Characteristics of the stress pulse generated by impact of a hollow striker on the flange of a split Hopkinson tension bar are investigated via an explicit finite element analysis. Design guidelines are extracted for the hollow striker and flange from the viewpoint of eliminating spurious waves located between the incident and reflected pulses. According to design guidelines, it is desirable to have a striker cross-sectional area the same as that of the flange. It is also desirable to make the cross-sectional area of the striker (flange) the same as that of the bar. As for the flange length, it is recommended to be comparable to the diameter of the bar. The magnitude and duration of the primary stress pulse are consistent with the results of a one-dimensional analysis even when spurious waves are present; meanwhile, overly long spurious waves should be avoided to eliminate their superposition with the reflected pulse. Spurious waves appear when general impedance of the striker is higher than the bar. The origin of spurious waves is a series of step-wise residual pulses generated by multiple cycles of striker impact that make the striker keep compressing the flange after the first cycle of impact. Step-wise residual pulses appear in two forms (continuous waves and discrete waves) in spurious waves due to the secondary impacts during the entrance process of step-wise residual pulses to the flange. The consequences of spurious waves in the use of split Hopkinson tension bars are discussed.
HopkinsonB. A method of measuring the pressure produced in the detonation of high explosives or by the impact of bullets. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Series A1914; 213: 437–456.
2.
KolskyH. An investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very high rates of loading. Proc Phys Soc Lond Sect B1949; 62: 676–700.
3.
MeyersMA. Dynamic behavior of materials, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1994.
4.
FieldJWalleySBourneN, et al.Experimental methods at high rates of strain. J Phys IV1994; 4: C8-3-C8–22.
5.
Al-MousawiMMReidSRDeansWF. The use of the split Hopkinson pressure bar techniques in high strain rate materials testing. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science1997; 211: 273–292.
6.
GamaBALopatnikovSLGillespieJW. Hopkinson bar experimental technique: a critical review. Appl Mech Rev2004; 57: 223–250.
7.
ChenWSongB. Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) bar – design, testing, and applications, New York: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2011.
8.
OthmanR. The Kolsky-Hopkinson bar machine, Berlin: Springer International Publishing, 2018.
9.
ShinHKimJ-B. Evolution of specimen strain rate in split Hopkinson bar test. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2019; 233: 4667–4687.
10.
ParkJMMoonJBaeJW, et al.Strain rate effects of dynamic compressive deformation on mechanical properties and microstructure of CoCrFeMnNi high-entropy alloy. Mater Sci Eng A2018; 719: 155–163.
11.
LeeW-SChenT-H. Plastic deformation and fracture characteristics of Hadfield steel subjected to high-velocity impact loading. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2002; 216: 971–982.
12.
SeoSMinOYangH. Constitutive equation for Ti–6Al–4V at high temperatures measured using the SHPB technique. Int J Impact Eng2005; 31: 735–754.
13.
XiongBDemartinoCXiaoY. High-strain rate compressive behavior of CFRP confined concrete: large diameter SHPB tests. Constr Build Mater2019; 201: 484–501.
14.
ShinHKimJB. Understanding the anomalously long duration time of the transmitted pulse from a soft specimen in a Kolsky bar experiment. Int J Precis Eng Manuf2016; 17: 203–208.
15.
WoutsJHaugouGOudjeneM, et al.Confinement device to assess dynamic crushability of wood material. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2018. 232: 1418–1432.
16.
LeeW-SLinC-FHuangS-Z. Effect of temperature and strain rate on the shear properties of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2006; 220: 127–136.
17.
Johnson GR and Cook WH. A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In: Proc. of the 7th international symposium on ballistics, The Hague, Netherlands, 19–21 April 1983, pp.541–547.
18.
ShinHKimJ-B. A phenomenological constitutive equation to describe various flow stress behaviors of materials in wide strain rate and temperature regimes. J Eng Mater Technol2010; 132: 021009.
19.
PanZLiangSYGarmestani, et al.Residual stress prediction based on MTS model during machining of Ti-6Al-4V. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2019. 233: 3743–3750.
20.
LiHZWangJA. Cutting forces model for milling Inconel 718 alloy based on a material constitutive law. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2012; 227: 1761–1775.
21.
SedighiMKhandaeiMShokrollahiH. Identification of optimized constitutive model parameters at a high strain rate using electromagnetic ring expansion test results. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2011; 225: 781–789.
22.
LiL-YMolyneauxTCK. Dynamic constitutive equations and behaviour of brass at high strain rates. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science1995; 209: 287–293.
23.
ChenYLiHWangJ. Analytical modelling of cutting forces in near-orthogonal cutting of titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2015; 229: 1122–1133.
24.
SedighiMKhandaeiMShokrollahiH. Identification of optimized constitutive model parameters at a high strain rate using electromagnetic ring expansion test results. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2011. 225: 781–789.
25.
YooY-HBaekS-HKimJ-B, et al.Performance of a flying cross bar to incapacitate a long-rod penetrator based on a finite element model. Eng Comput2013; 29: 409–415.
26.
OlcmenSMJonesSEWeinerRH. A numerical analysis of projectile nose geometry including sliding friction for penetration into geological targets. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2016; 232: 284–304.
27.
ChenGRenCYangX, et al.Evidence of thermoplastic instability about segmented chip formation process for Ti-6Al-4V alloy based on the finite-element method. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2011; 225: 1407–1417.
28.
NiuWMoRSunH, et al.A smooth particle hydrodynamic model for two-dimensional numerical simulation of Ti–6Al–4V serrated chip deformation based on TANH constitutive law. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2019. 233: 3004–3017.
29.
YooY-HBaekS-HKimJ-B, et al.Effects of impact location and angle of a flying cross bar on the protection of a long-rod penetrator. Trans Can Soc Mech Eng2013; 37: 1115–1125.
30.
SeifooriSLiaghatGH. A semianalytical and numerical study of penetration and perforation of an ogive-nose projectile into concrete targets under normal impact. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2011; 225: 1782–1797.
31.
DehestaniPFathiARDanialiHRM. Numerical study of the stand-off distance and liner thickness effect on the penetration depth efficiency of shaped charge process. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2018; 233: 977–986.
32.
KimD-HShinHJungD-W, et al.A numerical study on jet formation and penetration characteristics of the shaped charge with an aspect ratio of 2.73 and a high-strength copper liner (in Korean). Kor J Comput Design Eng2019; 24: 1–11.
33.
OgawaK. Impact-tension compression test by using a split-Hopkinson bar. Exp Mech1984; 24: 81–85.
34.
Nemat-NasserSIsaacsJBStrrettJE. Hopkinson techniques for dynamic recovery experiments. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci1991; 435: 371–391.
35.
GerlachRKettenbeilCPetrinicN. A new split Hopkinson tensile bar design. Int J Impact Eng2012; 50: 63–67.
36.
GanzenmüllerGCBlaumEMohrmannD, et al.A simplified design for a split-Hopkinson tension bar with long pulse duration. Procedia Eng2017; 197: 109–118.
37.
Owens AT. Development of a split Hopkinson tension bar for testing stress–strain response of particulate composites under high rates of loading. MS Thesis, Auburn University, USA, 2007.
38.
Acosta JF. Numerical and experimental studies on the use of a split Hopkinson pressure bar for high strain rate tension testing. MS Thesis, Wichita State University, USA, 2002.
39.
Young K. Development of a tensile split Hopkinson pressure bar testing facility. MS Thesis, Windsor University, Canada, 2015.
40.
NguyenK-HKimH-CShinH, et al.Numerical investigation into the stress wave transmitting characteristics of threads in the split Hopkinson tensile bar test. Int J Impact Eng2017; 109: 253–263.
41.
GanzenmüllerGCBlaumEMohrmannD, et al.A simplified design for a split-Hopkinson tension bar with long pulse duration. Procedia Eng2017; 197: 109–118.
42.
HauserFE. Techniques for measuring stress–strain relations at high strain rates. Exp Mech1966; 6: 395–402.
43.
LeBlancMMLassilaDH. Dynamic tensile testing of sheet material using the split-Hopkinson bar technique. Exp Tech1993; 17: 37–42.
44.
HardingJWelshLM. A tensile testing technique for fibre-reinforced composites at impact rates of strain. J Mater Sci1983; 18: 1810–1826.
45.
EskandariHNemesJA. Dynamic testing of composite laminates with a tensile split Hopkinson bar. J Compos Mater2000; 34: 260–273.
46.
NicholasT. Tensile testing of materials at high rates of strain. Exp Mech1981; 21: 177–185.
47.
StaabGHGilatA. A direct-tension split Hopkinson bar for high strain-rate testing. Exp Mech1991; 31: 232–235.
48.
LindholmUSYeakleyLM. High strain-rate testing: tension and compression. Exp Mech1968; 8: 1–9.
49.
MohrDGaryG. M-shaped specimen for the high-strain rate tensile testing using a split Hopkinson pressure bar apparatus. Exp Mech2006; 47: 681–692.
50.
MiaoYDuBMaC, et al.Some fundamental problems concerning the measurement accuracy of the Hopkinson tension bar technique. Meas Sci Technol2019; 30: 055009.
51.
Nguyen K-H. Numerical investigation into the stress wave transmitting characteristics of threads in the split Hopkinson tensile bar test. PhD Thesis, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, Republic of Korea, 2018.
52.
NguyenCSchindler \H. On spurious reflection waves in Hopkinson bar tensile tests using a collar. J Phys IV1997; 7: 85–90.
53.
Ansys Inc., Autodyn user manual. Canonsburg, PA: Ansys Inc., 2017.
54.
ShinHLeeHKimJ-B, et al.A numerical verification of the reliability of a split Hopkinson pressure bar with a total bar length of 3 m and a diameter of 1 inch. Appl Mech Mater2015; 799–800: 681–684.
55.
CouqueHWalkerJ. On the use of the compression split Hopkinson pressure bar to high strain rate. J Phys IV1994; 4: 23–28.
56.
ZhaoHGaryG. A new method for the separation of waves. Application to the SHPB technique for an unlimited duration of measurement. J Mech Phys Solids1997; 45: 1185–1202.
57.
MengHLiQM. Correlation between the accuracy of a SHPB test and the stress uniformity based on numerical experiments. Int J Impact Eng2003; 28: 537–555.
58.
ShinHKimD. One-dimensional analyses of striker impact on bar with different general impedance. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2019.
59.
Nemat-NasserSChoiJYGuoWG, et al.Very high strain–rate response of a NiTi shape-memory alloy. Mech Mater2005; 37: 287–298.
60.
ShergoldOAFleckNARadfordD. The uniaxial stress versus strain response of pig skin and silicone rubber at low and high strain rates. Int J Impact Eng2006; 32: 1384–1402.
