Structure
SOV-2000 armor is made of an overlapping series of high tensile strength ceramic discs encased in an aramid textile cover. Different layout configurations with variations in coverage are available.
AMI level III plates are fabricated using an outer 3 millimeters (0.12 in) MARS steel layer bonded to a compressed Dyneema backing, with a linex coating for spall reduction, resulting in a total plate thickness of approximately 1 inch (25 mm). AMI level III 12 inches (300 mm) × 14.5 inches (370 mm) plates weigh about 10 lb (4.5 kg) and 10 inches (250 mm) × 12 inches (300 mm) plates are about 9 lb (4.1 kg).
SOV-2000 is made of overlapping approximately 0.25 inches (6.4 mm) × 2 inches (51 mm) ceramic discs encased in a fabric cover. In evaluating the Dragon Skin system, it is important to note that while the external measurements of the Dragon Skin panel are 11.5 inches (290 mm) × 13.5 inches (340 mm), the area of level III coverage provided by the encased ceramic discs is 10 inches (250 mm) × 12 inches (300 mm); the fabric edges are not intended to provide ballistic protection. Weight of the SOV-2000 armor providing 10 inches (250 mm) × 12 inches (300 mm) of level III protection was approximately 5.5 lb (2.5 kg).
Read more about this topic: Dragon Skin
Famous quotes containing the word structure:
“The philosopher believes that the value of his philosophy lies in its totality, in its structure: posterity discovers it in the stones with which he built and with which other structures are subsequently built that are frequently better—and so, in the fact that that structure can be demolished and yet still possess value as material.”
—Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900)
“... the structure of our public morality crashed to earth. Above its grave a tombstone read, “Be tolerant—even of evil.” Logically the next step would be to say to our commonwealth’s criminals, “I disagree that it’s all right to rob and murder, but naturally I respect your opinion.” Tolerance is only complacence when it makes no distinction between right and wrong.”
—Sarah Patton Boyle, U.S. civil rights activist and author. The Desegregated Heart, part 2, ch. 2 (1962)
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (1886–1965)