Geometry & boundaries
Drawings, CAD, sketches, support conditions, constraints and known simplifications.
Services
Dynamic simulation support for accidental explosion, vapor-cloud-explosion, impact, and impulsive loading scenarios affecting structures and industrial systems.
Buyer problem
Accidental explosion or impact loading often governs local failure, support response, flange rotation, or damage progression — and hand methods cannot resolve the local deformation sequence or interaction between components.
Typical inputs
Drawings, CAD, sketches, support conditions, constraints and known simplifications.
Material grade, available test data, load history, temperature, pressure, blast/VCE or operating assumptions.
What the simulation must answer: local stress, damage indicator, comparison, screening, report or research evidence.
Technical depth
Use this path when accidental explosion, vapor-cloud explosion, impact or pressure-pulse loading may control local failure. The concern may be a bridge element, tank support, flange, pipe transition, equipment support, retrofit layer, blast shield or vulnerable connection zone.
Depending on the question, the work may use pressure-time histories, reflected pressure and drag components, Abaqus/Explicit dynamic response, CEL/ALE modelling for selected blast problems, contact, material damage, local plasticity and post-processing of displacement, reaction, strain and damage histories.
The analysis is checked through load timing, impulse consistency, boundary-condition reasonableness, contact stability, energy behavior, time-history outputs, mesh sensitivity around critical zones and comparison against expected structural response mechanisms.
The output helps clients identify vulnerable regions, compare strengthening options, screen local details, understand support or connection demand and translate dynamic response into practical inspection, retrofit or design-decision questions.
Typical inputs
Scoping note
The level of modelling is selected after reviewing the engineering question, available data, uncertainty and required decision. Axis does not recommend high-complexity simulation when a simpler verified check is more appropriate.
Related proof

Peer-reviewed Abaqus/Explicit CEL blast simulation of a CFRP-strengthened masonry arch bridge, with JH-II masonry, Mohr–Coulomb backfill, JWL TNT and VUMAT-based material implementation.

Nonlinear structural–environmental assessment linking VCE-induced local deformation in a connected LNG vessel–pipe–flange system to credible cryogenic-spill initiation regions.
Send available files and the engineering question. Axis FEA will respond with a suitable analysis route and required inputs.