No abstract

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

No abstract

This paper gives a discussion of the use of the split-Hopkinson bar with particular reference to the requirements of materials modelling at QinetiQ. This is to deploy validated material models for numerical simulations that are physically based and have as little characterization overhead as possible. In order to have confidence that the models have a wide range of applicability, this means, at most, characterizing the models at low rate and then validating them at high rate. The split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) is ideal for this purpose. It is also a very useful tool for analysing material behaviour under non-shock wave loading. This means understanding the output of the test and developing techniques for reliable comparison of simulations with SHPB data. For materials other than metals comparison with an output stress v strain curve is not sufficient as the assumptions built into the classical analysis are generally violated. The method described in this paper compares the simulations with as much validation data as can be derived from deployed instrumentation including the raw strain gauge data on the input and output bars, which avoids any assumptions about stress equilibrium. One has to take into account Pochhammer–Chree oscillations and their effect on the specimen and recognize that this is itself also a valuable validation test of the material model.

No abstract