Specimen size and shape effect in split Hopkinson pressure bar testing

The results from an experimental and computational study on the effects of specimen size and shape on split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) testing are presented. The effects of the L/D ratio (length L divided by diameter D) along with specimen shape (cylindrical versus square prismatic) were investigated. Even though specimens having a circular cylindrical cross-section are traditionally used in SHPB testing, a square cross-section specimen has advantages associated with in situ imaging of the specimen side surfaces during stress wave propagation. The results presented here show a strong correlation in specimen response between the two types of specimens. Different ranges of L/D ratios are recommended for obtaining stiffness and strength data at near constant strain rates.

[1]  G. Ravichandran,et al.  An Experimental Investigation of Damage Evolution in a Ceramic Matrix Composite , 1995 .

[2]  C. Rubio-Gonzalez,et al.  Finite-element simulation of wave propagation and dispersion in Hopkinson bar test , 2006 .

[3]  John Lambros,et al.  Determination of the dynamic response of brittle composites by the use of the split Hopkinson pressure bar , 1999 .

[4]  J. Lambros,et al.  Dynamic thermomechanical behavior of fiber reinforced composites , 2000 .

[5]  M. Forrestal,et al.  Dynamic and Quasi-Static Propagation of Compaction Waves in a Low-Density Epoxy Foam , 2006 .

[6]  G. Ravichandran,et al.  Evaluation of Ceramic Specimen Geometries Used in a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar , 1994 .

[7]  M. Meyers.  Dynamic Behavior of Materials , 1994 .

[8]  Michael Adam Kaiser,et al.  Advancements in the Split Hopkinson Bar Test , 1998 .

[9]  A. Waas,et al.  A note on data processing in the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar tests , 1998 .

[10]  D. A. Gorham,et al.  An empirical method for correcting dispersion in pressure bar measurements of impact stress , 1996 .

[11]  Guruswami Ravichandran,et al.  Critical Appraisal of Limiting Strain Rates for Compression Testing of Ceramics in a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar , 1994 .

[12]  M. J. Forrestal,et al.  Dynamic Compression Testing of Soft Materials , 2002 .

[13]  B. Song,et al.  Dynamic stress equilibration in split Hopkinson pressure bar tests on soft materials , 2004 .

[14]  J. Hutchinson,et al.  PLASTICITY THEORY , 2008, How to Love Everyone and Almost Get Away with It.

[15]  John Lambros,et al.  Strain rate effects on the thermomechanical behavior of polymers , 2001 .

[16]  John W. Gillespie,et al.  Hopkinson bar experimental technique: A critical review , 2004 .

[17]  S. C. Hunter,et al.  The Dynamic Compression Testing of Solids by the Method of the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar , 1963 .

[18]  M. J. Forrestal,et al.  A split Hopkinson bar technique for low-impedance materials , 1999 .

[19]  Tusit Weerasooriya,et al.  Dynamic and quasi-static compressive response of porcine muscle. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[20]  V.P.W. Shim,et al.  An analysis of stress uniformity in split Hopkinson bar test specimens , 2005 .

[21]  Isaac M Daniel,et al.  Dynamic compressive behavior of thick composite materials , 1998 .

[22]  D. Bancroft.  The Velocity of Longitudinal Waves in Cylindrical Bars , 1941 .

[23]  Jack R. Vinson,et al.  Specimen Geometry Effects on High-Strain-Rate Testing of Graphite/Epoxy Composites , 1999 .

[24]  Jia-Lin Tsai,et al.  Use of split Hopkinson pressure bar for testing off-axis composites , 2001 .