On the shock stress, substructure evolution, and spall response of commercially pure 1100-O aluminum

Plate impact shock and spall recovery experiments were conducted to study the effects of peak shock stress on the substructure evolution and spall response of fully annealed 1100 aluminum. The substructure of the material evolves substantially with increase in peak shock stress ranging from 4GPa to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Materials science & engineering. A, Structural materials : properties, microstructure and processing Structural materials : properties, microstructure and processing, 2014-11, Vol.618, p.596-604
Main Authors: Williams, C.L., Chen, C.Q., Ramesh, K.T., Dandekar, D.P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aluminum
Aluminum base alloys
Analysing. Testing. Standards
Annealing
Applied sciences
Dislocations
Dynamic recovery
Dynamics
Evolution
Exact sciences and technology
Fractures
Hardness
Heat treatment
Mechanical properties and methods of testing. Rheology. Fracture mechanics. Tribology
Metals. Metallurgy
Nanostructure
Production techniques
Recovery
Shock hardening
Shock stress
Stress analysis
Stresses
Substructure
Substructures
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Plate impact shock and spall recovery experiments were conducted to study the effects of peak shock stress on the substructure evolution and spall response of fully annealed 1100 aluminum. The substructure of the material evolves substantially with increase in peak shock stress ranging from 4GPa to 9GPa with dislocation debris uniformly distributed throughout the interior of the subgrain. Observations from substructure evolution in conjunction with spall failure results suggest that ductile fracture by void nucleation, growth, and coalescence was perhaps the dominant fracture mode for shock stresses up to approximately 8.3GPa. Whereas, beyond 8.3GPa the material softened possibly due to dislocation reorganization (dynamic recovery) and brittle intergranular fracture by decohesion with isolated pockets of nanovoids was perhaps the dominant fracture mode. The contributions of nanovoids to the dynamic recovery process, if any, were unresolved. Microhardness measurements show an increase in residual hardness throughout the shock stress range studied implying shock hardening up to approximately 8.3GPa. This observation also suggests that thermal softening was not operative throughout the shock stress range studied. However, dynamic recovery was thermally influenced during shock loading.
ISSN:0921-5093
1873-4936
DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2014.09.030