• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Design of Multi-layered Protection Against Guided Mortar Threats Yhrough Numerical Modeling

    2023-12-07 13:21:56BonnyThawaniSengKiatLimLauraBrownRichardCritchleyRachaelHazael
    Defence Technology 2023年11期

    Bonny Thawani,Seng Kiat Lim,Laura Brown,Richard Critchley,Rachael Hazael

    Cranfield Forensic Institute, Cranfield University, Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, Shrivenham, SN6 8LA, UK

    Keywords: Hydrocode Fragmentation High velocity Composite structures Foams

    ABSTRACT The trade -off between protection and weight is a constant consideration when designing a portable protective solution.Greater mobility is a desirable attribute and protection must therefore adapt,prompting a demand for lightweight,simple to construct,low-cost and effective ballistic protection systems.High strength and ductility,wave spreading capability and good energy absorption are key properties for ballistic protection.Four materials,polycarbonate,Kevlar?-epoxy,polyurethane foam,and aluminium alloy,possess these properties and were selected for analysis by numerical simulation.Multilayered configurations were proven to be an optimal solution,by exploiting the advantages of each material without having large penalties of mass and cost.Numerical modelling using ANSYS AUTODYN?is used to simulate monolithic and multi-layered target configurations,to obtain the penetration mitigation performance.The results are analysed to select configurations based on different requirements,such as lowest cost,lowest mass,best performance,and optimal configuration which balanced the three key parameters mentioned.The optimal configuration of Aluminium,Kevlar-Epoxy,Polyurethane,and Polycarbonate has layers with thickness of 7,3,38,2 mm respectively with a total mass of 7.97 kg,total cost of $39.86 and penetration of 29.34% (14.67 mm).Polynomial relationships between performance and mass/cost are also determined.

    1.Introduction

    It has been identified that precision mortar attack (aside from improvised explosive devices (IED))proved to be one of the major threats encountered by security personnel,as it has a circular error probable (CEP) of less than 5 m [1,2].Circular error probable is defined as a measure of weapon system precision where 50% of the rounds will land in the defined radius.Subsequently,the use of mortars has proven to be the cause for over 30% of casualties(more than 5000) and property damage in recent conflicts in the middle east [3-6].The development of ammunition has led to improved blast and fragmentation effects,which can undermine the protection capabilities of the gabion structures [7].According to Elshenawy [7],it was concluded that a multi-layered structure of five layers combining steel,sand,aluminium-polyurethane foam sandwich panel,with a total thickness of 35 cm,is required to mitigate steel mortar warhead fragments with velocity of 1100 m/s.

    Similar to most anti-ballistic systems [8],such a lightweight solution requires the following properties to mitigate fragment penetration.

    (1) High strength and ductility to impede the shock transmitted from the impact energy of the high velocity fragment;

    (2) Wave spreading capability to distribute the energy of the shock wave in material instead of passing the energy through it;

    (3) High energy absorption capability to absorb kinetic energy and convert it to heat energy or other internal energy[9-12,12].Therefore,the material needs to have high ductility so that it can undergo significant plastic deformation with large energy absorption and avoid the material having sudden failure that may result in secondary fragments [13].Advances in materials sciences have provided new materials that have the properties previously described but are also lightweight.Composite armour,which incorporates air spaces,ceramics,plastics in addition to steel,provides a lightweight yet high strength alternative to RHA.

    An alternative lightweight material is polycarbonate.Polycarbonate is a rigid thermoplastic that is designed to soften when heat is applied such as the impact energy generated by fragments[14].This allows the polycarbonate to melt at the high temperature generated by the impact and “wrap” around the fragment in its liquid state thereby slowing it down [14].This is unlike other materials,such as ceramic plates,that are brittle and may shatter upon impact and make them less effective for stopping additional impacts at the same location.Polycarbonate has good impact properties [15]and is pliable,which make it easier to fabricate to the required shape,thereby lowering the manufacturing cost [14].Polycarbonate is therefore often used as the material for “bullet resistant glass”.

    Another candidate material for high strength and ductility are aramid fibres.Aramid fibres,have a high strength to weight ratio and are five times stronger than steel [16].This material also has high tensile strength of 3620 MPa[16]and large energy absorption capability,making it an ideal material for ballistic protection.This is due to its chemical structures having long straight parallel monomers chains that are interconnected with strong hydrogen bonds through further processing.However,aramid fibres are rapidly degraded by ultraviolet (UV) light and moisture,which led to significant loss of strength and stiffness.The aramid fibres will need to be coated with UV stabilisers and combined with water resistant materials,such as epoxy,to protect it from the UV and moisture[17].Lastly,it is difficult to machine due to its high strength and therefore leads to a higher production cost for the product [18].

    Aluminium alloys are also a candidate material with high strength and ductility,yet light weight when compared to other metals like steel.Aluminium has a density of about 2700 kg/m3[19],which is about 2.9 times less than steel and 1.4 times less than aluminium ceramics.Therefore,it is heavier when compared to both polycarbonate and aramid fibres.

    Besides aramid fiber composites,porous material also demonstrates high energy absorption capability[18,20].A porous material is a solid permeated with interconnected network of pores that is filled with fluid (liquid or gas) [21].The pores distend the solid material with the result that the porous material has a smaller density and larger volume than its crystalline form Refs.[22-24].

    Closed cell (also known as rigid) porous metal or polyurethane(PU) foam are used in military applications,such as mine protection,to absorb blast waves’ energy [25].As closed cell foam is denser than open cell foam,it provides a more rigid structure for the system and better energy absorption capability.Based on experimental data and numerical simulation using AUTODYN?,Boey[26]concluded that PU foam provides a significant reduction in weight despite having a limited increase in penetration,when compared to aluminium (Al) metal foam.

    To maximise the effectiveness of materials,especially when lightweight is a requirement,researchers often look employ multilayered configurations.Multi-layered configurations for ballistic protection have been extensively studied [27-32],often highlighting their superior mass to ballistic protection performance.One of the most effective ways that high ballistic resistance is achieved is through impedance mismatch.Verreault’s numerical modelling and experimentation [33]shows that multi-layered configuration with alternating impedances material,is able to mitigate sympathetic detonation by scattering away more shock energy and increase in energy absorption.This means that the velocity of the fragment can be greatly reduced.The experiment shows that higher impedance mismatch between material results in less energy transmitted to the final target.

    Sueki’s study[31]highlighted the importance of the sequence of alternating impedance material.The penetration protection is better when low impedance material (i.e.polyethylene/polycarbonate) is inserted between high impedance materials (i.e.aluminium/steel) as compared to the alternate sequence where high impedance material is in between low impedance material.This is because the excitation frequency of the propagated stress wave was lowered due to the reflected wave caused by the high impedance mismatch [31,33].

    Besides the observation above,Boey [32]and Poh [34]further suggested the sequence of the material to be impeding layer,wave spreading layer,porous layer and follow by the support layer.Experimental and numerical study from Boey [32]shows that the multi-layer configuration is effective in stopping fragments with velocity of about 500 m/s from perforating through the layers.

    The use of numerical methods for testing the performance of the protection system provides a cost-effective alternative to dependence on experimental methods.Numerical methods allow the user to accurately visualise the response of the system when it is subjected to loading due to high velocity impact.Additionally,the large material libraries available in simulation software provide the user with a range of materials to experiment with,thus increasing the versatility of the study.In terms of versatility,numerical methods allow for testing with a range of geometries,that would otherwise be costly if done physically.Furthermore,use of hydrocodes allow the user to quantify data that would otherwise require expensive sensors and specialist setups to measure.In the case of high energy impact events (such as this study),use of numerical methods is a safer choice as compared to physical experiments.Although,it is important to point out that experimental validation of results from numerical studies is necessary to account for inaccuracies and incomplete data in material models.

    While much literature is focused on improving two areas such as mass reduction and penetration protection performance,it is found that optimisation on cost or on all three parameters are lacking.Therefore,this study aims to find an optimised solution that considered all three parameters.

    2.Methods and model setup

    2.1. AUTODYN? hydrocode simulation settings

    A 2D Lagrange model with axial symmetry was developed using ANSYS AUTODYN,in which rotation symmetry about the axial is assumed to form a cylindrical target shape.The details of the models used in this study are outlined in subsection 2.2.

    To establish the optimum mesh size,a fidelity study using element sizes of 1 mm (baseline),0.5 mm and 0.2 mm was undertaken.The simulations took approximately 15,25 and 200 min,and resulted in a depth of penetration difference of 6.0% and 9.1% against the baseline respectively (Table 1).To balance computational time and accuracy,an overall mesh element size of 0.5 mm(2 cells per mm) was selected,coupled with gradient zoning of 0.1 mm at the region of impact (lower portion in J direction for 10 mm radius out of the total 50 mm).

    Table 1 Fidelity study for mesh size.

    Table 2 Details the material,function,and model data for the simulation studies.

    To understand localised responses during the impact event,a series of moving gauges were placed axially on the fragment at 0.5 mm,while fixed gauges were placed on the target at 1 mm intervals.

    2.1.1.Material model

    All materials used the material models provided with the AUTODYN library,except for the porous material.For porous material,only the solid EOS is present in the material library,therefore,theP-α EOS [35]is used.The following parameters were required for the porous material model.

    (1) Initial density of the porous material [25].

    (2) Bulk sound speed in the elastic compaction region

    (3) Maximum elastic pressure(pressure at yield)

    (4) Solid compaction pressure

    (5) Solid Hugoniot parametersCandS[35]

    The porous density is 0.16 g/cm3obtained from supplier datasheet [25].Using formulas from Grady and Winfree on PU foam[40],the remaining porous material data can be calculated.The bulk sound speed,ceis obtained based on the following equation:

    where κ (Pa) is the bulk modulus (Pa) and ρ0(kg/m3) is the initial density.

    whereE(Pa)is the Young Modulus and υ is Poisson ratio,which is 0.3 based on the datasheet.

    The Young Modulus can be derived from the relationship with shear modulus,G.G(Pa)which is from the datasheet with the value of 75.2 MPa[25].

    This can be input back to Eqs.(2) and (3) to obtain a bulk modulus of 488.8 MPa and bulk sound speed of 1747.86 m/s.The bulk sound speed is similar to that experimentally recorded by Marsh [41]of about 1732 m/s.

    The initial compact pressure,Pewas determined based on the yield stress data obtained from the datasheet(1.55 MPa).The solid compaction pressure,Psis the pressure for which the porous material reaches a density equal to that of its solid counterpart.Based on the LASL shock equation of state by Marsh [42],the valuePsis 1.729 GPa as found under the graph of PU foam 0.16 g/cm3.Lastly,the solid EOS for porous material can be obtained from the AUTODYN? material library.

    2.2. Model setup

    As highlighted in the aim of this study,there will be simulations on two main configurations to understand their performance.The first set of configurations will be based on monolithic targets using the individual material listed in Table 3,to identify their performance.The second set of configurations will be based on multilayered composites of these material based on the layout in Fig.1.

    Fig.1.Proposed multi-layered target of 50 mm thickness: Layer A -Impeding layer;Layer B -Wave spreading layer;Layer C -Porous layer;Layer D -Supporting layer.

    Table 3 Sub-configuration for monolithic targets.

    2.3. Configuration 1 - monolithic targets

    Four monolithic targets materials (Table 3) were simulated to determine the penetration protection capabilities of three thickness of 6,20 and 50 mm 6 mm thickness is based on Ref.[43]where 6 mm thickness of CFRP has similar penetration depth regardless of the target geometry,lay-up,sequence,production method or fibre orientation.

    50 mm thickness is based on existing commercial target plates,such as the Mifram security modular ballistic protection[44],while 20 mm thickness is used as it is readily available,and an intermediate between 6 mm and 50 mm.It should be noted that should no perforation of the smaller thickness layer occur,the larger thicknesses are not simulated.

    For each target,the height (radius for 2D axial) of 280 mm is used,as it has the same area size1based on target plate of 500 mm by 500 mm.This size is selected,as it is of a manageable real world handling size and is similar to the commercially available systems[45].

    2.4. Configuration 2 - multi-layered targets

    Twelve multi-material configurations of fixed material order,with thickness 50 mm were simulated to optimise based on perforation resistance,mass,and cost.Each multi-layer target had a fixed layer arrangement of Aluminium-Kevlar Epoxy-Polyurethane-Polycarbonate (AL-KE-PU-PC) (Fig.1).AL forms the first impedance layer in view of its higher density as compared to the other materials.This provides a greater impedance effect to slow down the fragment.KE shall then be used as the wave-spreading layer to further mitigate the velocity of the fragment using its anisotropic properties.PU foam shall then be used as the filler,in view of its low mass and cost,and “shock absorber” of the target system as it has good pressure reduction properties.The great impedance mismatch shall also increase the shock reflection,thereby further reducing the shock transmitted to subsequent layers.PC shall be used as the support layer and shall be efficient stopping the low residual velocity fragment.

    Composite protection systems consist of multiple layers and materials that improve the system’s penetration protection performance.The impeding layer reduces the shock transmitted from the initial impact.The function of the wave spreading layer is to dissipate kinetic energy from the projectile in the axis perpendicular to the direction of impact.The porous layer absorbs any remaining kinetic energy when the pores undergo compaction under loading.Finally,the support layer prevents spalling from the porous layer for effective energy absorption [32]and provide additional layer to further mitigate penetration.For this study,the candidate materials for the impeding,wave spreading,porous,and support layers are aluminium alloy,aramid fibre (Kevlar?-epoxy),polyurethane foam,and polycarbonate,respectively.

    For each configuration,material layup thicknesses were selected based upon an iterative process.The iteration of the target thickness starts with 6 mm AL and 6 mm kE,together with a constant thin 2 mm PC,and the remaining portion will be filled with 38 mm of PU.The thickness of AL and KE was then changed systematically in 1 mm variations (Table 4).6 mm thickness of AL and KE was selected based on their effective penetration protection with respect to cost and mass,respectively.

    Table 4 Configuration for multi-layered targets.

    Configuration were also bound based upon their overall cost and mass.By considering the behaviour of the monolithic plates.Firstly,monolithic targets plates that resisted perforation were used as reference with respect to mass,and cost of the multi-layered targets.As shown in Table 4,a 20 mm AL monolithic target (0.25 m2face area)shall require 13.32 kg and a 15 mm kE monolithic target shall approximately cost$175.93.These two shall be the boundary values for the optimisation of cost and mass.

    2.5. Model validation

    An impact between the fragment and target is used to validate the AUTODYN?hydrocode.The simulation result,in particular the impact pressure,can be compared with theoretical calculation through impedance matching to ensure good agreement of results.This would then give confidence in the set up for the subsequent simulation.

    1It is assumed to be 80% of the remaining weight (4.2 kg minus 0.75 kg) of the mortar,discounting the weight of charges that will not be part of fragments.

    The material specification used for the code validation is shown in Table 5.The C,S and density are obtained from AUTODYN?material library.

    Table 5 Material specification for code validation.

    The set up shown in Fig.2,involves a steel 1006 fragment of 6 mm thickness and 2 mm height with a constant velocity,UDof 1000 m/s.The target is made of polycarbonate with a 6 mm thickness and 10 mm height for unsymmetrical impact.Gauges are set up at 1 mm intervals to collect peak pressure data to compare with theoretical analysis.Material data are based on AUTODYN?library,in particular the shock coefficient C1 and S1 in Table 2 shall be used for calculation.

    Fig.2.Code validation set up using a sample model for high velocity impact between steel projectile (Green) and polycarbonate target (Blue).

    The peak pressure at the polycarbonate target is 9.76 GPa at the time of 3.7 × 10-4ms,as shown in Fig.3.Correspondingly,the pressure gradient at about 3.3 × 10-4ms is shown in Fig.4.From observation,the shock wave takes on a triangular profile where the shock wave front is being relieved laterally as it moves through the target.This result in the pressure to rise and drop rapidly when the fragment moves through the respective points in the gauges.This is expected as the fragment is smaller than the target,which will release its energy to the side when impacted.

    Fig.3.Peak pressure at different locations on the target against time when steel projectile impacts polycarbonate plate.

    Fig.4.Pressure gradient at the interface between steel projectile and polycarbonate plate at 3.3 × 10-4 ms during a high velocity impact event.

    To compare the results,shock impedance matching is used where the pressure on the fragment,P1,will be equal to the pressure on the target,P2,when impacted.Based on Kerley [46]the equations forP1andP2are as follows:

    where ρ0refers to density,S and C refers to the coefficient from shock Hugoniot terms found in Table 5,UDrefers to the impact velocity and uprefers to the particle velocity.The two equations can then be equated to form the following quadratic equation to solve for the particle velocityup.

    Substituting the values and by using a quadratic solver,upis found to be 764.2 m/s.As a check,this particle velocity is substituted into Eq.(6) andP1is found to be 9.16 GPa.This theoretical value is in close agreement to the simulated value of 9.76 GPa.Therefore,this simple validation provides the confidence that the code is suitable for subsequent simulations.

    2.6. Experiment setup

    Experimental validation of the simulations was done using an Explosive Low Velocity Impact System(ELVIS)to fire a projectile at the multi-layered target.The target configuration selection was done based on the lowest mass;lowest cost;highest protection;and the optimal choice between these factors(discussed further in subsection 3.2.1).The aluminium,polyurethane foam,and polycarbonate were procured commercially,while the Kevlar-Epoxy plates were manufactured in-house (Easy Composites resin infusion kit).A digital vernier caliper (Proster PST140) was used at random points on the plate’s edge to ensure that the plate was of the correct thickness,and it had no irregularities.Fig.5 shows the experimental setup for the experimental validation of the simulations.

    Fig.5.Multi-layer target setup in ELVIS before being impacted by 5 mm steel projectile at 400 m/s.The target face is Aluminium,followed by Kevlar-Epoxy,Polyurethane foam,and polycarbonate.

    The simulation setup could not be adequately replicated experimentally,due to the large size of the target.Therefore,the target size was scaled down,alongside the impact velocity of the projectile to maintain the kinetic energy: target mass ratio.The target size was reduced to 150 mm×150 mm×50 mm.As a result,the impact velocity was reduced to 400 m/s.Furthermore,simulations with the material models were run with the new impact conditions to validate the multi-layer protection system design.The impact regimes for both cases,400 m/s impact and 1500 m/s impact,are not hydrodynamic.As a result,validation of the material models for impact at the lower velocity can be used to prove the validity of the models in the high velocity impact scenario.

    3.Results and discussion

    3.1. Monolithic targets

    The results of each monolithic configuration are given in Table 6,where all materials exhibited perforation at 6 mm.As plate thickness increased,plate perforation began to reduce for all materials,except for the foam which perforated at all thicknesses.For each of the monolithic materials,a ductile piercing behaviour occurred,while the Kevlar?-epoxy demonstrated an abnormal failure mode.As Kevlar? typically fails through delamination,the observed behaviour is likely a low fidelity representation of this failure mode.While a higher fidelity mesh would likely correct this phenomenon,its use would increase computation time [47].

    Table 6 Results for high velocity impact of steel projectile on 6,20,and 50 mm monolithic target plates.

    3.2. Results for configuration 2 - multi-layered targets

    To adequately design multi-layered targets,the performance of the individual targets needs to be known.The simulation results of each monolithic configuration are given in Table 6,where all materials exhibited perforation at 6 mm.As plate thickness increased,plate perforation began to reduce for all materials,except for the foam which perforated at all thicknesses.For each of the monolithic materials,a ductile piercing behaviour occurred,while the Kevlar?-epoxy demonstrated an abnormal failure mode.Further details of the performance of monolithic targets are available in Supplementary Information.A summary of the simulation results based on the multi-layered target configuration are tabulated in Table 7.The penetration performance in terms of percentage of the total thickness and dynamic deflection are extrapolated from the models as per the example shown in Fig.6 (see Table 7).

    Fig.6.Example of examining the penetration of projectile into multi-layered target and subsequent dynamic deflection of target.

    Table 7 Results for high velocity impact of steel projectile on multi-layered targets.

    From Table 8,one can observe that the combined thickness of the first two layers (Al and KE) have an impact on penetration performance.The larger the combined thickness,the lower the penetration.For combined thickness of 10 mm (i.e.Configuration 2C,2G and 2I),the penetration is greater than 29%(14.5 mm)of the total thickness.For combined thickness of 11 mm (i.e.Configurations 2 B,2 F and 2 K),the penetration ranges from 13.4% to 18.5%,i.e.from 6.7 mm to 9.3 mm.For combined thickness of 12 mm(i.e.Configuration 2 A,2 E and 2 L),the penetration is the region of 10%(5 mm) of the total thickness.The penetration further reduces to below 10% for combined thickness of more than 13 mm(i.e.2D and 2H).

    Table 8 Average performance specifications for combined thickness of Al and KE layers in a multi-layer protection system.

    Although greater combined thickness provides better resistance to penetration resistance,the effectiveness diminished after 12 mm as shown in Fig.7.This is supported by the average specifications(i.e.mass,cost,and penetration) tabulated for each combined thickness in Table 11.At the combined thickness of 12 mm,the penetration protection has the greatest improvement of 68%,but with high cost increment.Beyond 12 mm,the improvement is minimal at 72% and 74%,with the increase in average mass and cost to be high.Therefore,the optimal combined thickness of AL and KE should be less than 12 mm.

    Fig.7.Penetration mitigation against the combined thickness of Al/KE layers when a multi-layered target is subject to high velocity impact from a steel projectile.

    2Charge length is calculated by dividing the charge volume by charge area.Charge volume is calculated from HE weight divided by HE density.

    The second observation is on the allocation of individual material(Al and KE)thickness within the combined thickness of Al and KE.As Al has a higher density than KE,it provides a better impedance effect,thereby slowing down the fragment more.From Table 9,the combined thickness of 12 mm(i.e.configuration 2 A,2 E and 2 L) is used for comparison.It can be observed that as the thickness AL increases from 5 mm to 7 mm,the penetration decreases from approximately 13%-10%.In addition,the cost of the system also reduces by 26% due to the smaller thickness of the Kevlar?-epoxy layer.However,a higher Al thickness will increase the mass of the system by 6%.Therefore,this example makes a case for the trade-off in between performance,mass,and cost.The optimal configuration of the system shall be investigated in the next section.

    Table 9 Comparing system performance based on variation of individual material thickness of Al and KE in a multi-layered protection system.

    3.2.1.Determining the optimal configuration

    The optimal configuration will need to balance three key parameters,performance,mass,and cost.A simplified approach is used by giving all three parameters the same criteria weightage,where the parameters are ranked and assigned points.The lowest value (best) will be given one point and the highest value (worst)will be given twelve points as there are a total of twelve configurations.For each configuration,the points for each parameter will be summed up and tabulated to give an overall score.The configuration will then be ranked according to this overall score.The tabulated result based on this approach can be found in Table 10.

    Table 10 Ranking of multi-layer protection system configurations in an equal weightage system based on mass,cost,and penetration protection.

    From Table 10,2C and 2G are the best rank with the score tied at 15 points.Out of these two configurations,2G has a better penetration mitigation by 2% and lower cost by 22%,but higher mass by 3%.Therefore,2G seems to be the better option.However,this example shows the importance of assigning the weightage.This weightage is generally assigned by the users to suit their requirement.This weightage will vary among users as some may be more concerned about either performance,cost,or mass.Therefore,the option will be clearer once a definitive weightage is assigned.

    To further develop on the discussion of options,Table 11 tabulated the configuration that suits the requirement for lowest mass,lowest cost,and best protection.If the system requires to be of very low mass,configuration 2J (5,5,38,2) provides the lowest mass option of 7.45 kg but with poorer penetration mitigation performance of 39.3% (19.7 mm).Configuration 2H (8,6,34,2) provides the best performance but weighs 9.7 kg,which is not favorable for a low mass system.However,it is still much lighter as compared to its monolithic counterparts.Configuration 2I(8,2,38,2)provides the lowest cost option of$21.89 but with a poor penetration mitigation performance of 82.64% (41 mm).This option shall not be selected unless the only consideration is cost.Configuration 2H(8,6,34,2)provides the best performance but comes at the cost of $75.06,which is not favorable for a low-cost system.However,it is still much cheaper when compared to a 20 mm kE monolithic layer.

    Table 11 Summary of multi-layer configuration choices to fulfil different requirements based on mass,cost,and protection performance.

    In all,this provides an understanding of the overall spectrum of the performance of the target system.It is also observed that all the multi-layered configurations are within the mass (13.32 kg) and cost ($175.93) boundaries set out by the monolithic targets.

    3.2.2.Relationship of performance with mass and cost of system

    Figs.8 and 9 show the relationship of system performance with respect to mass and cost,respectively.A polynomial trend line was also fitted in both figures to indicate the relationship of performance with mass and performance with cost.For Fig.7,there is anoutlier point which results in the trend line not being as good a fit.The outlying point is for configuration 2I.That configuration has a thinner KE layer compared to other configurations.Consequently,this could lead to lower energy dissipation by that layer of the protection system.Subsequently,this causes more work to be done by the PU layer,resulting in higher penetration of the projectile as compared to the other composite systems.If this outlier is removed,theR2value will be 0.86.Further work can be done with more simulations to mitigate the effect of this outlier.For Fig.8,the polynomial trend line obtained a good fit with anR2value of 0.8.

    Fig.8.Penetration mitigation performance against mass of multi-layered targets when subject to high velocity impact loading from a solid steel projectile.

    Fig.9.Penetration mitigation performance against cost of multi-layered targets when subject to high velocity impact loading from a solid steel projectile.

    In all,these two polynomial relationships can be used to determine the required mass or cost for a pre-determined penetration performance,or vice versa.

    3.3. Experimental validation of simulations

    Lab scale experiments were carried out to validate the numerical simulations.The different layers of the protection system were clamped together using tape to closely replicate the model setup.Chemical bonding was not preferred to avoid the addition of an interface between materials.As mentioned in subsection 2.6,the validation was carried out using a scaled down setup due to limiting external factors.At lower impact velocities,the projectile was overmatched by the target.The largest penetration was observed in the lowest mass configuration (12.2% penetration).As predicted in the modelling,configuration 2H (best protection configuration) had the least penetration (5.7% penetration).

    While the kinetic energy: target mass ratio has been kept constant,the amount of work being done by the target material during the time frame of the impact event is lower.This results in lesser energy being absorbed and dissipated by the target material,thus causing the lower deformation of the target[48].Fig.10 shows the individual layers of the target after it has been subjected to low velocity impact.

    Fig.10.Individual layers of the protection system (Configuration 2H) after it was impacted by a steel projectile (5 mm diameter) at 400 m/s.Starting from the top left:Aluminium plate (top left),Kevlar-epoxy plate (top right),polyurethane foam layer(lower left),polycarbonate layer (lower right).

    From the figure,it can be noted that the aluminium layer undergoes maximum deformation while the remaining layers are not visibly affected.This further supports the qualitative observations from the simulations that the target overmatches the projectiles at a lower velocity due to lesser work being done by the target material during the impact event.While the low velocity (400 m/s)impact scenario isn’t an accurate representation of the impact at higher velocities (1500 m/s),it provides a secondary validation of the material models used in the earlier simulations.

    3.4. Effect of projectile size

    While the optimal configuration proposed was obtained using the given scenario outlined within this manuscript,its effectiveness against threat variation is unclear.The threat was varied by increasing the radius(and consequently the mass)of the projectile.To keep a common denominator for measuring system performance,the kinetic energy density(KED)of the projectile was kept the same as the case(s)with projectile radius 2.47 mm.The radius of the projectile for the additional test was 5 mm and the subsequent mass was 4.13 g.The constant KED value for this test was 1.102×107J/m2.For the additional test,this value was achieved by reducing the velocity of the heavier projectile to 915.2 m/s.Fig.11 shows the setup for the additional test.

    Fig.11.Setup of additional test with 5 mm radius fragment and velocity 915.2 m/s with constant KED.

    It was observed that the larger projectile easily perforates the protection system even with a relatively lower velocity.While the KED of the projectile is unchanged,the larger mass increases its kinetic energy.The kinetic energy of the 0.5 g projectile was 422.5 J whereas the 4.Projectile had a kinetic energy of 1731.24 J.The value of kinetic energy is important because the transfer of energy from the projectile to the protection system allows it to deform and dissipate the transferred energy [48].In the additional test,a significantly higher amount of kinetic energy was transferred to the system over the same time scale when compared to the tests with the smaller projectile.The larger energy transfer resulted in the larger deformation and subsequent failure of the protection system.Therefore,this additional test shows that a good configuration needs to consider multiple threat scenarios in view of evolving threats.However,over-engineering the protection system may lead to higher cost and mass as seen from the example in.Table 11 Despite this,maintaining the same level of protection may also bring about risks that need to be identified and balanced against.In addition,besides performance,mass,and cost,there also exists other requirements that may affect the decision as well.

    4.Conclusions

    The aim of balancing penetration mitigation performance,mass and cost of a protective target system is achieved as an optimal configuration is numerically simulated.In this study,monolithic targets were investigated first followed by multi-layered targets.It was concluded that the multi-layered target system provides a more balanced solution,without having large penalties on mass and cost.The multi-layered target (AL-KE-PU-PC) consists of (1)impeding layer (Al 6061),(2) the wave spreading layer (Kevlar?epoxy),(3) the porous layer (PU foam) and (4) the support layer(polycarbonate),each with different functions to provide mitigation against penetration.

    ANSYS AUTODYN? 2D was set up and used to simulate twelve multi-layered targets configurations of 280 mm radius and 50 mm total thickness,to obtain the penetration mitigation performance.Most material data were obtained from AUTODYN? library except for the PU foam which required the use of a P-α model.The results were analysed to select configurations based on lowest cost,lowest mass,best performance,and optimal configuration simultaneously balancing these three parameters mentioned.The optimal configuration has layers with thickness of 7,3,38,2 mm respectively with a total mass of 7.97 kg,total cost of $39.86 and penetration of 29.34%(14.67 mm)by a steel fragment of 2.47 mm radius with high velocity of 1319.26 m/s.Polynomial relationships between performance and mass/cost are also determined.

    Since the proposed solution is optimised for the specific threat of such fragment,further test was conducted using a fragment of larger mass(with constant KED)to validate the target performance on another scenario.The result show that in this case,the target system is perforated by the fragment with residual velocity of 470 m/s.

    In conclusion,this shows that the design solution needs to consider the evolving threat scenario and over-engineered the solution,while maintaining minimal cost and mass of the system.However,the approach used in this study can thus be replicated to determine the optimal solution balancing penetration mitigation.Performance,mass,and cost for a specific threat scenario.

    Declaration of competing interest

    The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

    Appendix A.Supplementary data

    Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2023.01.013.

    欧美大码av| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 国产高清videossex| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 禁无遮挡网站| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| av在线天堂中文字幕| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 97超视频在线观看视频| 精品电影一区二区在线| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 99国产精品99久久久久| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩 | 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产 | 午夜福利在线在线| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 看片在线看免费视频| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 嫩草影院精品99| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 亚洲av熟女| 极品教师在线免费播放| 嫩草影院精品99| 亚洲九九香蕉| or卡值多少钱| 久久久久久大精品| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 欧美日韩精品网址| www国产在线视频色| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 免费av不卡在线播放| 99久久成人亚洲精品观看| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| www.999成人在线观看| 香蕉av资源在线| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 99国产综合亚洲精品| av在线天堂中文字幕| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 综合色av麻豆| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 久久精品人妻少妇| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 一进一出抽搐gif免费好疼| 一本综合久久免费| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| 日韩欧美在线二视频| 最近在线观看免费完整版| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 九九热线精品视视频播放| www.999成人在线观看| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 日本与韩国留学比较| 日本成人三级电影网站| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 国产单亲对白刺激| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 小说图片视频综合网站| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| ponron亚洲| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 91老司机精品| 久久伊人香网站| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 无限看片的www在线观看| 欧美日韩黄片免| 1000部很黄的大片| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| www国产在线视频色| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 九色国产91popny在线| 成人精品一区二区免费| 中文字幕久久专区| 国产精品野战在线观看| 成人三级做爰电影| 国产美女午夜福利| 我要搜黄色片| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av | 国产单亲对白刺激| 嫩草影院入口| 亚洲av免费在线观看| 色吧在线观看| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 小说图片视频综合网站| ponron亚洲| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 亚洲九九香蕉| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 亚洲国产色片| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 久久久精品大字幕| 黄色日韩在线| 欧美日韩黄片免| 精品人妻1区二区| 两个人的视频大全免费| 亚洲无线观看免费| 久久久久久久久中文| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| aaaaa片日本免费| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 精品一区二区三区视频在线 | 日韩欧美免费精品| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 久久中文字幕一级| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| a级毛片a级免费在线| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 在线看三级毛片| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看 | 黄色日韩在线| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 亚洲成人久久性| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| av片东京热男人的天堂| 99热精品在线国产| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费 | 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 99视频精品全部免费 在线 | 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲| 久久香蕉精品热| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 十八禁网站免费在线| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 亚洲片人在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 国产精品永久免费网站| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 久久草成人影院| 一本精品99久久精品77| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 一级黄色大片毛片| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 国产av不卡久久| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 综合色av麻豆| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 精品福利观看| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 18禁观看日本| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 久久久久九九精品影院| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 日本在线视频免费播放| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 欧美大码av| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 嫩草影视91久久| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 久久久久国内视频| 精品久久久久久成人av| 无限看片的www在线观看| 午夜福利高清视频| 亚洲av成人av| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 免费在线观看亚洲国产| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 欧美日韩精品网址| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 日本一二三区视频观看| aaaaa片日本免费| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 国产淫片久久久久久久久 | 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 亚洲国产欧美网| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 日韩欧美三级三区| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看 | 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 此物有八面人人有两片| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 午夜福利在线在线| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 成在线人永久免费视频| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 在线国产一区二区在线| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 深夜精品福利| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 变态另类丝袜制服| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 看片在线看免费视频| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 精品久久久久久久末码| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 国产乱人视频| 岛国视频午夜一区免费看| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 国产精品永久免费网站| 看片在线看免费视频| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免费看| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 色视频www国产| 免费观看精品视频网站| 在线观看66精品国产| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 色综合站精品国产| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 搞女人的毛片| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 亚洲av美国av| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 在线播放国产精品三级| 超碰成人久久| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 国产99白浆流出| 十八禁网站免费在线| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 成人精品一区二区免费| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 日本三级黄在线观看| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 亚洲 国产 在线| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月 | 久9热在线精品视频| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 免费看a级黄色片| 十八禁网站免费在线| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 国产成人福利小说| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| av欧美777| 久久久久国内视频| 两个人看的免费小视频| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 国产成人福利小说| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 亚洲国产看品久久| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 免费搜索国产男女视频| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 久久国产精品影院| 免费看a级黄色片| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| www国产在线视频色| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 一夜夜www| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 国产一区二区激情短视频| av片东京热男人的天堂| 成人国产综合亚洲| 97超视频在线观看视频| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 性欧美人与动物交配| 看黄色毛片网站| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| av国产免费在线观看| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 亚洲国产色片| 两个人看的免费小视频| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 国产精品一及| 久久久久九九精品影院| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 全区人妻精品视频| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 亚洲国产色片| 少妇的逼水好多| av天堂在线播放| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 老司机福利观看| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 性色avwww在线观看| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 亚洲九九香蕉| 精品久久久久久成人av| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 亚洲国产欧美网| 香蕉av资源在线| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费 | 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 久久久久久大精品| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 小说图片视频综合网站| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 国产高潮美女av| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 免费av毛片视频| 免费看日本二区| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 美女免费视频网站| 国产淫片久久久久久久久 | 亚洲美女黄片视频| 毛片女人毛片| 国模一区二区三区四区视频 | 国产精品,欧美在线| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| 亚洲在线观看片| 身体一侧抽搐| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 99热这里只有精品一区 | 久久久久久久午夜电影| 国产高清videossex| 丁香欧美五月| xxxwww97欧美| 亚洲 国产 在线| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 精品久久久久久,| 1024手机看黄色片| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 一本久久中文字幕| 岛国在线观看网站| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 午夜久久久久精精品| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 麻豆av在线久日| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 国产高清三级在线| 999精品在线视频| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 老司机福利观看| 亚洲自拍偷在线| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 日本成人三级电影网站| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| avwww免费| 久99久视频精品免费| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 观看免费一级毛片| 色吧在线观看| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 一个人免费在线观看电影 | 草草在线视频免费看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 欧美日韩黄片免| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看 | 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲| 久久久久久大精品| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 欧美在线黄色| 国产视频内射| 悠悠久久av| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 久久精品91蜜桃| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| av视频在线观看入口| 香蕉久久夜色| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 制服人妻中文乱码| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 成年版毛片免费区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| av天堂在线播放| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 天天添夜夜摸| 国产1区2区3区精品| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站 | 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 日本一本二区三区精品| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 伦理电影免费视频| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 宅男免费午夜| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 天堂√8在线中文| 日日夜夜操网爽| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 看片在线看免费视频| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 少妇丰满av| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看 | 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 亚洲最大成人中文| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 两个人视频免费观看高清| www日本在线高清视频| av视频在线观看入口| 看黄色毛片网站| av在线天堂中文字幕| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 亚洲片人在线观看| 免费高清视频大片| 日本在线视频免费播放| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 国产视频内射| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 免费观看精品视频网站| 在线免费观看的www视频| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 美女高潮的动态| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 久久久久性生活片| 国产三级在线视频| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 美女大奶头视频| 成人三级做爰电影| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 国产精品永久免费网站| 久久天堂一区二区三区四区| 国产高清三级在线| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| av在线天堂中文字幕| 岛国在线观看网站| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 九九在线视频观看精品| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站 | 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 色在线成人网| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 男女做爰动态图高潮gif福利片| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 国产精品 国内视频| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 欧美色视频一区免费| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 久久久久久人人人人人| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色|