Int.d. Ympac~ Engng. Vol.2,No.3, pp.263-281, 1984 0734-743X/84 $3.00 + 0.

00
Printed in Great Britain Pergamon Press Ltd.

DYNAMIC AXIAL CRUSHING OF

CIRCULAR TUBES
W i o d z i m i e r z A b r a m o w i c z I and N o r m a n Jones

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Liverpool,

P.O. Box 147, Liverpool L69 3BX, U.K.
(Received 13 July 1984; in revised form 16 August 1984)

Summary - A series of axial crushing tests on steel circular cylindrical

shells loaded either statically or dynamically is reported and compared
with various theoretical predictions and e/R0irical relations. A modified
version of Alexander's theoretical analysis for axis!mmetric, or concertina,
deformations gives good a ~ t with the experimental results when the
effective crushing distance is considered and provided that the influence
of material strain rate sensitivity is retained in the dynamic crushing
case.

NOTAT I ON

b radius of toroidal shell element [15]

h shell thickness
P Cowper-Symcnds exponent in equation (26)
v mean velocity of striking mass during response
m
x0 H/R
A 2~Rh
A1 ~R 2
D Cowper-Symonds coefficient in equation (26)
E1,E 2 internal energy absorption
2H initial distance between plastic hinges at top and bottom of a
basic element (Fig. 5)
K initial kinetic energy
L initial length of a columa
M striking mass
Mo (2//3) (o0h'/4)
P theoretical predictions for mean static crushing load
m

C mean dynamic crushing load in experimental tests

mean static crushing load in experimental tests

theoretical prediction for mean static crushing load corrected

for effective crushing distance
~d theoretical prediction for mean dynamic crushing load corrected
m
for effective crushing distance and material strain rate sensi-
tivity
R mean radius of cylindrical shell
V impact velocity of striking mass
6 effective crushing distance
e

1Assistant Professor,
Institute of Fundamental Technological Research,
Swietokrzyska, 21, 00-049 Warsaw, Poland. SEBC Visiting Fellow, University of Liverix)ol ,
Autumn 1983.
263
264 Wlodzimierz A b r a m o w i c z and N o r m a n Jones

final experimental crushed distance

~f
£ strain
final mean strain
£ strain rate
Pm/A~u or Pm/AOu
u average stress
a
uniaxial yield stress
°0
o0d dynamic uniaxial yield stress
ou uniaxial ultimate tensile stress
d
ou dynamic uniaxial ultimate tensile stress
A/A I

INTRODUCTION
M a n y a r t i c l e s have been p u b l i s h e d on the static and dynamic c r u s h i n g of circu-
lar tubes which are known to be e f f i c i e n t energy a b s o r b e r s per unit w e i g h t of
m a t e r i a l [I - 3]. This article focuses on the range of dynamic loads which
give rise to a q u a s i - s t a t i c c r u s h i n g response. Larger dynamic loads are associ-
ated with the d y n a m i c p l a s t i c b u c k l i n g p h e n o m e n o n which is d i s c u s s e d in Refs
[4] and [5].

Results are r e p o r t e d for t w e n t y - t h r e e e x p e r i m e n t a l tests on 56 mm d i a m e t e r

steel tubes of various lengths s u b j e c t e d to dynamic axial loads. Comparisons
are made w i t h e x i s t i n g t h e o r e t i c a l p r e d i c t i o n s and empirical results and im-
p r o v e m e n t s are s u g g e s t e d to A l e x a n d e r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l analysis [6]. Some obser-
v a t i o n s are made on e f f e c t i v e c r u s h i n g d i s t a n c e s and m a t e r i a l strain rate ef-
fects.

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
The e x p e r i m e n t a l tests r e p o r t e d herein were c o n d u c t e d on the drop hammer rig
in Fig. I w h i c h is i n s t a l l e d in the D e p a r t m e n t of M e c h a n i c a l E n g i n e e r i n g at
the U n i v e r s i t y of Liverpool. Currently, this rig has a tup mass which can be
varied up to 75 kg. A flat c y l i n d r i c a l head was made from mild steel, covered
w i t h a g a u g e plate and a t t a c h e d to the tup. The tubular test specimens, with
the d i m e n s i o n s shown in Table I, simply rested on the base of the drop hammer
rig.

P h o t o - c e l l s were used to record the impact v e l o c i t y (V) in Table I.

Static c o m p r e s s i v e load-axial d e f l e c t i o n curves were o b t a i n e d for the

c i r c u l a r tubes listed in Table 2 at a c r o s s - h e a d speed of 1.66 x 10 -5 m s -I.
The static b e h a v i o u r d u r i n g the c r e a t i o n of four lobes for specimen No. 4 is
shown in Fig. 2.

A 0.2% proof stress of 222 MN m -2 and an u l t i m a t e stress of 336 MN m -2 were

o b t a i n e d from a static tensile test c o n d u c t e d on the same m a t e r i a l at a strain
rate of 10 -~ s -I, a p p r o x i m a t e l y .

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
A summary of the e x p e r i m e n t a l data from the dynamic tests on the c i r c u l a r tubes
is p r e s e n t e d in Table I. 6f is the final (permanent) r e d u c t i o n in axial length
of a test s p e c i m e n and the average dynamic force (Pm d) is defined as the initial
kinetic energy (K) d i v i d e d by 6f. The total energy imparted to a specimen is
equal to the initial k i n e t i c energy (K) and the additional p o t e n t i a l energy
 Dynamic axial c r u s h i n g of c i r c u l a r tubes 265

(Mg6f) lost by the striking mass during axial c r u s h i n g of a test specimen.

d
This a d d i t i o n a l p o t e n t i a l energy was not c o n s i d e r e d when e s t i m a t i n g Pm
in
Table I, but could be taken into account if the increased accuracy was con-
sidered necessary. The increase in p o t e n t i a l energy of tests T2 and T44 in
Table I, for example, is a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1.89% and 1.85%, respectively, which,
therefore, implies that the average dynamic force in these cases was somewhat
less than 2% larger than the c o r r e s p o n d i n g values given in Table I.

Two modes of d e f o r m a t i o n are d i s t i n g u i s h e d for the c i r c u l a r tubes in Table

I.

1, i
@
@
@
@ @

FIGURE I. Lower part of drop hammer rig.

 TABLE I. Experimental data for 2 in. cylindrical tubes with 0%
+ 0.343
R = 28.032 m m a n d h = 1.2 + 0.005 mm
- 0.472

d
Specimen L M V K 6f Pm Mode of
No. (ram) (kg) (m/s) (kJ) (nml) (kN) deformation*

T1 133.1 73.6 9.230 3.14 73.0 43.0 C

c~d
T2 133.0 73.6 10.358 3.95 103.2 38.3
c~d
T3 178.0 73.6 10.326 3.92 94.4 41.6 o
N
T4 178.1 73.6 10.372 3.96 90.3 43.9 c
T5 224.1 73.6 9.153 3.08 69.1 44.6 c
c*d
T6 224.0 73.6 10.275 3.89 88.9 43.8 N
c~d
T8 221.9 73.6 10.288 3.90 96.08 40.6
c~d
T9 244.3 73.6 10.275 3.89 95.70 40.6 m
c*d m
TI0 244.2 73.6 10.275 3.89 88.7 43.9 O
T11 267.1 73.6 8.511 2.67 64.5 41.4 c~d
Q
c+d N
T12 266.9 73.6 10.249 3.87 94.3 41.0
m
T13 289.2 73.6 8.488 2.65 62.9 42.1 c~d
c~d
T14 289.1 73.6 10.230 3.85 92.0 41.8 Z
O
T37 99.9 73.6 5.504 1.11 25.2 44.0 c m
c~d m
T38 100.0 73.6 7.927 2.31 53.3 43.3
T39 100.2 73.6 6.401 1.51 34.2 44.2 c O
T40 100.1 73.6 8.675 2.77 70.7 39.2 c*d

T41 100.0 73.6 8.667 2.76 64.0 43.1 c

c~d
T42 100.1 73.6 9.271 3.16 79.8 39.6
T43 100.0 26.6 9.730 1.26 25.2 50.0 c
T44 100.0 73.6 9.272 3.16 80.8 39.1 d

T45 100.0 26.6 10.198 1.38 29.3 47.1 c

T46 100.2 73.6 7.197 1.91 42.6 44.8 c

*c : concertina; d: diamond; +: transition.

 Dynamic axial crushing of c i r c u l a r tubes 267

TABLE 2. S t a t i c c o m p r e s s i o n t e s t s on c i r c u l a r t u b e s
( c r o s s - h e a d s p e e d = 1.66 x I0 -s m s -l)

Specimen R h L p s Mode of
No. (mm) (mm) (rnm) (kN)
m deformation*

4 27.94 1.20 178.1 32.60 c

7 28.10 1.20 222.3 30.16 c~d

*c: concertina; d: diamond.

50

P
(kN)

40

30

20

10,

0 | l 1 I I I
0 6 12 IB 24 30 36
6 (ram)

FI(~/RE 2. Static axial load versus crushing distance for test specimen
No. 4 in Table 2.
268 Wlodzimierz Abramowicz and Norman Jones

C o n c e r t i n a or a x i s y m m e t r i c deformation, denoted by 'c', is i l l u s t r a t e d in

Fig. 3. The first and s u b s e q u e n t lobes, which d e v e l o p in this mode of defor-
mation, p o s s e s s similar c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w h e t h e r a c i r c u l a r tube is loaded dy-
n a m i c a l l y or c r u s h e d s t a t i c a l l y as i ll u s t r a t e d in Fig. 3 which shows a specimen
which has been d e f o r m e d under both conditions.

The o t h e r mode of d e f o r m a t i o n identified in Table I is labelled 'd' to

d e n o t e d i a m o n d or n o n - a x i s y m m e t r i c behaviour, which is shown in Fig. 4.

FIGURE 3. Test specimen T4 in Table I. The last (top) four modes were
obtained in a static compression test.

FIGURE 4. Crushed circular tube test specimens. Concertina deformation

mode (left) and diamond modes (centre and right).
 Dynamic axial c r u s h i n g of c i r c u l a r tubes 269

THEORETICAL DETAILS

Introduction

This section c o n t a i n s an improvement to A l e x a n d e r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l analysis [6]

for the a x i s y m m e t r i c c r u s h i n g of axially loaded c y l i n d r i c a l shells (concertina
mode). Recent t h e o r e t i c a l p r e d i c t i o n s are reported for the n o n - a x i s y m m e t r i c
or d i a m o n d c r u s h i n g mode [7] and estimates are made of the e f f e c t i v e c r u s h i n g
d i s t a n c e and the influence of material strain rate effects.

M o d i f i c a t i o n of A l e x a n d e r ' s solution for a x i s y m m e t r i c (concertina mode) crushing

A l e x a n d e r [6] d e v e l o p e d a t h e o r e t i c a l analysis for the axisymmetric crushing

of a t h i n - w a l l e d c y l i n d r i c a l shell subjected to a static axial load. An alter-
native d e r i v a t i o n for this analysis is p r e s e n t e d in Ref. [8]. A slight modifi-
cation is made to this analysis in this section.

A l e x a n d e r assumed the c o l l a p s e mode 2 illustrated in Fig. 5. The energy

d i s s i p a t e d in the three stationary c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l plastic hinges during the
c r u s h i n g of one lobe is

E I = 4 ~ M 0 ( z R + H) (I)

which is identical to A l e x a n d e r [6] and Johnson [8].

IP/ / / / /
//// /// /

-~ .-h

Hinges
/

FI(~JRE 5. Idealized axisymmetric, or concentric, collapse mode for an

axially compressed cylindrical shell.

2Alexander [6] and Johnson [8] also examined buckling convolutfons which deform invards
rather than outwards as shown in Fig. 5. However, this led to minor differences in previous
theoretical predictions.
270 Wlodzimierz Abramowicz and N o r m a n Jones

Johnson [8] t a k e s the e n e r g y d i s s i p a t e d due to the c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l forces

as 2 a0h~2R{loge(R + s sinal/R}ds. It is assumed here that

0
H
E2 = 2 f 0 o 0 h ~ d A ' (2)

where ~ = d[{2w(R + s sin~)-2wR}/2wR]/dt = s c o s e ~ / R and dA = 2~(R + s sin~)ds.

Thus, e q u a t i o n (2) b e c o m e s

E2 = 4 ~ a 0 h c o s ~ ( H ' / 2 + H3sin~/3R) (3)

n/2
from which E2 = i
~0
E2d~ gives

E 2 = 2~a0hH2 (I + H / 3 R ) . (4)

E q u a t i o n (4) is d i f f e r e n t to A l e x a n d e r ' s p r e d i c t i o n [6] w h i c h is b a s e d on a

m e an c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l s t r a i n w h i c h d i s r e g a r d s the v a r i a t i o n w i t h s in Fig. 5.

Now, the m e a n c r u s h i n g load P is found from

m

Pm2H = E I + E2 (5)

which substituting equations (I) and (4) g i v e s

Pm/M0 = 2 / ( 3 ) ~ ( R / h ) (H/R) + 2~(R/h)(H/R)2//(3) + 2z2R/H + 27 (6)

f r om w h i c h ~(Pm/M0)/~H = 0 predicts,

2(R/h) (H/R) 3//3 + / 3 ( R / h ) ( H / R ) 2 - ~ = 0, (7)

or
H/R = {(~h//(3)R) (I + 2 x 0 / 3 ) - I } ½ (8)

w h e n x 0 = H/R. Equation (8) can be s o l v e d u s i n g the m e t h o d of s u c c e s s i v e

approximations.

Since R/h = 23.36 for the s p e c i m e n s in T a b l e I, x 0 = 0.256 according to

equation (8) and e q u a t i o n s (6) and (8) then p r e d i c t

Pm/M0 = 20.79 (2R/h) ½ + 11.90 (9)

and
H/R = 1.76 (h/2R) ½ (10)

respectively. E q u a t i o n (10) g i v e s g o od a g r e e m e n t w i t h the exact p r e d i c t i o n s

from equation (8) for o t h e r v a l u e s of R/h as s h o w n in Fig. 6 so that x 0 = 0.256
is s a t i s f a c t o r y for a w i d e r a n g e of R/h values.

Equations (9) a n d (10) s h o u l d be c o n t r a s t e d with Alexander's predictions

Pm/M0 = 20.73 (2R/h) ½ + 6.283 (11)

and
H / R = 1.905 (h/2R) ½, (12)
 Dynamic axial crushing of circular tubes 271

where M 0 = (2o0//3)(h2/4).

Non-axisymmetric (diamond mode) crushing

Pugsley and Macaulay [9, 10] found that the mean axial static force to crush a
c y l i n d r i c a l shell is

Pm/(2o0~Rh) = 10h/R + 0.03, R/h ~ 50, (13)

where the c o e f f i c i e n t s are selected to agree with some experimental test re-
sults on stainless steel and soft aluminium cylindrical shells. More recently,
Pugsley [11] has suggested the equation

Pm/(2a0~Rh) = 9.097 (h/R) (Oa/O 0) (14)

where o a is an average stress which is selected to take account of strain

hardening.

Wierzbicki [7] has derived the approximate expression

Pm/(2a0~Rh) = 3.64 (h/R) 2/3 (15)

and obtained good agreement with experimental results.

Equations (13) to (15) can be recast respectively into the form

Pm/M0 = 0.326 (2R/h) + 217.7 (16)

Pm/M0 = 198 Oa/a0 (17)

and

Pm/M0 = 62.88 (2R/h) I/3 (18)

0-8
H
R
0"6

0"4

02

0 I I I
0 20 40 60
2_R
h
FIGURE 6. Comparison of the theoretical predictions of equations (8) and
(10). : equation (8); - - - : equation (10).
272 Wlodzimierz Abramowicz and Norman Jones

It w a s shown in R e f e r e n c e [7] that

H/R = 0.816 (h/2R) I/3 (19)

is a s s o c i a t e d with equations (15) and (18).

Equations (11) and (17) (with 0 a = 00 ) are e q u a l for transition from sym-
m e t r i c to n o n - s y m m e t r i c c r u s h i n g w h e n R/h = 42.75 w h i c h c o m p a r e s w i t h R/h =
45.54 f o u n d by P u g s l e y [11] w h e n n e g l e c t i n g the c o n s t a n t in e q u a t i o n (11) ,
while equations (9) and (17) p r e d i c t a t r a n s i t i o n w h e n R/h ~ 40.

Effective Crushing Distance

A s i m p l e t h e o r e t i c a l a n a l y s i s w a s d e v e l o p e d in Ref. [12] to d e t e r m i n e the

e f f e c t i v e c r u s h i n g d i s t a n c e of c o l u m n s w h i c h was t a k e n as 2H in Refs [6] to
[10]. T h e i d e a l i z a t i o n s h o w n in Fig. 7 g i v e s an e f f e c t i v e c r u s h i n g d i s t a n c e

8 = 2H - 2x - h (20)
e m

where xm = 0.28(H/2) from Ref. [12]. Thus,

6 = 1.72H-h (21)
e

which when using equation (10) becomes

6e/2H = 0.86 - 0.568 (h/2R) I/2 (22)

h ~_

r~
f
h
2

Xm
i
-!-.
\..) 2Xm+ h--2H-8 e
Xil
k.
h
2
/"\. .7
I \.J

FI6~RE 7. Effective crushing distance (6e).

 Dynamic axial crushing of cylindrical tubes 273

It was shown in Ref. [13] that

6e/2H = 0.73 (23)

for the static behaviour of the thin-walled members used by Wierzbicki [7] to
obtain equations (15) and (18) for the non-symmetric crushing of cylindrical
shells.

The total plastic energy (E t) absorbed during the development of one lobe
was divided by 2H in Refs [6] to [10] in order to predict_the mean crushing
load. An a l t e r n a t i v e estimate of the mean crushing load Pm' which takes a
more realistic account of the mode of deformation, is given by Et/6e, or

Pm 20.79 (2R/h) I/2 + 11.90

M0 0.86-0.568 (h/2R) I/2 (24)

according to equations (9) and (22) for symmetric, or concertina crushing.

Similarly, equations (18) and (23) predict

Pm/M0 = 86.14 (2R/h) I/3 (25)

for the non-symmetric, or diamond, mode of crushing•

Material strain ra~e effects

The empirical C o w p e r - S y m o n d s uniaxial constitutive equation

g0d/g0 : I + (~/D) I/p (26)

is widely used to assess material strain rate effects in structures. Equation

(26) with the customary coefficients D = 40.4 s -I and p = 5 for mild steel, is
obtained from experimental tests on specimens having relatively small strains
in the n e i g h b o u r h o o d of the yield stress [14].

Now, e in equation (2) is obtained from a circumferential strain equal to

s sin~/R which has an approximate mean final value of Ef ~ H/2R• Thus,

ef ~ 0.88 (h/2R) I/2 (27)

according to equation (10) for the symmetric mode of deformation.

It was shown in Ref. [15] that the average strain during rolling defor-
mations is ef = h/4b, approximately, where b is the radius of the toroidal
shell element in the k i n e m a t i c a l l y admissible velocity field. Equation (13)
in Ref. [7] gives

b ~ 0 •715 (Rh2) I/3 (28) 3

for the non-symmetric, or diamond, mode of deformation associated with equations

(15) or (18). Finally,

3nI/3 is missing from ntm~rator of equation (13) in Pef. [7]. The exact values 11 = 0.820
and 13 = 2.391 are used to Qbtain equation (28).
274 W l o d z i m i e r z A b r a m o w i c z and Norman Jones

ef = 0.441 (h/2R) I/3 (29)

for the n o n - s y m m e t r i c crushing of cylindrical shells.

Equations (27) and (29) r e s p e c t i v e l y predict average strains of 12.9% and

12.2% for the test specimens in Table I with R/h = 23.36. An inspection of the
static tensile s t r e s s - s t r a i n curves for the tube material reveals that the
stresses a s s o c i a t e d with strains of this m a g n i t u d e are similar to the corre-
sponding ultimate tensile stress (au). However, it was shown in Ref. [13]
that the e q u a t i o n

aud/a u = I + (~/6844) I/3"91 (30)

fits the e x p e r i m e n t a l data for the ultimate tensile stresses of the steel
specimens examined by C a m p b e l l and Cooper [16].

Equations (24) and (25) with a u instead of a 0 give an estimate of the

static crushing loads (Pm) for the test specimens examined in this study. It
is assumed that the d e f o r m a t i o n mode remains u n c h a n g e d for dynamic crushing
(quasi-static behaviour) so that the associated load (Pm d) is found from equa-
d
tions (24) or (25) with a replaced by o according to equation (30). Thus,
U U

~ m d / ~ m = I + (e/6844) I/3"91 (31)

.An estimate for the strain rate (~) in an axially crushed cylindrical shell
is ~ = ef(Vm/H) when following the p r o c e d u r e d e v e l o p e d in Ref. [17] and where
v is the mean v e l o c i t y of the striking mass during crushing. This e x p r e s s i o n
m
may be replaced by

= 2efVm/~ e (32)

in order to c o m p e n s a t e for the e f f e c t i v e crushing distance being smaller

e
than 2H as d i s c u s s e d in the p r e v i o u s section.

The v a r i a t i o n of the striking mass velocity after impact is shown in Fig.

8 for one specimen. The mean velocity (vm) for the positive part of the curve

V )
( m/s 9

0
0 10 20 30
t(ms)
FIC~JRE 8. Velocity-time history of a tup after striking a 100 mm long
cylindrical tube test specimen obtained using a laser doppler velocimeter
system.
 Dynamic axial crushing of circular tubes 275

is V/2.321, where V is the initial velocity at impact. Another record gave a

mean velocity v m V/1.618 so that the average of these two results is v m
= . =

V/1.97, or

v ~ V/2. (33)
m

This is a crude estimate although v m = V/2.02 for six tests reported in Ref.
[13] on the axial crushing of square tubes. A linear variation in velocity
from the impact velocity V to zero velocity when motion ceases would give
equation (33). In this case, the deceleration and dynamic crushing force
would remain constant throughout crushing.

Equations (32) and (33) give

~ efV/~ e , (34)

which together with equations (10), (22) and (27) predicts

= 0.250 V/[R{0.86 - 0.568 (h/2R) I/2}] (35)

for the symmetric, or concertina, crushing mode. Similarly, equations (19),

(23), (29) and (34) predict

= o.370 V/R (36)

for the non-symmetric, or diamond, crushing mode.

Finally, equations (24), (25), (31), (35) and (36) give the mean dynamlc
crushing loads

Pm [20.7912R/h) 1/2 + 11.97 0.250V 11/3"91

M0 1 0.86 - 0.5681h/2R) I/2 + 6844R{0.86 - 0.568(h/2R) I/2}
(37)
and
Pmd/M0 = 86.14 (2R/h) I/3 {I + (0.370V/6844R) I/3"91} (38)

for symmetric and non-symmetric crushing modes, respectively.

DISCUSSION

The p r e d i c t i o n s of equations (9), (11), (16) - (18) (24) and (25) for the
static mean axial crushing loads of circular cylindrical shells are compared
in Figs 9(a) and 9(b) with empirical relations and experimental results reported
in Table 2 and Refs [3], [6], [18] and [19]. The dimensionless parameter
= Pm/AOu, or n = Pm/AOu, is known as the structural effectiveness and ¢ =
A/A I is the relative density, or solidity ratio, where A = 2~Rh and A I = zR 2
[3, 20]. The empirical relation

= 2¢ 0.7 (39)

proposed in Reference [3] is also shown in Fig. 9.

The e x p e r i m e n t a l test results in Fig. 9(b) exhibit considerable scatter

which is possibly due to differences in materials, strain hardening charac-
teristics, initial geometric imperfections, boundary conditions, buckling
modes, and various experimental effects including testing speed. However,
276 W l o d z i m i e r z A b r a m o w i c z and Norman Jones

e q u a t i o n (24), which is an improved version of A l e x a n d e r ' s analysis for sym-

metric, or c o n c e r t i n a , behaviour, gives fair a g r e e m e n t w i t h the e m p i r i c a l equa-
tion (39) and the mean of all the experimental results. E q u a t i o n s (16) and
(24) p r e d i c t that symmetric d e f o r m a t i o n s control the b e h a v i o u r when ~ ~ 0.053,
approximately, or R/h ~ 37.8, while the diamond d e f o r m a t i o n pattern aoverns
for R/h ~ 37.8. However, the mean static c r u s h i n g loads are s u f f i c i e n t l y close
for R/h ~ 25, a p p r o x i m a t e l y , that both diamond and c o n c e r t i n a modes of defor-
mation would be e n c o u n t e r e d in tests over a wide range of R/h values a c c o r d i n g
to e q u a t i o n s (16) and (24). Indeed, test specimen number 7 in Table 2 initially
d e f o r m e d with symmetric, or concertina, d e f o r m a t i o n s , which were then followed
by the d e v e l o p m e n t of n o n - s y m m e t r i c , or diamond, d e f o r m a t i o n modes. It is
i n t e r e s t i n g to note that the recent static axial crushing tests by Mamalis and
J o h n s o n [19] on a l u m i n i u m alloy 6061 T6 c i r c u l a r cylinders also exhibited a
similar phenomenon. Two specimens with R/h = 12.7 and 23.5 remained axisym-
metric t h r o u g h o u t deformation, while three specimens with R/h = 33.5, 40.0
and 57.7 first e x h i b i t e d a x i s y m m e t r i c b e h a v i o u r but a t r a n s i t i o n to a non-
s y m m e t r i c mode d e v e l o p e d as c r u s h i n g progressed. Andrews et ~Z. [21] also
o b s e r v e d a t r a n s i t i o n from symmetric to n o n - s y m m e t r i c c r u s h i n g in some HT 30
a l u m i n i u m alloy c i r c u l a r tubes. The results of Andrews et aZ. cannot be plotted
in Fig. 9(b) b e c a u s e the static c r u s h i n g loads were not p r e s e n t e d in Ref. [21].

Mamalis and Johnson [19] p r o p o s e d an e m p i r i c a l relation which is shown in

Fig. 9(a) and can be cast into the form

= 7¢/(4 + ~) + 0.07 (40)

when taking °u = °0 which is a r e a s o n a b l e a s s u m p t i o n a c c o r d i n a to the static

tensile s t r e s s - s t r a i n curve in Fig. I of Ref. [19].

It can be shown that b o t h static c o m p r e s s i v e steel test specimens in Table

2 have g e o m e t r i c p a r a m e t e r s which lie in the mixed mode region in Fig. 6 of
Ref. [21] for a l u m i n i u m a l l o y tubes. A m i x e d mode in Ref. [21] d e s c r i b e s the
s i t u a t i o n when a c o n c e r t i n a d e f o r m a t i o n mode d e v e l o p s initially then changes
to a non-symmetric, or d i a m o n d pattern.

The mean axial c r u s h i n g loads for the d y n a m i c a l l y loaded c y l i n d r i c a l shells

listed in Table I are p l o t t e d in Fig. 10 and c o m p a r e d with e q u a t i o n s (37) and
(38). It is evident that the e x p e r i m e n t a l values for mean dynamic loads associ-
ated w i t h symmetric c r u s h i n g tend to lie above the n o n - s y m m e t r i c results, which
is also c o n f i r m e d by e q u a t i o n s (37) and (38). The p r e d i c t i o n s of e q u a t i o n s (37)
and (38) give fair a g r e e m e n t with the c o r r e s p o n d i n g averages of the experimental
results, though it should be n o t e d that the static c o l l a p s e loads in e q u a t i o n s
(37) and (38) [i.e. e q u a t i o n s (24) and (25)] have been r e p l a c e d by the exper-
imental v a l u e s 32.6 kN and 30.16 kN from Table 2, respectively.

The mean dynamic axial c r u s h i n g loads are n o r m a l i z e d in Figure 11 with

respect to the c o r r e s p o n d i n g static c o l l a p s e loads. The h o r i z o n t a l line in
Fig. 11 is a s s o c i a t e d with the response of a c y l i n d r i c a l shell which is made
from a strain rate i n s e n s i t i v e material.

Euler b u c k l i n g was not e n c o u n t e r e d during the dynamic c r u s h i n g of any of

the test s p e c i m e n s in Table I . S p e c i m e n s T13 and T14 have the longest axial
lengths with L/2R ~ 5.2. These two steel specimens do not lie within the Euler
b u c k l i n g region in Fig. 6 of Ref. [21] for a l u m i n i u m alloy tubes. The concer-
tina and d i a m o n d d e f o r m a t i o n modes for c i r c u l a r tubes do not lead to any
 Dynamic axial crushing of c i r c u l a r tubes 277

1"0

0"8
/// ../
"q ///../ / 2
,.. . // / j-.%. 9
0'6
.

O.L, . i " / / / " " _. .~J G"~ ~ " -

I/.iS." ._-<-~-.-'-
.../i...~%.-
0.2 •" / ~ ; . ~ . -

,/
0
0:1 0:2 0'-3 0'4
(a) ¢)
FIGURE 9. (a) Ccmparison of theoretical predictions (with o 0 =%) and
empirical relations.
v

,.°t
0"8

0"6 zi
0"4

0"2

0 I i
0 0-1 0'.2 0.3 ¢ O'.L,
(b)

FIGURE 9. Static axial crushing of cylindrical shells.

(b) ~ r i s c n of equations (24) and (39) with experimental results.
------I: equation (11) ( A l ~ e r [6]); . . . . 2: equation (9);
3 : equation (24) ; - .~ 4 : equation (16) (Pugsley and Macaulay
[9, I0]);~--.---6: equation (17) (Pugsley [11]); . . . . 6: equation
(18) (Wierzbicki [7]); ~ . . . ~: equatiGn (25); . . . . 8: equation (39)
(Thornton et aZ. [3]); - - - 9: equation (40) (Mamalis and Johnson [19]).
Experimental results. +: Table 2 (mild steel) ; e: Mamalis and Johnson
[19] (alLmlinium 6061 T6) ; O: Ale~ander [6] (mild steel) ; A: Macaulay
and ~ [18] ; Q,V: Taken from Fig. 4.4 of Ref. [3].
278 Wlodzimierz Abramowicz and N o r m a n Jones

i n c l i n a t i o n and t h e r e f o r e o v e r a l l b e n d i n g of a s h o r t tube. This phenomenon

was o b s e r v e d in Ref. [13] for the a x i a l c r u s h i n g of s q u a r e tubes with certain
a s y m m e t r i c d e f o r m a t i o n modes.

It is i n t e r e s t i n g to c o m p a r e the s t a t i c p r o g r e s s i v e c r u s h i n g b e h a v i o u r of
c i r c u l a r and s q u a r e t u b e s h a v i n g the same v a l u e s of c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l area A I
and w a l l c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l a r e a A. The s o l i d i t y r a t i o ~ for c i r c u l a r and s q u a r e
t u b e s is t h e r e f o r e e q u a l and the c o r r e s p o n d i n g v a l u e s of Q are g i v e n in Fig.
9(b) for c i r c u l a r t u b e s and Fig. 18 of Ref. [13] for s q u a r e tubes. It can be
seen f r o m t h e s e two f i g u r e s that a s q u a r e tube is w e a k e r and that for a g i v e n
structural effectiveness % has an a s s o c i a t e d v a l u e of n w h i c h is a b o u t two-
t h i r d s of the c o r r e s p o n d i n g c i r c u l a r tube result. This observation agrees
w i t h the c o n c l u s i o n in Ref. [22] on s p o t - w e l d e d h i g h s t r e n g t h steel tubes.

Equation (30b) of V a u g h a n [4] p r e d i c t s a critical velocity Vcr ~ h(2~Lau/M)~

for the d y n a m i c axial plastic buckling of a c y l i n d r i c a l shell when M >> 2zRLhp
and, for s i m p l i c i t y , ~ is t a k e n as the m e a n flow stress. Thus, V ~ 2.03 m s -l
u cr
for test specimens T37 to T42 in T a b l e I and V c r ~ 3.46 m s -I for t e s t s p e c i m e n s
T13 and T14. T h e s e v e l o c i t i e s are s m a l l e r t h a n any v e l o c i t i e s l i s t e d in T a b l e
I. Nevertheless, the type of b u c k l i n g w i t h w r i n k l i n g a l o n g the w h o l e l e n g t h
of a tube, w h i c h is a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the test s p e c i m e n s e x a m i n e d in Ref. [4],
was not o b s e r v e d in a n y of the p r e s e n t tests. Thus, the t h e o r e t i c a l study in
Ref. [4] is not v a l i d b e l o w a c e r t a i n m a g n i t u d e of v e l o c i t y w h i c h is l a r g e r
t h a n V c r for the c y l i n d r i c a l t u b e s s t u d i e d herein.

50 o
o
0 0 0 A --o---% z~o- - - 2
p.d ~d 1,0 A

q 1
(kN) 30' 3

20

10

0 2.'s s'.0 V (m/s}

7.'s 16.0
FIGURE I0. C ~ r i s o n of theoretical predictions and experimental results
for the dynamic axial crushing of cylindrical shells.
O: axisymmetric experimental results from Table I ;
A : non-axisymmetric experimental results from Table I ;
I: strain rate insensitive behaviour according to equation (37) for
axisymmetric response;
~ 2 : equation (37) ;
- - - 3: strain rate insensitive behaviour according, to equation (38) for
non-axis_vmmetric response;
- - - 4: equation(38)
 Dynamic axial c r u s h i n g of c i r c u l a r tubes 279

V a u g h a n ' s t h e o r e t i c a l analysis [4] uses a p e r t u r b e d m o t i o n superposed on a

fully plastic axial response which, therefore, requires q ~ Oy/O u. Thus, it
appears that the p r o g r e s s i v e axial plastic b u c k l i n g examined in this article
d e v e l o p s when q ~ Oy/au. Indeed, if one defines q = Pmd/AOu , then, with the
e x c e p t i o n of Tests T43 and T45, the e x p e r i m e n t a l results in Table I give 0.54
~ ~ 0.63 w h i c h should be c o m p a r e d with qy/O u = 0 66. It is suggested, there-
fore, that when n e g l e c t i n g m a t e r i a l strain rate s e n s i t i v i t y effects, the struc-
tural e f f e c t i v e n e s s q = qy/O u might provide a t r a n s i t i o n between q u a s i - s t a t i c
p r o g r e s s i v e plastic b u c k l i n g e x a m i n e d in this article and dynamic plastic buck-
ling studied in Ref. [4].

CONC LU S IONS

A series of axial c r u s h i n g tests on steel c i r c u l a r c y l i n d r i c a l tubes loaded

e i t h e r staticallya or dynamically, is reported and c o m p a r e d w i t h various theor-
etical p r e d i c t i o n s and e m p i r i c a l relations.

A m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n of A l e x a n d e r ' s [6] t h e o r e t i c a l solution for axisymmetric,

or concertina, deformations, which includes a c o r r e c t i o n for the effective
c r u s h i n g distance, gives good a g r e e m e n t with the mean of the experimental static
c r u s h i n g loads.

1.5 o

-d d
o
A
k
~
%
f 3.
o Q
% ~ \2

1-0

0.5

i t i i
0 2-5 5.0 7.5 10-0
V(m/s)

FIGURE 11. Ratio of dynamic axial crushing loads to static axial crushing
loads of cylindrical shells.
- - -1: equations (37) and (38) for a strain rate insensitive material;
2: equation (37) ;
3: equation (38) ;
o: axisymmetric ~ r i m e n t a l results from Table I;
A: non-axisymmetrlc experimental results frcm Table 1.
280 Wlodzimierz Abramowicz and N o r m a n Jones

The mean d y n a m i c c r u s h i n g loads a s s o c i a t e d w i t h an a x i s y m m e t r i c , or con-

c e rtina, m o d e of d e f o r m a t i o n , w h i c h is p r e d i c t e d by a m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n of
A l e x a n d e r ' s t h e o r e t i c a l solution, g i v e s good a g r e e m e n t w i t h the c o r r e s p o n d i n g
e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s u l t s w h e n r e t a i n i n g the i n f l u e n c e of m a t e r i a l s t r a i n rate
sensitivity. A s i m i l a r m o d i f i c a t i o n to the t h e o r e t i c a l p r e d i c t i o n s of W i e r z -
b i c k i [7] for the n o n - s y m m e t r i c , or d i a m o n d , mode of d e f o r m a t i o n also gives
g o od a g r e e m e n t w i t h the c o r r e s p o n d i n g e x p e r i m e n t a l results.

Acknowledgements - The authors wish to acknowledge the Science and Engineering Research Council
for their support of this study through grant nt~nber GR/B/89737. One author (W.A.) obtained
an SERC Visiting Fellowship (grant number GR/C/40930) tenable for 2½ months in the Department
of Mechanical Engineering at Liverpool University during Auttm~ 1983.

The authors are indebted to Mr R. S. Birch and Mr W. S. Jouri for their assistance with
the experimental equipment: Mrs M. White for her typing_ and Mrs A. Green and Mr F. C. CAmmLins
for their preparation of the drawings. Thanks are also due to Professor S. R. Reid, Professor
T. Wierzbicki and Professor W. Johnson for their valuable confronts on this manuscript.

REFERENCES
I. A. A. Ezra and R. J. Fay, ~n assessment of energy absorbing devices for prospective use
in aircraft impact situations, in Dynamic Response of Structures, (G. Herrmann and N.
Perrone, eds.), pp. 225-246. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1972).
2. W. Johnson and S. R. Reid, Metallic energy dissipating systems. Appl. Mech. Rev. 3_!I,
277-288 (1978).
3. P. H. Thornton, H. F. Mahmood and C. L. Magee, Energy absorption by structural collapse.
Structur~l Cr~shworthiness, (N. Jones and T. Wierzbicki, eds. ), pp. 96-117. Butterworths,
London (1983).
4. H. Vaughan, The response of a plastic cylindrical shell to axial impact. ZAMP, 20, 321-
328 (1969).
5. N. Jones, Dynamic elastic and inelastic buckling of shells, in Developments in Thin-Walled
Structures - 2, (J. Rhodes and A. C. %~iker, eds.) , pp. 49-91. Elsevier Applied Science
Publishers, Amsterdam (1984).
6. J. M. Alexander, An approximate analysis of the collapse of thin cylindrical shells under
axial loading. Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 13, 10-15 (1960).
7. T. Wierzbicki, Optimum design of int_egrated front panel against crash, Report for Ford
Motor Company, Vehicle Component Dept., 15 July 1983.
8. W. Johnson, Impact Strength of Materials. Edward Arnold, London, Crane Russak, New York
(1972).
9. A. Pugsley and M. Macaulay, The large scale crumpling of thin cylindrical columns. Q.
J. Mech. Appl. Math. 13, I-9 (1960).
10. A. Pugsley, The Crunpling of tubular structures under impact conditions, in Proc. Syrup.
The Use of Aluminium in Railway Rolling Stock, pp. 33-41. Inst. Loco. Engrs. and The
Aluminium Dev. Assoc., London (1960).
11. A. G. Pugsley, On the crunpling of thin tubular struts. Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 3_~2,
I-7 (1979).
12. W. Abramowicz, The effective crushing distance in axially compressed thin-%~lled metal
columns. Int. J. Impact Engng. 1, 309-317 (1983).
13. W. Abramowicz and N. Jones, Dynamic axial crushing of square tubes. Int. J. Impact Engng.
2, 179-208 (1984).
14. N. Jones, Structural aspects of ship collisions, in Structural Crashworthiness, (N. Jones
and T. Wierzbicki, eds.), pp. 308-337. Butterworths, London (1983).
15. T. Wierzbicki, Crushing analysis of metal honeycombs. Int. J. Impact Engng. 1, 157-174
(1983).
16. J. D. C a ~ l l and R. H. Cooper, Yield and flow of low-c.azbon steel at medium strain rates
in P~oc. Conf. on the Physical Basis of Yield and Fracture, pp. 77-87. Inst. of Physics
and Physical Soc., London (1966).
17. T. Wierzbi~ki and W. Abramowicz, Crushing of thin-%~lled strain rate sensitive structures,
Rozprawy Inzynierskie Polska Akademia Nauk, 29, 153-163 (1981).
18. M.A. Macaulay and R. G. Redwood, Small scale model railway coaches under impact. Tk,
Engineer, 1041-1046, 25 Dec. 1964.
19. A. G. Mamalis and W. Johnson, The quasi-static crtmpling of thin-walled circular cylinders
and frusta under axial compression. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 25, 713-732 (1983).
 Dynamic axial crushing of c i r c u l a r tubes 281

20. T. Wierzbicki, Crushing behaviour of plate intersections, in Structural Crashworthiness

(N. Jones and T. Wierzbicki, eds.), pp. 66-95. Butterworths, London (1983).
21. K. R. F. Andrews, G. L. England and E. C~ani, Classification of the axial collapse of
cylindrical tubes under quasi-static loading. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 25, 687-696 (1983).
22. R. C. Van Kuren and J. E. Soott, Energy absorption of high-strength steel tubes under
impact crush conditions. Int. Auto. Eng. Cong., Detroit, SAE paper 770213 (1977) .