Abstract
Polyurea has attracted considerable attention owing to its potential applications in protective fields to improve the resistant performance of structures subjected to damage loads resulting from intentional or accidental explosions. However, different spraying strategies of polyurea may lead to significant differences in overall resistance performance of polyurea-coated structures, and the underlying mechanisms have not been clear until now. This study aims to elucidate the influence of spraying strategy, i.e., spraying area, spraying thickness, and spraying interface condition, on the dynamic response of polyurea-coated steel plates under localized air blast loading. Three types of plates manufactured using different spraying strategies were adopted to evaluate their blast-resistant performance. The spraying strategies used were (i) whole-area spraying, (ii) partial-area spraying, and (iii) in-contact backing of polyurea on the rear surfaces of steel plates. In addition, the influence of spraying thickness of polyurea for whole-area sprayed plates was evaluated. The energy absorbing mechanisms of polyurea backing layers were highlighted. The energy absorption of plates was quantitatively analyzed. The results show that the air blast resistances of whole-area sprayed and in-contact backed plates are both superior to, whereas that of partial-area sprayed plates is inferior to, bare steel counterparts. A suitable spraying thickness of polyurea can significantly reduce the damage of the front steel layer, whereas excessive spraying thickness decreases the overall air blast resistance of plates. The polyurea backing layer exhibits favorable performance in absorbing energy under a whole-area spraying condition. This study provides useful guidance for the design of polyurea-coated metal plates in engineering applications.
Highlights
Polymeric elastomers, like polyurea and polyurethane, provide an effective method for retrofitting, repair, reinforcement, and protection of building/civil infrastructures [1,2] and marine/aerospace structures [3,4,5], mainly owing to their high elongation, favorable abrasive properties, and preferable shock-mitigation performance
Zhang et al [10] have carried out an experimental study on the deflection response of sandwich panels with a polyurethane core subjected to air blast loads, and their results revealed that filling a polyurethane core was an effective method of reducing the deflections of face sheets
The application of polyurea in protective structures loads improvement generated from overall structural resistance toexplosions explosions. has polyurea-coated structures manufactured with intentional or unintentional grown rapidly owing to its potential improvement of different spraying strategies have significantly different overall resistance performance when subjected overall structural resistance to explosions
Summary
Like polyurea and polyurethane, provide an effective method for retrofitting, repair, reinforcement, and protection of building/civil infrastructures [1,2] and marine/aerospace structures [3,4,5], mainly owing to their high elongation, favorable abrasive properties, and preferable shock-mitigation performance. Bahei-El-Din and Dvorak [9] have investigated the dynamic behavior of polyurethane/polyurea-reinforced sandwich plates subjected to blast loads and indicated that the introduction of polyurethane/polyurea interlayers leads to a pronounced reduction of core compression and overall deflection. Zhang et al [10] have carried out an experimental study on the deflection response of sandwich panels with a polyurethane core subjected to air blast loads, and their results revealed that filling a polyurethane core was an effective method of reducing the deflections of face sheets. Jamil et al [11] have experimentally and numerically studied the blast response of aluminum/polyurethane sandwich plates They have pointed out that the increase in the thickness of the polyurethane core could increase the overall resistant performance of the structure. Codina et al [13] have given an alternative to reduce the damage of reinforced concrete (RC)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
