Quasi-Static Compression Stress-Strain Curves--IV, 2024-T3510 and 6061-T6 Aluminum Alloys

Benck, Ralph F.; Filbey, Gordon L.; Murray, Elizabeth

doi:10.21236/adb013221

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Estimates of crater radius for the DC simulation tend to consistently underestimate the experimental values by at most 5%, which corresponds to a slightly larger value when the 'true crater' size is taken into account. Resolution does not appear to play Benck et al (1976). 4 ST = small target.…”

Section: Intra-code Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One simulation used a simple von Mises model, with a typical shear strength for Al 6061-T6; two further simulations used the Johnson-Cook model with different parameters (see Table 6). The first set of Johnson-Cook model parameters (JC1), also used in the CTH simulation, was obtained from fits to experimental data in Benck et al (1976), the second set (JC2) was taken from Rule et al (1997). The results of these three simulations are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Intra-code Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of numerical codes for impact and explosion cratering: Impacts on strengthless and metal targets

Pierazzo

Artemieva

Asphaug

et al. 2008

Meteorit & Planetary Scien

165

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Over the last few decades, rapid improvement of computer capabilities has allowed impact cratering to be modeled with increasing complexity and realism, and has paved the way for a new era of numerical modeling of the impact process, including full, three-dimensional (3D) simulations. When properly benchmarked and validated against observation, computer models offer a powerful tool for understanding the mechanics of impact crater formation. This work presents results from the first phase of a project to benchmark and validate shock codes. A variety of 2D and 3D codes were used in this study, from commercial products like AUTODYN, to codes developed within the scientific community like SOVA, SPH, ZEUS-MP, iSALE, and codes developed at U.S. National Laboratories like CTH, SAGE/RAGE, and ALE3D. Benchmark calculations of shock wave propagation in aluminum-on-aluminum impacts were performed to examine the agreement between codes for simple idealized problems. The benchmark simulations show that variability in code results is to be expected due to differences in the underlying solution algorithm of each code, artificial stability parameters, spatial and temporal resolution, and material models. Overall, the inter-code variability in peak shock pressure as a function of distance is around 10 to 20%. In general, if the impactor is resolved by at least 20 cells across its radius, the underestimation of peak shock pressure due to spatial resolution is less than 10%. In addition to the benchmark tests, three validation tests were performed to examine the ability of the codes to reproduce the time evolution of crater radius and depth observed in vertical laboratory impacts in water and two well-characterized aluminum alloys. Results from these calculations are in good agreement with experiments. There appears to be a general tendency of shock physics codes to underestimate the radius of the forming crater. Overall, the discrepancy between the model and experiment results is between 10 and 20%, similar to the inter-code variability.

show abstract

Section: Intra-code Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Intra-code Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of numerical codes for impact and explosion cratering: Impacts on strengthless and metal targets

Pierazzo

Artemieva

Asphaug

et al. 2008

Meteorit & Planetary Scien

165

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other references [35,36,37,2] recommend different values in the range 73.8 GPa < E < 76.1 GPa, and differentiate [36] between longitudinal and transverse orientation.…”

Section: Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeatability and reproducibility of compression strength measurements conducted according to ASTM E9

Luecke

Ma²,

Graham

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ten commercial laboratories participated in an interlaboratory study to estab lish the repeatability and reproducibility of compression strength tests conducted according to ASTM International Standard Test Method E9. The test employed a cylindrical aluminum AA2024-T351 test specimen. Participants measured elastic modulus and 0.2 % offset yield strength, YS(0.2 % offset), using an extensometer attached to the specimen. The repeatability and reproducibility of the yield strength measurement, expressed as coefficient of variations were cv r = 0.011 and cv R = 0.020 The reproducibility of the test across the laboratories was among the best that has been reported for uniaxial tests. The reported data indicated that using diametrally opposed extensometers, instead of a single extensometer, doubled the precision of the test method. Laboratories that did not lubricate the ends of the specimen mea sured yield stresses and elastic moduli that were smaller than those measured in laboratories that lubricated the specimen ends. A finite element analysis of the test specimen deformation for frictionless and perfect friction could not explain the dis crepancy, however. The modulus measured from stress-strain data were reanalyzed using a technique that finds the optimal fit range, and applies several quality checks to the data. The error in modulus measurements from stress-strain curves generally increased as the fit range decreased to less than 40 % of the stress range.

show abstract

“…The Johnson-Cook constitutive model parameters for 6061-T651 were obtained from reference [8]. The Johnson-Cook fracture parameters were obtained from reference [23] and the Poisson's ratio was obtained from Benck et al [24]. For the PARTIAL BLINT simulations, all material parameters remained the same except that the Johnson-Cook constitutive model was replaced with an undocumented power law using the parameters provided in Piekutowski et al [16].…”

Section: Simulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling non-eroding perforation of an oblique aluminum target using the Eulerian CTH hydrocode

Scheffler

2005

International Journal of Impact Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quasi-Static Compression Stress-Strain Curves--IV, 2024-T3510 and 6061-T6 Aluminum Alloys

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Validation of numerical codes for impact and explosion cratering: Impacts on strengthless and metal targets

Validation of numerical codes for impact and explosion cratering: Impacts on strengthless and metal targets

Repeatability and reproducibility of compression strength measurements conducted according to ASTM E9

Modeling non-eroding perforation of an oblique aluminum target using the Eulerian CTH hydrocode

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About