Dependence of spall strength of metals on the amplitude of a shock-wave load

Огородников, В. А.; Ivanov, A. G.; Tyun'kin, E. S.; Grigor'ev, V. A.; Khokhlov, A. A.

doi:10.1007/bf00754975

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The variation in value as a function of the initial shock input [267] and the incipient formation of the spall plane [268] have been studied. Modelling of such systems is non-trivial and requires the successful integration of several steps; the passage of shock waves through an uncompressed material, the dispersion of the release waves (the so-called 'release fans'), the interaction of the releases and the fracture limit [269][270][271][272][273][274][275][276][277][278][279].…”

Section: Combined Experiments and Modelling Of Metallic Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies

Field¹,

Walley²,

Proud³

et al. 2004

International Journal of Impact Engineering

655

296

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Combined Experiments and Modelling Of Metallic Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies

Field¹,

Walley²,

Proud³

et al. 2004

International Journal of Impact Engineering

655

296

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a study involving Al and Mg95, specimens loaded by impact (shock wave stresses of P = 5.8 GPa and P = 3.7 GPa, respectively, and initial temperature ranging up to (0.80-0.90 T melt ) [70], it is found that spall strength is only weakly influenced by temperature. As the temperature is increased further, however, spall strength rapidly decreases.…”

Section: Temperature Dependence Of σ Spallmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Presently, there is no unambiguous answer to the question of the effect of shock wave amplitude on critical tensile stresses σ t [70][71][72]. The experimental data for five metals (Sn, Pb, Cu, Fe, U) in a wide range of shock wave amplitude [70] Fig.…”

Section: Dependence Of σ T On Shock Wave Amplitudementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamic Strength of Materials

Glushak¹,

Tyupanova²,

Bat'kov³

2006

Material Properties Under Intensive Dynamic Loading

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The methods used in practice for the acquisition and interpretation of experimental data pertaining to the resistance of materials to plastic-strain (shearstrength) are based on the concepts of the nature of motion of a material possessing strength and the features of high-rate deformation discussed in Chap. 1. These methods are briefly described below. Additional information on this topic is available to the reader in monographs [1-3], review [4], and the original papers cited in [1-4]. Comparison between the Shock Hugoniot and the Hydrostatic Compression IsothermGiven two assumptions: (1) material strength is isotropic, and (2) the difference between isothermal hydrostatic compression and the mean stress σ ii /3 is small, the dynamic yield strength is calculated to be the difference between the stress σ 1 on the elastic-plastic shock Hugoniot and the pressure P on the hydrostatic compression isotherm (given in terms of specific volume V (or strain ε)) as Y d = 3(σ 1 − P )/2. This approach to the estimation of Y d is limited to cases wherein the stresses σ 1 are relatively low, and the temperature rise during shock compression is modest (resulting in a thermal component of pressure that is low in comparison to the total pressure).For the aluminum alloy Al-2024, [5] recommends that for shock pressures in the 2.7 GPa ≤ σ 1 ≤ 9.4 GPa range, one should use the following relations for σ 1 (ε) (the normal stress component in a plane wave shock) and P (ε) (the hydrostatic compression) in calculations of the dynamic yield strength: σ 1 = 0.18 + 72.06ε − 347.1ε 2 (GPa); P = 75.9ε + 201ε 2 (GPa). This method for the evaluation of Y d , among other things, requires a highly accurate determination of the curves σ 1 (ε) and P (ε) since minor changes in ε can lead to significant changes in σ 1 and P .

show abstract

Dynamic fracture and scale effects (survey)

Ivanov¹

1994

J Appl Mech Tech Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A. G. Ivanov UDC 624.539.41. Introduction. The most important result of linear fracture mechanics (LFM) --which is based on Griffith's notion that a crack enters an unstable state --was the recognition of the fact that fracture (the separation of a whole into parts) is in fact the act of work being done. This work is done by elastic strain energy. The acceptance of this point of view led to a critical reexamination of fracture criteria and the development of new methods of testing materials for strength. Traditional strength criteria --the critical values of stress a B and strain ef and their combination --turned out to be inadequate. The role of material characteristics such as tensile strength cr B was limited to the comparison of materials in standard tests. Meanwhile, technical cohesive strength turned out to be 2-4 orders of magnitude lower than the actual strength of materials [1]. It became necessary to introduce new fracture criteria, including the fracture work completed on a unit surface Glc. This quantity is usually determined as part of the combination GIcE-Klc 2 (where E is the elastic modulus and Klc is the critical value of the stressintensity factor).The introduction of new fracture criteria required the development of new methods of determining them. The traditional strength criteria were easily found by constructing the stress-strain curve of the material, since these criteria were special points of the curve (Fig. 1). This was point aB on line 1 for ductile materials and point crf on line 2 for brittle materials. Line 3 is an approximation of line 2 used in the present study, while line 4 is the same as 3 except for a higher strain rate. A series of tests with special specimens of different sizes usually has to be performed in order to obtain the quantities 23' and Glc or Kic and K c, etc. in linear fracture mechanics.However, the major successes of LFM and its modifications notwithstanding, this approach still has certain deficiencies in regard to the practical application of the results of investigations to specific structures. As evidence, we can cite the periodic catastrophic failures of large structures designed in accordance with existing strength standards. The difficulties of using LFM increase sharply when attempts are made to describe high-rate dynamic failure --in which case diagnosing the growth and development of structural defects is almost impossible. These considerations give a reason to look for new approaches to solving fracture problems that differ from the local nature of LFM investigations and studies performed by similar methods. Just as knowing the laws governing the growth of a single tree does not guarantee that the processes involved in the growth of a forest will be understood, so it is that restricting the study of the loading of metals to LFM and its modifications may blind investigators to the principles underlying the failure of the load-bearing members of a structure or the structure as a whole.2. Integral Approach to the Problem of Fracture. Experiments involvin...

show abstract

Dependence of spall strength of metals on the amplitude of a shock-wave load

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

Review of experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies

Review of experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies

Dynamic Strength of Materials

Dynamic fracture and scale effects (survey)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About