Underwater blast loading of partially submerged sandwich composite materials in relation to air blast loading response

被引:3
|
作者
Rolfe E. [1 ]
Quinn R. [1 ]
Irven G. [1 ,2 ]
Brick D. [3 ]
Dear J.P. [1 ]
Arora H. [4 ]
机构
[1] Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial College London, London
[2] FAC Technology, 53 Lydden Grove, Wandsworth, London
[3] Radnor Range Ltd, 11 Broadaxe Business Park, Presteigne
[4] Zienkiewicz Centre for Computational Engineering, College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
Air blast; Composite sandwich panel; Digital image correlation; Hybrid composite; Underwater blast;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijlmm.2020.06.003
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The research presented in this paper focusses on the underwater blast resilience of a hybrid composite sandwich panel, consisting of both glass-fibre and carbon-fibre. The hybrid fibres were selected to optimise strength and stiffness during blast loading by promoting fibre interactions. In the blast experiment, the aim was to capture full-field panel deflection during large-scale underwater blast using high-speed 3D Digital Image Correlation (DIC). The composite sandwich panel was partially submerged and subjected to a 1 kg PE7 charge at 1 m stand-off. The charge was aligned with the centre of the panel at a depth of 275 mm and mimicked the effect of a near-field subsurface mine. The DIC deflection data shows that the horizontal cross-section of the panel deforms in a parabolic shape until excessive deflection causes core shear cracking. The panel then forms the commonly observed “bathtub” deformation shape. DIC data highlighted the expected differences in initial conditions compared to air-blast experiments, including the pre-strains caused by the mass of water (hydrostatic pressure). Furthermore, water depth was shown to significantly influence panel deflection, strain and hence damage sustained under these conditions. Panel deformations and damage after blast was progressively more severe in regions deeper underwater, as pressures were higher and decayed slower compared to regions near the free surface. An identical hybrid composite sandwich panel was subjected to air blast; one panel underwent two 8 kg PE7 charges in succession at 8 m stand-off. DIC was also implemented to record the panel deformations during air blast. The air and underwater blast tests represent two different regimes of blast loading: one far-field in air and one near-field underwater. The difference in deflection development, caused by the differing fluid mediums and stand-off distances, is apparent from the full-field results. During underwater blast the panel underwent peak pressure loading of approximately 52.6 MPa whilst during air blast the panel was subjected to 67.7 kPa followed by 68.9 kPa peak pressure loads in succession. The two experiments demonstrate the response of the same hybrid composite sandwich panel under two differing blast regimes. The post-blast damage and strength of the hybrid panels following air and underwater blasts were evaluated. Post-blast testing revealed that the underwater blast causes significantly more damage compared to air blast, particularly debonding between the skins and core. The air blast panel sustains no visible rear skin/core debonding, whereas 13 regions of rear-face debonds are identified on the underwater blast panel. Sustaining no front-skin breakage was advantageous for retaining a high proportion of the compressive modulus for this hybrid layup following underwater blast. Damage mechanisms were interrelated. Determining the most detrimental type is not straightforward in real explosive and non-idealised experiments, however debonding was understandably shown to be significant. A further study to isolate failure modes and improve in situ instrumentation is ongoing. © 2020 The Authors
引用
收藏
页码:387 / 402
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] The comparison of various foam polymer types in composite sandwich panels subjected to full scale air blast loading
    Kelly, Mark
    Arora, Hari
    Dear, John P.
    INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON DYNAMIC RESPONSE AND FAILURE OF COMPOSITE MATERIALS (DRAF2014), 2014, 88 : 48 - 53
  • [42] Silos structural response to blast loading
    Temsah, Yehya
    Jahami, Ali
    Aouad, Charles
    ENGINEERING STRUCTURES, 2021, 243
  • [43] Response of tunnels due to blast loading
    Prasanna, R.
    Boominathan, A.
    GEOTECHNICAL ASPECTS OF UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION IN SOFT GROUND, 2014, : 235 - 238
  • [44] Briefing: The response of glazing to blast loading
    Morison, Colin
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS-ENGINEERING AND COMPUTATIONAL MECHANICS, 2013, 166 (03) : 128 - 131
  • [45] Response of Material Under Blast Loading
    Schleh, Dan
    Li, Guojing
    Liu, Dahsin
    DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF MATERIALS, VOL 1, 2016, : 185 - 190
  • [46] Modification of air blast loading transmission by foams and high density materials
    Gelfand, B. E.
    Silnikov, M. V.
    Chernyshov, M. V.
    SHOCK WAVES, VOL 1, PROCEEDINGS, 2009, : 103 - +
  • [47] Investigation of Head Response to Blast Loading
    Lockhart, Philip
    Cronin, Duane
    Williams, Kevin
    Ouellet, Simon
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMA-INJURY INFECTION AND CRITICAL CARE, 2011, 70 (02): : E29 - E36
  • [48] Experiments on curved sandwich panels under blast loading
    Shen, Jianhu
    Lu, Guoxing
    Wang, Zhihua
    Zhao, Longmao
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPACT ENGINEERING, 2010, 37 (09) : 960 - 970
  • [49] LAMINATED AND SANDWICH PANELS SUBJECT TO BLAST PULSE LOADING
    Icardi, Ugo
    Ferrero, Laura
    JOURNAL OF MECHANICS OF MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES, 2009, 4 (09) : 1573 - 1594
  • [50] The response of clamped sandwich plates with metallic foam cores to simulated blast loading
    Radford, DD
    McShane, GJ
    Deshpande, VS
    Fleck, NA
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES, 2006, 43 (7-8) : 2243 - 2259