World Scientific
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

Numerical Investigation of Tensile and Compressive Behavior of Mild Steel Subjected to High Strain Rate

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S021945542440011XCited by:2 (Source: Crossref)
    This article is part of the issue:

    Numerical simulations were conducted to validate computational and constitutive models for steel materials through dynamic material tests involving both tension and compression. These simulations involved the numerical modeling of the split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) apparatus, with the appropriate loading applied directly in compression and indirectly in tension. To induce a tensile wave within the specimen, a shoulder, such as a coupler or collar, was interposed between the bars. The simulations were carried out using the LS-DYNA finite element code. In these numerical simulations of the SHPB tests, the MAT-15 Johnson–Cook material model was applied to represent mild steel. The resulting stress–strain relationships obtained under both compression and tension conditions were subsequently compared to corresponding experimental data. The primary objectives of these simulations were to determine the optimal placement of strain gauges on both the input and output bars of the tensile SHPB setup. Additionally, the simulations aimed to assess the influence of the gauge length-to-diameter ratio on the behavior of the mild steel specimen subjected to dynamic tension and compression. The results showed that the pulse produced due to the mechanical mismatch of the element at boundaries can be avoided using the length of the input bar smaller than the output bar. Further, the location of the strain gauge in the case of the output bar should be toward the output bar-shoulder interface, while in the case of the input bar, it should be considered at the center of the span of the bar.

    Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!

    Remember to check out the structures