COMPARING PLATE-LEVEL BLAST ANALYSIS USING ALE, S-ALE AND CONWEP METHODS
The simulation analyses of the explosion were performed using three different methods: LBE (Lagrangian-based Eulerian), PBM (Particle-based Method), and ALE (Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian). The reference point cloud data obtained from the scanning process after the explosion tests conducted on a 12 mm thick M400 steel plate indicated a deformation of approximately 12.5 cm at a Y-directional distance between the measured points. Based on this measurement, the explosion analyses were simulated using the aforementioned three methods. The scenario involved the detonation of 6 kg of TNT beneath the structure.
https://www.dynalook.com/conferences/14th-european-ls-dyna-conference-2023/blast-explosives/soenmez_anadolu_isuzu.pdf/view
https://www.dynalook.com/@@site-logo/DYNAlook-Logo480x80.png
COMPARING PLATE-LEVEL BLAST ANALYSIS USING ALE, S-ALE AND CONWEP METHODS
The simulation analyses of the explosion were performed using three different methods: LBE (Lagrangian-based Eulerian), PBM (Particle-based Method), and ALE (Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian). The reference point cloud data obtained from the scanning process after the explosion tests conducted on a 12 mm thick M400 steel plate indicated a deformation of approximately 12.5 cm at a Y-directional distance between the measured points. Based on this measurement, the explosion analyses were simulated using the aforementioned three methods. The scenario involved the detonation of 6 kg of TNT beneath the structure.
Soenmez_Anadolu_ISUZU.pdf
— 1.1 MB