logo

SCIENCE CHINA Technological Sciences, Volume 59 , Issue 9 : 1360-1369(2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-016-0263-4

Study on dynamic response of multi-body structure under explosive driving

More info
  • ReceivedApr 7, 2016
  • AcceptedJun 16, 2016
  • PublishedAug 15, 2016

Abstract

In this study, a complex multi-body structure was proposed, and the mechanism for the dynamic response of the structure under explosive driving was investigated by using the Lagrange equations of the second kind. An initial value subject to explosion loading was analyzed to develop the theoretical model of the dynamic response, and the centroid trajectory of three different structural shapes was solved. To verify the accuracy of the theoretical model, numerical simulation via finite element analysis within LS-DYNA and a dynamic experiment were conducted, and the consistent dynamic response process of the multi-body structure was obtained. In addition, the dynamic response time of the multi-body structure under different explosion loading conditions was calculated by the theoretical model, numerical simulation, and experimental investigation. It was found that the increased opening charge mass reduces the dynamic response time.


Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11372046, 11521062)


References

[1] The Newsroom of Encyclopedia of China Publishing House . Encyclopedia of China (Mechanics). Beijing: Encyclopedia of China Publishing House. 1985, Google Scholar

[2] Zhou T Q. The Dynamics of Explosion and Its Use. Hefei: Press of University of Science and Technology of China. 2001, Google Scholar

[3] Gurney R W. The initial velocities of fragments from bombs, Shell, Grenades. 1943. Google Scholar

[4] Jonas A Z. High Velocity Impact Dynamics. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1990. 752‒766. Google Scholar

[5] Jonas A Z, William P W. Explosive Effects and Applications. New York: Springer. 2002, : 221-257 Google Scholar

[6] Sun C W, Wei Y Z, Zhou Z K. The Application of Detonation Physics. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press. 2000, : 574-580 Google Scholar

[7] Sun C W, Wen S G, Zhao F. An optimal analysis of multi-stage explosive accelerated high velocity flyers with the improved Gurney model. Explo Shock Waves, 2004, 24: 299-304 Google Scholar

[8] Aziz A K, Hurwitz H, Sternberg H M. Energy transfer to a rigid piston under detonation loadings. Phys Fluids, 1961, 4: 380-384 CrossRef Google Scholar

[9] Kiselev V V. Estimation of the parameters of metal plates propelled by the sliding detonation of charges of condensed explosives in the initial phase of the process. Combust Explo Shock Waves, 1995, 31: 134-137 CrossRef Google Scholar

[10] Lim S. Acceleration profile of a flat flyer driven by detonation isentrope. Propell Explos Pyrot, 2013, 38: 410-418 CrossRef Google Scholar

[11] Tan D W, Sun C W, Wang Y P. The motion of an incompressible rigid viscous plastic cylinder driven by detonation products of explosives. Explo Shock Waves, 2000, 20: 348-352 Google Scholar

[12] Wang D S, Han C S. Delay in explosive detonation research of metal circular tube broken under the action of time. In: The 5th National Conference on Detonation and Shock Dynamics. 1997, Google Scholar

[13] Zhang S W, Hua J S, Liu C L, et al. A numerical simulation of the metallic tube expansion induced by inside head-on hitting two detonation waves. Explo Shock Waves, 2004, 24: 219-225 Google Scholar

[14] Chen J, Sun C W, Pu Z M, et al. Expansion of metallic tubes driven by detonation product behind two head-on colliding detonation waves. Explo Shock Waves, 2003, 23: 229-232 Google Scholar

[15] Singh M, Suneja H R, Bola M S, et al. Dynamic tensile deformation and fracture of metal cylinders at high strain rates. Int J Impact Eng, 2002, 27: 939-954 CrossRef Google Scholar

[16] Elsayed M A, Neuber A A, Dickens J C, et al. An explosively driven high-power microwave pulsed power system. Rev Sci Instrum, 2012, 83: 024705-11 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Buttler W T, Oro D M, Mariam F G, et al. Explosively driven two- shockwave tools with applications. J Phys Conf Ser, 2014. 99‒106. Google Scholar

[18] Yu S, Meguid S A. Multiphysics modeling and characterization of explosively loaded aluminum blocks. Acta Mech, 2016, 227: 707-720 CrossRef Google Scholar

[19] Xin H J, Wang H, Wu T H, et al. Dynamics simulation of a profiled rod after detonation flying against air resistance. Explo Shock Waves, 2015, 35: 541-546 Google Scholar

[20] Jiang H Y, Wang S S, Wei J F, et al. Explosive dispersal of solid and liquid media: Experimental investigation. Explo Shock Waves, 2014, 34: 574-579 Google Scholar

[21] Yuan S H, Wen S G, Li P, et al. Simulation of free surface particle velocity of flyer under the strong detonation drive. Explo Shock Waves, 2015, 35: 197-202 Google Scholar

[22] Wu C Q, Hao H, Lu Y. Dynamic response and damage analysis of masonry structures and masonry infilled RC frames to blast ground motion. Eng Struct, 2005, 27: 323-333 CrossRef Google Scholar

[23] Berg V, Stofleth J H, Preece D S, et al. Analysis of dynamic loadings of a simple structure to a blast wave. In: ASME 2002 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2002. 219‒225. Google Scholar

[24] Lu Y, Wang Z, Chong K. A comparative study of buried structure in soil subjected to blast load using 2D and 3D numerical simulations. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 2005, 25: 275-288 CrossRef Google Scholar

[25] Johnstonl J. Modeling and analysis of structural dynamics for a one-tenth scale model NGST sunshield. In: 19th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference Anaheim CA USA. 2001, Google Scholar

[26] Smalley K B, Tinker M L, Taylor W S. Structural modeling of a five-meter thin film inflatable antenna/concentrator. J Spacecr Rockets, 2002, 40: 27-29 Google Scholar

[27] Matthew J C, Hamid R H. Dynamics of a 4×6-meter thin film elliptical inflated membrane for space applications. In: 43rd Structures Structural Dynamics and Materials Con Denver Colorado. 2002, Google Scholar

[28] Mei F X, Zhou J P, Shui X P. Engineering Mechanics (Volume two). 1st ed. Beijing: Higher Education Press. 2003, Google Scholar

[29] Chen L S, Wang Y L. Rigid multi-body dynamics. Harbin: Harbin Engineering University Press. 1995, Google Scholar

[30] Huang Z L. System control calculation and MATLAB simulation. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press. 2001, Google Scholar

[31] Sui S Y, Wang S S. Terminal Effects. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press. 2000, Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    Diagram of multibody structure. (a) Circle; (b) triangle; (c) polygon.

  • Figure 2

    Space general position of main body.

  • Figure 3

    Diagram of detonation driving.

  • Figure 4

    (Color online) Centroid trajectory with various shapes of the main body. (a) c1; (b) c2.

  • Figure 5

    (Color online) Centroid trajectory with various dimensions of the main body. (a) c1; (b) c2.

  • Figure 6

    (Color online) Multibody structure. (a) Simulation model; (b) experimental structure.

  • Figure 7

    (Color online) Equipment of experiment. (a) Experimental structure; (b) blower; (c) camera.

  • Figure 8

    Diagram of experimental layout. (a) Top view; (b) front view.

  • Figure 9

    (Color online) Comparison of the centroid trajectories by the three methods. (a) t = 3 ms; (b) t = 6 ms; (c) t = 9 ms; (d) t = 12 ms.

  • Figure 10

    (Color online) Dynamic response process of main body. (a1)‒(a3) t = 3 ms; (b1)‒(b3) t = 7 ms; (c1)‒(c3) t = 9 ms; (d1)‒(d3) t = 12 ms; (a1), (b1), (c1), (d1) theoretical result; (a2), (b2), (c2), (d2) simulation result; (a3), (b3), (c3), (d3) experimental result.

  • Figure 11

    (Color online) Variation curves of evolution angles. (a) θ; (b) φ.

  • Figure 12

    (Color online) Variation curves of angular velocity. (a) ω1; (b) ω2.

  • Figure 13

    (Color online) Final state of experimental structure.

  • Table 1   Material properties of metal

    Part

    Material

    ρ(g cm−3)

    E(GPa)

    ν

    σs(GPa)

    G(GPa)

    Main body

    LY12

    2.71

    70

    0.33

    0.275

    25.9

    Joint

    Steel

    7.85

    207

    0.27

    0.375

    76.3

  • Table 2   Material properties of opening charge[31]

    ρ(g cm−3)

    pCJ(GPa)

    A (Mbar)

    B (Mbar)

    R1

    R2

    ω

    1.85

    28.4

    5.2

    0.07

    4.6

    1.3

    0.38

  • Table 3   Parameters of experimental setup

    Distance between camera and multi-body structure S (m)

    Ground distance of multi-body structure H (m)

    Diameter of support cylinder d (cm)

    Dimension of backdrop

    A (m)

    B (m)

    10

    1

    10

    2

    2

  • Table 4   Angle result with various times

    Time (ms)

    Matlab

    LS-DYNA

    Experiment

    θ (°)

    φ (°)

    θ (°)

    φ (°)

    θ (°)

    φ (°)

    t=0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    t=1

    14

    2.78

    10.56

    2.9

    8.44

    4.9

    t=2

    27.58

    6.02

    21.65

    6

    18.05

    7.14

    t=3

    40.22

    10.35

    33.17

    9

    28.21

    11.8

    t=4

    51.74

    15.63

    44.91

    12.2

    39.52

    18.4

    t=5

    61.94

    21.78

    56.24

    16.49

    50.69

    25.57

    t=6

    70.66

    28.73

    66.43

    22.46

    60.85

    32.82

    t=7

    77.81

    36.46

    75.47

    29.82

    68.79

    39.27

    t=8

    83.34

    44.9

    83.04

    38.6

    76.04

    50.45

    t=9

    87.21

    54.4

    88.67

    49.43

    80.82

    61.05

    t=10

    89.4

    64.9

    92.3

    62.04

    85.21

    70.47

    t=11

    89.8

    77

    93.24

    77.25

    87.8

    83.87

    t=12

    91.3

    91.7

    91.88

    91.63

    91

    91

  • Table 5   Dynamic response time with various opening charge

    Opening charge (g)

    Theoretical time (ms)

    Simulation time (ms)

    Experiment time (ms)

    No.1

    13

    14.4

    14.9

    15.6

    No.2

    16

    11.3

    11.8

    12.4

    No.3

    21

    8.1

    8.3

    8.9

Copyright 2020 Science China Press Co., Ltd. 《中国科学》杂志社有限责任公司 版权所有

京ICP备17057255号       京公网安备11010102003388号