English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

During the operation of the UN and NATO forces in Africa and Asia it appeared that the equipment held and utilized by these organizations was not proof against the missiles being shot by rocket propelled grenades. The missiles utilized by the terrorist organizations belong to the first generation. They have a head with a shaped charge jet permitting them to pierce up to 300 mm RHA steel. There are four protection methods against this hazard: reactive armour, thick proper armour, rod armour and active defence system. The reactive armour cannot be applied on each kind of vehicle. The thick, proper armour limits other important features of vehicles. The active defence systems continue to develop, except the Russian system “Arena”. Therefore, the fast development of rod armour appeared. The main task of this armour type is to disturb the symmetry of the shaped charge jet as a result of the shock that is effective of the deflagration and not the forming of cumulative jet. The finite element model of the missile with the cumulative head and its influence with two types of rod armour will be presented in this article. The cases of the missile impact with circular and square section for different typical speeds of missile will be considered.

Numerical analysis of missile impact being shot by rocket propelled grenades with rod armour