[vc_empty_space][vc_empty_space]
Results comparison for hat-shaped, double-notch and punch testing of split Hopkinson shear bar technique
Budiwantoro B.a, Faizah I.a, Prabowo D.A.a, Febrinawarta B.a, Kariem M.A.a
a Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, 40132, Indonesia
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624529070653{padding-top: 30px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner layout=”boxed”][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″ css=”.vc_custom_1624695412187{border-right-width: 1px !important;border-right-color: #dddddd !important;border-right-style: solid !important;border-radius: 1px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Abstract” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]© 2019 Published by ITB Journal Publisher.The split Hopkinson shear bar (SHSB) test is a modification of the high rate-impact test using a split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB). The SHSB has been developed for a variety of techniques, for example, the hat-shaped (circular or flat), double-notch, and punch (with or without notch) techniques. The main purpose of this study was to compare these three techniques to determine the shear stress-shear strain of aluminum alloy 2024-T351. The study was conducted using the Abaqus/CAE® software. The circular hat-shaped and punch (with and without notch) techniques used a quarter-section solid 3D model. The flat hat-shaped and double-notch techniques used a half-section solid 3D model. This study successfully tested and compared the three SHSB techniques, with a number of considerations, i.e. the same parameter values for kinetic energy, shear area and shear angle. Each technique has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of force equilibrium, flow stress fluctuation, constant strain rate, machine-ability, ease of experiment, etc. The optimum technique among the three is the hat-shaped technique.[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Author keywords” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]Constant strain rate,Double-notch,Hat-shaped,Hopkinson bar,Optimum technique,SHSB,Split Hopkinson pressure bars,Stress fluctuations[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Indexed keywords” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]Double-notch,Hat-shaped,Hopkinson bar,Punch,SHSB[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”Funding details” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]This work was carried out at the Engineering Design Laboratory Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung and was financially supported by Institut Teknologi Bandung through P3MI (Program Penelitian Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Inovasi).[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][megatron_heading title=”DOI” size=”size-sm” text_align=”text-left”][vc_column_text]https://doi.org/10.5614/j.eng.technol.sci.2019.51.6.5[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_column_text]Widget Plumx[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator css=”.vc_custom_1624528584150{padding-top: 25px !important;padding-bottom: 25px !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row]