Centrifuge experiment and numerical analysis of an air-backed plate subjected to underwater shock loading

Abstract

In this study, systematic centrifuge experiments and numerical studies are conducted to investigate the effect of shock loads due to an underwater explosion on the dynamic responses of an air-backed steel plate. Numerical simulations with three different models of pressure time history generated by underwater explosion were carried out. The first model of pressure time history was measured in test. The second model to predict the time history of shock wave pressure from an underwater explosion was created by Cole in 1948. Coefficients of Cole’s formulas are determined experimentally. The third model was developed by Zamyshlyaev and Yakovlev in 1973. All of them are implemented into the numerical model to calculate the shock responses of the plate. Simulated peak strains obtained from the three models are compared with the experimental results, yielding average relative differences of 21.39%, 45.73%, and 13.92%, respectively. The Russell error technique is used to quantitatively analyze the correlation between the numerical and experimental results. Quantitative analysis shows that the simulated strains for most measurement points on the steel plate are acceptable. By changing the scaled distances, different shock impulses were obtained and exerted on the steel plate. Systematic numerical studies are performed to investigate the effect of the accumulated shock impulse on the peak strains. The numerical and experimental results suggest that the peak strains are strongly dependent on the accumulated shock impulse.

Keywords

underwater explosion / centrifuge experiment / shock load / dynamic response / accumulated shock impulse

References

[1] Kirkwood J G, Bethe H A. Basic Propagation Theory. OSRD, 1942, 588–595

[2] Cole R H. Underwater Explosions. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1948

[3] Keil A H. The Response of Ships to Underwater Explosions. Washington D.C.: David Taylor Model Basin, 1961

[4] Reid W D. The Response of Surface Ships to Underwater Explosions. Defence Science and Technology Organization Canberra, 1996

[5] Jin Q K, Ding G Y. A finite element analysis of ship sections subjected to underwater explosion. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2011, 38(7): 558–566

[6] Rabczuk T, Gracie R, Song J H, Belytschko T. Immersed particle method for fluid-structure interaction. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2010, 81(1): 48–71

[7] Vu-Bac N, Lahmer T, Zhuang X Y, Nguyen-Thoi T, Rabczuk T. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Software, 2016, 100: 19–31

[8] Kwon Y W, Cunningham R E. Comparison of USA-DYNA finite element models for a stiffened shell subject to underwater shock. Computers & Structures, 1998, 66(1): 127–144

[9] Gong S W, Lam K Y. Transient response of floating composite ship section subjected to underwater shock. Composite Structures, 1999, 46(1): 65–71

[10] Zhang A M, Zhou W X, Wang S P, Feng L H. Dynamic response of the non-contact underwater explosions on naval equipment. Marine Structures, 2011, 24(4): 396–411

[11] Schiffer A, Tagarielli V L. The dynamic response of composite plates to underwater blast: Theoretical and numerical modelling. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2014, 70: 1–13

[12] Shin Y S. Ship shock modeling and simulation for far-field underwater explosion. Computers & Structures, 2004, 82(23–26): 2211–2219

[13] LeBlanc J, Shukla A. Dynamic response and damage evolution in composite materials subjected to underwater explosive loading: An experimental and computational study. Composite Structures, 2010, 92(10): 2421–2430

[14] LeBlanc J, Shukla A. Dynamic response of curved composite panels to underwater explosive loading: Experimental and computational comparisons. Composite Structures, 2011, 93(11): 3072–3081

[15] Kwon Y W, Fox P K. Underwater shock response of a cylinder subjected to a side-on explosion. Computers & Structures, 1993, 48(4): 637–646

[16] Cichocki K. Effects of underwater blast loading on structures with protective elements. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 1999, 22(6): 609–617

[17] Zong Z, Zhao Y, Li H T. A numerical study of whole ship structural damage resulting from close-in underwater explosion shock. Marine Structures, 2013, 31: 24–43

[18] Arora H, Del Linz P, Dear J P. Damage and deformation in composite sandwich panels exposed to multiple and single explosive blasts. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2017, 104: 95–106

[19] Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. A three-dimensional large deformation meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(29–30): 2777–2799

[20] Rabczuk T, Areias P M A, Belytschko T. A meshfree thin shell method for non-linear dynamic fracture. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2007, 72(5): 524–548

[21] Rabczuk T, Zi G, Bordas S, Nguyen-Xuan H. A simple and robust three-dimensional cracking-particle method without enrichment. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(37–40): 2437–2455

[22] Hamdia K M, Silani M, Zhuang X Y, He P F, Rabczuk T. Stochastic analysis of the fracture toughness of polymeric nanoparticle composites using polynomial chaos expansions. International Journal of Fracture, 2017, 206(2): 215–227

[23] Hamdia K M, Ghasemi H, Zhuang X Y, Alajlan N, Rabczuk T. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for flexoelectric nanostructures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2018, 337: 95–109

[24] De A, Zimmie T F. Centrifuge modeling of surface blast effects on underground structures. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 2007, 30(5): 427–431

[25] Hung C F, Lin B J, Hwang-Fuu J J, Hsu P Y. Dynamic response of cylindrical shell structures subjected to underwater explosion. Ocean Engineering, 2009, 36(8): 564–577

[26] Li J, Rong J L. Experimental and numerical investigation of the dynamic response of structures subjected to underwater explosion. European Journal of Mechanics-B/Fluids, 2012, 32: 59–69

[27] Ramajeyathilagam K, Vendhan C P, Rao V B. Non-linear transient dynamic response of rectangular plates under shock loading. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2000, 24(10): 999–1015

[28] Ramajeyathilagam K, Vendhan C P. Deformation and rupture of thin rectangular plates subjected to underwater shock. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2004, 30(6): 699–719

[29] Rajendran R, Narasimhan K. Linear elastic shock response of plane plates subjected to underwater explosion. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2001, 25(5): 493–506

[30] Hung C F, Hsu P Y, Hwang-Fuu J J. Elastic shock response of an air-backed plate to underwater explosion. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2005, 31(2): 151–168

[31] Kutter B L, O’Leary L M, Thompson P Y, Lather R. Gravity-scaled tests on blast-induced soil-structure interaction. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1988, 114(4): 431–447

[32] Plizzari G, Waggoner F, Saouma V E. Centrifuge modeling and analysis of concrete gravity dams. Journal of Structural Engineering, 1995, 121(10): 1471–1479

[33] Snay H G. The scaling of underwater explosion phenomena. White Oak, MD: Naval Ordnance Lab,1962

[34] Hu J, Chen Z Y, Zhang X D, Wei Y Q, Liang X Q, Liang J H, Ma G W, Wang Q S, Long Y. Underwater explosion in centrifuge part I: Validation and calibration of scaling laws. Science China. Technological Sciences, 2017, 60(11): 1638–1657

[35] Vanadit-Ellis W, Davis L K. Physical modeling of concrete gravity dam vulnerability to explosions. In: Waterside Security Conference (WSS). Carrara, 2010: 1–11

[36] Song G, Chen Z Y, Long Y, Zhong M S, Wu J Y. Experimental and numerical investigation of the centrifugal model for underwater explosion shock wave and bubble pulsation. Ocean Engineering, 2017, 142: 523–531

[37] Long Y, Zhou H Y, Liang X Q, Song G, Chen Z Y, Hu J, Wang Q S, Zhang X D, Liang J H, Huang Z J. Underwater explosion in centrifuge Part II: Dynamic responses of defensive steel plate. Science China. Technological Sciences, 2017, 60(12): 1941–1957

[38] Zamyshlyaev B V, Yakovlev Y S. Dynamic Loads in Underwater Explosion. Naval Intelligence Support Center Washington D. C. Translation Div, 1973

[39] Zhang Z H, Wang Y, Zhang L J, Yuan J H, Zhao H F. Similarity research of anomalous dynamic response of ship girder subjected to near field underwater explosion. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 2011, 32(12): 1491–1504

[40] Zong Z, Zhao Y J, Zou L. Numerical Computation for Structural Damages of Underwater Explosion. Beijing: Science Press, 2014 (in Chinese)

[41] Yao X L, Zhang A M, Xu W J. Application of coupled acoustic-structural analysis to warship underwater explosion. Journal of Harbin Engineering University, 2005, 26(6): 707–712 (in Chinese)

[42] Xu Y G, Zong Z, Li H T. Numerical analysis of structure response due to the combined effects of underwater explosion shock wave and bubble pulse. Chinese Journal of Ship Research, 2011, 6(3): 8–11 (in Chinese)

[43] Russell D M. Error measures for comparing transient data: Part I: development of a comprehensive error measure. In: Proceedings of the 68th Shock and Vibration Symposium. Hunt Valley, MD, 1997, 175–184

[44] Lee A S, Kim B O, Kim Y C. A finite element transient response analysis method of a rotor-bearing system to base shock excitations using the state-space Newmark scheme and comparisons with experiments. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2006, 297(3–5): 595–615

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the State Key Program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51339006).

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2019 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature