Blast load simulator experiments for computational model validation. Report 2

Dallriva, Frank D.; Johnson, Carol F.; O’Daniel, James L.; Barnes, Arthur K.; Dorrell, Cecil C

doi:10.21079/11681/21461

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A summary of the experimental program is provided for background. Further details on the BLS and the overall experimental program can be found in Dallriva et al (2017) andO'Daniel et al (2017). The main body of this report deals with the model comparisons and assessments of FPC capability.…”

Section: Purpose and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This ensured that the initial conditions were consistent for the FPC comparisons. Dallriva et al (2017) provides a detailed description of the single-structure experiments, and only a summary is provided here. A box-like structure was placed on the floor of the BLS to represent a single structure that is impinged on by the flow field as it progresses down the BLS.…”

Section: Bls Overview and Test Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling the Blast Load Simulator Airblast Environment Using First Principles Codes. Report 2, Blast Load Simulator Environment, Single Structures

Bessette¹,

O’Daniel²,

Akers³

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Blast Load Simulator (BLS) at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) has been utilized for applying simulated blast loads on structures for over a decade. An integrated experimental and computational program was undertaken to evaluate first principles codes (FPCs) for modeling airblast environments typical of those encountered in the BLS. The FPCs considered are CTH, DYSMAS, Loci/BLAST, and SHAMRC. The modeling is a multi-year effort and utilizes a number of BLS configurations for the code evaluation. The modeling discussed herein builds upon the first year, which examined the flow environment within an empty BLS and a case involving a single boxlike structure. The current effort expands on the single-structure scenario by employing venting at the target end of the BLS to mitigate upstream reflections and ensure a more ideal loading pulse on the structure. Three structure configurations are considered for this effort. The first is a baseline case with the front face of the box oriented perpendicular to the incoming flow. The remaining two configurations consider a rotated box at 30-and 45-deg obliquity with respect to the incoming flow. Comparisons of modeling results and BLS measurements are discussed. Shortcomings in the modeling physics are identified, and areas for improvement are noted for future development. DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.

show abstract

Section: Purpose and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Bls Overview and Test Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the Blast Load Simulator Airblast Environment Using First Principles Codes. Report 2, Blast Load Simulator Environment, Single Structures

Bessette¹,

O’Daniel²,

Akers³

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, flow problems (see Figure 1) occurring within the common design of blast simulators often leads to various flow anomalies such as transverse reflected waves, flow separation and jetting, and anomalous longitudinal waves (Uy et al, 2017). Conventional blast simulators often employ a constant cylindrical driver with a sudden and abrupt expansion section leading up to the test section (Alay et al, 2018;Chandra et al, 2012;Dallriva et al, 2016;Lloyd et al, 2009;Stolz et al, 2016). In other cases, expanding circular drivers are connected directly and abruptly to a straight test section (Ritzel, 2007) or simply in a constant cross-section for the entire length of the blast simulator (Aune et al, 2016;Colombo et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approximating a far-field blast environment in an advanced blast simulator for explosion resistance testing

Gan

Remennikov

Ritzel³

et al. 2020

International Journal of Protective Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the current state of blast-resistant design methods is based largely on empirical observations of actual explosive testing or numerical simulations, experimental testing remains the ultimate method for validating blast protection technologies. Field trials for performing systematic experimental studies are exceedingly expensive and inefficient. Conventional blast simulators (shock tubes) enable blast testing to be performed in a safe and controlled laboratory environment but are significantly deficient. The Australian National Facility of Physical Blast Simulation based on the ‘Advanced Blast Simulator’ concept was established to address the shortcomings of conventional blast simulators (shock tubes). The blast simulator at the National Facility of Physical Blast Simulation is a state-of-the-art design having a test section of 1.5 × 2.0 m with dual-mode driver able of operating with either compressed gas or gaseous detonation modes. The simulator is capable of a range of blast-test configurations such as full-reflection wall targets and diffraction model targets. This article aims to demonstrate the ability of the Advanced Blast Simulator in accurately generating a far-field blast environment suitable for high-precision and repeatable explosion testing of various building components. Blast pressure-time histories generated with the Advanced Blast Simulator are validated against equivalent TNT free-field curves reproduced with Conventional Weapons Effects Program. Numerical models based on Computational Fluid Dynamics were developed in ANSYS FLUENT to accurately characterise and visualise the internal flow environment of the National Facility of Physical Blast Simulation Advanced Blast Simulator. The Computational Fluid Dynamics model was also used to explain experimental observations and to determine density and dynamic pressure information for comparisons with free-field explosion conditions.

show abstract

Blast load simulator experiments for computational model validation. Report 2

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Modeling the Blast Load Simulator Airblast Environment Using First Principles Codes. Report 2, Blast Load Simulator Environment, Single Structures

Modeling the Blast Load Simulator Airblast Environment Using First Principles Codes. Report 2, Blast Load Simulator Environment, Single Structures

Approximating a far-field blast environment in an advanced blast simulator for explosion resistance testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About