Failure of AA 6061 and 2099 aluminum alloys under dynamic shock loading

Odeshi, A.G.; Adesola, A.O.; Badmos, A. Y.

doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.02.015

Cited by 56 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At high strain rates, the mechanisms of plastic deformation and fracture in most engineering materials follow different mode than what is typically observed in materials under quasi static loading or at low strain-rates. Both strain hardening and thermal softening, due to conversion of impact energy to thermal energy, occur simultaneously and compete to influence the plastic deformation process at high strain rates [9][10][11][12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microstructure and texture evolution in 21Mn–2.5Si–1.6Al–Ti steel subjected to dynamic impact loading

Eskandari

Zarei-Hazanki

Mohtadi-Bonab

et al. 2015

Materials Science and Engineering: A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microstructure and texture evolution in 21Mn–2.5Si–1.6Al–Ti steel subjected to dynamic impact loading

Eskandari

Zarei-Hazanki

Mohtadi-Bonab

et al. 2015

Materials Science and Engineering: A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As reported, adiabatic shearing is the major failure and fracture mechanism of aluminum alloys at high strain rates [26,43]. Microstructure characterization including second phase particle arrangement, shearing and cracking at highest level of deformation rate in the impacted specimens were discussed in this section.…”

Section: Post-mortem Microstructure Investigationmentioning

confidence: 92%

High Strain Rate Behavior of Ultrafine Grained AA2519 Processed via Multi Axial Cryogenic Forging

Azimi

Owolabi

Fallahdoost

et al. 2019

Metals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present work deals with studies on the dynamic behavior of ultrafine grained AA2519 alloy synthesized via cryogenic forging (CF) and room temperature forging (RTF) techniques. A split-Hopkinson pressure bar was used to perform high strain rate tests on the processed samples and the microstructures of the samples were characterized before and after impact tests. Electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) maps demonstrated a significant grain size refinement from ~740 nm to ~250 nm as a result of cryogenic plastic deformation showing higher dislocation densities and stored strains in the CF sample when compared to the RTF sample. This microstructure modification caused the increase of dynamic flow stress in this alloy. In addition, the aluminum matrix of the CF alloy is more densely populated with fragmented particles than the RTF alloy due to the heavier plastic deformation applied to the cryogenically forged alloy. The results obtained from the stress–strain curve for the RTF sample showed intense thermomechanical instabilities in the RTF sample which led to a severe thermal softening and the subsequent sharp drop in the flow stress. However, no significant decrease was observed in the stress–strain curve of the CF alloys with ultrafine grains which means that thermal softening would probably not be the most effective failure mechanism. Furthermore, higher level of sensitivity of CF alloys to strain rates was observed which is ascribed to transition of rate-controlling plastic deformation mechanisms. In the post-mortem microstructure investigation, deformed and transformed adiabatic shear bands (ASBs) were identified on the RTF alloy when the strain rate is over 4000 s−1 at which it had experienced a significant thermal softening. On the other hand, circular path and aligned split arcs are the various shapes of the deformed ASB seen at no earlier than 4500 s−1 in the CF alloys. This is associated with the crack failure caused by grain boundary sliding.

show abstract

“…They enhanced the description of the flexible behavior of components in a wide frequency range by means of a robust numerical differentiation approach and a constitutive model. Odeshi et al [116] investigated failure of different aluminum alloy under tempering. Microstructure examination was performed.…”

Section: Structural Health Monitoring Using Other Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of dynamic response parameters in damage prediction

Zai

Khan

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a literature review of published methods for damage identification and prediction in mechanical structures. It discusses ways which can identify and predict structural damage from dynamic response parameters such as natural frequencies, mode shapes, and vibration amplitudes. There are many structural applications in which dynamic loads are coupled with thermal loads. Hence, a review on those methods, which have discussed structural damage under coupled loads, is also presented. Structural health monitoring with other techniques such as elastic wave propagation, wavelet transform, modal parameter, and artificial intelligence are also discussed. The published research is critically analyzed and the role of dynamic response parameters in structural health monitoring is discussed. The conclusion highlights the research gaps and future research direction.

show abstract

Failure of AA 6061 and 2099 aluminum alloys under dynamic shock loading

Cited by 56 publications

References 34 publications

Microstructure and texture evolution in 21Mn–2.5Si–1.6Al–Ti steel subjected to dynamic impact loading

Microstructure and texture evolution in 21Mn–2.5Si–1.6Al–Ti steel subjected to dynamic impact loading

High Strain Rate Behavior of Ultrafine Grained AA2519 Processed via Multi Axial Cryogenic Forging

The role of dynamic response parameters in damage prediction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About