2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0734-743x(01)00021-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic behavior of concrete at high strain rates and pressures: II. numerical simulation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
46
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 113 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As described in Park et al (2001), the D-P model can consider the dependence of flow stress on internal friction through pressure, strain hardening/softening and strain-rate sensitivity. In this study, since the yield behavior of concrete depends on the hydrostatic pressure, the D-P model is chosen to simulate concrete specimens.…”
Section: Parameters Of Numerical Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As described in Park et al (2001), the D-P model can consider the dependence of flow stress on internal friction through pressure, strain hardening/softening and strain-rate sensitivity. In this study, since the yield behavior of concrete depends on the hydrostatic pressure, the D-P model is chosen to simulate concrete specimens.…”
Section: Parameters Of Numerical Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8 Park et al (2001) showed that the response of mortar specimens is insensitive to K , and thus K =1 is used in this work.…”
Section: Article In Pressmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, β =40° was used in the numerical simulations in the present study. Park et al (2001) found that ψ has limited influence on the specimen response in their simulation of plate impact of mortar. It is further proved that the influence of ψ on DIF in a SHPB test is almost negligible according to parametric studies in the present research.…”
Section: Article In Pressmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Numerical simulation, on the other hand, can reveal the stress and deformation details at micro-levels more easily. To date, a limited number of simulations on SHPB tests have been mainly about conventional SHPB with a cylindrical striker, and the simulation codes are usually finite element methods (Bertholf and Karnes 1975;Park et al 2001;Li and Meng 2003;Cotsovos and Pavlović 2008;Lu et al 2010;Zhu et al 2012). There are several drawbacks to these simulation works: (1) the presumed material constitutive relations should be given in advance, which causes the simulation to run as expected.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%