You are here
Why not Gurson-Tvergaard-Needleman void growth model for plate impact simulations?
Can someone answer me if Gurson-Tvergaard-Needleman void growth model is not suitable for flyer-plate impact simulations? I have come across some papers who have derived void growth equations to simulate fracture in ductile mateials like OFHC copper etc., subject to plate impact (uniaxial strain high strian rate loading). I have attached 3 of them. But none of them have used Gurson's yield function. I did not find any explanation if GTN model has any drawbacks in simulating spallation phenomena found in plate impact simulations.
Only Worswick and co-workers have used Gurson's model to simulate spallation in plate impact of brass. They have validated their free surface velocity profile with the experimental data.
Thanks,
Siva Prasad AVS.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 FP_SPALL_CU_JN_JOHNSON_DUCTILE_SOLIDS.pdf | 1.27 MB |
| FP_SPALL_CU_EFTIS_VOID_DAMAGE.pdf | 842.03 KB |
| FP_SPALL_CU_RAJENDRAN_GROVE_VOID_GROWTH.pdf | 1019.18 KB |
- sivaprasad.avs's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
- 3408 reads
Comments
Re: Gurson-Tvergaard-Needleman void growth and plate impact
The GTN model is the simplest void growth model in the lterature and has been used widely for impact simulations with various levels of success. There are even extensions of GTN that include rate dependence. The reason you don't find references in the litearture is that publishing information on simulations using existing models is not considered worthwhile. Only new models/new numerical algorithms/new experimental data are published. However, you can contact the authors of other void growth models to check whether they have presented some of their GTN-based results at conferences.
-- Biswajit