneous protective material or, as shown by way of example in FIG. 12B, of different layers of different materials or else protective structures 50, 51 and 52.

After the basic performance-reducing mechanisms that have been used in the overall protection arrangement according to the invention have been described so far, FIGS. 1 3 - 1 5 provide basic possibilities for optimizing or designing components of a reactive (and limited inert-dynamic) protective structure. Thus, FIG. 1 shows 3 examples of possible variations within the generally customary sandwich structure or the design of reactive or inert-dynamic sandwiches. The arrangement 1 3A according to FIG. 3 represents an employed reference sandwich, and the arrangement 1 3B represents the possibility of varying the angle of attack. Arrangement 1 3C shows the possibility of varying the thickness of the explosives or the thickness of the bulge plate insert. Arrangement 1 3 D shows an example of the possibility of varying the topping thickness, and arrangement 1 3E stands for asymmetrically structured sandwiches.

14 shows a number of possible combinations of materials for sandwich coatings, arrangement 14A being representative of symmetrically designed metallic coatings of medium to high densities. Arrangement 14B stands for asymmetrical metallic coating made of low-density materials. Arrangement 1 40 shows a possibility for an a symmetrical metallic covering from materials of different densities and thicknesses, arrangement 14D an asymmetrical metallic and / or non-metallic covering of different structures, densities and thicknesses. Arrangement 14E is to be understood as an example of an asymmetrical or also multi-layer covering in connection with a layer-like explosive foil structure.

Fig. 1 5 shows examples of achieving desired dismantling properties using the example of the front occupancy or reactive dismantling mechanisms, in particular taking into account the reduction or avoidance of the structural and battlefield loading by a protective structure according to the invention. Corresponding considerations and configurations naturally also apply to back coverings. It should be pointed out here that these and the following structures and mechanisms are building blocks which can be used in particular in protection zones A and C of overall protection arrangements in accordance with the invention.

Arrangement 1 5A shows a homogeneous covering 53, this covering being made of any material that only has to have sufficient acceleration resistance. Such a layer can of course also consist of individual elements (tiles). The main direction of propagation is symbolized by arrow 53A. Arrangement 1 5B is provided with a front covering 54 which delaminates under dynamic load; the main direction of propagation is symbolized by arrow 54-A. Arrangement 1 5C shows a front occupancy 55 fragmenting under dynamic loading. The correspondingly spread out spread is demonstrated by the two arrows 55A. Arrangement 1 5D is provided with a front covering 56 which dissolves under dynamic loading, and arrangement example 1 5E is equipped with a front covering 57 which disintegrates / atomizes under dynamic loading. The broader spreading of the directions of propagation here is symbolized by the arrows 57A.

Fig. 1 6 shows examples of a single or multi-layer or multi-part explosive coverage. Arrangement 1 6A has a highly asymmetrical film covering and arrangement 1 6B shows a corresponding structure 58 with double film covering 59 and 59A, which can be placed on top of one another or separated by a layer 60. 6C shows a double arrangement 1 F ^{'olienbestückung} 62 and 63 in the front and rear portion of the superstructure Schutzauf 61st The intermediate layer 64 can in turn consist of a homogeneous material, of materials with special properties (end ballistic effect, damping) or of a structure. Of course, the layer 64 can also consist of a multi-stage arrangement or can be made of materials with inclusions. In order to achieve a hybrid protective line, this layer 64 should advantageously also have a high efficiency against FK and KE threats. These basic arrangements can be found in zones A and C of the overall protection arrangement according to the invention. The individual modules can also be provided with parting lines / intermediate webs to prevent continuous detonation.

The technical details relating to the structure and mode of operation of individual protective structures or protective components, which are explained with reference to the previous figures and relate to the layers A, C and B, represent the essential basic building blocks for an overall protective arrangement in accordance with the invention solutions corresponding to the invention for the construction of a hybrid polyvalent Overall protection arrangement explained as basic examples of such structures.

Thus, FIG. 1 shows 7 exemplary embodiments for the basic structure of the overall protection arrangement corresponding to FIGS. 1A and 1B. Modifications of the reactive protection zone A (3) in the sense of a front reactive protection module are shown here. Various options for introducing the pyrotechnic device (primarily explosive foils with and without coverings) are shown in accordance with FIGS. 1A and 1B in the front, middle or rear area of zone A. This zone can also have multiple parts / layers in the vertical direction be constructed (see, for example, FIGS. 4B, 1 6B and 1 6C).

In FIG. 1 7A, the pyrotechnic layer 66 is introduced between the protective components 65 and 67, 65 representing the protective module to be accelerated towards the outside / bed, 67 the protective module acting on the structure or the occupancy of protective zone A. In the structure of Fig. 1 7 B (upper part), the pyrotechnic surface 68 is immediately in front of the protective zone B. This accelerates the thickest possible layer 65 against the threat. In addition, a maximum level of explosive energy is reported to Zone B below. In the lower part of the structure 1 7B, an example is shown in which there are several plates in front of the explosive film, with or without a space. In structure 1 7C, the pyrotechnic surface is embedded obliquely in A in accordance with FIG. 1 2A. Structure 1 7D shows an example of protection zone A in accordance with arrangement 1 7C, protection zone A or the outer reactive protection module 3 here being composed of a plurality of individual protection modules 73, staggered one above the other, with explosive foils 69A inserted at an angle.

Similar considerations also apply to the construction of protection zone C (of course with mirrored structures) in the event that it should also be designed reactively (indicated by the dashed arrow).

Fig. 1 8, corresponding to Fig. 1 7 for the protection zone A (and in a figurative sense also to the protection zone C), exemplary embodiments for the basic structure of the overall protection arrangement according to Fig. 1 A and 1 B. It concerns Modifications of the inert or inert-dynamic protection zone B, which is primarily designed to protect against KE and FK threats. As the simplest variant, construction 1 8A shows a solid plate or a homogeneous structure 71 made of a metallic or non-metallic material or of a quasi-homogeneous material mixture with or without inclusions, deposits or embedded bodies. In structure 1 8B, the KE protection module 4 (B) is designed as a three-layer (two or more layers) structure 75 of any composition. This can be a loose or firm combination of metallic and / or non-metallic materials. Structure 18C shows a further exemplary embodiment of protection zone B. Here, a venetian blind 76 made of buckling arrangements is shown, each of which has an inert-dynamic layer structure made of metallic and / or non-metallic materials. In construction 1 8D, this construction principle is further expanded by using two buckling plate blinds 76A and 76B with opposite arrangement or different angle adjustment as KE and HL-effective protection module 77 (see Fig. 8/8 C). The buckle plate blinds can vary in depth, arrangement, angle of attack, structure and number of buckling plates. Of course, all previous and the design examples and combinations still to be shown are to be applied to structures corresponding to FIG. 1B.

It can be assumed that when using buckling sheet blinds in the middle of the overall protection arrangement and with a corresponding protective design, the buckling plates will change their angle during the penetration of the projectile delayed or pre-disturbed by the front, reactive component. This creates an additional distraction effect, which results in distraction or increased destruction (erosion), especially in the case of longer projectiles (arrow projectiles, middle and rear parts of the hollow charge jet).

Fig. 1 9 uses further basic design and construction options to illustrate the practically unlimited scope when designing an overall protection arrangement in accordance with the invention. The example of the protection zone B shows modifications which also affect the external design or the structure of the protection zone B. Basically, this structure stands for arrangements with mixed angles of attack. Arrangement 1 9A shows an example of the configuration the inner protection zone B of the overall protection arrangement according to FIGS. 1A and 1B with an arrangement of here four parallel buckling plate arrangements 80 in the front area of the protection zone A.

In structure 1 9B, the buckling plate protection is provided by means of a blind-like arrangement 82, with a further protective surface 83 being located in the rear area of the protection zone B, which, for example, can also have damping functions for reducing structural loads. Furthermore, this layer can have a delaying effect on the possibly reactive process in the protection zone C. The protective performance can be increased considerably by a delayed or staggered sequence of the reactive process in the overall protective arrangement. Such a timed control of the triggering of reactive components takes place, for example, directly via the penetrating threat. However, it is also conceivable that separate activation is provided. This option is particularly interesting in the case of KE threats, because here the detonation of the explosive foil by the threat is not always ensured. In construction 1 9C, a flat buckling plate arrangement 84 corresponding to FIG. 1 9A in the front area of protection zone B is combined with a buckling plate blind 82 in the rear area of B.

Structure 1 9D shows an example of an embodiment of zone B with a container 88 inserted between a front, here two-layer filler plate arrangement 86 and a rear buckling louver blind 85. This can be filled with a flowable or free-flowing medium 89. The filling and emptying device 90 is also shown schematically. Between the protective components 86 and the container 89 there is an intermediate space around 87, so that the rear buckling plate / the rear accelerated plate has sufficient freedom of movement. Such containers or tanks 88 can of course have almost any shape and partially or completely fill the protection zone B. Furthermore, 88 can consist of one piece or consist of a battery of containers / tanks, which in turn can be designed as a closed, movable or permanently installed unit.

Basically, a combination of buckling plate sandwiches with reactive sandwiches is also conceivable. This would also be an example of the combination of protective Zones A and B and possibly still C, by alternately or mixedly introducing the two sandwich variants in variants 1 9A or 1 9B. In this way, for example, a buckle plate blind can be mixed reactively / inertly / inertly-dynamically in order to implement a protective component with a relatively low explosive mass, good damping of the accelerated elements and a small overall depth. The space between the individual sandwiches can either be filled with air or a medium that forms good damping and also certain mechanical properties, for example to build up an inherently stable body, but does not hinder the movement of the reactive or inert-dynamic parts.

Fig. 20 shows two hybrid polyvalent armor 91 and 95 as modifications of the overall protection arrangement according to Fig. 1 A and 1 B, in which the protection modules are arranged obliquely / angled or do not contain all of the above-mentioned protection zones in a clear form. The representation in Fig. 20A is representative of a constellation of protection zones of any shape and in any combination (in this case without a protection zone C) 91. In the illustration, the distance of the protection zone B as the rear protection zone (primarily to the KE defense) from the vehicle wall 2 is perceived by a fastening / mounting device 93 as a spacer, wherein an angle-variable mounting is also conceivable. This can be achieved, for example, by means of a rotating device attached at point 93A. The device 93 would then have to be provided with a lock for 91. The front protection zone 92 (zone A), in this case formed from anti-parallel boundary surfaces, serves in particular for HL and FK defense and is therefore primarily (but not necessarily) to be understood as a reactive unit. By dispensing with a third protection zone or by introducing an intermediate space at this position, the overall depth and the basis weight of the overall protection arrangement can be reduced and the protective behavior / protection potential adapted to the threat created if the overall protection is modular.

Corresponding considerations apply to the protection zone C of the overall protection arrangement 95 in FIG. 20B, in which the vehicle structure 2 (zone D) has the protection zones 96 as the first zone on the threat side (reactive HL protection in combination with inert or inert-dynamic KE protection, Protection zone A / B) and 97 as zone A / B The following protection zone C with the rear wall in contact with the vehicle structure and angled front (reactive, inert or inert-dynamic protection) are connected upstream.

The examples in FIGS. 1 to 20 served to explain the basic design options of the different protection zones of overall protection arrangements in accordance with the invention. In addition to this and also as evidence of the almost unlimited design options of the structures on which the present invention is based, FIGS. 21-26 show a number of further technical variants in connection with design variation options.

21 shows a hybrid polyvalent reactive overall protection arrangement 98, in which the inner protection zone B is also designed as a reactive, in particular also KE-effective, module 99. It consists of an inert, highly effective material or a glass-like substance with the effect of a crater collapse with angled rear surfaces and subsequent pyrotechnic device 1 01 or 101 A and the accelerated element 1 02 or 102A in front of a cavity 103 as a dissipation zone (cf. 1 2A and 1 7/1 7C). In this example, module 99 is divided into two components with damping 100 in between. The protection zone C is designed as a damping layer with a web-like structure 104, for example a sheet metal structure or a folded buckling sheet arrangement. This structure is said to have buffering or energy converting or consuming (absorbing) properties.

As already mentioned, the principle of the overall protection arrangements shown here is particularly suitable for adaptation to or in predetermined structures or vehicle surfaces in order to ensure their protection performance or to supplement their protection against further threats. 22, the front protection zone A of the reactive hybrid overall protection arrangement 105 is composed, according to ^" FIGS. 1A and 1B, of inert pre-armor modules 1 07 with subsequent reactive sandwiches 106. Between 106 and 107 there is a free space, in order to ensure a corresponding freedom of movement for the front accelerated components of 106. These protective components are held in position by a support system or a suspension device 108 or if necessary attached to the rear component 1 09. In this example, protection zones B, C and D are combined in one protection component 1 09. This is to be designed or selected from a material such that, in conjunction with the front components, adequate overall protection is guaranteed.

Overall protection arrangements according to the invention are also suitable for reactive components which require an auxiliary device for ignition (e.g. by means of spark ignition). In the simplest case, the reactive components can be triggered by the use of release foils or release grids, in the case of more complex solutions by means of detectors for controlled use or, in the highest configuration stage, program-controlled use.

23 shows an example of a hybrid polyvalent overall protection arrangement 110, in which zone A is provided on the front or its rear with devices for spark ignition of the following explosive foils. This means that both a reactive component of zone A and, as shown in the present example, a (possibly further) reactive device of zone B (or also C) can be controlled. The upstream triggering (contact) grille 1 1 1 or the individual grilles attached to the rear of A (in the case of a modular construction zone Z) serve to initiate the explosive foils 1 1 6 (separated or grouped) with an upstream accelerated layer 1 1 5. The protection zone B made of a protective material 99, which is also KE-active, has an inclined front surface, so that a distance is included as an interference area / dissipation zone between the zones n A and B. In the illustration there is a damping 1 1 7 between the protective material 99 and the rear protective zone D. A combined protective zone C / D adjoins this.

The reactive components can also be triggered by means of a proximity sensor 1 1 2 and / or a signal line 1 09A, which may send delayed signals to a modular triggering device 1 1 3 or an ignition device 1 14. The protection zone A can also be designed as an inert pre-armor or upstream layer. 24 shows an overall protection arrangement 1 18 corresponding to FIGS. 1A and 1B with a reactive, disassembling protection zone A, designed as a reactive sandwich, in which the effectiveness of a subsequent expanded dissipation zone is taken into account. The front layer 1 19 accelerated by the pyrotechnic device / explosive foil 1 1 6 is followed by a delaminating and / or fragmenting inner covering 1 20 within the protection zone A, so that the mechanisms illustrated in FIGS. 5 and 6 complement one another with regard to the protection performance, while the projectile enters dissipation zone 1 21. A layer 122 for support or disassembly / deflection and for damping is introduced for this. In this case, a bulge blind 1 23 is provided as the residual action zone in front of the supporting structure 2.

The principle of a modular structure, also in connection with an extended dissipation zone, is among others also tracked in Fig. 25. This is a hybrid polyvalent overall protection arrangement 1 24 in a completely resolved design. Thus, this protective arrangement 1 24 contains the possibility of expanding / adjusting the distance by means of a sliding mechanism 1 25 for the front protective modules 1 26 and 1 27 (which can be designed to be inert or inert-dynamic) in a box-like device 1 31. The direction of displacement is represented by arrows 128. The box-like or frame-like support structure also provides another possibility for changing the distance within the protective device, which is indicated by the arrows 1 29. The protective components 1 26 and 1 27 are followed by a correspondingly variable free space 130 as a dissipation zone. The entire protective arrangement can also be designed as a modular stem, in that it is mounted on the fastening elements 1 32 only when required.

Protection concepts that are viable over the longest possible period of time, especially in the case of lighter or light armored vehicles, not only have to intercept as wide a range of possible threats as possible, but also have to offer the greatest possible flexibility and retrofitting options. One solution to meet these requirements is to reactively equip the vehicles only when they are about to be used, for example. This principle can also be extended to massive armor components in order to drastically reduce the protective mass of a vehicle outside of the operating times. Also for that Transportation, especially air transportation, can be very beneficial. With a limited overall depth, it is possible in a number of examples shown here to combine the rear protection zone C with the vehicle-side zone D (cf., for example, FIGS. 7, 8, 1 0-1 2, 22-23). However, a modular, resolved form of the use of protective components in accordance with the invention also enables rapid adaptation to changing protection requirements or new technologies.

26 shows an arrangement 1 33 corresponding to FIGS. 1A and 1B with insertable / exchangeable modules as a further basic conceptual embodiment of the overall protection arrangement according to the invention. The protection zone C here is designed as a load-bearing structure 1 40 for the protection zones A, B and D, which in this example are formed by a modular reactive pre-armor (protection zone A) and a subsequent buckling plate blind (protection zone B). In the illustration, the armor is provided with receiving compartments or partitions / inserts 1 36, 1 37 and 1 39 for the individual protection modules. These consist, for example, a front, reactive zone 1 34 (a Beulblechjalousie example) designed with the reactive modules 1 34A, ^'a dynamic inert-1 as a module bay 38 and a rear residual power Zone 1 41st The reactive modules 1 34A can additionally be separated from one another by damping layers 1 35. Of course, the combination of these elements is variable according to the application scenario. Such arrangements allow extremely light structures in relation to the level of protection to be made possible in the vast majority of times when the vehicle does not have to be equipped with reactive or massive modules. This concept also offers the possibility of responding to a changing range of threats with appropriate modules. Only the protection modules that are required to achieve a protection level or to fulfill a specific mission are to be used. REFERENCE NUMBER LIST A hybrid polyvalent overall protection arrangement with primarily vertical

Zones B hybrid polyvalent overall protection arrangement with angled zonesC hybrid polyvalent overall protection arrangement with partially angled

Zones' vehicle / object wall / residual action zone front (reactive) protection zone inner protection zone (inert, inert-dynamic, reactive) rear protection zone (inert, inert-dynamic or reactive) shaped charge threat (HL) A HL-beam threat from projectile-forming charges (FK) A P-charge projectile Threat from aerodynamically stabilized balancing projectiles (APFSDS) A in buckling arrangement 30 deflected projectile 8 after lateral acceleration by 14 B undisturbed residual projectile C destroyed / deflected part of 8 after penetration of 1 5 D at 1 5 deflected projectile 8 E in 28 / 29 Deflected projectile Threat from spin-stabilized balancing projectiles (AP, APDS) A by 1 4 deflected (destroyed) core projectile B by 1 5 deflected (destroyed) main projectile 0 Threat by splinters 1 Side view of a vehicle with protection-relevant areas 2 Top view of a vehicle with protection-relevant areas Areas 3 reactive sandwich 3A original position of 1 3 4 front protective components te of 1 3 5 rear protective component of 1 3 pyrotechnic coating / explosives / explosive film direction of movement of 14 direction of movement of 1 5 accelerated plates supporting protective structure upstream reactive sandwich corresponding to 1 3 A front sandwich of a 20 upstream tandem reactive arrangement B rear sandwich of a 20 upstream tandem reactive arrangement C rear 20 arranged reactive sandwich front / in 20 integrated reactive sandwich A rear / in 20 integrated reactive sandwich connection layer / fastening layer / damping layer / spacer effective arrow of the lateral disruption by 1 4 A active arrow of the lateral disruption with moving plate 1 5 plunger of 6A undisturbed beam tip deflected middle beam part of 6A with opposing plate 1 4A deflected beam part at 1 5 B in 38A deflected beam part Buckle plate arrangement with deflected bullet 8E front active component of 28 rear active component of 28 dent insert by 31 accelerated Crater rim of 29 by 31 accelerated crater rim of 30 lateral disturbance force of 32 symbolizing arrow A lateral disturbance force of 33 symbolizing arrow Buckle plate blind made from two sandwiches 21 of 6A crater A collapsing crater B crater when a P load penetrates C crater when a KE penetrates Threat pressure field surrounding the crater 36 in 38 quasi-semi-infinite vitreous material A vitreous material of limited thickness B by 43 component 38A supported on the rear side A pressure field boundary A direction of propagation of the pressure field boundary 39 arrows symbolizing implosion pressure direction of propagation of the erupting crater material target structure, formed from a glass-like material 38A with support 43 support layer solid-state module with angled pyrotechnic surface Explosive layer / detonation film in 44 A propagation arrow for detonation front in 45 B contact point between 6A and 45 explosive film elements corresponding to 45 quasi-homogeneous target material in front of explosive layer 45 A quasi-homogeneous target material behind explosive layer 45 active arrow for lateral threat exposure by 45 in combination with 47A active arrow for lateral threat exposure 45 in combination with 47A Example of a multi-layer structure with integrated module corresponding to 44 blind-like explosive elements in 49 50 upstream protective area 50 subsequent protective area front component of a reactive special structure A main direction of propagation of 53 delaminating front component of a reactive special structure A direction of spread of 54 fragmenting front occupancy of a reactive special structure A direction of spread of 55 dissolving front occupancy of a reactive special structure A direction of propagation of 56 atomizing front covering of a reactive special structure A direction of expansion of 57 protective arrangement with double explosive foil front explosive foil in 58 A rear explosive foil in 58 separating layer between 59 and 59A protective structure with two explosive foils and thick intermediate layer 64 front explosive foil in 61 rear explosive foil in 61 intermediate layer between 62 and 63 protection module accelerated against the threat of 3 explosive foil on the vehicle side / in the direction of 4 and / or 5 component 4 explosive foils arranged on the inside of 3 explosive foils arranged diagonally in 3 A explosive foils arranged diagonally with a modular construction 69 upstream material of 3 rear occupancy of 69 modular construction of 3 individual, stacked modules of 72 inert protection module (plate) 4 as a multi-layer Inert KE protection module 4 as a buckling sheet blind A A front buckling sheet blind from 77 B Rear buckling sheet blind from 77 4 as two opposing / opposing buckling sheet blinds Separating surface between 76A and 76B inner protection module in arrangement 1 0 with non-parallel outer surfaces multi-level (here four-stage) dent plate area in 79 cavity in 79 blinds made of dent plates in 79 rear protection module / damping device / dissipation zone in 79 front, three-stage dent plate area in 79 rear dent plate blinds in 79 two-stage front dent plate area in 79 space between 86 and 88 inner container, tank liquid, pourable filling 90 Filling / emptying device

91 hybrid polyvalent reactive armor, angled protection modules of any shape and combination (here without protection zone C)

92 front protection module / protection zone of 91, with non-parallel surfaces

93 fastening device for 91

93A pivot point / pivot axis / movable attachment

94 cavity

95 hybrid polyvalent reactive armor with angled protection modules of any shape and combination (here without protection zone A)

96 combined protection zone A / B in 95

97 protection zone C in 95

98 Total protection arrangement with reactive zone B and zone C as damping

99 hollow charges, flat cone loads and KE projectiles that repel material

100 interface, shock absorbing layer between 99 and 99A

101 explosive foil 101 A explosive ^{foil •}

1 02 sheet / accelerated shift 102A sheet / accelerated shift

103 Free space behind reactive components

104 folded sheet metal structure / buckling sheet arrangement / damping zone 104A cassette for 1 04

105 Example of a hybrid polyvalent reactive total protection arrangement with modular protection zone A and inert pre-armor as well as a combined protection zone B / C / D

106 reactive sandwich in 1 05

1 07 pre-armor

108 Fastening / suspension device

109 B / C / D representing protective plate 1 09A ignition line / signal line

1 1 0 Overall protection arrangement with triggering device for the reactive component and single (A) / double reactive arrangement (A and B)

1 1 1 Tripping / contact grid

1 1 2 Proximity sensor 113 modular release device

114 ignition device

115 sheet / accelerated shift

116 explosive foil

117 damping layer

118 Example of a hybrid polyvalent reactive overall protection arrangement with reactive preliminary stage, middle fender and interception structure / buckling plate blind

119 disassembling / delaminating / fragmenting front cover

120 disassembling / delaminating / fragmenting rear cover

121 cavity

122 protection / damping layer introduced in 121

123 Partition area with adaptable protection zones

124 Example of a hybrid polyvalent reactive overall protection arrangement with sliding zones / components and detachable, sliding mounting device

125 Sliding / holding device for the reactive or inert or inert dynamic components 126 and 127

126 front protection component of 124

127 inner protective component of 124

128 direction of movement of 125

129 Direction of movement of the individual components 126 and 127 in 125

130 variable freedom

131 box / frame for 125 or 126 or 127

132 fastening device

133 Total protection with slide-in devices (boxes) for the protective components and internal support structure 140

134 reactive zone

134A reactive module before 134

135 Separation or damping layer

136 front chamber / box / mounting device for 134A

137 partition

138 slot, e.g. formed from a buckle sheet blind

139 chamber / box / assembly device for 1 1 140 support structure for 133

141 slot for 139

Claims

1 . Overall protection arrangement (1 A, 1 B, 1 C) against threats (6-10), such as shaped charges, flat cone loads, balancing projectiles and fragments, which can be applied to or integrated into a structure (2) to be protected, the overall protection arrangement (1 A, 1 B, 1 C) consists of a layer structure largely independent of the impact angle of the threat, the inner inert or inert-dynamic protection zone (4) against KE threats and a front reactive protection zone (3) against HL threats on the the structure (2) facing away from the inner protection zone (4) with a pyrotechnic protection mechanism (1 6), the front protection zone (3) being supported on the inner protection zone (4) and cooperating with it against the threats.

2. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 1, characterized in that the layer structure of the overall protection arrangement further comprises a rear protection zone (5) on the side of the inner protection zone (4) facing the structure to be protected (2), the rear protection zone (5) being reactive Protection zone or as an inert or inert-dynamic protection zone.

3. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) are connected in series or at least partially act simultaneously.

4. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 3, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement is at least partially integrated into the envelope of the structure to be protected (2) or at least partially releasably connected to it.

5. Protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) of the overall protection arrangement are arranged parallel or at an angle to the surface or wall of the structure to be protected (2).

6. Protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) are wholly or partially fixed or releasably connected to each other.

7. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement is part of a protective surface or a supporting structure.

8. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 7, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) is a solid / homogeneous plate, a sandwich or a buckling plate arrangement.

9. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 8, characterized in that between the front protection zone (3) and the inner Schutzzo ne (4) an intermediate layer with energy-compensating effect is provided.

1 0. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 9, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of a structure which one or more pyrotechnic layer (s) / parallel / non-parallel, one or more parts / Contains explosive foil (s).

1 1. Overall protection arrangement according to one of Claims 1 to 1 0, characterized in that that the inner protection zone (4) contains an intermediate space (87) in which elements that are reactively accelerated against one another meet.

1 2. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 1 1, characterized in that the intermediate space (87) in the inner protection zone is filled with damping materials / elements / structural elements.

1 3. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 1 2, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) are modular.

14. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 13, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) are mixed.

1 5. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 12, characterized in that the entire overall protection arrangement or parts thereof are movable.

16. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 1 5, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) overlap one another.

17. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 16, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protection mechanisms introduced into the front and / or rear reactive protection zone (3, 5) are obliquely arranged explosive foils or layers (69, 69A).

18. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 17, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanisms of the front and / or rear reactive protection zone (3, 5) are explosive foils or layers, the one or are coated on both sides with a metallic or non-metallic layer.

19. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 1 8, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism by the impinging or. penetrating threat (6-1 0) is ignited.

20. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 1 9, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism is initiated via an ignition device (1 1 4), a contact, a trigger grid (1 1 1) or a sensor (1 1 2).

21st Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 20, characterized in that the structure (2) to be protected is equipped with a detection system.

22. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 21, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement has electrical or pyrotechnic signal lines (1 09A).

23. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 22, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protection mechanism covers the entire protection zone (3) or is divided into individual areas with or without a space / partition.

24. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 23, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protection mechanism is constructed from explosive foils or layers of the same or different thickness.

25. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 24, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism consists of a geometric structure or has an uneven thickness distribution.

26. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 25, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism is constructed from a plurality of explosive films or layers arranged in parallel or non-parallel.

27. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 26, characterized in that the occupancy of the pyrotechnic protective mechanism is carried out in one or more layers, with or without an intermediate layer.

28. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 27, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protection mechanism is covered on one or both sides with a single- or multi-layer metallic structure / a metallic foam / a single- or multi-layer grid.

29. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 28, characterized in that between the pyrotechnic protection mechanism and the occupancy in the direction of the incident threat (6-1 0) an initiating layer in the form of a provided with holes or grooves, metallic or not -metallic layer is provided.

30. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 29, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protection mechanism is constructed from at least one explosive film or layer, which on the side facing the center of the overall protection arrangement with a thinner (1 mm to 3 mm) or thicker (3 mm 8 mm) metallic or non-metallic layer.

31 Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 30, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism is constructed from flat, corrugated, angled or otherwise shaped surfaces / protective surfaces.

32. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 31, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism can be inserted, removed, moved and / or exchanged.

33. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 32, characterized in that the pyrotechnic protective mechanism consists of a two- or multi-layer composite of the same or different materials.

34. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 33, characterized in that the layers of the composite are loosely placed on one another, glued, vulcanized together, welded or releasably connected to one another.

35. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 34, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) is constructed from a homogeneous or structured, metallic or non-metallic material, a mixture or mixture, a lattice-like structure, a scrim or a pressed body ,

36. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 35, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of an open or closed structure.

37. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 36, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of a dynamically compressible material (for example glass, polymer, metallic or non-metallic foam, pressed body, synthetic wood, fabric) or such a material contains.

38. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 36, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of a ceramic material or contains such a material.

39. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 36, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of a plastically deformable or liquid-like substance or is filled with a liquid or a free-flowing medium. ^•

40. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 39, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of a single-layer or multilayer structure containing buckling plates.

41. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 40, characterized in that the inner protection zone (4) consists of a single-layer or multi-layer buckling plate blind (66, 67).

42. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 40 or 41, characterized in that the bulge arrangements run parallel to the pyrotechnic protection mechanism or enclose an angle with it.

43. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 40 to 42, characterized in that the areas / volumes between the bulge arrangements / the bulge blind are open / empty / filled or closed (empty or filled).

44. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 43, characterized in that the filling consists of a shock-absorbing material (e.g. metallic or non-metallic foam, fabric, grid-like structure).

45. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 44, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement contains a supporting structure or itself represents a supporting structure.

46. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 45, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement is located in a non-metallic / metallic, closed / open container / housing.

47. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 46, characterized in that the protection zones (3, 4, 5) are provided with elements for changing the angle, rotation and / or increasing the distance.

48. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 47, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement or parts thereof are arranged rotatable / pivotable / tiltable / displaceable.

49. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 48, characterized in that the overall protective arrangement or parts thereof are firmly or releasably connected to one another.

50. Overall protection arrangement according to claim 49, characterized in that the connection is carried out by screwing, gluing, welding or vulcanizing.

51. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 50, characterized in that the overall protection arrangement or parts thereof are designed to be interchangeable.

52. Overall protection arrangement according to one of claims 1 to 50, characterized in that the reactive accelerated substances or layers consist of materials which themselves have no or only a minimal end-ballistic effect.