Polyethelene Body Armor

[BryanP]

Interesting story here:

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/05/new_material_fo.html

New Material for Thinner, Lighter Body Armor
By Aaron Rowe EmailMay 21, 2007 | 5:49:10 PMCategories: Materials Science, Military

TorqA new material developed by Dutch scientists has made its way into soft body armor. Dyneema SB61 is a fiber made from an extremely high grade of the common plastic polyethylene.

Laundry baskets, grocery bags, and milk jugs are all made from polyethylene. It is the simplest of the plastics. Polyethylene molecules are long chains that can be branched or straight. The length and straightness of the chains and the purity of the plastic determines how strong it is. High grade polyethylene has been used to make bulletproof vests for years, but this new material is stronger pound for pound than everything else on the market.

The original Dynema material was developed at DSM in 1979. Five years ago, Jean Beugels, Koos Mencke, and Réné Steeman were given an award by the American Chemical Society for developing the world's strongest synthetic fiber. That material, a newer grade of Dyneema, was put to use in bulletproof armor long before they won the award. Their company, DSM, decided that the strongest fiber was not good enough. Making good on a vow to never stop improving their product line, the company recently released SB61, the newest grade of the super-tough material that is vastly better at stopping bullets.

Since police officers are encouraged to wear a bulletproof vest under their uniform all day, they must be comfortable. For that reason, armor manufacturers have tried many different materials in an attempt to make body armor that is as light and flexible as possible. Several years ago, the thinnest and lightest bulletproof vests on the market were made from a material called Zylon. As it turned out, the high performance fabric was unstable when moist and would deteriorate gradually with exposure to sweat and humidity. This led to a massive recall of all vests containing the flawed material. Zylon can be destroyed by a chemical reaction called hydrolysis, which literally means "cut by water". Dyneema is not vulnerable to moisture damage because it has a particularly sturdy chemical backbone.

American Body Armor is the first company to begin using Dynema SB61 in armor. It is integrated into their TORQ line of vests, which are meant to be concealed beneath a layer of clothing. The thinnest mode of TORQ vest is only 5mm thick and can stop extremely fast bullets.

 

[Jim Watson]

Over here we call it Spectra. It has been used in vests with and instead of Kevlar for some time. Maybe Dyneema is a stronger grade.

 

[Red Dragon]

Can stop extremely fast bullets?

Don't pretty much all bullets go "extremely fast"?

gotta love vague discriptions with highly relative terms

 

[Dain Bramage]

Well you should see Polythene Pam
She's so good looking
But she looks like a man
Well, you should see her in drag
dressed in a polythene bag
Yes you should see Polythene Pam
Yeh, yeh, yeh

Get a dose of her in jackboot and kilt
She's killer diller when
she's dressed to the hilt
She's the kind of a girl
that makes the news of the world
Yes you could say she was attractively built
Yeh, yeh, yeh

 

[Sage of Seattle]

I thought that any kind of ballistic armor had to stop the inertia, not just the projectile penetration itself. 'Blunt trauma' anyone?

 

[MD_Willington]

Milk jugs are made from HDPE... they recycle them into plastic lumber and "solar fleece" material...

 

[Jeff White]

I will only use body armor that is 100% kevlar or twaron. There are serious issues with spectra, goldflex and zylon and laminates containing them.

Jeff

 

[Soybomb]

I will only use body armor that is 100% kevlar or twaron. There are serious issues with spectra, goldflex and zylon and laminates containing them.

That sounds like a very educated user.

A fun test for something like this might be a muzzle contact shot. Non kevlar fabrics have a fun tendency to melt and allow penetration.

 

[benEzra]

I wonder if the article refers to woven fabrics. Over here, high-molecular weight polyethylene has been used for some time in body armor, but as part of a composite (Allied Signal's Spectrashield brand) in which the polyethylene fibers are embedded in some sort of resin matrix. It's supposedly lighter than Kevlar for the same level of protection, but other than that I'm not hugely familiar with it.

 

[Lucky]

I will only use body armor that is 100% kevlar or twaron. There are serious issues with spectra, goldflex and zylon and laminates containing them.

Jeff

Spectra and it's variations are simply a different form of HMWPE. Dyneema is perfectly sound, it's used to make ballistic plates for French vests for many many years, they had them way back in the Balkans. The article even says its been around since '79. They're about an inch thick due to the relative thickness efficiency of that matierial vs. steel, but the mass efficiency makes it worthwhile. This means they have to be thicker than steel to do the same protection, but even at the increased thickness they still weigh less.

That sounds like a very educated user.

Y'all oughtta re-read Barnam and Bailey's business strategy.

Kevlar is simply a brand-name, a type of aramid. Like Coke and Pepsi are both perfecfly legitimate colas. GoldFlex is not about the particular MATERIAL used in it, it's about HOW the material is laid out. When you weave fabric each thread bends over the others, and that creates stress points. Since a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, that reduced the strength of the whole material. If you take those fibers and line them all up side-by-side really close together, and then take another layer of the same stuff and lay it on top crosswise, then you're making a material without those stress points.

Believe whatever and whoever you want, it's the internet and most advice is worth what it costs you.

 

[Jeff White]

Lucky,
Failures of laminated body armor have caused deaths to officers. The FBI has developed a new testing protocol:
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/gkrdds/myhomepage/BPUTest_protocol_v1.pdf

Colorado has also developed some new testing protocols:
http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/spo/vests.htm

You might also check out this test performed by Dr. Gary Roberts:
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000502

You can buy whatever you want...it's your body you're protecting. Me I'm going to stick with 100% kevlar and twaron. It works and it passes the new testing protocols that include contact shots.

Originally posted by Dr Gary Roberts:
http://lightfighter.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/440107306/m/1471013632

Note: Like U.S. Armor, Pinnacle also make soft armor using hybrid and polyethylene—skip these.

BEWARE!!! There are laminated versions of aramids that can be called 100% aramid, but are NOT the same as 100% WOVEN p-aramid.

Laminates are a poor choice if the threat of a contact shot exists.

Laminates tend to curl and crease making them a poor choice if you need to sit in a vehicle for prolonged periods.

Laminates have poor flame resistance.

100% woven p-aramid vests are a bit thicker, but offer substantially more protection. Officer's need to know that lighter, thinner, more expensive vests are NOT necessarily offering better protection.

Stick with all woven p-aramid (Kevlar or Twaron) vests and avoid soft armor containing Spectra or polyethylene/laminates (Spectrashield, Gold Flex, etc…).

At this time, the best IIIa soft armor vests available are the: U.S. Armor Eagle Enforcer and Pinnacle Armor Twaron Supreme.

You can believe whoever you want. I've spoken to Dr Roberts at length about this issue. I believe his test information.

Jeff

 

[Patriot-Brewer]

There's a new ballistic material that is thinner, lighter and provides better protection. It's still in the testing phase I believe. I have a friend who works for the company that invented it. I believe it's called Barotex made by Zicron Corp. Check out http://www.zicroncorp.com/

hope the link works

 

[Lucky]

Come on now, that's extremely specific complaints, and in no way a condemnation of all Spectra products and laminates containing them. You simply spoke too broadly and too strongly.

Again I must bring up the armour criteria of M.E. (mass efficiency) and T.E. (thickness efficiency). The complaints you point out occur in lighter, thinner vests that perform in NIJ testing at the same level as thicker heavier vests. It stands to simple logic that if you took the same lighter thinner materials and used more of them, you could achieve the same extremely close-range performance, as well as very well enhanced performance in all other tests. An alternative but fair comparison would be vests of the same weight and thickness. And the vests were designed for NIJ tests, designed to meet those criteria. If new criteria are invented one can only expect a lag period in development.

I'll read all your links, but the point that the experts state, which re-posters don't bother to copy, is that there are trade-offs and some criteria may be more important to one person than another. Remember the effectiveness of the 10-pound armour in the closet.

The repeated .44 magnum contact shots might be a major concern for some, as well as flame-resistance. For many performance against ice-picks will be an even higher priority, and they'd be contacting Meggitt for prison-guard stuff.

My non-expert opinion is that if three guys are holding you down and you are receiving multiple .44 magnum contact shots you're already pretty S.O.L., the muzzle could just as easily be against your unarmoured head. And one may do well to remember that there is no 100% solution, an officer wearing a functional vest was hit in the abdomen with a .45 and died later from internal damage suffered anyway.



P.S.

If you look around on that light-fighter forum you should be able to find where a soldier tested his Dyneema plate. It contradicts your original assertion though, so beware.

 

[Jeff White]

Lucky said;

Again I must bring up the armour criteria of M.E. (mass efficiency) and T.E. (thickness efficiency). The complaints you point out occur in lighter, thinner vests that perform in NIJ testing at the same level as thicker heavier vests. It stands to simple logic that if you took the same lighter thinner materials and used more of them, you could achieve the same extremely close-range performance, as well as very well enhanced performance in all other tests. An alternative but fair comparison would be vests of the same weight and thickness. And the vests were designed for NIJ tests, designed to meet those criteria. If new criteria are invented one can only expect a lag period in development.

There were many complaints about the NIJ standards that date back for years. The fact of the matter is that the NIJ tests were a poor criteria for judging how body armor would perform in the field. The NIJ tests have been replaced by the new FBI test and the Colorado test. Those tests are now the standard that those of us who wear body armor for a living use. There is a reason that the new testing standards were adopted. That reason is that people died when their vests that passed the NIJ test failed to stop rounds they were designed to stop. I don't give a rip about comparing vests of similar weight and thickness. I care about wearing a vest that stops the threats it's designed to stop.

I'll read all your links, but the point that the experts state, which re-posters don't bother to copy, is that there are trade-offs and some criteria may be more important to one person than another. Remember the effectiveness of the 10-pound armour in the closet.

I'm not buying that either. It took a generation to educate officers to wear their body armor on duty. Even on departments that don't require the wear of body armor most officers wear it. The idea that officers will give up protection for comfort doesn't wash with the current generation of officers.

The repeated .44 magnum contact shots might be a major concern for some, as well as flame-resistance. For many performance against ice-picks will be an even higher priority, and they'd be contacting Meggitt for prison-guard stuff.

It only takes one contact shot to penetrate a laminate vest. For the most part a soldier who is kicking in doors in Iraq or Afghanistan doesn't need to concern himself with contact shots. But a police officer or civilian faces a much greater threat of a contact shot. It only takes one to kill you.

My non-expert opinion is that if three guys are holding you down and you are receiving multiple .44 magnum contact shots you're already pretty S.O.L., the muzzle could just as easily be against your unarmoured head. And one may do well to remember that there is no 100% solution, an officer wearing a functional vest was hit in the abdomen with a .45 and died later from internal damage suffered anyway.

Again it only takes one shot to kill you. You're just as dead if one guy burns through your laminate vest with a .38 as you are if three guys hold you down and shoot you repeatedly with a .44. Dead is dead.

If you look around on that light-fighter forum you should be able to find where a soldier tested his Dyneema plate. It contradicts your original assertion though, so beware.

First off, we aren't talking about plates, which are an entirely different animal then soft armor. Secondly, I can document cases of things like 230 grain .45 acp bouncing off the bill of a ball cap, or a pot metal badge or belt buckle stopping a .38 or 9mm. Bullets do funny things. I'm not buying anything that some guy tested on his own.

Again, the the FBI and the state of Colorado developed new testing procedures because armor that passed NIJ testing was failing to stop rounds it was rated to stop. Do you think that they just woke up one day and decided to develop a new test because they were bored?

As I said in my earlier post, everyone is free to buy anything they want. I'm not wearing anything that didn't pass the new test protocols. Of course this isn't an academic exercise for me.....

Jeff

 

[Lucky]

That reason is that people died when their vests that passed the NIJ test failed to stop rounds they were designed to stop.

I'm not saying evolution isn't good, but I am saying that if you believe every next advancement is the be-all and end-all, you're always going to be disappointed. There will always be a weakness, strength will always be competing with weight, flukes will always happen.

The idea that officers will give up protection for comfort doesn't wash with the current generation of officers.

Then try to explain why every company is fighting to make the lightest vest possible... None of the ads use the Boris voice saying, "Heavy is good, heavy is reliable..."

It only takes one contact shot to penetrate a laminate vest.

Gross exaggeration. You're spinning a possible outcome into the only outcome.

And one can always make the alternative argument that the heavier and stiffer vest was unwieldy and slowed the officers evasion and draw speed, so it has to be able to withstand contact shots. It's all a balance, a bunch of trade offs. Your absolutist position might remain static, but the paradigm will change around it. The market will always move to a balance.

First off, we aren't talking about plates, which are an entirely different animal then soft armor.

Contrary to the original assertion. After I provide evidence that the HWMPE is not complete garbage as originally suggested, I should hope not. 3 million French men can't be wrong.

 

[thexrayboy]

New body armor and new material is great. Research brings us new wonders. I don't even mind being the test subject for some of these new wonders. However I would think twice about being the beta for new body armor. Lots of new materials have come along and not stood up well to time and environment. I personally would wait for these new wunderkinds to get a few miles and months of use to see how well they hold up. Then I would consider them.

 

[BryanP]

Hmm. I thought I was just posting a link to an interesting story. I didn't know I'd stir up such a hornet's nest. Still, an interesting discussion.

 

[Jeff White]

Lucky said;

I'm not saying evolution isn't good, but I am saying that if you believe every next advancement is the be-all and end-all, you're always going to be disappointed. There will always be a weakness, strength will always be competing with weight, flukes will always happen.

You've got things backwards, there has been devolution not evolution when it comes to soft body armor. The armor companies really only could compete with each other by making thinner, lighter more flexible armor. The problem was, it wasn't as good as the original product made of kevlar and twaron. There was all kinds of shady goings on in the body armor industry as each manufacturer tried to make their product the lightest, thinnest and most flexible on the market. It all came to a head when armor failed and people died. That is another very interesting story, but not really on topic here. I'll just say that the premier company in the business, Second Chance went into receivership and several other companies have been sued for consumer fraud by various state attorney generals and some executives have been criminally charged. The end result was the NIJ test was totally discredited and the FBI test is now the new standard. The armor that passes those tests are usually 100% kevlar or twaron. Some of the laminates do pretty well until you get to the contact shot portion of the tests. Soft armor technology is right about the same place it was in 1985.

Then try to explain why every company is fighting to make the lightest vest possible... None of the ads use the Boris voice saying, "Heavy is good, heavy is reliable..."

Asked and answered. See the paragraph above. That's the only way they can make their product different then their competitor's. I'm not against thinner and lighter armor, as long as it works as advertised. I don't want to worry about if I made the right trade off in the middle of a fight.

Gross exaggeration. You're spinning a possible outcome into the only outcome.

Never said it was the only possible outcome. Just said it was a possible outcome. You ever been in a fight? I mean a real fight, not two schoolboys pushing each other on the playground? Do you go into harms way? Facing someone armed with a firearm something you might do on a daily basis? I do. In fact in about 20 minutes I'm going to put on my level IIIA 100% kevlar soft body armor, put my uniform on and go do another 8 hour shift. Am I likely to need that armor? Probably not, but if I do, I don't want to be the guy thinking, "Man if I had only put up up with the discomfort of a 100% kevlar or twaron vest, I probably wouldn't be trying to keep from going into shock right now." In a fight for your life you can do everything right and still be killed. Why put anything to chance that you absolutely don't have to?

And one can always make the alternative argument that the heavier and stiffer vest was unwieldy and slowed the officers evasion and draw speed, so it has to be able to withstand contact shots. It's all a balance, a bunch of trade offs. Your absolutist position might remain static, but the paradigm will change around it. The market will always move to a balance.

That's why you train in the equipment you are going to fight in, so you can fight the bad guy, not your equipment. The market is moving towards my absolutist position as more and more agencies and individual officers adopt the FBI or Colorado standard. That's where the balance will end up until someone actually comes up with a lighter, thinner compound that will pass those tests.

Contrary to the original assertion. After I provide evidence that the HWMPE is not complete garbage as originally suggested, I should hope not. 3 million French men can't be wrong.

Like I said in my last post, it's apples and oranges, plates are not soft armor and they are tested differently to stop different threats. When's the last time the French won a war, wasn't it sometime just before Napoleon was thrown out of Russia? Surely you can come up with a better example then the French?

Jeff

 

[Lucky]

Yea that wording in the first paragraph isn't good. But the general point is that people are asking a lot from vests, and as you yourself have made it clear bullets don't always co-operate. Nothing is ever going to be 100%. Remember the fat man shot repeatedly COM with a .357 and then squeezed off one round from a .22 pistol and it hit the officer in the armpit and killed him.

Materials that decompose under normal use is one thing, but materials that make specific trades for specific benefits do not deserve to be lumped in the same category. They're two completely different things. It's like saying a Fiero that explodes if you idle too long is just as faulty as a Porsche that has poor crash safety.

That's the only way they can make their product different then their competitor's.

Or they were competing to meet the market demand for lighter.

Never said it was the only possible outcome.

Your writing style is sort of ambiguous

I'm going to put on my level IIIA 100% kevlar soft body armor, put my uniform on and go do another 8 hour shift. Am I likely to need that armor?

You probably see the similarities to the caliber debates appearing now. The only rational conclusion is that they are different strokes for different folks. Just because one has superior characteristics in some ways does not make the other garbage. The stuff that decomposes is garbage, the stuff that makes trade-offs is an alternative.

Soft armor technology is right about the same place it was in 1985.

In outward appearances. But if you peruse www.matweb.com 'Kevlar' isn't just kevlar, there's different generations. The binding resin of nylon vests was replaced with weave, then the weave (in Goldflex) replaced with a resin. The more things change the more they stay the same. Guys in Texas are making spider-silk out of goat's milk, guys in China are putting fullerenes together 1 molecule at a time (both directly applicable to soft armour) - it may appear that there is calm but in reality there's greater progress being made than ever before in materials technology.


And I thought all HWMPE was being condemned, my misunderstanding. Spectra is a family of products, a common material. Later mentioned -flex's are the layered method which takes some heat.

 

[Soybomb]

A large portion of the problem, as I see it at least, is that the "compromises" as you put them are often not sold as compromises, but as a superior alternative. Alot of people wind up buying body armor and being told that for an extra $100 they can get a laminate piece that is just as effective as the 100% woven aramid alternative and wind up giving up protection without their knowledge because of a bad or misleading salesman.

Past that its up to the end user if they want to make any trade off. I think the very warm welcome to the FBI standards show that at least most LEO's don't want to trade off protection. Honestly that makes sense, why would you want to pick your lvl 3a armor that provides protection against this list of threats and find out...well mostly. Most users want the protection foremost. I doubt you'd have alot of luck selling a gun that was 30% lighter and fired 98% of the time either.

 

[Lucky]

ahh but Soybomb a more accurate comparison would be with gun's terminal ballistics, would they not prefer a .454 or a .22 short? But they make compromises, give things up.

As for the salesmen, caveat emptor. Especially when you're buying life-saving equipment. I think that the bashing of some products based largely on rumour is just not fair, and while there may be some truth balance is need in perspective.

As well, a great deal is being asked and expected of vests! Considering that a couple decades ago what we're talking about would be viewed as pipe dreams. And then add to that the fact that vests never protect one completely anyway, they protect a large part of the torso. You can get killed by being shot in the arms, legs, abdomen, groin or neck very easily. Well it just seems kind of wrong to me to unfairly trash products that are innovative and rather good, simply because they are slightly weaker in one or two areas.

Europeans have had different armour testing system for many years, Russians too I think. The NIJ system was just good for benchmarking and categorizing. Just like there are sports cars and sedans, no-one says all sports cars are equal, but it's nice to be able to categorize.

And there will always be someone killed in a way no-one foresaw, and that will then become a crucial test that all armour must endure. Like being attacked simultaneously with squirt-guns and .44 magnums firing lathe-turned copper bullets. The saturated vest being weaker all vests that cannot survive this attack must be garbage (ironically -flex designs might perform better in that circumstance, hmm...)

 

[Soybomb]

ahh but Soybomb a more accurate comparison would be with gun's terminal ballistics, would they not prefer a .454 or a .22 short?

No I don't think so, to me large versus small calibers would be more like deciding to wear hard armor. We're not talking about "size", we're talking about an actual failure to do what it says it will do. To me the body armor that doesn't always stop what its rated to stop is the same as the gun that doesn't always fire. We're probably torturing this poor analogy though by now either way you slice it.

As for the salesmen, caveat emptor. Especially when you're buying life-saving equipment.

I won't be so cavalier about people who are thinking their armor can stop X round actually winding up with armor that can't. The NIJ tests shortcomings make these guys believe the salesman's pitch and give a false sense of security. I don't want guys who think they're buying armor thats been tested to stop up to X bullet finding out that it doesn't always provide that much protection.

I think that the bashing of some products based largely on rumour is just not fair, and while there may be some truth balance is need in perspective.

What product in particular are you talking about that is being based with no truth?

As well, a great deal is being asked and expected of vests!

I don't see any of that as justification to not make it abundantely clear that the 100% woven aramid vests provide more protection in a wider variety of circumstances than the laminates. The user needs to make the choice if they want to wear armor that will not allow penetration or wear armor that will probably not allow penetration.

The NIJ system was just good for benchmarking and categorizing. Just like there are sports cars and sedans, no-one says all sports cars are equal, but it's nice to be able to categorize.

When people die because the benchmarks aren't testing the newer designs in ways that they fail, don't be surprised when new standards and benchmarks are designed.

At this point though I guess I don't really see what we're even debating. Laminates don't always stop everything they're rated for. The wearer needs to decide if that is important to them or not.

 

[Lucky]

At this point though I guess I don't really see what we're even debating. Laminates don't always stop everything they're rated for.

Which ones don't stop what and when, though? That's the generalization which I think it unfair. There's some truth, but it's too generalized.

To me the body armor that doesn't always stop what its rated to stop is the same as the gun that doesn't always fire.

I understand, but I think the circumstances are being exaggerated so it's like covering the gun with molasses and then complaining about extraction problems. "It doesn't work right." "well it's dipped in molasses" ..."It doesn't stop everything." "well you put the muzzle of a .44 up against it for multiple shots."


I just don't see enough details on the FBI testing methods to understand them thoroughly. The NIJ stuff has been public for many many years, describing in great detail their criteria.

It shoudl take more than a handful of posts on the internet to cause a paradigm shift. It just seems an awful lot like many other bandwagon mentalities I've witnessed. Similarities to blind proponents of 9mm or .45 or this brand or that are quite strong. I'm just saying that rational, detached, objective contemplation is , in my opinion, a superior option than playing the zero-sum game, where one vest must be declared 'Winner' and the other 'Loser'. Because real life just doesn't work that way.

For example, it took 8 contact shots of 9 mm FMJ, rapidly placed into the same location before this eleven year old Level II Kevlar vest finally allowed a full penetration,

Lol no pictures or mention of what the clay block looked like! It's like the expression 'A Brenekke slug won't penetrate a vest, it will just make the front touch the back.' How comfortable will a dead or crippled man feel knowing that his vest wasn't technically penetrated

 

[Jeff White]

Lucky said;

Which ones don't stop what and when, though? That's the generalization which I think it unfair. There's some truth, but it's too generalized.

We don't know all the of that information yet because not every manufacturer's product has been through the FBI or Colorado test. What the tests are showing is that no laminated vest is proof against contact shots.

I understand, but I think the circumstances are being exaggerated so it's like covering the gun with molasses and then complaining about extraction problems. "It doesn't work right." "well it's dipped in molasses" ..."It doesn't stop everything." "well you put the muzzle of a .44 up against it for multiple shots."

If you go to this link:
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000502
you will find plenty of one round contact shot penetrations. If you want to publicly call Dr. Gary Roberts a liar, I'll be happy to invite him to post in this thread. The circumstances are not being exaggerated.

I just don't see enough details on the FBI testing methods to understand them thoroughly. The NIJ stuff has been public for many many years, describing in great detail their criteria.

Please post what you don't understand about it here and I will try to explain it to you, if I can't answer your questions I will contact Dr. Roberts or Buford Boone at the FBI and get you the answer.

It shoudl take more than a handful of posts on the internet to cause a paradigm shift. It just seems an awful lot like many other bandwagon mentalities I've witnessed. Similarities to blind proponents of 9mm or .45 or this brand or that are quite strong. I'm just saying that rational, detached, objective contemplation is , in my opinion, a superior option than playing the zero-sum game, where one vest must be declared 'Winner' and the other 'Loser'. Because real life just doesn't work that way.

It took a lot more then some posts on the internet to start this paradigm shift. It took the murder of Oceanside Officer Tony Zeppetella when he was shot through his body armor by a round that armor was rated to stop. It took Forest Hills Officer Ed Limbacher to be shot and wounded when his body armor failed to stop a round it was rated to stop. It took Tampa Officer James Wilkinson being wounded by a .357 round that wasn't stopped by his body armor that was rated to stop it.

After those incidents it was quite clear that officers wearing laminated body armor were paying for the choice with their blood and sometimes their lives. The NIJ even abandoned it's older testing protocols and solicted the scientific and law enforcement community for better ones:
http://www.fbo.gov/spg/DOJ/LEAA5/LEAA5/Reference-Number-RFI-2006-001/Synopsis.html
The link is dead now, but here is the text:

General Information

Document Type: Special Notice
Solicitation Number: Reference-Number-RFI-2006-001
Posted Date: Oct 27, 2005
Original Response Date: Nov 14, 2005
Current Response Date: Nov 14, 2005
Original Archive Date: Nov 29, 2005
Current Archive Date: Nov 29, 2005
Classification Code: H -- Quality control, testing & inspection services

Naics Code: 541990 -- All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical
Services
Contracting Office Address
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, OJP/Acquisition
Management Division, 810 Seventh Street NW, Washington, DC, 20531

Description
This is a REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) only. The National Institute of
Justice (NIJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), is the research,
development, and evaluation agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. NIJ
provides objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to
enhance the administration of justice and public safety. NIJ does not intend
to award a contract on the basis of this RFI or to otherwise pay for
information received in response to this RFI.

On August 24, 2005, NIJ introduced the NIJ 2005 Interim Requirements for
Bullet-Resistant Body Armor, which can be found at the following site:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bvpbasi/docs/08_18_05BodyArmor_int_reqts.doc. These
requirements modify and supplement NIJ's Standard-0101.04, Ballistic
Resistance of Personal Body Armor, which can be found at
http://www.nlectc.org/pdffiles/0101.04RevA.pdf. They are promulgated on an
interim basis to address recent NIJ research findings that indicate that
certain body armor models previously found by NIJ to be compliant with
earlier NIJ requirements for ballistic resistance of new body armor
(including NIJ Standard-0101.04) may not adequately maintain ballistic
performance during their service life. In conjunction with the Interim
Requirements, NIJ administers a voluntary body armor compliance testing
program. Armor samples are submitted to NIJ, where they are inspected to
ensure they meet labeling and workmanship requirements. The samples are then
ballistically tested for compliance with the Interim Requirements/NIJ
Standard at independent laboratories that have been certified by NIJ.

This RFI is issued solely to solicit technical input from public safety
officials/agencies and industry for consideration by NIJ as it revises its
ballistic body armor standard. No product demonstrations or marketing
presentations will be scheduled as a result of this market
research/information gathering announcement. Specifically, through this RFI,
NIJ seeks to gather operational performance requirements and testing
methodologies that public safety officials and industry representatives feel
should be included in future revisions to the NIJ 2005 Interim Requirements
for Bullet-Resistant Body Armor. NIJ is interested in obtaining suggested
operational requirements and testing methodologies, along with the rationale
for these suggestions. Where possible, respondents should provide supporting
information and technical data that may provide a basis for the suggested
change.

NIJ is interested, though not exclusively, in operational requirements and
testing methodologies that address:

- Validation of used armor performance;
- Non-destructive testing/monitoring methods for used armor to ensure
ongoing performance;
- Improved requirements and testing protocols for new armor (e.g. blunt
trauma, multi-shot impacts, contact shots,);
- Numbers and sizes of samples to be tested;
- Long-term performance of armor;
- Artificial armor aging protocols to replicate field use;
- Quality control and conformity assessments

Responses to this RFI should be submitted no later than November 14, 2005,
in order to ensure full consideration. The narrative section of your
response (summary of recommendations) should not exceed 7 double-spaced
pages. Company information, abstract, table of contents, charts, figures,
appendices, and data and information supporting the recommendations, do not
count toward the 7-page limit for the narrative section. Responses must be
sent via overnight express mail, and include the vendor's company name,
address, point of contact name, e-mail address, and telephone number. Any
proprietary or company confidential information provided in the response
must be clearly marked on every applicable page of the response provided.

Point of Contact
John Young, Contracting Officer, Phone 202-305-7745, Fax 202-307-0086, Email
[email protected] - Raymond German, Contracting Officer, Phone
202-307-0613, Fax 202-307-0086, Email [email protected]




Lance Miller
Deputy Director
Manager, Testing Services
NLECTC-National
Rockville, Maryland

On Augst 31,2005, Sarah V. Hart who was responsible for the NIJ testing criteria and their dragging of feet when armor began failing resigned from NIJ.

This all occurred two years ago. States and other government agencies stopped relying on the NIJ criteria for making purchase decisions and began doing their own testing. This is much more then a few people ranting on the internet.

Lol no pictures or mention of what the clay block looked like! It's like the expression 'A Brenekke slug won't penetrate a vest, it will just make the front touch the back.' How comfortable will a dead or crippled man feel knowing that his vest wasn't technically penetrated.

The use of clay to measure back face deformation is one of the things that made the NIJ tests suspect all along. Clay is not a good simulator of human flesh. Clay was chosen by NIJ because it wasn't elastic like human flesh and it stayed in shape and that made the backface deformation easy to measure. Current tests use properly calibrated ballistic gelatin.

If I may ask, what do you do and what is your experience with any of this?

Jeff