aacnscabcjabcahjhgsjsjkss

It was shown that the critical tube length has a tendency to increase
with increase in impact velocity, although under certain conditions the
counter-intuitive is observed and no distinct critical length could be
defined. Jensen et al.[22] performed a numerical study of the dynamic
buckling transition of aluminium alloy square tubes and noted that the
critical tube length varied depending on the width-to-thickness ratio and
impact velocity. Karagiozova and Alves [24] established the major
parameters that govern the dynamic buckling transition of aluminium
alloy circular tubes. The experimental study showed that the impact
velocity, i.e. inertia effects, is a key influential factor. The material
characteristics are shown to be a parameter as well, especially the
material hardening characteristics.
 tysklwbyodtnomm
The axial-load vs. displacement profile of progressive buckling
mode has a general oscillatory trend. An initial high peak force
is observed at the formation of the first lobe overcoming the
yield strength of the material. The lobe is a plastic hinge where
the walls of the tube fold around and extend at the hinges [19].
Thereafter a repetitive pattern is observed with the formation of
consecutive lobes. The axial-load profile show regular
oscillations about a mean force as shown
 Hjsckanxbcmtsc d
Only local deformation occurs at the plastic hinge resulting in
comparatively low energy absorption. An initial peak load is
observed as a result of the formation of the plastic hinge and
thereafter the load profile decays to a low, relatively constant
force as the tube flexes around the plastic hinge. Thin-walled
structures comprising of long and slender shells or tubes tend
to buckle globally. A square tube that has failed in Euler
buckling mode is shown in Figure 2.1. The specific square tube
has a length-to-width ratio of 8 and a wall-thickness-to-width
ratio of 0.006 [17]. These geometric ratios resulted in the
preference of this mode of failure.
 cycjnkbxjavxav

Before starting with the description of the theory, is useful to

know the difference between the true stress-strain curve
instead of the engineering curve and why is more meaningful
for this kind of study.
According to Deiter (1988), the engineering stress-strain curve
doesn’t consider the changing of the specimens’ dimension in
fact as presented in the equation (5) and (6), consider only the
initial dimensions.
 Abdjsckabh
bvxah
Where K is the stress at the unit deformation and n is the so-called strain-
hardening coefficient; these two coefficients vary for every alloy. To obtain
the flow curve, some simplifications have been made like neglecting the
Bauschinger effect and the initial elastic deformation. The Bauschinger
effect describe the material hysteresis behavior but usually it’s admitted an
equal yield stress for tension and compression; the other simplifications
are to consider the material behavior like perfectly rigid without the elastic
deformation below the yield stress and then during the plasticity the stress
cannot be higher than the yield stress, this is called a perfectly rigid-plastic
material.
Hay…, bro / sis

OK