Untitled

Static and Dynamic Crushing Behaviors of Aluminum Foam

“…Gibson and Ashby [1] gave some empirical correlations between the yield stress and density for aluminium foam. The quasi-static compression behaviors of aluminum foam were extensively investigated [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. In quasi-static compression, aluminum foam exhibited plastic deformation with a plateau stress for large strain values, which was ideal for crash energy absorption.…”

“…But for the dynamic compression behavior of aluminum foam, there were some conflicting results. Some researchers reported aluminium foams showed rate sensitive [9][10][11][12][13][14], some reported insensitive [15][16][17][18][19]. The dynamic crushing tests reported in the literatures were mostly conducted with classical Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB), which gave a strain rate up to 103/s.…”

The strain rate effect of an open cell aluminum foam

“…However, previous studies have led to conflicting conclusions on the effect of impact velocity or strain rate on the compressive behavior of the metallic foams. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Mukai et al, [6,9] Kathryn et al, [7] and Paul and Ramamurty [8] found the flow stress of a closed cell aluminum foam to increase with the increasing strain rate, while Lankford and Dannemann, [5] Deshpande and Fleck, [10] Hall et al, [11] and most other researchers addressed no strain-rate sensitivity in the closed-cell aluminum foams under both quasi-static and dynamic loadings. Moreover, the strain rate effect seems to be independent of whether the cell is open or closed, and of the cell wall materials.…”

“…[9] Although there seems to be no general trend in the strain rate sensitivity of metal foams, it has been found that such factors as morphology of the cells, composition of the cell wall materials, density of the metal foams, and impact direction do have influence over it. [12,13] It follows that further investigations are necessary to detect the origin of strain rate dependence in the material.…”