Underwater Explosion Abaqus Fatih Aruk Presentation

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF
RESPONSE OF A FLOATING STRUCTURE

TO AN UNDERWATER EXPLOSION (UNDEX)
M.Sc. Thesis by
Fatih ARUK
Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Tuncer

TOPRAK
Dr. Ergün
Examination Date: 09.06.2008
BOZDAĞ
İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering aruk@itu.edu.tr
What is the importance of UNDEX resistance?
Warships should last destructive effects of any near

•
underwater explosion.
Also shipboard systems must be shock hardened to

• a
certain level to ensure combat survivability of both
personnel and equipment.
So, shock resistance is a major issue that should be

considered during early design phase of...
warships, radars, weapons, torpedos or any

other shipboard equipment

Shock Trials (Physical Tests);
Extremely Expensive
•
Shipboard eqipment testing; MIL-S 901D

•Dangerous
(Military Specification for shock testing of ship
•Harmful to the surrounding Environment
board equipment)
•Require years of planning and preparation
•Due to safety risk, shock trials do
not test up to the ship’s design

limits or even the true wartime
•These tests are performed after the
shock environment.
first ship is already built.
Shock Test
Platform
Shock trials of USS WINSTON S. CHURCHILL
(DDGUnited
81) inStates
• 2001Navy spent tens of millions of dollars
• Years of planning and preparation

Impact Tests;
expensive experimental tests on simple cylindrical
shells and plate structures.
Computational modeling and response,

if perfected, can effectively and
accurately replace the experimental
procedures used to obtain the UNDEX
response.

UNDEX Simulation;
The shock response of an immersed or floating structure is
obtained when subjected to a near UNDEX loading
Three dimensional ship shock trial simulation of a
•Kwon and Cunningham;
warship was performed by Shin in 2004
dynamic responses of stiffened cylinder and
beam elements
DYNA3D [Explicit FE Code]+
•90s Kwon and Fox;
Underwater Shock Analysis (USA) [BE Code
the nonlinear dynamic response of a cylinder
based on DAA]
subjected to side-on underwater explosion
•Sun and McCoy
UNDEX analysis of a composite cylinder

ABAQUS + a fluid-structure interaction code
•Cichocki, Adamczyk, and Ruchwa
implemented fluid-structure interaction

phenomenon, pressure wave distribution, and
the radiation boundary conditions into
ABAQUS.
UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Similitude Relations (Pressure versus Time)
1+ A B
 ac   ac  vc t
P ( R, t ) = Pc   f (τ ) τ = 
R  R  ac
f (τ ) = e−τ τ ≤1
f (τ ) = 0.8251e −1.338τ + 0.1749e −1.805τ τ ≤7

P; Pressure
R; Distance to charge (stand-off distance)
ac ; Charge radius
t ; Time
Pc , vc , A, B; Charge constants

UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Similitude Relations (Pressure versus Time)
Pressure vs. time history for 25kg of HBX-1 charge, standoff distance of 10m
14
Material Source
according to Swisdak
according to Price
12
TNT (1.52 g/cc) Coles (1946) 1.42 992 0.13 0.18
TNT (1.60 10
g/cc) Farley and Snay (1978) 1.45 1240 0.13 0.23
8
TNT (1.60 g/cc) Price (1979) 1.67 1010 0.18 0.18
P(Mpa)
6
HBX-1 (1.72 g/cc) Swisdak (1978) 1.71 1470 0.15 0.29
4
HBX-1 (1.72 g/cc) Price (1979) 1.58 1170 0.144 0.24

2
Pentolite (1.71 g/cc) Thiel (1961) 1.65 1220 0.14 0.23

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
t(s) -3
x 10

UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Explosive Gas Bubble

UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Explosive Gas Bubble
Gas Bubble Max. Gas Bubble
Period 1 Radius 1
3
mc mc3
T = K5 5 amax = K 6 1
( D + 10) 6
( D + 10) 3
For our case ( MIL-S-901 D; 27.3 kg HBX-1 T=0.64 s

at 7.3 m depth) amax =4.4 m
•Bubble pulses are a strong source of excitation
for ships whose bending vibration mode is near

to the bubble pulse frequency
•It is especially important for the late time
response of the ship

•However, for our case, the first mode of
vibration
İTÜ
is well above the bubble pulse freq.
Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK
calcualted above.
UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Explosive Gas Bubble, Geers-Hunter Bubble Model (2002)
UNDEX= SHOCK WAVE PHASE + BUBBLE OSCILLATION PHASE
SHOCK WAVE PHASE provides initial

conditions for BUBBLE OSCILLATION
QUSPressure variation
includes
PHASE for two cases (7.3(2002)
Geers-Hunter m and 65 m cases)
model at stand-off
for UNDEXdistance (8.7 m)
loading.
-S-901 D; 27.3
urth-order kg HBX-1integrator
Runge-Kutta at 7.3 m depth
27.3 kg HBX-1the
to prescribe at 65 m depth
pressure varia

UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Cavitation
Cavitation takes place in water when there is

area of near-zero absolute pressure (about 206.8
Pa)
Two types of cavitation occur in an UNDEX event;
‘bulk’ cavitation; ‘local’ cavitation;

a large volume of low a small zone of low
pressure due to reflections pressure at
from sea surface fluid-structure interaction
surface.
The effect of cavitation on the response of the floating
structures is important and must be properly modeled
to obtain physically meaningful results.

UNDEX PHENOMENA;
Cavitation
‘bulk’ cavitation Cavitation condition:
Pi + Patm + Pstc + PR = 0
tc =
( R j2 − R j1 )
Equations of lower and upper cf
cavitation boundaries:
F ( x, y ) = 0
G ( x, y ) = 0
EXPLOSION VARIATIONS ACCORDING TO

İTÜ
MIL-S-901 D Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK
UNDEX
CavitationPHENOMENA; 2 Pmaxθ
v p (t ) =  e− β t θ − e −t θ 
m p (1 − β )
‘local’ cavitation
Taylor plate theory 2 Pmax − t θ
Pp (t ) = e − β e − β t θ 
v = v −1 v− β
p i r
Pi = ρ f c f vi
Pr = ρ f c f vr
dv p
mp + ρ f c f v p = 2 Pi = 2 Pmax e−t θ
dt
Assumptions; As  becomes large (a

•The plate is rigid lightweight plate), cavitation
occurs faster.
•The shock wave is planar

UNDEX
CavitationPHENOMENA;
‘local’ cavitation
2 Pmaxθ
v p (t ) =  e− β t θ − e −t θ  t ≤ tcav
m p (1 − β )
2 Pmax − t θ
Pp (t ) = e − β e − β t θ  t ≤ tcav
1− β
ident and total pressures behind, and velocity of shock platform

bjected to through-centerline UNDEX of 50 kg of HBX-1 charge at 30
Elements of UNDEX Simulation;
Acoustic Equations
brum equation for small motions of a compressible, adiabatic fluid
elocity-dependent momentum loses;
The slow flow assumption is
accurate for
steady
Acoustic Constitutive Equation; fluid velocities
Acoustic up to Equation
Constitutive
Machfor
0.1cavitating fluid;
linear
p = max { pv ,( pc − po ) }
nonlinear
lation of Direct Integration, Coupled Acoustic-Structural Analys
Introducing a variational field δp, integrating over

entire body and applying Green’s theorem
yields;
 1 ∂p 
T ( x) = n ⋅ u
−
& = −n ⋅ 
& f −
 ρ ∂x  Boundary traction
 f  term

Acoustic Boundary Conditions S fp the value of the acoustic
pressure is
prescribed;
S ft prescribes motion of the
fluid
ft ( ) modeling
−
T
particles,x = T0 = n ⋅ &
&
u f
Sthe pressure acoustic

radiating wave boundary
fi
waves passing exclusively outw
S fs acoustic-structural
interaction

  1 γ  1 ∂δ p ∂p 
∫V δ p  K f &
p&+ p& +

⋅  dV − ∫ δ pT0 dS +
ρ f K f  ρ f ∂x ∂x  the final
f   S ft
variational
1 1  statement for
+ ∫ δ p  p + p dS − ∫ δ pn − ⋅ u
& &m dS = 0
&
S fi  c1 a1  S fs the acoustic
medium
∫ δε : σdV + ∫ α c ρδ u ⋅ u dV + ∫ ρδ u ⋅u dV +
& &
&
m m m m
V V V
the virtual work
statement for a
+ ∫ pδ u m ⋅ ndS − ∫ δ u m ⋅ tdS = 0 structure.
S fs St

he Discretized Finite Element Equations
interpolation functions
up to the number of pressure nodes
up to the number of displacement degrees of free
[ M ] f { p&&} + [ C ] f { p&} + [K ] f { p } = [ S fs ]{u&&}+ {P } f
[ M ] s { u&&} + [ C] s { u&} +[ K]s { u} =[ S fs ]T { p} −{ P} s

face-Based Acoustic-Structural Interaction Procedure

Incident Wave Loading
Note that the source point

should be located out of the fluid domain.

Mesh Refinement
For reasonable accuracy, at least six representative
internodal intervals of
the acoustic mesh should fit into the shortest acoustic
wavelength present
1500 m s
f ≤
in the analysis. Eight or more will be better.
max
8 ⋅ 0.05m
f max ≤ 3750 Hz
; maximum linear element length
Meshing whole fluid
; the speed of sound medium with 50 mm
elements
; max. frequency of excitation which can bewould result
simulated in
accurate
about per
;the number of linear elements 16 million
acoustic
We usedwavelength
an element size of about 50 mm around the
elements!
acoustic-structural interface. The element size
increases up to 150 mm at outer fluid regions.
Explicit Time Integration
explicit central-difference time integration rule is used;
∆t(i +1) + ∆t(i )
u&N
1 = u&
N
1 + u&
&N
(i )
(i + )
2
(i − )
2 2
Each increment is relatively inexpensive because there is

•
no solution for a set of simultaneous equations.

•The time increments must be quite small so that the
accelerations are nearly constant during an increment.

mped mass matrix is used because its inverse is simple to compute.

vantages of the explicit time integration method;
•Well-suited to solving high-speed dynamic events
•No global tangent stiffness matrix. Iterations and
tolerances are not required.

Stability of Explicit Integration;
If damping
included;
● The Stable Time Increment Estimation;

Structural Damping
ects of damping on the stable time
rement in Explicit Analysis
Mass Stiffness
Proportion Proportion
al Dampingal Damping
In names of
natural freq.;
damps damps
β R lower higher
has greater effect on
frequenci frequencie
stable time increment
es s

UNDEX ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
UNDEX TEST PARAMETERS FROM MIL-S-901D
MIL-S-901D
specification which covers shock testing requirements for
ship board machinery, equipment, system and structures.
27.2 kg HBX-1
heavyweight shock
testing platform

NDEX CORRELATION METHODOLOGY
UNDEX TEST
PARAMETERS FROM
MIL-S-901D
UNDEX FE CONDUCT
MODEL UNDEX TEST
GENERATION
FLUID- MODIFY UNDEX SHORT DURATION

STRUCTURE MODEL/ANALYSES DYNAMIC
INTERACTION FE PARAMETERS RESPONSE
ANALYSIS
SHORT DURATION
N
DYNAMIC O
RESPONSE
Equivalen
t?
Y
E
S OF UNDEX
CORRELATION
RESPONSES AND VALIDATION
OF NUMERICAL CODE

SUBMODELING ANALYSIS

MODELING AND ANALYSIS
CAD MODELING; CATIA
V15
Weight; about 39
tones
MESHING;
ABAQUS CAE
Number of nodes:
140316
Number of elements:
142327 Linear
quadrilateral
elements of type S4R
Connections were impos

by means of kinematic
couplings
GENERATING A REDUCED (COARSE) MODEL for
tryouts and acoustic mesh convergence studies;
HYPERMESH Number of nodes: 7858
Number of elements:
8229 Linear quadrilateral
538 Linear triangular

MODAL ANALYSIS

UNDEX ANALYSIS WITH REDUCED (COARSE) MODEL
FLUID MESH CONVERGENCE ANALYSIS
Boundary Conditions
Plane type radiating
surfaces; f = 1
β =0
1 f
=
c1 ρf Kf
1 β γ 
= f ⋅ + 
a1  ρ f 2 ρ f ρ f K f 

Acoustic-Structural
Incident
Initial Static
Wave (UNDEX)
Pressure
Interaction
Loading



ANALYSIS WITH DEFORMABLE PLATFORM

ANALYSIS WITH DEFORMABLE PLATFORM;
EFFECT OF DAMPING
α R = 1.5
β R = 0.5E − 6
For first two modes; % 0.4

For the first torsional and
bending modes ; 0.25 %
and 0.15 %

ANALYSIS WITH DEFORMABLE PLATFORM;
EFFECT OF DAMPING

UNDEX ANALYSIS WITH MAIN (FINE) MODEL

EFFECT OF MESH REFINEMENT AROUND
ACOUSTIC-STRUCTURAL INTERACTION REGION
Mesh DFT Analysis of

Convergence Incident Pressure
Analysis; Waves;
Element size; Element size; 50
150 mm mm
Number of Number of nodes;
nodes; 1059260 4198257
EFFECT OF MESH REFINEMENT AROUND
ACOUSTIC-STRUCTURAL INTERACTION REGION

EFFECT OF CAVITATION

EFFECT OF STRUCTURAL DAMPING
α R = 1.5 β R = 0.5E − 6



SUBMODELING ANALYSIS

CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK
Fluid mesh size has important effect on the structural

•
response and should be selected carefully for

accurate results;
§ Mesh Convergence Study
•Though it requires a nonlinear fluid behavior which

§ DFT analysis of loadings
adds to the cost of the analyses, including cavitation
is a must to obtain physically meaningful results.
•The effect of damping was also shown to be
important for peak acceleration estimation in the

late time response
•Submodeling of the
analysis platform.
can bu run to obtain
converged stress-strain results at some sub-region
•Experimental work is a must for the validation of the
of the structure.
numerical code used and of the analysis procedure
followed in this study. The work done in this work will
provide the basis for the future experimental work.
END OF THE PRESENTATION
QUESTIONS?


Underwater Explosion Abaqus Fatih Aruk Presentation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Underwater Explosion Abaqus Fatih Aruk Presentation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF

RESPONSE OF A FLOATING STRUCTURE

Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Tuncer

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Warships should last destructive effects of any near

Also shipboard systems must be shock hardened to

So, shock resistance is a major issue that should be

warships, radars, weapons, torpedos or any

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Shipboard eqipment testing; MIL-S 901D

•Due to safety risk, shock trials do

not test up to the ship’s design

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Computational modeling and response,

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

UNDEX analysis of a composite cylinder

implemented fluid-structure interaction

f (τ ) = 0.8251e −1.338τ + 0.1749e −1.805τ τ ≤7

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

HBX-1 (1.72 g/cc) Price (1979) 1.58 1170 0.144 0.24

Pentolite (1.71 g/cc) Thiel (1961) 1.65 1220 0.14 0.23

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

For our case ( MIL-S-901 D; 27.3 kg HBX-1 T=0.64 s

for ships whose bending vibration mode is near

response of the ship

SHOCK WAVE PHASE provides initial

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Cavitation takes place in water when there is

‘bulk’ cavitation; ‘local’ cavitation;

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

‘bulk’ cavitation Cavitation condition:

EXPLOSION VARIATIONS ACCORDING TO

Assumptions; As  becomes large (a

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

ident and total pressures behind, and velocity of shock platform

Introducing a variational field δp, integrating over

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Sthe pressure acoustic

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

[ M ] f { p&&} + [ C ] f { p&} + [K ] f { p } = [ S fs ]{u&&}+ {P } f

[ M ] s { u&&} + [ C] s { u&} +[ K]s { u} =[ S fs ]T { p} −{ P} s

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Note that the source point

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Each increment is relatively inexpensive because there is

no solution for a set of simultaneous equations.

accelerations are nearly constant during an increment.

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

•No global tangent stiffness matrix. Iterations and

tolerances are not required.

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

FLUID- MODIFY UNDEX SHORT DURATION

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

Connections were impos

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK

İTÜ Mech. Eng. Fatih ARUK