| Citation: | ZHAO Fuqi, XU Peibao, WEN Heming. Influence of Specimen Size in SHPB Tests on Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2018, 32(1): 014101. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20170532
|
Dynamic compressive strengths of concrete-like materials are usually obtained by conducting laboratory tests such as split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) tests[1-5].Many empirical formulae for dynamic increase factor (DIF) based on laboratory test data were reported in the related literature Ref.[6-9].
It has to be mentioned here that the SHPB test data available for concrete materials in the literature were very scattered[7-10] due to the combined effects of strain rate, inertia and specimen size.More comprehensive investigation and discussion of the possible influencing factors can be also obtained in Ref.[1, 2, 7-11].The inertia (confinement) effect has been widely investigated experimentally[12], theoretically[13-14], numerically[5, 15] and an empirical equation for the dynamic increase factor due to inertia (confinement) effect was suggested in Ref.[16], which took no account of the effect of concrete specimen size.As strain rate effects on the compressive strengths of concrete-like materials play an important part in the construction of material constitutive models which, in turn, exert a great deal of influence on the numerical simulations of concrete structures subjected to intense dynamic loadings, it is, therefore necessary to obtain the pure strain rate effect data by eliminating the data due to the effects of inertia (confinement) and specimen size from SHPB tests.
In the present study, numerical simulations with a rate-independent material model are carried out on the influence of specimen size in SHPB tests on concrete and a new empirical equation for the dynamic increase factors due to inertia (confinement) effect is proposed which takes account of specimen size effect through its volume.Comparisons are made between the results from the numerical simulation and those from the new empirical formula and discussed.
The computational constitutive model for concrete developed in Ref.[1] is used to simulate the SHPB tests on concrete in the present study.This material model consists of equation of state (EOS), strength model including Lode effect, damage criteria and strain rate effects, etc.
The porous equation of state is used in the present study and can be expressed as[17]
|
ˉμ=ραρ0α0−1=αα0(1+μ)−1 |
(1) |
where μ=ρ/ρ0-1 is the volumetric strain, in which ρ and ρ0 are respectively the current and initial densities; α=ρs/ρ and α0=ρs0/ρ0 are the current and initial porosities in which ρs and ρs0 are the current and initial densities of solid (fully-compacted) material.
For μ > 0, concrete material is under compression condition
|
{α=max{1,min[α0,1+(α0−1)(plock−pplock−pcrush)n]}p=K1ˉμ+K2ˉμ2+K3ˉμ3 |
(2) |
where K1, K2 and K3 are the bulk moduli for fully compacted concrete material, pcrush is the pressure at which pore collapse occurs, plock is the pressure beyond which concrete material is fully compacted, n is the compaction exponent.
For μ < 0, concrete material is under tension condition.Hence, the pressure is
|
p=K1ˉμ |
(3) |
The strength surface of concrete can be written in the following form[1]
|
Y={3(p+ftt)r(θ,e)p≤0[3ftt+3p(fcc−3ftt)fcc]r(θ,e)0<p<fcc3[fcc+Bf′c(pf′c−fcc3f′c)N]r(θ,e)p≥fcc3 |
(4) |
where fcc=fc'δm_tηc and ftt=ftδtηt in which fc' and ft are the static compressive and tensile strength, δm_t and δt[2] are the dynamic increase factors due to strain rate effects only in compression and tension, ηc and ηt[18-20] are shape functions which represent shear damage and tensile softening of concrete respectively; B and N are empirical constants; r(θ, e)[21] is the Lode effect with θ and e being the Lode angle, the ratio of the tensile meridian to the compression meridian, respectively.
By setting ftt=0 and fcc=fc'r (residual strength), the residual strength surface for concrete can be obtained from Eq.(4)
|
Y={3pr(θ,e)0<p<f′cr3[f′cr+Bf′c(pf′c−r3)N]r(θ,e)p≥f′cr3 |
(5) |
Other information about shear, tensile damage, Lode effect and strain rate effect can be found in Ref.[1-2].
In this section, the commercial software LS-DYNA3D with user-defined subroutines is used to carry out the numerical study on the influence of specimen size in SHPB tests on concrete using a recently developed constitutive model for concrete[1] by setting the material DIF (δ) equal to 1.The inertia effect dynamic enhancement factor (Rc) can be obtained by dividing the strength results of simulation by quasi-static strength.The values of various parameters used in the material model are listed in Table 1[1].In this case, the numerically obtained strength increment of the studied specimen is attributed to the inertia (confinement) effect only.
| Parameters of EOS | Parameters of constitutive model | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ρ0/(kg·m-3) | ρs0/(kg·m-3) | pcrush/MPa | plock/GPa | n | K1/GPa | K2/GPa | K3/GPa | Strength surface | Shear damage | Tensile damage | Lode effect | |||||||||||||||
| fc'/MPa | ft/MPa | B | N | G/GPa | λs | l | r | λm | c1 | c2 | εfrac | e1 | e2 | e3 | ||||||||||||
| 2 400 | 2 680 | 15.2 | 3 | 3 | 13.9 | 30 | 10 | 45.6 | 3.8 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 10.5 | 4.6 | 0.45 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 3 | 6.93 | 0.007 | 0.65 | 0.01 | 5 | ||||
DownLoad:
CSV
An SHPB system contains incident and transmitter pressure bars with a short specimen between them, as shown in Fig. 1.A stress pulse of trapezium shape is applied to the incident pressure bar as shown schematically in Fig. 2 in which the incident stress starts from 0, quickly rises to the peak value of ppeak at t1, keeps as a constant for t2, then drops back to 0 after t3 and are summarized in Table 2.
| t1/μs | t2/μs | t3/μs | ppeak/MPa |
| 25 | 200 | 25 | Varies |
DownLoad:
CSV
Friction is an important factor which needs to be considered.However, in SHPB tests on concrete the effect of friction is negligibly small[22] in terms of its contribution to the total dynamic increase factor and is usually ignored in numerical simulations[23].Moreover, in SHPB tests measures are usually taken (i.e. by applying lubricant to both ends of concrete samples) to further reduce the effect of friction.Hence, in the present study the effect of friction is also ignored in the numerical simulations.
In this study, the dynamic strength increase factor is employed to reflect the effect of specimen size in SHPB tests on concrete.If there is no size effect there will be no difference for concrete samples with different sizes or volumes in terms of the dynamic increase factors at the same strain rate.Otherwise there will be size effect in SHPB tests on concrete.
Fig. 3 shows the numerical results for the dynamic increase factor due to inertia (confinement) effect Rc for concrete specimens with the same volume of different length/diameter ratios (i.e., Ø51 mm×51 mm, Ø64 mm×32 mm, Ø74 mm×24 mm) whilst Fig. 4 shows the numerical results for concrete samples with different volume of the same length/diameter ratios (i.e., Ø64 mm×32 mm, Ø80 mm×40 mm).It can be seen from Fig. 3 that the inertia effect is mainly related to the specimen volume and is insensitive to the length/diameter ratio when the volume and the material parameters of the specimens are kept the same.It also can be seen from Fig. 4 that the dynamic increase factor due to inertia (confinement) effect increases with the increase of the concrete specimen volume, which indicates that size effect does exist in SHPB tests on concrete as described above.
On the basis of the numerical results discussed in the previous section, a new empirical equation which takes consideration of the specimen size effect in SHPB tests on concrete is suggested here to describe the dynamic increase factor due to inertia (confinement) effect Rc by using the monotonically increasing and continuous properties of exponential functions in a simple and easy to use form, namely
|
Rc=Slg(˙ε˙ε0)+1βlg(VV0)−W+1 |
(6) |
where S, W, β are the constants to be determined numerically, ˙ε is the strain rate, ˙ε0 is the reference strain rate for a reference specimen usually taken to be ˙ε0=1.0 s-1, V is the volume of a concrete specimen under investigation, V0 is the volume of a concrete sample with a reference size, say, Ø51 mm×51 mm.Set V=V0 in Eq.(6), one obtains the dynamic increase factor due to inertia effect for the reference concrete specimen Rc0.
In the following, first, one determines the values of S and W in Eq.(6) using the numerical results for the concrete specimen with the same volume (i.e. V=V0) as presented in Fig. 3 and, then, the value of β in Eq.(6) using the numerical results for the concrete samples with different sizes/volumes as given in Fig. 4.
Fig. 3 shows the comparison between the numerical results and Eq.(6) with S=6, W=2.8 and V=V0 as indicated by the dashed line.It can be seen from Fig. 3 that reasonable agreement is obtained.Further examination reveals that the value of S in Eq.(6) should not be a constant but a function of strain rate.The slope of the curve is too small at the low strain rate, and too large at the high strain rate.By using the centrosymmetric properties of the hyperbolic tangent and the x-axis paralleled, S is taken as the following form to increase the slope of the curve at the low strain rate and decrease the slope at the high strain rate, namely
|
S=−Fitanh[lg(˙ε˙ε0−Wi)Si]+Gi |
(7) |
where Fi, Wi, Si, Gi are the constants determined using the numerical results for concrete samples with constant volume as presented in Fig. 3, namely, Fi=6.0, Wi=2.8, Si=0.8, Gi=8.5.The solid line in Fig. 3 is predicted from Eq.(6) with V=V0 together with Eq.(7).It is clear from Fig. 3 that good agreement is obtained.
Fig. 4 shows the comparison between Eq.(6) with β=2.7 and the numerical results obtained for the concrete samples with different sizes/volumes.The values of all the other parameters in Eq.(6) are listed in Table 3.It is evident from Fig. 4 that the present model agrees well with the numerical simulations.
| ˙ε0/s-1 | Fi | Si | Wi | Gi | W | β |
| 1.0 | 6.0 | 0.8 | 2.8 | 8.5 | 2.8 | 2.7 |
DownLoad:
CSV
In order to verify the validity of Eq.(6) more numerical simulations are performed on concrete specimens with different sizes. The numerical results are also presented in Fig. 4 and comparisons are also made between Eq.(6) and the numerical results.It can be seen from Fig. 4 that good agreement is obtained.
Fig. 5 shows the normalization of all the numerical results for concrete specimens with different sizes as given in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 with respect to those for the reference concrete sample, namely, Ø51 mm×51 mm.It is clear from Fig. 5 that all the numerical results collapse into one line.It lends further support to the validity of Eq.(6) for the dynamic increase factor due to inertia (confinement) effect which takes into consideration the influence of specimen size.
The influence of specimen size in SHPB tests on concrete has been investigated numerically using a rate-independent material model.A new empirical equation for the dynamic increase factor due to inertia (confinement) effect has also been proposed which takes into account the specimen size effect through its volume.It is demonstrated that the new empirical formula agrees well with the numerical results for SHPB tests on concrete with different specimen sizes.
| [1] |
XU H, WEN H M.A computational constitutive model for concrete subjected to dynamic loadings[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2016, 91:116-125. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.01.003
|
| [2] |
XU H, WEN H M.Semi-empirical equations for the dynamic strength enhancement of concrete-like materials[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2013, 60:76-81. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.04.005
|
| [3] |
TEDESCO J W, HUGHES M L, ROSS C A.Numerical simulation of high strain rate concrete compression tests[J].Computers & Structures, 1994, 51(1):65-77. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/004579499490037X
|
| [4] |
GROTE D L, PARK S W, ZHOU M.Dynamic behavior of concrete at high strain rates and pressures:Ⅰ.experimental characterization[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2001, 25(9):869-886. doi: 10.1016/S0734-743X(01)00020-3
|
| [5] |
LI Q M, LU Y B, MENG H.Further investigation on the dynamic compressive strength enhancement of concrete-like materials based on split Hopkinson pressure bar tests.Part Ⅱ:numerical simulations[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(12):1335-1345. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.04.010
|
| [6] |
HAO H, TARASOV B G.Experimental study of dynamic material properties of clay brick and mortar at different strain rates[J].Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, 2008, 8(2):117-132. doi: 10.1080/13287982.2008.11464992
|
| [7] |
BISCHOFF P H, PERRY S H.Compressive behaviour of concrete at high strain rates[J].Materials & Structures, 1991, 24(6):425-450. doi: 10.1007/BF02472016
|
| [8] |
TEDESCO J W, ROSS C A.Strain-rate-dependent constitutive equations for concrete[J].Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 1998, 120(4):398-405. doi: 10.1115/1.2842350
|
| [9] |
ZHOU X Q, HAO H.Mesoscale modelling and analysis of damage and fragmentation of concrete slab under contact detonation[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(12):1315-1326. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.02.010
|
| [10] |
COTSOVOS D M, PAVLOVIC M N.Numerical investigation of concrete subjected to compressive impact loading.Part 1:a fundamental explanation for the apparent strength gain at high loading rates[J].Computers & Structures, 2008, 86(1):145-163. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045794907001964
|
| [11] |
HAO H, HAO Y, LI Z X. A numerical study of factors influencing high-speed impact tests of concrete material properties[C]//Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Shock and Impact Loads on Structures. Adelaide: CI-Premier Pte Ltd, 2009: 37-52.
|
| [12] |
ZHANG M, WU H J, LI Q M, et al.Further investigation on the dynamic compressive strength enhancement of concrete-like materials based on split Hopkinson pressure bar tests.Part Ⅰ:experiments[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(12):1327-1334. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.04.009
|
| [13] |
FORRESTAL M J, WRIGHT T W, CHEN W.The effect of radial inertia on brittle samples during the split Hopkinson pressure bar test[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2007, 34(3):405-411. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2005.12.001
|
| [14] |
ZHANG M, LI Q M, HUANG F L, et al.Inertia-induced radial confinement in an elastic tubular specimen subjected to axial strain acceleration[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2010, 37(4):459-464. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.09.009
|
| [15] |
HAO Y, HAO H, LI Z X.Numerical analysis of lateral inertial confinement effects on impact test of concrete compressive material properties[J].International Journal of Protective Structures, 2010, 1:145-168. doi: 10.1260/2041-4196.1.1.145
|
| [16] |
LI Q M, MENG H.About the dynamic strength enhancement of concrete-like materials in a split Hopkinson pressure bar test[J].International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2003, 40(2):343-360. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7683(02)00526-7
|
| [17] |
HERRMANN W.Constitutive equation for the dynamic compaction of ductile porous materials[J].Journal of Applied Physics, 1969, 40(6):2490-2499. doi: 10.1063/1.1658021
|
| [18] |
HORDIJK D A. Local approach to fatigue of concrete[D]. Delft: Delft University of Technology, 1991.
|
| [19] |
MALVAR L J, CRAWFORD J E, WESEVICH J W, et al.A plasticity concrete material model for DYNA3D[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 1997, 19(9):847-873. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0734743X97000237
|
| [20] |
HARTMANN T, PIETZSCH A, GEBBEKEN N.A hydrocode material model for concrete[J].International Journal of Protective Structures, 2010, 1(4):443-468. doi: 10.1260/2041-4196.1.4.443
|
| [21] |
WILLAM K J, WARNKE E P.Constitutive model for the triaxial behavior of concrete[J].Proceedings of International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering, 1975, 19(1):1-30. http://www.docin.com/p-466143542.html
|
| [22] |
HAO Y, HAO H, LI Z X.Influence of end friction confinement on impact tests of concrete material at high strain rate[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2013, 60:82-106. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.04.008
|
| [23] |
LI Q M, LU Y B, MENG H.Further investigation on the dynamic compressive strength enhancement of concrete-like materials based on split Hopkinson pressure bar tests.Part Ⅱ:numerical simulations[J].International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(12):1335-1345. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2009.04.010
|
| [1] | SU Yongchao, NING Jianguo, XU Xiangzhao. Optimization Model and Visualization Simulation of Projectile Penetration into Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2025, 39(2): 025103. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20240811 |
| [2] | HUANG Shanxiu, CHEN Xiaoyang, ZHANG Chuanxiang, GUO Jiaqi. Mechanical Properties and Energy Evolution Characteristics of Concrete under Different Strain Rates and Content of MWCNTs[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2023, 37(1): 014101. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20220654 |
| [3] | LI Ping, SUN Chonghui, HUANG Ruiyuan, DUAN Shiwei. The Law of Combined Effect of Rate and Temperature on Compressive Strength of Concrete Materials[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2022, 36(2): 024204. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20210825 |
| [4] | GAO Guang-Fa. Hardening Effect of the Strain Rate on the Dynamic Tensile Strength of the Plain Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2017, 31(5): 593-602. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2017.05.013 |
| [5] | GAO Guang-Fa. Effect of Strain-Rate Hardening on Dynamic Compressive Strength of Plain Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2017, 31(3): 261-270. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2017.03.007 |
| [6] | LIU Hai-Feng, HAN Li. Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Mechanical Behavior of Concrete with Two-dimensional Random Distribution of Coarse Aggregate[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2016, 30(3): 191-199. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2016.03.003 |
| [7] | PEI Hong-Bo, NIE Jian-Xin, QING Jian-Feng, ZHOU Zheng-Qing. Damage Effects of Explosion of RDX-Based Aluminized Explosives in Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2015, 29(1): 23-28. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2015.01.004 |
| [8] | LI Zhi-Wu, XU Jin-Yu, DAI Shuang-Tian, BAI Er-Lei, GAO Zhi-Gang. Experimental Study on Concrete Exposed to High Temperature under Impact Loading[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2013, 27(3): 417-422. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2013.03.016 |
| [9] | XU Jin-Yu, LIU Jian, FAN Fei-Lin, REN Wei-Bo, XI Yang-Yang, YANG Kun. A High Temperature SHPB Impact Experimental Technique and Its Application[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2013, 27(1): 57-62. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2013.01.008 |
| [10] | PAN Jian-Hua, CHEN Xue-Dong. Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Fracture Toughness Test Using Three-Point Bending Specimen in SHPB[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2013, 27(6): 856-862. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2013.06.010 |
| [11] | YANG Yang, HE Tao, WEN He-Ming. An Abrasion Algorithm for Ogive-Nose Steel Projectile Penetrating Concrete Target[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2012, 26(1): 83-88. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2012.01.012 |
| [12] | CHEN Xing-Ming, LIU Tong, XIAO Zheng-Xue. Numerical Simulation Study of Parameter Sensitivity Analysis on Concrete HJC Model[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2012, 26(3): 313-318. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2012.03.011 |
| [13] | KANG Yan-Long, JIANG Jian-Wei, WANG Shu-You, MEN Jian-Bing. Numerical Simulation on the Effect of Surface Concrete Layer on Inner Explosion of Runway[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2012, 26(1): 76-82. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2012.01.011 |
| [14] | MENG Yang, WEN He-Ming. Numerical Simulation of the Response of Reinforced Concrete Slabs to Projectile Impact or Explosive Loading[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2011, 25(4): 370-378 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2011.04.014 |
| [15] | LIAN Bing, JIANG Jian-Wei, MEN Jian-Bing, WANG Shu-You. Simulation Analysis on Law of Penetration of Long-Rod Projectiles with High Speed into Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2010, 24(5): 377-382 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2010.05.010 |
| [16] | ZHONG Wei-Zhou, SONG Shun-Cheng, ZHANG Fang-Ju, ZHANG Qing-Ping, HUANG Xi-Cheng, LI Si-Zhong, LU Yong-Gang. Research on Behavior of Composite Material Projectile Penetrate Concrete Target[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2009, 23(1): 75-80 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2009.01.013 |
| [17] | LENG Bing-Lin, XU Jin-Yu, SUN Hui-Xiang, XU Jie. Numerical Simulation of Dynamic Response of Concrete Subjected to Internal Load of Blast[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2009, 23(2): 111-116 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2009.02.006 |
| [18] | TIAN Zhan-Dong, LI Shou-Cang, DUAN Zhuo-Ping, ZHANG Zhen-Yu. Numerical Simulation of the Trace of Projectiles Penetrating Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2007, 21(4): 354-358 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2007.04.004 |
| [19] | WANG Zheng, NI Yu-Shan, CAO Ju-Zhen, ZHANG Wen. Building of a Constitutive Model for Concrete under Dynamic Impact[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2006, 20(4): 337-344 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2006.04.001 |
| [20] | WANG Ke-Hui, CHU Zhe, ZHOU Gang, WANG Jin-Hai, ZHU Yu-Rong, MIN Tao, HAN Juan-Ni. Numerical Simulation and Experimental Study of Penetrator with Composite Structure Impacting Concrete Targets[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2005, 19(1): 93-96 . doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.2005.01.016 |
Figures(5) / Tables(3)
Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd support:
info@rhhz.net
ZHAO Fuqi, XU Peibao, WEN Heming. Influence of Specimen Size in SHPB Tests on Concrete[J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2018, 32(1): 014101. doi: 10.11858/gywlxb.20170532
| Parameters of EOS | Parameters of constitutive model | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ρ0/(kg·m-3) | ρs0/(kg·m-3) | pcrush/MPa | plock/GPa | n | K1/GPa | K2/GPa | K3/GPa | Strength surface | Shear damage | Tensile damage | Lode effect | |||||||||||||||
| fc'/MPa | ft/MPa | B | N | G/GPa | λs | l | r | λm | c1 | c2 | εfrac | e1 | e2 | e3 | ||||||||||||
| 2 400 | 2 680 | 15.2 | 3 | 3 | 13.9 | 30 | 10 | 45.6 | 3.8 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 10.5 | 4.6 | 0.45 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 3 | 6.93 | 0.007 | 0.65 | 0.01 | 5 | ||||
DownLoad:
CSV
| t1/μs | t2/μs | t3/μs | ppeak/MPa |
| 25 | 200 | 25 | Varies |
DownLoad:
CSV
| ˙ε0/s-1 | Fi | Si | Wi | Gi | W | β |
| 1.0 | 6.0 | 0.8 | 2.8 | 8.5 | 2.8 | 2.7 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| Parameters of EOS | Parameters of constitutive model | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ρ0/(kg·m-3) | ρs0/(kg·m-3) | pcrush/MPa | plock/GPa | n | K1/GPa | K2/GPa | K3/GPa | Strength surface | Shear damage | Tensile damage | Lode effect | |||||||||||||||
| fc'/MPa | ft/MPa | B | N | G/GPa | λs | l | r | λm | c1 | c2 | εfrac | e1 | e2 | e3 | ||||||||||||
| 2 400 | 2 680 | 15.2 | 3 | 3 | 13.9 | 30 | 10 | 45.6 | 3.8 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 10.5 | 4.6 | 0.45 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 3 | 6.93 | 0.007 | 0.65 | 0.01 | 5 | ||||
| t1/μs | t2/μs | t3/μs | ppeak/MPa |
| 25 | 200 | 25 | Varies |
| ˙ε0/s-1 | Fi | Si | Wi | Gi | W | β |
| 1.0 | 6.0 | 0.8 | 2.8 | 8.5 | 2.8 | 2.7 |
DownLoad:
DownLoad:
