Dynamic Response and Energy Dissipation Mechanisms of Soil–Lightweight Foam Composite Protective Layers Under Impact Loading

Engineering structures often face safety risks under impact or explosion loading, making the design of lightweight and efficient cushioning systems crucial. This study investigates the dynamic response and energy-dissipation characteristics of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS), Expanded Polyethylene (EPE), and soil–foam composite cushion layers under impact loading, using a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) testing apparatus. The tests include pure foam layers (lengths ranging from 40 to 300 mm) and a soil–foam composite layer with a total length of 60 mm (soil/foam ratio 1:1 to 1:3), subjected to impact velocities of 9.9–15.4 m/s. The results show that the stress wave propagation velocity of EPE is 149.6 m/s, lower than that of EPS at 249.3 m/s. At higher velocities, the attenuation coefficient for the 40 mm EPE sample reaches as low as 0.22, while EPS is 0.31. Furthermore, the maximum energy absorption coefficient of EPE exceeds 98%, with better stability at high impact velocities. In composite cushion layers, both soil and foam collaborate in energy absorption, but an increased proportion of soil leads to a decrease in energy absorption efficiency and attenuation capacity. Under equivalent ratios, the soil–EPE combination performs better than the soil–EPS combination. By constructing a comprehensive evaluation system based on three indices: stress wave attenuation coefficient, energy absorption coefficient, and energy absorption density, this study quantifies the impact resistance performance of different cushioning layers, providing theoretical and parametric support for material selection in engineering design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Coatings
Published
2025-09-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings15091074
Primary Topic
Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dynamic Response and Energy Dissipation Mechanisms of Soil–Lightweight Foam Composite Protective Layers Under Impact Loading

Xuefeng Mei, Peng Ju Cui, Xiaoyang Li, Jianping Gao et al.
Coatings
Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
article

Dynamic Response and Energy Dissipation Mechanisms of Soil–Lightweight Foam Composite Protective Layers Under Impact Loading

Xuefeng Mei, Peng Ju Cui, Xiaoyang Li, Jianping Gao, Jianli Wu, Dengfeng Li
article en

Abstract

Engineering structures often face safety risks under impact or explosion loading, making the design of lightweight and efficient cushioning systems crucial. This study investigates the dynamic response and energy-dissipation characteristics of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS), Expanded Polyethylene (EPE), and soil–foam composite cushion layers under impact loading, using a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) testing apparatus. The tests include pure foam layers (lengths ranging from 40 to 300 mm) and a soil–foam composite layer with a total length of 60 mm (soil/foam ratio 1:1 to 1:3), subjected to impact velocities of 9.9–15.4 m/s. The results show that the stress wave propagation velocity of EPE is 149.6 m/s, lower than that of EPS at 249.3 m/s. At higher velocities, the attenuation coefficient for the 40 mm EPE sample reaches as low as 0.22, while EPS is 0.31. Furthermore, the maximum energy absorption coefficient of EPE exceeds 98%, with better stability at high impact velocities. In composite cushion layers, both soil and foam collaborate in energy absorption, but an increased proportion of soil leads to a decrease in energy absorption efficiency and attenuation capacity. Under equivalent ratios, the soil–EPE combination performs better than the soil–EPS combination. By constructing a comprehensive evaluation system based on three indices: stress wave attenuation coefficient, energy absorption coefficient, and energy absorption density, this study quantifies the impact resistance performance of different cushioning layers, providing theoretical and parametric support for material selection in engineering design.

CoatingsVol. 15(9)
Metallurgical Corporation of China (China) (CN), Chengdu University of Technology (CN), Inner Mongolia University of Science and Technology (CN), Zhejiang Water Conservancy and Hydropower Survey and Design Institute (CN), Jiangjin Central Hospital (CN), Huainan Mining Industry Group (China) (CN), Chongqing Jiaotong University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.