泡沫子弹冲击下预制圆孔Q235钢板的动态响应与破坏机理

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2023.0359

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为评估带壳装药产生的爆炸冲击波和高速破片联合作用的毁伤效应,针对泡沫铝子弹冲击预制圆孔Q235钢板开展了数值模拟研究。采用实验结果验证数值计算的准确性,并系统分析靶板的动态变形、破坏模式、孔周位移等力学响应;基于描述应力状态的应力三轴度与Lode参数,揭示预制圆孔引发靶板孔周撕裂破坏的力学机理,厘清圆孔直径及板厚对结构抗毁伤性能的影响规律。研究结果表明:预制圆孔显著降低了结构的抗毁伤性能:随着孔径增大或板厚减小,靶板的孔周位移上升,引发撕裂破坏的临界载荷相应下降。

关键词: 预制孔板, 动态响应, 失效机理, 应力状态, 有限元模拟

Abstract:

A pre-holed Q235 steel plate subjected to foam projectile impact is numerically investigated to assess the structural damage caused by combined blast and fragment loading upon detonation of cased explosives. The validity of the numerical model is checked against experimental measurements. The validated model is then employed to investigate the dynamic response, deformation/failure modes and hole-edge deflection of the pre-holed plate. The physical mechanisms of tearing failure initiated around the pre-hole are revealed using the stress triaxiality and Lode parameter for describing the state of stress. The influences of hole diameter and plate thickness on the impact resistance and failure mechanism are also quantified. Results show that the presence of a pre-formed hole significantly curtails the impact resistance of the steel plate: With increase in hole diameter or decrease in plate thickness, the hole-edge deflection of the steel plate grows, while the projectile momentum causing tearing failure drops.

Key words: pre-holed plate, dynamic response, failure mechanism, stress state, numerical simulation

中图分类号:

O383.3

韩佳彤, 王昕, 张磊, 李振, 王鹏飞, 赵振宇, 卢天健. 泡沫子弹冲击下预制圆孔Q235钢板的动态响应与破坏机理[J]. 兵工学报, 2023, 44(12): 3654-3666.

HAN Jiatong, WANG Xin, ZHANG Lei, LI Zhen, WANG Pengfei, ZHAO Zhenyu, LU Tianjian. Dynamic Response and Failure Mechanism of Pre-holed Q235 Steel Plate under Foam Projectile Impact Loading[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2023, 44(12): 3654-3666.

图/表 27

图1 有限元计算模型

Fig.1 FE simulation model

图2 闭孔泡沫铝准静态压缩应力-应变曲线[20]

Fig.2 Quasi-static compressive true stress-true-strain curve of aluminum foam with closed cells[20]

表1 Q235钢的材料模型系数[23]

Table 1 Material model coefficients of Q235 steel[23]

参数	数值
ρ_p/(kg·m^-3)	7800
E/GPa	200
A/MPa	235
B/MPa	275
n	0.36
C	0.022
m	1.03
$ε · 0$ /s^-1	1
T_m/K	1673
T_r/K	293
泊松比	0.3
ε_f	1

表1 Q235钢的材料模型系数[23]

Table 1 Material model coefficients of Q235 steel[23]

参数	数值
ρ_p/(kg·m^-3)	7800
E/GPa	200
A/MPa	235
B/MPa	275
n	0.36
C	0.022
m	1.03
$ε · 0$ /s^-1	1
T_m/K	1673
T_r/K	293
泊松比	0.3
ε_f	1

表2 仿真和实验结果对比

Table 2 Comparison between numerical and experimental results

编号	子弹密度/ (kg·m^-3)	速度/ (m·s^-1)	单位面积动量/ (kPa·s)	孔周位移/mm
编号	子弹密度/ (kg·m^-3)	速度/ (m·s^-1)	单位面积动量/ (kPa·s)	实验结果	仿真结果	误差/ %
1	392	164	5.4	15.8	16.9	6.5
2	385	210	6.9	21.0	22.0	4.5
3	385	257	8.5	27.3	27.8	1.7
4	387	342	11.3	38.2	39.3	2.7
5	389	363	12.0	40.9	42.4	3.5
6	390	388	12.8	45.0	46.2	2.5

图3 泡沫铝弹丸动量I0=12.8kPa·s下实验与数值得到的预制圆孔Q235钢板失效模式对比

Fig.3 Comparison between experimentally observed and numerically predicted failure modes of pre-holed Q235 steel target plate for projectile momentum I0=12.8kPa·s

图4 靶板中心截面位移实验与仿真结果对比

Fig.4 Comparison between experimentally and numerically predicted central cross-sectional deflections

图5 靶板动态变形响应过程

Fig.5 Deformation process of pre-holed Q235 steel plate

图6 弹丸-靶板接触力及冲量传递时程曲线

Fig.6 Contact force and transmitted momentum-time curves of pre-holed Q235 steel plate

图7 孔周位移时程曲线

Fig.7 Hole-edge deflection-time curve of pre-holed Q235 steel plate

图8 典型应力状态

Fig.8 Typical stress state regimes

图9 靶板的孔周位移随子弹动量的变化关系

Fig.9 Hole-edgedeflection versus projectile momentum

图10 I0=6.63kPa·s下预制圆孔靶板的等效塑性应变云图

Fig.10 Equivalent plastic strain contours of pre-holed plate for I0=6.63kPa·s

图11 I0=6.63kPa·s下应力三轴度和Lode参数的演变历史

Fig.11 Change of stress triaxiality and Lode parameter for I0=6.63kPa·s

图12 I0=6.63kPa·s下代表性单元的平均应力三轴度与Lode参数

Fig.12 Average stress triaxialities and Lode parameters of representative elements for I0=6.63kPa·s

图13 I0=9.94kPa·s下预制圆孔靶板的等效塑性应变云图

Fig.13 Equivalent plastic strain contours of pre-holed plate for I0=9.94kPa·s

图14 I0=9.94kPa·s下应力三轴度与Lode参数的演变历史

Fig.14 Change of stress triaxiality and Lode parameter for I0=9.94kPa·s

图15 I0=9.94kPa·s下代表性单元的平均应力三轴度与Lode参数

Fig.15 Average stress triaxialities and Lode parameters of representative elements for I0=9.94kPa·s

表3 不同圆孔直径有限元模型的关键几何参数

Table 3 Key geometrical parameters of the pre-holed plates with various hole diameters

编号	D_f/ mm	L_p/ mm	L_f/ mm	h_p/L_p	h_p/ mm	d_f/ mm	d_f/L_p
1	57	180	85	0.0055	1	3.6	0.02
2						7.2	0.04
3						10.8	0.06
4						14.4	0.08
5						18	0.10

表4 不同孔径最终变形模式

Table 4 Failure modes of pre-holed plates with various hole diameters

图16 不同孔径靶板破坏模式

Fig.16 Failure modes of pre-holed plates with various hole diameters

图17 无量纲临界动量与圆孔直径关系

Fig.17 Dimensionaless critical momentum versus hole diameter

图18 临界动量作用下不同孔径靶板代表性单元的平均应力三轴度和Lode参数

Fig.18 Average stress triaxialities and Lode parameters of representative elements of pre-holed plates with various hole diameters at critical momentums

表5 不同靶板厚度有限元模型的关键几何参数

Table 5 Key geometrical parameters of pre-holed plates with various plate thicknesses

编号	D_f/ mm	L_p/ mm	L_f/ mm	d_f/L_p	d_f/ mm	h_p/ mm	h_p/L_p
1	57	180	85	0.04	7.2	0.50	0.0028
2						0.75	0.0041
3						1.00	0.0055
4						1.25	0.0069
5						1.50	0.0083

表6 不同厚度靶板最终变形模式图

Table 6 Failure modes of pre-holed plates with various plate thicknesses

图19 不同靶板厚度破坏模式

Fig.19 Failure modes of pre-holed plates with various plate thicknesses

图20 无量纲临界动量与靶板厚度关系

Fig.20 Dimensionaless critical momentum versus plate thickness

图21 临界动量作用下不同厚度靶板代表性单元的平均应力三轴度和Lode参数

Fig.21 Average stress triaxialities and Lode parameters of representative elements of pre-holed plates with various plate thicknesses at critical momentums

参考文献 27

[1]	任宪奔, 江鹏, 李营, 等. 舰船结构舱内爆炸毁伤与防护研究进展[J]. 中国科学:物理学力学天文学, 2021, 51(12): 7-26.
	REN X B, JIANG P, LI Y, et al. Review of the damage and protection of warship structures under internal blast loading[J]. Science China: Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 2021, 51(12): 7-26. (in Chinese)
[2]	陈山. 巨舰沉没,无人作战时代来临[N]. 环球时报, 2023-02-17(8)[2023-06-08].
	CHEN S, The great ships sank and the age of unmanned combat began[N]. Global Times, 2023-02-17( 8)[2023-06-08]. (in Chinese)
[3]	孙明月, 于宪钊. 美国海军舰载机联队未来建设重点[J]. 军事文摘, 2020, 457(1): 47-50.
	SUN M Y, YU X Z. Future focus of the United States Navy carrier-based aircraft wing[J]. Military Digest, 2020, 457(1): 47-50. (in Chinese)
[4]	陈传民. 美国未来航母舰队的可能组合[J]. 航空世界, 2012, 152(2): 34-37.
	CHEN C M. A possible combination of America's future carrier fleet[J]. Avation World, 2012, 152(2): 34-37. (in Chinese)
[5]	李典, 郑羽, 陈长海, 等. 空爆载荷下舰船典型结构损伤研究进展[J]. 船舶力学, 2020, 24(4): 543-557.
	LI D, ZHENG Y, CHEN C H, et al. Review on damage of typical ship protective structures under explosion load[J]. Journal of Ship Mechanics, 2020, 24(4): 543-557. (in Chinese)
[6]	张小东, 胡海, 姜林君. 美国海军战斧巡航导弹战术技术特性分析[J]. 飞航导弹, 2020, 431(11): 31-36.
	ZHANG X D, HU H, JIANG L J. Tactical and technical characteristics analysis of the Tomahawk cruise missile of the United States Navy[J]. Aerodynamic Missile Journal, 2020, 431(11): 31-36. (in Chinese)
[7]	姚梦雷, 侯海量, 李典, 等. 舱内爆炸载荷下Y型夹层板动响应及抗爆性能影响因素[J/OL]. 兵工学报, 2023(2023-01-04). https://doi.org/10.12382/bgxb.2022.0761
	YAO M L, HOU H L, LI D, et al. Dynamic response of Y-shaped sandwich plate and the influence factors of anti explosion performance under the explosion load in the cabin[J/OL]. Acta Armamentarii, 2023(2023-01-04). https://doi.org/10.12382/bgxb.2022.0761. (in Chinese)
[8]	LI Y, CHEN Z, REN X B, et al. Experimental and numerical study on damage mode of RC slabs under combined blast and fragment loading[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2020, 142:103579. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103579 URL
[9]	李茂, 朱锡, 侯海量, 等. 冲击波和高速破片联合作用下固支方板毁伤效应数值模拟[J]. 国防科技大学学报, 2017, 39(6): 64-70.
	LI M, ZHU X, HOU H L, et al. Numerical simulation of the damage effects of clamped square plate subjected to the impact of blast wave and fragments[J]. Journal of National University of Defense Technology, 2017, 39(6): 64-70. (in Chinese)
[10]	李茂, 侯海量, 朱锡, 等. 模拟破片杀伤战斗部空爆冲击波与高速破片群联合作用的等效试验方法[J]. 振动与冲击, 2020, 39(1): 184-190.
	LI M, HOU H L, ZHU X, et al. Equivalent test method to simulate combined damage action of air blast shock wave and high speed fragment group of fragment killing warhead[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2020, 39(1): 184-190. (in Chinese)
[11]	侯海量, 张成亮, 李茂, 等. 冲击波和高速破片联合作用下夹芯复合舱壁结构的毁伤特性[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2015, 35(1): 116-123.
	HOU H L, ZHANG C L, LI M, et al. Damage characteristics of sandcwich bulkhead under the impact of shock and high-velocity fragment[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2015, 35(1): 116-123. (in Chinese)
[12]	陈长海, 侯海量, 朱锡, 等. 破片式战斗部空中爆炸下冲击波与破片的耦合作用[J]. 高压物理学报, 2018, 32(1): 148-156.
	CHEN C H, HOU H L, ZHU X, et al. Coupling action spans for air-blast waves and fragments by fragmentation warheads exploding in air[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physis, 2018, 32(1): 148-156. (in Chinese)
[13]	孔祥韶, 吴卫国, 杜志鹏, 等. 圆柱形战斗部爆炸破片特性研究[J]. 工程力学, 2014, 31(1): 243-249.
	KONG X S, WU W G, DU Z P, et al. Research on fragments characteristic of cylindrical warhead[J]. Engineering Mechanics, 2014, 31(1): 243-249. (in Chinese)
[14]	LI L, ZHANG Q C, ZHANG R, et al. A laboratory experimental technique for simulating combined blast and impact loading[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2019, 134: 103382. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.103382 URL
[15]	蒋建伟, 侯俊亮, 门建兵, 等. 爆炸冲击波作用下预制孔靶板塑性变形规律的研究[J]. 高压物理学报, 2014, 28(6): 723-728.
	JIANG J W, HOU J L, MEN J B, et al. Study on deformation of perforated plates under blast loading[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2014, 28(6): 723-728. (in Chinese)
[16]	ZHANG C J, TAN P J, YUAN Y. Confined blast loading of steel plates with and without pre-formed holes[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2022, 163: 104183. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.104183 URL
[17]	GRANUM H, AUNE V, BØRVIK T, et al. Effect of heat-treatment on the structural response of blast-loaded aluminium plates with pre-cut slits[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2019, 132: 103306. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.05.020 URL
[18]	AUNE V, VALSAMOS G, CASADEI F, et al. On the dynamic response of blast-loaded steel plates with and without pre-formed holes[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2017, 108: 27-46. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.04.001 URL
[19]	ELVELI B S, IDDBERG M B, BØRVIK T, et al. On the strength-ductility trade-off in thin blast-loaded steel plates with and without initial defects—an experimental study[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2022, 171(7): 108787. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2021.108787 URL
[20]	YU R P, ZHANG Q C, WEI Z H, et al. Dynamic response of fully-clamped steel plate under laboratory-simulated sequential fragment impact and blast loading[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2023, 182: 110144. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2022.110144 URL
[21]	RADFORD D D, DESHPANDE V S, FLECK N A. The use of metal foam projectiles to simulate shock loading on a structure[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2004, 31(9): 1152-1171. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2004.07.012 URL
[22]	LI L, ZHANG Q C, LU T J. Ballistic penetration of deforming metallic plates: experimental and numerical investigation[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2022, 170: 104359. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.104359 URL
[23]	CHEN C H, WANG X M M, HOU H L, et al. Effect of strength matching on failure characteristics of polyurea coated thin metal plates under localized air blast loading: experiment and numerical analysis[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2020, 154: 106819. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.106819 URL
[24]	WANG X, YU R P, ZHANG Q C, et al. Dynamic response of clamped sandwich beams with fluid-filled corrugated cores[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2020, 139: 103533. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103533 URL
[25]	BAI Y L, WIERZBICKI T. A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with pressure and Lode dependence[J]. International Journal of Plasticity, 2007, 24(6): 1071-1096. doi: 10.1016/j.ijplas.2007.09.004 URL
[26]	BRIDGMAN P W. Studies in large plastic flow and fracture[M]. Cambridge, MA, US: Harvard University Press, 1964.
[27]	CHUNG KIM YUEN S, NURICK G N, LANGDON G S, et al. Deformation of thin plates subjected to impulsive load: Part III-an update 25 years on[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2017, 107: 108-117. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.06.010 URL