Dynamic behavior of metallic sandwich panels subject to air-blast explosion
Source abstract
Abstract
Honeycomb sandwich structures have been investigated for a variety of applications, particularly as blast resistant structures because of their excellent strength to mass ratio. The current study investigates the response of a stainless-steel sandwich panel, with hollow core, foam filled core, and gel filled core under air blast load using Finite Element (FE) analysis. Johnson-Cook (J-C) material model is used to estimate the plastic failure characteristics of steel under air-blast explosion of 1, 2 and 3 kg of trinitrotoluene at a stand-off distance of 100 mm. The air-blast simulation is achieved using the Conventional Weapons Effect Program (CONWEP) code developed by US army corps. A parametric study for the gel filled model is carried out by varying the core thicknesses and the blast-point stand-off distances (SoD) with respect to the front plate deflection (FPD), back plate deflection (BPD), and energy absorption. A strain rate analysis of sandwich structure is conducted for the hollow core and foam core models, wherein the strain rate for the hollow core panel is varied from 0.1/s - low strain rate (LSR) to 3500/s - high strain rate (HSR), and for the foam core model, it is varied from 0.004/s (LSR) to 12,000/s (HSR). It is found that the back plate deflection obtained from the HSR model in both cases is significantly smaller compared to the LSR model.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
PDPM Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing Jabalpur
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1177/1099636224128286310.1177/10996362241282863 ↗
2. 10.1177/1099636221106574810.1177/10996362211065748 ↗
3. 10.1177/1099636225131710910.1177/10996362251317109 ↗
4. 10.1177/1099636222112796710.1177/10996362221127967 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2007.06.00810.1016/j.ijimpeng.2007.06.008 ↗
6. 10.1177/1099636225138653410.1177/10996362251386534 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2026.12237510.1016/j.engstruct.2026.122375 ↗
8. Nakhikar MH, Babaei H, Haghgoo M. Experimental and numerical investigation of sandwich panels reinforced with horizontally arranged tubular cores under blast loading. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part E J Process Mech Eng. 2026; 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544089251410347
9. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2025.10543010.1016/j.ijimpeng.2025.105430 ↗
10. Zong Q, Changcheng YI, Zihao LI, et al. Dynamic response of shear thickening gel-filled honeycomb sandwich panels under blast loading: experimental research. Chin J High Press Phys. 2025; 39(9): 094101.
11. 10.1002/srin.20110007610.1002/srin.201100076 ↗
12. 10.1115/1.402947110.1115/1.4029471 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.jcomc.2024.10054910.1016/j.jcomc.2024.100549 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.dt.2025.01.00310.1016/j.dt.2025.01.003 ↗
15. 10.1007/s40430-023-04669-x10.1007/s40430-023-04669-x ↗
16. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2023.10475210.1016/j.ijimpeng.2023.104752 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.10698710.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.106987 ↗
18. 10.3390/ma1224410810.3390/ma12244108 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2022.11172810.1016/j.ijsolstr.2022.111728 ↗
20. 10.1016/S0022-5096(00)00069-710.1016/S0022-5096(00)00069-7 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.actamat.2011.03.00510.1016/j.actamat.2011.03.005 ↗
22. 10.1080/02670836.2018.154811310.1080/02670836.2018.1548113 ↗
23. 10.1179/174328008X27779510.1179/174328008X277795 ↗