4.6 Article

Influence of Ball Bearing Size on the Flight and Damage Characteristics of Blast-Driven Ball Bearings

期刊

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app12031133

关键词

improvised explosive devices; blast loading; deformation; damage; ball bearings

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the influence of ball size on the flight characteristics and damage of a ball bearing embedded in a rear detonated cylindrical charge. The findings provide valuable insights for blast protection engineers considering the effects of embedded projectiles in improvised explosive devices.
This paper presents insights into the influence of ball size on the flight characteristics and damage of a ball bearing embedded in a rear detonated cylindrical charge. It includes results from a post-test damage analysis of ball bearings from previously reported experiments. Computational simulations using Ansys Autodyn were used to provide extra information about the velocity variation during flight and the damage sustained by the ball bearings during the blast event. The influence of bearing size (diameter and mass) was investigated using the validated simulation models to extend the dataset beyond the initial experimental work. The peak bearing velocity is influenced by the charge mass to ball bearing mass ratio and the aspect ratio of the charge. Larger ball bearings require extra momentum to accelerate them to higher velocities, but their higher surface area means a greater portion of the explosive charge is involved in transferring kinetic energy to the projectile. Tensile spalling was to be the major damage mechanism within the ball bearings. The charge aspect ratio also influenced the hydrostatic pressure propagation within the ball bearing itself, affecting the location and degree of internal cracking within the bearings. These findings will prove valuable to blast protection engineers considering the effects of embedded projectiles in improvised explosive devices.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据