Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.

2, 199-204 ISSN 1229-9197 (print version)

DOI 10.1007/s12221-016-5839-7 ISSN 1875-0052 (electronic version)

Improving the Impact Resistance of p-aramid Fabrics by Sequential

Impregnation with Shear Thickening Fluid
Abhijit Majumdar*, Bhupendra S. Butola, Ankita Srivastava, Debarati Bhattacharjee1, Ipsita Biswas1,
Animesh Laha, Sanchi Arora, and Aranya Ghosh
Department of Textile Technology, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi 110 016, India
1
Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory, Chandigarh 160 030, India
(Received November 14, 2015; Revised January 5, 2016; Accepted January 14, 2016)

Abstract: A simple and effective method for impregnation of p-aramid (Kevlar®) fabric with shear thickening fluid (STF)
has been developed in this research. Kevlar fabric was impregnated with STF in two stages in a sequential manner. Three
levels of pressure (0.5, 1 and 2 bar) were used in each stage of impregnation. It was observed that impact energy absorption
by Kevlar fabrics, impregnated with STF in this newly developed method, increased significantly as compared to untreated
Kevlar fabrics and Kevlar fabrics treated with STF in conventional way (single step impregnation). Better results were
obtained when the first impregnation pressure was higher than that of the second, even with same combination of pressures.
Such fabrics also showed a much higher STF add-on (~18 %) as compared to that of fabrics impregnated in single step (3-
5 %). Low velocity ballistic tests also confirmed the advantages of the new method as sequentially impregnated fabric
showed 124.8 % and 24.4 % increase in impact energy absorption compared to untreated and STF impregnated Kevlar
fabrics in single step, respectively.
Keywords: Ballistic, Impact resistance, Kevlar, Sequential impregnation, Shear thickening fluid

Introduction or stiffness significantly. In a recent research, Feng et al. [9]

Body armors are used to provide protection against the
wounds and fatal injuries caused by the projectiles or other
sharp objects. They are generally classified into two categories
according to their structure and end use. Hard body armors
consist of ceramic or steel plates and they provide protection
against the high speed projectiles. Soft body armors are
made from multi-layered woven or laminated textile structures
and they provide protection against the low velocity
projectiles [1,2]. To meet the requirements of soft body
armors, it is essential to use 20-50 layers of high performance
fabrics. This makes the structure heavy, thick and inflexible
and hence uncomfortable for use. Considering these limitations,
a material is needed which can offer the required ballistic
protection with significantly improved flexibility and reduced
weight. To achieve these objectives, shear thickening fluids
(STF) have been introduced in soft body armor applications.
Shear thickening fluids show a non-Newtonian behavior,
which is often observed in concentrated colloidal dispersions,
characterized by significant increase in viscosity above a
critical shear rate. This transforms the STF into a material
with solid-like properties [3,4]. Therefore, STF treated fabrics
are expected to demonstrate significant improvement in
mechanical properties like stab and impact resistance.
Decker et al. [5], Hassan et al. [6] and Rosen et al. [7]
studied the stab resistance properties of fabrics impregnated
with STFs. Kang et al. [8] reported that fumed silica based
STF improves the stab resistance of 10 layers of Kevlar
fabrics from 100 N to 350 N without increasing its thickness
*Corresponding author: majumdar@textile.iitd.ac.in
compared the efficacy of two types of STF in enhancing the
stab resistance performance of Kevlar fabrics. They found
that sub-micron silica STF performs better than the fumed
silica based STF. Sun et al. [10] showed that the stab resistance
of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE)
fabrics also improves after the STF treatment. They found
that eight layers of UHMWPE fabrics treated with STF
shows comparable performance with 16 layers of neat
UHMWPE fabrics.
In the last few years, researchers have shown keen interest
in the application of STF on high performance fabrics to
improve their impact protection performance [11,12]. Lee et
al. [13] showed that the ballistic resistance of Kevlar fabric
is significantly enhanced by impregnation with STF. Impregnated
STF-fabric composites show better ballistic protection as
compared with simple stacks of neat fabric and STF. Majumdar
et al. [14] and Srivastava et al. [15] studied the effect of
process parameters (impregnation pressure and silica content
in STF) on impact resistance performance of STF treated
Kevlar fabrics in a systematic way. They later optimized the
impregnation pressure, silica content in STF and diluent
ratio by using the design of experiment (DOE) approach [16].
An analysis of deformation and energy absorption modes
showed the contribution of entire structure in impact energy
absorption in case of STF treated Kevlar fabrics [17]. Some
researchers have also explored the role of particle size and
particle hardness on the impact resistance performance of
STF treated Kevlar fabrics [18,19]. It has been observed that
higher particle size reduces the critical shear rate at which
the onset of shear thickening takes place. Park et al. [20,21]
carried out thorough investigation on the effect of sequencing

199
200 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.2 Abhijit Majumdar et al.

of untreated and STF treated Kevlar fabrics on impact

energy absorption. Kang et al. [22] found that impact energy
absorption by STF treated Kevlar fabric increases with the
increase in STF add-on%. Since there is a limit up to which
the STF add-on can be attained using normal impregnation
process, an attempt has been made in this research to develop a
simple and effective way for increasing the STF add-on% on
Kevlar fabrics and thereby improving their impact energy
absorption further. This involves impregnating the Kevlar
fabrics with STF twice in sequence, at different or same
pressures. The newly developed process has been named as
sequential impregnation process.

Experimental
Figure 1. Sequential impregnation of Kevlar fabric with shear
Materials thickening fluid.
Kevlar fabric having 200 g/m2 areal density was used in
this study. This fabric was pretreated with a fluoro-carbon
(PTFE) based water repellent surface finish. The details of
Table 2. Combination of pressures in sequential impregnation of
fabric parameters are given in Table 1. Silica nano-particles Kevlar fabrics
(100 nm), in aqueous medium, were used for the synthesis of
STF. Polyethylene glycol (Mw 200) was used as the dispersing 1st impregnation pressure (bar)
medium for the silica nano-particles. Since STFs are highly 0.5 1.0 2.0
concentrated dispersions having high viscosity and surface 2nd 0.5 Sample 1 Sample 4 Sample 7
tension, it is difficult to treat the textile fabrics uniformly impregnation 1.0 Sample 2 Sample 5 Sample 8
with it. To improve the wettability of the Kevlar fabrics with pressure (bar) 2.0 Sample 3 Sample 6 Sample 9
STFs, the latter was diluted with ethanol before application
onto the former.
process. After the impregnation process, the fabrics were
Sequential Impregnation of Kevlar with Shear Thickening dried at 80 oC for 40 minutes in a hot air oven to evaporate
Fluid ethanol. According to the experimental plan shown in Table
STF was prepared by dispersing silica nano-particles in 2, a total of nine samples were prepared by changing the
PEG with 70 % (w/w) silica concentration. Ethanol was pressure combinations and their sequences. After sequential
added with the STF at a fixed ratio (STF:ethanol=1:4 v/v). A impregnation and drying, the STF treated fabrics were tested
high speed homogenizer (MICCRA D-9, Art Prozess & for add-on% and dynamic impact energy absorption.
Labortechnik GmbH & Co. KG, Germany) at 17,800 rpm.
was used to make the dispersion. The rheological studies of Dynamic Impact Resistance Test
STF showed drastic rise in viscosity after a critical shear rate Dynamic impact resistance tests were conducted for STF
as presented in our previous studies [14,16]. Schematic treated Kevlar fabrics by using drop-weight type testing
representation of impregnation of Kevlar fabrics with STF is instrument (CEAST, Model: Fractovis Plus) following
shown in Figure 1. In sequential impregnation method, the ASTM: D3763. The velocity of impact was 6 m/s. The
Kevlar fabrics were impregnated twice in a sequential diameter of the impactor, which had a hemispherical head,
manner with STF. The impregnation pressures were kept at was 1.3 cm. The fabric samples were firmly held between
three levels (0.5, 1 and 2 bar) for each stage of the impregnation two circular jaws with pneumatic pressure of 6 bar. The
inner diameter of the circular jaw was 7.6 cm. The instrument
measured the impact energy in terms of J. The expected
Table 1. Kevlar fabric parameters shear rate created during the dynamic impact test can be
Parameters Details calculated from the ratio of projectile velocity and projectile
Weave Plain diameter [23] as shown below.
Areal density (g/m2) 200
Shear rate =
Yarn denier 1000
Fabric sett (ends and picks per cm) 9×9 Velocity of impactor- ------------------- 6.0 m/s- –1
-------------------------------------------------- = = 461.5 s
Finish Water repellent Diameter of impactor 0.013 m
Sequential Impregnation of p-aramid Fabrics with STF Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.2 201

Table 3. STF add-on% and impact energy absorption of Kevlar

fabrics
Pressure Impact Increase in
Sample Add-on
combination energy impact
code (%)
(bar) (J) energy (%)
Control 1 Untreated - 25.3 0
Control 2 STF treated 4.6 62.6 147.4
(single step)
1 0.5, 0.5 3.6 34.8 37.5
2 0.5, 1.0 4.0 44.8 77.1
Figure 2. Ballistic test set up.
3 0.5, 2.0 5.6 62.8 148.2
4 1.0, 0.5 6.3 63.1 149.4
Low Velocity Ballistic Test 5 1.0, 1.0 7.2 65.8 160.1
Low velocity ballistic impact test of single layer STF 6 1.0, 2.0 16.4 71.2 181.4
treated Kevlar fabrics was also carried out by using the set 7 2.0, 0.5 18.3 75.3 197.6
up shown in Figure 2. A 0.380 Caliber revolver was used to
8 2.0, 1.0 18.7 79.7 215.0
fire bullets of 11.62 g mass having a mean velocity of
165 m/s. Nine bullets were fired for each sample. Four 9 2.0, 2.0 7.1 69.6 175.1
optical velocity measurement systems were used to measure
the pre and post impact velocities of bullet. Two optical
screens (screens 1 and 2) were placed before the test fabric
to measure the pre-impact velocity and two more optical
screens (screens 3 and 4) were placed after the test fabric to
measure the post impact velocity. It was found that the drop
of velocity of the bullet over a distance of 4 meter was less
than 1 m/s when there was no test sample and therefore the
loss of energy due to air resistance was neglected. The
ballistic energy absorbed by the sample was calculated by
using the following expression:
1 2 2
E = --- m ( v1 – v2 ) ,
2
where E is the energy absorbed (J), m is the mass of the
bullet (kg), v1 is the pre-impact velocity (m/s) and v2 is post Figure 3. STF add-on% of Kevlar fabrics in sequential impregnation
process.
impact velocity (m/s).

Results and Discussion
STF Add-on% and Impact Performance of Kevlar Fabrics
Table 3 presents the STF add-on% and impact energy
absorption by Kevlar fabrics at different pressure combinations
of sequential impregnation process. Figure 3 also gives the
pictorial representation of add-on% values of STF treated
Kevlar fabrics. It has been found that generally add-on%
increases with the increase in 2nd impregnation pressure with
the 1st impregnation pressure being constant. This behavior
was also found to be true for the reverse situation where 1st
impregnation pressure increases while the 2nd impregnation
pressure is constant. By keeping the 1st impregnation
pressure at 0.5 bar, add-on% become 3.6, 4.0 and 5.6 for 2nd
impregnation pressures of 0.5, 1 and 2 bar, respectively.
Similar trends have been observed for 1st impregnation
pressure of 1 bar. It is also found that add-on is comparatively
lower (7.1 %) when both impregnation pressures are high i.e.
2 bar. This can be attributed to the fact that impregnation
with higher pressures in both steps causes squeezing out of
more amount of STF which affects the add-on%. It is also
observed from Figure 3 that for the same pressure
combination, higher impregnation pressure at the first step
yields more add-on%. With 0.5 bar and 1 bar as the 1st and
2nd impregnation pressure, respectively, 4 % add-on was
obtained while with reverse combination (1 bar and 0.5 bar
as the 1st and 2nd impregnation pressure, respectively) it
increased to 6.3 %. This behavior was also found to be true
for the pressure combinations of 0.5-2 bar and 1-2 bar. This
can be attributed to the fact that during first impregnation,
higher pressure ensures better and uniform penetration of
STF within the inter-filament pores of Kevlar yarns while
lower pressure in 2nd impregnation helps to increase the
add-on% of STF by surface deposition. Besides, first
202 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.2
impregnation with high pressure helps to overcome the
barrier created by water repellent PTFE finish for STF take-up
in the 2nd impregnation step. In an earlier study, the STF add-
on ranging from 1.6-5.5 % was reported with single step
impregnation of 200 g/m2 Kevlar fabrics [14]. Such low values
were observed due to the presence of a water repellent PTFE
finish on Kevlar fabrics. However, once the fibres are
impregnated with a fine layer of STF, the fabric can take-up
more STF which can result in further improvement in impact
energy absorption.
It has already been mentioned that the add-on% is low
(3.6-5.6 at 0.5-2 bar as second impregnation pressure) if the
first pressure is low (0.5 bar). This means that the first
impregnation with low pressure is not able to coat the Kevlar
yarns and filaments uniformly and they still repel the STF
during second impregnation. However, as the first pressure
increases to 1 bar, the add-on increases (6.3-16.4 % at 0.5-
2 bar as second pressure) and increases significantly to 18.3
and 18.7 when first pressure is 2 bar and the second pressures
are 0.5 and 1 bar, respectively.
Figure 4 represents the impact energy absorption by nine
Kevlar fabric samples prepared by sequential impregnation
process. It is observed that with sequential impregnation,
impact resistance of Kevlar fabrics increases significantly
not only compared to untreated Kevlar fabrics, but also
against the fabrics treated with STF by single step impregnation
process. The impact energy absorbed by untreated Kevlar
fabric is 25.3 J and that for STF treated Kevlar fabric is 62.6 J
(70 % silica concentration, 2 bar single step impregnation
pressure) [14]. Whereas, for sequential impregnation process,
the best result obtained is 79.7 J. Moreover, all the sequentially
impregnated Kevlar fabrics outperformed the Kevlar fabrics
impregnated with STF in single step except in two cases
(samples 1 and 2 in Table 3). It is also noted from Table 3
and Figure 4 that impact performance is significantly better
when 1st impregnation pressure is higher and 2nd impreg-
nation pressure is lower, than the vice versa, with the same
Figure 4. Impact energy absorption (J) by STF treated Kevlar
fabrics.
Abhijit Majumdar et al.
combination of pressures. With 0.5 bar and 1 bar as the 1st
and 2nd impregnation pressures, respectively, 44.8 J energy
is absorbed while with reverse combination (1 bar and
0.5 bar as the 1st and 2nd impregnation pressures, respectively),
it increases up to 63.1 J. Similar behavior is observed for the
pressure combinations of 0.5-2 bar and 1-2 bar. This behavior
is similar to the trend observed for STF add-on%. As indicated
in Figure 4, generally impact energy absorption increases
with increase in pressure for both 1st and 2nd impregnation
steps. Absorbed energy is 34.8 J for the combination of 0.5-
0.5 bar, whereas it is 62.8 J with combination of 0.5-2 bar.
Similar behavior is found with other pressure combinations.
Therefore, it can be inferred that proper choice of pressure
combinations in sequential impregnation process enhances
the STF add-on% and thereby improves the impact performance
of STF treated Kevlar fabrics. Figure 5 depicts the deformation
pattern of untreated Kevlar (control sample 1 in Table 3) and
STF treated Kevlar fabrics. It is seen that energy absorption
zone in STF treated Kevlar fabrics is much bigger and it
forms a bulge in the fabric during impact. In contrast, the
untreated Kevlar fabric shows a very small deformed zone
with conspicuous presence of pulled out yarns.
From Table 3 it is also noted that the maximum increase
(215.0 %) in impact energy absorption is found with 2 bar as
the 1st impregnation pressure and 1 bar as the 2nd impregnation
Figure 5. Deformed Kevlar fabrics after impact testing (a)
untreated and (b) STF treated.
Sequential Impregnation of p-aramid Fabrics with STF
Figure 6. STF add-on % and impact energy absorption by Kevlar
fabrics.
pressure (sample 8). Figure 6 shows the STF add-on% vs
impact energy absorption for the sequential impregnation
process. Same colored circles (blue, yellow and gray) show
the impact energy absorption values for same combination
of impregnation pressures with reverse sequences. In all the
three cases, for the same colored circles, the higher impact
energy absorption value was obtained when the first
impregnation pressure is high. Figure 6 also reveals that, in
general, impact energy absorption increases with the
increase in add-on% of STF on Kevlar fabrics. Therefore,
the improved impact performance of Kevlar-STF composites
in sequential impregnation process may be ascribed to high
add-on% and better distribution of STF.
Ballistic Performance
Low velocity (165 m/s) ballistic tests were performed for
single layer Kevlar fabrics treated with STF. Table 4 shows
the impact energy absorption during ballistic test of STF
treated Kevlar fabrics prepared by single step impregnation
process (2 bar) and another STF treated Kevlar fabric
prepared by sequential impregnation process (2 bar and
0.5 bar as 1st and 2nd impregnation pressures, respectively).
It is observed that with single step impregnation at 2 bar
pressure, the increase in ballistic impact energy absorption
with respect to untreated fabric is 80.7 % (from 18.07 J to
32.65 J), whereas for sequentially impregnated Kevlar fabric
Table 4. Low velocity ballistic performance of Kevlar fabrics
Impregnation Impact Increase in
Fabric type pressure energy impact
(bar) (J) energy (%)
Untreated - 18.07 - 5. M. J. Decker, C. J. Halbach, C. H. Nam, N. J. Wagner, and
STF treated 2 32.65 80.7
(single step impregnation)
STF treated 2.0 and 0.5 40.62 124.8
(sequential impregnation)
Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.2 203
it is 124.8 % (from 18.07 J to 40.62 J). While comparing the
ballistic impact results of Kevlar fabrics impregnated in
single step and sequential process, an improvement of 24.4 %
was obtained (from 32.65 J to 40.62 J) for the latter. Therefore,
the low velocity ballistic test results corroborate the findings
of dynamic impact test results.
Conclusion
This research presents the development of a new impreg-
nation process of Kevlar fabrics with STF for improving the
impact resistance. The Kevlar fabrics are impregnated twice
with STF using same or different pressures in sequential
impregnation process. The effect of different impregnation
pressure combinations on STF add-on% and impact resistance
of Kevlar fabrics has been analyzed. It was found that the
impact performance of sequentially impregnated Kevlar
fabrics is better than those of untreated and single step STF
impregnated Kevlar fabrics. The sequentially impregnated
Kevlar fabrics shows improvement in impact energy absorption
by 215.0 % and 124.8 % with respect to untreated Kevlar
fabrics in dynamic impact testing and low velocity ballistic
testing, respectively. The best performance is exhibited by
the fabrics when the first impregnation pressure is high and
second impregnation pressure is low than the vice versa.
Such fabrics also show high STF add-on%. It is postulated
that the treatment of fabrics at high pressure during the first
impregnation causes deeper and uniform distribution of STF
within yarn and fabric structures. Therefore, sequential
impregnation process, with specific pressure sequence, opens
up a new direction for further improvement in impact
performance of soft body armors based on STF treated
Kevlar fabrics.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to the Director, Terminal Ballistics
Research Laboratory, Chandigarh, India, for ballistic evaluation
and data analysis in this work.
References
1. E. Wilusz, “Military Textiles”, pp.17-49, Woodhead
Publishing Limited, Cambridge, England, 2008.
2. A. Srivastava, A. Majumdar, and B. S. Butola, Crit. Rev.
Solid State Mater. Sci., 37, 115 (2012).
3. N. J. Wagner and F. J. Brady, Phys. Today, 62, 27 (2009).
4. Y. S. Lee and N. J. Wagner, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 45, 7015
(2006).
E. D. Wetzel, Compos. Sci. Technol., 67, 565 (2007).
6. T. A. Hassan, V. K. Rangari, and S. Jeelani, Mater. Sci.
Eng. A., 527, 2892 (2010).
7. B. A. Rosen, C. H. Nam Laufer, and D. P. Kalman in
204 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.2 Abhijit Majumdar et al.

“Multi-threat Performance of Kaolin-based Shear Thickening 15. A. Srivastava, A. Majumdar, and B. S. Butola, Mater. Sci.
Fluid (STF)-treated Fabrics” (E. D. Wetzel and N. J. Wagner Eng. A-Struct. Mater. Prop. Microstruct. Rrocess., 529,
Eds.), pp.1-11, Society for the Advancement of Material 224 (2011).
and Process Engineering, Baltimore, MD, 2007. 16. A. Majumdar, B. S. Butola, and A. Srivastava, Mater. Des.,
8. T. J. Kang, K. H. Hong, and M. R. Yoo, Fiber. Polym., 11, 46, 191 (2013).
719 (2010). 17. A. Majumdar, B. S. Butola, and A. Srivastava, Mater. Des.,
9. X. Feng, S. Li, Y. Wang, Y. Wang, and J. Liu, Mater. Des., 51, 148 (2013).
64, 456 (2014). 18. B. K. Lee, I. J. Kim, and C. G. Kim, J. Compos. Mater., 43,
10. L. L. Sun, D. S. Xiong, and C. Y. Xu, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 1 (2009).
129, 1922 (2013). 19. D. P. Kalman, R. L. Merrill, N. J. Wagner, and E. D.
11. R. G. Egres, Y. S. Lee, J. E. Kirkwood, K. M. Kirkwood, E. Wetzel, Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 1, 2602 (2009).
D. Wetzel, and N. J. Wagner, “Novel Flexible Body Armor 20. J. L. Park, B. I. Yoon, J. G. Paik, and T. J. Kang, Text. Res.
Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluid (STF) Composites”, J., 82, 527 (2012).
pp.1-20, International Committee on Composite Materials, 21. J. L. Park, B. I. Yoon, J. G. Paik, and T. J. Kang, Text. Res.
San Diego, CA, 2003. J., 82, 542 (2012).
12. V. B. C. Tan, T. E. Tay, and W. K. Teo, Int. J. Solids Struct., 22. T. J. Kang, C. Y. Kim, and K. H. J. Hong, J. Appl. Polym.
42, 1561 (2005). Sci., 124, 1534 (2012).
13. Y. S. Lee, E. D. Wetzel, and N. J. Wagner, J. Mater. Sci., 23. Y. S. Lee, E. D. Wetzel, R. G. Egres, and N. J. Wagner,
38, 2825 (2003). “Advanced Body Armor Utilizing Shear Thickening Fluids”,
14. A. Majumdar, B. S. Butola, and A. Srivastava, Mater. Des., pp.1-6, Orlando, FL, 2002.
54, 295 (2014).