TY - JOUR
T1 - On the dynamic shear failure of Ti-6Al-4V in different test specimen geometries
AU - Du, Yutian
AU - Xu, Zejian
AU - Qin, Caifang
AU - Su, Mengyu
AU - Tan, P. J.
AU - Huang, Fenglei
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2024/11/1
Y1 - 2024/11/1
N2 - In this paper, the dynamic shear response and failure of Ti-6Al-4V using four different test specimen geometries, viz. Hat-Shaped Specimen (HSS), Flat Hat-Shaped Specimen (FHSS), Chip Hat-Shaped Specimen (CHSS) and Double Shear Specimen (DSS), are critically examined and compared. Through a combination of experiments (using the standard Split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar system), finite-element simulations and metallographic examinations of their fracture morphology, the dynamic shear characteristics (strain hardening, strain rate strengthening effect and failure strain) of Ti-6Al-4V obtained using the different specimen geometries are critically examined, compared and analyzed. It will be shown that differences in the stress/strain uniformity, the plastic deformation zone, and the stress state induced by the different specimen geometries lead to discrepancies in the measured shear response and failure that were observed. The shear stress–strain curve obtained using the DSS will be shown to be more precise than the other specimen geometries.
AB - In this paper, the dynamic shear response and failure of Ti-6Al-4V using four different test specimen geometries, viz. Hat-Shaped Specimen (HSS), Flat Hat-Shaped Specimen (FHSS), Chip Hat-Shaped Specimen (CHSS) and Double Shear Specimen (DSS), are critically examined and compared. Through a combination of experiments (using the standard Split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar system), finite-element simulations and metallographic examinations of their fracture morphology, the dynamic shear characteristics (strain hardening, strain rate strengthening effect and failure strain) of Ti-6Al-4V obtained using the different specimen geometries are critically examined, compared and analyzed. It will be shown that differences in the stress/strain uniformity, the plastic deformation zone, and the stress state induced by the different specimen geometries lead to discrepancies in the measured shear response and failure that were observed. The shear stress–strain curve obtained using the DSS will be shown to be more precise than the other specimen geometries.
KW - Dynamic shear
KW - Lode angle parameter
KW - Shear test
KW - Stress state
KW - Stress triaxiality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85201712394&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2024.113036
DO - 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2024.113036
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85201712394
SN - 0020-7683
VL - 304
JO - International Journal of Solids and Structures
JF - International Journal of Solids and Structures
M1 - 113036
ER -