0
Research Papers

Dynamic Biaxial Plastic Buckling of Circular Shells

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Abdul-Latif1

L3M, Université Paris 8, IUT de Tremblay, 93290 Tremblay-en-France, Franceaabdul@iu2t.univ-paris8.fr

R. Baleh

L3M, Université Paris 8, IUT de Tremblay, 93290 Tremblay-en-France, France

Patent no. WO 2005090822.

1

Corresponding author.

J. Appl. Mech 75(3), 031013 (May 01, 2008) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2839686 History: Received January 24, 2006; Revised October 22, 2006; Published May 01, 2008

Of particular interest is the experimental study of the complex dynamic plastic buckling of circular metallic shells and their energy absorption capacity. Initially proposed by Baleh and Abdul-Latif (2006), “Quasi-Stalic Biaxial Plastic Buckling of Tubular Structures used as an Energy Absorber  ,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 74, pp. 638–635, the novel idea, which aims to enhance the strength properties of materials, is extended for studying the biaxial plastic dynamic buckling behavior of circular shells. It can be assumed that changes in local deformation mechanisms, which reflect this enhancement in the strength properties, are mainly governed by the loading path complexity. The question of whether the performance of dynamic axially crushed tubes could be further improved by using the developed device (the absorption par compression-torsion plastique (ACTP)) generating a biaxial loading path (combined compression and torsion) from a uniaxial loading. A key point emerging from this study is that the structure impact response (i.e., the plastic flow mechanism and the absorbed energy) is influenced by the loading rate coupled with the biaxial loading complexity. In this study, three different metallic circular shells made from copper, aluminum, and mild steel, having distinct geometrical parameters, are extensively investigated. The obtained results show that the higher the biaxial loading complexity provided by the ACTP applied, the greater the energy absorbed by the copper, aluminum, and mild-steel structures. Thus, it is easy to demonstrate that the enhancement in the energy absorption, notably in the case of aluminum, is higher than 150%, in favor of the most complicated loading path (i.e., biaxial 45deg case) compared to the classical uniaxial case. Moreover, the deformation mode for the tested materials is slightly sensitive to the torsion amplitude in dynamic loading, contrary to the quasistatic one.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Brief view of the ACTP device: (1) cylindrical body; (2) crosspiece; (3) roller; (4) intermediate cylinder; (5) receiving disk; (6) higher tightening screw; (7) centering ball; (8) higher disk; (9) specimen; (10) lower conical half-shells; (11) basic disk; (12) lower tightening screw; (13) lower conical clip; (14) lower disk.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Presentation of the used measurement instrumentations of the drop mass bench

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Variation of the impact velocity during the crushing process

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Deformation modes of the three used structures under two boundary conditions: (a) free ends (DM); (b) fixed ends (AM)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Plot of crushing load evolution versus axial deflection under uniaxial dynamic and quasistatic loading conditions for the (a) copper, (b) aluminum, and (c) mild-steel circular shells

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Energy absorption evolution versus axial deflection under uniaxial dynamic and quasistatic loading condition for the (a) copper structures, (b) aluminum, and (c) mild-steel structures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Typical examples of the deformation modes for the copper and aluminum specimens having η=15.5 under different dynamic loading complexities: (a) biaxial 45deg, (b) biaxial 37deg, and (c) biaxial 30deg

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Deformation modes under different dynamic loading complexities: (a) biaxial 45deg, (b) biaxial 37deg, and (c) biaxial 30deg for specimens having η=19.5. (a) Copper. (b) Mild steel.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Evolution of collapse loads versus the axial deflection in different biaxial dynamic loading cases for the (a) copper, (b) aluminum, and (c) mild-steel shells

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Determination of the mean collapse loads with different loading complexities using different axial deflections

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Variation of the mean load for each fold occurring during shell collapse of (a) copper, (b) aluminum, and (c) mild-steel shells under two loading paths

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Energy absorption evolution versus axial deflection under different dynamic loading complexities for the (a) copper structures, (b) aluminum, and (c) mild-steel shells

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Histograms of the energy absorbed under different dynamic loading complexities for an axial deflection of δ=30mm for the (a) copper and (b) aluminum structures

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In