Method and system for calculating deformation and failure mode of front and rear panels under fragment impact

Abstract

The application discloses a calculation method and system for deformation and failure modes of front and rear panels under fragment impact, and belongs to the technical field of impact dynamics and structure protection. In view of the hydrodynamic ram effect caused by high-speed fragment impact, three core parameters of dimensionless impact strength Π1, water-impact wave strength Π2 and cavitation extrusion load strength Π3 are constructed, which respectively represent three kinds of mechanical mechanisms of direct impact of fragments, bending driven by shock waves and extrusion of cavitation expansion. A quantitative criterion of the failure modes of the front and rear panels and the product of Π1 and Π3 is established, and three kinds of failure modes of shear impact, petal break and petal tearing are divided. Meanwhile, a linear model of local deformation and Π1, and a binary linear model of global deformation and Π2 and Π3 are established. The method does not need complex simulation, and the evaluation can be completed in seconds, the calculation efficiency is greatly improved, the prediction accuracy is greater than or equal to 93%, and is suitable for the impact resistance design and safety evaluation of liquid storage structures such as liquid tanks and oil tanks.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the fields of impact dynamics and structural protection technology, specifically to a calculation method and system for the deformation and failure modes of front and rear panels under fragment impact. Background Technology

[0002] In the field of industrial equipment fault diagnosis, accumulator structures are key components in core areas such as ships, aircraft, and chemical equipment, and their impact resistance directly affects the survivability of the equipment and personnel safety. When high-speed fragments impact accumulator structures, they trigger a complex hydrodynamic Ram (HRAM) effect. This effect includes three interrelated mechanical stages: direct fragment impact, underwater shock wave propagation, and cavitation cavity expansion and compression. This can lead to significant local and global deformation of the front and rear panels of the accumulator structure, and even tearing failure, resulting in catastrophic liquid leaks, explosions, or fires. Extensive research has been conducted by scholars both domestically and internationally on the dynamic response and failure of accumulator structures under the HRAM effect. Existing technologies are mainly divided into three categories: numerical simulation, experimental research, and simplified models, but all have insurmountable technical bottlenecks. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The main objective of this application is to provide a method for calculating the deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels under fragment impact, including the following steps:

[0004] Step S1: Based on the fragment parameters, liquid storage structure size, liquid properties and panel strength, construct three independent dimensionless impact load parameters, namely, the dimensionless impact strength Π1 characterizing the direct impact shear plugging effect of the fragment, the dimensionless water-entry shock wave strength Π2 characterizing the local plastic bending effect of the shock wave in water, and the dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 characterizing the full-domain film stretching effect of cavity expansion.

[0005] Step S2: Classify the failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure into three categories: shear slugging, petal breakage, and petal tearing;

[0006] Step S3: Establish quantitative criteria for failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure based on the product of Π1·Π3, and determine the critical thresholds for the transition of different failure modes.

[0007] Step S4: Establish linear prediction models of the maximum relative local deformation of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure with respect to Π1, and binary linear prediction models of the maximum relative global deformation of the front and rear panels with respect to Π2 and Π3, respectively.

[0008] Step S5: Input the basic parameters of the fragment, panel and liquid reservoir, and automatically calculate and output the failure mode, maximum relative local deformation, maximum relative global deformation and safety assessment results of the front and rear panels of the liquid reservoir structure.

[0009] In one embodiment, the expressions for the three dimensionless parameters are as follows:

[0010] The dimensionless impact strength Π1 is used to characterize the shear plugging damage effect caused by direct fragment impact. Its physical essence is the ratio of the kinetic energy input of the fragment impact to the load-bearing capacity of the panel against shear plugging failure, expressed as:

[0011] ;

[0012] The dimensionless water-borne shock wave intensity Π2 is used to characterize the local plastic bending driving effect of the water-borne shock wave on the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the characteristic impulse of the shock wave transmitted to the panel to the dynamic resistance of the panel to plastic bending deformation, expressed as:

[0013] ;

[0014] The dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 is used to characterize the driving effect of cavity expansion on the full-area film tensile deformation of the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the incident kinetic energy of the fragment driving the cavity expansion to the ultimate bearing capacity of the panel against full-area film tensile deformation, expressed as:

[0015] ;

[0016] In the above formula, ρ d v0, D p and c p Let ρ represent the fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, and wave velocity, respectively. w and c w These represent the liquid density and wave velocity, ρ, respectively. t and σ y t represents the panel density and yield strength, respectively, and t, L1, and L2 represent the panel thickness, panel feature size, and liquid storage structure length, respectively.

[0017] In one embodiment, the failure characteristics of the shear plug are: the formation of a regular circular rupture with no radial tensile cracks at the hole edge, and the damage is highly localized; the failure characteristics of the petal rupture are: radial tensile cracks are generated at the edge of the plug hole, and the crack propagation range is limited to the local deformation zone within the projectile impact area; the failure characteristics of the petal tearing are: the radial cracks propagate to the entire panel area under the continuous action of cavitation extrusion load, forming an overall tensile failure.

[0018] In one embodiment, the quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the front panel is:

[0019] When Π1·Π3≤800, the front panel experiences shear-pump failure;

[0020] When 800 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 1000, the front panel fails due to a petal-like tear.

[0021] When Π1·Π3>1000, the front panel experiences petal tearing failure.

[0022] In one embodiment, the quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the rear panel is:

[0023] When Π1·Π3≤100, the rear panel experiences shear-pump failure;

[0024] When 100 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 900, the rear panel fails due to a petal tear.

[0025] When Π1·Π3>900, the rear panel experiences petal tearing failure.

[0026] In one embodiment, the linear prediction model for the maximum relative local deformation is:

[0027] Maximum relative local deformation δ' of the front panel l,f =a·Π1;

[0028] Maximum local deformation δ' of the rear panel l r = b + a·Π1;

[0029] Among them, through linear regression fitting of experimental and simulation data, the empirical constant a is set to 0.002 and b is set to 2.4.

[0030] In one embodiment, the binary linear prediction model for the maximum relative global deformation is:

[0031] Maximum relative global deformation of the front panel: δ' g,f = c1 + d1·Π2 + e1·Π3;

[0032] Maximum relative global deformation of the rear panel: δ' g,r= c² + d²·π² + e²·π³;

[0033] Among them, through multiple linear regression fitting of experimental and simulation data, the empirical constants are c1=1.37, d1=0.71, e1=-3.2, c2=2.04, d2=0.74, e2=-3.8.

[0034] In one embodiment, the steps of inputting the basic parameters of the fragments, panels, and liquid tank, and automatically calculating and outputting the failure modes, maximum relative local deformation, maximum relative global deformation, and safety assessment results of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure include:

[0035] The numerical range and physical rationality of the input fragments, panel and liquid tank basic parameters are verified. After the verification is passed, the dimensionless impact strength Π1, dimensionless water ingress shock wave strength Π2 and dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 are calculated.

[0036] Based on the aforementioned failure mode quantitative criteria, the failure modes of the front panel and the rear panel are determined respectively; if the failure mode is determined to be shear plug or petal breakage, the corresponding maximum relative local deformation and maximum relative global deformation are calculated; if the failure mode is determined to be petal tearing, the structure is marked as completely failed, and the deformation is no longer counted.

[0037] Based on the failure mode level and deformation threshold, the structural failure risk level under the current working condition is generated. The critical fragment initial velocity and critical panel thickness threshold that lead to petal tearing failure of the structure are calculated. Targeted structural optimization suggestions are given, and the calculation results and safety assessment report are finally output.

[0038] In one embodiment, the fragments include, but are not limited to, spherical fragments, oval fragments, and cylindrical fragments, and the fragment materials include, but are not limited to, steel, tungsten alloys, and aluminum alloys;

[0039] The liquid in the liquid storage structure includes, but is not limited to, water, aviation kerosene and diesel, and the panel material includes, but is not limited to, metal materials and fiber-reinforced composite materials.

[0040] A system for predicting the impact failure of liquid storage structures based on dimensionless parameter decoupling includes:

[0041] The parameter input module is used to acquire and input fragment parameters, liquid parameters, panel parameters, and structural dimension parameters;

[0042] The dimensionless calculation module is used to calculate and output the dimensionless impact strength Π1, the water-entry shock wave strength Π2, and the cavitation extrusion load strength Π3 based on the parameters provided by the parameter input module.

[0043] The failure mode determination module is used to calculate the quantitative criteria for failure modes based on Π1 and Π3 output by the dimensionless calculation module, and output the failure mode determination results for the front panel and the rear panel.

[0044] The deformation prediction module is used to calculate and output the maximum local deformation and the maximum global deformation of the front panel and the rear panel based on Π1, Π2 and Π3 output by the dimensionless calculation module.

[0045] Therefore, this application has the following beneficial effects:

[0046] This application breaks through the core technical bottleneck in the industry's assessment of the HRAM effect of high-speed fragment impact accumulator structures. It establishes for the first time an independent three-parameter decoupled dimensionless system, achieving unified characterization of three mechanical mechanisms: direct fragment impact, shock wave-driven bending, and cavitation extrusion, filling the technical gap in full-process load decoupling characterization. A quantitative criterion based on failure modes is proposed, clarifying the critical thresholds for three failure modes in the front and rear plates, shortening the single assessment cycle from 3-7 days to a few seconds, and improving computational efficiency by more than 1000 times. Simultaneously, a high-precision deformation prediction model is established, with a local and global deformation prediction accuracy of ≥93% and clear physical meaning.

[0047] This method has a wide range of applications, covering various fragment types, panel materials, and liquid media. It eliminates the need for complex fluid-structure interaction simulations and numerous live-fire tests, saving over 500,000 yuan in testing costs per design and reducing the design cycle from months to days. It provides an efficient and reliable engineering tool for the impact resistance design and safety assessment of liquid storage structures such as ship liquid tanks, aircraft fuel tanks, and hazardous materials storage tanks. Attached Figure Description

[0048] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in this application or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0049] Figure 1 This is a system flowchart of the calculation method for the deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels under fragment impact;

[0050] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels of a liquid storage structure under fragment impact.

[0051] Figure 3 The fracture morphology classification and critical threshold of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure under fragment impact ((a) front panel; (b) rear panel).

[0052] Figure 4 The relationship between local deformation and Π1 of the deformation and failure mode of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure under fragment impact ((a) front panel; (b) rear panel).

[0053] Figure 5 The relationship between the overall deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure under fragment impact and Π2 and Π3 ((a) front panel; (b) rear panel).

[0054] Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of the failure modes of the front and rear panels in Example 1;

[0055] Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the failure modes of the front and rear panels in Example 2. Detailed Implementation

[0056] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this application clearer, the technical solutions of this application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some, not all, of the embodiments of this application. Based on the embodiments of this application, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0057] It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of this application.

[0058] To address the challenge of assessing the hydrodynamic impact effect induced by high-speed fragment impacts on liquid-filled structures, existing technologies suffer from three major insurmountable shortcomings: First, mainstream fluid-structure interaction numerical simulations require fine meshing of the impact and liquid zones, resulting in a single full-scale assessment cycle of 3-7 days. This reliance on high-performance computing clusters leads to high modeling complexity, failing to meet the batch iteration requirements of dozens or even hundreds of operating conditions in engineering design. Second, live-fire tests cost over 500,000 yuan per test and are inherently dangerous. Due to limitations, only tests under limited typical operating conditions can be conducted, enabling only observation and qualitative description of phenomena, without establishing a quantitative mapping between load and structural response. Third, existing simplified models do not distinguish between three independent mechanical mechanisms: direct fragment impact, shock wave-driven bending, and cavitation compression. They use a single dimensionless parameter to characterize the entire process load, lack clear quantitative criteria for failure modes, and generally result in prediction errors exceeding 30%, failing to guide precise protection design.

[0059] This application utilizes global sensitivity analysis based on 7 sets of full-scale live-fire tests and 22 sets of high-precision numerical simulations to identify three independent, dimensionless parameters that are strongly correlated with structural response. It reveals for the first time the mechanism by which impact and cavitation loads couple and control failure mode transitions, establishing quantitative criteria for three types of failure modes in the front and rear plates. Simultaneously, it constructs high-precision prediction models for local and global deformation. This method requires no complex simulations or extensive experiments, completing evaluation in seconds with a prediction accuracy ≥93%, solving the long-standing technical challenge of "inability to quickly and quantitatively predict" in this field.

[0060] This application provides a method for calculating the deformation and failure mode of the front and rear panels under fragment impact, including steps S1 to S5, referring to... Figure 1 , Figure 1 This is a system flowchart of the calculation method for the deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels under fragment impact.

[0061] Step S1: Based on the fragment parameters, liquid storage structure size, liquid properties and panel strength, construct three independent dimensionless impact load parameters, namely, the dimensionless impact strength Π1 characterizing the direct impact shear plugging effect of the fragment, the dimensionless water-entry shock wave strength Π2 characterizing the local plastic bending effect of the shock wave in water, and the dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 characterizing the full-domain film stretching effect of cavity expansion.

[0062] Step S2: Classify the failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure into three categories: shear slugging, petal breakage, and petal tearing;

[0063] Step S3: Establish quantitative criteria for failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure based on the product of Π1·Π3, and determine the critical thresholds for the transition of different failure modes.

[0064] Step S4: Establish linear prediction models of the maximum relative local deformation of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure with respect to Π1, and binary linear prediction models of the maximum relative global deformation of the front and rear panels with respect to Π2 and Π3, respectively.

[0065] Step S5: Input the basic parameters of the fragments, panels and liquid tank, and automatically calculate and output the failure modes, maximum relative local deformation, maximum relative global deformation and safety assessment results of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure.

[0066] Specifically, in this embodiment, the application scenario is the rapid evaluation of the impact resistance of a certain type of ship's fuel tank against spherical steel fragments. The specific implementation process is as follows:

[0067] Step S1: Input basic parameters and construct decoupled dimensionless parameters. Standard 45# steel spherical fragments with a density of 7800 kg / m³ are used. 3 The initial velocity is 1154 m / s, the diameter is 12.7 mm, and the longitudinal wave velocity is 6020 m / s. The panel is made of 2024-T3 aluminum alloy plate commonly used in ships, with a yield strength of 353 MPa, a thickness of 2 mm, and a characteristic dimension of 340 mm. The liquid tank is 300 mm long, and the internal medium is aviation kerosene. Calculations using formulas yielded: dimensionless impact strength Π1 = 1186, representing the ratio of the fragment impact kinetic energy input to the panel's shear-impact bearing capacity; dimensionless water-entry shock wave strength Π2 = 11.88, representing the ratio of the characteristic impulse of the shock wave transmitted to the panel to the panel's dynamic resistance to plastic bending; and dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 = 0.295, representing the ratio of the cavity expansion driving kinetic energy to the panel's resistance to the full-range film tensile limit. The three parameters have a Pearson correlation coefficient ≤ 0.1, achieving complete decoupling of the load mechanism.

[0068] Step S2: Based on the failure morphology characteristics and dominant mechanical mechanism, the failure modes of the front and rear panels are uniformly classified into three categories: shear plugging (local regular circular break), petal break (local radial crack at the hole edge), and petal tearing (crack extends to the panel boundary).

[0069] Step S3: Calculate the coupling load parameter Π1·Π3=350. According to the quantitative criteria, the front panel 350≤800 indicates shear plugging failure; the rear panel 100<350≤900 indicates petal breakage failure.

[0070] Step S4: Substitute into the prediction model to calculate the deformation: the maximum relative local deformation of the front panel is 2.37 and the global deformation is 8.84; the maximum relative local deformation of the rear panel is 4.77 and the global deformation is 9.70. The prediction error is less than 2%.

[0071] Step S5: The system automatically completes parameter rationality verification and full-process calculation, outputs a standardized report, determines that the current working condition is of low failure risk, and recommends increasing the thickness of the rear panel to 2.5mm to withstand higher kinetic energy fragment impacts.

[0072] In one embodiment, the expressions for the three dimensionless parameters are as follows:

[0073] The dimensionless impact strength Π1 is used to characterize the shear plugging damage effect caused by direct fragment impact. Its physical essence is the ratio of the kinetic energy input of the fragment impact to the load-bearing capacity of the panel against shear plugging failure, expressed as:

[0074] ;

[0075] The dimensionless water-borne shock wave intensity Π2 is used to characterize the local plastic bending driving effect of the water-borne shock wave on the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the characteristic impulse of the shock wave transmitted to the panel to the dynamic resistance of the panel to plastic bending deformation, expressed as:

[0076] ;

[0077] The dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 is used to characterize the driving effect of cavity expansion on the full-area film tensile deformation of the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the incident kinetic energy of the fragment driving the cavity expansion to the ultimate bearing capacity of the panel against full-area film tensile deformation, expressed as:

[0078] ;

[0079] In the above formula, ρ d v0, D p and c p Let ρ represent the fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, and wave velocity, respectively. w and c wThese represent the liquid density and wave velocity, ρ, respectively. t and σ y t represents the panel density and yield strength, respectively, and t, L1, and L2 represent the panel thickness, panel feature size, and liquid storage structure length, respectively.

[0080] Specifically, in this embodiment, the three dimensionless parameters constructed in step S2 are the core foundation for achieving full-process load decoupling characterization and accurate prediction in this application. Unlike the fundamental defects of existing technologies where dimensionless parameters have a single physical meaning and mixed load mechanisms, this embodiment, through global sensitivity analysis, selects the following three independent parameters that are highly correlated with the target response from numerous possible dimensionless combinations. Their specific expressions and physical essence are as follows:

[0081] The dimensionless impact strength Π1 is used to characterize the shear plugging damage effect caused by direct fragment impact. Its physical essence is the ratio of the kinetic energy input of the fragment impact to the load-bearing capacity of the panel against shear plugging failure, expressed as:

[0082] ;

[0083] This parameter is used to independently characterize the shear plugging damage effect caused by direct impact of a fragment onto the front panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the kinetic energy input of the fragment impact to the panel's load-bearing capacity against shear plugging failure. The numerator reflects the impact energy density per unit area of ​​the fragment, while the denominator characterizes the shear strength in the thickness direction of the panel. A larger parameter indicates a stronger local impact capability of the fragment relative to the target plate, and a greater tendency to form regular shear plugging holes rather than plastic indentations. Statistical tests show that the correlation coefficient between Π1 and the local deformation of the front and rear panels is as high as 0.95 or higher, making it the absolute controlling factor for local deformation response.

[0084] The dimensionless water-borne shock wave intensity Π2 is used to characterize the local plastic bending driving effect of the water-borne shock wave on the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the characteristic impulse of the shock wave transmitted to the panel to the dynamic resistance of the panel to plastic bending deformation, expressed as:

[0085] ;

[0086] This parameter is used to independently characterize the localized plastic bending driving effect on the panel caused by the initial spherical shock wave excited by momentum exchange at the moment the fragment enters the water. Its physical essence is the ratio of the characteristic impulse of the shock wave transmitted to the panel to the dynamic resistance of the panel to plastic bending deformation. The characteristic pressure amplitude of the shock wave, multiplied by the fragment diameter D, represents the shock wave. p The denominator reflects the range of the shock wave's effect, while the denominator reflects the panel's bending load-bearing capacity within its width range. This parameter directly determines the initial bulging deformation degree of the panel during the shock wave's action.

[0087] The dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 is used to characterize the driving effect of cavity expansion on the full-area film tensile deformation of the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the incident kinetic energy of the fragment driving the cavity expansion to the ultimate bearing capacity of the panel against full-area film tensile deformation, expressed as:

[0088] ;

[0089] This parameter is used to independently characterize the quasi-static, global film tensile driving effect on the panel caused by the expansion and collapse of pulsating cavitation bubbles behind the fragment. Its physical essence is the ratio of the incident kinetic energy of the fragment driving the cavity expansion to the panel's ultimate bearing capacity against global film tensile deformation. L2 reflects the spatial scale of cavitation bubble development along the impact direction, while the overall denominator characterizes the panel's ultimate tensile resistance in a two-dimensional global range. The product of this parameter and Π1 constitutes the core of the coupling criterion for determining failure mode transition in this application. In the above formula, ρ d v0, D p and c p Let ρ represent the fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, and wave velocity, respectively. w and c w These represent the liquid density and wave velocity, ρ, respectively. t and σ y t represents the panel density and yield strength, respectively, and t, L1, and L2 represent the panel thickness, panel feature size, and liquid storage structure length, respectively.

[0090] In one embodiment, the failure characteristics of the shear plug are: the formation of a regular circular rupture with no radial tensile cracks at the hole edge, and the damage is highly localized; the failure characteristics of the petal rupture are: radial tensile cracks are generated at the edge of the plug hole, and the crack propagation range is limited to the local deformation zone within the projectile impact area; the failure characteristics of the petal tearing are: the radial cracks propagate to the entire panel area under the continuous action of cavitation extrusion load, forming an overall tensile failure.

[0091] Specifically, the three types of failure modes involved in this embodiment are a scientific classification of the typical failure modes of the front and rear plates of the liquid-filled structure under fragment impact, based on statistical analysis of failure morphology results from a large number of experiments and numerical simulations, combined with the physical action mechanism of the load at each stage of the hydrodynamic impact effect. Figure 2 This is a diagram illustrating the failure mode classification method for calculating the deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels under fragment impact. Specifically:

[0092] The macroscopic characteristics of shear plug failure are as follows: the front or rear panel exhibits a regular circular fracture matching the fragment diameter, with smooth and even edges. Microscopic observation reveals no obvious radial tensile crack initiation. The damaged area is strictly confined to the direct contact area between the fragment and the panel, and the adjacent adiabatic shear zone. No significant plastic deformation occurs in the remaining areas of the panel. This mode is dominated by the shear action of localized fragment impact, corresponding to a low Π1·Π3 coupling value.

[0093] The petal-shaped fracture failure is characterized by the following macroscopic features: several radially distributed tensile cracks initiate along the circumferential edge of the centrally plugged circular hole. The cracks originate from the circumferential tensile stress generated at the edge of the localized deformation zone by the cavitation extrusion load. However, their propagation is naturally constrained by the boundary of the localized plastic deformation zone formed by the projectile impact; the crack tip terminates within this boundary and does not extend outward. This mode represents a transitional form from localized impact damage to global tensile failure.

[0094] The petal-like tear failure is characterized by the following macroscopic features: the aforementioned radial tensile crack breaks through the mechanical constraints of the local plastic deformation zone and, under the continuous film tension of the cavitation extrusion load, continues to propagate outward along the crack tip until it reaches the panel boundary or fastening flange, forming a huge petal-shaped tear opening that runs through the entire panel, resulting in the complete loss of the structure's load-bearing capacity and liquid sealing function. This mode corresponds to an extremely high Π1·Π3 coupling value and is the most dangerous failure mode in impact accidents involving liquid-filled structures. Figure 3 This study investigates the deformation and failure modes of the front and rear panels of a liquid storage structure under fragment impact, including the fracture morphology classification and critical thresholds ((a) front panel; (b) rear panel). The failure modes of the front and rear panels were obtained through experiments and numerical simulations, and statistical analysis was performed to determine the critical thresholds for failure mode transitions: when the front panel Π1·Π3=800, a sudden change from shearing and plugging to petal fracture occurs; when Π1·Π3=1000, a sudden change from petal fracture to petal tearing occurs; the critical threshold of the rear panel is also determined based on the abrupt change point of the failure mechanism.

[0095] In one embodiment, the quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the front panel is:

[0096] When Π1·Π3≤800, the front panel experiences shear-pump failure;

[0097] When 800 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 1000, the front panel fails due to a petal-like tear.

[0098] When Π1·Π3>1000, the front panel experiences petal tearing failure.

[0099] Specifically, in this embodiment, based on the statistical analysis of failure morphology and mechanical mechanisms from 7 sets of full-scale live-fire tests and 22 sets of high-precision numerical simulations, a quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the front panel is established. Unlike the single-parameter judgment approach of existing technologies, this criterion uses the product of dimensionless impact strength Π1 and cavitation extrusion strength Π3 as the core judgment index, accurately reflecting the coupled control effect of direct impact shearing of fragments and expansion and tensile action of cavitation cavities, thus solving the technical problem that traditional methods cannot quantify the critical point of failure mode transition. The specific judgment rules are as follows:

[0100] When Π1·Π3≤800, the impact kinetic energy input of the fragment is absolutely dominant, the cavitation extrusion load strength is insufficient to cause tensile cracking at the hole edge, the front panel experiences shear plugging failure, the rupture is a regular circle with a diameter equivalent to the fragment, there are no radial cracks at the hole edge, and the damage range is limited to a region of 5 times the plate thickness around the impact point.

[0101] When 800 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 1000, the coupled load strength reaches the critical value, and 3-5 radial tensile cracks initiate at the edge of the plug hole. However, the crack propagation is constrained by the local deformation zone and does not extend to the panel boundary, forming a petal-shaped failure.

[0102] When Π1·Π3>1000, the cavitation extrusion load continues to drive the crack to unstable propagate. The crack penetrates the entire area of ​​the panel and extends to the boundary, forming petal tearing failure. The front panel completely loses its load-bearing and sealing capabilities.

[0103] In one embodiment, the quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the rear panel is:

[0104] When Π1·Π3≤100, the rear panel experiences shear-pump failure;

[0105] When 100 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 900, the rear panel fails due to a petal tear.

[0106] When Π1·Π3>900, the rear panel experiences petal tearing failure.

[0107] Specifically, in this embodiment, based on the difference in load transfer paths of the fragment impact-induced liquid storage structure and the mechanical characteristics of the rear panel under load, a quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the rear panel is established through statistical analysis of failure data from 7 sets of full-scale live-fire tests and 22 sets of high-precision numerical simulations. Unlike the front panel, which is directly impacted by fragments, the rear panel only bears the shock wave and cavitation compression load transmitted through liquid attenuation. Therefore, the critical threshold for failure mode transition is significantly lower than that of the front panel. This criterion uses the product of π1 and π3 as a unified judgment index to accurately quantify the control effect of the impact and cavitation coupled loads on the failure of the rear panel. The specific judgment rule is as follows:

[0108] When Π1·Π3≤100, the liquid has a significant attenuation effect on the kinetic energy of the fragment. The load intensity transferred to the rear panel can only induce local shear plugging. The rear panel fails due to shear plugging. The rupture is a regular circle with a diameter slightly larger than that of the fragment. There are no obvious radial tensile cracks at the edge of the hole. The damage range is limited to the impact projection area.

[0109] When 100 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 900, the coupling between the shock wave and the cavitation extrusion load is enhanced, and 2-4 radial cracks are generated at the edge of the plug hole. However, the crack propagation is constrained by the bending resistance of the panel and does not extend to the panel boundary, resulting in petal-shaped failure.

[0110] When Π1·Π3>900, the tensile load generated by the expansion of the cavitation cavity exceeds the ultimate bearing capacity of the panel, the cracks rapidly destabilize and extend to the panel boundary, forming petal tearing failure, and the rear panel completely loses its sealing and bearing functions.

[0111] In one embodiment, the linear prediction model for the maximum relative local deformation is:

[0112] Maximum relative local deformation δ' of the front panel l,f =a·Π1;

[0113] Maximum local deformation δ' of the rear panel l ,r=b+ a·Π1;

[0114] Among them, through linear regression fitting of experimental and simulation data, the empirical constant a is set to 0.002 and b is set to 2.4.

[0115] Specifically, in this embodiment, the maximum relative local deformation prediction model established in step S5 is a linear prediction formula established based on system regression analysis of 7 sets of experimental data and 22 sets of simulation data, combined with decoupling research on the mechanical mechanism of local deformation. The mechanism research of this application shows that local deformation is mainly formed by local loads such as direct impact from fragments and local high pressure at the fragment head. Its deformation range is relatively small, does not reach the wall boundary, and the curvature exhibits an inward concave characteristic. The dimensionless impact intensity Π1 is the absolute controlling factor of local deformation. The relative intensity Π2 of the water-entry shock wave and the relative cavitation extrusion intensity Π3 contribute little to this local deformation and can be ignored in engineering prediction. This provides a solid theoretical basis for the simplified prediction of local deformation.

[0116] Based on the above understanding of the mechanism, the prediction model is specifically established as follows:

[0117] Maximum relative local deformation δ' of the front panel l,f =a·Π1;

[0118] Maximum relative local deformation δ' of the rear panel l ,r=b+ a·Π1.

[0119] Among them, coefficient a reflects the local deformation increment of the front and rear panels caused by each unit increment of Π1, while intercept b reflects the initial local indentation effect of the rear panel caused by the pre-action of fluid pressure under the condition of no direct impact from fragments.

[0120] By performing least-squares linear regression fitting on the experimental and simulation data, the empirical constants a and b are determined to be 0.002 and 2.4 respectively in this embodiment. Figure 4 The fitting relationship between the dimensionless local deformation of the front and rear panels and Π1 is intuitively displayed. The blue data points represent simulation results, while the green and pink data points represent experimental results for front and rear panels made of different materials. The fitting results show that the data points are closely distributed on both sides of the regression line, and the high linear correlation quantitatively verifies the mechanism analysis conclusion that Π1 is the absolute controlling factor of local deformation. This prediction model simplifies the complex calculation of local deformation to a single multiplication operation, achieving ultimate engineering convenience while ensuring prediction accuracy.

[0121] In one embodiment, the binary linear prediction model for the maximum relative global deformation is:

[0122] Maximum relative global deformation of the front panel: δ' g,f = c1 + d1·Π2 + e1·Π3;

[0123] Maximum relative global deformation of the rear panel: δ' g,r= c² + d²·π² + e²·π³;

[0124] Among them, through multiple linear regression fitting of experimental and simulation data, the empirical constants are c1=1.37, d1=0.71, e1=-3.2, c2=2.04, d2=0.74, e2=-3.8.

[0125] Specifically, in this embodiment, the maximum relative global deformation prediction model established in step S6 is based on an in-depth analysis of the full-cycle load evolution and front and rear panel deformation mechanism of the fragment impact sump structure, combined with multiple linear regression of full-condition experimental and numerical simulation data. The mechanism study in this application shows that the global deformation extends to the wall panel boundary, exhibiting an outward bulging characteristic, which is distinctly different from the mechanism where local deformation is solely controlled by Π1. The global deformation is mainly formed by the combined action of overall loads such as the initial shock wave from the fragments and cavitation extrusion loads, with the relative intensity of the water-entry shock wave Π2 and the relative cavitation extrusion intensity Π3 being the joint controlling factors.

[0126] Based on the above understanding of the mechanism, the prediction model is specifically established as follows:

[0127] Maximum relative global deformation δ' of the front panel g,f = c1 + d1·Π2 + e1·Π3;

[0128] Maximum relative global deformation δ' of the rear panel g,r= c² + d²·Π² + e²·Π³.

[0129] Through multiple linear regression fitting, the empirical constant values ​​determined in this embodiment are: c1=1.37, d1=0.71, e1=-3.2, c2=2.04, d2=0.74, e2=-3.8.

[0130] Figure 5 The paper visually demonstrates the dimensionless overall deformation of the front and rear panels and the binary linear plane fitting relationship between Π2 and Π3. Blue represents simulation results, while green and pink represent two different experimental results. This fitting result quantitatively verifies the aforementioned mechanistic analysis conclusions regarding the overall deformation of the front and rear panels, namely, that the relative intensity of the water-induced shock wave Π2 and the relative cavitation compression intensity Π3 are the absolute controlling factors of the overall deformation of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure. The physical meaning of Π2 is the ratio of the shock wave load to the panel's bending load capacity. After the spherical shock wave arrives at the panel, it forms a uniformly distributed bulging load across the entire panel, driving the panel to produce initial overall bending deformation. The larger the value of Π2, the higher the relative intensity of the shock wave load, and the greater the overall deformation of the panel. The physical meaning of Π3 is the ratio of the incident kinetic energy of the fragment to the ultimate resistance of the panel to global thin-film tensile deformation. It fundamentally characterizes the driving force of the fluid cavitation compression effect on the overall deformation of the panel, and also indirectly reflects the boundary constraint effect of the liquid tank length L2 on the cavity development. Π3 determines the final degree of overall panel deformation development; when Π2 remains constant, the larger Π3 is, the smaller the overall panel deformation. That is, when Π2 remains constant, a larger Π3 means a longer liquid tank length L2, a more significant geometric constraint effect of the boundary on the overall deformation, and the later pressure of the cavitation compression load is lower than the initial shock wave, resulting in a decreasing trend in the final overall plastic deformation increment. This model simplifies the traditional complex fluid-structure interaction simulation calculation into a single-order binary linear operation.

[0131] In one embodiment, the step of automatically calculating and outputting the failure modes, maximum relative local deformation, maximum relative global deformation, and safety assessment results of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure, based on the input parameters of the fragments, panels, and liquid reservoir, includes:

[0132] The numerical range and physical rationality of the input fragments, panel and liquid storage basic parameters are verified. After the verification is passed, the dimensionless impact strength Π1, dimensionless water ingress shock wave strength Π2 and dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 are calculated.

[0133] Based on the aforementioned failure mode quantitative criteria, the failure modes of the front panel and the rear panel are determined respectively; if the failure mode is determined to be shear plug or petal breakage, the corresponding maximum relative local deformation and maximum relative global deformation are calculated; if the failure mode is determined to be petal tearing, the structure is marked as completely failed, and the deformation is no longer counted.

[0134] Based on the failure mode level and deformation threshold, the structural failure risk level under the current working condition is generated. The critical fragment initial velocity and critical panel thickness threshold that lead to petal tearing failure of the structure are calculated. Targeted structural optimization suggestions are given, and the calculation results and safety assessment report are finally output.

[0135] Specifically, in this embodiment, this application realizes fully automated calculation from parameter input to result output, without manual intervention, and can complete the complete evaluation within seconds. The specific execution process is as follows:

[0136] First, parameter verification and dimensionless load calculation are performed: The system automatically verifies the numerical range and physical rationality of 11 basic parameters, including fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, panel yield strength, thickness, and tank length. The verification rules include parameter non-negativity, commonly used engineering range constraints (such as fragment initial velocity 400-2000m / s, panel thickness 0.5-10mm), and dimensional consistency verification. If the verification fails, an error message will pop up and indicate the abnormal parameter. After the verification passes, the three dimensionless formulas in step S1 are called to complete the batch calculation of Π1, Π2, and Π3.

[0137] Next, the failure mode determination and deformation calculation are performed: the system automatically calculates the coupled load parameters of Π1·Π3 and matches them with the quantitative criteria for failure modes of the front and rear plates respectively; if the failure is determined to be shear plugging or petal breakage, the linear model and binary linear model in step S4 are automatically called to calculate the corresponding maximum relative local deformation and global deformation; if the failure is determined to be petal tearing, the system automatically marks the structure as completely failed, no longer calculates the deformation, and marks "the structure has lost its sealing and bearing capacity".

[0138] Finally, a safety assessment and standardization report is generated: risks are classified according to failure mode levels (shear plugging is low risk, petal breakage is medium risk, and petal tearing is high risk), the ultimate fragment velocity and ultimate wall thickness that lead to petal tearing failure of the structure are calculated, and structural reinforcement recommendations are given; the final output is a standardized assessment report containing a parameter list, dimensionless parameter values, failure modes, deformation, risk levels and optimization schemes.

[0139] In one embodiment, the fragments include, but are not limited to, spherical fragments, oval fragments, and cylindrical fragments, and the fragment materials include, but are not limited to, steel, tungsten alloys, and aluminum alloys;

[0140] The liquid in the liquid storage structure includes, but is not limited to, water, aviation kerosene and diesel, and the panel material includes, but is not limited to, metal materials and fiber-reinforced composite materials.

[0141] Specifically, in this embodiment, the calculation method of this application has strong engineering universality, covering various typical fragments, liquid media, and panel materials, breaking through the limitation of existing technologies that are only applicable to specific working conditions. Fragment types include mainstream warhead fragment shapes such as spherical, oval, and cylindrical. Fragment materials cover commonly used fragment materials such as 45# steel, armor steel, tungsten alloy, and aluminum alloy. Through equivalent diameter correction and material wave velocity parameter adaptation, the impact effect of fragments with different shapes and densities can be accurately predicted. Liquid media include commonly used industrial liquids such as water, aviation kerosene, and diesel. By introducing liquid density and sound wave velocity parameters, the shock wave propagation characteristics and cavitation evolution laws of different liquids can be adapted. Panel materials include metallic materials such as aluminum alloy, steel, and titanium alloy, as well as fiber-reinforced composite materials such as carbon fiber and glass fiber reinforced epoxy resin. By adjusting the yield strength parameter, the shear and tensile load-bearing capacity of different materials can be accurately characterized.

[0142] A system for predicting the impact failure of liquid storage structures based on dimensionless parameter decoupling includes:

[0143] The parameter input module is used to acquire and input fragment parameters, liquid parameters, panel parameters, and structural dimension parameters;

[0144] The dimensionless calculation module is used to calculate and output the dimensionless impact strength Π1, the water-entry shock wave strength Π2, and the cavitation extrusion load strength Π3 based on the parameters provided by the parameter input module.

[0145] The failure mode determination module is used to calculate the quantitative criteria for failure modes based on Π1 and Π3 output by the dimensionless calculation module, and output the failure mode determination results for the front panel and the rear panel.

[0146] The deformation prediction module is used to calculate and output the maximum local deformation and the maximum global deformation of the front panel and the rear panel based on Π1, Π2 and Π3 output by the dimensionless calculation module.

[0147] Specifically, in this embodiment, a modular layered architecture design is adopted to achieve automated, high-precision, and rapid assessment of the failure modes and deformation of the front and rear plates of the liquid storage structure under fragment impact, solving the engineering pain points of complex modeling and long calculation cycles in traditional simulation systems. The core of the system includes four functional modules: The parameter input module supports the input of 11 basic parameters through a visual interface, covering fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, wave velocity, liquid density, wave velocity, panel yield strength, thickness, feature dimensions, and liquid tank length. It has built-in parameter verification logic to automatically intercept non-negative anomalies, dimensional errors, and invalid parameters that exceed the commonly used engineering range and provide correction prompts. The dimensionless calculation module has built-in three decoupled dimensionless parameter calculation formulas established in this application. It receives the verified input parameters, automatically completes the parallel calculation of Π1, Π2, and Π3, and outputs the results in real time to the subsequent modules. The failure mode determination module automatically calculates the coupled load parameters of Π1 and Π3, matches them with the quantitative criteria for the failure modes of the front and rear plates, and outputs three types of determination results: shear plugging, petal breakage, and petal tearing. Petal tearing failure is automatically marked as "complete structural failure". The deformation prediction module intelligently calls the prediction model based on the failure mode, calculating the maximum relative local deformation and global deformation of the front and rear plates separately for shear plugging and petal-shaped breakage conditions, and converting them into actual deformation output. It should be noted that the specific embodiments of this application are as follows:

[0148] Example 1: Typical Operating Condition Prediction

[0149] Fragment: 45# steel spherical fragment, density ρ d =7800 kg / m 3 Diameter D p =12.7mm, initial velocity v0=1154m / s;

[0150] Panel: 2024-T3 aluminum plate, density ρ t =2700 kg / m 3 Yield strength σ y =353MPa, thickness t=2mm;

[0151] Liquid storage tank: width L1=340mm, length L2=300mm;

[0152] The calculation yields:

[0153] ;

[0154] ;

[0155] 100 < Π1·Π3 = 350 < 800;

[0156] Judgment: The front panel exhibited shear-plug failure, and the rear panel exhibited petal-shaped failure, consistent with experimental results. (See attached image) Figure 6 .

[0157] Example 2: Prediction of High Load Conditions

[0158] Fragment: Tungsten alloy fragment, density ρ d =17800 kg / m 3 Diameter D p =12.7mm, initial velocity v0=1167m / s;

[0159] Panel: 2024-T3 aluminum plate, density ρ t =2700 kg / m 3 Yield strength σ y =353MPa, thickness t=1mm;

[0160] Liquid storage tank: width L1=340mm, length L2=300mm;

[0161] ;

[0162] ;

[0163] Π1·Π3=15285>1000;

[0164] Judgment: Both the front panel petals and the rear panel petals have torn and failed. This is consistent with experimental results. (See attached image) Figure 7 .

[0165] Table 1

[0166]

[0167] Table 1 presents the results of 7 sets of full-scale live-fire tests and 22 sets of high-precision numerical simulations, summarizing the 7 sets of full-scale live-fire test results and 22 sets of high-precision numerical simulations supporting the technical solution of this application. These results cover core input parameters such as fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, panel thickness, width, and liquid length. The table also lists the values ​​of three dimensionless parameters (Π1, Π2, and Π3) under the corresponding working conditions, as well as measured / simulated data on failure modes of the front and rear plates, local deformation, and overall deformation. This dataset covers typical engineering conditions such as fragment densities, panel thicknesses of 1-3 mm, and liquid tank lengths of 50-300 mm, providing complete data support for the construction of the decoupled dimensionless parameter system, determination of failure mode critical thresholds, and fitting of the deformation prediction model. It verifies the 100% failure mode prediction accuracy and ≥93% deformation prediction precision of this method.

[0168] It should be noted that, in this document, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or system that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such a process, method, article, or system. Unless otherwise specified, an element defined by the phrase "comprising one..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article, or system that includes that element.

[0169] The sequence numbers of the embodiments in this application are for descriptive purposes only and do not represent the superiority or inferiority of the embodiments.

[0170] It should be particularly noted that, through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that each embodiment can be implemented by means of software plus necessary general-purpose hardware platforms, or of course, by hardware. Based on this understanding, the above technical solutions, in essence or the parts that contribute to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, such as ROM / RAM, magnetic disk, optical disk, etc., and includes several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in the various embodiments or some parts of the embodiments.

[0171] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of this application, and are not intended to limit them. Although this application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some of the technical features. Such modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application.

Claims

1. A method for calculating the deformation and failure modes of front and rear panels under fragment impact, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step S1: Based on the fragment parameters, liquid storage structure size, liquid properties and panel strength, construct three independent dimensionless impact load parameters, namely, the dimensionless impact strength Π1 characterizing the direct impact shear plugging effect of the fragment, the dimensionless water-entry shock wave strength Π2 characterizing the local plastic bending effect of the shock wave in water, and the dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 characterizing the full-domain film stretching effect of cavity expansion. Step S2: Classify the failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure into three categories: shear slugging, petal breakage, and petal tearing; Step S3: Establish quantitative criteria for failure modes of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure based on the product of Π1·Π3, and determine the critical thresholds for the transition of different failure modes. Step S4: Establish linear prediction models of the maximum relative local deformation of the front and rear panels of the liquid storage structure with respect to Π1, and binary linear prediction models of the maximum relative global deformation of the front and rear panels with respect to Π2 and Π3, respectively. Step S5: Input the basic parameters of the fragment, panel and liquid reservoir, and automatically calculate and output the failure mode, maximum relative local deformation, maximum relative global deformation and safety assessment results of the front and rear panels of the liquid reservoir structure.

2. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The expressions for the three dimensionless parameters in step S1 are as follows: The dimensionless impact strength Π1 is used to characterize the shear plugging damage effect caused by direct fragment impact. Its physical essence is the ratio of the kinetic energy input of the fragment impact to the load-bearing capacity of the panel against shear plugging failure, expressed as: ； The dimensionless water-borne shock wave intensity Π2 is used to characterize the local plastic bending driving effect of the water-borne shock wave on the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the characteristic impulse of the shock wave transmitted to the panel to the dynamic resistance of the panel to plastic bending deformation, expressed as: ； The dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 is used to characterize the driving effect of cavity expansion on the full-area film tensile deformation of the panel. Its physical essence is the ratio of the incident kinetic energy of the fragment driving the cavity expansion to the ultimate bearing capacity of the panel against full-area film tensile deformation, expressed as: ； In the above formula, ρ d v0, D p and c p Let ρ represent the fragment density, initial velocity, diameter, and wave velocity, respectively. w and c w These represent the liquid density and wave velocity, ρ, respectively. t and σ y t represents the panel density and yield strength, respectively, and t, L1, and L2 represent the panel thickness, panel feature size, and liquid storage structure length, respectively.

3. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S2, the failure characteristics of the shear plug are: the formation of a regular circular rupture with no radial tensile cracks at the edge of the hole, and the damage is highly localized; the failure characteristics of the petal rupture are: radial tensile cracks are generated at the edge of the plug hole, and the crack propagation range is limited to the local deformation zone within the projectile impact area; the failure characteristics of the petal tearing are: the radial cracks extend to the entire panel under the continuous action of cavitation extrusion load, forming an overall tensile failure.

4. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S3, the quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the front panel is: When Π1·Π3≤800, the front panel experiences shear-pump failure; When 800 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 1000, the front panel fails due to a petal-like tear. When Π1·Π3>1000, the front panel experiences petal tearing failure.

5. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S3, the quantitative criterion for the failure mode of the rear panel is: When Π1·Π3≤100, the rear panel experiences shear-pump failure; When 100 < Π1·Π3 ≤ 900, the rear panel fails due to a petal tear. When Π1·Π3>900, the rear panel experiences petal tearing failure.

6. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S4, the linear prediction model for the maximum relative local deformation is: Maximum relative local deformation δ' of the front panel l,f =a·Π1; Maximum local deformation δ' of the rear panel l r = b + a·Π1; Among them, through linear regression fitting of experimental and simulation data, the empirical constant a is set to 0.002 and b is set to 2.

4.

7. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S4, the bivariate linear prediction model for the maximum relative global deformation is: Maximum relative global deformation of the front panel: δ' g,f = c1 + d1·Π2 + e1·Π3; Maximum relative global deformation of the rear panel: δ' g,r = c² + d²·π² + e²·π³; Among them, through multiple linear regression fitting of experimental and simulation data, the empirical constants are c1=1.37, d1=0.71, e1=-3.2, c2=2.04, d2=0.74, e2=-3.

8.

8. The calculation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The steps of inputting the basic parameters of the fragments, panels, and liquid reservoir, and automatically calculating and outputting the failure modes, maximum relative local deformation, maximum relative global deformation, and safety assessment results of the front and rear panels of the liquid reservoir structure include: The numerical range and physical rationality of the input fragments, panel and liquid storage basic parameters are verified. After the verification is passed, the dimensionless impact strength Π1, dimensionless water ingress shock wave strength Π2 and dimensionless cavitation extrusion strength Π3 are calculated. Based on the aforementioned failure mode quantitative criteria, the failure modes of the front panel and the rear panel are determined respectively; if the failure mode is determined to be shear plug or petal breakage, the corresponding maximum relative local deformation and maximum relative global deformation are calculated; if the failure mode is determined to be petal tearing, the structure is marked as completely failed, and the deformation is no longer counted. Based on the failure mode level and deformation threshold, the structural failure risk level under the current working condition is generated. The critical fragment initial velocity and critical panel thickness threshold that lead to petal tearing failure of the structure are calculated. Targeted structural optimization suggestions are given, and the calculation results and safety assessment report are finally output.

9. The calculation method according to claim 7, characterized in that, The fragments include, but are not limited to, spherical fragments, oval fragments, and cylindrical fragments, and the fragment materials include, but are not limited to, steel, tungsten alloys, and aluminum alloys; The liquid in the liquid storage structure includes, but is not limited to, water, aviation kerosene and diesel, and the panel material includes, but is not limited to, metal materials and fiber-reinforced composite materials.

10. A system for predicting impact failure of liquid storage structures based on dimensionless parameter decoupling, characterized in that, include: The parameter input module is used to acquire and input fragment parameters, liquid parameters, panel parameters, and structural dimension parameters; The dimensionless calculation module is used to calculate and output the dimensionless impact strength Π1, the water intrusion shock wave strength Π2, and the cavitation extrusion load strength Π3 based on the parameters provided by the parameter input module. The failure mode determination module is used to calculate the quantitative criteria for failure modes based on Π1 and Π3 output by the dimensionless calculation module, and output the failure mode determination results for the front panel and the rear panel. The deformation prediction module is used to calculate and output the maximum local deformation and the maximum global deformation of the front panel and the rear panel based on Π1, Π2 and Π3 output by the dimensionless calculation module.

Images