표제지
요약
ABSTRACT
목차
제1장 서론 12
1.1. 연구배경 12
제2장 이론적 배경 13
2.1. 슬로싱 하중 13
2.2. 충돌 하중 17
2.3. CEL 기법 18
2.4. Mie- Grüneisen 상태 방정식 19
2.5. 유한요소모델 검증 21
제3장 하중을 받는 액체수소 탱크 배플의 강도 평가 27
3.1. 유한요소 모델 27
3.2. 액체수소 탱크 해석 방법 및 검증 30
3.2.1. 격자 유효성 검증 31
3.3. 액체수소 탱크 배플의 영향 32
3.3.1. 충돌 해석 시 액체수소 탱크 배플의 영향 33
3.3.2. 슬로싱 해석 시 액체 수소탱크 배플의 영향 40
3.4. 적재율에 따른 해석 모델 유동 분석 48
3.4.1. 적재율에 따른 충돌 모델 유동 분석 48
3.4.2. 적재율에 따른 슬로싱 모델 유동 분석 49
3.5. 배플의 강도 평가 50
3.5.1. 충돌 하중 시 배플의 강도 평가 50
3.5.2. 슬로싱 하중 시 배플의 강도 평가 52
3.5.3. 배플의 두께에 따른 강도 평가 54
제4장 결론 56
참고문헌 58
Table 1. Material properties of water 22
Table 2. Material properties of LH2 30
Table 3. Material properties of baffle 30
Table 4. The pressure reduction effect of baffle with filling ratio 48
Figure 1. Period of the fluid in the tank with filling ratio 15
Figure 2. Results of FFT method with filling ratio 16
Figure 3. Triangular impulse 17
Figure 4. The VOF method which shows the fraction of fluid in each element 18
Figure 5. General calculation procedure of Eulerian element in Abaqus 19
Figure 6. 3D rectangular tank containing a liquid and having a vertical baffle 21
Figure 7. Liquid sloshing in an unbaffled tank 23
Figure 8. Comparison of time histories of pressure at (a) PT1 and (b) PT4[이미지참조] 24
Figure 9. Liquid sloshing in a tank with baffle 25
Figure 10. Comparison of time histories of pressure at (a) PT1, (b) PT2, (c) PT3, and (d) PT4[이미지참조] 27
Figure 11. Geometric model 28
Figure 12. FE model 29
Figure 13. The location of the probes to monitor the baffle stress 31
Figure 14. Comparison of the stress for three different mesh size at Pb2[이미지참조] 32
Figure 15. The location of the probes to monitor the pressure variation with time 33
Figure 16. Comparison of the pressure in collision analysis with filling ratio 25% 36
Figure 17. Comparison of the pressure in collision analysis with filling ratio 50% 38
Figure 18. Comparison of the pressure in collision analysis with filling ratio 75% 40
Figure 19. Comparison of the pressure in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 25% 43
Figure 20. Comparison of the pressure in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 50% 45
Figure 21. Comparison of the pressure in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 75% 47
Figure 22. Liquid flow in collision analysis with filling ratio 25% 48
Figure 23. Liquid flow in collision analysis with filling ratio 50% 49
Figure 24. Liquid flow in collision analysis with filling ratio 75% 49
Figure 25. Liquid flow in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 25% 49
Figure 26. Liquid flow in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 50% 50
Figure 27. Liquid flow in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 75% 50
Figure 28. Results of the stress in collision analysis with filling ratio 25% 51
Figure 29. Results of the stress in collision analysis with filling ratio 50% 51
Figure 30. Results of the stress in collision analysis with filling ratio 75% 52
Figure 31. Results of the stress in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 25% 53
Figure 32. Results of the stress in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 50% 53
Figure 33. Results of the stress in sloshing analysis with filling ratio 75% 54
Figure 34. Results of the baffle thickness increased by 5mm 55
Figure 35. Comparison of the stress for two different baffle thickness at Pb2[이미지참조] 55