4.3 Article

Dispersion correction in split-Hopkinson pressure bar: theoretical and experimental analysis

期刊

CONTINUUM MECHANICS AND THERMODYNAMICS
卷 34, 期 4, 页码 895-907

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00161-019-00776-0

关键词

The Kolsky method; Measuring bar; Dispersion; Wave number; Experiment; Deformation; Frequency; Frequency equation; Strain pulse

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [17-79-20161]
  2. Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation [9.6109.2017/6.7]
  3. Russian Science Foundation [17-79-20161] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper presents experimental and mathematical analysis of the dispersion effect of pulses propagating along an elastic bar with finite radius, and explores the improvement of interpretation of experimental data through the dispersion shift calculation procedure.
The paper presents experimental and mathematical analysis of the dispersion effect of pulses, which propagate along an elastic bar whose cross section has a finite radius. In some cases, dispersion can influence significantly the interpretation of the experimental data, obtained in experimental schemes, which are based on using measuring bars for investigation material behavior at high strain rates (the split-Hopkinson pressure bar method and its modifications). Solutions for the Pochhammer-Chree equation are obtained for various measuring bars used in experimental setups in the Research Institute for Mechanics of Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod. The procedure of pulse shift accounting for dispersion has been implemented and tested on the basis of our experimental data and the data available in the existing scientific literature. This procedure was employed to analyze the influence of pulse shape on the degree of its change in shape during its propagation along a measuring bar. It is shown how the procedure of dispersion shift improves the quality of interpretation of primary experimental data for some materials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据