2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103743
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analytical and numerical studies on impact force profile of RC beam under drop weight impact

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
19
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 102 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An analytical spring-mass model for RC beams subjected to impact loads should be derived by taking into consideration both the local and global responses. By considering both local and global response, an analytical method proposed by Li et al (2021) provides close prediction to the experimental testing. The analytical model adopted the penalty contact algorithm for the local stiffness of a flat-head projectile (LS-Dyna, 2012) while the Hertz contact model is utilized for curved-head projectiles (Machado et al, 2012).…”
Section: Analytical Investigationsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…An analytical spring-mass model for RC beams subjected to impact loads should be derived by taking into consideration both the local and global responses. By considering both local and global response, an analytical method proposed by Li et al (2021) provides close prediction to the experimental testing. The analytical model adopted the penalty contact algorithm for the local stiffness of a flat-head projectile (LS-Dyna, 2012) while the Hertz contact model is utilized for curved-head projectiles (Machado et al, 2012).…”
Section: Analytical Investigationsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Accordingly, the duration of the sinusoidal half-wave tended to be prolonged with decreasing amplitude except for Beam N-F0: approximately 20 and 25 ms for Beams P-F2 and P-F3.5 and Beams P-F1 and H-F2, respectively. Based on the numerical study reported by Li et al (2021), these results imply that Beams P-F2 and P-F3.5 had the largest global stiffness and that Beam N-F0 had the smallest stiffness. The duration in the case of Beam N-F0 was approximately 20 ms, similar to those of Beams P-F2 and P-F3.5.…”
Section: Experimental Results For Impact Loadingmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…The durations of the force plateau for Beams P-F2 and P-F3.5 were similar compared with that at H = 1 m and lasted for approximately 5 ms. This implies that these global stiffnesses may be decreased by impacting with a greater energy (Li et al, 2021). On the other hand, the durations of the force plateau for Beams P-F1 and H-F2 at H = 1.5 m were shortened by approximately 10 ms compared to those at H = 1 m. This may be because the beams reached the unloading state earlier due to their lower rebars breaking, as described below.…”
Section: Experimental Results For Impact Loadingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For numerical simulations, LS-DYNA finite element software was used. LS-DYNA is an explicit code and more preferable for the impact analysis; 4345 but in this code, it is possible to do a quasi-static analysis by running a regular explicit simulation, invoking the mass-scaling option as necessary to crank out the results in a reasonable timeframe, but this approach can be tricky. You have to keep an eye on the kinetic energy in the system as you want to minimize the inertial effects.…”
Section: Numerical Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%