Influence of the Projectileas Length on Interrupted Dynamic Tension Experiment Results

Influence of the Projectileas Length on Interrupted Dynamic Tension Experiment Results

Roberto Alonso Gonzalez Lezcano

Contact

Roberto Alonso Gonzalez Lezcabo

Contact

Jose Manuel del Rio

Contact

Universidad San Pablo CEU

Influence of the Projectileas Length on Interrupted Dynamic Tension Experiment Results

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

8751M

Influence of the Projectileas Length on Interrupted Dynamic Tension Experiment Results Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground

Abstract

The main focus of this work is to discuss the influence of the projectile’s length on the results of a Split Hopkinson Tension Bar (SHTB) experiment. By using the commercial software ABAQUS, finite element simulations of high-strain-rate tension experiments are accomplished on Aluminium 7017-T73 alloy specimens when varying the length of the projectile employed. The finite element analyses described herein are applied to simulate the effects of the variation of the projectile’s length on the measurements obtained in the incident, reflected, and transmission bars. Different strain rates are obtained when varying the projectile’s length always provided that its speed remains constant. The simulation results show that the projectile’s length has a significant effect on the strain obtained in the specimen and also on the subsequent stress-strain curve of the specimen. In view of this research, it can be concluded that the projectile’s length is a factor that can resolutely influence the interrupted dynamic tension experiment results since it has a significant effect on the strain obtained within the specimen. The simulations also provide complementary information to the experiments and an in-depth understanding of the specimen’s behaviour.

References

31 Cites in Article

Reference Format

R González-Lezcano,J Del Río (2015). Numerical analysis of the influence of the damping rings' dimensions on interrupted dynamic tension experiment results.
J Harding,L Welsh (1983). A tensile testing technique for fibre-reinforced composites at impact rates of strain.
U Lindholm,L Yeakley (1968). High strain-rate testing: Tension and compression.
C Albertini,M Montagnani (1976). Wave-propagation effects in dynamic loading.
Theodore Nicholas (1981). Tensile testing of materials at high rates of strain.
G Staab,A Gilat (1991). A direct-tension split Hopkinson bar for high strain-rate testing.
A Thakur,S Nemat-Nasser,K Vecchio (1996). Dynamic Bauschinger effect.
P Verleysen,J Degrieck (2004). Experimental investigation of the deformation of Hopkinson bar specimens.
G Gray (2000). Classic Split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar Testing.
Bazle Gama,Sergey Lopatnikov,John Gillespie (2004). Hopkinson bar experimental technique: A critical review.
Robert Gerlach,Christian Kettenbeil,Nik Petrinic (2012). A new split Hopkinson tensile bar design.
H Kolsky (1949). An Investigation of the Mechanical Properties of Materials at very High Rates of Loading.
T Rio,E Barbero,R Zaera (2008). Dynamic tensile behaviour at low temperature of CFRP using a split 14.
A Hamouda,M Hashmi (1998). Testing of composite materials at high rates of strain: advances and challenges.
M Khlif,N Masmoudi,C Bradai (2012). Polypropylene tensile test under quasi-static and dynamic loading.
P Verleysen,J Degrieck,T Verstraete,J Van Slycken (2009). Influence of Specimen Geometry on Split Hopkinson Tensile Bar Tests on Sheet Materials.
M Kaiser (1998). [Investigations in dynamics of gauge theories in theoretical particle physics]. [Virginia Polytechnic Institute State Univ. , Blacksburg].
S Swantek,A Wicks,Wilson (2001). An optical methodof strain measurement in the split Hopkinson pressurebar.
M Pe´rez-Martı´n,B Erice,F Galvez (2014). On the loadingratedependence of the Al 7017-T73 fractureinitiationtoughness.
J Rodriguezperez (2002). Analisis y desarrollo de metodologías para la obtención de propiedades mecanicas de materialesa altas velocidades de deformación y a alta temperatura.
A Resnyansky (2000). Study of influence of loading method onresults of the split Hopkinson bar test.
X Yang,X Xiong,Z Yin,H Wang,J Wang,D Chen (2014). Interrupted Test of Advanced High Strength Steel with Tensile Split Hopkinson Bar Method.
S Nemat-Nasser,J Isaacs,J Starrett (1991). Hopkinson techniques for dynamic recovery experiments.
Ma Dongfang,Chen Danian,Wu Shanxing,Wang Huanran,Hou Yanjun,Cai Canyuan (2010). An interrupted tensile testing at high strain rates for pure copper bars.
Y El-Saeid Essa,J López-Puente,J Pérez-Castellanos (2007). Numerical simulation and experimental study of a mechanism for Hopkinson bar test interruption.
R Lezcano,Essa Yes,J Perez-Castellanos (2003). (US) Influence of the Projectile's Length on Interrupted Dynamic Tension Experiment Results values concentrate in such portion and therefore it Hopkinson pressure bar. ComposSciTechnol 2005; 65(1.
Louis Sytsma (2013). ASTM standards on environmental sampling, 2nd ed. ASTM (American Society For Testing and Materials), ASTM, west Conshohocken, PA, (1997), 1010 Pages, [ISBN No.:0‐8031‐1835‐X], U.S. List Price: $99.00.
X Wu,D Gorham (1997). Stress Equilibrium in the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Test.
Fengchun Jiang,Kenneth Vecchio (2009). Hopkinson Bar Loaded Fracture Experimental Technique: A Critical Review of Dynamic Fracture Toughness Tests.
(1999). ABAQUS (version 5.8).
S Godunov,E Romenskii (2003). Elements of continuummechanics and conservation laws.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Roberto Alonso Gonzalez Lezcano. 2016. \u201cInfluence of the Projectileas Length on Interrupted Dynamic Tension Experiment Results\u201d. Global Journal of Research in Engineering - E: Civil & Structural GJRE-E Volume 15 (GJRE Volume 15 Issue E4): .

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

Download Article

GJRE Volume 15 Issue E4
Pg. 17- 24

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/gjre

Print ISSN 0975-5861

e-ISSN 2249-4596

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

GJRE-E Classification: FOR Code: 090599

Submission ReceivedJune 14, 2015
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted July 3, 2015
Published July 15, 2015

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

January 6, 2016

Language

Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 102

Country: Spain

Subject: Global Journal of Research in Engineering - E: Civil & Structural

Authors: Roberto Alonso Gonzalez Lezcabo, Jose Manuel del Rio (PhD/Dr. count: 0)

View Count (all-time): 209

Total Views (Real + Logic): 4064

Total Downloads (simulated): 1905

Publish Date: 2016 01, Wed

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 56 views
Month 2: 34 views
Month 3: 30 views
Month 4: 42 views
Month 5: 26 views
Month 6: 30 views
Month 7: 41 views
Month 8: 42 views
Month 9: 43 views
Month 10: 33 views
Month 11: 46 views
Month 12: 33 views
Month 13: 35 views
Month 14: 31 views
Month 15: 26 views
Month 16: 28 views
Month 17: 14 views
Month 18: 19 views
Month 19: 26 views
Month 20: 31 views
Month 21: 23 views
Month 22: 38 views
Month 23: 38 views
Month 24: 41 views
Month 25: 29 views
Month 26: 46 views
Month 27: 34 views
Month 28: 24 views
Month 29: 48 views
Month 30: 40 views
Month 31: 30 views
Month 32: 17 views
Month 33: 19 views
Month 34: 29 views
Month 35: 22 views
Month 36: 32 views
Month 37: 40 views
Month 38: 32 views
Month 39: 41 views
Month 40: 21 views
Month 41: 22 views
Month 42: 33 views
Month 43: 41 views
Month 44: 47 views
Month 45: 28 views
Month 46: 35 views
Month 47: 44 views
Month 48: 25 views
Month 49: 28 views
Month 50: 42 views
Month 51: 25 views
Month 52: 29 views
Month 53: 48 views
Month 54: 19 views
Month 55: 42 views
Month 56: 46 views
Month 57: 29 views
Month 58: 16 views
Month 59: 30 views
Month 60: 25 views
Month 61: 24 views
Month 62: 26 views
Month 63: 31 views
Month 64: 16 views
Month 65: 29 views
Month 66: 21 views
Month 67: 14 views
Month 68: 22 views
Month 69: 49 views
Month 70: 23 views
Month 71: 21 views
Month 72: 25 views
Month 73: 22 views
Month 74: 39 views
Month 75: 32 views
Month 76: 41 views
Month 77: 26 views
Month 78: 31 views
Month 79: 31 views
Month 80: 31 views
Month 81: 25 views
Month 82: 34 views
Month 83: 21 views
Month 84: 20 views
Month 85: 20 views
Month 86: 39 views
Month 87: 21 views
Month 88: 46 views
Month 89: 36 views
Month 90: 13 views
Month 91: 26 views
Month 92: 33 views
Month 93: 27 views
Month 94: 31 views
Month 95: 39 views
Month 96: 46 views
Month 97: 25 views
Month 98: 20 views
Month 99: 44 views
Month 100: 40 views
Month 101: 35 views
Month 102: 16 views
Month 103: 32 views
Month 104: 26 views
Month 105: 14 views
Month 106: 43 views
Month 107: 30 views
Month 108: 40 views
Month 109: 43 views
Month 110: 15 views
Month 111: 48 views
Month 112: 34 views
Month 113: 22 views
Month 114: 44 views
Month 115: 29 views
Month 116: 38 views
Month 117: 17 views
Month 118: 28 views
Month 119: 28 views
Month 120: 31 views
Month 121: 26 views
Month 122: 57 views
Month 123: 37 views
Month 124: 37 views

Total Views: 4064

Total Downloads: 1905

2026 Trends

Published Article

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]