Characterization of impact behaviour of armour plate materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three armour plate materials, including two steels, namely HHA and Mars 300, and an aluminium alloy 5083, were studied under impact loading to determine their behaviour and the mechanisms of deformation that lead to failure. The experimental testing was carried out using either a direct impact compression Split Hopkinson Bar or a torsion Hopkinson Bar. The impact properties and stress-strain cures were obtained as a function of the impact momentum in compression and the angle of twist in torsion. It was found that at the high strain rates developed in the specimen during the tests, the deformation occurs by the formation of adiabatic shear bands (ASBs) which may lead to the formation of cracks within the bands and the ultimate failure of the specimens. It was also found that below a certain impact momentum, the deformation is more uniform and no ASBs are formed. Also, ASBs are more likely to form in the BCC metals such as the two steels while diffuse ASBs associated with plastic flow are exhibited in the 5083 aluminum alloy. Microstructural techniques ranging from optical microscopy to atomic force microscopy (AFM) were used to study the topography of the ASBs. Also, modelling of the formation was performed. The results provide a comprehensive understanding of the role of ASBs in the failure of these materials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".