Dynamic responses and damage evolution of conformal radome composites under blast loading
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, the dynamic responses and damage evolution of two types of conformal radome composites (CRCs), namely single‐window conformal radome (SWCR) and multi‐window conformal radome (MWCR), under blast loading, were investigated using numerical methods. The results show that the local dynamic response of the conformal window is dominating. The window deformation of SWCR is larger than that of MWCR under the same scaled distance, and the MWCR exhibits better blast resistance. The increase in window size causes the reduction of the bending stiffness of CRCs. The obvious stress concentration appears in the notch of carved foam cores, caused by the window effect. The conformal windows are weak parts for the CRCs under the blast loading. It was revealed that the damages of CRCs are mainly concentrated at the edges, center, and diagonal areas of the conformal windows. Highlights Designed two types of conformal radome composites with hierarchical configuration. Established the finite element (FE) models of two types of conformal radome composites Revealed the dynamic responses and damage evolution of conformal radome composites under blast loading.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Response to Dynamic Loads · Cellular and Composite Structures · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
China Ship Development and Design Center Wuhan China
Research Center of Lightweight Structures and Intelligent Manufacturing, State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical Structures Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics Nanjing China
AECC Nanjing Light Aero‐Engine Co., Ltd Nanjing China
Funding
China Scholarship Council
References (56)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2023.11079410.1016/j.compositesb.2023.110794 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.marstruc.2020.10280110.1016/j.marstruc.2020.102801 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.08.03910.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.08.039 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.11726110.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117261 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2023.11015910.1016/j.compscitech.2023.110159 ↗
6. 10.1063/1.503749510.1063/1.5037495 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2021.10906410.1016/j.compscitech.2021.109064 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2022.11031610.1016/j.compositesb.2022.110316 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.08.05910.1016/j.compstruct.2017.08.059 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.05.02710.1016/j.compscitech.2017.05.027 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.addma.2022.10304410.1016/j.addma.2022.103044 ↗
12. 10.1002/pc.2016210.1002/pc.20162 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.11713310.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117133 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.coco.2023.10160810.1016/j.coco.2023.101608 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.06.03110.1016/j.compstruct.2014.06.031 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.10445810.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.104458 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2023.10460910.1016/j.ijimpeng.2023.104609 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.coco.2022.10107210.1016/j.coco.2022.101072 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.10645710.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106457 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ast.2020.10577710.1016/j.ast.2020.105777 ↗
21. 10.1002/pc.2646110.1002/pc.26461 ↗
22. 10.1177/109963621771657510.1177/1099636217716575 ↗
23. 10.1002/pc.2698910.1002/pc.26989 ↗
24. 10.1002/pc.2697110.1002/pc.26971 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2022.11002610.1016/j.compositesb.2022.110026 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.coco.2022.10106110.1016/j.coco.2022.101061 ↗
27. 10.1007/s12221‐016‐5660‐310.1007/s12221‐016‐5660‐3 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.10771410.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.107714 ↗
29. 10.1002/pc.2726410.1002/pc.27264 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.cma.2010.03.03110.1016/j.cma.2010.03.031 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.cma.2006.06.02010.1016/j.cma.2006.06.020 ↗
32. 10.1002/nme.115110.1002/nme.1151 ↗
33. Hallquist JO · 2010
34. D. Systèmes Abaqus – SIMULIA User Assistance.2021.
35. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.01110.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.011 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.02.04110.1016/j.compstruct.2015.02.041 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.09.03210.1016/j.engstruct.2016.09.032 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.10.00310.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.10.003 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13391910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133919 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.08.00210.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.08.002 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2023.11006310.1016/j.compscitech.2023.110063 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2008.04.00810.1016/j.ijimpeng.2008.04.008 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2011.02.00510.1016/j.ijimpeng.2011.02.005 ↗
44. 10.1186/s40712‐020‐0116‐310.1186/s40712‐020‐0116‐3 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.04.01310.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.04.013 ↗
46. 10.1002/nme.267010.1002/nme.2670 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.10420310.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.104203 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2008.12.00410.1016/j.ijimpeng.2008.12.004 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.tws.2023.11090910.1016/j.tws.2023.110909 ↗
50. CONWEP · 1992
51. M 5‐855‐1 · 1986
52. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.11333310.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113333 ↗
53. 10.1007/s10443‐011‐9191‐110.1007/s10443‐011‐9191‐1 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.12.01110.1016/j.compstruct.2013.12.011 ↗
55. 10.1016/j.tws.2017.02.02010.1016/j.tws.2017.02.020 ↗
56. Simulia · 2010