聚氨酯泡沫铝复合结构抗爆吸能试验及数值模拟分析

张勇

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2021-0182

聚氨酯泡沫铝复合结构抗爆吸能试验及数值模拟分析

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0182

张勇

江苏建筑职业技术学院建筑建造学院，江苏徐州 221116

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（51478462, 51508565）

详细信息

作者简介:
张　勇（1980－　），男，博士，讲师，freebirdzy1980@163.com

中图分类号: O383；TU599
计量
- 文章访问数: 413
- HTML全文浏览量: 235
- PDF下载量: 132
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-05-12
- 修回日期: 2021-06-02
- 网络出版日期: 2022-03-09
- 刊出日期: 2022-05-09

Testingand numerical simulation of the antiknock energy absorption of polyurethane foam aluminum composite structure

ZHANG Yong

School of Architecture Construction, Jiangsu Vocational Institute of Architecture Technology, Xuzhou 221116, Jiangsu

摘要

摘要: 通过对聚氨酯泡沫铝和混凝土组成的复合结构进行接触爆炸试验，探讨了聚氨酯泡沫铝的吸能性能，并进行数值模拟分析。结果显示：聚氨酯泡沫铝的吸能性能明显优于泡沫铝，吸能层厚度对吸能效果影响很大，多层结构的聚氨酯泡沫铝吸能性能对比厚度一致的单层吸能层结构没有明显的改善；在保证了比较合理的吸能层厚度后，防护结构的每一层材料层存在着一个最佳的厚度组合来保证复合层优良的抗爆性能。
- 聚氨酯泡沫铝 /
- 夹层结构 /
- 抗爆试验 /
- 吸能性能 /
- 光滑粒子流体动力学
Abstract: Based on the contact explosion experiments, the absorption performance of the polyurethane foam aluminum and concrete composite structure was analyzed, and the relevant numerical simulation was analyzed and compared. First, polyurethane foam aluminum composite material was made through the pressurized equipment homemade. The hole of the aluminum foam was filled with polyurethane foam through pressure. Then the polyurethane foam aluminum composite material plates and concrete plates were fixed on the explosion experiment apparatus with high sensitivity of strain sensors, acceleration sensors and displacement sensors under the structure or surface. The experiments measured 5 groups of contact explosion experiment data under different structure combinations. Based on the change variables to the experiments, the calculation of numerical simulation experiments were supplemented to make up for other explosion experiments not involved due to lack of experiment conditions. The smooth particle hydrodynamic method (SPH) was used in the numerical simulation to avoid using Lagrange algorithm in explosion shock damage under the large deformation problem of mesh distortion problem. This method can more accurately reflect the explosion impact damage effect. Three kinds of calculation models were used to the numerical simulation. The main research was that the whole antiknock and absorption performance was changed with energy absorption layer thickness change and the number of the structure layer change of the composite structure. Results through explosion experiments and numerical analysis show that absorption performance of polyurethane foam aluminum is superior to that of aluminum foam, energy absorption layer thickness has a great influence on energy absorption effect, and the absorption performance of multilayer structure of polyurethane foam aluminum has no obvious improvement contrasting with the absorption performance of single layer structure with the same thickness. The multilayer structure of polyurethane foam aluminum also increases the difficulty of construction. Under certain conditions, with the reasonable energy absorption layer thickness of the protective structure there is one best combination to ensure that the compound layer thickness of excellent antiknock performance. Finally draw the conclusions: the explosion shock wave energy absorption performance can be improved about 25% by polyurethane foam aluminum than by aluminum foam. The thickness of the polyurethane foam aluminum significantly affects on the energy absorption antiknock performance. The energy absorption performance can improve 50% with increasing the 100% thickness of polyurethane foam aluminum. Effect of changing the antiknock structural energy absorption layers combination is not obvious.
- polyurethane foam aluminum /
- sandwich structure /
- antiknock test /
- energy absorption performance /
- smooth particle hydrodynamics

HTML全文

图 1 聚氨酯泡沫铝板（左）和泡沫铝板（右）对比（尺寸：1 m×1 m）

Figure 1. Polyurethane foam aluminum (left) and aluminum plates (right) (size: 1 m×1 m)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 试验组的安放

Figure 2. Test site layout

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 数据采集系统

Figure 3. Data acquisition system

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 现场5组试验布置

Figure 4. Five groups experimental setups

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 聚氨酯泡沫铝夹层（左）和泡沫铝夹层（右）受破坏情况对比

Figure 5. Differences in the damage between the polyurethane foam aluminum sandwich (left) and aluminum foam sandwich (right)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 两种工况受破坏情况

Figure 6. Damage in two cases

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 底部测点压力-时间曲线

Figure 7. Pressure force-time curves at the bottom point

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 底部测点位移曲线图

Figure 8. Displacement curves at the bottom point in three different cases

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 建立试验模型

Figure 9. Test model establishment

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 模型3的爆炸应力波传播图

Figure 10. Blast stress wave spread of model 3

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 底部混凝土测点压力的试验和模拟结果验证

Figure 11. Stress test and simulation contrast of the concrete points at the bottom

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 不同工况 0.9 ms时的破坏对比

Figure 12. Destruction contrast in different cases at 0.9 ms

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 工况4、6、7底部混凝土节点应力对比

Figure 13. Stress contrast of case 4, 6 & 7 nodes of the concrete at the bottom

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 工况4、8底部混凝土节点速度对比

Figure 14. Velocity contrast of model 4 & 8 node of the concrete at the bottom

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 泡沫铝板材的性能参数表

Table 1. Performance of aluminum foam plank parameter

孔径	孔隙率	通孔率	体积质量	抗压强度	抗弯强度	抗拉强度
1.66 mm	68~78%	90~95%	0.60~0.85 g/cm³	8.61 MPa	8.06 MPa	3.41 MPa

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 混凝土的配合比（kg/m³）

Table 2. Mixture ratio of concrete (kg/m³)

水	水泥	硅粉	粉煤灰	砂	石子	减水剂
150	370	50	80	595	1155	9

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 试验组设计

Table 3. Design of the test

工况	组合方式
1	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（220 mm）
2	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）/泡沫铝层（20 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）
3	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）/聚氨酯泡沫铝层（20 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）
4	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）/聚氨酯泡沫铝层（40 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）
5	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（66 mm）/聚氨酯泡沫铝层（20 mm）/混凝土层（66 mm）/ 聚氨酯泡沫铝层（20 mm）/混凝土层（66 mm）

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 改变材料层厚度的试验模型

Table 4. Change material thickness of the test model

工况	组合方式
6	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（120 mm）/聚氨酯泡沫铝层（20 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）
7	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（110 mm）/聚氨酯泡沫铝层（30 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）
8	覆土层（100 mm）/混凝土层（100 mm）/聚氨酯泡沫铝层（30 mm）/混凝土层（110 mm）

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(15)

[1]	SHEN J H, LU G X, WANG Z H, et al. Experiments on curved sandwich panels under blast loading [J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2010, 37(9): 960–970. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.03.002.
[2]	MERRETT R P, LANGDON G S, THEOBALD M D. The blast and impact loading of aluminium foam [J]. Materials & Design, 2012, 44: 311–319. DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.016.
[3]	YUN N R, SHIN D H, JI S W, et al. Experiments on blast protective systems using aluminum foam panels [J]. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2014, 18(7): 2153–2161. DOI: 10.1007/s12205-014-0092-3.
[4]	曾贵玉, 聂福德, 刘兰, 等. 聚氨酯原位结晶包覆HMX的研究 [J]. 含能材料, 2011, 19(2): 138–141. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2011.02.004. ZENG G Y, NIE F D, LIU L, et al. In-situ crystallization coating HMX by polyurethane [J]. Chinese Journal of Energetic Materials, 2011, 19(2): 138–141. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9941.2011.02.004.
[5]	朱长春, 翁汉元, 吕国会, 等. 国内外聚氨酯工业最新发展状况 [J]. 化学推进剂与高分子材料, 2012, 10(5): 1–20. DOI: 10.16572/j.issn1672-2191.2012.05.001. ZHU C C, WENG H Y, LYU G H, et al. The latest development status of polyurethane industry at home and abroad [J]. Chemical Propellants & Polymeric Materials, 2012, 10(5): 1–20. DOI: 10.16572/j.issn1672-2191.2012.05.001.
[6]	王冬梅, 夏绍灵, 张琳琪, 等. 聚氨酯/纳米复合材料的制备方法的研究进展 [J]. 高分子通报, 2011(3): 65–72. DOI: 10.14028/j.cnki.1003-3726.2011.03.015. WANG D M, XIA S L, ZHANG L Q, et al. Research progress in the Preparation methods of polyurethane/Nano-composite materials [J]. Polymer Bulletin, 2011(3): 65–72. DOI: 10.14028/j.cnki.1003-3726.2011.03.015.
[7]	USTA F, TÜRKMEN H S, SCARPA F. Low-velocity impact resistance of composite sandwich panels with various types of auxetic and non-auxetic core structures [J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2021, 163: 107738. DOI: 10.1016/J.TWS.2021.107738.
[8]	YÜKSEL E, GÜLLÜ A, ÖZKAYNAK H, et al. Experimental investigation and pseudoelastic truss model for in-plane behavior of corrugated sandwich panels with polyurethane foam core [J]. Structures, 2021, 29: 823–842. DOI: 10.1016/J.ISTRUC.2020.11.058.
[9]	隋顺彬, 康建功, 孙建虎. 泡沫铝在油气爆炸荷载作用下的吸能减冲击性能 [J]. 爆破, 2011, 28(2): 30–34. DOI: 10.3963/j.issn.1001-487X.2011.02.009. SUI S B, KANG J G, SUN J H. Energy absorption and vibration reduction performance of aluminum foam under fuel-air explosion loading [J]. Blasting, 2011, 28(2): 30–34. DOI: 10.3963/j.issn.1001-487X.2011.02.009.
[10]	张伟, 齐明思, 赵志芳, 等. 泡沫铝-聚氨酯复合材料制备及力学性能分析 [J]. 包装工程, 2017, 38(21): 35–40. DOI: 10.19554/j.cnki.1001-3563.2017.21.008. ZHANG W, QI M S, ZHAO Z F, et al. Preparation and mechanical property analysis of aluminum foam-polyurethane composites [J]. Packaging Engineering, 2017, 38(21): 35–40. DOI: 10.19554/j.cnki.1001-3563.2017.21.008.
[11]	谢卫红, 杜红涛, 李顺才. 泡沫铝与聚氨酯泡沫铝吸能特性对比 [J]. 沈阳建筑大学学报(自然科学版), 2011, 27(2): 307–311. XIE W H, DU H T, LI S C. Comparative study of energy absorption performance for open-cell aluminum and polyurethane foam aluminum [J]. Journal of Shenyang Jianzhu University (Natural Science), 2011, 27(2): 307–311.
[12]	谢卫红, 杜红涛, 李顺才. 聚氨酯泡沫铝复合材料动态力学实验 [J]. 复合材料学报, 2011, 28(3): 103–108. DOI: 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.2011.03.030. XIE W H, DU H T, LI S C. Experimental study on dynamic mechanical performance of polyurethanealuminum foams composites [J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica, 2011, 28(3): 103–108. DOI: 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.2011.03.030.
[13]	张勇, 陈力, 陈荣俊, 等. 聚氨酯泡沫铝动力学性能实验及本构模型研究 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2014, 34(3): 373–378. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2014)03-0373-06. ZHANG Y, CHEN L, CHEN R J, et al. Dynamic mechanical property experiment and constitutive model establishment of polyurethane foam aluminum [J]. Explosion and Shock waves, 2014, 34(3): 373–378. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2014)03-0373-06.
[14]	YU R, LUO W, YUAN H, et al. Experimental and numerical research on foam filled re-entrant cellular structure with negative Poisson's ratio [J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2020, 153: 106679. DOI: 10.1016/J.TWS.2020.106679.
[15]	张勇. 地面防护工程抗爆复合材料与结构研究 [D]. 江苏, 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2014: 26, 99, 103. ZHANG Y. Research on the antiknock composite material and structure of ground defense engineering [D]. Xuzhou, Jiangsu: China University of Mining and Technology, 2014: 26; 99; 103.