1 s2.0 S0734743X05000874 Main

International Journal of Impact Engineering 32 (2006) 19451963
Deformation and fracture behaviour of plate specimens

subjected to underwater explosiona review
R. Rajendran
a,
, K. Narasimhan
b
a
BARC Facilities, Kalpakkam 603 102, India
b
Department of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay,
Mumbai 400 076, India
Received 1 February 2005; received in revised form 26 April 2005; accepted 31 May 2005
Available online 11 August 2005
Abstract
Behaviour of plate specimens subjected to underwater explosion is of interest to metal forming
community and ship designers. The break down of the original molecule of an explosive into product
molecules associated with the evolution of large amount of heat generates a shock front in the water
medium, followed by a gas bubble pulsation. The interaction of the shock wave with a plate imparts energy
to it, which is dissipated in the form of deformation. The intensity of explosion determines whether a plate
undergoes elastic deformation, yielding, plastic deformation or fracture. When the deformation is in the
elastic range, the stress developed in the plate is given as a function of the material and shock wave
parameters. As the intensity of explosion progressively increases, the elastic to plastic transition occurs over
a specic shock factor. Plastic deformation is predicted as a function of geometric and material properties
of the plate and shock pulse impulse. Deection-time history reveals the reloading effects of the shock
wave. As the deforming plate absorbs maximum energy, depending on its strength and ductility, it
undergoes fracture. Terminal strain to fracture is considered as the criterion for explosive shock
performance of ship materials.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Plate deformation; Shock factor; Impulse; Deection-time history; Terminal strain to fracture.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijimpeng
0734-743X/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2005.05.013
Corresponding author. Fax: +91 4114 280282.

E-mail address: rajurajendr@yahoo.co.in (R. Rajendran).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
NomenclatureSymbols
a half-length of the rectangular plate (m)
b half-breadth of the rectangular plate (m)
c velocity of sound in water medium (m/s)
D depth of explosion (m)/material parameter
E Youngs modulus of the plate material (MPa)
E
pa
energy transmitted per unit area for air-backed plate (J/m
2
)
E
pw
energy transmitted per unit area for water-backed plate (J/m
2
)
Eq
TNT
TNT equivalent of the explosive
E
sh
energy density of the shock wave (J/m
2
)
E
TNT
energy of the TNT explosive (kcal/kg)
I free eld impulse of the shock wave (Ns/m
2
)
I
tot
total impulse (Ns)
J mechanical heat equivalent (J/kcal)
m mass per unit area of the plate specimen (kg/m
2
)
n material parameter for strain rate effects
p shock wave pressure (MPa)
P
m
Peak pressure (MPa)
p
o
hydrostatic pressure (MPa)
P
tot
total pressure acting on the plate specimen (N/m
2
)
q material parameter
R
max
maximum radius of the gas bubble (m)
R radius of the circular plate/radius of the hole bored (m)
S stand off (m)
SF shock factor (kg
1/2
/m)
t time (s) or thickness of the plate (m)
t
vma
time to reach maximum velocity for air backed plate (s)
t
vmw
time to reach maximum velocity for water backed plate (s)
T duration of rst pulsation of the gas bubble (s)
v velocity of the plate (m/s)
V impact velocity (m/s)
V
ma
maximum velocity of air backed plate (m/s)
V
mw
maximum velocity of water backed plate (m/s)
W TNT equivalent of charge quantity (kg)
W
cri
critical quantity of explosive charge that is required to bore a hole (kg)
x
a
inverse weight number for air backed plate
x
w
inverse weight number for the water backed plate
YF yield factor (s/N
1/2
)
z displacement of each element of the plate specimen (m)
Z total static pressure water head at the location of the explosive (m)
R. Rajendran, K. Narasimhan / International Journal of Impact Engineering 32 (2006) 19451963 1946
1. Introduction
Underwater shock response of plate specimens is studied both by ship designers and metal
forming community to understand the relation between the explosive forces and the plate
deformation and fracture behaviour. Effects of underwater explosion have been studied ever since
it was realized that explosion underwater could be accomplished [1]. It is reported by Hilliar [2]
that earliest experiments were conducted in the period of 18701880 and attempted to measure the
intensity of pressure at different points in the water. This review brings out the sequence of events
of underwater explosion and its effect on plate specimens.
2. The shock wave
All underwater explosion phenomena are caused by the explosion of a charge which consists of
an explosive [35]. An explosive reaction is the break down of the original molecules into product
molecules (such as CO, CO
2
, NO, CH
4
, H
2
as gases, and C, Pb, Al
2
O
3
as solids) together with the
evolution of large amount of heat (1050 kcal per kg of TNT explosive). The temperature in the
product gas is of the order of 3000 1C and the pressure about 5000 MPa.
The sudden energy release associated with the explosion of a high explosive leads to the
formation of a superheated, highly compressed gas bubble and the generation of a shock wave in
the surrounding water [1]. The propagation velocity drops rapidly to the sound velocity
(approximately 1440 m/s for sea water) within 10 times the charge radius [3]. The underwater
shock wave generated by the explosion is superimposed on the hydrostatic pressure. The pressure
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Greek letters
a
j
Johnsons damage number
b ratio of breadth to length of the rectangular plate
d inelastic central deection of the plate (m)
f
fracture strain of the plate material (m/m)
F
c
dimensionless parameter for circular plates
F
r
dimensionless parameter for rectangular plates
Z coupling factor
n Poissons ratio
y time constant (ms)
r mass density of the water medium (kg/m
3
)
r
p
mass density of the plate material (kg/m
3
)
s
a
apex von-Mises stress (MPa)
s
d
damage stress (MPa)
s
y
yield stress of the plate material (MPa)
w angle of incidence normal to the plate
time history, p(t), at a xed location starts with an instantaneous pressure increase to a peak
pressure, P
m
, (in less than 10
7
s) followed by a decay which in its initial portion is usually
approximated by an exponential function as [5]
pt P
m
e
t=y
(1)
with y as the decay time, valid for 0otoy. The peak pressure and the decay constant depend
on the size of the explosive charge and the stand off from this charge at which pressure is
measured [1].
P
m
52:16
W
1=3
S
_ _
1:13
, (2)
y 96:5 W
1=3
_ _
W
1=3
S
_ _0:22
, (3)
where P
m
is in MPa, y is in micro seconds, W is expressed in kg of TNT and the stand off, S, is
measured in metre. These formulae apply to any size of charge, from a few grains to nuclear
weapons, exploded at any depth, and describe the shock wave properly except in the immediate
vicinity of the explosive charge (10 times the charge radius), where the peak pressure is higher than
what formula predicts. As the shock wave passes a xed location and subjects the liquid at this
point to a transient pressure p(t), the liquid is simultaneously subjected to ow with a velocity v(t)
in the direction of the wave which is related to the transient pressure [1]:
pt rcvt. (4)
A correction due to spherical ow is required and then the ow velocity becomes
vt
pt
rc

1
rS
_
t
0
pt dt (5)
The rst term is the velocity for a plane wave and the correction term is called after ow term.
The after ow term becomes signicant in the close vicinity of the explosion, and also for large
time intervals.
The energy in the shock wave of the explosion consists of two equal components, one pertaining
to the compression in the water and the other due to the associated ow. The shock wave energy
density E
sh
for a plane shock wave is [5]
E
1
rc
_
/
0
p
2
t dt. (6)
For a fully exponential shock wave
E
1
rc
P
2
m
y. (7)
The effectiveness of the shock wave depends on the time integral of the pressure, or impulse,
more signicantly than on the detailed form of pressure versus time. The impulse of unit area of
ARTICLE IN PRESS
the shock wave front upto a time t after the arrival is given by [5]
I
_
t
0
pt dt. (8)
Strictly, the pressure p(t)p
o
in excess of hydrostatic pressure should be used in this equation.
But for most cases of interest, the shock wave pressure p(t) is so large that the difference is of no
importance. The energy is estimated for the whole length of the shock wave and the impulse is
integrated to a time t 6:7y are given by [5]
E
sh
98 000 W
1=3
_ _
W
1=3
S
_ _2:1
, (9)
I 5760 W
1=3
_ _
W
1=3
S
_ _0:891
, (10)
where E is in J/m
2
and I is Ns/m
2
. Nomogram was made by US Naval Ordinance Laboratory,
White Oak [1], to determine the peak pressure, time constant, free eld impulse and energy of a
shock wave generated by the underwater explosion of an explosive charge at a specied stand off.
3. The gas bubble
The initial gas pressure is considerably decreased after the principal part of the shock wave has
been emitted, but it is still higher than the equilibrium hydrostatic pressure [5]. Upto 12 gas bubble
pulsations have been observed using a detonator as the charge [2]. The rst bubble pulse can have
a peak pressure of 1015 per cent of the shock wave peak pressure. During the pulsation process,
the bubble migrates upward because of the inuence of the gravity, with the maximum migration
occurring during the minima [6].
The gas bubble generated by the explosion is nearly spherical during the initial expansion and
contraction [1]. The two characteristic parameters are the maximum radius R
max
, reached during
the rst pulsation and the duration T of the pulsation (from the explosion to the rst following
minimum). Both vary with the size of the explosion charge and the depth at which the explosion
occurs [3].
R
max
3:3
W
Z
_ _
1=3
, (11)
T 2:08
W
1=3
Z
5=6
, (12)
where Z D10 represents the total static pressure at the location of the explosive. Here D is
the depth of the explosion in m. Nomogram was made by Keil [1] for determining the maximum
gas bubble radius and the time of rst bubble pulsation.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
4. Fluid-plate interaction
When the pressure pulse generated by the detonation process is transmitted in water to the plate
it gets modied by the acceleration of the plate and reected back into the water. The dimensions
of plate is usually large compared with the effective length of the pulse [7]. Linear pressure density
relationship which implies constant velocity of shock wave propagation is assumed during the
analytical treatment of the plate interaction, since the error caused is below 5 per cent for
pressures up to 40 MPa [8]. The plate is assumed to be innite since the diffraction time is typically
much large compared to the time taken for the plate to reach its maximum velocity. In other
words, the time taken by the shock wave to travel from the edge to the centre of the plate through
the shortest length is large compared to the cavitation time. If the plate is initially stationary, a
plane pressure wave striking it will give the plate an initial kick off velocity. A reected shock
wave will at the same time be transmitted back in the water which must be of such magnitude that
the resultant particle velocity of the water in contact with the plate is equal to the velocity of the
plate. When a shock wave arrives at a plate in normal direction it gets reected and the pulse
becomes doubled. As the plate accelerates, a relief wave occurs and the pressure rapidly falls. The
approximate equation of motion is [1,3,9,10]
P
tot
m
d
2
z
dt
2
2P
i
rc
dz
dt
, (13)
where m is the mass per unit area of the plate, P
tot
is the total pressure, P
i
is the incident pressure
that decreases exponentially with time, z is the displacement of each element in the direction of
shock front, r is the density of water, c is the velocity of sound in water and t is the time which is
measured from the onset of the wave. The incident pulse can be approximated as given in Eq. (1)
From Eqs. (1) and (13) yield the maximum velocity, V
max
as
V
ma

2P
m
rc
x
1=1x
a
a
, (14)
where x
a
is the inverse mass number for air backed plates which is given as
x
a

rcy
m
. (15)
The maximum velocity for air backed plates is reached when the resultant pressure falls to zero.
The time to reach V
max
is given by
t
vma

y ln x
a
x
a
1
. (16)
The equation of motion for water backed plate is modied as [3]
P
tot
m
d
2
z
dt
2
2P
1
2rc
dz
dt
. (17)
The maximum velocity of water backed plate is [9]
V
mw

2P
m
2rc
x
1=1x
w
w
, (18)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
where
x
w

2rcy
m
. (19)
The maximum velocity for water backed plate is reached when the resultant pressure equals the
hydrostatic pressure of water behind the plate. The time to reach V
mw
is given by
t
vmw

y ln x
w
x
w
1
. (20)
From Eq. (14), the kinetic energy or the energy transmitted per unit area E
pa
for air backed plate
is
E
pa

2mP
2
m
r
2
c
2
x
2=1x
w
w
(21)
and for a water backed plate is
E
pw

mP
2
m
2r
2
c
2
x
2=1x
w
w
(22)
For oblique incidence, m is replaced by mcos w , where w is the angle of incidence normal to the
plate. Substituting tr
p
for m in Eqs. (21) and (22)
E
pa

2tr
p
P
2
m
r
2
c
2
x
2=1x
a
a
(23)
E
pw

tr
p
P
2
m
2r
2
c
2
x
2=1x
w
w
, (24)
where r
p
is the mass density and t is the thickness of the plate.
5. Reloading effects
The tensile wave during reection of the shock wave from the plate creates water breaking
which causes cavitation. Multiple reection of tensile wave between the cavitated zone and the
plate surface causes multiple pressure peaks, which are known as spray reloading. Closure of the
cavitated space by the interaction of the gas bubble causes major reloading which is also known as
water hammer reloading [3]. After a long gap (of the order of milliseconds) the secondary pulse
emitted by the gas bubble is felt by the plate. The pressure- time history of an air-backed plate
subjected to underwater explosion is shown in Fig. 1. As seen from Fig. 1, spray reloading is
almost negligible when compared to the primary pulse whereas water hammer reloading is more
intense [11]. For reloading to occur, the water head above the charge must be greater than half the
stand off distance [9]. The reloading phase delivers considerably larger amount of energy to the
plate than the primary pulse. The effect of reloading reaches its maximum when the depth of
explosion becomes twice the stand off. The contribution of reloading to the total energy delivered
to the plate by the shock wave is incorporated in Eq. (9), but to the impulse in Eq. (10), it is not
incorporated [9].
ARTICLE IN PRESS
6. Elastic and yield behaviour
For small intensity of explosion, the stresses developed in the plate are in the elastic range. For
thin circular plates undergoing biaxial loading, the apex von-Mises stress s
a
is [12]
s
a

6Er
p
P
2
m
x
2=1x
r
2
c
2
1 n
, (25)
where n is the Poissons ratio.
The apex von-Mises stress decreases in a parabolic fashion with radial distance from the centre
of the plate and approaches zero at its edge. For thin rectangular plates it is given as [13,14]
s
a
0:867
14Er
p
P
2
m
x
2=1x
r
2
c
2
. (26)
The apex von-Mises stress varies as a papabolic function of length and breadth of the rectangle
and approaches zero at its edge. A typical strain-time history on a circular plate is shown in Fig. 2
where the strain due to reloading is more than the strain due to the primary shock pulse.
As the intensity of explosion further increases, the plate attains its limiting elastic range beyond
which it undergoes permanent deformation. The shock factor, SF, which is an indication of shock
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time (ms)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
M
P
a
) C
A
B
7.0
3.5
3.5
7.0
Fig. 1. Reloading effects on a 300 mm250 mm4 mm steel plate for the detonation of Mk79 detonator (equivalent
to 1 g of TNT) at a stand off of 0.8 m and a depth of 2 m. (A) Primary shock pulse; (B) spray reloading; (C) main
reloading.
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.06
1200.00
1200.00
0.00
-600.00
-1200.00
S
t
r
a
i
n

(
m
i
c
r
o

s
t
r
a
i
n
)
Time (s)
Reloading
Fig. 2. A typical strain time history at the centre of a circular plate of 290 mm diameter and 4 mm thickness for the
explosion of 11.7 g of TNT at a stand off of 1.2 m and a depth of 2 m.
energy and is given by [3]
SF 0:445
W
p
S
. (27)
The SF for which yielding of a thin air backed plate will take place is [14]
SF YF
1
Z
p s
y
t
p
, (28)
where Z is the coupling factor which is given by
Z 4x
1x=1x
. (29)
YF is the yield factor which is 2.212 10
9
s=
N
p
for circular plates and 1.997 10
9
s=
N
p
for
rectangular plates [14], s
y
is the static yield stress in MPa and t is the thickness of the plate in m. It
is to be observed here that yielding takes place due to main reloading and not the primary shock
pulse. It is seen from Eq. (27) that a range of charge quantity and stand off combination is
possible for generating the shock factor for yielding for a specic plate. The time constant y that
can be conveniently generated in a shock test facility is known. The charge quantity in kg and
stand off in m required for generating the required shock factor for yielding at the given time
constant are obtained from Eqs. (3) and (27) as
W
SF
0:445
_ _
0:5946
y
96:6 10
6
_ _
2:7026
, (30)
S
0:445
SF
_ _
0:7027
y
96:6 10
6
_ _
1:3513
. (31)
7. Plasticity deformation energy
Elastoplastic shock response of plane plates was studied extensively by underwater shock
community because it presents simplest structural element in a ship [3]. Detailed study on damage
of air backed plates held regidly at their peripheries was made by the US Navy in connection
with the torpedo protection programme which was conducted at David Taylor model Basin [15].
The deformation of rigidly clamped thin circular diaphragms by static and explosive pressures
were studied by Gleyzal [16] to derive the energy required for deformation from the
central deection of the diaphragm. Diaphragms of different materials were analysed to obtain
the relation between the pressure parameter and the central deection. The energy absorbed
during dynamic plastic deformation was found to be proportional to the square of the
deection. Plates deformed between spherical and conical shapes during underwater explosion
[10]. While the energy absorbed for parabolic deformation is almost the same as that of
spherical deformation, the conical and the hyperbolic deformation absorb half the spherical
deformation energy for the same depth of bulge. The energy absorption for deformation,
using the deph of bulge, is obtained by multiplying the yield stress of the material with the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
thickness and the increase in area. Typical deformation prole of a diaphragm obtained by static
pressure is always spherical. Whereas the deformation prole of the underwater exloded plate
changes from conical to spherical as the shock pulse changes from spherical to plane wave [17].
The energy absorbed for the deformation of the circular diaphragm was measured using grid
strains on the plates by Greeneld [18]. Detailed discussion on the experimenal determination of
large strains is presented by Sowerby et al. [19]. Keil [1] reports that deformaton energy is less
when compared to the input shock energy. But by adding a correction factor the energy balance is
maintained.
8. Deection-time history
There have been several experimental studies to measure large deformation of plates subjected
to blast loading [20]. Johnson et al. [21] measured the displacement time history of a deforming
plate subjected to underwater explosion using pin contactors developed by Minshall [22]. The pins
were positioned at known intervals apart in the path of the deforming blank. As the blank
made contact with each pin, a signal was generated and displayed on the oscilloscope. Williams
[23] used high speed photography (15 000 frames per second) to photograph the growing
bulge of the plate. Bednarsky [24] used steriophotogrammetric method to measure the
displacements, strains and strain rates of a circular plate subjected to underwater explosion.
The lming speed was 6000 frames per second. The photographs of the deformation process
were made with steady frequency and within ten frames. The deection time history was plotted
for the entire plate. Streak photo was used by Hudson et al. [25] to measure the deection time
history of a circular plate subjected to underwater explosion. The reloading effects due to
water hammer effects was clearly seen after 100 ms whereas the deformation due to primary pulse
took nearly 1000 ms. This observation of secondary phase loading was noted by Johnson et al. [21]
also. The velocity of the plate is almost constant except at the edges due to clamping effects [9].
Nurick [2628] developed light interference technique to measure the deection time history of a
plate subjected to impulse load. Photo voltaic diodes were used to measure the light interference
pattern obtained during deformation. Deections up to 20 mm over a time period of 200 ms were
observed.
9. Deection predictions
There have been many theoretical predictions for the deection of plates subjected to impulsive
loads [29]. Johnson [30] proposed a guide line for assessing the behaviour of metals subjected to
impact loading using a dimensionless number dened as
a
j

r
p
V
2
s
d
, (32)
where V is the impact plate velocity, r
p
is the material density and s
d
is the damage stress.
Johnsons damage number is predictable only when the plates have similar dimensions. The
ARTICLE IN PRESS
damage number can be written in terms of impulse as [31]
a
j

I
tot
A
2
t
2
r
p
s
d
, (33)
where I
tot
is the total impulse, s
d
is damage stress and A is area of the plate over which impulse is
imparted. For convenience, s
d
is taken as s
y
. A modied damage parameter, F, was introduced by
Nurick [28] that incorporated plate dimensions and loading. For circular plates [32]
F
c

I
tot
pRt
2
rs
y
_ _
1=2
(34)
and for rectangular plates,
F
r

I
tot
2t
2
4abrs
y
_ _
1=2
, (35)
where 2a and 2b are the length and breadth of the plate. For large plastic deformation (mode I
failure) [28]
d
t
_ _
c
0:425F
c
0:227 (36)
and
d
t
_ _
r
0:471F
r
0:001, (37)
where d is the deection at the centre of the plate and t is the thickness of the plate. Plates
subjected to higher impulses during air blast undergo mode II (tearing at edges) and mode III
(transverse shear at edges) failures [3335]. For underwater explosion, Rammerswaal [36]
showed that explosive forming caused structural changes like mechanical twins in the metal.
The experimental relations between the deformation and the explosive parameters (charge weight
and stand off) were reported by Finnie [37]. The ring was carried out in water tank of atleast
2.7 m diameter in order to minimise the effects of shock reections. Sheets of various materials
were exploded underwater. The impulse per unit deformation showed linear relation with the
original thickness of the plate. Also, the impulse required for rupture increased linearly with the
original thickness. Rajendran et al. [38] showed for underwater explosion based on free eld
impulse that
d
t
_ _
c
0:541F
c
0:433, (38)
d
t
_ _
r
0:553F
r
0:741. (39)
Since Eqs. (38) and (39) were derived for maximum reloading effect, for a depth of explosion
less than twice stand off, they will give less deection. A photographic view of an inelastically
deformed plate is shown in Fig. 3. Analytical predictions made by Jones [39] for the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
deection-thickness ratio are given below:
d
t
_ _
c
0:817F
c
(40a)
for circular plates. Taking strain rate effects into account, Eq. (40a) is modied as [39]
d
t
_ _
c
0:817
F
c
n
p , (40b)
where n is given as
n 1
I
2
3r
2
p
t
2
DR
r
p
3s
y
_ _
1=2
_ _
1=q
, (41)
where D and q are material parameters (D 40 and q 5 for steel). The variation of deection-
thickness ratio as a function of dimensionless parameter for circular plates is shown in Fig. 4. A
comparison has been made for the theoretical prediction by Jones [39], empirical predictions by
Nurick et al. [28] and empirical predictions by Rajendran et al. [38]. The comparison shows that
empirical prediction by Rajendran et al. [38] closely adheres to experiments accounting for
reloading effects during underwater explosion. Empirical prediction by Nurick et al. [28]
uderpredicts because reloading effects are not accounted for. Theoretical prediction by Jones [39]
overpredicts when strain rate effects were not considered and compares well with experiments
when strain rate effects were considered.
For rectangular plates, predictions by Jones [39] (for breadth to length ratio b
5
6
) without
stain rate effects are given as
d
t
_ _
r
0:95 1 0:6637F
2
r
_ _
1=2
1
_ _
(42a)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 3. A photographic view of the rectangular HSLA steel plate deformed during the underwater explosion; charge
weight 40 g of PEK-1 explosive; stand off 15 cm.
and with strain rate effects
d
t
_ _
r
0:95 1 0:6637
F
2
r
n
_ _
1=2
1
_ _
, (42b)
where n for steel is given as
n 1 0:0357
I
2
t
2

s
y
p
_ _
1=q
. (43)
The variation of deection-thickness ratio as a function of dimensionless parameter for
rectangular plates is shown in Fig. 5. A comparison has been made for the theoretical prediction
by Jones [39], empirical predictions by Nurick et al. [28] and empirical predictions by Rajendran et
al. [38]. The comparison shows that empirical prediction by Rajendran et al. [38] closely adheres
to experiments accounting for reloading effects during underwater explosion. Empirical
prediction by Nurick et al. [28] uderpredicts because reloading effects are not accounted for.
Theoretical prediction by Jones [39] overpredicts when strain rate effects were not considered and
coincides with empirical predictions by Nurick et al. [28] when strain rate effects were considered.
10. Explosion bulge test
The shock resistance of machinery and equipment in a naval vessel are related to the ability of
the hull to withstand shock damage. It becomes therefore necessary to quantify the hull damage
due to underwater explosion and qualify the hull structure for shock resistance. The ability of the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40
0
10
20
30
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
-
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

r
a
t
i
o
Circular plates
Experimental Ref[38]
Nurick and Martin (Eq. 36)
Jones (Eq. 40a)
Jones (Eq. 40b)
Rajendran and Narasimhan (Eq. 38)
Fig. 4. Deection-thickness ratio as a function of non-dimensional parameter for circular plates.

hull material to withstand large deformation before fracture is a major criterion in naval
structural applications [40].
Explosion bulge test (EBT) has been used as the nal qualication test to verify the dynamic
plasticity of defence structural materials [41]. Explosive loading promotes brittle fracture due to
high strain rate inuence on material ow properties. Naval Research Laboratory, Washington
developed EBT [42,43] to investigate the response of steel weldments to air blast. The principal
objective of the EBT was to assess the material behaviour without establishing its relationship
with the underwater shock forces.
MIL-STD-2149A(SH), formulated by the US Navy [44] recommends air blast as the source of
energy to evaluate the resistance of base materials and weldments to fracture under rapid loading
conditions. It also recommends repetitive shock loading on the test plate with a reduction in
thickness in each shot until nal strain to fracture.
ARE, UK and DREA, Canada independently developed underwater EBT [40,41] to minimise
the charge and the environmental noise nuisance. Hodgson and Boyd [45] gave a detailed account
of behaviour of weldments subjected to explosive loading.
Pellini [46] placed the test panel over a circular die which was chamfered to provide smooth
entry of the bulge. Uniform loading of the test specimen was ensured by off-set of the explosive
from the test plate. The unsupported area of the plate was approximately 28 per cent of the total
area. Failure criterion was either physical failure of the weld joint by the appearance of a crack or
the required reduction in thickness. Pellini [47] demonstrated the effect of temperature on the
plastic deformation of weld panels when subjected to explosive loading. The ductility of the plates
decreased with decrease in temperature and a behaviour similar to the energy absorption of
Charpys V-notch specimen as a function of temperature was observed.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
10
20
30
40
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
-
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

r
a
t
i
o
Rectangular plates
Experimental (Ref [38])
Rajendran and Narasimhan (Eq.39)
Nurick and Martin (Eq.37)
Jones (Eq. 42a)
Jones (Eq. 42b)
Fig. 5. Deection-thickness ratio as a function of non-dimensional parameter for rectangular plates.
Puzak et al. [48] investigated the response of HY80 to shock loading for different weldments.
Low energy input to the commercial submerged arc welding improved the fracture resistance of
heat affected zone and not the weld deposit. The result was corroborated by Charpys V-notch test
which showed low energy absorption at all temperatures.
A modied version of the explosion bulge test involving detonation of charge adjacent to the
test piece while submerged in water was developed by Porter et al. [49] and experiments were
conducted to provide plastic strain data.
11. Fracture
Fox [7] observed that the edge fracture occurs for a plate restrained at its edges. Sumpter [50]
showed that fracture toughness of bulge panels is a strong function of crack length and panel
thickness ratio. A semi-elliptical crack of known length and depth was introduced to the weld
prior to the test. The panel was tested at 5 1C. The test was performed with a sheet contact
explosive. Fatigue crack growth occurred along the whole of the machined notch tip but the
surface length did not increase beyond the machined size. Naval vessel hull welds are required to
sustain a plastic strain level of 2 per cent in the presence of surface breaking fatigue crack 7.5 mm
deep and 50 mm long [51].
Sumpter [51] formulated pass/fail criterion for the cracked panels subjected to shock load.
Sielski [52] reviewed the application of explosion bulge test for fracture mechanics materials
testing. While explosion bulge test does not directly give numbers for design purposes, the
material performance under the condition of explosive loading and rapid crack growth are used as
an indicator of behaviour under service conditions [53].
The dynamic fracture resistance of metal structures loaded into the plastic regime by non-
contact underwater explosion was reported by Gifford et al. [5455]. Strain was measured on the
cracked HY80 plate for the shock intensity varying from the elastic to plastic range. The average
strain rate for plastic shots was 30 s
1
as compared to about 5 s
1
for elastic shots.
12. Strain rate effects
The strain rate experienced during deformation process of an underwater explosion is in the
range of 1100 s
1
as reported by Keil [1]. However strain rates up to 500 were reported by
Bednarsky [24] for a diaphragm subjected to underwater explosion. Sumpter et al. [56] reported
that the strain rate of plates subjected to shock loading due to whipping lies between 2 and 20 s
1
.
The strain rate of a plate subjected to underwater explosion is the maximum at its centre and zero
at its edges [24].
13. Contact underwater explosion
Research on contact explosion damage studies started way back in 1924 on the Japanese
discarded battle ship Tosa [1]. Imperial Japanese Navy carried out contact underwater explosion
ARTICLE IN PRESS
damage on Tosas hull with different charges at three widely separate parts to obtain necessary
technical back ground to develop the underwater protection systems to their war ships. Tests
carried out by Keil [3] on scaled models ruled out the inuence of depth of submergence on the
damage potential of contact explosion. Keil described that there is a denite relation between the
radius, R, of the hole that is being made by an explosive of quantity, W, during contact explosion
with a plate of thickness t.
R 0:0704
W
t
_
, (44)
where R and t are in m and W is in kg. This relation is valid only above certain charge quantity
since a minimum quantity of explosive is required for making a hole in the plate of specied
thickness. The critical charge weight W
cri
above which Eq. (44) holds good is given by
W
cri
2:72t. (45)
The basis on which the above prediction was obtained is not described in literature. A recent
prediction for the radius of the hole that is bored is given by Rajendran et al. [57]
R
2ZWEq
TNT
E
TNT
J
pts
y
, (46)
where Eq
TNT
is the TNT equivalent of the explosive , E
TNT
is the energy of TNT in kcal/kg, J is
the mechanical energy conversion unit, Z is the coupling factor which is equal to 0.1236 and e
f
is
the fracture strain. However, the plate does not tear exactly in a circular manner but as a lotus as
shown in Fig. 6.
14. Conclusions
Theory of underwater explosion phenomena was reviewed with special emphasis on the
interaction of shock waves with plane plates. Plates undergo more damage by reloading than by
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 6. Underwater contact explosion damage of a circular steel plate for 23 g of TNT explosive charge.
the primary pulse. The elastic stress due to the primary pulse, the yield onset and the extent of
permanent deformation of thin plates are predictable for non-contact explosion. Explosion bulge
test serves as the qualication test for ship materials. Flawed bulge explosion test species the
minimum plastic strain in the presence of a sharp crack as acceptance criterion. The damage of
plates due to contact explosion, which is very little amenable to theoretical treatment, is also
predictable for thin steel plates of circular geometry.
References
[1] Keil AH. The response of ships to underwater explosions. Trans Soc Naval Archit Mar Eng 1961;69:366410.
[2] Johnson W, Poyton A, Singh H, Travis FW. Experiments in the underwater explosion stretch forming of clamped
circular blanks. Int J Mech Sci 1966;8:23770.
[3] Keil AH. Introduction to underwater explosion research. UERD, Norfolk Naval Ship Yard, Portsmouth,
Virginia; 1956.
[4] Engineering Design Hand Book. Explosive services, explosive trains. Head Quarters, US Army Materiel
Command; 1974.
[5] Cole RH. Underwater explosions. NJ, USA: Princeton University Press; 1948.
[6] Herring C. Theory of pulsation of gas bubble produced by an underwater explosion. Comp Underwater Explos
Res 1950;2:35161.
[7] Fox EN. A review of underwater explosion phenomena. Comp Underwater Explos Res 1947;1:183.
[8] Haung H. Numerical analysis of interaction of pressure pulses with submerged structures. In: Smith CS, Clarke
JD, editors. Advances in marine structures. London & New York: Elsevier Publishers; 1986.
[9] Ezra AA. Principles and practice of explosive metal working, vol. 1. Adelphi, London, WC2N 6JH: Industrial
News Papers Ltd., John Adams House; 1973.
[10] Kennard AH. The effect of pressure wave on a plate or diaphragm. Comp Underwater Explos Res ONR
1944;3:1164.
[11] Rajendran R, Satyanarayana KSBS. Interaction of nite amplitude acoustic waves with a plane plate. J Acoust
Soc India 1997;25:V5.17.
[12] Rajendran R, Narasimhan K. Linear elastic shock response of plane plates subjected to underwater explosion. Int
J Impact Eng 2001;25:493506.
[13] Rajendran R, Narasimhan K. Underwater shock response of circular HSLA steel plates. Shock Vib 2000;7:25162.
[14] Rajendran R, Response of thin HSLA steel plates to underwater explosive shock loading. Ph.D. Thesis, IIT
Bombay, Mumbai, India; 2001.
[15] Hudson GE. Theory of dynamic plastic deformation of a thin diaphragm. Comp Underwater Explos Res ONR
1951;3:164200.
[16] Glezal AN. Plastic deformation and absorption of energy by thin circular plates under normal loading. Comp
Underwater Explos Res ONR 1951;3:14352.
[17] Fye PM, Eldridge FE. Diaphragm gauge studies of underwater explosion. Comp Underwater Explos Res ONR
1951;3:51794.
[18] Greeneld MA. A method for determining the energy absorption of of thin steel diaphragms. Comp Underwater
Explos Res ONR 1944;3:14352.
[19] Sowerby R, Cuh E, Duncan JL. Determination of large strains in metal forming. J Strain Analy 1982;17(2):95101.
[20] Nurick GN, The measurement of deformation response of a structure subjected to an explosive load using light
interference technique. Proceedings of the 1986 SEM Spring Conference on Experimental Mechanics. The Society
of Experimental Mechanics Inc; 1986. p. 105114.
[21] Johnson W, Kormi K, Travis FW. An investigation into the explosive deep drawing of circular blanks using plug
cushion technique. Int J Mech Sci 1966;6:287301.
[22] Minshall S. Properties of elastic and plastic waves determined by pin contactors and crystals. J Appl Phys
1955;26:4639.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[23] Williams T. Some metallurgical aspects of metal forming. Sheet Met Ind 1962;29:3918.
[24] Bednarsky T. The dynamic deformation of a circular membrane. Int J Mech Sci 1969;11:94959.
[25] Hudson GE, Johnson CT. Time displacement studies on diaphragm by explosive loading. Comp Underwater
Explos Res 1951;3:44560.
[26] Nurick GN. A new technique to measure the deection time history of a structure subjected to high strain rates. Int
J Impact Eng 1985;3(1):1726.
[27] Nurick GN. Using photo voltaic diodes to measure the deformation response of a structure subjected to an
explosive load, SPIE. High Speed Photogr 1986;674:21525.
[28] Nurick GN, Martin JB. Deformation of thin plates subjected to impulsive loadinga review, Part II: experimental
studies. Int J Impact Eng 1989;8(2):17186.
[29] Nurick GN, Martin JB. Deformation of thin plates subjected to impulsive loadinga review, Part I: theoretical
consideration. Int J Impact Eng 1989;8(2):15170.
[30] Johnson W. Impact strength of materials. Arnold E, editor. London: 1972.
[31] Nurick GN. An empirical solution for predicting maximum central deection of impulsively loaded plates.
International Conference on Mechanical Properties of Materials at High Rates of Strain, Oxford, Institute of
Physics Society, No. 12, Session 9; 1989: p. 457463.
[32] Teeling-Smith RG, Nurick GN. Deformation and rupture of blast loaded circular platespredictions and
experiments. Int J Impact Eng 1991;11(1):7791.
[33] Olson MD, Nurick GN, Fagnan JR. Deformation and rupture of blast loaded square platespredictions and
experiments. Int J Impact Eng 1993;13(2):27991.
[34] Nurick GN, Shave GC. The deformation and tearing of thin square plates subjected to impulsive loadsan
experimental study. Int J Impact Eng 1996;18(1):99116.
[35] Nurick GN, Gelman ME, Marshall NS. Tearing of blast loaded plated with clamped boundary conditions. Int
J Impact Eng 1996;18(78):80327.
[36] Remmerswaal JR. The peaceful use of explosives. Sheet Met Ind 1962; 475486.
[37] Finnie TM, Explosive forming of circular diaphragms, Sheet Met Ind 1962; 391398.
[38] Rajendran R, Narasimhan K. Performance evaluation of HSLA steel subjected to underwater explosion. J Mater
Eng Performance, ASM 2001;10:6674.
[39] Jones N. Structural impact. UK: Cambridge University Press; 1989.
[40] Sumpter JDG. Design against fracture in welded joints. In: Smith CS, Clarke JD, editors. Advances in marine
structures. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers; 1986. p. 32646.
[41] Porter JF. Response of SMA and Narrow Gap HY80 Weldments to explosive shock. Technical Memorandum 88/
206, DREA. Atlantic, Canada; 1988.
[42] Hartbower CE, Pellini WS, Explosion bulge test studies of deformation of weldments. Welding J 1951;
307s318s.
[43] Hartbower CE, Pellini WS, Investigation of factors which determine the performance of weldments, Welding J,
1951; 499s511s.
[44] US Navy. Standard procedure for explosion bulge testing of ferrous and non-ferrous metallic materials and
weldments. MIL-STD-2149A (SH); 1990.
[45] Hodgson J, Boyd GM. Brittle fracture in welded ships: an empirical approach from recent experience. The
Institution of Naval Architects 1958;100(3):14180.
[46] Pellini WS. Use and interpretation of NRL explosion bulge test. Washington DC: NRL; 1952.
[47] Pellini WS. Evaluation of engineering principles for fracture safe design in steel structures. Washington DC: NRL;
1969.
[48] Puzak PP, Bebiki AJ. Explosion bulge test performance of HY80 weldments. Washington DC: NRL; 1958.
[49] Porter JF, Morehouse DO. Development of the DREA underwater single shot explosion bulge procedure.
Canadian Fracture Conference 21, Halifax, Nova Scotia; 1990.
[50] Sumpter JDG. Prediction of critical crack size in plastically strained welded panels. ASTM-STP-995; 1989;
p. 415432.
[51] Sumpter JDG. Design against fracture in welded structures. J Naval Sci 1987;13(4):25870.
[52] Sielski RA. Fracture mechanics of ship structures. Naval Eng J 1992; 3645.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
[53] Khan MZS, Sanders DS, Burch IA, Mouritz AP. Materials aspect of damage tolerence and reliability of ship
structure and components. Naval Eng J 1994; 192207.
[54] Gifford LN, Dally JW. Fracture resistance of metal structures loaded in to plastic regime. In: Smith CS, Dow RS,
editors. Advanes in marine structures-2. Elsevier Applied Science; 1991. p. 2341.
[55] Gifford LN, Carlberg JR, Wiggs AJ, Sickles JB. Explosive testing of full thickness pre-cracked weldments. In:
Gudas JP, Joyce JA, Huckett EM, editors. Fracture mechanics twenty rst Symposium, ASTM-STP-1074.
Philadelphia: ASTM; 1990. p. 15777.
[56] Sumpter JDG, Bird J, Clarke JD, Caudrey AJ. Fracture toughness of ship steels. R Inst Naval Archit. 1988.
p. 169186.
[57] Rajendran R, Narasimhan K. Damage prediction of clamped circular plates subjected to contact underwater
explosion. Int J Impact Eng 2001;25:37386.
ARTICLE IN PRESS

1 s2.0 S0734743X05000874 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0734743X05000874 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Impact Engineering 32 (2006) 19451963

Deformation and fracture behaviour of plate specimens

Corresponding author. Fax: +91 4114 280282.

Fig. 4. Deection-thickness ratio as a function of non-dimensional parameter for circular plates.

You might also like