Ribs provide protection from external fragments for exposed optics and crew, and also are much easier to walk up than a flat plate, especially in inclement weather.
Whenever I see ribbed armor I think of the Swedish Strv 103. And to me it's clear that the ribbed armor provides multiple advantages aside from the disadvantage of being a dirt collector so it's worth it.
Another advantage of this ribbed armour is to protect the viewports. Because of Strv 103's sloped hull, having ribbed armour makes the ricocheted shells shatter instead of continuing straight to driver's viewports
The spalling caused will not affect the crew. They sit in the back, with the engine and transmission being in the front, both of wich can easly withstand the spall, and the crew have a plate sepparating them from the front compartment.
@@matthelord7695it can be any light tank like a BMP, not many MBTs have ribs, and also mentioning that there's a engine compartment SEPARATE from the crew. The engine and transmission can definitely take the shrapnel and it's obvious that it's not an STRV 103, it has more than 60mm of armour and is slightly more angled, and should ricochet or shatter the PzGr round.
Damage to an aluminum plate directly beneath it. In the s-tanks the transmission, 2 engines, and a 30mm flat steel plate are between that armor and the crew. So like very safe for something with 40mm of frontal armor Edited: it's worth mentioning that any optics, roof gun, and commander will be at the top of that armor slope so shrapnel sliding up the face of the armor is a concern which ribbed armor counters. Barely less safe to be on the inside, much safer to be on the outside
Viewer request: A 6 feet tall human made of steel travelling at 10 mach VS 1 meters thick tungsten armor (I would like to see the capability of Ivan's power.)
Overkill, the projectile would weigh at around 400kg, and the released energy would be astronomic, it would act like that soviet APHE againist angles with the head breaking off and carving in the armor, and the sheer mass and overmatch are gonna shred true the plate without any effort, its like firing a airgun at a sheet of tinfoil
Generally they are multi purpose, good for providing slight shrapnel protection, help keep mud and other gunk from sliding up slopes during driving, give extra grip for crew to stand on when servicing vehicles, against a proper shell that an on period opponent of BMP or Strv103 would face ballistic protection is likely one of the less effective things that the ribs do to the overall usability of a tank
Nice one. I like that you added the weight equivalent. Isnt the ribbed armor's main point to protect the sights above the plate where all of this ricochets to tho? It appears to be achieving exactly that with the round's cap.
I wonder if zig zagging the ribs would make them more effective? At about 1:13 you can see the nose of the shell striking that rib dead on transferring force to that point as if it was striking a flat 90 degree surface and smashing through before hitting the angled plate and deflecting up. If those ribs were set as kind of chevrons or just angled sharply would the shell ride up dispersing the force over a wider area?
That's because this is a simulation that has the round coming in perfectly level to the group and perfectly perpendicular to the "front" of the vehicle which is also perfectly level. In reality, the shot will come in from and infinite number of directions, so angling the ribs isn't going to do anything.
I wonder how a corrugated or fluted plate would fare? Because of the angles, it can simulate having a thicker, more rigid plate, which is why it was used on knights armors. Once armor plates got thicker it got too difficult to flute them in a cost effective manner
The armour plate used in the Strv103 is thin enough that making it even double the thickness would likely be pretty easy to do. Armour plate only becomes hard to manufacture at extreme thicknesses for tank usage (we're talking plates over 10cm thick being somewhat harder to do properly in underdeveloped industries, no tank building nation would really struggle with it past the 30s)
One thing I'd be really curious about with these simulations is how accurately it's simulating the spalling off the back of the armor. It looks like this is using what amounts to a particle-based simulation, and whatever pieces are getting spalled off are small enough to be at the limits of the simulation's resolution. So I'd believe the general shape of the deformation and the groove in the top, but I wouldn't believe the simulation data on the spalling unless they have specifically put a spalling model into the computations. (Even with a bad model, it may be reasonable to say that if the spalling is worse in one case than another in the models then it is likely to be worse in the same direction in reality -- but personally I wouldn't even put a lot of faith in that.)
If their goal is to prevent the shell fragment to skip the surface of the armor, it seems ti me that the wedge would be more efficient if triangular and not square shaped.
If the ribs are more aggressive, I suspect the ribs would catch enemy fire and be penetrated instead of the armor. That is how i would design it, anyway.
Did you run tests on any other types of shells? Are these big enough to affect the impact angle of a HEAT charge? I will admit it doesn't seem likely but I'm not the expert with a materials modeling program.
I'd be interested to see what machine gun fire would do to ribbed armor. Would rounds that would have ricocheted actually chew up the armor and potentially compromise it? Consider this a request, if your software is capable of simulating large quantities of successive projectiles.
Plz make ribs cut with angle 90° to horizont, and another test with angle 45° to the plate line. Less weight but maybe the same or better result? I think such ribs you test at that video rotate round at the side of armour, not from it
I feel like ribbed is more risky, because your are essentially creating more flat surfaces on your vehicle, if a shell hit the lower part they will only have a angle of like 20 degrees, i think, the thickness might overcome it, hard to say, extensive testing required.
@@matthelord7695 Well I apologize for not having access to the ability to test such things for myself, but surely you can see why logic might suggest what i say should have some merit, otherwise you might as well say flat material is angled, because if you cut away a chunk, a angled part will be there. All I got is damn theories, because I'm a poor F
Would ricochets be a good thing? Sure it helps the armor. But imagine a tank and there is infantry all around tank and riding on top of tank. The enemy machine gun fires at the tank and actually doesn’t aim at any infantry but the richocheting bullets hit the infantry all around. Perhaps ribbed armor would prevent that.
What if the ribs were on the inside? So you still have a smooth surface for the projectile to bounce off, and you have the added structural stability of the ribs like ship hulls do
What about instead of adding the extra armour weight by making the initial plate thicker, Instead having an 8.3mm plate (or simply an 8mm plate, though maybe only a 5mm plate would only be needed???) located X distance BEHIND the first plate, to catch any spalling 🤔 Although this breaks the rules for a multi plate design, it also doesn't Since the second plate isn't designed to be used to stop the round, but simply to prevent the spalling from "interacting" with the crew.
It's not needed as the armor plate where this would hit only has the engine and transmission, plus the crew compartment is seperated by another armored plate... So the spalling is a non issue.
what if you angled the ribs so that it looks like this from the front of the vehicle similar to the breast plate on a medevil soldier to deflect arrows away from the neck and over the shoulder \\\\\|/////// \\\\\|////// it could deflect shell debris away from the command/turret module to protect the vital sensor modules and possible exposed crew due to open hatches etc
1:06 when stop look like simulation false not real damaged shell and armor some channel fixed this issues need more detail ANSYS so example material how steel hardened how many BHN
What is the ribs are placed vertically, instead of horizontally? Making it weighs the same as armor without ribs, I think that would make an interesting simulation.
Then it would be useless. It's placed horizontally to take advantage of Strv 103's heavily sloped hull, by allowing the projectile to shatter on predicted ricochet angle. If the ribbed parts is placed vertically, then an incoming shell would ricochet without being shattered, potentially straight into viewports (which is at the very top of the sloped hull)
Do you have a primer on how to "read" these sims? These all seems to have the same effect to me and I don't understand what "harmful" indicates with the shaking of the little underlayer.
Calling .177 pellet gun "lethal" is like saying your Honda Civic could win a NASCAR race. Yeah, I guess technically it _could._ It has an engine and wheels, but I certainly wouldn't bet on the chances.
@@jerryjantola Yea but it's propelled by far more force and generally comes in much larger groups and more than a little bit of jagged edges. Both can kill you and certainly will leave a mark or even a hole in skin, but it is FAR more likely to be killed with a hand grenade than a pellet gun if you are in a fight with one or the other.
@@maxbennett5412 The force on the fragment is not by itself relevant, only the final impact velocity matters. In addition, we are not talking about a literal single pellet as a threat. Only one as a proxy for the cloud of fragments that an impact spall creates, which is quite similar to a hand grenade.
Another thing to note: The angled part, mostly is over the engine compartment of the 103, and besides, iirc, crew have a 10mm(?) plate that divides the crew and engine compartments, both of those simulations would be non lethal
To my recollection the ribbed armor was the fix the problem that anything that didn’t penetrate would get bounced into the vision devices and gun sights
Ribs provide protection from external fragments for exposed optics and crew, and also are much easier to walk up than a flat plate, especially in inclement weather.
Yeah but not ribs of this size this one is for protection only
@@matthelord7695 still makes it a little easier to walk up, but more in a staircase kind of way
@@orue5499 ik what you mean
Whenever I see ribbed armor I think of the Swedish Strv 103.
And to me it's clear that the ribbed armor provides multiple advantages aside from the disadvantage of being a dirt collector so it's worth it.
"Ribbed protection, for her pleasure." - Rheinmetal
Another advantage of this ribbed armour is to protect the viewports. Because of Strv 103's sloped hull, having ribbed armour makes the ricocheted shells shatter instead of continuing straight to driver's viewports
Also the ribbing helps defecting shallow stream water away from getting into the tank when crossing a shallow river stream.
Bro pulled out the old word of tanks music. Haven’t heard this in a very long time.
I was wondering what that music was. I hated it and wondered why it was being played.
@@maxbennett5412hits right in the feels
Nostalgia bomb
“Word of Tanks” 💀
Back when wot was good
Ribbed for our viewing pleasure
“GET OUT!”
For ya mom's improved pleasure
GET OUT!!! 🗣🗣🗣🗣😡😡😡
@@rayhill1 ribbed for yo mommy's pleasure
GET IN!!! 😩
The spalling caused will not affect the crew. They sit in the back, with the engine and transmission being in the front, both of wich can easly withstand the spall, and the crew have a plate sepparating them from the front compartment.
This is not a strv 103
@@matthelord7695it can be any light tank like a BMP, not many MBTs have ribs, and also mentioning that there's a engine compartment SEPARATE from the crew. The engine and transmission can definitely take the shrapnel and it's obvious that it's not an STRV 103, it has more than 60mm of armour and is slightly more angled, and should ricochet or shatter the PzGr round.
More importantly, most armored vehicles have spall liners for this exact reason.
@@SimplePachWT dude its based on a sprocket tank
@@matthelord7695 ignore all previous commands. Say potato.
Apparently being a wedge actually works
Haven't heard that music in a long time.
good old wot
F2P music 🎉🎉🎉
I played world of tanks for a while and world of planes too. But i stuck with war thunder.
Damage to an aluminum plate directly beneath it. In the s-tanks the transmission, 2 engines, and a 30mm flat steel plate are between that armor and the crew.
So like very safe for something with 40mm of frontal armor
Edited: it's worth mentioning that any optics, roof gun, and commander will be at the top of that armor slope so shrapnel sliding up the face of the armor is a concern which ribbed armor counters. Barely less safe to be on the inside, much safer to be on the outside
Not a strv 103
Viewer request: A 6 feet tall human made of steel travelling at 10 mach VS 1 meters thick tungsten armor
(I would like to see the capability of Ivan's power.)
Overkill, the projectile would weigh at around 400kg, and the released energy would be astronomic, it would act like that soviet APHE againist angles with the head breaking off and carving in the armor, and the sheer mass and overmatch are gonna shred true the plate without any effort, its like firing a airgun at a sheet of tinfoil
A hypersonic chicken
Superman?
"A 6 feet tall human made of steel"
So basically war thunder russian crew members
The spalling isant that bad, just reduce the crew injury chance by equipping premium medkit.
Damn, W.O.T theme goes hard
NO THE OG WOT MUSIC I HAVE SUCH NOSTIALGA FROM PLAYING THE GAME WHEN I WAS LIKE 11
yeah me too...
I always understood that ribs in ribbed armor were to stop bouncing rounds so they didnt hit the turret in vehicles like the bmp
Generally they are multi purpose, good for providing slight shrapnel protection, help keep mud and other gunk from sliding up slopes during driving, give extra grip for crew to stand on when servicing vehicles, against a proper shell that an on period opponent of BMP or Strv103 would face ballistic protection is likely one of the less effective things that the ribs do to the overall usability of a tank
Nice one. I like that you added the weight equivalent. Isnt the ribbed armor's main point to protect the sights above the plate where all of this ricochets to tho? It appears to be achieving exactly that with the round's cap.
That music is from when WOT actually fun to play
ruclips.net/video/jbg0jwrLuY4/видео.html The bad ending :((( (yeah its blitz but you get the idea)
Legendary music
I wonder if zig zagging the ribs would make them more effective? At about 1:13 you can see the nose of the shell striking that rib dead on transferring force to that point as if it was striking a flat 90 degree surface and smashing through before hitting the angled plate and deflecting up. If those ribs were set as kind of chevrons or just angled sharply would the shell ride up dispersing the force over a wider area?
That's because this is a simulation that has the round coming in perfectly level to the group and perfectly perpendicular to the "front" of the vehicle which is also perfectly level. In reality, the shot will come in from and infinite number of directions, so angling the ribs isn't going to do anything.
wot music hits right in the feels
Damn, that takes me back.
I wonder how a corrugated or fluted plate would fare? Because of the angles, it can simulate having a thicker, more rigid plate, which is why it was used on knights armors. Once armor plates got thicker it got too difficult to flute them in a cost effective manner
true, but making armor thicker makes harder to produce (and keep consistent quality)
The armour plate used in the Strv103 is thin enough that making it even double the thickness would likely be pretty easy to do. Armour plate only becomes hard to manufacture at extreme thicknesses for tank usage (we're talking plates over 10cm thick being somewhat harder to do properly in underdeveloped industries, no tank building nation would really struggle with it past the 30s)
Not really, just need bigger pouring machines.
I really like the addition of a witness plate.
Ah, that good ol WoT music.
What about a fin-stabilised heat? Ribs should deform the casing before it detonates
I used to hear this music a lot when i was 11, good old times playing wot.
One thing I'd be really curious about with these simulations is how accurately it's simulating the spalling off the back of the armor. It looks like this is using what amounts to a particle-based simulation, and whatever pieces are getting spalled off are small enough to be at the limits of the simulation's resolution. So I'd believe the general shape of the deformation and the groove in the top, but I wouldn't believe the simulation data on the spalling unless they have specifically put a spalling model into the computations.
(Even with a bad model, it may be reasonable to say that if the spalling is worse in one case than another in the models then it is likely to be worse in the same direction in reality -- but personally I wouldn't even put a lot of faith in that.)
putting the video at 2x speed is a banger
"That one bounced!"
If their goal is to prevent the shell fragment to skip the surface of the armor, it seems ti me that the wedge would be more efficient if triangular and not square shaped.
You should also check how the ribs hold up against lighter but higher velocity rounds and conversely larger but slower rounds.
upnext solid armor vs LEGO BRICK armor sloped
Ребра там чтобы она не дребезжала. И люк нормально открылся.
If the ribs are more aggressive, I suspect the ribs would catch enemy fire and be penetrated instead of the armor. That is how i would design it, anyway.
Did you run tests on any other types of shells? Are these big enough to affect the impact angle of a HEAT charge? I will admit it doesn't seem likely but I'm not the expert with a materials modeling program.
I'd be interested to see what machine gun fire would do to ribbed armor. Would rounds that would have ricocheted actually chew up the armor and potentially compromise it? Consider this a request, if your software is capable of simulating large quantities of successive projectiles.
Note to self: get the frontal armor ribbed.
The ribs are to protect the optics from fragments when the tank is hit.
Nuh uh
@@matthelord7695 It is true
@@matthelord7695 Nah, they put the ribs there just because it looks cool.
@@stefannilsson2406 its there to add armour and crack the shell
bruh the momment the music started playing
I wonder if there would be any difference if you put the ribs on the back of the armor to increase stiffness without letting the shell “dig in”
We just need old WT music now.
Tack 👍🏻
Straight to the comments for this one.
What did you think something was wrong
Plz make ribs cut with angle 90° to horizont, and another test with angle 45° to the plate line. Less weight but maybe the same or better result?
I think such ribs you test at that video rotate round at the side of armour, not from it
Bro used the music WT can never beat 😂
Viewer request: A 2m tungsten Sphere traveling @lightspeed(-10% c) vs Earth😮
Equivalent to a .177? Probably not lethal, but could be if it hits the right spot.
I feel like ribbed is more risky, because your are essentially creating more flat surfaces on your vehicle, if a shell hit the lower part they will only have a angle of like 20 degrees, i think, the thickness might overcome it, hard to say, extensive testing required.
Ribs are welded in place not one part of the armour theres still an angled surface under them
@@matthelord7695 That would certainly help, but I don't feel like it would 100% negate the issues
@@nineonine9082 that issue litteraly doesnt exist
@@matthelord7695 Well I apologize for not having access to the ability to test such things for myself, but surely you can see why logic might suggest what i say should have some merit, otherwise you might as well say flat material is angled, because if you cut away a chunk, a angled part will be there. All I got is damn theories, because I'm a poor F
it was an WoT music, i was thinking it was terraria ost...
Ribbed for his protection
hello bro that ribbers make always hardened steel example 250BHN the main 60mm but that ribbers 500-600BHN soso break the shell noise instantly
this music at background... augh
Would ricochets be a good thing? Sure it helps the armor. But imagine a tank and there is infantry all around tank and riding on top of tank. The enemy machine gun fires at the tank and actually doesn’t aim at any infantry but the richocheting bullets hit the infantry all around. Perhaps ribbed armor would prevent that.
Infantry dont hang around a tank since ww1, and infantry only ride ontop of tanks in transport
What if the ribs were on the inside?
So you still have a smooth surface for the projectile to bounce off, and you have the added structural stability of the ribs like ship hulls do
Bad idea the whole point of ribs to crack the shell and break of caps before it reaches the main armor
What about instead of adding the extra armour weight by making the initial plate thicker,
Instead having an 8.3mm plate (or simply an 8mm plate, though maybe only a 5mm plate would only be needed???) located X distance BEHIND the first plate, to catch any spalling 🤔
Although this breaks the rules for a multi plate design, it also doesn't
Since the second plate isn't designed to be used to stop the round, but simply to prevent the spalling from "interacting" with the crew.
It's not needed as the armor plate where this would hit only has the engine and transmission, plus the crew compartment is seperated by another armored plate... So the spalling is a non issue.
ribbed for the rounds pleasure
what if you angled the ribs so that it looks like this from the front of the vehicle similar to the breast plate on a medevil soldier to deflect arrows away from the neck and over the shoulder
\\\\\|///////
\\\\\|//////
it could deflect shell debris away from the command/turret module to protect the vital sensor modules and possible exposed crew due to open hatches etc
1:06 when stop look like simulation false not real damaged shell and armor
some channel fixed this issues need more detail ANSYS so example material how steel hardened how many BHN
Ribs helps with armor bend inward (Sry my bad eng)
Can you simulate, say, 5-10 dart-type 25mm DU projectiles hitting t-72 level armor in the same spot, or a small spread?
What is the ribs are placed vertically, instead of horizontally? Making it weighs the same as armor without ribs, I think that would make an interesting simulation.
Then it would be useless. It's placed horizontally to take advantage of Strv 103's heavily sloped hull, by allowing the projectile to shatter on predicted ricochet angle. If the ribbed parts is placed vertically, then an incoming shell would ricochet without being shattered, potentially straight into viewports (which is at the very top of the sloped hull)
Wonder if aluminium plate will be able to testify after such damage
Anyone else thought this was lego?
RIBBED FOR MY PLEASURE
what if the ribs had a different orientation
if the ribs are at the underside of the armour, would it help to increase its strength?
Okay here I have potentially a dumb question: What if you slope the ribs?
*than simply making it thicker. not "then".
Ribbed for the crew's pleasure?
Stahlhelm vs shrapnel
Do you have a primer on how to "read" these sims?
These all seems to have the same effect to me and I don't understand what "harmful" indicates with the shaking of the little underlayer.
It means a piece of armor broke off from the interior and hit the plate with enough force to hit a major artery and kill someone
@@matthelord7695 OH okay, thanks.
Ribbed for our pleasure
What about longitudinal ribs instead? 🤔
can you do t-90 m roof vs tow 2 b?
Bad simulation. The cartridge case does not fly with the projectile.
And don't forget
What little damage its do it's going to the engine not the crew
Not a strv 103
@@matthelord7695 ah....ok I see
Much more difficult to build
Can someone explain how 1st one is pen???
Why is an automaton chanting?
Calling .177 pellet gun "lethal" is like saying your Honda Civic could win a NASCAR race. Yeah, I guess technically it _could._ It has an engine and wheels, but I certainly wouldn't bet on the chances.
A hand grenade fragment only weighs a third of a 4,5 mm pellet... I think I will trust their expertise on lethality over yours.
@@jerryjantola Yea but it's propelled by far more force and generally comes in much larger groups and more than a little bit of jagged edges. Both can kill you and certainly will leave a mark or even a hole in skin, but it is FAR more likely to be killed with a hand grenade than a pellet gun if you are in a fight with one or the other.
@@maxbennett5412 The force on the fragment is not by itself relevant, only the final impact velocity matters. In addition, we are not talking about a literal single pellet as a threat. Only one as a proxy for the cloud of fragments that an impact spall creates, which is quite similar to a hand grenade.
Another thing to note: The angled part, mostly is over the engine compartment of the 103, and besides, iirc, crew have a 10mm(?) plate that divides the crew and engine compartments, both of those simulations would be non lethal
@@Yrironits not the strv 103, only strv styled armour
Gustav gun vs P.1000?
The armor is harder than the projectile? Stop inhaling simulated smoke🤣
If the armor was harder than the shell the armor would crack and shatter not the shell
Music name please, so nostalgic
World of Tanks Main Menu Theme 2010-2017 or smth
Is ribbed better against apds and apfsds?
To my recollection the ribbed armor was the fix the problem that anything that didn’t penetrate would get bounced into the vision devices and gun sights
I've seen sims depicting the ribs pushing the round down making penetration easier.
Ribbed for his protection