Scholarlink

<p>Multilayered armor systems (MAS) are typically composed of three layers including a ceramic, synthetic Kevlar fiber, and an aluminum alloy sheet. The high cost and detrimental environmental impact associated with Kevlar production have initiated an investigation for impact-resistant alternatives stemming back to 2007. Therefore, researchers have been looking for alternatives that provide better solutions for environmental concerns and promote sustainable practices since 2007. The current paper has gathered literature covering over 50 types of bio-composites developed to replace Kevlar in MAS. However, no one has conducted a study to know which alternative is the best. Therefore, this work aims to select the best bio-polymeric material that can substitute Kevlar based on three main criteria including the penetration depth, density, and cost using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The penetration depth was given the highest weight (45%) as safety is the most crucial criterion, while the cost and the density were given 30% and 25%, respectively. The results indicated that the highest priority of alternatives with respect to the main criteria was different. For example, four types of bio-composites (epoxy-30 vol.% ramie fabric, epoxy-30 vol.% curaua fiber, epoxy-30 vol.% giant bamboo, and epoxy-30 vol.% ramie fiber) had higher preferences than synthetic Kevlar with respect to the penetration depth. When it comes to the priority vector concerning the cost, all types of bio-composites had higher priorities than Kevlar. Regarding the density, five other different bio-composites were lighter than Kevlar. These conflicting alternatives emphasized the great difficulty for the decision-makers to select the best alternative, so using AHP was worth it. Kevlar did not receive priority across all criteria, indicating the existence of viable alternatives to it. The highest overall priority, concerning the main goal, was assigned to the polyester-30 vol.% sisal composite. When Kevlar was compared to polyester-30 vol.% sisal (its best alternatives), an extra three soldiers rather than one can be protected with multilayered armor vests at the same cost. Five scenarios were used in the sensitivity analysis to ensure model robustness. The scenarios revealed that polyester-30 vol.% sisal, polyester-30 vol.% non-woven jute, polyester-30 vol.% curaua fiber, epoxy-30 vol.% mallow fiber, and epoxy-30 vol.% ramie fiber composites were the top five alternatives regardless of their order. Therefore, it can be said that the model’s dynamic response is consistent since using five scenarios did not significantly influence the rank of the alternatives. However, all scenarios revealed that polyester-30 vol.% sisal had the highest priority.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A smart selection of the best bio-multilayered armor: an AHP decision model

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月28日

查看全文
  • Mu’ayyad M. Al-Shrida,
  • Faris M. AL-Oqla,
  • Mohammed A. Almomani,
  • Mohammed T. Hayajneh

摘要

Multilayered armor systems (MAS) are typically composed of three layers including a ceramic, synthetic Kevlar fiber, and an aluminum alloy sheet. The high cost and detrimental environmental impact associated with Kevlar production have initiated an investigation for impact-resistant alternatives stemming back to 2007. Therefore, researchers have been looking for alternatives that provide better solutions for environmental concerns and promote sustainable practices since 2007. The current paper has gathered literature covering over 50 types of bio-composites developed to replace Kevlar in MAS. However, no one has conducted a study to know which alternative is the best. Therefore, this work aims to select the best bio-polymeric material that can substitute Kevlar based on three main criteria including the penetration depth, density, and cost using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The penetration depth was given the highest weight (45%) as safety is the most crucial criterion, while the cost and the density were given 30% and 25%, respectively. The results indicated that the highest priority of alternatives with respect to the main criteria was different. For example, four types of bio-composites (epoxy-30 vol.% ramie fabric, epoxy-30 vol.% curaua fiber, epoxy-30 vol.% giant bamboo, and epoxy-30 vol.% ramie fiber) had higher preferences than synthetic Kevlar with respect to the penetration depth. When it comes to the priority vector concerning the cost, all types of bio-composites had higher priorities than Kevlar. Regarding the density, five other different bio-composites were lighter than Kevlar. These conflicting alternatives emphasized the great difficulty for the decision-makers to select the best alternative, so using AHP was worth it. Kevlar did not receive priority across all criteria, indicating the existence of viable alternatives to it. The highest overall priority, concerning the main goal, was assigned to the polyester-30 vol.% sisal composite. When Kevlar was compared to polyester-30 vol.% sisal (its best alternatives), an extra three soldiers rather than one can be protected with multilayered armor vests at the same cost. Five scenarios were used in the sensitivity analysis to ensure model robustness. The scenarios revealed that polyester-30 vol.% sisal, polyester-30 vol.% non-woven jute, polyester-30 vol.% curaua fiber, epoxy-30 vol.% mallow fiber, and epoxy-30 vol.% ramie fiber composites were the top five alternatives regardless of their order. Therefore, it can be said that the model’s dynamic response is consistent since using five scenarios did not significantly influence the rank of the alternatives. However, all scenarios revealed that polyester-30 vol.% sisal had the highest priority.