Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development of Tensile Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Technique for Studying the Dynamic Behaviour of Metals

  • Published:
Mechanics of Solids Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The tensile split-Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) system is significantly used for dynamic material characterization of metals in the range of strain rates 102–104 s–1. There is no standard design methodology or readily available technique for the development of this apparatus. In the present study, a detailed design and development of tensile SHPB apparatus for dynamic material characterization of metals in tension has been presented. The output incident and transmitted wave signals obtained were found to be consistent with the striker bar impact velocity that was varied in the range 4–14 m/s and the wave speed in the steel 4340 bar observed as 5144 m/s. The elastic compressive wave generated in incident bar, which was effectively transmitted to the transmission bar through the shoulder. This process showcased the high accuracy and precision of the bar alignment system, along with the parallel alignment of the bar end faces. To avoid the disturbance caused by the shoulder in the output bar, the length of the output bar and input bar were set to 2000 and 1500 mm, respectively. Furthermore, positioning SG-2 along the output bar and SG-3 along the input bar was found the most optimal position to avoid disturbances in the output signals.

The average experimental incident wave strain peak amplitude (Average of strain at SG-1 and SG-2) recorded at 4.1, 5.95, 8.3, 10.3, and 12.5 m/s striker impact velocity was –405, –588, –815, –1014, and –1243 micro-strain, respectively. It was observed –1.69, –1.76, –1.03, –1.36, and –2.37% error in the incident wave strain amplitude at the respective impact velocities. Similarly for the proper alignment of Striker, incident, shoulder, and transmission bar, the average values of the recorded strain gauges have 1.80, 1.93, 1.43, 1.26 and 1.70% higher strain amplitude as compared to analytical values corresponding to their striker impact velocities. Based on experimental results, it has been observed there were less than 2.5% error was observed in the average peak strain in comparison to the analytical results. Hence, it has been concluded that the system is accurately aligned such that in the absence of a specimen the striker, incident, shoulder, and transmission bars function as a single bar. It may be concluded that the developed SHPB-T setup has been well calibrated and could be suitably used to perform the further experiments on metals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 10.
Fig. 11.
Fig. 12.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. T. Bhujangrao, C. Froustey, E. Iriondo, et al., “Review of intermediate strain rate testing devices,” Metals 10 (7), 894 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/met10070894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. W.W. Chen and B. Song, Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) Bar: Design, Testing and Applications (Springer Science & Business Media, 2010).

  3. F.W. Marrs, V.W. Manner, A.C. Burch, et al., “Sources of variation in drop-weight impact sensitivity testing of the explosive pentaerythritol tetranitrate,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 60 (13), 5024–5033 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c06294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. G. T. Gray III, “Classic split Hopkinson pressure bar testing,” in ASM Handbook, Vol. 8: Mechanical Testing and Evaluation, Ed. by H. Kuhn and D. Medlin (ASM Int., 2000), pp. 462–476. https://doi.org/10.31399/asm.hb.v08.a0003296

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. W. Zhang, P. Hao, Y. Liu, and X. Shu, “Determination of the dynamic response of Q345 steel materials by using SHPB,” Proc. Eng. 24, 773–777 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S. Tanimura, H. Hayashi, T. Yamamoto, and K. Mimura, “Dynamic tensile properties of steels and aluminum alloys for a wide range of strain rates and strain,” J. Solid Mech. Mater. Eng. 3 (12), 1263–1273 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1299/jmmp.3.1263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. A. Rajput and M. A. Iqbal, “Ballistic performance of plain, reinforced and pre-stressed concrete slabs under normal impact by an ogival-nosed projectile,” Int. J. Impact Eng. 110, 57–71 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.03.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. M. A. Iqbal, A. Rajput, and N. K. Gupta, “Performance of prestressed concrete targets against projectile impact,” Int. J. Impact Eng. 110, 15–25 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.11.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. A. Rajput, M. A. Iqbal, and C. Wu, “Prestressed concrete targets under high rate of loading,” Int. J. Protect. Struct. 9 (3), 362–376 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/2041419618763933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. A. Rajput, M. A. Iqbal, and N. K. Gupta, “Ballistic performances of concrete targets subjected to long projectile impact,” Thin-Walled Struct. 126, 171–181 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2017.01.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. N. Kojima, H. Hayashi, T. Yamamoto, et al., “Dynamic tensile properties of iron and steels for a wide range of strain rates and strain,” Int. J. Modern Phys B. 22 (09n11), 1255–1262 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979208046621

  12. M. M. Khan and M. A. Iqbal, “Dynamic response of concrete subjected to high rate of loading: a parametric study,” Mech. Solids. 58 (4), 1378–1394 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654423600915

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. J. Hopkinson, “On the rupture of iron wire by a blow,” Proc. Literary Phil. Soc. Manchester 1, 40–45 (1872).

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Hopkinson, “On the rupture of iron wire by a blow 1872 Article 38,” in Original Papers-by the Late John Hopkinson (1901), pp. 316–320.

  15. B. Hopkinson, “X. A method of measuring the pressure produced in the detonation of high, explosives or by the impact of bullets,” Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 213 (497–508), 437–456 (1914). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1914.0010

  16. R. M. Davies “A critical study of the Hopkinson pressure bar,” Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 240 (821), 375–457 (1948). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1948.0001

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. H. Kolsky “An investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very high rates of loading,” Proc. Phys. Soc. B 62, 676 (1949). https://doi.org/10.1088/0370-1301/62/11/302

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. J. M. Krafft, A. M. Sullivan, and C. F. Tipper, “The effect of static and dynamic loading and temperature on the yield stress of iron and mild steel in compression,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 221 (1144), 114–127 (1954). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1954.0009

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. J. Harding, E.O. Wood, and J.D. Campbell “Tensile testing of materials at impact rates of strain,” J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2 (2), 88–96 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1243/JMES_JOUR_1960_002_016_02

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. F. E. Hauser, “Techniques for measuring stress-strain relations at high strain rates,” Exp. Mech. 6 (8), 395–402 (1966). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02326284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. J. Duffy, J. D. Campbell, and R. H. Hawley, “On the use of a torsional split Hopkinson bar to study rate effects in 1100-0 aluminum” J. Appl. Mech. 38 (1), 83–91 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3408771

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. U. S. Lindholm and L. M. Yeakley, “High strain-rate testing: tension and compression,” Exp. Mech. 8 (1), 1–9 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02326244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. R. A. Frantz Jr. and J. Duffy, “The dynamic stress-strain behavior in torsion of 1100-0 aluminum subjected to a sharp increase in strain rate,” J. Appl. Mechs. 39 (4), 939–945 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3422895

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. T. Nicholas “Tensile testing of materials at high rates of strain,” Exp. Mech. 21 (5), 177–185 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02326644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. B. Song, K. Connelly, J. Korellis, et al., “Improved Kolsky-bar design for mechanical characterization of materials at high strain rates,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 20 (11), 115701 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/20/11/115701

  26. R. Govender, M. Kariem, D. Ruan, et al., “Towards standardising SHPB testing-A Round Robin exercise,” EPJ Web Conf. 183, 02027 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201818302027

  27. R. Gerlach, Ch. Kettenbeil, and N. Petrinic, “A new split Hopkinson tensile bar design,” Int. J. Impact Eng. 50, 63–67 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2012.08.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. D. Mohr and G. Gary, “M-Shaped specimen for the high-strain rate tensile testing using a split Hopkinson pressure bar apparatus,” Exp. Mech. 47, 681–692 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-007-9035-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. G. H. Staab and A. Gilat, “A direct-tension split Hopkinson bar for high strain-rate testing,” Exp. Mech. 31 (3), 232–235(1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02326065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. K. Ogawa, “Impact-tension compression test by using a split-Hopkinson bar,” Exp. Mech. 24 (2), 81–86 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02324987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. U. S. Lindholm, “Some experiments with the split hopkinson pressure bar,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids. 12 (5), 317–335 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(64)90028-6

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  32. L. Wang, Foundations of Stress Waves (Elsevier, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  33. M. Hassan and K. Wille, “Experimental impact analysis on ultra-highperformance concrete (UHPC) for achieving stress equilibrium (SE) and constant strain rate (CSR) in Split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) using pulse shaping technique,” Construct. Build. Mater. 30 (144) 747–757 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. R. Panowicz and J. Janiszewski, “Tensile split Hopkinson bar technique: numerical analysis of the problem of wave disturbance and specimen geometry selection,” Metrol. Meas. Syst. 23 (3), 425–436 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1515/mms-2016-0027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. M.A. Kariem, J.H. Beynon, and D. Ruan “Misalignment effect in the split Hopkinson pressure bar technique,” Int. J. Impact Eng. 1 (47) 60–70 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2012.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. M. M. Khan and M. A. Iqbal, “Design, development, and calibration of split Hopkinson pressure bar system for dynamic material characterization of concrete,” Int. J. Protect. Struct. 20414196231155947 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1177/20414196231155947

Download references

Funding

Authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, India through the research grant no. AERB/CSRP/73/03R/2019 for the present study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, 247667, Roorkee, India

    Mohammad Mohsin Khan, Ajay Kumar & Mohd Ashraf Iqbal

Authors
  1. Mohammad Mohsin Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ajay Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohd Ashraf Iqbal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mohammad Mohsin Khan, Ajay Kumar or Mohd Ashraf Iqbal.

Ethics declarations

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors of this work declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

DECLARATION

All authors have been confirming their approval for publication and declare no conflicts of interest among them.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note.

Allerton Press remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khan, M.M., Kumar, A. & Iqbal, M.A. Development of Tensile Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Technique for Studying the Dynamic Behaviour of Metals. Mech. Solids 58, 3315–3332 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654423601568

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654423601568

Keywords:

Search

Navigation