Experimental Study of Impact Energy Absorption of Aerogel Sandwich Structures

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2022.1009

Abstract

Abstract:

To meet the impact and collision protection needs of armored vehicles, ships and other weapons and equipment, an impact energy absorption structure with an aerogel core is proposed. Using a one-stage light air gun system, combined with the force sensors, a high-speed camera and digital image related technologies, the impact energy absorption characteristics of seven aerogel sandwich structures at three impact velocities of 10.4 m/s, 15.4 m/s and 19.0 m/s are studied. The results show that: the peak impact force, collapse distance, specific energy absorption and mean impact force of the seven aerogel sandwich structures increase gradually with the increase of impact velocity; under the same impact velocity, with the increasing aerogel layer thickness, the specific energy absorption of the sandwich structures gradually increases, the peak impact force decreases, and the overall change of the impact force efficiency is small. Therefore, within the research scope, a larger aerogel layer thickness is beneficial to the improvement of impact energy absorption of the aerogel sandwich structures, and can avoid the damage of excessive peak force to the protection personnel or equipment.

Key words: impact energy absorption, sandwich structure, aerogel, specific energy absorption

LI Zehao, XU Wenlong, WANG Cheng, JIA Shiyu, XUE Shengpeng, MA Dong. Experimental Study of Impact Energy Absorption of Aerogel Sandwich Structures[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2023, 44(3): 682-690.

Figures/Tables 19

Fig. 1 Dimensions of the aerogel sandwich structure

Fig. 2 Experimental set-up

Fig. 3 Force-displacement curves of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=10.0 mm)

Table 1 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=10.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s^-1)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	9.7	5.9	16.1	5.3	54.5
v₂=15.4	14.6	6.6	28.7	8.3	56.9
v₃=19.0	22.8	7.3	48.8	12.9	56.6

Fig. 4 Force-displacement curves for the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=14.0 mm)

Table 2 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=14.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s^-1)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	7.3	6.8	18.5	4.4	61.0
v₂=15.4	12.0	9.2	41.3	7.3	60.6
v₃=19.0	19.7	9.6	64.9	11.1	56.4

Fig. 5 Force-displacement curves of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=18.0 mm)

Table 3 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=18.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s^-1)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	6.2	9.5	29.9	4.1	66.7
v₂=15.4	10.8	11.8	64.5	7.2	66.5
v₃=19.0	19.3	12.1	94.8	10.2	52.8

Fig. 6 Force-displacement curves of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=20.0 mm)

Table 4 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=20.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s^-1)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	6.6	10.2	37.6	4.2	63.5
v₂=15.4	10.9	11.9	72.9	7.0	64.0
v₃=19.0	17.4	12.2	96.2	8.9	50.9

Fig. 7 Force-displacement curves of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=22.0 mm)

Table 5 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=22.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s^-1)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	5.6	11.9	44.3	3.7	65.7
v₂=15.4	11.9	14.7	87.9	5.9	49.3
v₃=19.0	15.1	14.8	113.4	7.5	49.5

Fig. 8 Force-displacement curves of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=24.0 mm)

Table 6 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=24.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	5.8	13.6	49.1	2.9	49.9
v₂=15.4	11.3	15.3	108.8	5.7	50.4
v₃=19.0	14.5	15.6	145.2	7.4	51.2

Fig. 9 Force-displacement curves of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=26.0 mm)

Table 7 Impact performance indicators of the aerogel sandwich structure under different impact speeds (Ta=26.0 mm)

冲击速度/(m•s^-1)	峰值力/kN	压垮距离/mm	比吸能/(J•kg^-1)	平均碰撞力/kN	碰撞力效率/%
v₁=10.4	5.5	14.0	54.8	2.6	46.1
v₂=15.4	9.1	15.5	109.3	4.6	50.6
v₃=19.0	16.7	15.8	192.6	7.8	46.7

Fig. 10 Variation of S with the thickness of the aerogel layer

Fig. 11 Variation of p with the thickness of the aerogel layer

Fig. 12 Variation of C with the thickness of the aerogel layer

References 25

[1]	ALPHONSE M, RAJA V K B, KRISHNA V G, et al. Mechanical behavior of sandwich structures with varying core material-A review[J]. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021, 44: 3751-3759. doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.11.722 URL
[2]	ACANFORA V, ZARRELLI M, RICCIO A. Experimental and numerical assessment of the impact behaviour of a composite sandwich panel with a polymeric honeycomb core[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2023, 171: 104392. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.104392 URL
[3]	余同希, 朱凌, 许骏. 结构冲击动力学进展(2010-2020)[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2021, 41(12): 1-61.
	YU T X, ZHU L, XU J. Progress in structural impact dynamics during 2010-2020[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2021, 41(12): 1-61. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/s10573-005-0001-7 URL
[4]	刘志芳, 王军, 秦庆华. 横向冲击载荷下泡沫铝夹芯双圆管的吸能研究[J]. 兵工学报, 2017, 38(11): 2259-2267. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2017.11.024
	LIU Z F, WANG J, QIN Q H. Research on energy absorption of aluminum foam-filled double circular tubes under lateral impact loadings[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2017, 38(11): 2259-2267. (in Chinese)
[5]	TARLOCHAN F. Sandwich structures for energy absorption applications: a review[J]. Materials, 2021, 14(16): 4731. doi: 10.3390/ma14164731 URL
[6]	霍新涛. 铝蜂窝三明治结构耐撞性能研究[D]. 长沙: 湖南大学, 2018.
	HUO X T. Research on crashworthiness characteristics of aluminium honeycomb sandwich structures[D]. Changsha: Hunan University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[7]	GUO Y G, CHEN L M, ZHU C L, et al. Fabrication and axial compression test of thermoplastic composite cylindrical sandwich structures with hierarchical honeycomb core[J]. Composite Structures, 2021, 275: 114453. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114453 URL
[8]	ZHAO Y, YANG Z H, YU T L, et al. Mechanical properties and energy absorption capabilities of aluminium foam sandwich structure subjected to low-velocity impact[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2021, 273: 121996. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121996 URL
[9]	GUO K L, ZHU L, LI Y G, et al. Experimental investigation on the dynamic behaviour of aluminum foam sandwich plate under repeated impacts[J]. Composite Structures, 2018, 200: 298-305. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.05.148 URL
[10]	ZHANG Y W, YAN L L, ZHANG C, et al. Low-velocity impact response of tube-reinforced honeycomb sandwich structure[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2021, 158: 107188. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.107188 URL
[11]	QI J Q, LI C, TIE Y, et al. Energy absorption characteristics of origami-inspired honeycomb sandwich structures under low-velocity impact loading[J]. Materials & Design, 2021, 207: 109837.
[12]	WU X, LI Y G, CAI W, et al. Dynamic responses and energy absorption of sandwich panel with aluminium honeycomb core under ice wedge impact[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2022, 162: 104137. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2021.104137 URL
[13]	WANG Z G, WANG X X, LIU K, et al. Crashworthiness index of honeycomb sandwich structures under low-speed oblique impact[J]. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 2021, 208: 106683. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106683 URL
[14]	ZHANG D H, JIANG D, FEI Q G, et al. Experimental and numerical investigation on indentation and energy absorption of a honeycomb sandwich panel under low-velocity impact[J]. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2016, 117: 21-30.
[15]	SUN G Y, CHEN D D, HUO X T, et al. Experimental and numerical studies on indentation and perforation characteristics of honeycomb sandwich panels[J]. Composite Structures, 2018, 184: 110-124. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.09.025 URL
[16]	ZHANG Y, LI Y G, GUO K L, et al. Dynamic mechanical behaviour and energy absorption of aluminium honeycomb sandwich panels under repeated impact loads[J]. Ocean Engineering, 2021, 219: 108344. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108344 URL
[17]	HUANG W, LU L Z, FAN Z, et al. Underwater impulsive resistance of the foam reinforced composite lattice sandwich structure[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2021, 166: 108120. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2021.108120 URL
[18]	PANG Y Z, YAN X J, QU J, et al. Dynamic response of polyurethane foam and fiber orthogonal corrugated sandwich structure subjected to low-velocity impact[J]. Composite Structures, 2022, 282: 114994. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114994 URL
[19]	MOHAMMADKHANI P, JALALI S S, SAFARABADI M. Experimental and numerical investigation of Low-Velocity impact on steel wire reinforced foam Core/Composite skin sandwich panels[J]. Composite Structures, 2021, 256: 112992. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112992 URL
[20]	ZHU Y F, SUN Y G. Low-velocity impact response of multilayer foam core sandwich panels with composite face sheets[J]. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 2021, 209: 106704. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106704 URL
[21]	ZHU L, GUO K L, LI Y G, et al. Experimental study on the dynamic behaviour of aluminium foam sandwich plates under single and repeated impacts at low temperature[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2018, 114: 123-132. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.12.001 URL
[22]	GUO K L, ZHU L, LI Y G, et al. Numerical study on mechanical behavior of foam core sandwich plates under repeated impact loadings[J]. Composite Structures, 2019, 224: 111030. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111030 URL
[23]	许鲁. SiO₂气凝胶混杂芳纶非织布抗冲击波性能的研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江理工大学, 2017.
	XU L. Study on shock wave resistance of SiO₂ aerogel hybrid aramid nonwoven fabric[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University of Technology, 2017. (in Chinese)
[24]	杨杰, 李树奎, 闫丽丽, 等. 二氧化硅气凝胶的防爆震性能及机理研究[J]. 物理学报, 2010, 59(12):8934-8940.
	YANG J, LI S K, YAN L L, et al. Protective performance and protective mechanism of SiO₂ aerogel under explosive loading[J]. Acta Physica Sinica, 2010, 59(12):8934-8940. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7498/aps URL
[25]	ZHU G H, LIAO J P, SUN G Y, et al. Comparative study on metal/CFRP hybrid structures under static and dynamic loading[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2020, 141: 103509. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103509 URL