Dynamic Material Property Characterization with Kolsky Bars

  • Weinong W. ChenEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)


Split Hopkinson pressure bars (SHPB), also called Kolsky bars, have been widely used to determine the stressstrain response of materials in the strain-rate range 102 – 104/s. Unlike quasi-static testing methods for material properties, the high-rate Kolsky bar technique does not have a closed-loop control system to monitor and adjust testing conditions on the specimen to specified levels. There are no standards to guide the experimental design either. This presentation briefly reviews the physical nature of Kolsky bar experiments and recent modifications in the attempt to conduct experiments for more accurate results. The main approach for obtaining improved results is to deform the specimen uniformly under an equilibrated stress state at a constant strain rate. Examples of experiment design to achieve the desired testing conditions are presented.


Shape Memory Alloy Constant Strain Rate Incident Pulse NiTi Shape Memory Alloy Equilibrate Stress State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kolsky, H., “An Investigation of the Mechanical Properties of Materials at Very High Rates of Loading,” Proc. Royal Soc. Lond., B, 62, 676-700, (1949).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lindholm, U.S. and Yeakley, L.M., “High Strain Rate Testing: Tension and Compression,” Experimental Mechanics, 8, 1-9 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Duffy, J., Campbell, J. D., and Hawley, R. H., “On the Use of a Torsional Split Hopkinson Bar to Study Rate Effects in 1100-0 Aluminum,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 37, 83-91, (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christensen, R. J., Swanson, S. R., and Brown, W. S., ”Split-Hopkinson-Bar Tests on Rock Under Confining Pressure,” EXPERIMENTAL MECHANICS, 29, 508-513, (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ellwood, S., Griffiths, L. J., and Parry, D. J., “Materials Testing at High Constant Strain Rates,” J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum., 15, 280-282 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nemat-Nasser, S., Isaacs, J. B. and Starrett, J. E., “Hopkinson Techniques for Dynamic Recovery Experiments,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond., A, 435, 371-391 (1991).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frew, D. J., Forrestal, M. J., and Chen, W., “Pulse Shaping Techniques for Testing High-Strength Steel with a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar,” Experimental Mechanics, 45, 186-195 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, W., Song, B., Frew, D. J., and Forrestal, M. J., “Dynamic Small Strain Measurement with a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar,” Experimental Mechanics, 43, 20-23 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, W. and Song, B., “Temperature Dependence of a NiTi Shape Memory Alloy’s Superelastic Behavior at a High Strain Rate,” Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, 1, 339-356 (2006).MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, W. and Luo, H., “Dynamic Compressive Responses of Intact and Damaged Ceramics from a Single Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Experiment,” Experimental Mechanics, 44, 295-299 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Schools of Aeronautics/Astronautics, and Materials EngineeringPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations