2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.08.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simulating blast effects on steel beam-column members: Methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The test plate was modeled with parameters for annealed 304 stainless steel [36,37]. The parameters for A-36 steel were taken from ASTM-A36 [38]. The parameters for the 350 grade maraging steel were those of a similar, VascoMax 300 alloy [39], but with an adjusted yield strength of 2.195 GPa to better represent the C-350 grade steel used here [40].…”
Section: The Particle Contact Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The test plate was modeled with parameters for annealed 304 stainless steel [36,37]. The parameters for A-36 steel were taken from ASTM-A36 [38]. The parameters for the 350 grade maraging steel were those of a similar, VascoMax 300 alloy [39], but with an adjusted yield strength of 2.195 GPa to better represent the C-350 grade steel used here [40].…”
Section: The Particle Contact Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To compare the displacements of the solid plates and the sandwich panels to the same test charge configuration, an additional set of simulations was performed using a fixed standoff distance (47.54 cm) to the back of both the solid plates and sandwich panels. The detonation was initiated on the surface of the HE sphere at the detonator location shown in The same Johnson-Cook parameters used in the reference solid plate study [34] were used to define the material properties for the 304 stainless steel honeycomb panels [40,41], the A-36 test support frame [42], the C-350 grade age hardened, maraging steel Kolsky bar [43,44], and the four carbon steel bolts that attached the panel to the support structure [45]. There was no fracture of the honeycomb panels or cells observed after testing.…”
Section: Fe Geometry Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The J-C model parameters for 304SS were reported by Dean et al [83] and by Mori et al [84] for annealed 304SS. For the A-36 steel constitutive model, the model parameters for ASTM-A36 were assumed [85]. The J-C parameters for 350 grade, maraging steel were taken from parameters for a similar VascoMax 300 alloy [86], assuming approximately equivalent material properties with an adjusted yield strength parameter for 350 grade steel.…”
Section: Materials Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The test plate was modeled with parameters for annealed 304 stainless steel [83,84]. The parameters for A-36 steel were taken from ASTM-A36 [85]. The parameters for the 350 grade maraging steel were those of a similar, VascoMax 300 alloy [86], but with an adjusted yield strength of 2.195 GPa to better represent the C-350 grade steel used here [87].…”
Section: Fe Geometry Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation