{"title":"让剪切变得简单--验证用于剪切测试的剪切压缩试样 0 (SCS0)","authors":"I. Levin, D. Rittel","doi":"10.1007/s11340-023-00996-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Validate and assess the limitations of the Shear Compression 0 Specimen (SCS0) as a simple shear specimen for quasi-static and dynamic large strain loading conditions. Propose a simple data reduction procedure, using a simple, back of the envelope method, as a first approximation for the strain, as opposed to cumbersome numerical simulations and avoid the use of ad-hoc data reduction factors.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Static and dynamic finite elements simulations were performed in which the large deformation options was turned on and off. Assessment of the Lode parameter in each case and evaluation of the accuracy of the specimen’s strains and stresses as determined through simple data reduction and full numerical simulations.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The SCS0 was shown to undergo simple shear, both statically and dynamically, as evidenced from the very low values of the Lode parameter. The calculated stress is in excellent agreement with the measured one, determined using simple strength of materials definitions. When assuming the corresponding kinematics, it is observed that the calculated and the measured strain diverge to an extent of about 25%. This discrepancy is shown to result from the assumption of large geometrical deformations in the numerical model as opposed to the simple analytical kinematics.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The conclusion is that the SCS0 is now fully validated, and the experimentalist will decide which strain approximation is suitable, between analytical and numerical.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":552,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Mechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making Shear Simple – Validation of the Shear Compression Specimen 0 (SCS0) for Shear Testing\",\"authors\":\"I. Levin, D. Rittel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11340-023-00996-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Validate and assess the limitations of the Shear Compression 0 Specimen (SCS0) as a simple shear specimen for quasi-static and dynamic large strain loading conditions. Propose a simple data reduction procedure, using a simple, back of the envelope method, as a first approximation for the strain, as opposed to cumbersome numerical simulations and avoid the use of ad-hoc data reduction factors.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Static and dynamic finite elements simulations were performed in which the large deformation options was turned on and off. Assessment of the Lode parameter in each case and evaluation of the accuracy of the specimen’s strains and stresses as determined through simple data reduction and full numerical simulations.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The SCS0 was shown to undergo simple shear, both statically and dynamically, as evidenced from the very low values of the Lode parameter. The calculated stress is in excellent agreement with the measured one, determined using simple strength of materials definitions. When assuming the corresponding kinematics, it is observed that the calculated and the measured strain diverge to an extent of about 25%. This discrepancy is shown to result from the assumption of large geometrical deformations in the numerical model as opposed to the simple analytical kinematics.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The conclusion is that the SCS0 is now fully validated, and the experimentalist will decide which strain approximation is suitable, between analytical and numerical.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":552,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental Mechanics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental Mechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11340-023-00996-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, CHARACTERIZATION & TESTING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Mechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11340-023-00996-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, CHARACTERIZATION & TESTING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目标 验证和评估剪切压缩 0 号试样(SCS0)作为准静态和动态大应变加载条件下的简单剪切试样的局限性。提出一种简单的数据还原程序,使用简单的包络后退法作为应变的第一近似值,而不是繁琐的数值模拟,并避免使用临时数据还原因子。对每种情况下的 Lode 参数进行评估,并对通过简单数据缩减和完全数值模拟确定的试样应变和应力的准确性进行评估。计算得出的应力与使用简单材料强度定义确定的测量应力非常吻合。假设采用相应的运动学原理,可以发现计算应变和测量应变的偏差约为 25%。结论是 SCS0 现在已得到充分验证,实验人员将决定在分析和数值之间选择哪种应变近似方法更合适。
Making Shear Simple – Validation of the Shear Compression Specimen 0 (SCS0) for Shear Testing
Objective
Validate and assess the limitations of the Shear Compression 0 Specimen (SCS0) as a simple shear specimen for quasi-static and dynamic large strain loading conditions. Propose a simple data reduction procedure, using a simple, back of the envelope method, as a first approximation for the strain, as opposed to cumbersome numerical simulations and avoid the use of ad-hoc data reduction factors.
Methods
Static and dynamic finite elements simulations were performed in which the large deformation options was turned on and off. Assessment of the Lode parameter in each case and evaluation of the accuracy of the specimen’s strains and stresses as determined through simple data reduction and full numerical simulations.
Results
The SCS0 was shown to undergo simple shear, both statically and dynamically, as evidenced from the very low values of the Lode parameter. The calculated stress is in excellent agreement with the measured one, determined using simple strength of materials definitions. When assuming the corresponding kinematics, it is observed that the calculated and the measured strain diverge to an extent of about 25%. This discrepancy is shown to result from the assumption of large geometrical deformations in the numerical model as opposed to the simple analytical kinematics.
Conclusion
The conclusion is that the SCS0 is now fully validated, and the experimentalist will decide which strain approximation is suitable, between analytical and numerical.
期刊介绍:
Experimental Mechanics is the official journal of the Society for Experimental Mechanics that publishes papers in all areas of experimentation including its theoretical and computational analysis. The journal covers research in design and implementation of novel or improved experiments to characterize materials, structures and systems. Articles extending the frontiers of experimental mechanics at large and small scales are particularly welcome.
Coverage extends from research in solid and fluids mechanics to fields at the intersection of disciplines including physics, chemistry and biology. Development of new devices and technologies for metrology applications in a wide range of industrial sectors (e.g., manufacturing, high-performance materials, aerospace, information technology, medicine, energy and environmental technologies) is also covered.