Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Full length article

A membrane equivalent method to reproduce the macroscopic mechanical

responses of steel wire-ring nets under rockfall impact
Yuntao Jin a,c , Zhixiang Yu a,b,c ,∗, Liru Luo a,c , Liping Guo a,c , Lijun Zhang a,c
a
School of civil engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China
b
National Engineering Laboratory for Prevention and Control of Geological Disasters in Land Transportation, Chengdu 610031, China
c
Research Center of Protection Structures Against Natural Hazards, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Steel wire-ring nets, which have complex nonlinear mechanical behaviour, are widely used in rockfall
Rockfall protection protection engineering. At present, the circular beam model with a discrete contact boundary is the most
Steel wire-ring net accurate method to simulate steel wire-ring nets’ mechanical responses, but its computational efficiency
Membrane equivalent method
is low. This paper hereby proposes a membrane equivalence-based continuum simulation method: the
Numerical model
membrane equivalent method (MEM)1 . This study’s aim is to greatly improve the computational efficiency of
Computational efficiency
numerical models through the MEM without compromising computational accuracy in macroscopic mechanical
behaviour, compared to the circular beam model. According to the out-of-plane loading experimental results
of the net panel and membrane analytical model of orthogonal tension belts, an exponential hardening
constitutive model of the equivalent membrane was derived. The MEM’s material parameters were corrected
in numerical models for a less than 10% error between the simulated and experimental results. Under
the rigid boundary condition, the net panel impact simulation results established by the MEM agreed with
extant literature’s experimental results, the peak acceleration error was 4.3%, and the rebound characteristic
of the net was reproduced. Under the flexible boundary condition, the MEM’s obtained maximum impact
displacement and impact force errors were 10.3% and 7.7%, respectively, compared to 3000 kJ full-scale
impact experimental results. The MEM’s computational efficiency can be increased almost tenfold compared
to that of the circular beam model.

1. Introduction
Flexible rockfall protection systems are widely used in rockfall
protection engineering to prevent possible casualties and damage to
important infrastructures. These systems are composed of supporting
structures, steel wire ropes, interception nets and energy dissipators [1,
2]. The interception net is the most sophisticated structural com-
ponent of the flexible protection system, having the form of steel
wire-ring, rhomboid chain-link wire [3] or hexagonal wire nets. The
steel wire-ring net is the most frequently used because of its charac-
teristic large deformation and excellent buffering performance under
rockfall impact. The steel wire-ring net’s mesh shape changes greatly
after loading [4], as the high-strength steel wires that constitute each
wire-ring undergo elastic–plastic deformation near the impact area, and
contact interfaces sliding occurs between these wire-rings. Therefore,
the mechanical behaviour of the steel wire-ring net is very complex
as a strong nonlinear problem with large deformation. At present,
experimental methods or numerical simulation are most commonly
used to study the mechanical behaviour of steel wire-ring nets, though
due to the advantages of low cost and flexible expansion, numerical
simulation has become the more popular research method.
The discrete element methods [5–9] and finite element methods
[10–12] are frequently used in the nonlinear numerical simulation of
interception nets. In early finite element models, the internal boundary
of the wire-rings was often treated as continuous. For example, research
regarded the wire-rings combination unit as a triangular mesh using
common nodes, and the linear elements were used for simulation [13],
though they had low simulation accuracy in spite of high computational
efficiency. Kwan et al. [14] introduced a numerical method which
simplified the steel wire-ring net to an orthogonal cable net using
common nodes. This method retained the steel wire ring nets’ high
computational efficiency, but an improvement was not obvious. Yu,
Xu and Qi et al. [15–17] established the circular beam model with a
discrete contact boundary, and proposed the constitutive model with
softened Young’s modulus under the condition of wire-ring section
area equivalence. This model significantly improved the simulation

∗ Corresponding author at: School of civil engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China.
E-mail address: yzxzrq@swjtu.edu.cn (Z. Yu).
1
MEM: abbreviation of the membrane equivalent method proposed in this paper to reproduce the macroscopic mechanical behaviour of steel wire-ring nets.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.108227
Received 17 December 2020; Received in revised form 19 July 2021; Accepted 22 July 2021
Available online xxxx
0263-8231/© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 1. Test equipment.

accuracy of ring nets’ mechanical behaviour. In Guo et al. [18], the

ring net out-of-plane loading process revealed the characteristics of
force transmission. Based on this discovery, the researchers proposed
an analytical calculation method for ring nets, which is convenient
for simplified engineering design. The above studies have promoted
the development of ring nets’ computational theory, but the current
methods are either too simplified, ignoring the strong nonlinear and
large deformation characteristics of the ring nets and resulting in over-
estimating net stiffness, or are too complex and their computational
consumption is high. It is inevitable to consider material, geometric
and contact nonlinearity in the accurate numerical simulation of ring
nets’ mechanical behaviour. It is therefore a primary focus in flexible
protection structures to develop a more efficient computational method
that also takes accuracy into consideration.
Steel wire-ring nets are composed of wingdings of high-strength
steel wires, meaning that the rings’ bending stiffness is slight and their
internal force under impact is dominated by tensile force, leading to a
strong similarity with a membrane structure when subjected to out-of- Fig. 2. Net panel status during test: (a) initial tension status; (b) status before failure;
plane loading. The whole net panel can therefore be regarded as a thin (c) status at moment of failure.
membrane. For example, Mentani et al. [19] proposed an equivalent
continuum simulation approach to rhomboid chain-link nets using shell
elements. In this approach, the net panel was equivalent to a thin computation of the ring nets under both rigid and flexible sliding
shell with equal stiffness. Because the relative sliding between contact boundary conditions were realized, and the simulated results compared
interfaces in rhomboid chain-link wire nets can usually be disregarded, and validated.
the equivalence of rhomboid chain-link wire nets was simpler than
that of steel wire-ring nets. In Sasiharan and Leonardi et al. [20,21], 2. The mechanical behaviour of steel wire-ring nets
interception nets were considered continuous isotropic membranes to
simplify the computation. Dhakal et al. [22] used Belytschko–Lin– 2.1. Test overview
Tsay shell elements to simulate rhomboid chain-link nets and bilinear
material constitutive model to correct material parameters through The steel wire-ring nets’ out-of-plane loading test was carried out
net loading tests. These works have demonstrated that it is feasible in the Protection Structure Research Center of Southwest Jiaotong
to simplify interception nets into continuous membrane structures. University. Through the loading test of the 3 m × 3 m ring nets, the
However, the equivalent objects of the above research are rhomboid ring nets’ F–D curves during the loading process were obtained, and
chain-link wire nets, whose nonlinear characteristics are not so obvious, their mechanical and deformation characteristics revealed. The test
and the studies’ material constitutive models as used in their methods pieces included six specifications of R5/3/300, R7/3/300, R9/3/300,
are relatively simple. R12/3/300, R16/3/300 and R19/3/300, each with three test pieces.
To obtain the material parameters of an equivalent membrane The test equipment was mainly a 150-t tensile testing machine com-
through the MEM, the current study consisted of an out-of-plane load- posed of a steel reaction frame, hydraulic jack, displacement sensor,
ing experiment with ring nets with dimensions 3 m × 3 m, obtained loading unit and thrust device (Fig. 1). The thrust device served as the
the F–D curves of the specimen and analysed and revealed the nets’ loading device that directly contacted the net panel to transfer the load
orthogonal mechanical characteristic. Based on the equivalent me- from the test machine.
chanical model of the ring nets and the assumption of the shortest
force transmission path of the membrane, an analytical model of the 2.2. Experimental phenomenon
equivalent membrane under out-of-plane loading was also established,
and the constitutive model of the equivalent membrane was obtained. Individually, each ring net’s three test pieces were connected to the
The study further allowed development of MEM numerical models test bench with shackles, and the thrust device was pushed under the
corresponding to a ring net 45 kJ impact test [23], a ring net 81 kJ central area of the ring net after the test piece was arranged, then
test and a flexible barrier 3000 kJ full-scale impact test. The efficient connected with the hydraulic rod. The lifting speed of the thrust device

2
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 3. Formation of orthogonal tension paths.

during the test was 6 mm/s, the displacement data was collected by Table 1
Results of the out-of-plane loading experiment.
the displacement sensor and the F–D data was recorded by the data
collector and synchronously generated until the ring net broke. Fig. 2 Specification Average Average ultimate Nets’ failure position
ultimate displacement
shows the status of the ring net at different loading stages. force (kN) (mm)
The basic unit of the ring net is the ‘‘five rings’’ (Fig. 2a), so save
R5/3/300 245 1089 Edge of thrust device
those connected to the border, the rings had four force transmission R7/3/300 377 1040 Edge of thrust device
points (Fig. 3). Observing the deformation history of the ring net test, R9/3/300 508 1029 Edge of thrust device
it was found that the wire-rings were ring-shaped before deformation R12/3/300 666 930 Edge of thrust device
R16/3/300 924 920 Edge of thrust device
(Fig. 2a), though most were rectangular after deformation (Fig. 2b).
R19/3/300 1203 910 Edge of thrust device
According to the mechanical analysis of the ring net, sliding occurred
between the rings per ‘‘adaptive redistribution’’ after the net was
loaded, and the rings deformed due to the combined tension-bending
force. As the load increased, the self-adaptive sliding tended to stabi- stiffness k(𝜃), that is, the equivalent spring (Fig. 5). The basic force
lize. After that, the rings entered the dominant axial tension phase, and balance equations were as follows:
the rings tended to be rectangular. Since the tension must be along
𝐹 (𝜃) = 𝑘(𝜃)𝛥𝑥 (1)
the direction of the wire bundles, an orthogonal tension distribution
pattern formed (Fig. 3). The wire bundles formed dense orthogonal 𝐹 = 4𝐹 (𝜃) sin 𝜃 (2)
tension paths, similar to the orthogonal cable-net structure.
where F (𝜃) is the equivalent spring tension force, k(𝜃) is the equivalent
spring stiffness, 𝛥x is the equivalent spring elongation, 𝜃 is the angle
2.3. F–D characteristics of net out-of-plane loading between the spring axis and the horizontal plane and F is the contact
force between the thrust device and net panel. The 1/4 symmetrical
The loading F–D results were obtained through sensor collection. part of the membrane with the same boundary could also be regarded
The ultimate force and displacement are shown in Table 1 and the F– as the above-mentioned equivalent spring, and had the same force
D curves appear in Fig. 4. The horizontal plane where the shackles’ balance equations as Eqs. (1) and (2). Equivalence could thus be
connection points were located was taken as the displacement zero ele- achieved when the membrane and net panel had the same out-of-plane
vation of the F–D curves. According to the results, it was clear that with loading stiffness as shown in Eq. (3):
the increase in number of wire wingdings, the nets’ ultimate resistance
capacity and stiffness increased, while their ultimate displacement ∑
6
𝑘mem = 4𝑘(𝜃) sin 𝜃 = 8 𝑘𝑖 sin 𝜃 (3)
decreased. The nets eventually reached their ultimate capacity when 𝑖=1
the nets’ region contacting the edge of thrust device broke. The F–
where 𝑘mem is the out-of-plane loading stiffness of the equivalent mem-
D curves had three characteristic stages (Fig. 4a). Stage I was the
brane and 𝑘i is the stiffness of each tension path in the net panel
horizontal relaxation section, which was approximately a horizontal (Fig. 5).
straight line caused by the ring nets’ initial sliding relaxation. Stage II The following force transmission assumptions were made for the
was the nonlinear stiffness section, which was a concave curve caused equivalent membrane: the tensile force was directly transmitted to
by the sliding between the rings and the rings’ bending deformation; at the shortest path (vertical boundary direction) during the out-of-plane
this stage, net stiffness significantly increased. Stage III was the linear loading, ignoring the corner area’s stiffness contribution. A numerical
hardening section, which was approximately an oblique straight line. calculation test also showed that the corner stress level was very low
At this stage, the wire-rings entered the dominant stage of axial tension, (Fig. 6 right). The membrane was then divided into three parts for
showing greater overall stiffness. analysis (Fig. 6 left). Part I was a low-stress zone and its stiffness contri-
bution was disregarded, part II was a unidirectional uniform stretching
2.4. Mechanical model zone, and part III was a biaxially uniform stretching zone. As such,
the mechanical model of the membrane out-of-plane loading could be
The net panel had four symmetrical boundaries in the experiment, simplified into a model of orthogonal tension belts. The four tension
and each net boundary formed 12 tension paths (Fig. 5). Due to belts in part II were the above-mentioned four equivalent springs. Then,
symmetry, half of the paths (six tension paths) were analysed. The the problem was simplified to determine the stiffness k(𝜃) of those four
tension paths on each boundary were regarded as 12 nonlinear springs, springs, as meant to determine the membrane material parameters and
and these parallel springs were equivalent to a nonlinear spring with equivalent thickness.

3
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 4. Out-of-plane loading F–D curves of ring nets: (a) R5/3/300 F–D curves; (b) R7/3/300 F–D curves; (c) R9/3/300 F–D curves; (d) R12/3/300 F–D curves; (e) R16/3/300
F–D curves; (f) R19/3/300 F–D curves.

Fig. 5. Equivalent mechanical model of net panel.

belts, rendering the essence of the equivalent model to determine

Fig. 6. Regional division of equivalent membrane and its orthogonal tension belts.
3. Membrane equivalent model
3.1. Analytical model
As outlined in Section 2.4, the equivalent membrane’s mechani-
cal analysis was simplified to an analysis of the orthogonal tension
the membrane’s material parameters. Different from actual orthotropic
membrane materials [24,25], the equivalent membrane material in this
study was an isotropic material, which is a virtual material that does
not exist in the real world. To obtain the membrane material param-
eters, the analytical model was established based on the assumption
of the orthogonal tension belts. Assuming that the tension belt at any
time during the loading process was composed of two straight segments
and a circular arc (Fig. 7), the displacement of the thrust device at the
corresponding time was D, and the vertical contact force between the
thrust device and the membrane F. The length of the tension belt in
part II was l, the width b (the initial width 𝑏0 was taken as 𝑏0 = 𝑑 = 1
m), the projection height to the vertical plane h, the thickness t and
the angle between the tension belt and horizontal plane 𝜃. The vector
height of the thrust device’s curved surface was ℎ0 = 0.109 m, and the
arc length 𝐿r = 1.032 m. Supposing that the 𝑦-direction of the local
coordinate system was along part II’s tensile direction, the 𝑥-direction
was the width direction of the tensile belt in part II, and the 𝑧-direction
was the membrane thickness direction (Fig. 7).
Analysing the analytical model of the tension belt, the geometric
relationships in the model could be described as:
ℎ + ℎ0 = 𝐷 (4)

4
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Table 2
Equivalent membrane thicknesses of different specifications.
Specification 𝑡0 (mm) Specification 𝑡0 (mm)
R5/3/300 0.42 R12/3/300 1.00
R7/3/300 0.60 R16/3/300 1.33
R9/3/300 0.76 R19/3/300 1.58

mass per unit area of the equivalent membrane was consistent with
the ring nets’ corresponding specifications, and the density 𝜌 was taken
as 7850 kg/m3 . Then, the membrane’s equivalent thickness 𝑡0 was
Fig. 7. Analytical tension belt model. described as:
𝑚
𝑡0 = 𝑛 (15)
𝜌
√
𝑙= 𝑑 2 + ℎ2 (5) where 𝑚n is the mass per unit area of the wire-ring net with n wingdings
𝐷 − ℎ0 of wire per ring. The corresponding equivalent thicknesses of each
sin 𝜃 = √ (6) specification are shown in Table 2.
𝑑 2 + ℎ2
2𝑙 + 𝐿𝑟 − 3𝑑 3.2. MEM constitutive model
𝜀ey = (7)
3𝑑
𝜀ey was the nominal strain in the 𝑦-direction of the tension belt in part Due to the initial relaxation characteristics in the ring net described
II, ignoring the uneven strain distribution, which was obtained from in Section 2.3, the rings would undergo a significant slippage process
the following equation: when subjected to a small load. This feature was reflected in the
√ initial horizontal section of the F –D curve, and this slippage behaviour
2 𝑑 2 + (𝐷 − ℎ0 )2 + 𝐿𝑟
𝜀ey = −1 (8) was irreversible. Then the F –D curve entered the hardening phase.
3𝑑 To reflect these characteristics of the ring net, the initial plasticity
Since there is a certain difference between the nominal and true assumption was introduced when determining the equivalent consti-
strain of the material undergoing large deformation, it was necessary tutive model. And the stress–strain curve of the virtual membrane
to convert the nominal strain into the true strain. The true strain should have the following characteristics: the yield stress was a small
increment d𝜀t at any instant was the displacement increment 𝛥L divided value (tends to zero) and the material entered the initial yield platform
by the current length L [26]: after loading to match the horizontal relaxation section of the F–D
𝛥𝐿 𝑑𝐿 curve, then entered the hardening stage. Based on the analytical model
𝑑𝜀t = lim = (9)
𝛥𝐿→0 𝐿 𝐿 described in Section 3.1, the expression of the true strain 𝜀ty is Eq.
Supposing the original length of the material was 𝐿0 , the final (11). Since the virtual material yielded at the beginning of loading and
length was 𝐿1 , and the length had intermediate values 𝐿01 , 𝐿02 , 𝐿03 the deformation was mainly plastic during the whole loading process,
𝐿n−1 , 𝐿n , so the strain increment in the whole process was integrated so it can be approximated that the deformation did not cause volume
to obtain the true strain: change [27]:
𝐿1 𝐿 𝐿 + (𝐿1 − 𝐿0 )
𝑑𝐿 𝜃 = 𝜀x + 𝜀y + 𝜀z = 0 (16)
𝜀t = = ln 1 = ln 0 = ln(1 + 𝜀e ) (10)
∫𝐿0 𝐿 𝐿0 𝐿0
where 𝜃 is the volumetric strain, and 𝜀x , 𝜀y and 𝜀z are the normal strains
where 𝜀t and 𝜀e are the true and nominal strain of the material; hereby, in the x-, y- and 𝑧-directions. According to Eqs. (10), (11), (16), 𝜀ex and
the nominal strain in the 𝑦-direction of the tension belt of Eq. (8) could 𝜀ez could be determined as follows:
be converted to the true strain 𝜀ty : √
𝜀ty 1 2 𝑑 2 + (𝐷 − ℎ0 )2 + 𝐿r
√ 𝜀tx = 𝜀tz = − = − ln( ) (17)
2 𝑑 2 + (𝐷 − ℎ0 )2 + 𝐿r 2 2 3𝑑
𝜀ty = ln(1 + 𝜀ey ) = ln( ) (11) √
3𝑑 2 𝑑 2 + (𝐷 − ℎ0 )2 + 𝐿r − 1
𝜀ex = 𝜀ez = ( ) 2 −1 (18)
Similar to Eqs. (1) and (2), the force balance equations of membrane 3𝑑
could be described with: According to Eq. (13), the stress in the tension belt’s 𝑦-direction was
𝐹y = 𝑏𝑡𝜎y = 𝑑(1 + 𝜀ex )𝑡0 (1 + 𝜀ez )𝜎y (12) given as:
𝐹y 𝐹
𝐹 = 4𝐹y sin 𝜃 = 4𝑑𝑡0 (1 + 𝜀ex )(1 + 𝜀ez )𝜎y sin 𝜃 (13) 𝜎y = = (19)
𝑏𝑡 4 sin 𝜃d(1 + 𝜀ex )t0 (1 + 𝜀ez )
where 𝐹y is the tension force of the tension belt in part II, and 𝜎y , In Eq. (19), 𝜀ex and 𝜀ez are both functions of D per Eq. (18). Substituting
𝜀ex and 𝜀ez are the tension belt’s 𝑦-direction stress, the 𝑥-direction and several data points from the experimental F–D curves into Eqs. (11) and
the 𝑧-direction nominal strain, respectively. The determination of 𝜀ex (19), the stress–strain data points of the equivalent membrane were
and 𝜀ez in Eq. (13) was relative to the type of constitutive model used. obtained. The obtained stress–strain data points were fitted with an
According to Eqs. (11) and (13), if F, D and the constitutive model are exponential function curve (Fig. 8), and the equivalent membrane’s
known, the corresponding 𝜎y and 𝜀ty , that is, the membrane’s stress– exponential hardening constitutive model corresponding to n could be
strain curve can be obtained. Similarly, if the type of constitutive model described with:
and the stress–strain curve are known, the F–D curve can be obtained: [ ]
𝜎 = 𝑀 exp(𝑁𝜀) − 1 (20)
𝜀ty = 𝑓 (𝐷) (14a)
𝑀 = 0.1124 + (𝑛 − 5) × 0.105 (21)
𝑁 = 31.85 − (𝑛 − 5) × 0.139 (22)
𝜎y = 𝑔(𝐹 ) (14b)
where 𝜎 and 𝜀 are the stress and strain of the equivalent membrane,
In addition, to determine the membrane’s equivalent thickness, M and N are variables related only to the number of wire-ring net
following the principle of consistent quality in dynamic analysis, the wingdings n and e is the natural constant.

5
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 8. Exponential hardening constitutive model of membrane by curve fitting.

Fig. 10. Young’s modulus and failure strain corresponding to n calculated via analytical
It is worth noting that although a fully plastic model can reproduce method.
the loading behaviour, it cannot reflect the rebound process of the mesh
to the rockfall. Therefore, the Young’s modulus of the material model
needs to be defined. Although the constitutive model in this paper
defined the yield stress as an infinitesimal, the stress–strain curves
had significant hardening characteristics, there would be some elastic
strain development in the hardening stage if the Young’s modulus was
defined. For the virtual membrane material with a yield stress of an
infinitesimal, it could be understood as having a very small virtual
elastic stage (Fig. 9) and the slope of the virtual elastic stage was the
Young’s modulus, which determined the slope of the unloading path
and the proportion of elastic strain. The unloading paths in Fig. 9 show
the effect of the Young’s modulus on elastic strain. When the Young’s
modulus increased (𝐸e2 > 𝐸e1 ), the elastic strain decreased (𝜀e2 < 𝜀e1),
and the rebound height of rockfall decreased. Therefore, the larger
the Young’s modulus, the closer the exponential hardening model is to
full plasticity. To consider the rebound characteristics of the mesh, the Fig. 11. Loading surfaces of the material model.
minimum value of the Young’s modulus, that is, the maximum value
of the tangent modulus in the corresponding stress–strain curve, was
taken. The rationality validation of the Young’s modulus values will be the failure strain 𝜀𝑓 corresponding to n and the calculation equation
described in detail in Section 5.1.2.
of the failure strain was obtained via linear fitting (Fig. 10). The final
According to the above-mentioned initial value method of the
values of the failure strain were calibrated by the numerical models,
Young’s modulus, the calculated values of Young’s modulus correspond-
and the Young’s modulus changed accordingly.
ing to n had little difference, and the average value of 11 000 MPa
was considered the unified value (Fig. 10). Poisson’s ratio was 0.3, the Although one-dimensional stress–strain relationship was used, based
abscissa of the failure points on the stress–strain curves was taken as on the assumption of uniaxial stretching of the membrane tension belts

Fig. 9. Influence of Young modulus on rebound using exponential hardening model.

6
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 12. Numerical model of membrane under out-of-plane loading.

in Section 2.4, it was approximately considered that the uniaxial stress–

strain relationship could be applied for 2D elements, which brought the
errors discussed in Section 4.2.2. And the simple uniaxial stress–strain
relationship would be more suitable for engineering design. The mate-
rial of 2D elements followed the associated flow rule (Formula (23)),
the plastic potential function was consistent with the yield function,
and the Von-Mises yield function (formula (24)) was used. Since plane
elements were used, it could be further simplified to a 2D situation
(formula (25)). The initial yield surface was a point (Fig. 11) since the
yield stress was defined as an infinitesimal. The plastic deformation
took place once load applied, isotropic hardening occurred, and the
material reached the subsequent yield surfaces. As the stress continued
to increase, it eventually reached the failure surface. The stress state on
failure surface could be transformed to Von-Mises stress, then failure
plastic strain could be obtained by Formula (27b). The failure criterion
was the maximum plastic strain criterion, which meant the material
failed when it reached the set plastic strain threshold.
𝜕𝑓
d𝜀𝑝𝑖𝑗 = d𝜆 (23)
𝜕𝜎𝑖𝑗
where d𝜀𝑝𝑖𝑗 is the plastic-strain-increment vector, d𝜆 is a scaler harden- Fig. 13. Young’s modulus and failure strain corresponding to n calibrated via numerical
ing parameter, and 𝜕𝑓 ∕𝜕𝜎𝑖𝑗 is the gradient of the potential surface. model.

1[ ] 1 2
𝑓 = 𝑓0 − 𝑘2 (𝜀p ) = (𝜎1 − 𝜎2 )2 + (𝜎2 − 𝜎3 )2 + (𝜎1 − 𝜎3 )2 − 𝜎v−m =0
6 3
(24) model of the equivalent membrane under out-of-plane loading is shown
1[ ] 1 2 in Fig. 12. The exponential hardening constitutive model described in
2 2 2
𝑓= (𝜎1 − 𝜎2 ) + 𝜎1 + 𝜎2 − 𝜎v−m = 0 (25) Section 3.2 was adopted for the membrane material, and the stress–
6 3
strain curves (Eq. (20)) corresponding to n were the numerical model’s
where f is the yield surface function, 𝑓0 is the second invariant of
input, the yield stress 0.01 MPa was adopted. Poisson’s ratio was
deviatoric stress tensor, 𝑘2 (𝜀p ) is a hardening function of plastic strain,
0.3, and the initial value of Young’s modulus was 11 000 MPa, per
𝜎v−m is the Von-Mises stress which can be defined as the function
Section 3.2. The equivalent thickness of the membrane is shown in
of plastic strain in the software, and 𝜎1 , 𝜎2 , 𝜎3 is the three principal
Table 2, and the mesh size was 25 mm × 25 mm. The initial input
stresses.
values of failure strain referred to Fig. 10. The appropriate failure strain
4. Numerical model and parameter calibration values in the numerical model were corrected by ultimate forces from
the experiments. See the parameters calibration in the next section for
4.1. Numerical model details.

The purpose of the MEM was to realize the macroscopic mechanical 4.2. Parameters calibration via numerical models
behaviour equivalence of the wire-ring nets in numerical simulations,
and greatly improve their computational efficiency. This study’s solu- 4.2.1. Parameters calibration
tions were based on the explicit transient nonlinear dynamic analysis The values of the failure strain in the numerical model were cali-
software LS-DYNA. The most commonly used mesh shapes in numerical brated and determined by controlling the relative errors between the
models are triangular and quadrilateral [28], though only quadrilateral ultimate forces of the membrane and experimental results within 10%.
meshes were used in this paper. The most commonly used Belytschko– Values of Young’s modulus were taken as the tangent modulus of the
Lin–Tsay [29,30] single-point integrated shell elements in LS-DYNA corresponding stress–strain curves at the calibrated failure points. The
were applied in this study’s MEM numerical model. Although the calibrated Young’s modulus E, failure strain 𝜀𝑓 and failure plastic strain
bending and shear stiffness of the shell elements were considered theo- 𝜀𝑝𝑓 were calculated as follows, and the curves fitting the corresponding
retically, the thickness of the thin shell was 0.42∼1.58 mm, which was equations are shown in Fig. 13:
three to four orders of magnitude different from the plane size, so the 𝐸 = −99.5𝑛 + 11911 (MPa) (26)
contribution of bending and shear stiffness was negligible. The nodes
around the membrane were also hinged, and the thrust device was
given a uniform rigid body displacement boundary in the numerical 𝜀𝑓 = 0.0006𝑛2 − 0.0187𝑛 + 0.3286 (27a)
model. The contact between the membrane and thrust device was a [ ]
surface-to-surface contact using the penalty function and Coulomb- 𝜎 𝑀 exp(𝑁𝜀𝑓 ) − 1
𝜀𝑝𝑓 = 𝜀𝑓 − = 𝜀𝑓 − (27b)
friction model, and the friction coefficient was 0.4. The numerical 𝐸 𝐸

7
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 14. Comparison of simulated and test results: (a) R5/3/300-net; (b) R7/3/300-net; (c) R9/3/300-net; (d) R12/3/300-net; (e) R16/3/300-net; (f) R19/3/300-net.

Fig. 15. Membrane shapes and stress distribution: (a) 𝐷 = 400 mm; (b) 𝐷 = 700 mm; (c) 𝐷 = 1080 mm.

Fig. 16. Plastic strain distribution of out-of-plane loading models: (a) R5/3/300; (b) R7/3/300; (c) R9/3/300; (d) R12/3/300; (e) R16/3/300; (f) R19/3/300;.

4.2.2. Simulation results model was also established using the equivalent area method [16], and
The material parameters were put into the numerical model to the loading curves of the two methods were compared with the test
obtain the loading F–D curves using the MEM model; the circular beam curves (Fig. 14). The area enclosed by the curve and the horizontal axis

8
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Table 3
Relative error contrast between the MEM model and circular beam model (CBMa ).
R5/3/300 R7/3/300 R9/3/300 R12/3/300 R16/3/300 R19/3/300
MEM CBM MEM CBM MEM CBM MEM CBM MEM CBM MEM CBM
Displacement error 6.6% 4.8% 5% 4.7% 6.6% 4.2% 2.3% 2.2% 6.6% 5.8% 1.6% 4.9%
Force error 6.9% 3.2% 1.9% 4.6% 6.9% 3.9% 2.3% 3.2% 6.9% 4.6% 6.9% 5.6%
Energy error 3.7% 9.5% 1.3% 6.7% 3.7% 7.9% 3.3% 9.6% 3.7% 9.1% 8.8% 8.8%
a CBM: abbreviation of the circular beam model to simulate the steel wire-ring nets’ mechanical behaviour.

was the ultimate energy consumption capacity of the corresponding Table 4

net. Table 3 shows the relative errors of the simulated ultimate force,
displacement and energy dissipation capacity compared to the exper-
imental results. In a comprehensive comparison, the loading curves
simulated by the circular beam model fit the experimental curves bet-
ter, but they brought higher computational consumption. The loading
curves obtained via the MEM also reproduced the three characteristic
stages of the loading process’s initial relaxation, nonlinear stiffness and
linear hardening sections. The results showed that the MEM can effec-
tively reproduce ring nets’ macroscopic mechanical behaviour under
out-of-plane loading, without compromising computational accuracy.
It should be noted that the ultimate displacement obtained by the
MEM was slightly smaller than that of the experimental result, because
the stiffness contribution of the membrane corner was disregarded
in the analytical model and the one-dimensional stress–strain curves
derived, meaning that the stress–strain curves were stiffer than the
ideal relationship. When these derived stress–strain curves were in-
put the numerical model using 2D elements, the contribution of the
membrane’s corner stiffness was reflected, resulting in 2D stress state.
Taking the simulated results of the equivalent membrane corresponding
to the R5/3/300 net as an example, the simulated results to illustrate
the shape change and stress distribution during the loading process are
shown in Fig. 15. The corner wrinkling of the square membrane [31,32]
can be observed in Fig. 15a, and the stress distribution shows that
its corner stress level is very low, indicating that it is reasonable
to ignore the corner effect of part I in the analytical model, and a
one-dimensional stress–strain relationship is acceptable. The orthog-
onal tensile-belt-effect was significant in both stress distribution and
plastic strain distribution (Fig. 16), and the failure position of the
membrane occurred at the edge of the thrust device (Fig. 15c), which
was consistent with the experimental results.
4.2.3. Sensitivity analysis of mesh size
In the above numerical models, the mesh size was 25 mm × 25 mm.
To prove the stabilization of the model response with finer mesh, the
sensitivity analysis of mesh size was carried out for R5/3/300 ring
net as an example. Using mesh sizes from 50 mm to 1.5625 mm, the
thrust device was applied to load the peripherally hinged 3 m × 3 m
membrane at a uniform speed of 100 mm/s. The shell thickness was
0.42 mm, the stress–strain curve was input per Formula (20), and the
Young’s modulus was 11 414 MPa per Formula (26). The Poisson’s ratio
was 0.3, and the failure plastic strain was 0.222 per Formula (27b).
The F -D curves of different mesh sizes were obtained and compared
with the test result. As shown in Fig. 17, when the mesh size reduced,
the ultimate force increased, and the responses of the model tended to
be stable when the meshes less than 12.5 mm were used. The meshes
not more than 12.5 mm should have been used according to this law,
but it causes more computational resources when using small meshes.
And the net panel’s impact responses were compared and validated for
both 25 mm and 12.5 mm meshes in Section 5.1. The plastic strain
distributions at failure are shown in Fig. 18, which illustrates that the
strain develops a little more adequately in small mesh size situation.
Input membrane parameters in equivalent numerical model.
E (MPa) 𝜈 𝜀𝑝𝑓 Stress–strain curve 𝑡0 (mm) Timestep (s)
11 214 0.3 0.191 Eq. (23) 0.6 1 × 10−5
5. Mem validation
5.1. Validation via a net panel impact experiment
5.1.1. Stiffness validation
Steel wire-ring nets are used for rockfall protection, requiring the
MEM to be validated under impact loads. Grassl et al. [23] carried out
an impact test with a ring net panel under a rigid boundary. The net
panel size was 3.9 m × 3.9 m, and the edges of the net were fixed on
a steel frame with high rigidity. The impact test block was a sphere
with a diameter of 0.88 m, a mass of 830 kg and an impact energy
of 45 kJ. The block’s time history curves of displacement, velocity and
acceleration during the impact process were obtained via high-speed
camera and an acceleration sensor fixed on the block.
The circular beam and MEM models corresponding to the net im-
pact test were each established. The circular beam model’s simulation
method was the equivalent area method [16]. The stress–strain curve
of the softened Young’s modulus was adopted. The general self-contact
was also utilized between the rings’ contact interfaces in the model,
and each ring was divided into 16 beam elements. In the MEM model,
the exponential hardening constitutive model described in Section 3.2
was adopted for the membrane material. The specific input stress–
strain curve referred to Eq. (20), Young’s modulus and the failure
plastic strain to Eqs. (26) and (27b). The 25 mm and 12.5 mm meshes
were used in the MEM model and the specific input parameters of the
numerical model are shown in Table 4.
Fig. 19 features the shapes of the net and membrane, respectively
in the circular beam and MEM models (25 mm mesh) under impact.
At t = 0.06 s, there was a slight difference between the shape of
the membrane and the net due to the latter’s slightly larger initial
relaxation. In addition, there was a stress wave effect at the initial
moment of impact (Fig. 19a). The area directly impacted deformed
rapidly, and the displacement of the remaining area lagged behind due
to inertial action. At t = 0.1 s, the net and membrane began to grow
taut, their stiffness developed rapidly and the deformation patterns
of both were consistent. At t = 0.15 s, the block reached the lowest
point, the membrane’s tensile belt effect was significant and the ring
net’s elements tended to be orthogonal. Fig. 20 shows the plastic strain
distribution for 25 mm and 12.5 mm mesh models. Fig. 21 compares
the block motion parameters obtained from the simulation and test
results in Grassl et al. [23], which tell that the numerical models
established by the MEM can accurately reproduce the block’s motion
characteristics both for 25 mm and 12.5 mm meshes. The peak relative
error of acceleration value was 4.3% and 3.3%, for 25 mm mesh
and 12.5 mm mesh respectively, and the 25 mm mesh was adopted
considering its higher computational efficiency. It should be noted that
the block’s rebound height and velocity were overestimated by using
the circular beam model in Fig. 21, indicating that the net’s energy
consumption and elastic energy storage ratio in the impact process were
unreasonable, so the MEM model has some advantages in this regard.

9
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 17. Sensitivity analysis of mesh size: (a) F –D curves; (b) Ultimate forces and displacements of different mesh sizes.

Fig. 18. Plastic strain distribution at failure with different mesh sizes: (a) 50 mm mesh; (b) 25 mm mesh; (c) 12.5 mm mesh; (d) 6.25 mm mesh; (e) 3.125 mm mesh; (f)
1.5625 mm mesh.

Fig. 19. Shapes and stress distribution of membrane and net: (a) t = 0.06 s; (b) t = 0.1 s; (c) t = 0.15 s.

10
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 20. Plastic strain distribution of R7-net 45 kJ impact model: (a) 25 mm mesh model; (b) 12.5 mm mesh model.

Fig. 21. Comparison of block motion characteristics (test result from [23]): (a) comparison of block displacement history; (b) comparison of block velocity history; (c) comparison
of block acceleration history.

Fig. 22. Ring net impact test configuration.

5.1.2. Rebound validation
Although the yield stress was an infinitesimal, according to the
description in Section 3.2, the value of the Young’s modulus in the ex-
ponential hardening constitutive model was important for the rebound
characteristics of the ring net. To verify the rationality of the Young’s
modulus in the MEM constitutive model, the sensitivity analysis of
rockfall rebound to Young’s modulus was carried out based on the
exponential hardening constitutive model, and the impact test was
carried out with R12/3/300 net as an example to verify the rationality
of Young’s modulus in MEM. As shown in Fig. 22, the net impact
test frame was a steel frame with large stiffness, and the column
spacing was 4.5 m. The 3.9 m × 3.9 m ring net was connected to
the frame beams through shackles, and it was impacted by a sphere
with a diameter of 0.8 m, a weight of 760 kg, and an impact energy
of 81 kJ. Through the high-speed camera (FastCAM Mini UX50) with
the sampling frequency of 1000 fps, the vertical displacement–time
history curve of the impactor was obtained. Based on the exponential
hardening constitutive model with a yield stress of an infinitesimal,
when the Young’s modulus was 1.07 × 104 MPa, 2 × 104 MPa and
4 × 104 MPa, the impactor’s vertical displacement–time history curve
was obtained by MEM simulations under the same working conditions,
and was compared to the test results (Fig. 23). It can be seen that for
the equivalent membrane using the exponential hardening constitutive
model, when the Young’s modulus increased, the rebound height of the
impactor decreased. When the Young’s modulus 𝐸 = 1.07 × 104 MPa,
the rebound height of the impactor was 2.04 m closest to the test
rebound height of 2.25 m, with a relative error of 9.3%. If a closer
rebound height was wanted, the Young’s modulus should be further

11
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al.
Fig. 23. Sensitivity analysis of rebound height to E based on MEM constitutive model.
Table 5
Brake rings layout in the experiment model.
Position Series connection Parallel connection
(amount) (amount)
Upslope rope 1 2
Upper major support rope 4 0
Upper minor support rope 3 0
Lower major support rope 4 0
Lower minor support rope 3 0
Edge support rope 2 0
reduced. However, it is worth noting that the Young’s modulus is cal-
culated by Formula (26), which is the maximum tangent modulus of the
corresponding stress–strain curve, that is, the minimum possible value
of Young’s modulus. So the Young’s modulus values by Formula (26)
are reasonable and can effectively consider the rebound characteristics
of the ring net to rockfall. The maximum plastic strain distributions are
shown in Fig. 24 for the above models.
5.2. Validation via a 3000 kJ full-scale impact experiment
5.2.1. Overview of experimental and numerical models
To study the impact mechanical behaviour of a flexible rockfall
barrier under high energy impact, a 3000 kJ full-scale impact exper-
iment was carried out at the Protection Structure Research Center of
Southwest Jiaotong University. The experimental model was a three-
span flexible rockfall barrier, with each span 10 m, a post height of
6.6 m and the impact position located in the middle of the second
span. An 8.9-t polyhedron impact block was used, which was released
freely by a tower crane at a height of 33.7 m away from the inter-
ception R19/3/300 net. The flexible rockfall barrier was assembled on
the concrete reaction wall, whose structural layout and components
specifications are shown in Fig. 25. The layout and quantities of brake
rings on different support ropes are shown in Table 5. The activation
force of the brake rings was more than 50 kN, with a working tension of
50–80kN, and the ultimate elongation was more than 1 m. A high-speed
camera (FastCAM Mini UX50) was used to record the block’s falling
process at a sampling rate of 1000 fps. After the experiment, the block’s
trajectory was captured and analysed through the motion analysis
software ProAnalyst; the block’s acceleration time history curve was
thus obtained, allowing calculation of the impact process’s F–D curve.
The circular beam and MEM models of the flexible rockfall barrier
were established; their calculation conditions and component specifi-
cations were consistent with the experiment conditions. The method
used in the circular beam model was the equivalent area method [16].
12
Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227
A general self-contact was applied between the contact interfaces of
the rings, and each ring was divided into 64 beam elements. In the
MEM model, a flexible boundary was used for the membrane, which
is consistent with the real structural boundary. Fig. 26 displays the
guided-sliding contact between the edge nodes of the membrane and
cable elements (Guided Cable Contact in LS-DYNA). The shell element
nodes on the boundary could slide freely along the ropes with friction
consideration to reflect the boundary condition of the flexible barrier.
The membrane, with a thickness of 1.58 mm, was applied according to
Table 2, and the 25 mm × 25 mm mesh membrane size was prescribed
in the MEM model. The specific input parameters of the model are
shown in Table 6.
5.2.2. Analysis of experimental and simulated results
Fig. 27 features a comparison of the barrier shock states under the
maximum impact force obtained by the above two simulation methods
and the experimental results. The barrier’s deformation pattern at the
moment of maximum impact force demonstrates that the system shape
obtained by the circular beam model was closer to the experiment re-
sult. At the moment when the block’s lowest point reached the midpoint
elevation of the posts at 𝑡 = 0 s, the time to reach the maximum force
in the experiment was 0.506 s, and the corresponding moments in the
circular beam and MEM models were 0.432 s and 0.485 s, respectively,
indicating that the MEM’s calculation result was closer to the experi-
mental value. The simulation method used in the circular beam model
was also an equivalent method by correcting Young’s modulus and the
cross-section area of the rings in the numerical model to match the test
results. Therefore, the circular beam model’s macroscopic simulation
results were not necessarily more accurate than that of the MEM model
proposed in this paper. From the local deformation characteristics of
the net near the impact area (Fig. 27 left), both the experimental and
circular beam models had the phenomenon of rings converging to the
middle, while the MEM model had a similar phenomenon of membrane
wrinkling. These reflect the nets’ great slippage along the ropes under
the flexible sliding boundary. The appearance of wrinkling in the MEM
model also demonstrates the validity of the equivalent boundary in the
model. Fig. 28 shows the maximum plastic strain distribution and it
reflects the shortest force transferring path for the flexible barrier.
Fig. 29 shows the impact F–D responses of the barrier obtained
though numerical simulation and experimentation. The maximum im-
pact displacement and impact force in the experiment were 9.87 m
and 955 kN, respectively. The simulation results of the MEM model
were 8.85 m and 1029 kN. These simulation results could reflect the
development trend of the barrier’s impact force, as the relative errors
were 10.3% and 7.7%, respectively. Fig. 30 demonstrates the internal
energy time history of the components in the circular beam and MEM
models. The energy consumption contribution of the components and
interfaces sliding to the system are consistent in the two numerical
models. The reason why the sliding energy consumption in the MEM
model is smaller than that in the CBM model is that the sliding
between the rings was disregarded after the ring net was simplified to
a continuum. As a whole, the MEM numerical model can reproduce the
macroscopic impact responses of a flexible rockfall barrier.
5.3. Computational efficiency
The steel wire-ring nets MEM model was proposed to solve the
problem of the circular beam model’s low computational efficiency. In
this regard, the calculation time of the circular beam and MEM models
with the flexible barrier mentioned in Section 5.2 were compared.
Table 7 shows that the MEM model can greatly improve wire-ring
nets’ computational efficiency at a structural scale, and this model’s
computational speed increased 10.8 times with the same number of
nodes. With the increase of the wire-ring nets’ calculation scale, the
computing resources consumed by the self-contact in the nets may
increase significantly, and the advantage of the MEM model may be
more obvious for flexible barriers with large-area wire-ring nets, such
as the flexible drapery system.
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 24. Maximum plastic strain distribution of R12-net 81 kJ impact model: (a) 𝐸 = 1.07 × 104 MPa; (b) E = 2 × 104 MPa; (c) 𝐸 = 4 × 104 MPa.

Fig. 25. Components layout in experimental model.

Fig. 26. MEM numerical model and contact boundary of membrane.

Table 6
Input parameters in the MEM numerical model.
E (MPa) 𝜈 𝜀𝑓 Yield stress (MPa) Element type Material model
Exponential hardening
Membrane 10 020 0.3 0.189 0 Shell
(introduced in Section 3.2)
Block 2 × 104 0.28 – – Solid Linear elastic
Post 2.06 × 105 0.3 0.2 345 Beam Ideal elastic–plastic
Cable 1.5 × 105 0.3 – 1770 Cable Linear elastic

Table 7
Contrast of computational efficiency.
MEM model Circular beam model
Net specification Corresponding parameters of R19/3/300 net R19/3/300
Impact energy (kJ) 3000 3000
Nodes amount 320 850 320 212
Computational approach MPP (massively parallel processing) MPP (massively parallel processing)
Termination time (s) 0.8 0.8
Timestep (s) 5.4 × 10–6 5.4 × 10–6
CPU Intel i7 6700k@4.00 GHz Intel i7 6700k@4.00 GHz
Memory applied (G) 16 16
Time consumption 53 m 23 s 9 h 37 m 30 s

13
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al. Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227

Fig. 27. Barrier states at maximum impact force moment: (a) experiment result; (b) simulation result with circular beam element; (c) simulation result with MEM.

Fig. 28. Maximum plastic strain distribution of flexible barrier model using R19-net.

6. Conclusions
This paper proposed a membrane equivalent method (MEM) to
reproduce the impact mechanical behaviour of steel wire-ring nets,
which proved to greatly improve computational efficiency without
compromising calculation accuracy compared to the circular beam
model. Based on the wire-ring nets’ out-of-plane loading experimental
results, the ring nets’ mechanical characteristics were studied, and
an analytical model of the equivalent membrane’s orthogonal tension
belt established. Based on the above analytical model and the F -D
data from the net experiment, the equivalent membrane’s stress–strain
curve was derived and its exponential hardening constitutive model
was constructed. The MEM’s equivalent parameters were determined
by calibrating the parameters in the numerical model of the net under
out-of-plane loading. Under the ring net’s rigid boundary condition,
the net impact experiment responses were used to verify the MEM’s
effectiveness. Under the nets’ flexible sliding boundary condition, a
3000 kJ full-scale impact experiment with a flexible rockfall barrier
was carried out to validate the MEM model. Based on the above
experimentation, the following conclusions can be drawn:
(1) The wire-ring net under out-of-plane loading has an obvious
orthogonalized mechanical characteristic, and the loading F–
D curve has three characteristic stages: a horizontal relaxation
section, nonlinear stiffness section and linear hardening section.
The exponential hardening constitutive model derived from the

14
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al.
Fig. 29. Force versus displacement barrier curves.
Fig. 30. Time history of components internal energy.
experimental F–D curves can accurately reproduce the wire-
ring nets’ macroscopic mechanical behaviour under out-of-plane
loading.
(2) The MEM model’s simulated block displacement, velocity and
acceleration time history curves were consistent with the test
results, and the acceleration peak error was 4.3%. The rebound
characteristics could be also reproduced. The MEM can thus
reproduce the dynamic responses of steel wire-ring nets under
the rigid boundary condition.
(3) Using the 3000 kJ impact numerical model established by the
MEM model, the errors of the simulated maximum impact dis-
placement and impact force compared to the experiment results
were 10.3% and 7.7%, respectively. The MEM can reproduce the
impact responses of wire-ring nets under the flexible boundary
condition. This method can be used in the research of flexible
protection structures’ macroscopic mechanical behaviour and
engineering design.
(4) Between the circular beam and MEM models, with the same
number of elements, the MEM’s computational efficiency can be
increased approximately 10 times without compromising accu-
racy, which greatly improves the research efficiency of flexible
protection structures and reduces research costs. It is also conve-
nient for the design and use of rockfall protection engineering,
since its modelling is simpler and more efficient.
The MEM’s effectiveness provides a simplified means for the simu-
lation of complex mesh structures’ macroscopic mechanical behaviour
15
Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227
under impact. This method can also be applied to complex fabric
meshes, such as rhombic and hexagonal meshes, but it is worth noting
that a corresponding loading test and parameter calibration in the
numerical model are essential.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yuntao Jin: Conceptualization, Project administration, Methodol-
ogy, Software, Validation, Writing – review & editing. Zhixiang Yu:
Conceptualization, Resources, Project administration, Funding acquisi-
tion. Liru Luo: Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation. Liping
Guo: Writing – original draft, Visualization. Lijun Zhang: Supervision.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Founda-
tion of China (Grant Nos. 51408498, 51678504); the National Key R&D
Program of China (Grant No. 2018YFC1505405); and the Science and
Technology Program of Sichuan, China (Grant No. 2018JY0029).
References
[1] X. Qi, H. Xu, Z. Yu, L. Zhao, Q. Meng, Dynamic mechanical property study of
brake rings in flexible protective system, Eng. Mech. 35 (09) (2018) 198–206,
http://dx.doi.org/10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2017.06.0438.
[2] G. Liu, J. Xie, S. Xie, Experimental and numerical investigations of a new U-
shaped thin plate energy absorber subjected to bending and friction, Thin-Walled
Struct. 115 (2017) 215–224, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2017.02.025.
[3] J.P. Escallón, A. von Boetticher, C. Wendeler, E. Chatzi, P. Bartelt, Mechanics of
rhomboid chain-link wire nets with loose connections, Eng. Struct. 101 (2015)
68–87, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.07.005.
[4] Y. Zhao, Z. Yu, S. Zhao, Ring-net subdivision equivalent model of flexible
protection system, J. Southwest Jiaotong Univ. 54 (4) (2019) 809–815, http:
//dx.doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.20170949.
[5] K. Thoeni, A. Giacomini, C. Lambert, S.W. Sloan, J.P. Carter, A 3D discrete
element modelling approach for rockfall analysis with drapery systems, Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 68 (2014) 107–119, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.
2014.02.008.
[6] D. Bertrand, A. Trad, A. Limam, C. Silvani, Full-scale dynamic analysis of an
innovative rockfall fence under impact using the discrete element method: from
the local scale to the structure scale, Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 45 (2012) 885–900,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00603-012-0222-5.
[7] J. Coulibaly, M.-A. Chanut, S. Lambert, F. Nicot, Non-linear discrete mechanical
model of steel rings, J. Eng. Mech. 143 (9) (2017) 04017087, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001303.
[8] A. Effeindzourou, K. Thoeni, A. Giacomini, C. Wendeler, Efficient discrete
modelling of composite structures for rockfall protection, Comput. Geotech. 87
(2017) 99–114, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2017.02.005.
[9] K. Thoeni, C. Lambert, A. Giacomini, S.W. Sloan, Discrete modelling of hexagonal
wire meshes with a stochastically distorted contact model, Comput. Geotech. 49
(2013) 158–169, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.10.014.
[10] S. Miranda, C. Gentilini, G. Gottardi, L. Govoni, A. Mentani, F. Ubertini, Virtual
testing of existing semi-rigid rockfall protection barriers, Eng. Struct. 85 (2015)
83–94, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.12.022.
[11] C. Gentilini, G. Gottardi, L. Govoni, A. Mentani, F. Ubertini, Design of falling
rock protection barriers using numerical models, Eng. Struct. 50 (2013) 96–106,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.07.008.
[12] L. Zhao, J.W. He, Z.X. Yu, Y.P. Liu, Z.H. Zhou, S.L. Chan, Coupled numerical
simulation of a flexible barrier impacted by debris flow with boulders in front,
Landslides 17 (12) (2020) 2723–2736.
[13] F. Nicot, B. Cambou, G. Mazzoleni, From a constitutive modelling of metallic
rings to the design of rockfall restraining nets, Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods
Geomech. 25 (2001) 49–70, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1096-9853(200101)25:
1<49::AID-NAG117>3.0.CO;2-N.
[14] J.S.H. Kwan, S.L. Chan, J.C.Y. Cheuk, R.C.H. Koo, A case study on an open
hillside landslide impacting on a flexible rockfall barrier at Jordan Valley, Hong
Kong, Landslides 11 (6) (2014) 1037–1050, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10346-
013-0461-x.
Y. Jin, Z. Yu, L. Luo et al.
[15] Z. Yu, C. Liu, L. Guo, L. Zhao, S. Zhao, Nonlinear numerical modeling of the
wire-ring net for flexible barriers, Shock Vib. (2019) 1–23, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1155/2019/3040213.
[16] H. Xu, C. Gentilini, Z.X. Yu, X. Qi, S. Zhao, An energy allocation-based
design approach for flexible rockfall protection barriers, Eng. Struct. 173 (2018)
831–852, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.018.
[17] X. Qi, Z.X. Yu, L. Zhao, H. Xu, S.C. Zhao, A new numerical modelling approach
for flexible rockfall protection barriers based on failure modes, Adv. Steel Constr.
14 (3) (2018) 479–495.
[18] L. Guo, Z. Yu, L. Luo, X. Qi, S. Zhao, An analytical method of puncture mechan-
ical behaviour of ring nets based on the load path equivalence, Eng. Mech. 37
(05) (2020) 138–148, http://dx.doi.org/10.6052/j.issn.1000-4750.2019.07.0345.
[19] A. Mentani, L. Govoni, A. Giacomini, G. Gottardi, O. Buzzi, An equivalent
continuum approach to efficiently model the response of steel wire meshes to
rockfall impacts, Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 51 (2018) 2825–2838, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1007/s00603-018-1490-5.
[20] N. Sasiharan, B. Muhunthan, T.C. Badger, S. Shu, D. Carradine, W. Pullman, U.
Washington, Numerical analysis of the performance of wire mesh and cable net
rockfall protection systems, Eng. Geol. 88 (2006) 121–132, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1016/j.enggeo.2006.09.005.
[21] A. Leonardi, F. Wittel, M. Mendoza, R. Vetter, H. Herrmann, Particle–fluid–
structure interaction for debris flow impact on flexible barriers, Comput.-Aided
Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 31 (2014) 323–333, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/mice.12165.
[22] S. Dhakal, N.P. Bhandary, R. Yatabe, N. Kinoshita, Experimental, Numerical and
analytical modelling of a newly developed rockfall protective cable-net structure,
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 11 (12) (2011) 3197–3212, http://dx.doi.org/10.
5194/nhess-11-3197-2011.
16
Thin-Walled Structures 167 (2021) 108227
[23] H. Grassl, A. Volkwein, E. Anderheggen, W.J. Ammann, Steel-net rockfall
protection - experimental and numerical simulation, Struct. Shock Impact VII
63 (2002) 1–11, http://dx.doi.org/10.2495/SU020141.
[24] D. Li, Z. Zheng, Y. Tian, J. Sun, X. He, L. Yan, Stochastic nonlinear vibration
and reliability of orthotropic membrane structure under impact load, Thin-Walled
Struct. 119 (2017) 247–255, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2017.06.008.
[25] J.-C. Thomas, A. Van, An exact solution for inflated orthotropic membrane tubes,
Thin-Walled Struct. 67 (2013) 116–120, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2013.
01.012.
[26] I. Faridmehr, M. Osman, A. Adnan, A. Nejad, R. Hodjati, M. Amin, Correlation
between engineering stress-strain and true stress-strain curve, Amer. J. Civ. Eng.
Archit. 2 (1) (2014) 53–59, http://dx.doi.org/10.12691/ajcea-2-1-6.
[27] H. Chen, Elasticity and Plasticity, China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing,
2004.
[28] B. San, Y. Wu, S. Shen, Comparison of plane and curved elements for the analysis
of membrane structures by finite element method, Eng. Mech. 025 (002) (2008)
168–173.
[29] S. Key, C. Hoff, An improved constant membrane and bending stress shell
element for explicit transient dynamics, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.
124 (1995) 33–47, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(95)00785-Y.
[30] W. Rust, K. Schweizerhof, Finite element limit load analysis of thin-walled
structures by ANSYS (implicit), LS-DYNA (explicit) and in combination,
Thin-Walled Struct. 41 (2) (2003) 227–244, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-
8231(02)00089-7.
[31] B. Li, R. Liu, Q. Cong, H. Guo, Q. Lin, Stress superposition method and free
vibration of corner tensioned rectangular thin membranes, Thin-Walled Struct.
(2020) 107201, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.107201.
[32] Q. Huang, J. Yang, W. Huang, G. Giunta, S. Belouettar, H. Hu, The boundary
effects on stretch-induced membrane wrinkling, Thin-Walled Struct. 154 (2020)
106838, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.106838.