Work

A Quantitative Approach to Comparing High Velocity Impact Experiments and Simulations Using XCT Data

Year: 2015

Type: conference-paper

Abstract: While computational models of impact events have the potential to accelerate the design cycle, one's confidence in a material model should be related to the extent of validation work that has been performed for that model. Quantities of interest used for validation are often either scalar volume-averaged quantities (such as the average density, or the force applied to a boundary) or field quantities (such as the strain field obtained from digital image correlation, or density maps computed from X-ray computed tomography (XCT)). Volume averaged quantities are easy to compare quantitatively since they are either a single value or a simple time series. However, these averaged quantities do not capture differences in the failure process within a material and can be blunt instruments for validation efforts. Field quantities provide spatial information, but are difficult to reduce to a scalar that quantifies the goodness of a particular model with respect to another model. This work describes an approach to using XCT data to quantify how well a particular simulation agrees with simulation data while accounting for the statistical nature of failure in brittle materials.

Source: Procedia Engineering

DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.04.079

Authors: Andrew L. Tonge, Brian Leavy, Jerry LaSalvia, K.T. Ramesh, Rebecca Brannon

Institutions: Johns Hopkins University, Hopkins Extreme Materials Institute, University of Utah

Language: English

Topic: High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior

Subfield: Materials Chemistry

Field: Materials Science

Domain: Physical Sciences

Open Access status: diamond

Funders: Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Army Research Laboratory

Awards: G5259331294, G881609237