8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 1/45
HSEHealth & Safe ty
Executive
Nonlinear analysis of stainless steel corrugatedpanels under blast loading: A numerical study
Prep ared by Imperial College of Science , Technology and
Medicine. for the Health and Safe ty Executive 2003
RESEARCH REPORT 102
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 2/45
HSEHealth & Safe ty
Executive
Nonlinear analysis of stainless steel corrugatedpanels under blast loading: A numerical study
V. De Rosa, J. Friis and L.A. Louca
Imp erial College of Science
Technology and Medicine.
This report presents results from a study to investigate the response of 3 standard corrugation profiles
which have been subjected to pressure time histories typical of a hydrocarbon explosion. In particular,
the study has investigated the sensitivity of peak displacements, plastic strains and dissipated energy
to mesh density and loading as these are commonly used parameters to describe the performance of
structures and to assess structural integrity in commonly used failure models.
This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Itscontents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do
not necessarily reflect HSE policy.
HSE BOOKS
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 3/45
© Crown copyright 2003
First published 2003
ISBN 0 7176 2722 5
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted inany form or by any means (electronic, mechanical,photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the priorwritten permission of the copyright owner.
Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to: Licensing Division, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ or by e-mail to [email protected]
ii
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 4/45
CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv
1. INTRODUCTION 12. FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING 3 2.1 Geometry and Loading 3 2.2 Material Behaviour 4 2.3 Choice of Element 5 2.4 Meshing 5 2.5 Eigenfrequency and Mesh Density Study 7
2.6 Response Parameters for Assessment 10 2.7 Results 10 3. LOCAL MODEL OF WELDED CONNECTION 26 3.1 Introduction 26 3.2 Structural Model 26 3.3 Material Model 27 3.4 Finite Element Model 27 3.5 Results 29 4. CONCLUSIONS 35 5. REFERENCES 37
iii
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 5/45
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents results from a study to investigate the response of 3 standard corrugation
profiles which have been subjected to pressure time histories typical of a hydrocarbon
explosion. In particular, the study has investigated the sensitivity of peak displacements, plasticstrains and dissipated energy to mesh density and loading as these are commonly used parameters to describe the performance of structures and to assess structural integrity incommonly used failure models.
An initial eigenvalue analysis was conducted to establish the first ten natural frequencies of thethree panels using different mesh densities and element types. The triangular elements availablewithin the ABAQUS finite element package were not found to perform as well as therectangular elements for the same mesh density. Up to the first six modes of vibration littledifference was seen between element types. However for the higher modes the results becamesensitive to mesh density with the results becoming less reliable for coarser meshes, indicatingfiner meshes are required to pick up the higher frequency modes.
A full non-linear dynamic finite element analysis accounting for both material and geometricnonlinearity of two of the profiles was carried out over a range of pressure time histories. Theresults indicated that the peak deflection and dissipated energy, which is a measure of the
energy absorbed by plastic deformation, were relatively insensitive to mesh density. This was both with and without added viscosity to the material model to account for strain rate effects.
However, the equivalent plastic strain was found to be very sensitive to mesh density. This wasexacerbated at low duration and high peak pressure events which can lead to brittle failuremodes developing. The addition of viscosity to the material model reduced the sensitivity but itwas not sufficient to remove this effect to mesh density.
A more refined model of the local weld detail was analysed in order to provide a more accurate
description at the critical location in the global model where failure was likely to occur. Themodel provided a more accurate three dimensional pattern of the strain distribution in andaround the weld detail. Although the peak values were occurring in the same location for thetwo models, the local model indicated that strain values higher than those in the global modelcan be achieved, despite the fact that the same loading history was applied to both models.
Despite the extensive detail in the model, the sensitivity of the plastic strain values to meshdensity could not be eliminated. However the reduced ductility of the 3D local model was
apparent and has implications for assessing ductility of structural systems on results obtainedfrom 2D analysis.
iv
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 6/45
1. INTRODUCTION
Corrugated panels are widely used on offshore topsides as firewalls and blastwalls to provide
separation between modules and ensure the safety of personnel. Since the Piper Alpha
1
tragedyin July 1988, a great deal of experimental and numerical work has been carried out in order toimprove understanding in the nature of the loading produced in a typical module structure
during a hydrocarbon explosion. While there has also been an interest in the blast resistance of beam and plate type structures over the same period, there is very little hard data available on
their response characteristics. This is particularly so in the area of failure, where the integrity of welded connections under large displacements, inevitable under the extreme loads being produced by explosion scenarios being considered, need to be assessed in order to establish safelower bound containment pressures for typical panel structures.
A recent study2
undertaken at Imperial College funded by the HSE, SHELL, BG Technologyand BP investigated the response of typical corrugated firewalls currently in use. A number of
full scale tests were conducted at Spadeadam as part of an ongoing safety study during the early1990‘s which provided a useful database in order to validate numerical finite element models.The firewalls were supported on novel connection details consisting of flexible angles whichwere shown to contribute significantly to the dissipation of the blast energy. It was estimated
that for a blastwall of 2.5 m span as much as 30% of total dissipated energy was absorbed in thetransverse angle perpendicular to the corrugation at the time of failure. The flexible angle was
also shown to reduce the amount of localised straining at the weld locations which gives anoverall improvement in structural integrity and estimated increase in capacity of almost 50%.
At present there is no universally accepted failure model for predicting dynamic plastic failureof a welded connection. Previous work by Holmes et al 3 has used a local damage model to
predict the ductile fracture of a welded T-joint under dynamic loading. The work was carried
out on small scale specimens with finite element analyses requiring extremely fine meshes.Bammann et al
4have used an internal state variable type of criterion which requires fracture
data from notched specimens to obtain damage parameters. Nurrick et al 5 has adopted a
relatively simple rupture strain criterion based on uniaxial tests of coupon specimens. Weldintegrity assessment using a strain based failure criteria was also adopted by Plane et al 6 as part
of a finite element analysis which was validated against large scale tests. The results highlightedthe conservative nature of simple failure models using a specified rupture strain in a finiteelement analysis.
The current numerical studies being conducted has highlighted that the prediction of plasticstrains at locations of high strain gradients is strongly dependent on mesh density as the strain
fields in the vicinity of the connection is characterised by large gradients. Although a continued
increase in the fineness of the mesh in this region will provide more information on strainvariations, the maximum value will tend to infinity due to the presence of a singularity. Thisreflects simplifications made in the geometric modelling of the weld detail which is inevitablefor practical modelling purposes. However the use of a simple strain based failure criteria was
used effectively to provide a lower bound to the containment pressure as the failure process for the numerical model gave an excellent qualitative comparison with the large scale testing.
A more universal approach to determining failure has been introduced by Jones and Shen 7,8
using an energy density failure criterion for beam and frame structures. The method assumesthat rupture occurs in a rigid-plastic structure when the absorption of plastic work reaches a
critical value which at an assumed hinge location can be determined from dynamic engineering
stress-strain curves.
1
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 7/45
The concept of energy was tested in reference 2 by carrying out an initial parametric studywhich suggested that the initiation of weld rupture could be predicted with sufficient accuracyusing a criteria based on the total amount of strain energy dissipated in the structure. A lower
bound for the energy capacity of the firewalls was determined for a static load condition. Thiswas then used as a limiting value in the dynamic analyses which produced encouraging results.
Importantly, studies of mesh sensitivity showed that the calculated value for dissipated energyconverge very rapidly with mesh refinements. This suggests that the safety of the firewall mayeffectively be assessed for different blast scenarios using the dissipated energy as a failurecriteria assuming failure occurs in a ductile tensile tearing mode and no local buckling of the
corrugations occur.
The study presented in this report has attempted to investigate further the effect of mesh densityon local strain values at connection details for three different corrugation profiles.
An initial eigenvalue analysis was conducted to establish the fundamental frequency of the
profiles and to study the effect of mesh density and element type on the first ten modes of vibration. The models were then analysed using a number of pressure time histories to
investigate the sensitivity of local strain values and dissipated energy to mesh density. Theinfluence of including strain rate effects have also been included in order to investigate the possibility of removing some of the strain singularity indicated in reference 2. The final sectionof the report establishes a local submodel with the weld modeled in some detail in order toestablish whether the strain singularity can be removed by the addition of viscosity.
2
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 8/45
2. FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING
2.1 GEOMETRY AND LOADING
The three corrugated profiles investigated in this study basically consist of unstiffenedtrapezoidal cold-formed profiles, made of stainless steel Grade 2205, spanning vertically for alength of 4.000 m between supporting structures. The geometry of the profiles is shown in
Figure 1. The profiles have been referred to as:(i) a shallow-trough profile, termed X in the following, with a wave length of 260 mm,
a depth of 41 mm and a thickness of 2.5 mm;(ii) a medium-trough profile, termed Y in the following, with a wave length of 250 mm,
a depth of 80 mm and a thickness of 2.5 mm;(iii) a deep-trough profile, termed Z in the following, with a wave length of 350 mm, a
depth of 195 mm and a thickness of 5.0 mm.
The structural scheme considered in the finite element model has been obtained by applying the
mathematical boundary conditions given, on the one hand, by symmetry considerations and, onthe other hand, by some sort of engineering judgement on constructive details typically used at
interfaces with deck plates and top girders. In particular, as far as symmetry conditions areconcerned, symmetry planes have been adopted along the longitudinal planes both at mid-peak
and at mid-trough of the transverse section, so that only a half-wave of the corrugation (assumedto be extracted from a panel with an infinite width) has been modelled
CL
67 45 67
4 1
260
40.5 40.5
t=2.5mm
40 45 80 45 40
8 0
250
CL
Shallow Trough
t=2.5mm
36 72 36
1 9 5
CL
Medium Trough
103 103
350
t=5.0mm
Deep Trough
Figure 1
Investigated profiles
3
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 9/45
Symmetry boundary conditions have also been accounted for about the transverse plane atmidspan of the corrugation. Therefore, only one quarter of the whole single corrugation (whosecross-section is represented in Figure 1) has been modelled. As regards modelling boundary
conditions at the terminal transverse section of the corrugation, in the —global“ model analysedin the present Section, a 10 mm thick stainless steel plate has been assumed to be rigidly
connected to the corrugation, with its lower edge being hinged. A more realistic modelling,adopted for the —local“ model, will be shown in the following.
Finally, as far as loading conditions are concerned, isosceles pressure pulses having a duration
time equal to 40, 80 and 120 ms and a peak pressure ranging from 0.50 bar to 1.50 bar , with anincreasing step equal to 0.25 bar , have been applied. Obviously, response parameters
corresponding to a load with given duration time and peak pressure have been assumed to bevalid only when the adopted failure criteria are satisfied for the given structural model.
2.2 MATERIAL BEHAVIOUR
Both the corrugations and the end plates are made of stainless steel Grade 2205. The relevantstress-strain diagram (in terms of true Cauchy stress and logarithmic strain, respectively) isdepicted in Figure 2. As far as the elastic part of the material behaviour is concerned, a linear
model (defined by a Young modulus E =2.1⋅ 105 Nmm
-2and a Poisson modulus ν =0.30) has been
chosen. As soon as the uniaxial equivalent yielding stress of 435.169 Nmm-2(defining a Von
Mises œ and therefore isotropic œ yield surface) is attained, the corresponding incremental strain
is governed by the associated plastic flow law and the adoption of an isotropic hardening model.As regards the implementation of the material strain-rate dependence in the finite elementmodel, it has been achieved by means of the well-known Cowper-Sydmonds formula:
1
+
ε&D
q
1σ σ=d 0
In particular, material constants D=7.69 s-1 and q=5.13, corresponding to a 0.1% offset proof
stress, are taken as evaluated by Jones and Birch9.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
S t r
σ
, ( M P a )
e s s ,
E=0.200E6 MPa Nominal
True
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Strain, ε , ( m/m )
Figure 2
Material stress-strain behaviour
4
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 10/45
2.3 CHOICE OF ELEMENTS
In the analyses illustrated in the present report, ABAQUS/Explicit10,11 has been used as the
finite element model. Three-dimensional shell elements have been adopted throughout, asdeemed correct and advisable whenever the thickness of the structure is less than 1/10 of a
typical structural dimension (in the present case, distance between supports or wavelength of thehighest vibration mode of interest). In particular, the following three finite elements have beenconsidered:
(i) the S4 finite element: a four-node, three-dimensional, fully-integrated, finite-strain,
general-purpose (i.e. valid for both thick and thin shell problems) element, with sixdegrees of freedom per node (i.e. three displacement components and three rotation
components);(ii) the S4R finite element: a four-node, three-dimensional, finite-strain, general-
purpose (i.e. valid for both thick and thin shell problems) element, with six degreesof freedom per node (i.e. three displacement components and three rotation
components), using a reduced (lower order) integration law to form the elementstiffness (the only Gauss point is situated at the centre of the element), while the
mass matrix is still integrated exactly;(iii) the S3≡ S3R finite element: a three-node, three-dimensional, finite-strain, general- purpose (i.e. valid for both thick and thin shell problems) element, with six degreesof freedom per node (i.e. three displacement components and three rotationcomponents); the number of Gauss points is equal to 1 in both cases, and it issituated at the centre of the element.
For all of the elements, five section points have been specified through the shell thickness.
Stresses and strains are calculated independently at each section point through the thickness of the shell by means of a Simpsons integration rule.
2.4 MESHING
As advisable when adopting explicit methods of solution in numerical problems, a uniformmesh density has been adopted throughout the whole model, regardless of the mesh coarseness,the adopted finite element and the boundary conditions.
As far as the meshes based on four-noded finite elements are concerned, three basic mesh
densities have been adopted for the all the investigated geometries: coarse mesh, medium andfine (termed 1, 2 and 3 in the following, respectively). In all the cases, i.e. regardless of the profile geometry or the mesh density, the number of nodes in the transverse direction has been
chosen such in a way to keep a constant width-to-depth ratio (approximately equal to 1.0÷ 2.5)for the considered finite element. Besides, an extra mesh geometry, indicated by number 4 and
characterised by a width-to-depth ratio equal to 1.0, has been considered: it has been obtained by keeping the same number of nodes on the transverse section as in the mesh geometry 3,
while the number of nodes in the longitudinal direction has been increased in such a way as toobtain square finite elements. Details of the considered mesh geometries for all the threeconsidered profiles are given in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3 below (in the —Label“ column of each Table the letter indicating the profile type precedes the number indicating the meshdensity). For shallow- and medium-trough corrugation only, the considered mesh geometries
based on four-noded elements are also illustrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4, respectively.
As far as the meshes based on the three-node finite element are concerned, they have beenconsidered for the shallow profiles only and, in particular, only for the geometries indicated
above as X1 and X2. This is due to the relatively poor results yielded by these meshes in theeigenvalue analysis which is discussed in Paragraph 2.4. For triangular meshes, no figures are
5
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 11/45
shown, since they have been obtained by simply dividing every rectangular finite element intwo equal parts, and keeping unchanged the spatial distribution of nodes of both the original
geometries.
.
Figure 3
FE models for shallow-trough profile
Figure 4
FE models for medium-trough profile
Table 1 Meshing for ³ shallow trough profile
LabelTransverse Direction Elts. Longitudinal Direction Elts.
Total No. of Elts. Width-to-Depth RatioNo. Average Width [mm] No. Depth [mm]
X1 7 21.0 40 50 280 0.42 X2 9 16.3 50 40 450 0.41 X3 14 10.5 80 25 1120 0.42 X4 14 10.5 200 10 2800 1.05
Table 2 Meshing for ³ medium trough profile
LabelTransverse Direction Elts. Longitudinal Direction Elts.
Total No. of Elts. Width-to-Depth Ratio
No. Average Width [mm] No. Depth [mm] Y1 9 19.1 40 50 360 0.38 Y2 12 14.3 50 40 600 0.36 Y3 17 10.1 80 25 1360 0.40
4 17 10.1 200 10 3400 1.01
Table 3 Meshing for ³ deep trough profile
LabelTransverse Direction Elts. Longitudinal Direction Elts.
Total No. of Elts. Width-to-Depth RatioNo. Average Width [mm] No. Depth [mm]
Z1 14 20.9 40 50 560 0.42 Z2 19 15.4 50 40 950 0.38 Z3 30 9.8 80 25 2400 0.39 Z4 30 9.8 200 10 6000 0.98
6
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 12/45
2.5 EIGENFREQUENCY AND MESH DENSITY STUDY
In order to establish the finite element and the mesh geometry to be adopted in the nonlinear
explicit analysis of the global model, an eigenfrequency analysis has been performed for different finite element models, i.e. for some of the possible combinations between the finite
elements and mesh geometries illustrated in Paragraph 2.3. Each of the considered finiteelement models has been applied to all the three profile geometries described above; besides,different boundary conditions have been applied to nodes lying along the internal edge of the 10
mm thick plate at the end of the corrugation. In particular, for these nodes, the translational
degrees of freedom are assumed to be fixed, as well as the rotational degrees of freedom about both axes perpendicular to the cross section of the profile and perpendicular to the longitudinal
plane in the mid-plane of the corrugation. On the other hand, for the rotational degree of freedom about an axis perpendicular to the longitudinal symmetry planes, two boundary
conditions have been considered: either restrained (i.e. a fully-clamped boundary condition isobtained along the edge) or free (i.e. a simply-supported boundary condition is obtained along
the edge). These two —limit“ boundary conditions have been considered in order to determine alower bound and an upper bound to the eigenfrequencies for a given finite element model and a
given profile, according to the rotational constraint that different constructional details at theedge of the end-plate will be able to provide in reality.
The eigenfrequency analysis has been performed by means of a subspace iteration eigensolver,and the obtained eigenvectors have been normalised with respect to the structure‘s mass matrix
(i.e. the eigenvectors are scaled so that the generalised mass for each vector is unity).For each finite element and mesh geometry, results are presented in Tables 4 to 9, for shallow-,medium- and deep-trough profiles, respectively. In particular, for each profile type, the former Table gives the results for the —simply-supported“ boundary condition, while the latter refers to
the —fully clamped“ boundary condition. In each Table, the shadowed column is intended tohighlight the eigenfrequencies provided by the —most accurate“ finite element model, clearly
given by the combination between the most refined mesh geometry, indicated by number 4, and
the S4 finite element.
A comparison between the eigenfrequencies provided by the several models and the ones
yielded by the —most accurate“ model leads to the following observations:i) the accuracy of the results provided by the different models is practically
independent of the boundary conditions at the end transverse section of thecorrugation. In terms of eigenfrequencies, the difference œ even for the highest ones œ is almost invariably contained within a 2% range (the only exception being foundfor the three-node-element-based models), and no prediction is possible on the possibility that either the simply supported or the fully clamped condition will
provide the stiffer response.ii) finite-element models (such as X1,S3 and X2,S3) based on three-node elements
show a relatively poor performance, if their results are compared with the onesyielded by models characterised by the same number of nodes (but with a number
of elements equal to 50%!) but based on four-node elements, either they are full- or reduced-integration (i.e. the models indicated in Table 10 and Table 11 as X1,S4;
X1,S4R; X2,S4;X2,S4R). For example, it can be seen that, while the firsteigenfrequency is correctly predicted by models based on four-node elements even
by the X1 mesh geometry, the equivalent three-node model provides an 8÷ 11%stiffer response, depending on the geometrical boundary conditions. Therefore,three-node elements have been used only for the earliest numerical experiments(regarding the shallow-trough profile).
iii) convergence towards the —exact“ solution (i.e. the one provided by the most refinedmodel) is the same regardless of the investigated geometry of the profile
(shallow/medium trough) aqnd the adopted finite element: mesh geometries denoted
7
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 13/45
by X3 and Y3 provide practically the same eigenfrequency values (i.e. within a0.5% range) as the corresponding most refined models X4 and Y4. Therefore, meshgeometries characterised by a width of about 10 mm and a length of about 25 mm
provide eigenfrequency values very close to the corresponding ones yielded by themost refined model accounted for in the present analysis.
iv) as far intermediate mesh geometries X2 and Y2 are concerned, in one case(medium-trough profile) solutions practically identical to the ones given by mostrefined ones are obtained; on the other hand, quite surprisingly, for eigenfrequencies from the second onward, for shallow-trough profiles, they provide
results much stiffer (up to 40%) than the —exact“ ones and, noticeably, even worsethan the ones provided by the coarsest mesh geometries.
As a consequence of the considerations illustrated above, only the S4R finite element will be
used in the nonlinear analyses illustrated in the following (both in the —global“ and in the —local“models), while the three mesh geometries denoted with numbers from 1 to 3 will be adopted for
comparison purposes on the adopted response parameters in the nonlinear field. The nonlinear analysis, both for the local and the global model, will be limited to the X and Y profiles.
Table 4
Eigenmodes for simply supported shallow-trough profileEigenfrequency Values [Hz] for Simply Supported Shallow-Trough Corrugated Profiles (L=4.000 m)
Mode No. X1,S4 X1,S4R X2,S4 X2,S4R X3,S4 X3,S4R X4,S4 X4,S4R X1,S3 X2,S3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10.4 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 76.7 75.9 76.6 76.1 76.6 76.3 202 200 200 199 201 200 363 359 357 355 357 356 502 497 503 499 488 486 578 573 603 597 556 554 618 612 662 655 592 591 646 638 700 692 619 617 672 661 730 720 643 640 699 685 757 745 668 664
10.3 76.5 200 357 487 555 592 618 642 666
10.3 11.2 10.7 76.3 84.6 80.0 200 222 210 355 388 370 485 514 499 554 578 568 591 616 608 617 647 639 641 678 669 665 700 699
Table 5 Eigenmodes for fully clamped shallow-trough profile
Eigenfrequency Values [Hz] for Fully Clamped Shallow-Trough Corrugated Profiles (L=4.000 m)
Mode No. X1,S4 X1,S4R X2,S4 X2,S4R X3,S4 X3,S4R X4,S4 X4,S4R X1,S3 X2,S3
1 18.9 18.7 18.9 18.8 18.9 18.8 18.9 18.8 21.0 19.8 2 100 98.9 99.8 99.2 99.8 99.5 99.7 99.4 111 104 3 236 234 234 232 234 234 234 233 258 244 4 397 393 391 389 390 389 389 388 420 402 5 522 518 527 524 505 504 505 504 529 516 6 586 582 616 611 563 562 563 562 584 576 7 622 616 669 663 596 595 596 595 620 613 8 650 641 705 697 622 620 621 621 651 643 9 675 664 734 724 646 643 645 644 683 674
10 702 689 761 749 671 668 669 669 701 700
8
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 14/45
Table 6 Eigenmodes for simply supported medium-trough profile
Eigenfrequency Values [Hz] for Simply Supported
Medium-Trough Corrugated Profiles (L=4.000 m)
Mode No. Y1,S4 Y1,S4R Y2,S4 Y2,S4R Y3,S4 Y3,S4R Y4,S4 Y4,S4R
1 22.7 22.5 22.7 22.6 22.7 22.6 22.7 22.6 2 151.5 149.2 151.2 150.5 151.1 150.4 150.9 150.3 3 390.2 383.4 387.7 384.8 386.8 384.1 385.8 383.5 4 708.1 694.7 695.5 688.7 693.1 686.9 690.1 685.4 5 956.1 952.7 854.8 854.7 856.2 856.2 856.2 856.2 6 959.0 956.0 857.7 857.4 859.1 859.0 859.1 859.1 7 960.2 958.5 864.2 863.3 865.6 865.2 865.5 865.4 8 965.6 964.0 871.0 867.9 872.6 871.1 872.2 871.6 9 978.7 975.3 878.5 876.4 879.2 878.2 878.9 878.4 10 990.0 982.2 891.3 887.2 892.7 890.9 892.3 891.8
Table 7 Eigenmodes for fully clamped medium-trough profileEigenfrequency Values [Hz] for Fully Clamped
Medium-Trough Corrugated Profiles (L=4.000 m)
Mode No. Y1,S4 Y1,S4R Y2,S4 Y2,S4R Y3,S4 Y3,S4R Y4,S4 Y4,S4R
1 36.6 36.0 36.6 36.4 36.6 36.4 36.6 36.4 2 192 189 192 191 191 191 191 191 3 453 447 449 448 448 447 448 446 4 784 775 765 763 764 762 763 761 5 956 956 855 855 856 856 856 856 6 959 959 858 858 860 859 859 860 7 966 963 865 865 867 866 867 867 8 970 966 876 873 877 876 876 877 9 984 980 887 885 887 886 886 886 10 993 985 895 891 896 895 895 896
Table 8 Eigenmodes for simply supported deep-trough profile
Eigenfrequency Values [Hz] for Simply Supported
Deep-Trough Corrugated Profiles (L=4.000 m)
Mode No. Z1,S4 Z1,S4R Z2,S4 Z2,S4R Z3,S4 Z3,S4R Z4,S4 Z4,S4R
1 49.7 49.5 49.7 49.5 49.6 49.5 49.6 49.5 2 200 200 258 256 198 197 197 197 3 209 209 286 286 206 206 206 206 4 215 215 293 292 212 212 212 212 5 217 217 298 298 214 213 214 213 6 224 223 301 300 220 220 220 220 7 234 233 310 309 231 230 230 230 8 248 246 322 321 244 243 243 243 9 264 262 337 335 260 259 259 259 10 284 281 350 347 279 278 278 278
9
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 15/45
Table 9 Eigenmodes for fully clamped deep-trough profile
Eigenfrequency Values [Hz] for Fully Clamped
Deep-Trough Corrugated Profiles (L=4.000 m)
Mode No. Z1,S4 Z1,S4R Z2,S4 Z2,S4R Z3,S4 Z3,S4R Z4,S4 Z4,S4R
1 76.1 75.9 76.3 76.2 76.0 75.9 76.0 75.9 2 204 204 273 273 201 201 201 201 3 212 211 288 288 209 208 208 208 4 218 218 296 295 215 215 215 215 5 219 218 298 298 216 216 216 216 6 229 228 305 304 226 225 226 226 7 242 240 316 315 238 238 238 238 8 258 256 331 329 254 253 254 253 9 278 275 348 346 273 272 272 272
10 302 298 369 366 295 294 294 294
2.6 RESPONSE PARAMETERS FOR ASSESSMENT
In order to evaluate the influence of the considered load characteristics (i.e. peak pressure and
duration), material model (linear elastic with isotropic hardening, either including strain-ratedependence or not) and mesh density on the structural response, three parameters have been
considered:1. the maximum equivalent plastic strain (either in the corrugation or in the end-plate),
termed PEEQ in the Tables and Figures below:
t
ε pl =⌠ ⌡
2tr (dεpl dεpl )
30
2. the maximum transverse displacement in the midspan section at the instant t=T d
corresponding to the end of the applied blast load, termed U 3max in the Tables andFigures below;
3. the total strain energy in the structure, termed ALLIE in the Tables and Figures below.Such quantity is given by the sum of the energy dissipated by rate-independent and rate-dependent (if any) plastic deformation, and the recoverable strain energy. Both thesequantities are measured at the instant t=T d corresponding to the end of the applied blast
load. Obviously, if this measure were performed at t>T d , only the measure of theresidual elastic strain energy would be affected.
2.7 RESULTS
Table 10 and Table 11 below show the obtained results for the X and Y profiles. Whenever
strain-rate dependence has been included, symbol SR has been added to the letter and thenumber identifying the investigated geometry and the adopted mesh density, respectively.
From Figures 5 to 7 it is shown the variation of the total strain energy of the structure with theadopted mesh density, material model and time duration, for a given peak pressure. It may beobserved that results yielded by the three different mesh densities are practically coincident,
either the strain-rate dependence is accounted for or not, once the load characteristics and the profile geometry are given; even the shapes of the ALLIE-T d curves are very similar. Besides, asexpected, the influence of the strain-rate dependence on this response parameter decreases as theduration of the applied load increases: typically, for non-strain-rate-sensitive models, an
10
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 16/45
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 17/45
Table 11 Response of simply supported shallow-trough profile
Model Label Td [s] P [bar] U3,max (Td) [mm] ALLIE (Td)[J] PEEQmax [%]
X1 0.040 0.50 -123.1 1.09E+03 7.31 X1,SR 0.040 0.50 -79.0 8.49E+02 7.28 X2 0.040 0.50 -123.7 1.09E+03 8.76
X2,SR 0.040 0.50 -80.0 8.56E+02 8.72 X3 0.040 0.50 -124.9 1.09E+03 12.90 X3,SR 0.040 0.50 -78.8 8.43E+02 12.26 X1 0.080 0.50 -103.2 5.04E+02 3.54
X1,SR 0.080 0.50 -77.6 3.25E+02 3.17 X2 0.080 0.50 -103.8 5.10E+02 4.30
X2,SR 0.080 0.50 -78.3 3.30E+02 3.93 X3 0.080 0.50 -104.5 5.22E+02 6.32
X3,SR 0.080 0.50 -77.3 3.30E+02 5.57 X1 0.120 0.50 -58.7 2.51E+02 2.11
X1,SR 0.120 0.50 -41.8 1.83E+02 2.00 X2 0.120 0.50 -59.7 2.54E+02 2.59
X2,SR 0.120 0.50 -41.7 1.85E+02 2.50 X3 0.120 0.50 -60.3 2.59E+02 3.92
X3,SR 0.120 0.50 -41.4 1.89E+02 3.39 X1 0.040 0.75 -231.8 2.37E+03 14.51
X1,SR 0.040 0.75 -188.6 1.83E+03 14.53 X2 0.040 0.75 -233.8 2.40E+03 16.74
X2,SR 0.040 0.75 -189.2 1.84E+03 16.73 X3 0.040 0.75 -236.8 2.44E+03 22.50
X3,SR 0.040 0.75 -186.6 1.81E+03 22.53 X1 0.080 0.75 -160.5 1.20E+03 7.88
X1,SR 0.080 0.75 -95.6 8.00E+02 6.83 X2 0.080 0.75 -162.1 1.21E+03 9.23
X2,SR 0.080 0.75 -96.7 8.06E+02 8.28 X3 0.080 0.75 -166.2 1.24E+03 13.11
X3,SR 0.080 0.75 -95.2 7.94E+02 11.37 X1 0.120 0.75 -117.2 6.61E+02 4.57
X1,SR 0.120 0.75 -89.1 4.91E+02 4.40 X2 0.120 0.75 -117.3 6.61E+02 5.44
X2,SR 0.120 0.75 -89.0 4.91E+02 5.37 X3 0.120 0.75 -118.9 6.76E+02 7.91
X3,SR 0.120 0.75 -88.2 4.95E+02 7.26 X1 0.040 1.00 -295.1 4.18E+03 23.50
X1,SR 0.040 1.00 -237.6 3.21E+03 23.13 X2 0.040 1.00 -298.2 4.24E+03 27.17
X2,SR 0.040 1.00 -238.8 3.23E+03 26.79 X3 0.040 1.00 -303.6 4.33E+03 37.38
X3,SR 0.040 1.00 -238.7 3.17E+03 36.51 X1 0.080 1.00 -203.8 2.11E+03 13.05
X1,SR 0.080 1.00 -162.6 1.38E+03 11.14 X2 0.080 1.00 -205.3 2.15E+03 15.14
X2,SR 0.080 1.00 -162.8 1.39E+03 13.01 X3 0.080 1.00 -208.0 2.21E+03 20.59 X3,SR 0.080 1.00 -159.3 1.37E+03 17.56 X1 0.120 1.00 -158.5 1.26E+03 8.26
X1,SR 0.120 1.00 -122.1 9.77E+02 8.04 X2 0.120 1.00 -159.9 1.26E+03 9.64
X2,SR 0.120 1.00 -122.5 9.77E+02 9.48 X3 0.120 1.00 -161.4 1.29E+03 13.46
X3,SR 0.120 1.00 -122.3 9.73E+02 12.62 X1 0.080 1.25 -246.6 3.22E+03 18.76 X2 0.080 1.25 -249.8 3.28E+03 21.61 X3 0.080 1.25 -256.5 3.39E+03 29.56 X1 0.120 1.25 -205.1 1.99E+03 12.37 X2 0.120 1.25 -206.3 2.00E+03 14.26 X3 0.120 1.25 -207.8 2.01E+03 19.23 X1 0.120 1.50 -239.1 2.83E+03 16.79 X2 0.120 1.50 -240.6 2.85E+03 19.13 X3 0.120 1.50 -243.8 2.88E+03 25.60
12
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 18/45
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 19/45
d p
Td [s]
I E [ J ]
Y1 Y2 Y3
ALLIE Value on the Y Profile at t=T for P =0.50 bar
0.00E+00
1.00E+02
2.00E+02
3.00E+02
4.00E+02
5.00E+02
6.00E+02
7.00E+02
0.040 0.080 0.120
A L L
Y1,SR Y2,SR Y3,SR
Figure 7 Maximum strain energy calculated for the various FE models of medium-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 0.50 bar
d p
0
Td [s]
U
[ m m ]
X1 X2 X3
Maximum Transverse Midspan Displacement on the X Profile at t=T for P =0.50 bar
-140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20
0.040 0.080 0.120
3 m a x
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 8
Maximum displacement calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 0.50 bar
14
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 20/45
d p
0
Td [s]
U
]
X1 X2 X3
Maximum Transverse Midspan Displacement on the X Profile at t=T for P =1.00 bar
-350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50
0.040 0.080 0.120
3 m a x
[ m m
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 9 Maximum displacement calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 1.00 bar
d p
0
Td [s]
U
]
Y1 Y2 Y3
Maximum Transverse Midspan Displacement on the Y Profile at t=T for P =0.50 bar
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0.040 0.080 0.120
3 m a x
[ m m
Y1,SR Y2,SR Y3,SR
Figure 10 Maximum displacement calculated for the various FE models of medium-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 0.50 bar
15
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 21/45
d
Pp ]
X1 X2 X3
PEEQ Peak Value on the X Profile for T =0.040 s
0.00 0.06 0.12 0.18 0.24 0.30 0.36 0.42 0.48 0.54 0.60
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 [bar
P E E Q
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 11 Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant duration of 0.04 sec
d
0.50 Pp ]
X1 X2
X3
PEEQ Peak Value on the X Profile for T =0.080 s
0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15 0.18 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.30
0.75 1.00 1.25 [bar
P E E Q
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 12 Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant duration of 0.08 sec
16
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 22/45
d
1.00 Pp ]
X1 X2 X3
PEEQ Peak Value on the X Profile for T =0.120 s
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20
0.50 0.75 1.25 [bar
P E E Q
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 13 Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant duration of 0.12 sec
l p
Td [s]
X1 X2 X3
PEEQ Peak Va ue on the X Profile for P =0.50 bar
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.040 0.080 0.120
P
E E Q
X1,SR
X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 14 Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 0.50 bar
17
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 23/45
l p
Td [s]
X1 X2 X3
PEEQ Peak Va ue on the X Profile for P =0.75 bar
0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15 0.18 0.21 0.24
0.040 0.080 0.120
P E E Q
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
Figure 15 Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 0.75 bar
l p
Td [s]
X1 X2 X3
PEEQ Peak Va ue on the X Profile for P =1.00 bar
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 0.32 0.36 0.40
0.040 0.080 0.120
P E E Q
X1,SR X2,SR
X3,SR
Figure 16
Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile whensubjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 1.00 bar
18
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 24/45
l p
Td [s]
X1 X2 X3
PEEQ Peak Va ue on the X Profile for P =1.25 bar
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60
0.040 0.080 0.120
P E E Q
Figure 17
Maximum plastic strain calculated for the various FE models of shallow-trough profile when
subjected to pressure pulses with a constant peak pressure of 1.25 bar
From all the figures above, it can be clearly seen that the equivalent plastic strain is mesh-
dependent, both for strain-rate dependent and strain-rate independent material models. For agiven duration time of the pulse pressure, Figures from 8 to 10 show that, as regards the non-strain-sensitive-models, an increase of about 100% of the parameter under consideration takes place for P p=0.50 bar , when passing from the coarsest mesh density to the finest one. On theother hand, when the assumed value of the peak pressure is the maximum one roughlycompatible with the assumed duration time (i.e. 0.75 bar for T d =40 ms, 1.00 bar for T d =80 ms,1.25 bar for T d =120 ms), the increase of the PEEQ when passing from the X1 to the X3 model,
ranges, in all the cases, between 50% and 60%. In particular, considering the —extreme cases“for the profile X , it may be observed that, evaluating the average of the maximum value of the
PEEQ: over all the considered pressures: for low time durations, there is an increase of about60% when passing from the coarse mesh to the fine one, while the increase is of 25% only when
high time durations are accounted for; over all the considered duration times: for low pressures,there is an increase of about 15% when passing from the coarse mesh to the fine one, while the
increase is of about 50% when high peak pressures are accounted for. Basically, the problem of the mesh dependency is exacerbated by short duration time and high peak pressure events. Inany case, however, the observed influence of the mesh density on the equivalent plastic strain isa considerable matter of concern, especially if the following considerations are accounted for: asfar as the other two response parameters are concerned, practically no mesh-sensitivity, as
illustrated above, can be observed, meaning that even the coarsest one is suitable to providesufficiently accurate results in terms of both global (i.e. the total strain energy in the structure)and local (i.e. the maximum transverse displacement at midspan) parameters; if the attainmentof a limit value of the equivalent plastic strain is assumed as a simple criterion to assess thefailure of the blast wall under given loading conditions, mesh sensitivity effects often showthemselves to be of crucial importance, since a load condition which may be considered as
—safe“ according the coarsest mesh density, may become —unsafe“ according to the intermediate
or finest mesh; the same applies if a more refined strain-based fracture mechanics criterion is
19
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 25/45
adopted in order to assess the resistance of the blast wall with respect to some of the possiblefailure forms, e.g. plate tearing; the importance of acquiring a reliable evaluation of the plasticstrain state via the finite element method is even more evident if one observes that, as shown by
Figure 18, the greatest mesh-dependence effects on the values of the PEEQ reported in Figuresfrom 11 to 17 are invariably localised in the part of the corrugated profile adjacent to the
corrugation-to-end-plate welded connection, i.e. where experiments have proved most of thefailures initiate.
Figure 18 shows, for a particular loading case on the shallow-trough profile, the variation, in the
longitudinal direction, of the maximum PEEQ value obtained, for a given finite element model.Distance reported on the abscissa is therefore the distance of the centroids of the rectangular
elements, all belonging, for a given mesh density, to the same cross-section and then having thesame distance from the end section of the corrugation. As outlined above, it can be seen that
mesh-dependence effects on the considered response parameter become less important as thelongitudinal distance from the end section increases, and they are particularly clear when
passing from the intermediate to the fine mesh, rather than from the coarse to the intermediateone. Besides, whatever is the mesh density, the equivalent plastic strain tends to infinity as the
distance from the end-plate goes to zero. More specifically, it may be interestingly observed thatthe PEEQ vs. distance curve for the finest mesh does not show a monotonic trend as in the twoother cases, since a sudden decrease in the PEEQ, followed by an immediate increase, can bedetected. Since all of the maximum values of the PEEQ, at a given cross-section, reported in
Figure 18 invariably take place in the compressed flange of the profile, such a trend of the curve
seems to indicate the occurrence of a local buckling phenomenon having a half-wave lengthshorter than the characteristic dimension of the finite element adopted for the coarse and theintermediate meshes. A diagram showing, for the X3 model and the same loading condition asabove, the PEEQ values at the centroid of the finite elements in the compressed flange of the
corrugation up to a distance of 200 mm from its terminal section, is provided in Figures 19-21.In this way, a bi-dimensional view of the PEEQ distribution in the most critical region is
provided; again, the steep increase in the PEEQ values in the part of the corrugation adjacent to
the end-plate can be appreciated.
Variation of the Maximum Cross-Sectional PEEQ
with Distance from the End Section (X Profile, P=0.50 bar, Td=50 ms)
X1 X2 X3
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06 0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
P E E Q
X1,SR X2,SR X3,SR
0 1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 0
1 0 0
1 1 0
1 2 0
1 3 0
1 4 0
1 5 0
1 6 0
1 7 0
1 8 0
1 9 0
2 0 0
Distance from the End Section [mm]
Figure 18
Longitudinal distribution of plastic equivalent strains
20
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 26/45
0 25
50 75
150
a t
'
D i s t a n c
e f r o m M i d
- P l a n e o
f t h e E n
d P l a t e
[ m m ]
100 125
175 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12
P E E Q
e l e m e
n t s
G a u s s p o i n t s
Figure 19 Spatial distribution of plastic equivalent strains
21
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 27/45
0 25
50 75
100 125
150 175
a t
'
i
D i s t a n c
e f r o m M i d
- P l a n e o f t h e
E n d P
l a t e [ m m
]
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12
P E E Q
e l e m e
n t s G a u s s p o n t s
Figure 20 Spatial distribution of plastic equivalent strains
22
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 28/45
0 25
50 75
100 150
D i s t a n
c e f r o m
M i d - P l a
n e o f t h e E n
d P l a t e
[ m m ]
125 175 0.00
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12
P E E Q a t e l e m e
n t s ' G a u s s
p o i n t s
Figure 21 Spatial distribution of plastic equivalent strains
23
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 29/45
The mesh-dependency shown by the PEEQ response parameter and discussed above has beenattributed to a strain localisation phenomenon, i.e. an intense concentration of the (plastic)deformation in narrow zones. Such zones have been identified, in particular, as those parts of
the corrugation which are not only along the boundary between two adjacent flat plates, but alsovery close to the 10 mm thick end-plate. From the mechanical point of view, the concentration
of plastic strain in these zones might be explained as the combined effect of the presence of acorner between two adjacent flat plates and the considerably stiff constraint provided by the end plate to transverse displacements taking place in the direction parallel to the mid-plane of thecorrugation. In fact, while the unrestrained corrugation would —naturally“ tend to flatten, the end
plate tends to prevent this phenomenon in its close proximity, being the in-plane stiffness of athick and flat end-plate which is orders of magnitude higher than the corresponding stiffness of
a cold-formed corrugated profile. However, if on the one hand the pattern of the plastic strainobserved in Figures 19-21 can be expected, as it is clear that this is not entirely due to numerical
singularities, the strong dependence of the magnitude of the equivalent plastic strain on theadopted mesh density (as it clearly appears from Figures 11-17 ) cannot be neglected. Such a
mesh-dependence of the plastic equivalent strain is observed even though, as shown in Figure
18 for a particular loading case and geometry, the position of the Gauss points in the
longitudinal direction, which changes slightly due to the mesh density considered, is accountedfor. In Figure 18 it can be observed, once again, that for a given cross-section of thecorrugation, if two or more Gauss points œ belonging to elements of two or more differentmeshes œ fall in that cross-section or in its vicinity, the equivalent plastic strains associated withthe more refined mesh are consistently higher than the corresponding ones associated with
coarser meshes. From Figures 11-17 it may also be noticed that the mesh-sensitivity shown bythe PEEQ, for a given profile geometry and peak pressure, is almost independent of the durationtime: therefore, even if œ as a limit case œ the loading process is quasi-static, this phenomenonwill still take place. Finally, it can be easily observed from the same Figures that, where a limit
value of the PEEQ were adopted as failure criterion, it might well happen that a given profilegeometry, under a given loading history, may be deemed to be on the safe side if a relatively
coarse mesh is adopted, while it will be considered unsafe if a more refined mesh is used.
As illustrated above, the importance, from both the theoretical and the practical point of view, of the PEEQ mesh-sensitivity is apparent and therefore it is deemed to be worthy, in the present
work, of some further considerations. Actually, the phenomenon of strain localisation has beenobserved by several Authors in ductile metals and structural metallic alloys, and occurring indifferent structural contexts, ranging from necking of a metallic bar under axial tension (Bazantand Cedolin
12) to simple shearing displacement boundary conditions of a infinite planar strip
(Needleman13) and round bars subjected to large torsional strains (Tanaka and Spretnak 14). Inthese simple cases, all relevant to rate-independent, elasto-plastic material models, the strainlocalisation phenomenon has been interpreted as an instability process, and conditions have
been found at which the material constitutive relationships allow a bifurcation fromhomogeneous or smoothly varying deformation into a band (i.e. a narrow area along which
deformation is highly concentrated). From the mathematical point of view, this leads to achange of type of the governing equations (in particular, from hyperbolic to elliptic in the
dynamic case) and, from the physical point of view, gives infinite strains over a set of measurezero in dynamic problems (Lasry and Belytschko15). In a finite element model, when the critical
stress level triggering localisation is reached, obtained results are severely mesh-dependent, i.e.deformation localises in one or few elements, irrespective of their size; furthermore, plasticenergy dissipated along the band after its formation tends to zero, as the mesh is refined. Inorder to eliminate mesh sensitivity in numerical calculations, several Authors have suggested
different methods, all based on ensuring that the localisation zone remains finite. This is done,for example, introducing non-local variables in the material model (in a kinematic-typestructural theory, this means that generalised displacements and generalised strains are averagedover a finite volume œ thus leading, for example, to an average measure of the equivalent plasticstrain, as done by Lasry and Belyschko16); or using Cosserat (or —polar“) continuum theory,
24
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 30/45
instead of the usual Cauchy model. Finally, according to other Authors (Needleman13
, Sluys et
al.17
, Zhu18
), a relatively simple solution can be obtained by adopting the classical continuumtheory and a classical plasticity model, but including some viscous effects in the material in
order to make the solution mesh-independent. In particular, in the simple case studied by Needleman13, it is proved that when material rate dependence is accounted for, under dynamic
loading conditions wave speeds remain real and mesh size effects do not occur for this simple problem. In the present study strain rate effects were introduced into the fininte element model by the classical metal plasticity model given by the Cowper-Sydmonds law. The material parameters required for the model were taken from Jones and Birch9, and the results obtained by
the strain-rate sensitive model were presented, along with the corresponding cases for the non-rate dependent material, in Figures 5-21, and are labelled by —SR“.
Unfortunately, as far as the influence of the mesh density on the equivalent plastic strain is
concerned, it can be easily deduced from Figures 11-18 that the amount of viscosity introducedin the model (coherent with the experimental data obtained), even though yielding some
improvement, does not seem to be sufficient, given the geometry of the model, to achieve theexpected mesh independency. Actually, as predicted by Cescotto and Li
19, while in simple cases
adopting an elastic-viscoplastic material model can be effectively employed as a localisationlimiter, in more complicated situations the mesh independency can also be achieved, but it isconditional to the amount of viscosity introduced in the model. In our case this is limited by thestrain rates achieved which for typical gas explosions are low when compared to faster eventssuch as TNT explosions or hard impacts.
25
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 31/45
3. LOCAL MODEL OF WELDED CONNECTION
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In the present Section, a detailed finite element model of the terminal part of the shallow-trough profiles, termed X in Section 2, as well as the end plate is presented. The obtained results will bediscussed and, for some particular load histories, they will also be compared to the onesobtained, in the particular region under consideration, from the global model considered inSection 2.
A careful analysis of the local fields of stress and strain in this area has been made necessaryfrom the results obtained in the previous Section, where it clearly appeared that, evenintroducing the strain-rate sensitivity phenomena in the material model, no mitigation of the plastic strain localisation phenomenon was achieved. On the contrary, as observed by severalAuthors Niemi
20and Fayard et al.
21, at the intersection of thin shells, where hot spots
commonly appear, the stress gradient continued to be strongly sensitive to the mesh size.
Therefore, the main goal of the model presented in the following is to assess if a more realisticfinite element model of the terminal part of the structure œ together with the adoption of finite
elements having characteristic dimensions much smaller than in the global model œ might beuseful in order to attain the aforementioned purpose of mitigating the mesh-dependence of the
solution. Secondly, the response yielded by the present three-dimensional local model allows usto evaluate the relative magnitudes of the six components of the stress and strain tensors, so that
an estimate of the error made in the use of a two-dimensional local model would be considered.In fact, because of the complicated finite element modelling of the spatial model and thecumbersome analyses to be performed subsequently, a plane strain or plane stress hypothesis isfrequently assumed in the literature, especially when dealing with fatigue studies on welded
connections as in Niemi20
and Fayard et al 21.. Thirdly, the implementation of a three-dimensional finite element model of the terminal part of the corrugation and the supporting
substructure will allow, in future work, the introduction of transverse and longitudinal cracks inthe welding, simulating weld defects. This further development, together with a more accuratematerial model for the weld metal and the introduction of proper heat affected zones, shouldmake possible a sufficiently accurate simulation of the ductile fracture phenomena frequentlytaking place at the welded connections of blast-walls, as shown by wide experimental evidence
and reported by Louca and Friis2.
3.2. STRUCTURAL MODEL
The structural scheme considered in the local model, illustrated in a three-dimensional view in Figure 22, has been obtained as a sub-model of the global model presented in the previousSection for the shallow-trough profile X. In particular, the part of the corrugation considered inthe local model corresponds to the part which, in the global model, is situated at a distance, fromthe mid-plane of the end plate, less or equal to 200 mm. The terminal plate (part of a 100x75x10
RSA unequal angle profile) has still the same geometry and material as in the global model and,as far as the boundary conditions are concerned, symmetry conditions have still been imposed
not only along the longitudinal edges of the corrugation but also on the edges of the end platelying on such symmetry planes. Besides, for the end plate a pinned boundary condition has beenapplied along the mid-plane line of the edge originally perpendicular to the direction of the blastwave and on the opposite side of the corrugation itself (with respect to the incident wave). Thesame sort of —hinge“ had also been considered in the global model, and in both cases aims at
representing, with a sufficient degree of accuracy, the actions applied by the supporting
structure on the considered part. In the global model the interaction between the corrugation and
26
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 32/45
the plate has been modelled by means of mathematical equations imposing the same value for all of the degrees of freedom of the nodes lying on the two sides of the boundary. In the localmodel a 6 mm continuous fillet weld, on both sides of the corrugation, has been explicitly
introduced in the model. In such a way, the rigidity locally introduced by the welding is notassumed to be infinite (Fayard et al.
21), but its finite value its explicitly accounted for, and also
makes feasible œ in future works œ a more detailed material modelling of the welding itself andthe relevant heat affected zones ( HAZ s), as well as the introduction of cracks simulating welddefects.
The isosceles pressure-time history compatible with the one adopted in the global model has been applied, in the local model, on the corrugated profile.
3.3 MATERIAL MODEL
The strain-rate sensitive, isotropic hardening model (based on the Von Mises yield surface) previously described in section 2.2 for stainless steel Grade 2205 has been adopted both for the
corrugation and the end plate. As far as the welding is concerned, the same material model asfor the corrugation has been assumed. Neither HAZ s nor residual stresses were introduced inmodelling the welded connection, so that a comparison between the results provided, in theterminal part of the structure, both by the local and the global model may be carried out.
3.4 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
The finite element model illustrated in the following consists of 16586 nodes and 13230
elements, which are both solid (continuum) elements and three-dimensional shells. In particular,the three-node shell-type finite element S3 has been adopted to model the corrugated profile
from the cross-section at 200 mm from the mid-plane of the end plate up to the upper weld toe.
As it will be explained in detail in the following part of the present Paragraph, modellingrequirements have made necessary the use of this type of finite element, notwithstanding the poor performance provided in the elastodynamic analyses, as illustrated in Section 2. Besides,
two eight-node, first order, reduced integration prismatic solid elements with hourglass control,termed C3D8R in the following, have been adopted through the thickness of both the end plateand that part of the corrugation which is situated between the welding fillets. On the other hand,in order to model the welding seams, it has been possible to use C3D8R solid elements only for the internal part, while six-node first order triangular prisms, termed C3D6 in the following,have been used to model the external surface (i.e. the surface bounded by the upper and thelower weld toe).
The model-related boundary conditions introduced in the numerical model along the
longitudinal planes of the corrugation and along the edges of the end plate, are as described inSection 3.2. More detailed considerations are instead to be provided in order to explain the
history-related boundary conditions, i.e. the time-dependent boundary conditions applied on thetransverse section of the corrugated profile situated at a distance of 200 mm from the mid-plane
of the end plate. In fact, being the model considered herein —extracted“ from the global one,described in Section 2, it was necessary to represent properly and effectively the actions applied by the part of the structure not represented in the local model on the part, which is insteadconsidered in the present Section. In ABAQUS/Standard (Hibbit et al.
22 ,), a relevant sub-
modelling option is provided, through which the displacement and/or velocity time-histories of the nodes at the boundary between the local and the global model are saved automatically whenthe analysis of the latter is performed, and are applied as time-dependent boundary conditions inthe former. Unfortunately, this option is available only for linear analyses or, in case anymechanical, geometrical and/or boundary nonlinearities are introduced, only if a static analysis
27
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 33/45
is performed. In the present case, time-dependent boundary conditions were introducedfollowing a similar procedure but, because of the peculiarities of the analysis performed here,this had to be done directly in the input file of the local model. In particular, while performing
the analysis of the global model for a given profile geometry and loading history, in the cases inwhich the fine mesh geometry was adopted the displacement time-histories of all the 15 nodes
situated along the cross-section at a distance from the mid-plane of the end-plate equal to 200
mm were saved. This was done for all the degrees of freedom of each node: therefore, for theinternal nodes along the aforementioned line, six time-histories were recorded; while, for thetwo nodes lying on the longitudinal symmetry planes, only three time-histories were necessary
(one for each one of the active degrees of freedom). The 84 displacement time-historiesobtained in this way, and recorded with a time step equal to 0.002 s, were then introduced as
time-dependent boundary conditions on the 15 nodes which, in the local as well as in the globalmodel, are situated along the aforementioned cross-section. A proper —smoothing“ option
(Hibbit et al 22.,) has been introduced in the finite element model in order to avoid discontinuitiesin computing the velocity and acceleration time-histories from the given piecewise-linear
displacement time-histories. However, still aiming at the same purpose, velocity time-historieshave also been assigned for the translational degree of freedom in the transverse direction
indicated by 3 in the global reference system illustrated in Figure 22.
In the current model, and contrary to what is commonly deemed to be appropriate andcomputationally suitable for nonlinear dynamic analyses performed by means of the explicitmethod, it was not possible to keep a uniform mesh geometry in the part of the corrugated
profile modelled by means of the three-dimensional shell elements S3. The necessity of adopting a graded mesh depended on the necessity of having only 15 nodes along the cross-section at 200 mm from the mid-plane of the end plate (as required by the sub-modelling procedure described above) and, at the same time, of using, in proximity of the welded
connection, shell elements having a characteristic dimension which is small enough to allow asufficiently detailed description of the welding seams. In fact, while the size of the shell
elements adopted in the X3 mesh geometry œ and then at the aforementioned cross-section œ is
as given in Table 1, eight-node hexahedra as wide as 2.4 mm (in the transverse direction) have been used. Consequently, in order to grade the mesh from the 15 nodes at the aforementionedcross-section to the 57 nodes required along the weld toes, it was necessary to adopt the three-
node three-dimensional shell finite elements S3, at least with regard to the transition zones between two adjacent zones having different mesh densities. Further to these considerations,one possibility would have been to use triangular elements in the mesh-transition zones, andquadrangular elements in the remaining parts of the corrugation. However, aiming at reducingthe number of the finite element types introduced in the model, as well as at simplifying themesh generation procedure, S3 elements were also used for constant mesh densities zones.Further details about the adopted mesh densities throughout the corrugated plate modelled by
means of shell elements are reported in Table 12 below, where the reported distance iscomputed along the longitudinal direction (indicated by 1 in the global reference system
illustrated in Figure 22) and is taken between a given cross section (i.e. a given row of nodes inthe transverse direction) and the mid-plane of the end plate.
Table 12
Meshing for local modelDistance [mm] Transverse Direction Elts. Longitudinal Direction Elts.
Total No. of Elts. Width-to-Depth RatioNo. Average Base [mm] No. Height [mm]
12.5÷47.5 56 2.6 14 2.5 784 1.05 50.0÷95.0 28 5.3 9 5.0 252 1.05 100÷200 14 10.5 10 10 140 1.05
Finally, it has to be observed that a multi-point-constraint (Hibbit et al 22
.,), termed MPC in the
following, has been used to allow for the transition from the shell element modelling to the solid
28
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 34/45
element modelling through the thickness of the corrugation-to-welding edge; this has beennecessary since the nodes defining the S3R elements have six degrees of freedom, while nodesdefining the C3D8R have only got the three translational degrees of freedom. In order to
overcome this difficulty, first of all, a shell-to-solid MPC has been used to constrain each shellnode on the edge to the corresponding line of nodes on the solid-mesh-side of the interface;
then, a slider MPC has been adopted in order to constrain each interior node on each line of thesolid mesh at the interface to remain on the straight line defined by the bottom and the top nodesof that line.
Figure 22
Explicit FE modelling of weld detail
3.5 RESULTS
In the present section, results obtained from the local model, according to the finite element
procedure described in the previous part of this Section, for three particular loading histories, allof them applied to the shallow-trough profile are presented. More precisely, the load casesconsidered were those for which adopting a failure criterion based on the maximum PEEQ
attained might result in a safe/unsafe condition according to the adopted mesh density. Theseinclude isosceles pressure waves characterised by a peak pressure equal to 0.50 bar , 1.00 bar
and 1.25 bar and a duration time equal to 40 ms, 80 ms and 120 ms, respectively. The obtainedresults, in terms of PEEQ, are presented in Figures 23-25, for the low pressure-short duration,intermediate pressure-intermediate duration, high pressure-long duration cases, respectively.
Besides, the former (peak pressure equal to 0.50 bar , duration time equal to 40 ms) of the
aforementioned three cases has been considered in detail, i.e. the values of the PEEQ have been plotted on each one of the three plates making up the corrugation at the Gauss point of eachelement, in order to allow a proper comparison with the corresponding Figures 19-21 obtainedfrom the global model. Actually, more precisely, in order to make the graphical representationas clear as possible, the PEEQ values reported there are not exactly the ones obtained at the
Gauss point of each triangular element, but are given by the average of the values of the plastic
29
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 35/45
equivalent strain found at the integration points of two adjacent triangular elements (i.e. twoelements having the hypotenuse in common. Besides, it has to be observed that the PEEQvalues of triangular elements situated in the mesh transition zones have not been reported, since
they correspond to one row of elements (in the direction indicated by 2 in Figure 22) only, andcan be therefore neglected when looking at the general pattern of this physical quantity as
provided by the local model. Finally, it should be noticed that the values of the equivalent plastic strain have been reported only up to a distance of 12.5 mm from the mid-plane of the end plate, i.e. up to the toe of the welding seams.
As far as the discussion of the obtained results is concerned, it appears clearly from Figures 26-28 that considerably high values of the equivalent plastic strains are detected in the vicinity of
the cross-section at 200 mm from the mid-plane of the end plate, where displacement andvelocity time-histories have been applied. These values of the PEEQ, extremely close to the
limit value characterising the material failure, can be certainly regarded as local effects induced by the nodal displacements applied in the aforementioned cross-section: in fact, the pattern of
the PEEQ is decreasing while decreasing the distance from the end plate, and has not beenabsolutely noticed in the results provided by the global model. Besides, some 80 mm away from
the terminal section, this effect seems to have disappeared completely, as the values of the PEEQ are the same as provided by the global analysis. On the other hand, in proximity of thewelded connection, the PEEQ values tend to rise again, approximately following the same pattern, and this similarity in the spatial distribution of this quantity can be noticed not only inthe longitudinal direction, but also in the transverse one. Once again, the peak value of the
equivalent plastic strain takes place at the cross-section adjacent to the welding, and in particular in the flange of the corrugated profile ( Figure 26 ) which is essentially compressed bythe incident blast wave. More precisely, the highest value of the PEEQ is detected at the same place both in the global and in the local model (cf. Figure 19 and Figure 26 ), but the adoption
of a finer mesh density has again lead to an increase of about 50% of the value of the PEEQdetected in the local model.
Figure 23 Plastic strains at weld detail when subjected to a pressure pulse with a peak pressure of 0.50 bar
and a duration of 40 msec
30
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 36/45
Figure 24 Plastic strains at weld detail when subjected to a pressure pulse with a peak pressure of 1.00 bar
and a duration of 80 msec
Figure 25 Plastic strains at weld detail when subjected to a pressure pulse with a peak pressure of 1.25 bar
and a duration of 120 msec
31
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 37/45
32
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
P E E Q a t e l e m e n t ' s G a u s s P o
i n t s
D i s t a n
c e f r o m
M i d - P l a
n e o f t h
e E n d P
l a t e [ m m ]
Figure 26
Spatial distribution of plastic equivalent strains
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 38/45
33
200
180
160
140
120
100
8060
40
20
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
P E E Q a t e l e m e n t s ' G a u s s p o i n t s
D i s t a n c
e f r o m M i d
- P l a n e o
f t h e E n
d P l a t e
[ m m ]
Figure 27
Spatial distribution of plastic equivalent strains
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 39/45
180
200
160 140
120 100
80 60
40 20
m e
'
s s
i
D i s t a n c
e f r o m M i
d - p l a n e
o f t h e
E n d P l a
t e [ m m
]
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
P E E Q a t E l e
n t s
G a u
p o n t s
Figure 28 Spatial distribution of plastic equivalent strains
34
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 40/45
4. CONCLUSIONS
This report presents results from a study to investigate the response of 3 standard corrugation profiles which have been subjected to pressure time histories typical of a hydrocarbonexplosion. In particular, the study has investigated the sensitivity of peak displacements, plasticstrains and dissipated energy to mesh density and loading as these are commonly used parameters to describe the performance of structures and to assess structural integrity in
commonly used failure models.
An initial eigenvalue analysis was conducted to establish the first ten natural frequencies of thethree panels using different mesh densities and element types. The triangular elements availablewithin the ABAQUS finite element package were not found to perform as well as therectangular elements for the same mesh density. Up to the first six modes of vibration littledifference was seen between element types. However for the higher modes the results became
sensitive to mesh density with the results becoming less reliable for coarser meshes, indicatingfiner meshes are required to pick up the higher frequency modes.
A full non-linear dynamic finite element analysis accounting for both material and geometric
nonlinearity of two of the profiles was carried out over a range of pressure time histories. Theresults indicated that the peak deflection and dissipated energy, which is a measure of the
energy absorbed by plastic deformation, were relatively insensitive to mesh density. This was both with and without added viscosity to the material model to account for strain rate effects.However, the equivalent plastic strain was found to be very sensitive to mesh density. This wasexacerbated at low duration and high peak pressure events which can lead to brittle failure
modes developing. The addition of viscosity to the material model reduced the sensitivity but itwas not sufficient to remove this effect to mesh density.
A more refined model of the local weld detail was analysed in order to provide a more accuratedescription at the critical location in the global model where failure was likely to occur. Themodel provided a more accurate three dimensional pattern of the strain distribution in andaround the weld detail. Although the peak values were occurring in the same location for the
two models, the local model indicated that strain values higher than those in the global modelcan be achieved, despite the fact that the same loading history was applied to both models.
Despite the extensive detail in the model, the sensitivity of the plastic strain values to meshdensity could not be eliminated. However the reduced ductility of the 3D local model was
apparent and has implications for assessing ductility of structural systems on results obtainedfrom 2D analysis.
In terms of the influence of the conclusions on a practical design or re-assessment a number of issues on the modelling need to be considered. It is clear that the results are sensitive to meshrefinement and when assessing the response at the ductility level blast it is important to carry
out sensitivity studies by investigating 3 different mesh densities and applying different pressuretime histories to investigate variations in strain at critical locations. The results in combination
with engineering judgement should give a good indication of a sensible cut off for defining thecontainment pressure of the wall. The idea of using 3 different meshes should also helpminimise the likely misinterpretation of results. For example certain buckling modes may not beapparent in a coarse model but should be picked up in the finer mesh.
The critical locations are likely to be the connections where interpretation of results can
sometimes be difficult as this report has indicated. However, from the comments in the previous
35
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 41/45
paragraph the mesh study should provide convergence of the gradient of stress and strain at thislocation, but obviously the peak value of strain will increase with increasing mesh refinement.Although not considered in this report, the determination of the maximum strain could be
obtained by using an average over a specified area of the weld location assuming thin shellelements have been used to model the detail. The use of thick shell elements did not provide a
clear conclusion as to modelling guidelines and further work is clearly needed.
The current performance standards for assessing the response, particularly at the ductility levelare limited due to the increase in the uncertainties at the level of deformations likely to be
experienced. The current limit of 5% on the local strain is commonly used in conjunction withFE studies. This limit is not unreasonable given the uncertainties in the numerical modelling and
also in experimental measurements of large strains. However defining the ductility based on asingle parameter may be misleading and future studies should investigate the concept of a
response index which uses more than a single parameter for assessing the ductility of aconnection detail. This has been applied to the assessment of earthquake connection details to
establish fracture potential of different connection configurations.
36
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 42/45
5. REFERENCES
1. Cullen, Lord. The Public Inquiry into the Piper Alpha Disaster, HMSO, 1990.2. Louca, L. A. and Friis, J. Modelling Failure of Welded Connections to Corrugated
Panels under Blast Loading. HSE OTO Report No. 088/2000.3. Holmes, B. S., Kirkpatrick, S. W., Simons, J. W., Giovanola, J. H. & Seaman, L.
Modeling the Process of Failure in Structures. In Structural Crashworthiness and
Failure, ed. N. Jones & T. Wierzbicki. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, Barking,Essex, 1993, Chap. 2.
4. Bammann, D. J., Chisea, M. L., Horstemeyer, M. F. & Weingarten, L. I., Failure in
Ductile Materials Using Finite Element Methods. In Structural Crashworthiness and
Failure, ed. N. Jones & T. Wierzbicki. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, Barking,Essex, 1993, Chap. 1.
5. Nurick, G. N., Olson, M. D., Fagnan, R. F. & Levin, A. Deformation and Tearing of Blast-Loaded Stiffened Square Plates. Int. J. Impact Engng., Vol 16, No. 2, pp. 273-291, 1995.
6. Plane, C. A., Bedrossian, A. N. and Gorf, P. K. FE Analysis and Full Scale Blast Testsof an Offshore Firewall Panel. Int. Conf. on Offshore Structural Design AgainstExtreme Loads. ERA, London, 1994.
7. Jones, N.and Shen, W. Criteria for the Inelastic Rupture of Ductile Metal BeamsSubjected to Large Dynamic Loads. Structural Crashworthiness and Failure, Chapter 3,
Ed. Jones, N and Wierzbicki, T, 1993.8. Shen, W. Q. & Jones, N., A Failure Criterion for Beams Under Dynamic Loading. Int.
J. Impact Engng, Vol. 12, pp. 101-21, 1992.9. Jones, N. and Birch, R. S., 1998. Dynamic and Static Tensile Stress on Stainless Steel
for the Steel Construction Institute, Liverpool, UK.10. Hibbit, D., Karlsson, B. I., Sorensen, P., 1998. ABAQUS Theory Manual, Ver. 5.8.
Hibbit, Karlsson and Sorensen Inc., Pawtucket, RI, USA.
11. Hibbit, D., Karlsson, B. I., Sorensen, P., 1998. ABAQUS/Explicit User‘s Manual, Ver.5.8 (Vols. 1, 2). Hibbit, Karlsson and Sorensen Inc., Pawtucket, RI, USA.
12. Bazant, Z. P., Cedolin, L., 1991. Stability of structures: elastic, inelastic, fracture, and damage theories, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
13. Needleman, A., 1987. Material Rate Dependence and Mesh Sensitivity in Localisation Problems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 67:1:69-85.
14. Tanaka, K., Spretnak, J. W., 1973. An Analysis of Plastic Instability in Pure Shear in
High Strength AISI 4340 Steel , Metal Transactions, 4:443-454.15. Lasry, D., Belytschko, T., 1988. Localisation Limiters in Transient Problems,
International Journal of Solids and Structures, 24:6:581-597.
16. Lasry, D. and Belytschko, T., 1988. Localisation Limiters in Transient Problems,
International Journal of Solids and Structures, 24:6:581-597.17. Sluys, L. J., Bolck, J. and de Borst, R., 1992. Wave propagation and Localisation in
Viscoplastic Media, Proceedings of the International Conference on ComputationalPlasticity, Barcelona, Spain.
18. Zhu, Y. Y., 1992. Contribution to the Local Approach of Fracture in Solid Mechanics,Doctoral Thesis in Applied Sciences, University of Liege, Liege, Belgium.
19. Cescotto, S. and Li, X. K., 1996. Modelling of Strain Localisation in a Large StrainContext , Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 4:6:645-654.
20. Niemi, E. (Editor), 1995. Stress Determination for Fatigue Analysis of Welded Components, The International Institute of Welding, Cambridge, UK.
21. Fayard, J.-L., Bignonnet, A., Van Dang, K., 1996. Fatigue Design Criterion for Welded Structures, Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, 19:6: 723-
729.
37
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 43/45
22. Hibbit, D., Karlsson, B. I., Sorensen, P., 1998. ABAQUS Standard Manual, Ver. 5.8.Hibbit, Karlsson and Sorensen Inc., Pawtucket, RI, USA.
38
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 44/45
Printed and published by the Health and Safety ExecutiveC30 1/98
Printed and published by the Health and Safety Executive
C0.6 0 9 /03
8/8/2019 Nonlinear Analysis of Stainless Steel Corrugated Panels Under Blast Loading- A Numerical Study- Rr102
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nonlinear-analysis-of-stainless-steel-corrugated-panels-under-blast-loading- 45/45
ISBN 0-7176-2722-5