金属蜂窝夹层结构抗水下爆炸特性

魏子涵; 赵振宇; 叶帆; 裴轶群; 王昕; 张钱城; 卢天健

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2020-0392

金属蜂窝夹层结构抗水下爆炸特性

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0392

魏子涵^{1, 2,},
赵振宇^{2, 3, ,},
叶帆⁴,
裴轶群⁵,
王昕^{1, 2},
张钱城¹,
卢天健^{2, 3, ,}

1.
西安交通大学机械结构强度与振动国家重点实验室，陕西西安 710049
2.
南京航空航天大学多功能轻量化材料与结构工信部重点实验室，江苏南京 210016
3.
南京航空航天大学机械结构力学及控制国家重点实验室，江苏南京 210016
4.
中国船舶及海洋工程设计研究院，上海 200011
5.
上海船舶工艺研究所，上海 200032

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（11972185，12002156，12072250）；中国博士后科学基金（2020M671473）；特种车辆及其传动系统智能制造国家重点实验室开放基金（GZ2019KF015）

详细信息

作者简介:
魏子涵（1996－　），男，硕士，wzh123@stu.xjtu.edu.cn

通讯作者:
赵振宇（1986－　），男，博士，sufengxing@foxmail.com

卢天健（1964－　），男，博士，教授，tjlu@nuaa.edu.cn

中图分类号: O383.1
计量
- 文章访问数: 616
- HTML全文浏览量: 324
- PDF下载量: 126
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2020-10-16
- 修回日期: 2021-01-14
- 网络出版日期: 2021-07-22
- 刊出日期: 2021-08-05

Resistance of all-metallic honeycomb sandwich structures to underwater explosion shock

WEI Zihan^{1, 2
,},
ZHAO Zhenyu^{2, 3
, ,},
YE Fan⁴,
PEI Yiqun⁵,
WANG Xin^{1, 2},
ZHANG Qiancheng¹,
LU Tianjian^{2, 3
, ,}

1.
State Key Laboratory for Strength and Vibration of Mechanical Structures, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, Shaanxi, China
2.
MIIT Key Laboratory of Multifunctional Lightweight Materials and Structures, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, Jiangsu, China
3.
State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical Structures, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, Jiangsu, China
4.
Marine Design and Research Institute of China, Shanghai 200011, China
5.
Shanghai Shipbuilding Technology Research Institute, Shanghai 200032, China

摘要

摘要: 金属蜂窝夹层结构是一种新型的舰船防护结构，在舰船防护领域具有广阔的应用前景，但目前缺乏对其在实际水下爆炸载荷作用下动态响应的研究。为研究金属蜂窝夹层结构在水下爆炸载荷作用下的动态响应及防护性能，设计并制备了背板加筋蜂窝夹层结构样件以及相应的浮箱，在大型露天水池中进行了水下实爆实验；通过声固耦合算法对结构响应进行模拟，实验结果与模拟结果吻合良好，随后分析了蜂窝夹层板的变形过程及能量吸收特性，量化了载荷参数（冲击因子）及结构参数（前后面板厚度比和芯体相对密度）对结构动态响应的影响；最后，以蜂窝夹层板的面密度和后面板中心点最大变形的无量纲量为目标函数，使用NSGA-Ⅱ遗传算法对结构进行了多目标优化，得到对应的Pareto前沿。结果表明，随着冲击因子的增大，蜂窝夹层板整体变形显著增大，蜂窝芯体始终是主要的吸能构件，但其吸能占比逐渐降低；随着前后面板厚度比或芯体相对密度的增加，蜂窝夹层结构的最大变形呈现先降低后升高的趋势，同时呈现不同的变形模式，芯体相对密度对结构变形的影响更为显著；对蜂窝夹层结构开展多目标优化可有效降低结构的面密度及最大变形，优化结果可为蜂窝夹层结构的设计选型提供参考。
- 蜂窝夹层结构 /
- 水下爆炸 /
- 声固耦合法 /
- 优化设计
Abstract: All-metallic honeycomb sandwich structure is a new kind of ship protection structure, which has a broad application prospect in the field of ship protection. However, there is not enough research on the dynamic response of honeycomb sandwich structures under an actual underwater explosion load. The dynamic behavior and protective performance of honeycomb sandwich structures subjected to the underwater explosion load were investigated, both experimentally and numerically. A backplane stiffened honeycomb sandwich structure and the corresponding buoyant box were designed and fabricated for the subsequent experimental study in a large open water pool. The structural response was numerically simulated by using the coupled acoustic-structural approach (integrated in commercial FE code ABAQUS/Explicit). The numerical simulation results are in good agreement with the experimental measurements. Then, the deformation process and energy absorption characteristics of the honeycomb sandwich structure subjected to underwater explosion load were investigated. The effects of the load parameter (impact factor) and two geometric parameters (i.e., facesheet thickness ratio and core relative density) on the dynamic response of the sandwich structure were analyzed. Finally, the Pareto optimal designs with minimize value of non-dimensional areal density and minimize value of non-dimensional maximum deformation of the central point on back facesheet were obtained by using the NSGA-Ⅱ algorithm. The results show that with the increase of the impact factor, the overall deformation of the structure increases significantly. The honeycomb core is the main energy absorbing substructure during this process, and its energy absorption ratio gradually decreases. With the increase of either face sheet thickness ratio or core relative density, the deformation of the structure first decreases and then increases, accompanied by changes in deformation modes. The influence of core relative density is more significant. The optimized structures obtained from multi-objective optimal design effectively reduce the areal density and the maximum deformation, which can be used as a reference for the future design of honeycomb sandwich structures.
- honeycomb sandwich /
- underwater explosion /
- coupled acoustic-structural simulation /
- optimal design

HTML全文

图 1 水下爆炸实验布置

Figure 1. Layout of underwater explosion experimental setup

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 实验样件

Figure 2. A sample for underwater explosion experiment

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 蜂窝夹层板及其代表胞元示意图

Figure 3. Schematics of a honeycomb sandwich panel and its unit cell

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 四方蜂窝芯体的制备

Figure 4. Fabrication of square honeycomb cores

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 浮箱示意图

Figure 5. Schematic of the buoyant box

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 有限元模型

Figure 6. Finite element simulation model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 网格收敛性分析

Figure 7. Mesh convergence analysis

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 压力测点处冲击波压力时程曲线

Figure 8. Shock wave pressure-time curves at the pressure measuring point

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 样件前、后面板中心点变形时程曲线

Figure 9. Deformation-time curves at the central points of the front and back faces of the sample

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 水下爆炸载荷作用下样件变形过程模拟结果

Figure 10. Simulated deformation process of the sample subjected to underwater explosion

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 样件整体变形

Figure 11. Overall deformation of the sample after underwater explosion

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 试样剖面变形模拟结果与实验结果的对比

Figure 12. Comparison of simulated and experimental profile deformations of the sample

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 蜂窝夹层板前、后面板中心点的加速度时程曲线

Figure 13. Acceleration-time curves at the central points of the front and back faces of the honeycomb sandwich panel

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 蜂窝夹层板及其构成结构的能量吸收曲线

Figure 14. Energy absorption curves of the honeycomb sandwich panel and its constituting sub-structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 冲击因子对夹层板变形及能量吸收的影响

Figure 15. Effect of the impact factor on deformation and energy absorption of sandwich structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 不同的冲击因子对应的结构截面变形示意图

Figure 16. Cross-sectional morphologies of sandwich structures subjected to underwater explosion for different impact factors

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 17 前后面板厚度比和芯体相对密度对结构变形的影响

Figure 17. Effect of the facesheet thickness ratio and core relative density on deformation of sandwich structures

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 18 不同前/后板厚度比对应的结构截面变形示意图

Figure 18. Cross-sectional morphologies of sandwich structures subjected to underwater explosion for different facesheet thickness ratios

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 19 不同芯体相对密度对应的结构截面变形示意图

Figure 19. Cross-sectional morphologies of sandwich structures subjected to underwater explosion for different core relative densities

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 20 优化流程图

Figure 20. Flow chart of optimization methodology

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 21 多目标优化问题的Pareto前沿

Figure 21. The Pareto fronts for the present multi-objective optimization problem

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 22 最优解集对应的w₁/H_c、w₂/H_c和w_c/H_c与δ_max/a之间的关系

Figure 22. Relationships of w₁/H_c, w₂/H_cand w_c/H_c with δ_max/a obtained from corresponding optimization solutions

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 304不锈钢的应变率参数^[19]

Table 1. Strain-rate parameters of 304 stainless steel^[19]

${\dot \varepsilon _{{\rm{pl}}}}$/s⁻¹	K
1	1.11
10²	1.26
10³	1.46
10⁴	1.62

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 采样点及其对应的有限元模拟结果

Table 2. Sampling points and corresponding numerical results

采样点编号	w₁/H_c	w₂/H_c	w_c/H_c	δ_max/a	采样点编号	w₁/H_c	t₂/H_c	w_c/H_c	δ_max/a
1	0.025	0.045	0.038	0.094	31	0.109	0.041	0.063	0.060
2	0.113	0.117	0.042	0.047	32	0.038	0.041	0.023	0.093
3	0.089	0.057	0.013	0.093	33	0.061	0.129	0.054	0.053
4	0.101	0.021	0.040	0.082	34	0.033	0.093	0.025	0.081
5	0.113	0.085	0.058	0.046	35	0.101	0.045	0.044	0.063
6	0.105	0.089	0.017	0.076	36	0.109	0.065	0.009	0.096
7	0.097	0.061	0.032	0.064	37	0.049	0.113	0.034	0.065
8	0.053	0.061	0.036	0.067	38	0.121	0.109	0.011	0.084
9	0.097	0.125	0.038	0.050	39	0.069	0.053	0.032	0.069
10	0.081	0.101	0.017	0.077	40	0.017	0.089	0.025	0.114
11	0.029	0.061	0.050	0.077	41	0.073	0.025	0.023	0.094
12	0.053	0.029	0.027	0.094	42	0.077	0.041	0.021	0.084
13	0.041	0.081	0.048	0.065	43	0.089	0.133	0.030	0.057
14	0.045	0.077	0.056	0.062	44	0.065	0.029	0.067	0.072
15	0.133	0.073	0.021	0.070	45	0.037	0.049	0.019	0.096
16	0.053	0.017	0.046	0.096	46	0.085	0.097	0.042	0.051
17	0.021	0.097	0.052	0.077	47	0.077	0.057	0.050	0.057
18	0.057	0.069	0.027	0.070	48	0.081	0.109	0.030	0.059
19	0.073	0.085	0.046	0.053	49	0.029	0.049	0.061	0.078
20	0.125	0.069	0.065	0.047	50	0.093	0.025	0.007	0.120
21	0.125	0.105	0.036	0.068	51	0.061	0.081	0.054	0.055
22	0.069	0.093	0.065	0.050	52	0.057	0.105	0.036	0.061
23	0.121	0.121	0.048	0.044	53	0.041	0.073	0.040	0.069
24	0.065	0.113	0.063	0.051	54	0.021	0.117	0.052	0.074
25	0.017	0.017	0.011	0.182	55	0.129	0.021	0.015	0.096
26	0.085	0.129	0.058	0.045	56	0.049	0.133	0.034	0.064
27	0.037	0.121	0.013	0.093	57	0.033	0.037	0.015	0.116
28	0.117	0.037	0.067	0.061	58	0.117	0.033	0.019	0.099
29	0.133	0.033	0.061	0.063	59	0.105	0.125	0.056	0.042
30	0.025	0.101	0.023	0.089	60	0.129	0.053	0.044	0.058

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 优化结果与模拟结果的对比

Table 3. Comparison between optimization solutions and numerical results

采样点编号	w₁/H_c	w₂/H_c	w_c/H_c	${ {\bar M} / {(\rho {H_{\rm{c} } })} }$	δ_max/a
采样点编号	w₁/H_c	w₂/H_c	w_c/H_c	${ {\bar M} / {(\rho {H_{\rm{c} } })} }$	优化	模拟	误差/%
1	0.017	0.017	0.007	0.043	0.197	0.195	1.02
2	0.133	0.133	0.067	0.359	0.037	0.038	−2.70
3	0.039	0.041	0.023	0.115	0.092	0.094	−2.17
4	0.058	0.063	0.031	0.167	0.068	0.067	1.47

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(28)

[1]	陈永念. 舰船水下爆炸数值仿真及抗爆结构研究[D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2008: 1−2.
[2]	NURICK G N, OLSON M D, FAGNAN J R, et al. Deformation and tearing of blast-loaded stiffened square plates [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 1995, 16(2): 273–291. DOI: 10.1016/0734-743X(94)00046-Y.
[3]	朱锡, 白雪飞, 黄若波, 等. 船体板架在水下接触爆炸作用下的破口试验 [J]. 中国造船, 2003, 44(1): 46–52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-4882.2003.01.007. ZHU X, BAI X F, HUANG R B, et al. Crevasse experiment research of plate membrance in vessels subjected to underwater contact explosion [J]. Shipbuilding of China, 2003, 44(1): 46–52. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-4882.2003.01.007.
[4]	梅志远, 朱锡, 刘润泉. 船用加筋板架爆炸载荷下动态响应数值分析 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2004, 24(1): 80–84. MEI Z Y, ZHU X, LIU R Q. Dynamic response researches of ship’s stiffened plate structure under explosive load [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2004, 24(1): 80–84.
[5]	JEN C Y, TAI Y S. Deformation behavior of a stiffened panel subjected to underwater shock loading using the non-linear finite element method [J]. Materials and Design, 2010, 31(1): 325–335. DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2009.06.011.
[6]	GUPTA N K, KUMAR P, HEGDE S. On deformation and tearing of stiffened and un-stiffened square plates subjected to underwater explosion: a numerical study [J]. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 2010, 52(5): 733–744. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2010.01.005.
[7]	方斌, 朱锡, 张振华. 水下爆炸冲击波载荷作用下船底板架的塑性动力响应 [J]. 哈尔滨工程大学学报, 2008, 29(4): 326–331. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7043.2008.04.002. FANG B, ZHU X, ZHANG Z H. Plastic dynamic response of ship hull grillage to underwater blast loading [J]. Journal of Harbin Engineering University, 2008, 29(4): 326–331. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7043.2008.04.002.
[8]	牟金磊, 朱锡, 张振华, 等. 水下爆炸载荷作用下加筋板变形及开裂试验研究 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2008, 27(1): 57–60. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3835.2008.01.013. MU J L, ZHU X, ZHANG Z H, et al. Experimental study on deformation and rupture of stiffened plates subjected to underwater shock [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2008, 27(1): 57–60. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3835.2008.01.013.
[9]	KEIL A H. The response of ships to underwater explosions [R]. Washington: David Taylor Model Basin, 1961.
[10]	FLECK N A, DESHPANDE V S. The resistance of clamped sandwich beams to shock loading [J]. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 2004, 71(3): 386–401. DOI: 10.1115/1.1629109.
[11]	张延昌, 顾金兰, 王自力. 蜂窝式夹层板结构单元的防护性能分析 [J]. 舰船科学技术, 2008, 30(6): 108–113. DOI: 10.3404/j.issn.1672-7649.2008.06.022. ZHANG Y C, GU J L, WANG Z L. Research on the anti-shock capacity of square honeycomb sandwich plane [J]. Ship Science and Technology, 2008, 30(6): 108–113. DOI: 10.3404/j.issn.1672-7649.2008.06.022.
[12]	王自力, 张延昌, 顾金兰. 基于夹层板抗水下爆炸舰船底部结构设计 [J]. 舰船科学技术, 2010, 32(1): 22–27. DOI: 10.3404/j.issn.1672-7649.2010.01.002. WANG Z L, ZHANG Y C, GU J L. Anti-shock double bottom structure design of warship based on sandwich panel [J]. Ship Science and Technology, 2010, 32(1): 22–27. DOI: 10.3404/j.issn.1672-7649.2010.01.002.
[13]	XUE Z Y, HUTCHINSON J W. A comparative study of impulse-resistant metal sandwich plates [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2004, 30(10): 1283–1305. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2003.08.007.
[14]	WADLEY H N G, DHARMASENA K P, QUEHEILLALT D T, et al. Dynamic compression of square honeycomb structures during underwater impulsive loading [J]. Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, 2007, 2(10): 2025–2048. DOI: 10.2140/jomms.2007.2.2025.
[15]	MORI L F, LEE S, XUE Z Y, et al. Deformation and fracture modes of sandwich structures subjected to underwater impulsive loads [J]. Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, 2007, 2(10): 1981–2006. DOI: 10.2140/jomms.2007.2.1981.
[16]	任鹏. 非药式水下冲击波加载技术及铝合金结构抗冲击特性研究[D]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学, 2014: 99−116.
[17]	陈高杰, 沈晓乐, 王树乐, 等. 基于声固耦合法的环肋壳水下冲击数值仿真试验 [J]. 兵工自动化, 2015, 34(2): 7–10. DOI: 10.7690/bgzdh.2015.02.002. CHEN G J, SHEN X L, WANG S L, et al. Numerical simulation test of ring-stiffened hull subjected to underwater shock based on coupled acoustic-structural arithmetic [J]. Ordnance Industry Automation, 2015, 34(2): 7–10. DOI: 10.7690/bgzdh.2015.02.002.
[18]	YU B, HAN B, NI C Y, et al. Dynamic crushing of all-metallic corrugated panels filled with close-celled aluminum foams [J]. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 2015, 82(1): 011006. DOI: 10.1115/1.4028995.
[19]	STOUT M G, FOLLANSBEE P S. Strain rate sensitivity, strain hardening, and yield behavior of 304L stainless steel [J]. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 1986, 108(4): 344–353. DOI: 10.1115/1.3225893.
[20]	李金河, 赵继波, 谭多望, 等. 炸药水中爆炸的冲击波性能 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2009, 29(2): 172–176. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2009)02-0172-05. LI J H, ZHAO J B, TAN D W, et al. Underwater shock wave performances of explosives [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2009, 29(2): 172–176. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2009)02-0172-05.
[21]	ZAMYSHLYAEV B V, YAKOVLEV Y S. Dynamic loads in underwater explosion: AD0757183 [R]. Washington: Naval Intelligence Support Center Washington DC Translation DIV, 1973.
[22]	O’HARA G J, CUNNIFF P F. Scaling for shock response of equipment in different submarines [J]. Shock and Vibration, 1993, 1(2): 161–170. DOI: 10.3233/SAV-1993-1207.
[23]	张延昌, 周红, 王果, 等. U型折叠式夹层板防护性能数值仿真分析 [J]. 船舶力学, 2013, 17(10): 1191–1201. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7294.2013.10.013. ZHANG Y C, ZHOU H, WANG G, et al. Numerical simulation analysis on protective performance of U-type corrugated cores sandwich panel [J]. Journal of Ship Mechanics, 2013, 17(10): 1191–1201. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7294.2013.10.013.
[24]	孙晓旺, 陶晓晓, 王显会, 等. 负泊松比蜂窝材料抗爆炸特性及优化设计研究 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2020, 40(9): 66–76. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0011. SUN X W, TAO X X, WANG X H, et al. Research on explosion-proof characteristics and optimization design of negative Poisson’s ratio honeycomb material [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2020, 40(9): 66–76. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2020-0011.
[25]	YANG M, HAN B, SU P B, et al. Axial crushing of ultralight all-metallic truncated conical sandwich shells with corrugated cores [J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2019, 140: 318–330. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2019.03.048.
[26]	吕小青, 王旭, 徐连勇, 等. 基于径向基函数神经网络和NSGA-Ⅱ的气保焊工艺多目标优化 [J]. 天津大学学报(自然科学与工程技术版), 2020, 53(10): 1013–1018. DOI: 10.11784/tdxbz201909067. LÜ X Q, WANG X, XU L Y, et al. Multi-objective optimization of gas metal arc welding process parameters based on radial based function neural network and NSGA-Ⅱ [J]. Journal of Tianjin University (Science and Technology), 2020, 53(10): 1013–1018. DOI: 10.11784/tdxbz201909067.
[27]	DEB K, PRATAP A, AGARWAL S, et al. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-Ⅱ [J]. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 2002, 6(2): 182–197. DOI: 10.1109/4235.996017.
[28]	WANG X, LI X, YUE Z S, et al. Optimal design of metallic corrugated sandwich panels with polyurea-metal laminate face sheets for simultaneous vibration attenuation and structural stiffness [J]. Composite Structures, 2021, 256: 112994. DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112994.