爆炸位置对钛合金定向泄爆容器冲击响应的影响

郭德龙; 任云燕; 徐豫新; 李永鹏; 李旭东; 杨祥

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2023-0126

爆炸位置对钛合金定向泄爆容器冲击响应的影响

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2023-0126

郭德龙^1,,
任云燕¹,
徐豫新^{1, 2, 3, ,},
李永鹏¹,
李旭东⁴,
杨祥⁵

1.
北京理工大学爆炸科学与技术国家重点实验室，北京 100081
2.
北京理工大学高能量密度材料教育部重点实验室，北京 100081
3.
北京理工大学重庆创新中心，重庆 401120
4.
中北大学机电工程学院，山西太原 030051
5.
上海飞机设计研究院，上海 201210

基金项目: 工信部科技三项之民机项目（KJKT 19-057）

详细信息

作者简介:
郭德龙（1999－　），男，硕士研究生，guo-delong@qq.com

通讯作者:
徐豫新（1982－　），男，博士，准聘教授，xuyuxin@bit.edu.cn

中图分类号: O383; V223.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 189
- HTML全文浏览量: 65
- PDF下载量: 61
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-04-07
- 修回日期: 2023-09-05
- 网络出版日期: 2023-12-25
- 刊出日期: 2024-02-06

Effect of explosion location on impact response of titanium alloy directional detonation container

GUO Delong^1
,,
REN Yunyan¹,
XU Yuxin^{1, 2, 3
, ,},
LI Yongpeng¹,
LI Xudong⁴,
YANG Xiang⁵

1.
State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
2.
Key Laboratory of High Energy Density Materials of Ministry of Education, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
3.
Chongqing Innovation Center, Beijing Institute of Technology, Chongqing 401120, China
4.
School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, North University of China, Taiyuan 030051, Shanxi, China
5.
Shanghai Aircraft and Research Institute, Shanghai 201210, China

摘要

摘要: 研究了不同位置炸药爆炸作用下钛合金定向泄爆容器的冲击响应。通过试验与数值模拟，分析了100 g TNT炸药放置不同位置时容器的抗爆性能和冲击端头的飞行角度，并以限制罐体运动为目的，对罐体轴向受力进行了分析。研究表明：爆炸物位于轴线时，罐体产生弹性形变；紧贴内壁中间位置时，罐体外壁鼓包并贯穿开裂；紧贴内壁近端头处时，罐体外壁凸起。100 g TNT炸药作用下，冲击端头出口速度均值为124.45 m/s、最大偏角为2.3°，且爆炸物位置对端头出口速度影响较小。爆炸物位于轴线前、后端时，轴向力较爆炸物位于轴线中心时分别增大173%和116%。该研究可为民机定向泄爆容器及连接结构设计提供参考。
- 冲击动力学 /
- 最小风险炸弹位置 /
- Ti-6Al-4V合金 /
- 定向泄爆容器
Abstract: The reported study focuses on the investigation of the impact response of a titanium alloy directional detonation container when it is subjected to explosives at different positions. Through experimental and numerical simulation studies, the explosion resistance of the container and the flight angle of the impact plug are investigated when 100 g of TNT is placed in different positions. In order to restrict the motion of the container, the axial force on the container is analyzed. The results show that the container undergoes elastic deformation when the explosive is located on the axis. When it is in close contact with the middle of the inner wall, the outer wall of the container bulges and cracks. When it is in close contact with the near end of the inner wall, the outer wall of the container protrudes. Under the action of 100 g of TNT, the average velocity of the impact plug outlet is 124.45 m/s, and the maximum deviation angle is 2.3°. The explosive position has little influence on the velocity of the plug outlet. When the explosive is located at the front and rear ends of the axis, the axial force increases by 173% and 116%, respectively, compared to that when the explosive is located at the center of the axis. The study can provide reference to the design of directional detonation container and connection structure of civil aircraft.
- impact dynamics /
- least risk bomb location /
- Ti-6Al-4V alloy /
- directional detonation container

HTML全文

图 1 定向泄爆容器结构

Figure 1. Structure of the directional blowout container

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 测试装置

Figure 2. Test equipment

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 速度测试示意图

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of speed test

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 TNT位于不同位置时罐体的损伤情况

Figure 4. Damage conditions of the tank when TNT was located at different positions

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 高速摄影图像

Figure 5. High-speed photographic images

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 定向泄爆容器网格模型

Figure 6. Tank grid model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 有限元模型

Figure 7. Finite element model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 工况5中试验与数值模拟破坏形貌对比

Figure 8. Comparison of failure morphologies by test and simulation in case 5

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 工况5和工况6罐体的破坏形貌损伤云图

Figure 9. Damage nephograms of the tanks in case 5 and case 6

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 工况5和工况6罐体内空气域的压力云图

Figure 10. Air domain pressure nephograms in the tanks in case 5 and case 6

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 工况2和工况6端头的损伤云图

Figure 11. Damage nephograms of the head in case 2 and case 6

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 工况2和工况6端头的偏转角度

Figure 12. Deflection angles of the impact plugs in case 2 and case 6

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 炸药位于不同位置时端头的速度

Figure 13. Terminal velocity when the explosives at different locations

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 第1阶段的罐体轴向力

Figure 14. Axial force of the tank in stage 1

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 第2阶段罐体轴向力

Figure 15. Axial force of the tank in stage 2

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 各阶段的轴向力峰值

Figure 16. Peak value of axial force in each stage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 测试工况

Table 1. Test condition

工况	炸药位置	炸药示意图	工况	炸药位置	炸药示意图
1	罐体轴线靠近后端盖处		4	罐体内壁靠近后端盖处
2	罐体轴线中心		5	罐体内壁中心
3	罐体轴线靠近端头处		6	罐体内壁靠近端头处

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 测试工况

Table 2. Test conditions

工况	炸药位置	端头速度/(m·s⁻¹)	罐体损伤情况
1	罐体轴线靠近后端盖处		无变形、无开裂
2	罐体轴线中心位置	117.9	无变形、无开裂
3	罐体轴线靠近端头处		无变形、无开裂
4	罐体内壁靠近后端盖处		无变形、无开裂
5	罐体内壁中心位置		贯穿性裂纹，裂纹长度116.1 mm
6	罐体内壁靠近端头处		罐体凸起

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 TC4钛合金和15-5PH材料参数^[15-16]

Table 3. Material parameters of TC4 titanium alloy and 15-5PH^[15-16]

材料	ρ/(g·cm⁻³)	G/GPa	A/GPa	B/GPa	C	M	n	c_p/(J·kg⁻¹·K⁻¹)	T_m/K	T_r/K
TC4钛合金	4.428	109.778	1 098	1 092	0.014	1.1	0.930	560	1 878	293
15-5PH	7.800	196.507	1 077	499	0	0	0.568	502	1 713	293

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 TNT材料参数^[18]

Table 4. TNT material parameters^[18]

ρ/(g·cm⁻³)	爆速/(m·s⁻¹)	爆压/GPa	a/GPa	b/GPa	R₁	R₂	ω	E	V
1.63	6 930	21	373.77	3.7471	4.15	0.9	0.35	6.0	1

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 数值模拟结果与试验结果的对比

Table 5. Comparison between simulation results and test results

工况	爆炸物质量/g	爆炸物位置	破坏模式	端头飞行速度			贯穿裂纹长度
工况	爆炸物质量/g	爆炸物位置	破坏模式	试验/(m·s⁻¹)	模拟/(m·s⁻¹)	误差/%	试验/mm	模拟/mm	误差/%
2	100	罐体轴线中心	无变形、无开裂	117.9	125.5	6.45	−	−	−
5	100	罐体内壁中心	贯穿性裂纹	−	120.1	−	116.1	109.6	5.60

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(18)

[1]	Flight Safety Foundation. ASN Aviation safety database [EB/OL]. 2022. http://aviation-safety.net/database/year/2022/1.
[2]	FAR Part 25 Amendment No: 25-127. Security considerations requirements for transport gategory airplanes [S]. United States: Federal Aviation Administration, 2008.
[3]	14 CFR Parts 25 Airworthiness standards: transport category airplane [S]. Washington: Federal Aviation Administration, 2013.
[4]	CCAR-121-R5 大型飞机公共航空运输承运人运行合格审定规则 [Z]. 中国民用航空局, 2017.
[5]	MASI F, MARIANO P M, VANNUCCI P. Blast actions in aircrafts: an integrated methodology for designing protection devices [J]. Engineering Structures, 2018, 175: 895–911. DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.08.082.
[6]	DANG X L, CHAN P C. Design and test of a blast shield for Boeing 737 overhead compartment [J]. Shock and Vibration, 2006, 13(6): 547063. DOI: 10.1155/2006/547063.
[7]	LANGDON G S, KRIEK S, NURICK G N. Influence of venting on the response of scaled aircraft luggage containers subjected to internal blast loading [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2020, 141: 103567. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103567.
[8]	Civil Aviation Authority. Aircraft hardening research programme-final overview report: CAA paper 2001/9 [R]. London: CAA, 2001.
[9]	陆鹏, 郭忠宝, 杨超. 民用飞机最小风险炸弹位置适航符合性验证方法研究 [J]. 民用飞机设计与研究, 2016(4): 6–12. DOI: 10.19416/j.cnki.1674-9804.2016.04.002. LU P, GUO Z B, YANG C. Verification method investigation of airworthiness compliance for civil aircraft least risk bomb location design [J]. Civil Aircraft Design & Research, 2016(4): 6–12. DOI: 10.19416/j.cnki.1674-9804.2016.04.002.
[10]	冯振宇, 傅博宇, 解江, 等. 爆炸冲击载荷下机身壁板的动态响应 [J]. 航空学报, 2022, 43(6): 525513. DOI: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2021.25513. FENG Z Y, FU B Y, XIE J, et al. Dynamic response of fuselage panel under explosive impact load [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2022, 43(6): 525513. DOI: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2021.25513.
[11]	刘宗兴, 刘军, 李维娜. 爆炸冲击载荷下典型机身结构动响应及破坏 [J]. 航空学报, 2021, 42(2): 224252. DOI: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2020.24252. LIU Z X, LIU J, LI W N. Dynamic response and failure of typical fuselage structure under blast impact load [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2021, 42(2): 224252. DOI: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2020.24252.
[12]	朱铮铮, 冯蕴雯, 薛小峰, 等. 一种民机客舱便携式定向防爆装置: CN106197184A [P]. 2016-12-07.
[13]	韩璐, 苏健军, 张玉磊, 等. 一种聚能泄压民机客舱定向防爆装置: CN109780956A [P]. 2019-05-21.
[14]	李永鹏, 徐豫新, 杨祥, 等. 冲击载荷作用下机身壁板破坏效应及结构优化 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2023, 42(14): 40–47. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2023.14.005. LI Y P, XU Y X, YANG X, et al. Failure effect and structure optimization of a fuselage panel under impact load [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2023, 42(14): 40–47. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2023.14.005.
[15]	WANG X M, SHI J. Validation of Johnson-Cook plasticity and damage model using impact experiment [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2013, 60: 67–75. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.04.010.
[16]	戴志成. 飞机断离销剪切强度有限元与实验研究 [D]. 沈阳: 沈阳理工大学, 2017. DAI Z C. Finite element and experimental study on shear strength of aircraft fuse pin [D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Ligong University, 2017.
[17]	CASTEDO R, NATALE M, LÓPEZ L M, et al. Estimation of Jones-Wilkins-Lee parameters of emulsion explosives using cylinder tests and their numerical validation [J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2018, 112: 290–301. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.10.027.
[18]	LEE E, FINGER M, COLLINS W. JWL equation of state coefficients for high explosives: UCID-16189 [R]. Livermore: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1973. DOI: 10.2172/4479737.