Low velocity impact of transversely isotropic beams and plates

Mode II Interlaminar Fracture of the Center Notch Flexural Specimen under Impact Loading

“…The response is similar to the no-defect specimen presented in Figure 3. The oscillatory nature of the impact force history has also been observed by other researchers [40] and results from the flexural vibration of the beam. APC-2 CNF specimens exhibited similar behavior.…”

Contact problems involving beams

“…The Fourier transform technique has been applied to a range of beam-like contact problems (Schonberg et al, 1987;Keer and Schonberg, 1986;Keer and Silva, 1972) of which it clearly represents the definitive solution. However, its use demands a significant familiarity with dual integral equations and the final calculation still involves a numerical solution.…”

An experimental study of pre-notched clamped beams under impact loading

“…(1) the projectile was rebounded at time of 2.25-4.25 ms (refer to the analytical work by Schonberg et al (1987)); (2) the average deceleration a before the projectile stops going ahead in the tests ranged from 1166g to 3184g, while the average impact force applied on the beam during the period, F , ranged from 0.74 Table 5 Effect of increasing impact velocity: Test Set 4 (Projectile: S1b, S1c) to 2.00 kN; if calibrated more precisely, the variation history with time of the deceleration of the projectile and impact force applied on the beam could be calculated from the displacements measured from the successive photographs; (3) with the increase of energy ratio R ¼ K 0 =U e max (here K 0 ¼ GV 2 0 =2 with G being mass of the projectile is the kinetic energy of the projectile before impact and U e max ¼ M 2 0 ð2LÞ=2EI ¼ 2:40 J is the maximum energy that the beam can store elastically), a larger portion of the projectile's initial kinetic energy was absorbed by the beam. For example, 95% of K 0 was absorbed by the beam if R > 5.…”