{"title":"以结构破坏为特征的城市环境CFD爆炸模拟的部分验证","authors":"S. Burrows, S. Forth, R. P. Sheldon","doi":"10.2495/cmem-v9-n4-365-380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We demonstrate the capabilities of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and a pressure-impulse failure model to predict blast loading and structural damage in a geometrically complex cityscape. The simulated loading is compared against experimental results for 69 g PE4 in a 1/50th scale model with wood-framed and plywood-faced buildings; data were collected from 11 pressure gauges throughout. In the initial simulation, geometric features were modeled as perfectly rigid, whereas buildings in the experiment failed: the resulting differences between the model and experiment allowed us to evaluate CFD when failure occurs. Simulated peak pressures during the first positive phase were still within 20% of experiment at most pressure gauges. However, errors in first phase impulses were around 40%, suggesting that building-failure effects are greater toward the phase end. Then, to model building-failure effects, we attempted to fit pressure-impulse failure curves to the plywood-faces: this proved too simplistic to produce realistic blast wave behavior due to the various, complex failure modes. This work illustrates key limitations of available CFD software and the pressure-impulse failure model – both industry-standard tools to determine structural response to blast. We conclude that stronger coupling between blast loading and structural response is needed where significant failure occurs.","PeriodicalId":36958,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Computational Methods and Experimental Measurements","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Partial validation of CFD blast simulation in a cityscape environment featuring structural failure\",\"authors\":\"S. Burrows, S. Forth, R. P. Sheldon\",\"doi\":\"10.2495/cmem-v9-n4-365-380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We demonstrate the capabilities of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and a pressure-impulse failure model to predict blast loading and structural damage in a geometrically complex cityscape. The simulated loading is compared against experimental results for 69 g PE4 in a 1/50th scale model with wood-framed and plywood-faced buildings; data were collected from 11 pressure gauges throughout. In the initial simulation, geometric features were modeled as perfectly rigid, whereas buildings in the experiment failed: the resulting differences between the model and experiment allowed us to evaluate CFD when failure occurs. Simulated peak pressures during the first positive phase were still within 20% of experiment at most pressure gauges. However, errors in first phase impulses were around 40%, suggesting that building-failure effects are greater toward the phase end. Then, to model building-failure effects, we attempted to fit pressure-impulse failure curves to the plywood-faces: this proved too simplistic to produce realistic blast wave behavior due to the various, complex failure modes. This work illustrates key limitations of available CFD software and the pressure-impulse failure model – both industry-standard tools to determine structural response to blast. We conclude that stronger coupling between blast loading and structural response is needed where significant failure occurs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Computational Methods and Experimental Measurements\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Computational Methods and Experimental Measurements\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2495/cmem-v9-n4-365-380\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Engineering\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Computational Methods and Experimental Measurements","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2495/cmem-v9-n4-365-380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
我们展示了计算流体力学(CFD)和压力冲击失效模型在几何复杂的城市景观中预测爆炸载荷和结构损伤的能力。在木结构和胶合板结构的1/50比例模型中,将模拟载荷与69 g PE4的实验结果进行了比较;从11个压力表收集数据。在最初的模拟中,几何特征被建模为完全刚性的,而实验中的建筑物失败了:模型和实验之间的差异使我们能够在失败发生时评估CFD。在大多数压力表上,第一正相的模拟峰值压力仍在实验的20%以内。然而,第一阶段脉冲的误差约为40%,这表明建筑物的破坏效应在阶段结束时更大。然后,为了模拟建筑物的破坏效应,我们试图拟合胶合板表面的压力-脉冲破坏曲线:由于各种复杂的破坏模式,这种方法被证明过于简单,无法产生真实的冲击波行为。这项工作说明了现有CFD软件和压力冲击失效模型的主要局限性,这两种工具都是确定结构对爆炸响应的行业标准工具。我们得出结论,在发生重大破坏的地方,爆炸载荷和结构响应之间需要更强的耦合。
Partial validation of CFD blast simulation in a cityscape environment featuring structural failure
We demonstrate the capabilities of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and a pressure-impulse failure model to predict blast loading and structural damage in a geometrically complex cityscape. The simulated loading is compared against experimental results for 69 g PE4 in a 1/50th scale model with wood-framed and plywood-faced buildings; data were collected from 11 pressure gauges throughout. In the initial simulation, geometric features were modeled as perfectly rigid, whereas buildings in the experiment failed: the resulting differences between the model and experiment allowed us to evaluate CFD when failure occurs. Simulated peak pressures during the first positive phase were still within 20% of experiment at most pressure gauges. However, errors in first phase impulses were around 40%, suggesting that building-failure effects are greater toward the phase end. Then, to model building-failure effects, we attempted to fit pressure-impulse failure curves to the plywood-faces: this proved too simplistic to produce realistic blast wave behavior due to the various, complex failure modes. This work illustrates key limitations of available CFD software and the pressure-impulse failure model – both industry-standard tools to determine structural response to blast. We conclude that stronger coupling between blast loading and structural response is needed where significant failure occurs.