Advertisement

Computational Models for Structural Crashworthiness Analysis in Explosions

  • Jeom Kee PaikEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Topics in Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality book series (TSRQ, volume 37)

Abstract

In structures and infrastructures, blast pressure loads arising from explosions can cause failure involving highly nonlinear aspects associated with multiple physical phases, multiple scales, and multiple criteria. Structural failures in explosions may include crushing and fracture as well as buckling and plastic collapse. Such failure constitutes structural crashworthiness behavior. In reality, blast pressure loads are distributed non-uniformly over individual structural members (as described in Chap.  9). Therefore, it is very important to use the actual load distributions to obtain accurate results from structural response analyses. This chapter describes computational modeling techniques for simulating nonlinear structural responses under blast pressure loads using nonlinear finite element method modeling.

References

  1. 1.
    Biggs JM (1964) Introduction to structural dynamics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cowper G, Symonds PS (1957) Strain-hardening and strain-rate effects in the impact loading of cantilever beams. Technical Report 28, Department of Applied Mathematics, Brown University, RI, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hjertager BH, Fuhre K, Bjørkhaug M (1986) Spherical gas explosion experiments in a high-density obstructed 27 m3 corner. CMI Report No. 865403-3, Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jones N (1989a) Some comments on the modelling of material properties for dynamic structural plasticity. In: Harding J (ed) International conference on the mechanical properties of materials at high rates of strain. Institute of Physics Conference Series, vol 102, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones N (1989b) On the dynamic inelastic failure of beams. In: Wierzbicki T, Jones N (eds) Structural failure. Wiley, Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jones N (1993) Material properties for structural impact problems. In: Rama Rao P (ed) Advances in materials and their applications. Wiley, Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones N (2012) Structural impact, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jones N (2013) The credibility of predictions for structural designs subjected to large dynamic loadings causing inelastic behavior. Int J Impact Eng 53:106–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jones N (2014) Dynamic inelastic response of strain rate sensitive ductile plates due to large impact, dynamic pressure and explosive loadings. Int J Impact Eng 74:3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    LR (2014) Rules and regulations for the classification of offshore units—guidelines for the calculation of probabilistic explosion loads. Lloyd’s Register, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paik JK (2007) Practical techniques for finite element modeling to simulate structural crashworthiness in ship collisions and grounding (Part I: Theory). Ships Offshore Struct 2(1):69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paik JK (2007) Practical techniques for finite element modeling to simulate structural crashworthiness in ship collisions and grounding (Part II: Verification). Ships Offshore Struct 2(1):81–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paik JK (2018) Ultimate limit state analysis and design of plated structures, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paik JK, Kim SJ, Lee JC, Kim BJ, Seo JK, Ha YC (2014) A new procedure for the nonlinear structural response analysis of offshore installations in explosions. SNAME Maritime Convention, The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 22–24 October, Houston, TX, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sohn JM, Kim SJ, Seo JK, Kim BJ, Paik JK (2016) Strength assessment of stiffened blast walls in offshore installations under explosions. Ships Offshore Struct 11(5):551–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tanimura S, Tsuda T, Abe A, Hayashi H, Jones N (2014) Comparison of rate-dependent constitutive models with experimental data. Int J Impact Eng 69:104–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.The Korea Ship and Offshore Research Institute (Lloyd’s Register Foundation Research Centre of Excellence)Pusan National UniversityBusanKorea (Republic of)

Personalised recommendations