What do you mean, "don't try this at home?" I bought my very own 100T hydraulic press and high speed camera off ebay for just such an occasion. Now I've wasted my money!
@@daimyo2k The oldest armor the Russian military still uses in 2024 is old T-55AMs and T-62Ms, each with their own add-on composite armor on top of the steel which was far closer to modern steel in quality than WWII steel due to some massive reforms to the Soviet steel industry in the '50s (which actually caused Soviet/Russian metallurgy to become significantly better than western metallurgy with the Soviets being able to synthesize high-heat tolerance alloys for rocket engines decades ahead of the west), which means that low-end '80s composite armor is the worst armor that the Russians actually use today, and even then, they mostly just use it for frontline artillery support rather than the usual breakthrough/direct fire role tanks occupy. Soviet and Russian tanks have been better armored than their western peers of the same era since the T-64 was introduced in the mid-'60s due to the weight savings granted by their use of an autoloader enabling the use of thicker and heavier armor, and due to their use of explosive-reactive armor in addition to the standard non-explosive reactive armor and laminate armor all modern tanks use. Though it should be noted that there is a night and day difference in quality between '40s Soviet steel and, 50s Soviet steel, with the former being of infamously low quality, while the latter is still some of the best steel in the world today. Old T-34s were all either scrapped or sold for export to the point where Russia is now buying back old T-34s previously sold to other countries to keep their small fleet of still operational T-34s running with spare parts so they can continue to use them for parades. Really, WWII-era steel is so rare and so sought after due to its lower radioisotope content due to having been made before the first atomic bomb was detonated that I highly doubt the veracity of this video, as not only would that pre-atomic age steel scrap be the most expensive thing destroyed in this video, it would also not be more shiny and rust-free than the 2010s steel armor.
@@daimyo2k They use ceramic composite armour. During a brief spell they had access to unlimited titanium of free, they made a bunch of plates out of it, and issued it to close combat squads. Its made just for shotgun shells really, its ussr stuff, when they would need to send their own army, into their own buildings. Like "we need the army to clear a building in berlin" not "we need to fight on the front line". We know they use ceramic composite now, you can go online and actually buy it, we know where it is made even in the silk factory. The body armour you get given comes with empty pouches. You are supposed to fill them as a mission needs. If titanium plates are turning up in their armour, then its the guys putting the old armour in the empty pockets themselves. I wouldn't blame them for this really. But they have been verified using ceramic composite for a long time now.
It is called the new slow gun. They ride up in a truck and attach it to an armored vehical, and two hours later... The press has done its job. Still kinda interesting.
If you let an enemy vehicle armed only with a hydraulic press close enough to let them use it on you, you've probably got much bigger issues than the thickness of your armor...
I'm amazed looking at the comments on everyone's take on this video. People read way to much into it and what it means. All the Title says is The press vs armor. Which is a hydraulic press putting load bearing pressure on types of armor grade steel. It's not a test. Smashing !
Actually, the title says Russian vs. America armor, so there's some implication that one is better than the other. But, as a retired Army officer and metallurgical engineer, the test is pretty irrelevant in that it does not replicate any specific threat that an armored vehicle would see.
@@AakeTraak There definitely is pressure in outer space, e.g. the electron degeneracy pressure in white dwarfs that prevent those former star cores from further collapse.
@@beanking81 if you keep a cabin pressure of 1 bar to make it comfortable for the astronauts the pressure outside the space craft is only - 1 bar, something a bicycle wheel could hold without a problem. Submarines have to take huge pressure differences though. Materials for space flight have very different requirements like high heat resistance to not burn up on reentry, high stiffness so they don't bend under enormous acceleration, radiation blocking so the astronauts don't get cancer and high corrosion resistance so oxygen radicals from the upper atmosphere don't make it rust in time lapse speed.
There is a difference between the two pieces, a piece made in 1940 and a piece made in 2010. The difference is in time and technology. The hydraulic head was replaced.
As well as it is incorrect to compare two metals with a difference of 30-50 years. Metal fatigue should still give a very large error, which, to put it mildly, is unacceptable in comparative tests
Not only that, this armour isn't ever going to face a hydraulic press in the battlefield ... effectiveness against various munitions might not be told by such a test.
Will AR-500 steel vs Russian Medium harden steel.. That like AR-500 Vs AR-300 The Medium Harden steel is use so that the armor plate wont crack, they would put the harder plate RHA or AR-500 on top of the less brittle steel. Not much difference in technology, It just harder steel vs softer steel, during ww2 even to this day, they would put a harden face plate on top of the softer so the whole plate would not just crack when hit. Todays Armor technology AR-500 or RHA steel no longer the main stay of the armor in tanks after ww2, it all Composite now, because of HEAT weapon would melt any Steel and the dart will poke a hole though any steel as well.
This isn't Russian versus us armor. This is just Titanium vs Steel armor. Both countries have many armor types. Titanium is widely known to be less strong than steel. The real reason for Titanium use is it's strength to weight ratio. Armor can be HEAVY, especially steel; but is at the discretion of the wearer to decide strenght or agility
Yes. Titanium alloys in computer games are always the best/strongest ones which is wrong. I guess it started in the 90s when someone misinterpreted efficiency for durability/strength.
Brother my ar500 doesnt make me anyless agile😂 my top speed was 20mph w/wo i could run a marathon w/wo . Pull ups push up sit ups any motion uneffected by an extra 22lbs vs 13lbs in my opinion all or nothin.
@startingbark0356 That is patently false. Titanium is better armor only in video games. Here in reality, there is no scenario where titanium will perform better than carbon steel or tungsten steel.
@kevinbillingsley8256 compared to RHA it performs better, mythbusters tested it with thin titanium and its better to deflect bullets, your talking about very strong steel alloys tho
Interesting side note: AR500 isn't even the top grade. The AR stands for Abrasion Resistant, and was designed for hard use industrial equipment. There's even higher grades in the 700 class.
@@Sableagle At about 1.4 million foot pounds of energy, I wouldn't stand within 600 yards of the splash zone. To be fair, there's very few structures that would stand up to that without significant damage either. But since we're firing theoreticals, I would suggest hauling in a 36 inch thick block as a starting point and see how it goes. 😉
@@C-M-E I was thinking that if 5.56 x 45 mm from a 25.4" barrel can defeat 6 mm of steel at 10 paces, then a 5.7 x 45 cm from a 21' barrel ought to defeat 60 mm of steel at 100 paces, but you do raise a valid point about how nasty it would be for the downrange population of ants. I wonder how scary the bits of watermelon rind from that impact would be.
I've never heard of AR700, only AR600. I know SSAB makes a Hardox Extreme, which is Brinnel 700. I guess that would be similar. A better test of armor steel would be the MIL A 12560 and 46100.
@@TrivkaKovac-es7mj Not at all. I'm not talking about the armor on the T90s. I'm talking about the T53s that Russia has been using in Ukraine since most of the T90s have been destroyed or captured. 😉
someone explained in detail what these plates are used for, and its close combat where they might get hit with shotguns, its for internal russian military uses. Like a hostage, swat style stuff, they all wear it, put up a shield, and storm in the building one after the other, protected from blasts. Their "war" armour is ceramic composite. Their armour vests like the USA can have pockets empty, and it is possible a soldier might put these old plates in empty pockets, but we know for sure, they are making huge amounts of ceramic composite plates. The last shipment was like 25,000 of them to the front line. If I really had to guess, then I would think every time they find a box of these old plates, they sell them to america for collectors, and buy new ceramic composite ones. Titanium has a good value, so after doing this test the plate still has value.
@@MorningNapalmhe's right, it's mainly tension on the back that make perforation. He means armor is more designed for high strain rate loads, not static loads applied from a press
Очень прочная и хрупкая против непрочной но вязкой. Под каждый тип брони нужен определённый снаряд. Если добавить энергию скорости снаряда, то современная сталь расколется легче чем старая сталь. Советские фугасы были расчитаны именно на прочною, но хрупкую броню.
Should be noted; Hydraulic Testing is not the same as Ballistic Testing... In a Ballistic event, the penetration force is reduced as kinetic energy dissipates through contact. Thx CHP.
Yes, a slow pressure is entirely different from an impact that lasts for micro seconds. It is like comparing a vise squeezing something vs a sledge hammer hitting it. But the press is informative and it is very cool! I loved this video.
@@Leehensman no it's not actually. the only round where that applies is in the sabot. other AP rounds have shape charges in the head, that upon detonation, release a molten jet of copper or other element which drills straight through the armor. (rpg 7 is a good example)
It would be harder to slowly push a BB through two sheets of paper than an inch of oobleck but the paper would never stop the BB if it were fired instead. Resistance to compressive force and resistance to impact and penetration are entirely separate material properties.
you aren't even comparing the same class of armor; AR500 is so brittle that it is not suitable as tank armor, then again the T34 armor is probably so soft it isn't suitable as modern tank armor either. you might have armor with a brinell hardness of 300, this is acceptable as it is hard enough to resist impact deformation from small calibers but tough enough not to just utterly crack when shot with a kinetic penetrator
Correct, and that relatively soft but tough armour had a distinct purpose to use its elasticity to absorb the energy of the projectiles without fracturing.
Literally not WW2 tank armor can compare to modern steel... Heck even in modern time steel is being improve. For example Japan Type 90 and Type 10 tank use different kind of steel that its more modern.. Same in Russia, T-14 Armata use a new Steel.
Armor isnt made to stop slow crushing objects, they will just crush you anyway! Armor is designed to stop a saft moving projectile thats moving at a high rate of speed and weighs a couple hundred grams.
Pretty sure he wasn't trying to test the ballistic strength of the armor. Why can't people just sit and watch something interesting without making stupid comments, smh.
what we want in Armor is resistance to penetration from rounds and fragments traveling over 1200 fps. with no spalling on the inside. strong, but not brittle.
what exactly is "a high rate of speed". Speed is measured as a distance covered per unit time i.e Km/h, Mph. That is a rate so what exactly is a high rate of a rate??
The armor on the front of a T-34 is actually "thicker." It's designed to be at a 45 degree angle making the 45 mm armor actually 63.64 mm when measured horizontally, which is how a round would hit it. It was a cost (and weight) saving way to improve protection.
Unsuprisingly, the armor on the front top glacius of a sherman tank, was even more sloped than the russian armor. Need I point out that the russians weren't the first, or only ones to use sloped armor, just look at iron clads of the civel war. It's not a new idea...
@@evilshews It is more like russia created a trend. Look at the t-34. They are using slope armor all around the tanks. Where USA only started doing that in M10 tank. Other nation spotted that as very effective and started making similar designs. Same think as now in ukraine and russia war. Small drones use by ukraine was very effective. Now russia using them the same way.
@@ALFABETAS999- Not really, the French have tanks with sloped armour all around before the T-34. The problem with sloped armour is its diminishing return with every slope you leave less usable space. Plus, the notorious terrible welding by the Soviets that would crack the entire tank by it’s seems with even a glancing shot. The Germans used special welding technique and inter-locking metal plates to make the tank structure stronger on their Panther tanks. There’s a reason post-war Western and Soviet tanks ditched the sloped armour in favor of laminating hard steel armor.
Husband watching this video reads: “Warning: Do not repeat at home anything you saw in this video”. He shouts to his wife in the kitchen “Darling, for pity’s sake, switch of that 500 ton hydraulic press”🤣😂
@@Niever1 Your criticism is completely misplaced. If you had taken the time to look online you would have found that “For pity’s sake” is a very old phrase, dating back to the 17th century and it’s forerunner “for pity” back to 15th century. Regarding “switch of”, do you really think I would have left it like that if I could’ve changed it. It was caused by the stupid auto correct or auto complete, whatever it is called, changing what I had written. Unfortunately I couldn’t correct it because those 3 dots you click on to edit or delete a comment won’t work. I asked Apple to solve the problem and they couldn’t and they said it was a UA-cam problem, so I phoned UA-cam and they couldn’t solve it and said it was an Apple problem. What then am I supposed to do? If my spelling problems are the biggest worry in your life, then I’m very happy for you.
Сталь 1940 - сквозное отверстие получилось при усилии 450 т, при этом кусок металла остался целый. Сталь вязкая. Сталь 2010 года при давлении шаром, разрушилась на куски при давлении 350т. А теперь представьте, что будет в за броневом пространстве от осколков, противоосколочный подбой в этом случае не спасет.
Dude, that was the coolest shit I have seen in a long time. And let me do you this favor, all you haters talking smack, he never said anything was better than anything else. He spent a bunch of money to show us all things we really would not mind seeing. I, for one, appreciate it, It was a good thing you had the presence of mind to have the second camera set up. Again, way cool. What was that super cooled ball made of, and was it nitrogen that you had just pulled it out of?
🤣🤣🤣 ну да, сейчас бы проверять металл разных эпох. И почему на датчик давления не показал на втором экземпляре? 🤔 Наверное потому что наконечник из алюминия поставил. 😂😂😂
Maybe high carbon chromium steel, because ball bearings are often made out of that. The same AR500 scene is in his video titled "500 ton hydraulic press vs hot steel ball". He cools this one to -200 C and heats another to 800 C. (1000 degrees C makes a difference!)
@@pex_the_unalivedrunk6785 White dwarfs are tough stuff, and the Sun's closest neighbor is one of those. But neutron stars are even tougher, if their substance can be classified as "matter". Its spacetime is so bent that when looking at it from the equatorial plane, one sees all of both their north and south poles at the same time, all of the time as it rotates. There can be no chemistry in their surrounding magnetic fields. Atomic cores are completely separated from electrons, everything transforms into plasma as it approaches.
I would like to know that too. I suspect it was supercooled to rapidly contract the steel armour and cause it to crack. The cooling effect might have caused cracking of the armour anyway, even without the hydraulic press.
I am surprised that there was no safety cage around the piston/plate area. That’s crazy! I use to use a tensile machine when I worked in the lab 45 years ago. We had a safety cage.
I enjoy your videos, especially showing the difference between metal quality and strength. Can't wait for the next video, and the new press room and press are amazing.
Jsou dva momenty. Ten první je to že kdokoliv, kdo opustí svoji zemi ať již z jakýchkoliv důvodů, nemůže počítat s tím že v jiné nebo azylové zemi získá stejné postavení a jistoty jako u sebe doma, zcela automaticky. Mám zato že občané bývalé ČSR, kteří opustili nejen svůj domov ale i Evropu a šli hledat štěstí za oceán by mohli kdyby byli ještě naživu, vyprávět. No a ten druhý moment je, proč se přes osmdesát % občanů Ukrajiny nehodlá do své vlasti po ukončení bojů a opětovného nastolení svobody a práva po tom krvavém Majdanu , vrátit . Že by to bylo proto že to na té Ukrajině vůbec není a nebylo ani dříve tak, jak se nám zde neustále vnucuje? Jen připomínám že Ukrajinu opouštěli z důvodů hledání si lepšího žití a lepší budoucnosti její občané již v devadesátých letech min.století a bylo jim kolem (teda těm které jsem osobně znal), mezi dvaceti až pětatřiceti lety. Většina z nich zde dnes má postaveno své vlastní bydlení , založené rodiny a děti již ve věku dospělosti. To pro ty, kdo zde neustále prohlašují že Ukrajinci utíkají ze své země teprve od doby, kdy na Ukrajinu vpadli Rusové. Ukrajina je totiž v ekonomickém srabu přesně od doby, kdy dostala status nezávislosti a Rusko na ni ztratilo vliv. Od té doby Ukrajinu opustily ne deset nebo statisíce lidí, ale miliony. Západ si potom z Ukrajiny vytvořil hotové ,,Eldorádo" Za pár šupů mu mocenský režim rozprodal co se jen dalo a převážně to byla zemědělská půda v četně průmyslových podniků a nerostného bohatství, kterého je na Ukrajině v podzemí ještě dost a dost pro další těžbu minimálně na dalších několik století. To je obrovské bohatství na to aby se ho ten, kdo ho za pár suchých z nosu získal , jen tak vzdal. A to je ten hlavní důvod pro neustálou podporu trvání válečného střetu mezi Ukrajinou a RF ze strany západu. On si totiž ve své sebestřednosti myslí že čím déle to bude trvat, tím více se Rusové unaví a to až do té míry že se jim vše zhroutí. Větší nesmysl by jeden nevymyslel a je tragédií Ukrajinců že tuto politiku západu protlačovanou přes Zelenskýho, nevidí. V tom případě platí jen jedno. Chytrému napověz a hloupého kopni. Jak vidno, Ukrajinci si nic jiného jak ten kopanec nezaslouží...
Hrozbou pro nás a všechny svobodné národy je ruský nacionalismus, nikoli ti, kteří s ním bojují. Nikdo nezažil tak dobře jako Československo, co je to „mír za každou cenu“. Mír ano, ale ne za podmínek agresora. Kdybys byl skutečný Čech a ne ruský troll, nepsal bys takové nesmysly. Jak všechno, co jsi napsal, souvisí se silou kovu?
@@vladz-07 В России нет национализма, но есть фашизм. Россия соответствует всем его признакам, согласно характеристикам фашизма, определенным Умберто Эко. Отличие в том, что вместо свастики буква - "Z". Путин шаг за шагом повторяет ошибки австрийского художника. Посмотрите программу Соловьева, как он и его гости пренебрежительно отзываются о других народах. Вы видели эти шоу? Посмотрите хотя бы раз, и вы быстро измените свое мнение. Мне жаль говорить, что вы стали страной, против которой воевали ваши предки.
@@vladz-07 Откуда ты можешь знать, откуда я? Я точно не из Северной Кореи, Сирии, Белоруссии или Никарагуа, Потому что остальные говорят то же, что и я. За исключением этих четырех стран, все страны проголосовали за осуждение «попытки незаконной аннексии» России на заседании Совета ООН. За резолюцию проголосовали 143 страны, против - всего 5, включая саму Россию. Есть старое правило, и я советую вам ему следовать. Если только один человек скажет вам, что вы пьяны, не обращайте на это внимания. Если два - задумайтесь. Если трое и более человек скажут вам, что вы пьяны, идите спать.
You can’t compare a 1940s Russian steel plate with a 210 American steel plate. Armour plate making technology in these two years would’ve been different.
Maybe high carbon chromium steel, because ball bearings are often made out of that. The same AR500 scene is in his video titled "500 ton hydraulic press vs hot steel ball". He cools this one to -200 C and heats another to 800 C. (1000 degrees C makes a difference!)
That isn't as bad as you might think. Metallurgy hasn't really advanced that much over the last century. Any industrialized nation could make steel of nearly perfect quality(which if you were being generous you could call the Soviet Union in 1940). The problems are Ballistic resistance is much different than compressive resistance. Armor needs to stop sudden powerful shocks from Bullets, shells , and explosives. The slow compression of a press is not at all comparable. The biggest problem though is that in 1940, the Soviets didn't really have a standard way or amount that they tempered their armor. They didn't have a significant Navy, and the tanks were being put out as fast as humanly possible with out all the tweaking that engineers like to do that get the most out of their work. For them it was better to have 2 passable tanks than 1 excellent one. If you wanted to judge the various armor ideas of the time. You would probably want to test American, British, and German armor of the time. (IDK about tanks but for ships Americans used harder armor that would shrug off hits better but if hit really hard could shatter, Germans used a softer armor that could be penetrated and damaged more easily but rarely if ever shattered. The British sort of split the difference. So useless information still kind of fun to watch things get smashed. Oops there is some useful info that wasn't pointed out. This dispels a common misconception. That Titanium is stronger than steel. Well not per unit of volume. So one inch of titanium would not be as strong as one inch of steel. It would be much lighter though. In strength to weight Titanium is the champ among the base metals. Also has a really high melting point which makes it great for everything aircraft. It also makes it a monster to smelt. AFIK it is chemically smelted theses days. As opposed to with heat smelted with those big blast furnaces.
@@Snipergoat1Посмотрите на количество современных и тех танков или самолётов, Танки и самолёты второй мировой были лишь коробками с двигателем или фанерным каркасом с обшивкой, тем более уж Т-34, образец 1943 стоил в 2 раза дешевле образца 1940. Но Вы правы касаемо свойств брони. Отто Кариус рассказывает, что начинал от с 38t, и при попадании, броня раскололась и отрубила радисту руку. И конечно же удар и давление разные вещи, стекло очень твёрдое, но хрупкое. А вот сейчас выясняется, что советские конструкторы были правы: толстая броня 8см лучше, чем тонка 4-6 см у громоздких танков НАТО, со спичечными коробками на башнях, что конечно крайне аппетитно для дронов и гранатомётов, и пусть экипаж и выживет, но дорогущий танк уже нет, часто из-за БК потом выгорает и копус, и хотя советские танки и устарели, эта проблема решена в Т-14 армата и навсегда(хотя корпус её серьёзно пострадает). Но не применяют её так же как Т-44 и ИС-3, чтобы не потерять как немцы Тигр в болоте.
A high velocity impact would be different, as materials behave differently under a rapid microsecond pressure vs a slow pressure, plus the round has different properties than cone on the press. Like a person hitting water diving into a pool, vs that same person diving into water from a plane 1000 feet high - the water will be like concrete at high velocity. Also I suspect this press has much more energy than a 30 mm round at its fired velocity. I would love to see the same targets hit by a 30 mm depleted uranium round and compare the results to this video! See how the WW2 armor does.
@@jaabnegat Steel 1940 - a through hole was made under a force of 450 tons, while the piece of metal remained intact. The steel is viscous. Steel 2010, when pressed by a ball, broke into pieces under a pressure of 350 tons. Now imagine what will happen in the armor space from fragments, the anti-fragment lining will not save in this case.
Try pressing down on modern reactive armor? In the 2010 armor plate demo, is press head tip made of lead? What is Rockwell hardness of cone? Where is tonnage gauge? Has press been calibrated or certified by testing or calibration service?
Would have been better if you would have used the same tip that pierced the Russian plate on the AR500. Can definitely see the difference in metal composition.
Pierce russian armour with high-quality instrumental steel cone, and USA armour prodused 70 year later with cone of crude steel?.. Wow, you really cool, pal, it's sooo fair competition... )))
it would have been even more epic if he trolled us by having the catastrophic failure happen while the countdown was still at like 4 or 5 💀 anyone standing in that room could have gotten shredded.
I saw it coming in real time, when it began to crack...that target is made out of some pretty tough stuff. a .50 cal bmg has a lot of muzzle energy and is pretty heavy for a bullet...especially AP tungsten core rounds.
Man, that AR500 is strong. Hence why it broke and didn’t deform much. The harder something becomes, the more likely it will break or shatter, but not bend.
Jeez dude you almost got me killed in Elden Ring, I had to rewind and watch the molten shrapnel shoot out again! haha Edit: Dude that metal sphere that blew the brick up and sent it flying out to destroy the entire setup was unreal. I had to rewatch that a couple times. Love the videos comrade.
A bullet doesn't have the luxury of adding more energy to it after it hits it's target. All of the bullets energy has been spent before it leaves the barrel of the gun. A press has the ability to add more power as needed to the load after it makes contact. A bullet would have been stopped completely after the first plate shattered and since it doesn't have a huge resivoire of power that it can access after contacting the first plate. It would have stopped immediately !!!
The bullet’s energy is far from spent by the time it exits the gun barrel. Much of the kinetic energy of the exploding charge is transferred to the bullet, which expends a tiny bit of it via friction as it spins down the barrel. Most of the bullet’s kinetic energy is still intact as it leaves the barrel. A small amount of this energy is expended due to air friction. When the bullet hits the target and is eventually stopped, the remaining kinetic energy is transferred into the target material.
@@blindlemon9 the bullet starts to slow down as soon as it leaves the barrel and once it hits it's target, it doesn't have another shell casing full of powder to give it another push. That press can keep the pressure on until it blows a seal and it can add more as needed once it contacts the target. The bullet don't have that luxury. A bullet is like a hammer hitting the nail one time only. The press is like a hammer hitting the nail as many times as necessary to drive it all the way in.
@@arthurgay5746 The _cartridge_ expends its energy driving the _bullet_ down the barrel. The bullet leaves the barrel with some energy, and loses some of it to the air between it and whatever it hits. If a 1 kg bullet going 1 km/s hits a 3 mm steel or titanium plate, it's not going to stop. Lose some energy, yes, but once that plate's out of the way whatever energy the bullet has left is still in it and carries on into whatever's behind that plate. If bullets couldn't hit more than one thing there wouldn't be quite as many people dying in changing rooms in the USA.
I'm guessing this is a Russian Channel. It would be fairly easy to find WW2 Soviet armor. It's not like they have old Sherman tanks in every small town park like we do. They likely have old T-34s for that. Another problem is that Soviet tanks at the time were being slammed out as fast as humanly possible. That left little time for niceties like standardized tempering for armor. I would not be surprised if no tempering at all was done on most tanks. So any given bit of armor would not be representative of a whole or even of the tanks that was next to it on the assembly. American Armor at the time was standardized, Soviets had a Nazi in the face problem that took up all of their time.
На основании сравнительных испытания советской брони 1940 года под вольфрамовым наконечником и американской брони 2010 под стальным углеродистым наконечником (характерные повреждения наконечника) делается вывод о превосходстве американской брони. Х.Ы. Американская танковая броня (название и марку не помню, искать сейчас в сети лениво) 35 мм., толщиной пробивалась бронебойной пулей из мосинки. Из мосинки калибром 7.62 мм.! Не из противотанкового ружья калибром 14.5 мм.
I'm not surprised at all that the ar500 Target plate did so well in these tests because I have one of these half inch ar 500 targets that's about twice the size of that one, and my friend recently brought his AR-15 with green tip armor penetrating rounds to the range with me and hit my plate several times with it and it barely put more than a scratch on it like barely. Almost microscopic dimples in it. That ar500 steel that's pretty tough stuff.
Green tip is NOT armor penetrating. Not at all. It keeps the bullet moving in a straight line going through things that might deflect the bullet, like bushes and shrubs, window glass, or car doors. It adds a little weight to the tip of the bullet like you would add to the tip of a paper airplane. It's a little piece of steel, and yes, they call in a penetrator, but it's not armor piercing.
Typical clickbait propaganda with tiktok baity music You might aswell say that a russian T-90 can destroy a sherman tank easy... because it's obvious it will, due to obsolete military advancements from last century xd Cool visuals tho, but it's very misleading with that thumbnail and what the video attempts to show that USA armor is better when the comparison is not even fair to begin with.
I read a lot of the comments but I still don't know what the sphere (frozen? why?) was made out of? That's the biggest question by far after watching this. Anyone? Thanks. 🙏🏻
the cones were made in China....but I want to know what that ball is made of. Probably vibranium or adamantium or something from the MCU...it's gotta be forged from a dead dwarf star.
The theme of the video, the method of its verification, and everything about it is just a bunch of nonsense, and nothing about it is correct. At the very least, if they had reproduced the phenomenon in an area that behaves as a pseudo-fluid due to inertial compression, the video would have been a little more in line with the theme. It is a complete mistake. ;-(
I think that that is a bit harsh. Seeing the consequences for the different materials under pressure was interesting. The areas that could be improved involved being more consistent with revealing the pressures at the point of failure in every case, using a fresh sample when changing the set ups and giving specific details about the most relevant material properties involved in compressive strength...such as hardness, brittle onset, ductility loss with increased hardness, influence of martensitic structure et al.! Still don't know what the sphere was made of... and as for the music > turn down the volume! Overall enjoyed the content!
Last one was crazy! It first looked like nothing happened at the focal point, but everything around it exploded. This is a good example why you should not do things like this without protection, or don't be around it.
Como las películas de Hollywood, donde siempre por casualidad los mejores en absolutamente todos los aspectos, a nivel mundial, son los estadounidenses. ¡Qué objetivos que son!
In the Russian steel armor How did you get 450 tons from nearly 6000 psi???? The correct ton-force that is equivalent to 6000 psi is actually about 2.68 ton force
I tried to explain Mithril or enchanted armor over steel armor to a senior IBM staffer. He did not understand why swords bent, dulled, or notched. Then again his DNA was only 98 % human.
What do you mean, "don't try this at home?" I bought my very own 100T hydraulic press and high speed camera off ebay for just such an occasion. Now I've wasted my money!
I'll subscribe !
😂😂
Lol.
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Nice one. 👍
its not russian vs america armor................. its ww2 armor vs New armor !
Yes it's a bad way to compare! Better to compare the material from the same period of each contries. You know what i mean lol my english sucks!
or very old soviet armor from a t34 1942 vs modern 2010 steel armor
The thing is... Russia is probably still using the WWII armor
@@daimyo2k The oldest armor the Russian military still uses in 2024 is old T-55AMs and T-62Ms, each with their own add-on composite armor on top of the steel which was far closer to modern steel in quality than WWII steel due to some massive reforms to the Soviet steel industry in the '50s (which actually caused Soviet/Russian metallurgy to become significantly better than western metallurgy with the Soviets being able to synthesize high-heat tolerance alloys for rocket engines decades ahead of the west), which means that low-end '80s composite armor is the worst armor that the Russians actually use today, and even then, they mostly just use it for frontline artillery support rather than the usual breakthrough/direct fire role tanks occupy. Soviet and Russian tanks have been better armored than their western peers of the same era since the T-64 was introduced in the mid-'60s due to the weight savings granted by their use of an autoloader enabling the use of thicker and heavier armor, and due to their use of explosive-reactive armor in addition to the standard non-explosive reactive armor and laminate armor all modern tanks use. Though it should be noted that there is a night and day difference in quality between '40s Soviet steel and, 50s Soviet steel, with the former being of infamously low quality, while the latter is still some of the best steel in the world today.
Old T-34s were all either scrapped or sold for export to the point where Russia is now buying back old T-34s previously sold to other countries to keep their small fleet of still operational T-34s running with spare parts so they can continue to use them for parades. Really, WWII-era steel is so rare and so sought after due to its lower radioisotope content due to having been made before the first atomic bomb was detonated that I highly doubt the veracity of this video, as not only would that pre-atomic age steel scrap be the most expensive thing destroyed in this video, it would also not be more shiny and rust-free than the 2010s steel armor.
@@daimyo2k They use ceramic composite armour. During a brief spell they had access to unlimited titanium of free, they made a bunch of plates out of it, and issued it to close combat squads. Its made just for shotgun shells really, its ussr stuff, when they would need to send their own army, into their own buildings. Like "we need the army to clear a building in berlin" not "we need to fight on the front line". We know they use ceramic composite now, you can go online and actually buy it, we know where it is made even in the silk factory.
The body armour you get given comes with empty pouches. You are supposed to fill them as a mission needs. If titanium plates are turning up in their armour, then its the guys putting the old armour in the empty pockets themselves. I wouldn't blame them for this really. But they have been verified using ceramic composite for a long time now.
So if your enemy aims his hydraulic press at you, just know the odds of survival for you are greatly diminished.
It is called the new slow gun. They ride up in a truck and attach it to an armored vehical, and two hours later... The press has done its job. Still kinda interesting.
Unless you have the 2010 American made metal! USA USA USA
😂
If you let an enemy vehicle armed only with a hydraulic press close enough to let them use it on you, you've probably got much bigger issues than the thickness of your armor...
Hahahaha .... you are very funny .... I can´t stop laughing ... hahahaha.
I don't seem to recall the Germans having anti-tank guns that flung 500-ton press heads. In Dune, "... The slow blade penetrates the shield."
Good reference, Gurney!
Это не просто медленный клинок, это меееееееееееедленныыыыыый клинок XD
They were stuck with '88s
I'm amazed looking at the comments on everyone's take on this video. People read way to much into it and what it means. All the Title says is The press vs armor. Which is a hydraulic press putting load bearing pressure on types of armor grade steel. It's not a test. Smashing !
Actually, the title says Russian vs. America armor, so there's some implication that one is better than the other. But, as a retired Army officer and metallurgical engineer, the test is pretty irrelevant in that it does not replicate any specific threat that an armored vehicle would see.
Yeah, the fact that they changed gauges halfway through the test is pretty concerning.
Armor is to resist sudden kinetic events, not sustained pressure. This doesn't prove it to be ineffective.
The results are still good finding out which armor is best suited for the pressures of outer space.
@@beanking81 Pressure of outer space? There are no pressure in outer space.
@@AakeTraak There definitely is pressure in outer space, e.g. the electron degeneracy pressure in white dwarfs that prevent those former star cores from further collapse.
All the pressure is in outer space
@@beanking81 if you keep a cabin pressure of 1 bar to make it comfortable for the astronauts the pressure outside the space craft is only - 1 bar, something a bicycle wheel could hold without a problem. Submarines have to take huge pressure differences though. Materials for space flight have very different requirements like high heat resistance to not burn up on reentry, high stiffness so they don't bend under enormous acceleration, radiation blocking so the astronauts don't get cancer and high corrosion resistance so oxygen radicals from the upper atmosphere don't make it rust in time lapse speed.
I hope I never get shot with a hydraulic press
It'll take a while
You worry too much
😂
@@marcadams9698
True 🤣
You will be killed by that terrible music first... 😀
There is a difference between the two pieces, a piece made in 1940 and a piece made in 2010. The difference is in time and technology. The hydraulic head was replaced.
As well as it is incorrect to compare two metals with a difference of 30-50 years. Metal fatigue should still give a very large error, which, to put it mildly, is unacceptable in comparative tests
@@AcidGreen1000actually older alloys relieves their stress over time.
Not only that, this armour isn't ever going to face a hydraulic press in the battlefield ... effectiveness against various munitions might not be told by such a test.
Will AR-500 steel vs Russian Medium harden steel.. That like AR-500 Vs AR-300
The Medium Harden steel is use so that the armor plate wont crack, they would put the harder plate RHA or AR-500 on top of the less brittle steel.
Not much difference in technology, It just harder steel vs softer steel, during ww2 even to this day, they would put a harden face plate on top of the softer so the whole plate would not just crack when hit.
Todays Armor technology AR-500 or RHA steel no longer the main stay of the armor in tanks after ww2, it all Composite now, because of HEAT weapon would melt any Steel and the dart will poke a hole though any steel as well.
You all forget the effect freedom has on materials.
This isn't Russian versus us armor. This is just Titanium vs Steel armor. Both countries have many armor types. Titanium is widely known to be less strong than steel. The real reason for Titanium use is it's strength to weight ratio. Armor can be HEAVY, especially steel; but is at the discretion of the wearer to decide strenght or agility
Yes. Titanium alloys in computer games are always the best/strongest ones which is wrong. I guess it started in the 90s when someone misinterpreted efficiency for durability/strength.
Brother my ar500 doesnt make me anyless agile😂 my top speed was 20mph w/wo i could run a marathon w/wo . Pull ups push up sit ups any motion uneffected by an extra 22lbs vs 13lbs in my opinion all or nothin.
Titanium is better at deflecting bullets however, especially at less dept, due its hardness
@startingbark0356 That is patently false. Titanium is better armor only in video games. Here in reality, there is no scenario where titanium will perform better than carbon steel or tungsten steel.
@kevinbillingsley8256 compared to RHA it performs better, mythbusters tested it with thin titanium and its better to deflect bullets, your talking about very strong steel alloys tho
Interesting side note: AR500 isn't even the top grade. The AR stands for Abrasion Resistant, and was designed for hard use industrial equipment. There's even higher grades in the 700 class.
How well does it stand up to a 4 kg copper slug at 1 km/s?
@@Sableagle At about 1.4 million foot pounds of energy, I wouldn't stand within 600 yards of the splash zone. To be fair, there's very few structures that would stand up to that without significant damage either. But since we're firing theoreticals, I would suggest hauling in a 36 inch thick block as a starting point and see how it goes. 😉
@@C-M-E I was thinking that if 5.56 x 45 mm from a 25.4" barrel can defeat 6 mm of steel at 10 paces, then a 5.7 x 45 cm from a 21' barrel ought to defeat 60 mm of steel at 100 paces, but you do raise a valid point about how nasty it would be for the downrange population of ants. I wonder how scary the bits of watermelon rind from that impact would be.
I mean, throw some HYX80 steel on that press and see how it holds up.
I've never heard of AR700, only AR600. I know SSAB makes a Hardox Extreme, which is Brinnel 700. I guess that would be similar. A better test of armor steel would be the MIL A 12560 and 46100.
1940 steel compared to 2010 steel os a joke. The science is totally different
Its still Russian bullet proof vests😂
@@tclanjtopsom4846 REALLY???
Well to be fair Russia is still using the tanks that armor is from.
@@michaellee1244 YOU MEEN THE RUSSIAN T90 USE THE SAME ARMOR FROM 1934??? NOT SO GOOD PROPAGANDA , TO BE FAIR....
@@TrivkaKovac-es7mj Not at all. I'm not talking about the armor on the T90s. I'm talking about the T53s that Russia has been using in Ukraine since most of the T90s have been destroyed or captured. 😉
Does this mean tanks are in trouble when we have giant fighting machines with crab-like pincers?
Why do I have to think of Fallout 4 Automatron :)
As long as the tanks don't have a pile bunker, you'll be fine .
Yes! Fear the armored crabcat!
Yes, absolutely, that's EXACTLY what this means. We're all doomed!
Possibly… 😓
Armor is not for tensile strength i guess it's more for impulsive strength
Tensile strength? This is compression, mostly, possibly some shear.
@@MorningNapalmCompression at the top generated traction at the bottom of the metal plate.
Impact strength, which is toughness, basically hardness without being brittle.
someone explained in detail what these plates are used for, and its close combat where they might get hit with shotguns, its for internal russian military uses. Like a hostage, swat style stuff, they all wear it, put up a shield, and storm in the building one after the other, protected from blasts. Their "war" armour is ceramic composite. Their armour vests like the USA can have pockets empty, and it is possible a soldier might put these old plates in empty pockets, but we know for sure, they are making huge amounts of ceramic composite plates. The last shipment was like 25,000 of them to the front line. If I really had to guess, then I would think every time they find a box of these old plates, they sell them to america for collectors, and buy new ceramic composite ones. Titanium has a good value, so after doing this test the plate still has value.
@@MorningNapalmhe's right, it's mainly tension on the back that make perforation. He means armor is more designed for high strain rate loads, not static loads applied from a press
Очень прочная и хрупкая против непрочной но вязкой. Под каждый тип брони нужен определённый снаряд. Если добавить энергию скорости снаряда, то современная сталь расколется легче чем старая сталь. Советские фугасы были расчитаны именно на прочною, но хрупкую броню.
fragile but tough?? Sounds like you're suffering from verbal diarrhea. I bet fracture mechanics is not your area of expertise.
Фугасы вообще не расчитаны для брони😂😅🎉
Should be noted; Hydraulic Testing is not the same as Ballistic Testing...
In a Ballistic event, the penetration force is reduced as kinetic energy dissipates through contact. Thx CHP.
would have been much better without the irritating music in the start
Totally agree with ya partner
I looked at the comments just to see if anyone mentioned the awful music.
Volume control
Always check comments before hearing that cringe music lol
Mf always complaining about something dam bro
The slow energy push doesn't do justice to actual projectiles moving Much Faster!
Still Cool AF!!!
Yes, a slow pressure is entirely different from an impact that lasts for micro seconds. It is like comparing a vise squeezing something vs a sledge hammer hitting it. But the press is informative and it is very cool! I loved this video.
Kinetic energy is key.
He didn’t say it did.
I love watching the pressure guage build and see the point of failure. Way more pressure than the armor would be expected to take and fascinating.
@@Leehensman no it's not actually. the only round where that applies is in the sabot. other AP rounds have shape charges in the head, that upon detonation, release a molten jet of copper or other element which drills straight through the armor. (rpg 7 is a good example)
It would be harder to slowly push a BB through two sheets of paper than an inch of oobleck but the paper would never stop the BB if it were fired instead.
Resistance to compressive force and resistance to impact and penetration are entirely separate material properties.
It was still a pleasure to watch.
Oobleck?
you aren't even comparing the same class of armor; AR500 is so brittle that it is not suitable as tank armor, then again the T34 armor is probably so soft it isn't suitable as modern tank armor either. you might have armor with a brinell hardness of 300, this is acceptable as it is hard enough to resist impact deformation from small calibers but tough enough not to just utterly crack when shot with a kinetic penetrator
Yes. In other words, it can't be considered a (tank) armor by modern standards, be it Russian, American, Chinese or otherwise.
Correct, and that relatively soft but tough armour had a distinct purpose to use its elasticity to absorb the energy of the projectiles without fracturing.
Literally not WW2 tank armor can compare to modern steel... Heck even in modern time steel is being improve. For example Japan Type 90 and Type 10 tank use different kind of steel that its more modern.. Same in Russia, T-14 Armata use a new Steel.
Armor isnt made to stop slow crushing objects, they will just crush you anyway! Armor is designed to stop a saft moving projectile thats moving at a high rate of speed and weighs a couple hundred grams.
Pretty sure he wasn't trying to test the ballistic strength of the armor. Why can't people just sit and watch something interesting without making stupid comments, smh.
@@douchebaggins7 Ikr
what we want in Armor is resistance to penetration from rounds and fragments traveling over 1200 fps.
with no spalling on the inside.
strong, but not brittle.
what exactly is "a high rate of speed". Speed is measured as a distance covered per unit time i.e Km/h, Mph. That is a rate so what exactly is a high rate of a rate??
The armor on the front of a T-34 is actually "thicker." It's designed to be at a 45 degree angle making the 45 mm armor actually 63.64 mm when measured horizontally, which is how a round would hit it. It was a cost (and weight) saving way to improve protection.
Unsuprisingly, the armor on the front top glacius of a sherman tank, was even more sloped than the russian armor. Need I point out that the russians weren't the first, or only ones to use sloped armor, just look at iron clads of the civel war. It's not a new idea...
@@evilshewswho here said that the Russian's were the first to invent this or that it's a new idea?
Тільки сталь у т 34 була наскільки гидезна що її шили всі кому не лінь, навіть 37 мм гармати
@@evilshews It is more like russia created a trend. Look at the t-34. They are using slope armor all around the tanks. Where USA only started doing that in M10 tank. Other nation spotted that as very effective and started making similar designs. Same think as now in ukraine and russia war. Small drones use by ukraine was very effective. Now russia using them the same way.
@@ALFABETAS999- Not really, the French have tanks with sloped armour all around before the T-34. The problem with sloped armour is its diminishing return with every slope you leave less usable space. Plus, the notorious terrible welding by the Soviets that would crack the entire tank by it’s seems with even a glancing shot. The Germans used special welding technique and inter-locking metal plates to make the tank structure stronger on their Panther tanks. There’s a reason post-war Western and Soviet tanks ditched the sloped armour in favor of laminating hard steel armor.
Husband watching this video reads: “Warning: Do not repeat at home anything you saw in this video”. He shouts to his wife in the kitchen “Darling, for pity’s sake, switch of that 500 ton hydraulic press”🤣😂
срочно !!!!!!
Butchered phrase. "For Pete's sake" and "switch of that 500 ton hydraulic press" what is a "switch of"? Like a switch of a tree? Or bush?
@@Niever1 Your criticism is completely misplaced. If you had taken the time to look online you would have found that “For pity’s sake” is a very old phrase, dating back to the 17th century and it’s forerunner “for pity” back to 15th century. Regarding “switch of”, do you really think I would have left it like that if I could’ve changed it. It was caused by the stupid auto correct or auto complete, whatever it is called, changing what I had written. Unfortunately I couldn’t correct it because those 3 dots you click on to edit or delete a comment won’t work. I asked Apple to solve the problem and they couldn’t and they said it was a UA-cam problem, so I phoned UA-cam and they couldn’t solve it and said it was an Apple problem. What then am I supposed to do? If my spelling problems are the biggest worry in your life, then I’m very happy for you.
Сталь 1940 - сквозное отверстие получилось при усилии 450 т, при этом кусок металла остался целый. Сталь вязкая. Сталь 2010 года при давлении шаром, разрушилась на куски при давлении 350т. А теперь представьте, что будет в за броневом пространстве от осколков, противоосколочный подбой в этом случае не спасет.
Dude, that was the coolest shit I have seen in a long time. And let me do you this favor, all you haters talking smack, he never said anything was better than anything else. He spent a bunch of money to show us all things we really would not mind seeing. I, for one, appreciate it, It was a good thing you had the presence of mind to have the second camera set up. Again, way cool. What was that super cooled ball made of, and was it nitrogen that you had just pulled it out of?
Well said. This showed us something we don't get to normally see. The finish to this vid was sick!
It´s funny how some people spend time watching this video, only to make a "funny" comment and disparage it.
🤣🤣🤣 ну да, сейчас бы проверять металл разных эпох. И почему на датчик давления не показал на втором экземпляре? 🤔 Наверное потому что наконечник из алюминия поставил. 😂😂😂
One thing is certain...This was one expensive video with all those test materials. The AR500 never fails to amaze me
It illustrate that you don’t want super hard material to make armors, but ones that, while rather hard, can bend without breaking.
Yeah and the bye bye hydraulic press steel
This is a reupload too
@@franck3279 : No, that superhard AR500 steel looks great as static / vehicle protection armor from anything short of literal cannon balls apparently.
Yes but then ruined whole vid by adding the repetitive crap music.👏
so what was the cooled ball material? Tungsten?? diamond? looked metallic though..
I have been wondering the same thing
Maybe high carbon chromium steel, because ball bearings are often made out of that. The same AR500 scene is in his video titled "500 ton hydraulic press vs hot steel ball". He cools this one to -200 C and heats another to 800 C. (1000 degrees C makes a difference!)
I am pretty sure it was forged from the core of a white dwarf star...making it the strongest known alloy in the universe.
@@pex_the_unalivedrunk6785 White dwarfs are tough stuff, and the Sun's closest neighbor is one of those. But neutron stars are even tougher, if their substance can be classified as "matter". Its spacetime is so bent that when looking at it from the equatorial plane, one sees all of both their north and south poles at the same time, all of the time as it rotates.
There can be no chemistry in their surrounding magnetic fields. Atomic cores are completely separated from electrons, everything transforms into plasma as it approaches.
I would like to know that too. I suspect it was supercooled to rapidly contract the steel armour and cause it to crack. The cooling effect might have caused cracking of the armour anyway, even without the hydraulic press.
I am surprised that there was no safety cage around the piston/plate area. That’s crazy! I use to use a tensile machine when I worked in the lab 45 years ago. We had a safety cage.
Это русские)
I enjoy your videos, especially showing the difference between metal quality and strength. Can't wait for the next video, and the new press room and press are amazing.
Вот и настал тот момент,когда все переломал и больше нечего!Порадуемся за наших друзей иностранцев,хоть у них есть что посмотреть!
Ну не знаю... "Леопольды", "абрамсы" горят ярко, жарко, много... Ваши.
Huh
1940 vs 2010 : LOL
yup, when they use 1940 Russian then they should use 1940 American, anything less than a year match is pure propaganda. ( lying to us )
While not a fair comparison it does illustrate how much progress was made in metallurgy.
russia use same technology for casting steel now in 2024 as in 1940.
@@muhammedbayramali2589 You are really really STUPID !
@@muhammedbayramali2589 от куда тебе знать, такому деревянному, какие технологии в металлургии использует Россия?
Jsou dva momenty. Ten první je to že kdokoliv, kdo opustí svoji zemi ať již z jakýchkoliv důvodů, nemůže počítat s tím že v jiné nebo azylové zemi získá stejné postavení a jistoty jako u sebe doma, zcela automaticky. Mám zato že občané bývalé ČSR, kteří opustili nejen svůj domov ale i Evropu a šli hledat štěstí za oceán by mohli kdyby byli ještě naživu, vyprávět. No a ten druhý moment je, proč se přes osmdesát % občanů Ukrajiny nehodlá do své vlasti po ukončení bojů a opětovného nastolení svobody a práva po tom krvavém Majdanu , vrátit . Že by to bylo proto že to na té Ukrajině vůbec není a nebylo ani dříve tak, jak se nám zde neustále vnucuje? Jen připomínám že Ukrajinu opouštěli z důvodů hledání si lepšího žití a lepší budoucnosti její občané již v devadesátých letech min.století a bylo jim kolem (teda těm které jsem osobně znal), mezi dvaceti až pětatřiceti lety. Většina z nich zde dnes má postaveno své vlastní bydlení , založené rodiny a děti již ve věku dospělosti. To pro ty, kdo zde neustále prohlašují že Ukrajinci utíkají ze své země teprve od doby, kdy na Ukrajinu vpadli Rusové. Ukrajina je totiž v ekonomickém srabu přesně od doby, kdy dostala status nezávislosti a Rusko na ni ztratilo vliv. Od té doby Ukrajinu opustily ne deset nebo statisíce lidí, ale miliony. Západ si potom z Ukrajiny vytvořil hotové ,,Eldorádo" Za pár šupů mu mocenský režim rozprodal co se jen dalo a převážně to byla zemědělská půda v četně průmyslových podniků a nerostného bohatství, kterého je na Ukrajině v podzemí ještě dost a dost pro další těžbu minimálně na dalších několik století. To je obrovské bohatství na to aby se ho ten, kdo ho za pár suchých z nosu získal , jen tak vzdal. A to je ten hlavní důvod pro neustálou podporu trvání válečného střetu mezi Ukrajinou a RF ze strany západu. On si totiž ve své sebestřednosti myslí že čím déle to bude trvat, tím více se Rusové unaví a to až do té míry že se jim vše zhroutí. Větší nesmysl by jeden nevymyslel a je tragédií Ukrajinců že tuto politiku západu protlačovanou přes Zelenskýho, nevidí. V tom případě platí jen jedno. Chytrému napověz a hloupého kopni. Jak vidno, Ukrajinci si nic jiného jak ten kopanec nezaslouží...
Hrozbou pro nás a všechny svobodné národy je ruský nacionalismus, nikoli ti, kteří s ním bojují.
Nikdo nezažil tak dobře jako Československo, co je to „mír za každou cenu“.
Mír ano, ale ne za podmínek agresora.
Kdybys byl skutečný Čech a ne ruský troll, nepsal bys takové nesmysly.
Jak všechno, co jsi napsal, souvisí se silou kovu?
@@dradowan2586нет, живя в России я знаю, что русского национализма нет, в здоровой форме присутствует и это нормально, как и для всех национальностей
@@vladz-07
В России нет национализма, но есть фашизм.
Россия соответствует всем его признакам, согласно характеристикам фашизма, определенным Умберто Эко.
Отличие в том, что вместо свастики буква - "Z".
Путин шаг за шагом повторяет ошибки австрийского художника.
Посмотрите программу Соловьева, как он и его гости пренебрежительно отзываются о других народах. Вы видели эти шоу?
Посмотрите хотя бы раз, и вы быстро измените свое мнение.
Мне жаль говорить, что вы стали страной, против которой воевали ваши предки.
@@dradowan2586 понятно откуда ты товарищ. Бредятину написал какую то.Вот как всё закончится приедешь в Россию и увидишь всё своими глазами
@@vladz-07
Откуда ты можешь знать, откуда я?
Я точно не из Северной Кореи, Сирии, Белоруссии или Никарагуа,
Потому что остальные говорят то же, что и я.
За исключением этих четырех стран, все страны проголосовали за осуждение «попытки незаконной аннексии» России на заседании Совета ООН. За резолюцию проголосовали 143 страны, против - всего 5, включая саму Россию.
Есть старое правило, и я советую вам ему следовать.
Если только один человек скажет вам, что вы пьяны, не обращайте на это внимания.
Если два - задумайтесь.
Если трое и более человек скажут вам, что вы пьяны, идите спать.
Thanks for wasting your press cones for our entertainment. One of the best channels out there.
You can’t compare a 1940s Russian steel plate with a 210 American steel plate. Armour plate making technology in these two years would’ve been different.
Cool video. You should place a ruler on the white background to illustrate how much the press is moving when is slows to a crawl.
Of which material and how cold was the ball in the end?
Maybe high carbon chromium steel, because ball bearings are often made out of that. The same AR500 scene is in his video titled "500 ton hydraulic press vs hot steel ball". He cools this one to -200 C and heats another to 800 C. (1000 degrees C makes a difference!)
From what material this press is made?
Comparing an armour plate made some 80 years ago and an other made 15 years ago...😏 Come on.
That isn't as bad as you might think. Metallurgy hasn't really advanced that much over the last century. Any industrialized nation could make steel of nearly perfect quality(which if you were being generous you could call the Soviet Union in 1940). The problems are Ballistic resistance is much different than compressive resistance. Armor needs to stop sudden powerful shocks from Bullets, shells , and explosives. The slow compression of a press is not at all comparable.
The biggest problem though is that in 1940, the Soviets didn't really have a standard way or amount that they tempered their armor. They didn't have a significant Navy, and the tanks were being put out as fast as humanly possible with out all the tweaking that engineers like to do that get the most out of their work. For them it was better to have 2 passable tanks than 1 excellent one. If you wanted to judge the various armor ideas of the time. You would probably want to test American, British, and German armor of the time. (IDK about tanks but for ships Americans used harder armor that would shrug off hits better but if hit really hard could shatter, Germans used a softer armor that could be penetrated and damaged more easily but rarely if ever shattered. The British sort of split the difference.
So useless information still kind of fun to watch things get smashed.
Oops there is some useful info that wasn't pointed out. This dispels a common misconception. That Titanium is stronger than steel. Well not per unit of volume. So one inch of titanium would not be as strong as one inch of steel. It would be much lighter though. In strength to weight Titanium is the champ among the base metals. Also has a really high melting point which makes it great for everything aircraft. It also makes it a monster to smelt. AFIK it is chemically smelted theses days. As opposed to with heat smelted with those big blast furnaces.
@@Snipergoat1Посмотрите на количество современных и тех танков или самолётов, Танки и самолёты второй мировой были лишь коробками с двигателем или фанерным каркасом с обшивкой, тем более уж Т-34, образец 1943 стоил в 2 раза дешевле образца 1940. Но Вы правы касаемо свойств брони. Отто Кариус рассказывает, что начинал от с 38t, и при попадании, броня раскололась и отрубила радисту руку. И конечно же удар и давление разные вещи, стекло очень твёрдое, но хрупкое. А вот сейчас выясняется, что советские конструкторы были правы: толстая броня 8см лучше, чем тонка 4-6 см у громоздких танков НАТО, со спичечными коробками на башнях, что конечно крайне аппетитно для дронов и гранатомётов, и пусть экипаж и выживет, но дорогущий танк уже нет, часто из-за БК потом выгорает и копус, и хотя советские танки и устарели, эта проблема решена в Т-14 армата и навсегда(хотя корпус её серьёзно пострадает). Но не применяют её так же как Т-44 и ИС-3, чтобы не потерять как немцы Тигр в болоте.
No its Titanium vs Steel armor.
Not the music💀
Agreed! The music is 💩!
I would turn off sound but then I miss the sounds of the press. The music is SO un-necessary and SO annoying.
tell the ai bot to turn the channel on the music
*WHAT TF DID YOU THINK HE WAS GOING TO PLAY??? He is Russian!! Not American. He isn't going to play country music.* 😑
Yes , so loud music , why ? I stopped watching .
How would this related to the imparted energy of a 30mm depleted uranium round against armor?
A high velocity impact would be different, as materials behave differently under a rapid microsecond pressure vs a slow pressure, plus the round has different properties than cone on the press. Like a person hitting water diving into a pool, vs that same person diving into water from a plane 1000 feet high - the water will be like concrete at high velocity. Also I suspect this press has much more energy than a 30 mm round at its fired velocity. I would love to see the same targets hit by a 30 mm depleted uranium round and compare the results to this video! See how the WW2 armor does.
I'd like to see the m4 sherman from ww2 vs a t90 now to even it up
Kogo szanse wyrównać?
@@jaabnegat Steel 1940 - a through hole was made under a force of 450 tons, while the piece of metal remained intact. The steel is viscous. Steel 2010, when pressed by a ball, broke into pieces under a pressure of 350 tons. Now imagine what will happen in the armor space from fragments, the anti-fragment lining will not save in this case.
Thank goodness for a chilled ADAMANTIUM sphere when ya need one.😂
Try pressing down on modern reactive armor? In the 2010 armor plate demo, is press head tip made of lead? What is Rockwell hardness of cone? Where is tonnage gauge? Has press been calibrated or certified by testing or calibration service?
What are the seismometers reading outside at 8:50? I get the feeling the ground shook on that one.
at least he gave us a several second warning for that jump scare...holy 💩
And what about russian steel armor of 2021...????
You need to get together with the Slo Mo guys for stuff like this!
Would have been better if you would have used the same tip that pierced the Russian plate on the AR500. Can definitely see the difference in metal composition.
Pierce russian armour with high-quality instrumental steel cone, and USA armour prodused 70 year later with cone of crude steel?..
Wow, you really cool, pal, it's sooo fair competition... )))
You have very cool videos. what kind of track is playing at 4 minutes?
8:30 wow that changed genres really fast. Glad you're alright after that
it would have been even more epic if he trolled us by having the catastrophic failure happen while the countdown was still at like 4 or 5 💀 anyone standing in that room could have gotten shredded.
Pause and go to 3:25 put on 0.25% speed and tap tap the pause and zoom in to watch the crack propagate before the catastrophic failure. 😊
I saw it coming in real time, when it began to crack...that target is made out of some pretty tough stuff. a .50 cal bmg has a lot of muzzle energy and is pretty heavy for a bullet...especially AP tungsten core rounds.
Man, that AR500 is strong. Hence why it broke and didn’t deform much. The harder something becomes, the more likely it will break or shatter, but not bend.
It's more a property of metals than of materials in general. The more C you add the more hardness it gets, but more brittle too
Jeez dude you almost got me killed in Elden Ring, I had to rewind and watch the molten shrapnel shoot out again! haha
Edit: Dude that metal sphere that blew the brick up and sent it flying out to destroy the entire setup was unreal. I had to rewatch that a couple times. Love the videos comrade.
Not sure why; but I was dying laughing, to the point of tears, the last 2 minutes or so of the video. That was EPIC.
A bullet doesn't have the luxury of adding more energy to it after it hits it's target. All of the bullets energy has been spent before it leaves the barrel of the gun. A press has the ability to add more power as needed to the load after it makes contact. A bullet would have been stopped completely after the first plate shattered and since it doesn't have a huge resivoire of power that it can access after contacting the first plate. It would have stopped immediately !!!
The bullet’s energy is far from spent by the time it exits the gun barrel. Much of the kinetic energy of the exploding charge is transferred to the bullet, which expends a tiny bit of it via friction as it spins down the barrel. Most of the bullet’s kinetic energy is still intact as it leaves the barrel. A small amount of this energy is expended due to air friction. When the bullet hits the target and is eventually stopped, the remaining kinetic energy is transferred into the target material.
@@blindlemon9 the bullet starts to slow down as soon as it leaves the barrel and once it hits it's target, it doesn't have another shell casing full of powder to give it another push. That press can keep the pressure on until it blows a seal and it can add more as needed once it contacts the target. The bullet don't have that luxury. A bullet is like a hammer hitting the nail one time only. The press is like a hammer hitting the nail as many times as necessary to drive it all the way in.
If the energy was spent before it leaves the barrel the bullet would just fall on the floor.
@@pandafamily9879 what are you saying... there's a rocket engine attached to the slug ?? That would make it a rocket launcher. Not a firearm.
@@arthurgay5746 The _cartridge_ expends its energy driving the _bullet_ down the barrel.
The bullet leaves the barrel with some energy, and loses some of it to the air between it and whatever it hits.
If a 1 kg bullet going 1 km/s hits a 3 mm steel or titanium plate, it's not going to stop.
Lose some energy, yes, but once that plate's out of the way whatever energy the bullet has left is still in it and carries on into whatever's behind that plate.
If bullets couldn't hit more than one thing there wouldn't be quite as many people dying in changing rooms in the USA.
holy sh't, that one little steel part from 2010 is capable to broke all room☠️
Your music choice is the Chernobyl of UA-cam
It would be interesting to know where you got those samples of Russian and US armor from !
Great video! I’m curious if you would get a touch less thermometer to show the temp before/after the press… I’m interesting in the energy transfer!
I don't get it....why test soviet armour from 1940 and American from 2010
I'm guessing this is a Russian Channel. It would be fairly easy to find WW2 Soviet armor. It's not like they have old Sherman tanks in every small town park like we do. They likely have old T-34s for that.
Another problem is that Soviet tanks at the time were being slammed out as fast as humanly possible. That left little time for niceties like standardized tempering for armor. I would not be surprised if no tempering at all was done on most tanks. So any given bit of armor would not be representative of a whole or even of the tanks that was next to it on the assembly.
American Armor at the time was standardized, Soviets had a Nazi in the face problem that took up all of their time.
I think the key word here is "Clickbait Title".
He tested what he got at hand 😂
They're still probably recycling steel from WW2
I already thought that ball is sketchy...
I like how u hydraulic press metal things it’s satisfying
Keep it up❤
Why didn't you use a strain gauge? Have you explored active armour?
Love your Channel ❤❤❤❤
1947 versus 2010? No wonder!
Russia got that chineseium-titanium 😂
Strange that the US buy most of their Titanium from Russia !
На основании сравнительных испытания советской брони 1940 года под вольфрамовым наконечником и американской брони 2010 под стальным углеродистым наконечником (характерные повреждения наконечника) делается вывод о превосходстве американской брони.
Х.Ы. Американская танковая броня (название и марку не помню, искать сейчас в сети лениво) 35 мм., толщиной пробивалась бронебойной пулей из мосинки. Из мосинки калибром 7.62 мм.! Не из противотанкового ружья калибром 14.5 мм.
Очень предвзятый эксперимент. Вообще так эксперименты не ставят. Это идиотизм на видео.
What is the item being pressed into the armor made of?
Very interesting. Really enjoyed it.
I'm not surprised at all that the ar500 Target plate did so well in these tests because I have one of these half inch ar 500 targets that's about twice the size of that one, and my friend recently brought his AR-15 with green tip armor penetrating rounds to the range with me and hit my plate several times with it and it barely put more than a scratch on it like barely. Almost microscopic dimples in it. That ar500 steel that's pretty tough stuff.
Green tip is NOT armor penetrating. Not at all. It keeps the bullet moving in a straight line going through things that might deflect the bullet, like bushes and shrubs, window glass, or car doors. It adds a little weight to the tip of the bullet like you would add to the tip of a paper airplane. It's a little piece of steel, and yes, they call in a penetrator, but it's not armor piercing.
@@ChrisZuby that does make sense. That's just how I always heard it 🙂
Ну чувак, сравнил хер с пальцем!
well, the proverbial russian "dick" at this very moment is mostly some limp T-54s so the test is very accurate lol
Its "oh such fun" to tear things up! ...But tell us what any of this proves! Comparing 1940's Russian armor vs 2010's USA armor?? Really??
Veoma dobar,precizan,interesantan ali i skup video ❤
What was the material of the frozen ball at the end there? More tungsten? Or something more exotic? Inquiring minds want to know.
Typical clickbait propaganda with tiktok baity music
You might aswell say that a russian T-90 can destroy a sherman tank easy... because it's obvious it will, due to obsolete military advancements from last century xd
Cool visuals tho, but it's very misleading with that thumbnail and what the video attempts to show that USA armor is better when the comparison is not even fair to begin with.
I don't know what these "comparisons" are good for. The measurement methods are not suitable for the intended use of the materials.
For FUN.
It may not be “scientific “, but it is always interesting.😊
@@jeffking4176 In this case it make sense 😉
Clickbait title much?
Yup it worked on all of us. That's always the best part of going down the UA-cam rabbit hole.
@@mebobtheone you surely mean the worst part, why in the world would you like clickbait?
@@DCresident123 No not at all. I use the term in the context of just clicking on whatever I might enjoy while going down the YT rabbit hole.
I read a lot of the comments but I still don't know what the sphere (frozen? why?) was made out of? That's the biggest question by far after watching this. Anyone? Thanks. 🙏🏻
On those slow presses, is the titanium plating hot afterward?
Jeez
What is the cone made of?
Nokia 3310
@@franck3279 xD
the cones were made in China....but I want to know what that ball is made of. Probably vibranium or adamantium or something from the MCU...it's gotta be forged from a dead dwarf star.
Inconscientemente me quería correr del celular porque sabía que iba a explotar jajaja saludos desde argentina
El algoritmo y los vídeos de baterías en llamas y chinos en ascensores prendiéndose fuego me trajo aquí tbn xD
The theme of the video, the method of its verification, and everything about it is just a bunch of nonsense, and nothing about it is correct.
At the very least, if they had reproduced the phenomenon in an area that behaves as a pseudo-fluid due to inertial compression, the video would have been a little more in line with the theme.
It is a complete mistake. ;-(
I think that that is a bit harsh. Seeing the consequences for the different materials under pressure was interesting. The areas that could be improved involved being more consistent with revealing the pressures at the point of failure in every case, using a fresh sample when changing the set ups and giving specific details about the most relevant material properties involved in compressive strength...such as hardness, brittle onset, ductility loss with increased hardness, influence of martensitic structure et al.!
Still don't know what the sphere was made of... and as for the music > turn down the volume! Overall enjoyed the content!
I think you missed the point of this channel. Nobody’s testing ballistic armor vs bullets. They’re testing ballistic armor against a 100T press.
The guy wants to play with his press , has nothing to do with science or fair assessment.
This might be the best video on yt...
What was the Russian armor designed to stop, in 1940?
For a eaqual and fair comparision you have to take also US Tank steel from 1940., not todays standard...
the music doesn't make sense
It makes complete sense.
It means the maker of the video is an idiot.
Damn that AR500 is hard!
What was that last test ? Thanks for the video.
Last one was crazy! It first looked like nothing happened at the focal point, but everything around it exploded. This is a good example why you should not do things like this without protection, or don't be around it.
When you have to add music, you admit that the video is boring.
No, when you have to add shitty music, you admit that you have shitty taste in music.
Boffofem
That AR 500 said “ is that all you got boy?”
In any case, the United States is always depicted as the best... even though the reality is empty🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Como las películas de Hollywood, donde siempre por casualidad los mejores en absolutamente todos los aspectos, a nivel mundial, son los estadounidenses. ¡Qué objetivos que son!
Mucha película de holliwoo
Maybe they should make the armor out of the same thing they made the hydraulic press tip from 😂
Your hydrolic push and base have very strong material. What material is those?
Had to mute it....
Ok 😊.
In the Russian steel armor How did you get 450 tons from nearly 6000 psi???? The correct ton-force that is equivalent to 6000 psi is actually about 2.68 ton force
At a 36 cm diameter ram, the 40 MPa reading would give roughly 450 tons of force.
That music is horrible. I think the world tilted off its axis on that last one.
I tried to explain Mithril or enchanted armor over steel armor to a senior IBM staffer. He did not understand why swords bent, dulled, or notched. Then again his DNA was only 98 % human.
Even if AR-500 shattered it was still very impressive. Good Video.