Processing math: 7%

钢管混凝土-FRP管海水海砂混凝土组合柱轴压模型

缪坤廷, 魏洋, 朱超, 丁明珉, 郑开启

缪坤廷, 魏洋, 朱超, 等. 钢管混凝土-FRP管海水海砂混凝土组合柱轴压模型[J]. 复合材料学报, 2022, 39(11): 5403-5414. DOI: 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20211206.003
引用本文: 缪坤廷, 魏洋, 朱超, 等. 钢管混凝土-FRP管海水海砂混凝土组合柱轴压模型[J]. 复合材料学报, 2022, 39(11): 5403-5414. DOI: 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20211206.003
MIAO Kunting, WEI Yang, ZHU Chao, et al. Model for stress-strain curves of concrete filled steel tube-seawater and sea sand concrete filled FRP tube composite columns under axial load[J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica, 2022, 39(11): 5403-5414. DOI: 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20211206.003
Citation: MIAO Kunting, WEI Yang, ZHU Chao, et al. Model for stress-strain curves of concrete filled steel tube-seawater and sea sand concrete filled FRP tube composite columns under axial load[J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica, 2022, 39(11): 5403-5414. DOI: 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20211206.003

钢管混凝土-FRP管海水海砂混凝土组合柱轴压模型

基金项目: 江苏省研究生科研与实践创新计划(KYCX21_0880);国家自然科学基金(51778300);江苏省自然科学基金(BK20191390);江苏省重点研发计划(BE2020703);江苏省六大人才高峰项目(JZ-017);江苏省高校“青蓝工程”项目(2020)
详细信息
    通讯作者:

    魏洋,博士,教授,博士生导师,研究方向为约束混凝土结构 E-mail:wy78@njfu.edu.cn

  • 中图分类号: U445.7

Model for stress-strain curves of concrete filled steel tube-seawater and sea sand concrete filled FRP tube composite columns under axial load

  • 摘要: 提出一种钢管混凝土-纤维增强复合材料(FRP)管海水海砂混凝土(SWSSC)组合柱新型结构,其由外侧钢管、夹层普通混凝土、内侧FRP管和核心SWSSC构成。在轴向荷载作用下,夹层普通混凝土受到钢管的约束,而核心SWSSC受到钢管和FRP管的共同约束,考虑到两部分混凝土的不同约束机制,在现有的FRP-钢复合管约束混凝土的计算模型的基础上,本文提出了钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱的峰值点和极限点的计算模型;并利用FRP-钢复合管约束混凝土的应力-应变曲线模型,得到了钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱的应力-应变预测曲线;在72个钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱的轴压试验结果的基础上,对建议的模型进行了验证与评估。结果表明,提出的模型可以较好地预测钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱的应力-应变曲线。最后,利用提出的应力-应变曲线模型对钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱的轴压性能进行了参数化分析。
    Abstract: A novel structure termed as concrete filled steel tube-seawater and sea sand concrete (SWSSC) filled fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) tube composite columns was proposed, which was composed of outer steel tube, sandwiched ordinary concrete, inner FRP tube and core SWSSC. The sandwiched ordinary concrete was confined by the outer steel tube, while the core SWSSC was confined by both steel tube and FRP tube under axial compression. Considering the different confinement mechanism of two kinds of concrete, the calculation models of peak point and ultimate point of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns were proposed based on the existing calculation model of concrete-filled FRP-steel composite tube columns. And the predicted stress-strain curve model was obtained by using the stress-strain curve model of concrete-filled FRP-steel compo-site tube columns. The proposed model was verified and evaluated on the basis of the existing test results. The results show that the proposed model can predict the stress-strain curve of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns well. Finally, based on the proposed stress-strain model, the axial compression behavior of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns with different parameters was analyzed.
  • 蜂窝夹层结构具有比模量大、隔音、隔热、吸能强、成本低等优点,在航空航天、交通运输、土木建筑、海洋船舶等许多领域都有广泛的应用[1]。碳纤维增强树脂复合材料(CFRP)蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板主要通过蜂窝芯和蒙皮的变形、损伤及内能形式将冲击能量加以耗散,从而达到吸能的目的[2-3]。CFRP板和铝蜂窝在生产和使用过程中都容易受到低速冲击的影响,而且蜂窝夹层板在低速冲击下的损伤一般是目视不可见的,但这种损伤却能够明显降低零部件的寿命和强度[4-5]。因此,研究结构参数对CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层结构低速冲击性能的影响很有必要。

    国内外有大量关于蜂窝夹层板在不同载荷下力学性能的研究[6-11]。Zhang等[12]通过摆锤冲击试验和数值模拟方法研究了铝蜂窝夹层结构在低速冲击下的动力学特性,并得出结论:蜂窝芯是主要的吸能构件。Chen等[13]通过落锤式低速冲击试验与数值模拟方法验证了试验与仿真结果的一致性,并探究了CFRP面板-Nomex蜂窝夹层结构的损伤机制。A. Riccio等[14]结合落锤冲击试验和仿真模型探究了亚麻天然纤维蜂窝的吸能效果,试验与仿真结果吻合较好。Sun等[15]通过解析法研究了金属蒙皮蜂窝夹层板在低速冲击下的动态响应,通过与已有的试验结果对比,证明了其解析法的可靠性。Vincenzo Crupi等[16]结合试验方法和数值模型,研究了玻璃纤维增强树脂复合材料(GFRP)面板对低速冲击下铝蜂窝结构动力学性能的影响,发现GFRP面板是增强蜂窝夹层板能量吸收和承载能力的重要构件。Inés Ivañez等[17]基于材料用户子程序建立了CFRP面板-铝蜂窝夹层梁低速冲击有限元模型,通过多次试验对比验证了仿真模型的有效性,并得出结论:蜂窝夹层结构受低速冲击时,冲击能量较大时,蒙皮吸能较多,冲击能量较小时,蜂窝芯吸能较多。

    目前对不同材料蜂窝夹层板在低速冲击下动态响应的研究有很多[18-22],但CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板在低速冲击下的损伤模式相对较复杂,关于建立该类型夹层板在低速冲击下的精细化仿真模型,以探究其结构参数对抗低速冲击性能的影响以及各组件损伤对吸能占比的研究比较少,研究结构参数对该类型蜂窝夹层板低速冲击性能的影响,对其在实际工程中的应用及结构参数优化有重要的指导意义。本文使用半球头式落锤冲击试验平台和高速摄像分析平台,进行了蜂窝芯单元边长对CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板抗低速冲击性能影响的试验探究,根据试验结果验证了所建仿真模型的准确性。利用该数值模型进一步探究了蜂窝芯高度、蒙皮厚度和蜂窝芯壁厚等结构参数对蜂窝夹层板低速冲击性能的影响。

    基于D7766/D7766M—11标准[23],搭建了如图1所示的CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板落锤冲击试验平台,平台主要构成设备包括:XBL-300型落锤式低速冲击试验机及数据采集装置,厂家为长春科新试验仪器有限公司。其中,控制平台、落锤、夹具和防二次冲击装置是试验机的主要构件。使用的i-speed 2系列高速摄像机及配备的ProAnalyst数码分析软件由Xcitex公司提供,如图2所示。

    图  1  落锤式低速冲击试验平台
    Figure  1.  Low-speed impact test system of drop hammer
    图  2  高速摄像分析平台
    Figure  2.  High-speed camera analysis platform

    试件蒙皮均采用由威海光威复合材料有限公司提供的CFRP层合板,CFRP蒙皮是型号为T300/7901的碳纤维增强环氧树脂复合材料,铺层顺序为(45/-45/0)2s,单层厚度为0.1 mm,单块蒙皮长L=100 mm,宽W=100 mm,厚Tf =1.2 mm;铝蜂窝采用Al 3003-H19铝箔粘接而成,蜂窝芯壁厚Tc=0.06 mm,铝芯高Hc=20 mm,正六边形蜂窝芯单元边长Lc=2 mm、4 mm、6 mm;蜂窝芯与蒙皮之间采用LJM-170胶膜进行粘接;夹层板总体尺寸为100 mm×100 mm×22.4 mm。图3为蜂窝夹层板的几何构型示意图及试件,表1为T300/7901层合板的材料参数[24]表2为Al 3003-H19铝箔的材料参数。

    表  1  CFRP蒙皮的材料参数
    Table  1.  Mechanical properties of CFRP laminates
    T300/7901ValueAdhesiveValue
    E1/MPa125 000GCn/(Nmm1)0.52
    E2,E3/MPa11 300GCs,GCt/(Nmm1)0.92
    G12,G13/MPa5 430σn,max50
    {G_{23}}{\rm{/MPa}}3 979{\sigma _{{\rm{s}},\max }}{\rm{/MPa}}94
    ν12, ν230.3{\sigma _{{\rm{t}},\max }}{\rm{/MPa}}94
    ν230.42{K_{\rm{n}}}{\rm{/(N}} \cdot {\rm{m}}{{\rm{m}}^{ - {\rm{3}}}}{\rm{)}}100 000
    {X_{\rm{T}}}{\rm{/MPa}}2 000{K_{\rm{s} } },{K_{\rm{t} } }{\rm{/(N} } \cdot {\rm{m} }{ {\rm{m} }^{ - {\rm{3} } } }{\rm{)} }100 000
    {X_{\rm{C}}}{\rm{/MPa}}1 100
    {Y_{\rm{T}}},{Z_{\rm{T}}}{\rm{/MPa}}80
    {Y_{\rm{C}}},{Z_{\rm{T}}}{\rm{/MPa}}280
    S{\rm{/MPa}}120
    Notes: Ei(i=1,2,3) is Young’s modulus in i direction; Gij(i,j=1,2,3) is shear modulus in i-j plane; νij(i,j=1,2,3) is Poisson’s ratio in i-j plane; Xt/Xc and Yt/Yc are the tensile/compressive strengths in 1 and 2 directions, respectively; S is shear strength; G_{\rm{n}}^{\rm{C}} is toughness in tension; G_{\rm{s}}^{\rm{C}}and G_{\rm{t}}^{\rm{C}} are toughness components in shear; σn,max is maximum nominal stress of normal-only mode; σs,max and σt,max are maximum nominal stress in 1 and 2 directions, respectively; Kn is stiffness in tension; Ks and Kt are stiffness components in shear.
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    表  2  Al 3003-H19铝箔材料参数
    Table  2.  Material properties of Al3003-H19 aluminum alloy foil
    PropertyValue
    Density/(kg·m−3)2 730
    Young’s modulus/GPa70
    Poisson’s ratio0.3
    Yield strength/MPa183
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    图  3  碳纤维增强树脂复合材料(CFRP)蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板几何构型示意图及试件
    Figure  3.  Schematic of geometric configurations and specimens of aluminum honeycomb sandwich plates with carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) face sheets

    在进行落锤冲击试验时,用夹具将试件固定,设置好落锤下降高度后进行冲击试验。落锤完成冲击时,防二次冲击装置会立刻夹紧落锤。冲击时压力传感器采集的冲击力数据由数据采集装置记录并保存;同时通过高速摄像机记录冲击过程,以便使用ProAnalyst数码分析软件获得落锤在冲击过程中的运动数据。冲击过程中的冲击试验参数:落锤质量m=2.5 kg,半球形冲头直径为25 mm,落锤下降高度h=0.48 m,理论冲击能量为E=11.76 J。由于落锤在下降过程中存在摩擦,通过高速摄像平台测得落锤接触夹层板时初始冲击速度为3.0 m/s,即实际冲击能量为11.25 J。

    本文引用文献[24-25]中基于渐进损伤力学(CDM)方法对受损的CFRP蒙皮进行刚度退化,此方法定义了损伤因子Df,其值随着材料损伤的扩展而逐渐增大。层合板损伤后利用基于应力描述的三维Hashin准则进行损伤判定:

    纤维拉伸失效\left( {{\sigma _{11}} \geqslant 0} \right)

    {\left( {\frac{{{\sigma _{11}}}}{{{X_{\rm{T}}}}}} \right)^2} + \frac{1}{{{S^2}}}\left( {\sigma _{12}^2 + \sigma _{13}^2} \right) \geqslant 1 (1)

    纤维压缩失效\left( {{\sigma _{11}} < 0} \right)

    {\left( {\frac{{{\sigma _{11}}}}{{{X_{\rm{C}}}}}} \right)^2} \geqslant 1 (2)

    基体开裂失效\left( {{\sigma _{22}} + {\sigma _{33}} \geqslant 0} \right)

    \frac{1}{{Y_{\rm{T}}^2}}{\left( {{\sigma _{22}} + {\sigma _{33}}} \right)^2} + \frac{1}{{{S^2}}}\left( {\sigma _{23}^2 - {\sigma _{22}}{\sigma _{23}}} \right) + \frac{1}{{{S^2}}}\left( {\sigma _{12}^2 + \sigma _{13}^2} \right) \geqslant 1 (3)

    基体压溃失效\left( {{\sigma _{22}} + {\sigma _{33}} < 0} \right)

    \begin{split} \frac{1}{{{Y_{\rm{C}}}}}\left[ {{{\left( {\frac{{{Y_{\rm{C}}}}}{{2S}}} \right)}^2} - 1} \right]\left( {{\sigma _{22}} + {\sigma _{33}}} \right) + \frac{1}{{4{S^2}}}{\left( {{\sigma _{22}} + {\sigma _{33}}} \right)^2} + \\ \frac{1}{{{S^2}}}\left( {\sigma _{23}^2 - {\sigma _{22}}{\sigma _{23}}} \right) + \frac{1}{{{S^2}}}\left( {\sigma _{12}^2 + \sigma _{13}^2} \right) \geqslant 1 \end{split} (4)

    其中,σijij=1,2,3)为CFRP面板单元的各个方向应力张量。

    基于内聚力(Cohesive)单元的双线性本构模型,建立了CFRP层合板胶层模型以模拟CFRP层合板的分层损伤。内聚力单元的双线性本构模型如图4所示[26-28]σ轴表示单元的应力,δ横轴表示单元的相对分离位移。当δ<δ0时,内聚力单元未破坏,其应力和相对位移呈线性关系,刚度为K,即O→A段;当δ0δ<δmax时,内聚力单元发生部分破坏,卸载时单元进入线性软化阶段,如图4中虚线部分,此时刚度为(1-Df)KDf为损伤因子,即O→A→B→O段,如重加载,初始阶段内聚力单元的σδ的关系即对应O→B段;当δδmax时,内聚力单元完全失效。

    图  4  内聚力单元的双线性本构模型
    Figure  4.  Bilinear constitutive model of cohesive element

    A点表示材料开始出现损伤,其对应的损伤准则为

    {\left( {\frac{{{{\left( {{t_{\rm{n}}}} \right)}^2}}}{{t_{\rm{n}}^0}}} \right)^2} + {\left( {\frac{{{{\left( {{t_{\rm{s}}}} \right)}^2}}}{{t_{\rm{s}}^0}}} \right)^2} + {\left( {\frac{{{{\left( {{t_{\rm{t}}}} \right)}^2}}}{{t_{\rm{t}}^0}}} \right)^2} \geqslant 1 (5)

    其中,t_{\rm{n}}^0t_{\rm{s}}^0t_{\rm{t}}^0分别表示内聚力单元的法向和两个切向强度。AB段表示内聚力单元的损伤扩展,本文选择与试验吻合度较高的基于能量释放率的B-K准则[24]

    G_{\rm{n}}^{\rm{C}} + \left( {G_{\rm{s}}^{\rm{C}} - G_{\rm{n}}^{\rm{C}}} \right){\left( {\frac{{{G_{\rm{S}}}}}{{{G_{\rm{T}}}}}} \right)^\eta } = {G^{\rm{C}}} (6)

    其中:GS=Gs+GtGT=Gn+GSG_{\rm{s}}^{\rm{C}} = G_{\rm{t}}^{\rm{C}}Gii=n,s,t)为Cohesive单元的应变能释放率;G_i^{\rm{C}}为单元的临界应变能释放率;GC对应图4中△OAC的面积,即单元开裂对应的总临界能释放率;η为单元材料修正系数。

    基于CFRP层合板本构模型和用户材料子程序VUMAT,在ABAQUS有限元分析软件上建立蜂窝夹层板在低速冲击下的精细化仿真模型,如图5所示,蜂窝夹层板结构参数如表3所示。其中,层合板采用C3D8R单元,层间胶层采用COH3D8单元,铝蜂窝芯采用S4R壳单元;夹具和落锤均设置为刚体,夹具限制所有自由度,落锤仅保留冲击方向的自由度;假设蒙皮与蜂窝芯始终保持粘接,其接触类型设置为“Tie”,冲头与蒙皮采用“面-面接触”;为了节约计算成本,仅对临近冲击区域蒙皮进行网格细化,细化区域网格大小为1.5 mm×1.5 mm,其余区域网格大小为3 mm×3 mm,蜂窝芯网格大小为1 mm×2 mm。

    表  3  CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的结构参数
    Table  3.  Structural parameters of aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets
    LabelCell side length {L_{\rm{c}}}/mmCore height {H_{\rm{c}}}/mmFacesheet thickness {T_{\rm{f}}}/mmCell wall thickness {T_{\rm{c}}}/mm
    A12201.20.06
    A24201.20.06
    A36201.20.06
    B14101.20.06
    B24201.20.06
    B34301.20.06
    C14201.20.06
    C24201.80.06
    C34202.40.06
    D14201.20.06
    D24201.20.10
    D34201.20.14
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格
    图  5  CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的低速冲击有限元模型
    Figure  5.  Finite element model of aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets for low-velocity impact simulation

    为了证明数值模拟方法所建有限元模型的准确性,以本文的试验参数为参照,将数值模拟计算结果与试验结果进行对比。在保证其他参数相同的条件下,蜂窝芯单元边长Lc=2 mm、4 mm、6 mm的CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板在质量m=2.5 kg、下降高度h=0.46 m的半球头落锤的冲击下(仿真中设置落锤初始速度为3 m/s),仿真与试验的接触力历程对比如图6所示,通过高速摄像平台采集分析了落锤的速度历程,仿真与试验速度历程对比如图7所示。

    图  6  试验与仿真中CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的接触力历程对比
    Figure  6.  Comparison of experimental and numerical contact force historiesof aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets
    图  7  试验与仿真中落锤的速度历程对比
    Figure  7.  Comparison of experimental and numerical velocity histories of the impactor

    通过对比图6图7的仿真和试验数据可知:在相同能量的冲击作用下,三种蜂窝芯单元边长夹层板在仿真中的接触力峰值分别为4 037 N、3 666 N和2 854 N,试 验d接触力峰值分别为3 799 N、3 476 N和2 811 N,仿真和试验接触力峰值的偏差分别为6.24%、5.47%和1.53%;仿真和试验的接触时长的差值分别为0.72 ms、0.40 ms和0.11 ms。试验与仿真在接触力历程和速度历程的总体趋势方面具有良好的一致性。

    将A组所有受冲击后的蜂窝夹层板由冲击区域的中心纵向切开,会发现受冲击位置的上蒙皮与芯层之间的胶层脱粘,蜂窝芯存在折叠和屈曲,上蒙皮的下表面均有部分基体开裂的现象。试验与仿真的蜂窝芯损伤深度对比如表4所示,不同蜂窝芯单元边长的夹层板在相同的冲击能量下得到了三种不同的变形深度,A组试验中受低速冲击区域蜂窝芯变形深度分别为2.15 mm、2.77 mm和4.32 mm,仿真中的蜂窝芯变形深度δ分别为2.20 mm、3.03 mm和4.10 mm。仿真与试验得到夹层板的蜂窝芯变形量之间的偏差分别为2.33%、9.39%和5.09%。由于本文设置的低速冲击能量较小,下蒙皮未发生任何形式的损伤,故不再在文中赘述其受载情况。

    表  4  试验与仿真中蜂窝芯损伤深度δ的对比
    Table  4.  Comparison of experimental and numerical deformations δ of honeycomb cores
    LabelTop face sheetCross-section
    ExperimentSimulation-Honeycomb core
    A1
    A2
    A3
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    综上所述,所搭建的低速冲击有限元仿真模型可以较为准确地预测低速冲击下CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的动力学响应。

    图8为三种不同蜂窝芯边长的CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板在质量m=2.5 kg、初始冲击速度为3 m/s的半球头落锤的冲击下,有限元模型预测的A组落锤动能历程,图9为预测的接触力-位移关系。可知,相同冲击能量下的蜂窝芯边长Lc分别为2 mm、4 mm、6 mm的CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的最大变形深度依次增大,分别为5.26 mm、6.25 mm、7.40 mm。

    图  8  A组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的动能历程对比
    Figure  8.  Comparison of kinetic energy histories of the impactor for group A aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens
    图  9  A组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的接触力-位移对比
    Figure  9.  Comparison of contact force-central displacement histories of the impactor for group A aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens

    通过分析可知:随着蜂窝芯单元边长的增大,夹层板受冲击时,落锤动能减小速率逐渐降低,接触时长逐渐增加,接触力峰值随之减小,夹层板受冲击位置的变形深度随之增大。可见,增大蜂窝芯单元的边长会降低蜂窝夹层板的刚度,但其吸能效果会随之增强。

    为了确定在低速冲击载荷下,蜂窝芯高度Hc对CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板吸能特性的影响,在仿真中使用了Hc=10 mm、20 mm、30 mm三种不同高度的蜂窝芯,蜂窝芯单元边长Lc=4 mm,蒙皮厚度Tf=1.2 mm,蜂窝芯壁厚Tc=0.06 mm,其余条件保持不变。图10为该工况下落锤的接触力历程对比,图11为落锤的动能历程对比,图12为落锤的接触力-位移关系对比。

    图  10  B组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的接触力历程对比
    Figure  10.  Comparison of contact force histories of the impactor for group B aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens
    图  11  B组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的动能历程对比
    Figure  11.  Comparison of kinetic energy histories of the impactor for group B aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens
    图  12  B组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的接触力-位移对比
    Figure  12.  Comparison of contact force-central displacement histories of the impactor for group B aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens

    图10~12可知:在蜂窝芯高度Hc=10 mm、20 mm、30 mm的该组仿真中,三种蜂窝夹层板在低速冲击载荷下,落锤的接触力峰值分别为3852N、3666N、3674N,接触时长分别为5.81 ms、5.85 ms、5.82 ms,最大变形深度分别为6.25 mm、6.26 mm、6.38 mm,且落锤的接触力历程、动能历程和接触力-位移的图形几乎保持一致。B组仿真中预测的蜂窝夹层板冲击损伤如表5所示。可知,蜂窝芯受冲击区域的最终变形量δ分别为2.97 mm、3.03 mm和3.08 mm,其变形量相差较小。由该组仿真结果可见,蜂窝芯高度的变化对于CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的刚度和抗低速冲击性能影响不大。

    表  5  仿真预测的B组CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板冲击损伤
    Table  5.  Simulation predicted impact damage of group B aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets
    LabelCross-section
    Honeycomb sandwich plateHoneycomb core
    B1
    B2
    B3
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    为了确定蒙皮厚度Tf对低速冲击载荷下CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板吸能特性的影响,在仿真中使用了Tf=1.2 mm、1.8 mm、2.4 mm三种不同厚度的CFRP蒙皮,蜂窝芯单元边长为4 mm,蜂窝芯高度Hc=20 mm,蜂窝芯壁厚Tc=0.06 mm,其余条件保持不变。图13为该工况下落锤的接触力历程对比,图14为落锤的动能历程对比,图15为落锤的接触力-位移关系对比。

    图  13  C组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的接触力历程对比
    Figure  13.  Comparison of contact force histories of the impactor for group C aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens
    图  14  C组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的动能历程对比
    Figure  14.  Comparison of kinetic energy histories of the impactor for group C aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens
    图  15  C组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的接触力-位移对比
    Figure  15.  Comparison of contact force-central displacement histories of the impactor for group C aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens

    图13~15可知:在蒙皮厚度Tf=1.2 mm、1.8 mm、2.4 mm的该组仿真中,三种蜂窝夹层板在相同冲击能量的低速冲击载荷下,落锤的接触力峰值分别为3666N、3923N、4314N,接触时长分别为5.85 ms、5.13 ms、4.28 ms,最大变形深度分别为6.26 mm、5.14 mm、4.39 mm。C组仿真中预测的蜂窝夹层板冲击损伤如表6所示。可知,蜂窝芯受冲击区域的最终变形量δ分别为3.03 mm、2.41 mm和2.13 mm。随着蜂窝夹层板蒙皮厚度的增大,冲击时,落锤动能的减小速率随之增大,接触时间随之减少,接触力的峰值随之增大,夹层板受冲击区域的变形量随之减小。可见,蒙皮厚度的增加会使蜂窝夹层板的刚度增大,吸能效果随之降低。

    表  6  仿真预测的C组CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板冲击损伤
    Table  6.  Simulation predicted impact damage of group C aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets
    LabelCross-section
    Honeycomb sandwich plateHoneycomb core
    C1
    C2
    C3
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    为了探究低速冲击载荷下,蜂窝芯壁厚Tc对CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板吸能特性的影响,在仿真中使用了Tc=0.06 mm、0.10 mm、0.14 mm三种不同壁厚的蜂窝芯,蜂窝芯单元边长为4 mm,蜂窝芯高度Hc=20 mm,蒙皮厚度Tf=1.2 mm,其余条件保持不变。图16为该工况下落锤的接触力历程对比,图17为落锤的动能历程对比,图18为落锤的接触力-位移关系对比。

    图  16  DCFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板组试件落锤的接触力历程对比
    Figure  16.  Comparison of contact force histories of the impactor for group D aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens
    图  17  DCFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板组试件落锤的动能历程对比
    Figure  17.  Comparison of kinetic energy histories of the impactor for group D specimens
    图  18  D组CFRP 蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板试件落锤的接触力-位移对比
    Figure  18.  Comparison of contact force-central displacement histories of the impactor for group D aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets specimens

    根据图16~18可知:在蜂窝芯壁厚Tc=0.06 mm、0.10 mm、0.14 mm的该组仿真中,三种蜂窝夹层板在相同冲击能量的低速冲击载荷下,落锤的接触力峰值分别为3666N、4153N、4454N,接触时长分别为5.85 ms、5.31 ms、4.99 ms,最大变形深度分别为6.26 mm、5.50 mm、5.28 mm。仿真预测的D组蜂窝夹层板冲击损伤如表7所示。可知,蜂窝芯受冲击区域的最终变形量δ分别为3.03 mm、2.83 mm和2.77 mm。随着蜂窝夹层板蜂窝芯壁厚的增大,在低速冲击下,落锤动能的减小速率随之增大,接触时间随之减少,落锤与夹层板之间的接触力峰值随之增大,夹层板受冲击区域的变形量随之减小。可见,增加蜂窝芯的壁厚会使蜂窝夹层板的刚度增大,抗低速冲击的性能增强。

    表  7  仿真预测的D组CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板冲击损伤
    Table  7.  Simulation predicted impact damage of group D aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets
    LabelCross-section
    Honeycomb sandwich plateHoneycomb core
    D1
    D2
    D3
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    表8为不同结构参数的CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板在相同能量的低速冲击下,各组件的吸能占比情况。可知:在本文设置的较低能量级冲击载荷下,CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的吸能占比均大于60%,足以证明蜂窝夹层结构具有较好的冲击吸能特性;在该规格的冲击条件下,CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板最主要的吸能组件是铝蜂窝芯,上蒙皮吸能次之,下蒙皮吸能最少。由A组夹层板吸能占比分析可知,随着蜂窝芯单元边长的增大,蜂窝芯吸能占比逐渐增大,上蒙皮吸能占比逐渐减小,夹层板总吸能逐渐增大;由B组数据分析可知,随着蜂窝芯高度的增大,蜂窝芯吸能占比逐渐增大,上蒙皮吸能逐渐减少,夹层板总吸能逐渐增大;由C组数据分析可知,随着蒙皮厚度的增大,蜂窝芯层吸能占比逐渐减小,上蒙皮吸能占比逐渐增大,夹层板总吸能逐渐增大;由D组数据分析可知,随着蜂窝芯壁厚的增大,蜂窝芯吸能占比逐渐减小,上蒙皮吸能占比逐渐增大,夹层板总吸能逐渐增大。综上所述,在本文所设置的载荷条件下,增大蜂窝芯单元边长、蜂窝芯高度、蒙皮厚度和蜂窝芯壁厚,均能增加蜂窝夹层板的吸能量。然而吸能效果需结合碰撞时的接触时长、接触力峰值、变形损伤深度和吸能量综合考虑,故需结合图表才能得到合理的结论。

    表  8  不同结构参数的CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板组件吸能占比
    Table  8.  Absorbed energy rates by components of aluminum honeycomb sandwich plate with CFRP face sheets with different structural parameters %
    ParametersCell side length {L_{\rm{c}}}Core height {H_{\rm{c}}}Facesheet thickness {T_{\rm{f}}}Cell wall thickness {T_{\rm{c}}}
    A1A2A3B1B2B3C1C2C3D1D2D3
    Upper plate20.4317.2916.4919.5317.2916.0417.2926.9731.7217.2920.8830.02
    Honeycomb45.1650.0158.6038.4550.0157.3550.0143.2039.7850.0145.6141.75
    Lower plate1.881.702.512.151.701.701.701.080.721.702.693.32
    Impactor32.5331.0022.4039.8731.0024.9131.0028.0527.7831.0030.8224.91
    Sandwich plate67.3769.0077.6060.1369.0075.0969.0071.9572.2269.0069.1875.09
    下载: 导出CSV 
    | 显示表格

    建立了碳纤维增强树脂复合材料(CFRP)蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板精细化低速冲击仿真模型,通过对比不同蜂窝芯边长的夹层板在相同冲击能量下的仿真与试验结果,证明了试验与仿真结果具有较好的一致性。进而利用该数值模型探究了蜂窝芯高度、蒙皮厚度和蜂窝芯壁厚等结构参数对于蜂窝夹层板低速冲击性能的影响。

    (1)随着蜂窝芯单元边长的增大,夹层板受冲击时,落锤动能减小速率逐渐降低,接触时长逐渐增加,接触力峰值随之减小,夹层板受冲击位置的变形深度随之增大。可见,蜂窝芯单元边长尺寸的增大会降低蜂窝夹层板的刚度,但其吸能效果会随之增强。

    (2)蜂窝夹层板的芯层高度对夹层板的刚度及抗低速冲击性能影响较小。

    (3)增大蜂窝夹层板的蒙皮厚度,可以提高夹层板的刚度,但会降低夹层板的吸能效果。

    (4)增大蜂窝芯壁厚,会提高蜂窝夹层板的刚度和抗低速冲击性能。

    (5)在本文的低速冲击条件下,CFRP蒙皮-铝蜂窝夹层板的蜂窝芯是主要的吸能组件,上蒙皮吸能占比次之,下蒙皮吸能最少。

  • 图  1   钢管混凝土-纤维增强复合材料(FRP)管海水海砂混凝土(SWSSC)组合柱试件示意图

    Figure  1.   Schematic diagram of concrete filled steel tube-seawater and sea sand concrete (SWSSC) filled fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) tube composite columns

    图  2   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱约束机制分析图

    Figure  2.   Analysis diagram of confinement mechanism for concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    P—Axial load; flf—Confining pressure provided by FRP tube; fls—Confining pressure provided by the steel tube; σa—Axial stress of steel tube; As—Sectional area of steel tube; fco1—Compressive strength of sandwiched concrete; Ac1—Sectional area of sandwiched concrete; fco2—Compressive strength of core concrete; Ac2—Sectional area of core concrete

    图  3   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱典型应力-应变曲线

    Figure  3.   Typical stress-strain curves of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    fcu—Ultimate stress of specimens; fcc—Peak stress of specimens; εcu—Ultimate strain of specimens; εcc—Peak strain of specimens

    图  4   部分钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱试件的试验过程及破坏模式

    Figure  4.   Test process and failure modes of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite column specimens

    图  5   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱极限点模型评估

    Figure  5.   Evaluation of ultimate point model for concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    A—Average of theoretical value to experiment value ratio; S—Standard deviation; E—Absolute average error

    图  6   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱峰值点模型评估

    Figure  6.   Evaluation of peak point model for concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    图  7   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱计算流程图

    Figure  7.   Flow chart of model calculation for concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    Ecs—Initial stiffness of stress-strain curves (i.e. the slope of initial stage of stress-strain curves); Esec—Second stiffness of stress-strain curves (i.e. the slope of second linear strengthening stage of stress-strain curves); xnnth iteration point

    图  8   钢管混凝土-FRP管海水海砂混凝土组合柱应力-应变曲线模型验证

    Figure  8.   Verification of stress-strain curves model for concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    图  9   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱参数化分析

    Figure  9.   Parametric analysis of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    表  1   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱试件的具体参数

    Table  1   Detailed parameters of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    SpecimensSteel thickness/
    mm
    FRP tube diameter/
    mm
    FRP tube layersFRP tube numbersSpecimensSteel thickness/
    mm
    FRP tube diameter/
    mm
    FRP tube layersFRP tube numbers
    S4.5D70IC2 4.5 70 2 1 S4.5D35IIIC2 4.5 35 2 3
    S4.5D70IC3 4.5 70 3 1 S4.5D35IIIC3 4.5 35 3 3
    S4.5D70IC4 4.5 70 4 1 S4.5D35IIIC4 4.5 35 4 3
    S4.5D90IC2 4.5 90 2 1 S4.5D45IIIC2 4.5 45 2 3
    S4.5D90IC3 4.5 90 3 1 S4.5D45IIIC3 4.5 45 3 3
    S4.5D90IC4 4.5 90 4 1 S4.5D45IIIC4 4.5 45 4 3
    S4.5D110IC2 4.5 110 2 1 S4.5D55IIIC2 4.5 55 2 3
    S4.5D110IC3 4.5 110 3 1 S4.5D55IIIC3 4.5 55 3 3
    S4.5D110IC4 4.5 110 4 1 S4.5D55IIIC4 4.5 55 4 3
    S6.0D70IC2 6.0 70 2 1 S6.0D35IIIC2 6.0 35 2 3
    S6.0D70IC3 6.0 70 3 1 S6.0D35IIIC3 6.0 35 3 3
    S6.0D70IC4 6.0 70 4 1 S6.0D35IIIC4 6.0 35 4 3
    S6.0D90IC2 6.0 90 2 1 S6.0D45IIIC2 6.0 45 2 3
    S6.0D90IC3 6.0 90 3 1 S6.0D45IIIC3 6.0 45 3 3
    S6.0D90IC4 6.0 90 4 1 S6.0D45IIIC4 6.0 45 4 3
    S6.0D110IC2 6.0 110 2 1 S6.0D55IIIC2 6.0 55 2 3
    S6.0D110IC3 6.0 110 3 1 S6.0D55IIIC3 6.0 55 3 3
    S6.0D110IC4 6.0 110 4 1 S6.0D55IIIC4 6.0 55 4 3
    Notes: Labels of the specimens are as follows: The first letter “S” denotes steel tube, the second number such as “6.0” denotes the thickness of the steel tube; the second letter and number such as “D90” denotes the diameter of the FRP tube; the number “I” denotes the number of the FRP tube; the third letter and number such as “C2” denotes the number of FRP layers. For example, “S6.0D55IIIC3” indicates that the thickness of the steel tube is 6.0 mm, diameter of the FRP tube is 55 mm, the number of FRP tube is 3, and number of layers of the FRP tube is 3.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2   钢管混凝土-FRP管SWSSC组合柱参数变化的影响

    Table  2   Influence of parameter variation of concrete filled steel tube-SWSSC filled FRP tube composite columns

    SpecimensTwo-layersFour-layersSix-layersEight-layersTen-layers
    Ultimate stress/MPaIncrease ratio/%Ultimate stress/MPaIncrease ratio/%Ultimate stress/MPaIncrease ratio/%Ultimate stress/MPaIncrease ratio/%Ultimate stress/MPaIncrease ratio/%
    S4.5D80100.62120.64141.30162.61184.59
    S4.5D90103.012.37125.403.95148.445.06172.135.86196.496.45
    S4.5D100105.392.31130.163.80155.584.81181.665.53208.396.06
    S4.5D110107.772.26134.933.66162.734.59191.185.24220.305.71
    S4.5D120110.152.21139.693.53169.884.39200.714.98232.215.41
    S4.5D130112.532.16144.463.41177.024.21210.244.75244.125.13
    S6.0D80121.11141.23162.01183.44205.54
    S6.0D90123.501.98146.023.39169.194.44193.025.22217.515.82
    S6.0D100125.901.94150.813.28176.384.25202.604.96229.495.51
    S6.0D110128.291.90155.613.18183.574.08212.194.73241.475.22
    S6.0D120130.691.87160.403.08190.763.92221.784.52253.454.96
    S6.0D130133.091.83165.192.99197.953.77231.364.32265.444.73
    Notes: The labels of the specimens are as follows: the first letter “S” denotes steel tube, the second number such as “6.0” denotes the thickness of the steel tube; the second letter and number such as “D90” denotes the diameter of the FRP tube. For example, “S6.0D90” indicates that the thickness of the steel tube is 6.0 mm, diameter of the FRP tube is 90 mm.
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] 韦建刚, 周俊, 罗霞, 等. 高强钢管超高强混凝土柱抗震性能试验研究[J]. 工程力学, 2021, 38(7):30-40, 51.

    WEI J G, ZHOU J, LUO X, et al. Experimental study on quasi-static behavior of ultrahigh strength concrete filled high strength steel tubular columns[J]. Engineering Mechanics,2021,38(7):30-40, 51(in Chinese).

    [2] 颜燕祥. 方钢管UHPC短柱轴压性能试验研究[J]. 建筑结构, 2021, 51(12):117-123.

    YAN Y X. Experimental study on behavior of square UHPC filled short steel tube columns subjected to axial compression[J]. Building Structure,2021,51(12):117-123(in Chinese).

    [3] 魏洋, 柏佳文, 张依睿, 等. 矩形开槽钢管混凝土柱的受压承载性能[J]. 东南大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 50(2):237-243. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0505.2020.02.005

    WEI Y, BAI J W, ZHANG Y R, et al. Compressive behaviors of rectangular concrete-filled slotted steel tubular columns[J]. Journal of Southeast University (Natural Science Edition),2020,50(2):237-243(in Chinese). DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0505.2020.02.005

    [4] 郭晓云, 陈杰, 唐永明. 不同纤维增强复合材料加固混凝土短柱轴心受压承载力试验研究[J]. 复合材料科学与工程, 2021, 8:66-72.

    GUO X Y, CHEN J, TANG Y M. Experimental study on axial compression bearing capacity of concrete short column strengthened with different fiber reinforced composites[J]. Composites Science and Engineering,2021,8:66-72(in Chinese).

    [5] 马高, 曾志虎. BFRP约束损伤混凝土棱柱体轴压力学性能研究[J]. 防灾减灾工程学报, 2020, 40(6):910-918.

    MA G, ZENG Z H. Axial compression behavior of pre-damaged concrete prisms confined with BFRP[J]. Journal of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Engineering,2020,40(6):910-918(in Chinese).

    [6]

    WEI Y, XU P F, ZHANG Y R, et al. Compressive behaviour of FRP-steel wire mesh composite tubes filled with seawater and sea sand concrete[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2021, 314(Part B): 125608.

    [7] 赵均海, 张焕青, 李莹萍. 等角八边形中空夹层钢管混凝土短柱承载力统一解[J]. 应用力学学报, 2021, 38(3):1054-1061.

    ZHAO J H, ZHANG H Q, LI Y P. Unified solutions on bearing capacity of concrete-filled double skin steel tubular stub column with equal-angle octagon[J]. Chinese Jour-nal of Applied Mechanics,2021,38(3):1054-1061(in Chinese).

    [8]

    LONG Y L, LI W T, DAI J G, et al. Experimental study of concrete-filled CHS stub columns with inner FRP tubes[J]. Thin-Walled Structures,2018,122:606-621. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2017.10.046

    [9]

    ZHANG Y R, WEI Y, BAI J W, et al. A novel seawater and sea sand concrete filled FRP-carbon steel composite tube column: Concept and behavior[J]. Composite Structures,2020,246(8):112421.

    [10] 柏佳文, 魏洋, 张依睿, 等. 新型碳纤维增强复合材料-钢复合管海水海砂混凝土圆柱轴压试验[J]. 复合材料学报, 2021, 38(9):3084-3093.

    BAI J W, WEI Y, ZHANG Y R, et al. Axial compression behavior of new seawater and sea sand concrete filled circular carbon fiber reinforced polymer-steel composite tube columns[J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica,2021,38(9):3084-3093(in Chinese).

    [11] 李广悦. 圆截面钢-混凝土-CFRP-混凝土实心组合短柱轴压力学性能研究[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳建筑大学, 2011.

    LI G Y. Study on mechanical properties of circular steel-concrete-CFRP-concrete solid composite short columns under axial compression[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Jianzhu University, 2011(in Chinese).

    [12]

    LI G C, LANG Y, YANG Z J. Behavior of high strength CFSST stub columns with inner CFRP tube under axial compres-sive load[J]. Advanced Steel Construction,2011,7(3):239-254.

    [13]

    LI Y L, ZHAO X L. Hybrid double tube sections utilising seawater and sea sand concrete, FRP and stainless steel[J]. Thin-Walled Structures,2020,149:106643. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.106643

    [14] 张海镇. 内置FRP-UHPC芯柱的钢管混凝土组合柱轴压力学性能研究[D]. 西安: 西安建筑科技大学, 2017.

    ZHANG H Z. Research on the mechanical properties of concrete-filled steel tube columns with FRP-UHPC core columns subjected to axial compression[D]. Xi’an: Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, 2017(in Chinese).

    [15] 陶毅, 张海镇, 史庆轩, 等. 内置FRP约束混凝土的方钢管混凝土轴压承载力[J]. 土木建筑与环境工程, 2017, 39(2):43-49.

    TAO Y, ZHANG H Z, SHI Q X, et al. Bearing capacity of steel tube-concrete-FRP-concrete composite columns[J]. Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering,2017,39(2):43-49(in Chinese).

    [16]

    ZHANG Y R, WEI Y, BAI J W, et al. Stress-strain model of an FRP-confined concrete filled steel tube under axial compression[J]. Thin-Walled Structures,2019,142:149-159. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2019.05.009

    [17] 张依睿, 魏洋, 柏佳文, 等. 纤维增强聚合物复合材料-钢复合圆管约束混凝土轴压性能预测模型[J]. 复合材料学报, 2019, 36(10):2478-2485.

    ZHANG Y R, WEI Y, BAI J W, et al. Models for predicting axial compression behavior of fiber reinforced polymer-steel composite circular tube confined concrete[J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica,2019,36(10):2478-2485(in Chinese).

    [18]

    YU T, TENG J G, WONG Y L. Stress-strain behavior of concrete in hybrid FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns[J]. Journal of Structural Engineering,2010,136:379-389. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000121

    [19]

    WEI Y, JIANG C, WU Y F. Confinement effectiveness of circular concrete-filled steel tubular columns under axial compression[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research,2019,158:15-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.03.012

    [20] 曾翔, 吴晚博, 霍静思, 等. 圆铝合金管混凝土短柱轴心受压承载力研究[J]. 工程力学, 2021, 38(2):52-60.

    ZENG X, WU W B, HUO J S, et al. The axial strength of concrete-filled aluminum alloy circular tubular stub columns[J]. Engineering Mechanics,2021,38(2):52-60(in Chinese).

    [21]

    HAN L H, YAO G H, ZHAO X L. Tests and calculations for hollow structural steel (HSS) stub columns filled with self-consolidating concrete (SCC)[J]. Journal of Constructional Steel Research,2005,61:1241-1269. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.01.004

    [22]

    HAN L H, YAO G H, ZHONG T. Performance of concrete-filled thin-walled steel tubes under pure torsion[J]. Thin-Walled Structures,2007,45:24-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2007.01.008

    [23]

    JIANG T, TENG J G. Analysis-oriented stress-strain models for FRP-confined concrete[J]. Engineering Structures, 2007, 29: 2968-2986.

    [24]

    POPOVICS S. A numerical approach to the complete stress-strain curve of concrete[J]. Cement & Concrete Research,1973,3(5):583-599.

    [25]

    WEI Y, WU G, LI G F. Performance of circular concrete-filled fiber-reinforced polymer-steel composite tube columns under axial compression[J]. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites,2014,33:1911-1928. DOI: 10.1177/0731684414550836

  • 期刊类型引用(0)

    其他类型引用(4)

图(9)  /  表(2)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  1171
  • HTML全文浏览量:  603
  • PDF下载量:  82
  • 被引次数: 4
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2021-11-01
  • 修回日期:  2021-11-18
  • 录用日期:  2021-11-29
  • 网络出版日期:  2021-12-06
  • 刊出日期:  2022-10-31

目录

/

返回文章
返回