Strawboard has been utilised as a fragmentation capture material since the 1960s, mainly employed to capture fragments from explosives and explosive devices from arena trials of munitions. As this material has historically been calibrated to a known standard, it has a proven record of allowing research establishments to ascertain the velocity of a fragment based on the depth of penetration of the strawboard. During the time of calibration, strawboard was used as a common building material which was both widely available and relatively affordable; however, due to the recent economic crisis and geopolitical supply issues, this is no longer the case. Building on initial testing, this paper investigates alternatives to strawboard to determine if a cheaper, more readily available material can be used instead. The alternatives are compared and judged based on the NATO ARSP-03 guideline for capture material which includes metrics such as price and attainability, as well as assessing environmental impact and its ability to be used as a viable alternative to strawboard in an explosive environment. Based on these NATO guidelines, explosive fragmentation and ballistic experiments were conducted, and ten materials were tested based on the following criteria: Handling, Density, Flammability, Calibration, Cost and Availability. Medium Density Fibreboard (MDF) was found to be a suitable alternative to strawboard. The data demonstrates that it provides the same capture performance as strawboard at approximately a quarter of the cost and is far more readily available. Other materials also showed potential and further testing should be undertaken to validate these materials as alternatives to MDF.

自 20 世纪 60 年代以来，Strawboard 一直被用作碎片捕获材料，主要用于捕获弹药试验场中爆炸物和爆炸装置的碎片。由于这种材料历史上已经按照已知标准进行了校准，因此它具有允许研究机构根据吸管板的穿透深度确定碎片速度的良好记录。在校准期间，草板被用作一种常见的建筑材料，既广泛可用，又相对便宜；然而，由于最近的经济危机和地缘政治供应问题，情况已不再如此。在初步测试的基础上，本文研究了草板的替代品，以确定是否可以使用更便宜、更容易获得的材料来代替。根据北约 ARSP-03 捕获材料指南对替代品进行比较和判断，其中包括价格和可实现性等指标，以及评估环境影响及其在爆炸性环境中用作草板的可行替代品的能力。根据这些北约准则，进行了爆炸碎片和弹道实验，并根据以下标准对十种材料进行了测试：处理、密度、可燃性、校准、成本和可用性。中密度纤维板（MDF）被发现是稻草板的合适替代品。数据表明，它提供了与稻草板相同的捕获性能，而成本约为稻草板的四分之一，而且更容易获得。其他材料也显示出潜力，应进行进一步测试以验证这些材料作为中密度纤维板的替代品。