In this work, tension and compression tests have been carried out on aluminium samples at low and high strain rate, the latter performed by means of a direct tension Hopkinson bar equipment. The parameters of the Johnson-Cook constitutive model have been identified using different approaches; the first method consists in the classical Finite Element Model Updating, where numerical simulations are repeated with different material parameters until the mismatch between the experimental and numerical load–displacement curves falls below an acceptable threshold. The second method is based on the analysis of the digital images acquired by a fast camera during the tests; this permitted to calibrate the JC model by an analytical minimization procedure, without any FE simulation. A third inverse technique was also implemented, consisting in applying the FE model updating but using an enriched cost function, where also the mismatch between the numerical and acquired specimen shape profiles is included and minimized. The advantages and drawbacks of the different techniques are assessed and compared.

Identification of constitutive model parameters in Hopkinson bar tests

Mancini E.;
2017

Abstract

In this work, tension and compression tests have been carried out on aluminium samples at low and high strain rate, the latter performed by means of a direct tension Hopkinson bar equipment. The parameters of the Johnson-Cook constitutive model have been identified using different approaches; the first method consists in the classical Finite Element Model Updating, where numerical simulations are repeated with different material parameters until the mismatch between the experimental and numerical load–displacement curves falls below an acceptable threshold. The second method is based on the analysis of the digital images acquired by a fast camera during the tests; this permitted to calibrate the JC model by an analytical minimization procedure, without any FE simulation. A third inverse technique was also implemented, consisting in applying the FE model updating but using an enriched cost function, where also the mismatch between the numerical and acquired specimen shape profiles is included and minimized. The advantages and drawbacks of the different techniques are assessed and compared.
978-3-319-42254-1
978-3-319-42255-8
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11697/176037
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact