A numerical assessment of simple airblast models of impact airbursts

A numerical assessment of simple airblast models of impact airbursts
复制标题

冲击空气爆炸的简单空气爆炸模型的数值评估

DOI:
10.1111/maps.12873
复制
发表时间:
2017
影响因子:
2.2
通讯作者:
Collins G
Collins G
中科院分区:
地球科学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Collins G

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

10-100米大小的小行星和彗星与地球相撞时,由于极端的空气阻力,会在大气中产生爆炸性的能量转移,从而造成巨大的破坏。这样的空中爆炸会产生强烈的冲击波,从流星体的轨道辐射出去,对表面造成损害。预测空爆冲击波损伤的现有技术是将空爆视为静态能量源,并使用基于能量的标度方法推断核爆炸试验的经验结果。这里我们将此方法与使用iSALE冲击物理代码的两个更复杂的模型进行比较。我们考虑了一种移动源空爆模型,其中流星体的能量被划分为三分之二的内能和三分之一的爆炸高度的动能,以及一种基于流星体破坏的煎饼模型的能量沿着流星体的轨迹沉积到大气中的模型。为了证明使用煎饼模型的合理性,我们证明它很好地符合2013年车里雅宾斯克火球的推断能量释放。三种模型预测的超压在距离地面零点的径向距离超过爆炸高度三倍时基本一致。在较小的径向距离上,移动源模型预测的超压是静态源模型的两倍,而基于煎饼模型的圆柱形线源模型预测的超压是静态源模型的两倍。考虑到与空气爆炸损伤预测相关的其他不确定性,静态源方法为概率危害评估提供了足够的方位平均空气爆炸近似值。
Asteroids and comets 10–100 m in size that collide with Earth disrupt dramatically in the atmosphere with an explosive transfer of energy, caused by extreme air drag. Such airbursts produce a strong blastwave that radiates from the meteoroid's trajectory and can cause damage on the surface. An established technique for predicting airburst blastwave damage is to treat the airburst as a static source of energy and to extrapolate empirical results of nuclear explosion tests using an energy‐based scaling approach. Here we compare this approach to two more complex models using the iSALE shock physics code. We consider a moving‐source airburst model where the meteoroid's energy is partitioned as two‐thirds internal energy and one‐third kinetic energy at the burst altitude, and a model in which energy is deposited into the atmosphere along the meteoroid's trajectory based on the pancake model of meteoroid disruption. To justify use of the pancake model, we show that it provides a good fit to the inferred energy release of the 2013 Chelyabinsk fireball. Predicted overpressures from all three models are broadly consistent at radial distances from ground zero that exceed three times the burst height. At smaller radial distances, the moving‐source model predicts overpressures two times greater than the static‐source model, whereas the cylindrical line‐source model based on the pancake model predicts overpressures two times lower than the static‐source model. Given other uncertainties associated with airblast damage predictions, the static‐source approach provides an adequate approximation of the azimuthally averaged airblast for probabilistic hazard assessment.
DOI: --
发表时间: 2005
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
G. Collins;K. Wünnemann
通讯作者: K. Wünnemann
小行星风险评估:概率方法
DOI: --
发表时间: 2016
期刊: Risk Analysis
影响因子: 3.8
作者:
J. Reinhardt;X. Chen;Wenhao Liu;P. Manchev;M. Paté
通讯作者: M. Paté
DOI: 10.2172/972902
发表时间: 1952
期刊: --
影响因子: --
作者:
S. Glasstone;P. Dolan
通讯作者: S. Glasstone;P. Dolan
DOI: --
发表时间: 1991
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
V. Tsvetkov;A. Skripnik
通讯作者: A. Skripnik
具有地面足迹预测的火流星进入数值模拟
DOI: --
发表时间: 2016
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
M. Aftosmis;M. Nemec;D. Mathias;M. Berger
通讯作者: M. Berger