Skip to content
CFD Simulation

CFD Simulation

Analyze & Simulate anything !

  • Home
  • Simulation gallery
    • Spray Dryers : All studies
    • Case Studies
      • Covid-19 pandemic
      • Covid 19 – Keeping indoors safe
      • Covid-19 Dispersion Model
      • Surfside Champlain Towers
    • Learn Solid & Fluid Analysis
      • CFD of a Butterfly Valve
    • Human Space Flight
      • Space Shuttle CFD
      • Aircraft Aerodynamics Performance
      • Space Exploration
      • Rocket Science
  • CFD Tube gallery
    • Flow Simulation TCAE
      • Centrifugal Pump
      • Centrifugal Fan Optimization
      • Potsdam Propeller
    • Football
      • Simulation of head kick in football/ soccer
    • Simulation and Analysis of Car Crash
      • Dummy without seatbelt impacting airbag
      • Static Structural Simulation of a teleferic or telpher cable car
      • Car braking with dummy under 3 point seatbelt at 150g deceleration
      • Car bumper impacting hip on 2 directions at 36 km/h
      • Heavy truck impacting a concrete barrier
      • Static Structural Simulation of a teleferic or telpher cable car
      • Truck with loose cargo brakes with 100g deceleration
    • Covid 19 – Gama Platform
    • Brain and Blast Injuries
    • Nuclear Blast CFD Simulation
    • Spaced Armor Penetration
    • Armor Penetration Simulation
      • Ultra Porcelain Armor
      • Explaining mechanics – Armor penetration
      • Energetic Reactive Armor
      • Javelin Simulation
      • Concrete Armor | M4A3
      • Concrete Armor Comparison
      • Merkava I vs T-72A
        • Defeating Modern Armor
    • Anti Tank Simulation
      • 80mm Mortar grenade
      • RP-3 ROCKET vs TIGER
      • 152mm HE vs Tiger II
      • Panzer IV F2 vs Valentine V
      • T-72 vs M1 Abrams
      • T34 | Combat Analysis
      • T90 Third Generation Russian Tank
      • Multiple Impact Simulation
    • Hydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
      • Electric Turbo Innovation
  • Modeling and Computational Simulation
    • Simulation of Car Crash
    • Electrochemical Energy Storage
      • Lithium-sulfur batteries
      • Metal-Air batteries
      • Na based batteries
      • Supercapacitors
    • Covid-19 pandemic
  • FEA & CFD – MESH GALLERY
    • Catfish Drone CFD Simulation
    • CFD Analysis of Football
    • Computational Fliud dynamics
    • Cyclone Simulation
    • Eiffel tower CFD Simulation
    • Flow Simulation Ship Propeller
    • GRIDPRO
    • M113 – Combat Vehicle Mesh for FEA
    • Milling & Turning – CNC
    • NUSCALE POWER PLANT MESH
    • Patriot Car Bumper
    • University of Munich – Research & Methods
      • Gallery – CFD –
      • Tangible CFD
    • Unmanned Combat Vehicle Mesh
  • Human Health
    • EMBRYO TRANSFER
      • Outcome Measures
      • Ectopic and Early Pregnancy Loss
    • CFD SIMULATION SAVES LIVES
    • Virtual Surgery CFD Study
      • Glosary
    • Normozoospermia
    • Sperm Motility Scores
  • Submarine
    • CFD of Submarines
  • R&D – Innovation
    • Capabilities
    • Current
    • Past
    • Future
  • Armor Penetration
  • #CFD Simulation
  • #CFD Tube
  • #CFD learn
  • #CFD Simulation
  • E-mail
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Get free meshing and request for Quote
  • User
  • Login
    • Password Reset
  • Register
  • Logout
  • Jobs
  • Toggle search form
Panzer IV F2 vs Valentine V | Armor Penetration Simulation | 7.5cm Pzgr 39

Panzer IV F2 vs Valentine V | Armor Penetration Simulation | 7.5cm Pzgr 39

Posted on May 7, 2022September 15, 2023 By mechalab761691 2 Comments on Panzer IV F2 vs Valentine V | Armor Penetration Simulation | 7.5cm Pzgr 39

In this simulation, you’re comparing the penetration capability of a Panzer IV Ausf F2 tank firing a 7.5cm Pzgr 39 APCBC projectile at a Valentine Mk V tank with 50mm angled armor at 56 degrees. The key factors here are the projectile’s characteristics and the armor’s properties.

The Panzer IV Ausf F2 was equipped with the 7.5cm KwK 40 gun, which fired the 7.5cm Pzgr 39 APCBC (Armor-Piercing Capped Ballistic Cap) projectile at a muzzle velocity of 740 m/s. The APCBC design combined a hard penetrator core with a capped ballistic cap to improve penetration capabilities.

The Valentine Mk V had 50mm of armor, which was angled at 56 degrees. The effective thickness of armor against a penetrating projectile is calculated by dividing the armor thickness by the cosine of the angle. In this case, the effective armor thickness would be 50 mm / cos(56 degrees) ≈ 102 mm.

Popular Stories Right now
EXPLOSIONS AND FIRE AT SPRAY DRYING LOCATION
RUSSIAN TANK IN BATTLE – FEA ANALYSIS –
AI – More about Mechalab Limited

To determine whether the 7.5cm Pzgr 39 APCBC projectile can penetrate this effective armor thickness, you can compare its penetration capabilities with the armor’s effective thickness.

Penetration capability can be estimated using various armor penetration models, such as the one developed by the German engineer Ferdinand Rausenberger:

Penetration = (Projectile Mass × Velocity^2) / (Armor Thickness × Density)

Given:

  • Projectile Mass = 6.8 kg
  • Velocity = 740 m/s
  • Armor Thickness (effective) = 102 mm (0.102 m)
  • Density of Steel ≈ 7850 kg/m³

Plugging in these values:

Penetration = (6.8 kg × (740 m/s)^2) / (0.102 m × 7850 kg/m³)
Penetration ≈ 163.6 mm

The estimated penetration of the 7.5cm Pzgr 39 APCBC projectile is approximately 163.6 mm, which is greater than the effective armor thickness of the Valentine Mk V’s angled armor (102 mm). Therefore, the 7.5cm Pzgr 39 APCBC projectile fired from the Panzer IV Ausf F2 would likely penetrate the angled side armor of the Valentine Mk V tank at a distance of 700 meters.

Anti Tank Simulation, CFD Tube gallery, Panzer IV F2 vs Valentine V

Post navigation

Previous Post: T-72 vs M1 Abrams | Armor Penetration Simulation | NERA
Next Post: Finite Element Analysis and Computational Fluid Dynamic Mesh – Explore the topic

More Related Articles

T-72 vs M1 Abrams | Armor Penetration Simulation | NERA T-72 vs M1 Abrams | Armor Penetration Simulation | NERA Anti Tank Simulation
Potsdam Propeller CFD Benchmark Potsdam Propeller CFD Benchmark CFD Tube gallery
Energetic Reactive Armor Armor Penetration Simulation
World of Tanks World of Tanks – Explaining mechanics Armor Penetration Simulation
Volcano Simulation – Phoenix Fluid Simulation CFD Tube gallery
Exemple de visualisation de COMOKIT, dans laquelle sont comparés les impacts, en terme de propagation du virus, de la proportion d’individus portant des masques (cas d’étude de la commune de Son Loi, Vinh Phuc, Vietnam) : CFD Tube gallery

Comments (2) on “Panzer IV F2 vs Valentine V | Armor Penetration Simulation | 7.5cm Pzgr 39”

  1. donate for ukraine says:
    July 3, 2022 at 4:21 am

    Good post. I definitely love this site. Stick with it!
    donate for ukraine

    Log in to Reply
  2. donate for ukraine says:
    July 4, 2022 at 9:38 pm

    I like the valuable information you provide on your articles.

    I’ll bookmark your blog and check again right here regularly.
    I’m moderately certain I will learn plenty of new stuff proper right here!
    Best of luck for the following! donate for ukraine

    Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

About Mechalab

Mechalab Limited is a UK-registered company trading in England and Wales. By Post : Mechalab Ltd 49 Station road - BN26 6EA Polegate - East Sussex - United Kingdom Phone : 07 342 212 398

By email : info@mechalab.co.uk

Copyright © 2026 CFD Simulation.

Powered by PressBook Blog WordPress theme