Sci Eng Compos Mater 2017; 24(4): 581–590
Xiaodan Yuan, Wenxian Wang*, Xiaoqing Cao, Tingting Zhang, Ruishan Xie and Ruifeng Liu
Numerical study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al
plate in explosive/impact welding
DOI 10.1515/secm-2015-0316
Received March 13, 2015; accepted October 11, 2015; previously
published online December 18, 2015
Abstract: In this study, the process of explosive welding
of Mg/Al plate is represented, and the interfacial behavior
of two metals is researched. The objective of this work is
to investigate the factors that affect the quality of explo-
sive bonding and the distribution of physical parameters
on the collision. A finite difference engineering package
with smoothed particle hydrodynamics method is used
to model the oblique impact of a thin flyer plate (Al) on
a relatively thick base plate (Mg). Wavy interface and jet-
ting phenomenon, which existed in the experiment, are
well reproduced in the simulation. The contours of pres-
sure, shear stress, velocity, and effective plastic strain of
magnesium and aluminum are also distinctly described.
The bonding turns out to be a possible solid-state welding
process. The effective plastic strain exceeds a minimum
value, and the shear stress is just the opposite sign in this
simulation where available bonding occurred. Wave for-
mation appears to be the result of variation in the veloc-
ity distribution on the interface and periodic disturbances
of magnesium and aluminum. A transition from straight
to wave occurs along the interface. High values of plastic
strain of two metals are predicted on the interface.
Keywords: impact/explosive welding; jetting; Mg/Al; sim-
ulation; wave.
*Corresponding author: Wenxian Wang, College of Materials
Science and Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, 79 West
Yingze Street, Taiyuan 030024, Shanxi Province, China,
e-mail: wangwenxian@tyut.edu.cn; and Key Laboratory of Interface
Science and Engineering in Advanced Materials, Ministry of
Education, 79 West Yingze Street, 030024 Taiyuan, Shanxi Province,
China
Xiaodan Yuan, Xiaoqing Cao, Tingting Zhang, Ruishan Xie and
Ruifeng Liu: College of Materials Science and Engineering, Taiyuan
University of Technology, 79 West Yingze Street, 030024 Taiyuan,
Shanxi Province, China; and Key Laboratory of Interface Science and
Engineering in Advanced Materials, Ministry of Education, 79 West
Yingze Street, 030024 Taiyuan, Shanxi Province, China
1 Introduction
Magnesium alloys, one of the lightest structural metals
with a density one-third lighter than that of aluminum
alloys, have been researched extensively for industrial
applications during the past decades [1]. However, the
poor corrosion resistance of magnesium limits its appli-
cation in industry. Aluminum alloys, which offer high
strength-to-weight ratio, good formability, and good cor-
rosion resistance, are widely used in the aerospace and
automobile industries [2]. Composite laminates of magne-
sium alloys and aluminum alloys, which take advantage
of their high specific strength and overcome disadvan-
tages of magnesium alloys, would be promising structural
materials. Therefore, the technology for joining aluminum
alloys to magnesium alloys is required for manufacturing
new structural materials. Recently, macroscopic compos-
ites and/or multilayer laminates of aluminum and mag-
nesium alloys have received much attention [3–9]. This
composite laminate may own a good combination of the
properties of aluminum and magnesium alloys.
By traditional techniques, brittle intermetallics are
easy to generate on the bonding interface of magnesium
alloys and aluminum alloys, which greatly reduce plastic-
ity [10–12]. The aim of this study is to produce a composite
plate via cladding aluminum alloys plate to magnesium
alloys plate by explosive welding. High energy rate
welding methods are capable of producing good-quality
and large-area bonding bi-metal plates, including plates
with grossly different mechanical properties [13]. As a
main method, explosive welding has been developed
and widely applied in industry production for decades.
As one of the joining technologies, explosive welding has
a number of benefits in comparison with other conven-
tional welding techniques. The primary advantage is its
capability to fabricate layered target with a high-quality
metallurgical bonding between similar or dissimilar
metal plates [14–19], such as steel-steel plates [14, 15],
titanium-stainless steel clad plates [16], titanium-alu-
minum clad plates [17], copper-stainless steel clad plates
[18], or other multi-layer materials. Another advantage is
higher bonding strength than the flyer plate or the base
plate. In addition, it allows the fabrication of large-scale
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
582      X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate
composite plates. In the process of welding, some com-
plicated physical phenomena, such as explosion, high-
speed collision, plastic deformation of metal plates,
interaction of different materials, moving interface or free
surface, and high-temperature and high-pressure states,
occur in very short duration due to detonation effect of
the explosive [20]. Furthermore, the process is capable of
joining with high surface areas due to its ability to dis-
tribute the high energy density through explosion [21]. A
schematic illustration of explosive welding is shown in
Figure 1. The flyer plate impacts on the base plate after
explosion. The metal plates are made to collide obliquely
with each other at high velocity after the detonation of
the explosive charge with rate Vd. The flyer plate col-
lides to the base plate with rate Vp under the impetus of
the detonation wave. During the high-speed impact of
metal plates, a high-speed jet is produced between the
metal plates. The appropriate impact angle β and impact
velocity Vp are required for well-bonding. Collision point
S moves forward with rate Vcp governing the time avail-
able for bonding. The high pressure during the collision
process also leads to considerable local plastic deforma-
tion of the metals in the bonding zone. The process of the
explosive welding is finished in an instant, as the release
of explosive energy and the interaction of metal system
are completed in microseconds.
Therefore, explosively driven impact welding is a true
example of multidisciplinary research, as the phenomena
associated with it fall under the various branches of engi-
neering science. As a multidisciplinary research field, the
mechanism of explosive welding has been explored by
many investigators in the past several years. Some vari-
eties of research work about the welding interface [14],
bond strength [22], welding window theory [19], joint
mechanism [23], and numerical simulation of welding
Vd
High explosive
Air flow
Flyer plate
Base plate
Vp
β simulate the impact process of Mg/Al alloys plates; to
S Vcp
Figure 1: Schematic drawing of the explosive welding with the
larger view of collision area.
process [24] have been investigated. With regard to the
numerical simulation, FEM has been applied to simu-
late the explosive welding in recent works. EI-Sobky and
Blazynski studied the explosive welding process using a
liquid analogue, which is based on the similarity between
hydrodynamic fluid behavior and material deformation
in explosive welding. Lazari and Al-Hassani analyzed the
transient response of metal plates under explosive loading.
Oberg et al. simulated the process employing Lagrangian
finite difference code method but only obtained jetting. In
Akihisa’s [24] paper, wavy interface was formed, but there
was not any jetting reproduced. Akbari Mousavi et  al.
studied the process using Euler processor. The materials at
the collision point were considered to behave like a liquid.
The straight or wavy interface and jetting phenomena
were modeled, and the velocity of jet was also predicted.
Euler computation can be applicable to plate impact, but
historical process is difficult to be understood [25]. Akbari
Mousavi and Burley [26] also simulated the explosive
welding of titanium and steel plates using the model of
low detonation velocity explosives and analyzed two cri-
teria that form the basis of a welding window including
shear stress and plastic strain. However, their simulations
did not model the whole adhesion process of two sur-
faces. Akbari Mousavi and Al-Hassani [27] used ABAQUS
with Arbitrary Eulerian Lagrangian formulation to model
the process of explosively driven plate. But only the last
contacting layers were shown in the ABAQUS figures. In
addition, the wave interface is not obvious. Tanaka [28]
simulated the explosion and gained well wave structure
and jetting using smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH)
method. SPH is a gridless Lagrangian hydrodynamics
using particles. Unlike conventional Lagrangian tech-
niques, SPH avoids mesh tangling and is therefore much
more robust in its treatment of problems with large mate-
rial distortions [29]. Therefore, in this work, SPH method
is applied to study the interfacial behavior of the explo-
sion welding of Mg/Al plates.
Zhang and Wang [30] and Yan et al. [2] have success-
fully obtained Mg/Al alloy plates with good bonding by
explosive welding. However, only the microstructure and
mechanical characteristics of Mg/Al alloys composite
plate were investigated by experiments. Few studied the
explosive welding process of Mg/Al alloys plate by simu-
lation and researched its interfacial deformation behavior.
Therefore, in this paper, the main aims are to numerically
research the distribution of physical parameters such as
contact pressure, velocity effective plastic strain, and shear
stress on the interface; and to explore further its interfacial
behavior.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
 X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate      583

2 Simulation of impact welding (Century Dynamics). The simulation models the impact of
an aluminum alloy flyer plate to a magnesium alloy base
plate during the explosion process. Base plate is 2 mm in
2.1 E
 quation of state model and strength
thickness and 10  mm in length. Flyer plate is 0.4  mm in
model thickness and 10 mm in length. The ratio of thickness is
1:5, which is also used in the experiment. According to the
The Shock EOS is widely used in materials with large
following equations, which are the lower limit for bonding
deformation. In this study, a Mie-Gruneisen EOS is chosen
proposed by Blosinski [34] and the upper limit for welding
to be the equation of state of the materials. This equation
proposed by Crossland and Wittman [35, 36]:
describes the basic relationship between particle velocity
and shock velocity. The form of the equation is as follows: Vc
Vp =
 β (6)
ρ = ρH + Γ ρ ( e-eH ) (1) 2 sin 
 2
where 

ρ = Γ0 ρ0 = constant (2) k
Vc = 4
(7)
t 0.25
Vp
and 
ρ0 c0 u( 1 + u )
ρH = 2 (3) where Vp is the collision velocity, Vc is the flyer plate veloc-
 1-( g -1) u ity, β is the collision angle, k4 depends on the explosive

and material of flyer plate, t is the thickness of flyer plate,
1 ρH  u  and the effects of the thickness of flyer plate on the results
eH = (4)
2 ρo  1 + u  can be viewed as that of flyer plate velocity. The flyer plate

velocity Vc is set to a constant value in this simulation.
where Γ0 is the Gruneisen coefficient, u = (ρ/ρ0)-1, ρ, is the The model simplifies the process of detonation and pre-
current density, ρ0 is the initial density, and c0 is the bulk sents the moment of collision between the flyer plate and
sound speed [31]. base plate. In this paper, only one set of flyer plate veloc-
The Von Mises strength model is chosen in the process ity is given to study the interfacial behavior of Mg alloys
of modeling. This strength model takes into account the and Al alloys plate. The effects of flyer plate velocity on
shear modulus and yield stress of materials. This model the interface morphology and behavior need to be further
does not include any strain hardening parameters. The yield researched.
criterion is dependent on the classic Von Mises equation: The SPH processor is used, which is a Lagrangian
technique with the potential to be both efficient and
( σ 1 -σ 2 ) 2 + ( σ 2 -σ 3 ) 2 + ( σ 1 -σ 3 ) 2 = 2Υ 2 (5)
accurate at modeling material deformation and to be
flexible in terms of the inclusion of specific material
where σ1, σ2, and σ3 are the principal stress and Y repre-
models [37]. In addition, SPH is a gridless technique
sents yield stress [32]. In this paper, the physical param-
so that it does not suffer from the normal problems of
eters of the EOS of materials [33] and strength model of
grid tangling in large deformation problems. The parti-
materials are given in Table 1.
cle size plays an important role on the computational
timing point of view and stability. In modeling impact
and explosive welding, the particle size is crucial in
2.2 Simulation of impact welding
visualizing the interface topography and jetting. In this
study, the particle size Δr is 20 μm. Therefore, the flyer
Numerical simulations of the impact welding process
and base plates are modeled using nearly 60,000 par-
described above are carried out using ANSYS/AUTODYN-2D
ticles. The initial velocity is given as the initial condi-
tion. For the flyer plate, the initial velocity 1000 m/s is
Table 1: The physical and equation of state (EOS) parameters of two applied in this work, and it is set to zero for the base
metals.
plate. In order to ensure that the stress wave can reflect
back in free surface rather than in other boundaries, the
Material   ρ0 (g/cm3)  c0 (m/s)  s (-)  Γ0  u (GPa)  Y0 (GPa)
free boundary is designed to be in accord with the physi-
6061Al   2.703  5240  1.4  1.97  25  0.12 cal conditions. And the initial impact angle between
AZ-31B   1.775  4516  1.256  1.43  14  0.19
flyer and base plate is set to 20°.

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
584      X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate
In order to ensure the precision and consistency of
the solution, time steps for the analysis are automatically
computed. It is reasonable to calculate some physical
parameters such as pressure, velocity, shear stress, and
effective plastic strain for each particle at the end of every
time step. The contour or history curve of abovementioned
parameters will generate as required in the postprocessor.
3 Weld interfaces
3.1 Experimental results
In the experiment, the dimensions of AZ31B and 6061Al
plates are 255 mm × 600 mm × 20  mm as base plate and
300 mm × 650 mm × 4 mm as flyer plate, respectively. The
detonation is a “slower” powder mix of ammonium nitrate
and diesel fuel oil (ANFO) with the explosive velocity of
2500–3000 m/s, and the ANFO was made by Consoli-
dated Mining and Smelting Co. The explosive charge is
uniformly placed on the surface of the flyer plate with a
detonator at its edge. The thickness of the ANFO explosive
layer is about 30 mm. The device for the preparation for
explosive welding is shown in Figure 2.
In general, the interface shape fell roughly into three
kinds of waveform, including straight, wavelet, and wave
100 mm
B Detonator ANFO
Offset distance
Figure 2: The device of preparation for the explosive welding. (A) Scene drawing of the explosive welding; (B) schematic drawing of the
explosive welding.
with some vortex shedding. Photographs of the differ-
ent interfaces observed in samples taken from explosive
welding are shown in Figure 3. During the explosion,
vortex appears on the interface. A larger view of vortex
is illustrated in Figure 3. It means that there is a good
mechanical interlocking on the interface between alu-
minum and magnesium alloy.
3.2 Numerical simulation results
The distributions of some physical parameters such as
contact pressure, velocity effective plastic strain, and
shear stress of plates around the contact area are depicted
for material combination. Figures 4–8 show that material
location, pressure, velocity, effective plastic strain, and
shear stress contour appear at a moment in the simula-
tion. In order to observe the process more clearly, the
partial enlargement of collision point is in the upper right
corner of these pictures, respectively. The wavy interface,
which was seen in the experiment (Figure 2), reappeared.
There is a transition from a smooth interface to a wavy
one along the direction of the collision (Figure 4). The
simulation analysis predicts a wavy interface, and the
amplitude and wavelength are similar to the results of
the experiment.
y
6061Al
AZ 31B x
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
 X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate      585

40 mm
A B

10 mm 10 mm

Figure 3: Macroscopic interfaces after explosive welding at 2500–3000 m/s denotation velocity – 4-mm 6061Al alloy flyer plate and 20-mm
AZ31B Mg alloy base plate. (A) Earlier stage of the interface; (B) later stage of the interface.

Figure 4: The material location of combination in the simulation.

Jetting is also reproduced in the simulation 4 Discussion

(Figures  4–8). It is obvious that the jetting comes from
both flyer plate and base plate, and the contribution of
base plate to the jetting is more than that of flyer plate.
The distribution of the pressure is relatively uniform
except the area near the collision point in Figure 5. High
pressure occurs at the collision point. The velocity of col-
lision point is also the highest in Figure 6. The effective
plastic strain and stress profiles are described in Figure 7
and Figure 8, respectively. In order to further observe the
process, two face-to-face points are taken at the edge of
lower surface of flyer plate and upper surface of base
plate, respectively. The curve of pressure and effective
plastic strain of the two points are shown in Figures 9
and 10, respectively.
4.1 Jet formation
One of the most important conditions to achieve explo-
sive welding is the formation of jetting at the collision
point [38]. To achieve the metallurgical bonding of two
metals, the distance between two surfaces has to be small
enough to reach the range of the inter-atomic attractive
forces (10-1 μm magnitude). Only at the equilibrium of the
atomic spacing are the attraction and repulsion between
two atoms in balance. That is to say, the interactive energy
between atoms reaches its minimum value. The jetting
between the two plates clears surfaces of two metals and

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
586      X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate
Figure 5: The pressure distribution of combination in the simulation.
Figure 6: The velocity distribution of combination in the simulation.
makes clean and fresh surfaces. Hence, atoms between
interfaces can achieve a good bonding.
In general, jetting will occur at any oblique angle if the
velocity at the collision point goes to subsonic. However,
only the pressure of collision is nine times higher than the
static strength of material. The materials near the colli-
sion point can enter the flow state and form jetting. Only
when the impact load exceeds the dynamic strength may
jetting occur. The formation of jetting in the simulation
of the aluminum flyer impacting magnesium base plate
is shown in Figure 4. Most parts of jetting originate from
base plate and move towards aluminum plate or magne-
sium plate through observation of the whole simulation.
The reason is that the density of magnesium is less than
that of aluminum. It can be found that a low-density mate-
rial is more prone to produce jetting. According to the
standard equation (Crossland, 1982), νj = [νp/sin β](1+cos β)
[38], where νj is the velocity of jetting, the predicted
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
 X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate      587

Figure 7: The effective plastic strain distribution of combination in the simulation.

Figure 8: The shear stress distribution of combination in the simulation.

value of velocity of jetting obtained from the simulation is
13%–18% lower than the theoretical value using the above
equation. The maximum velocity of the jetting by simula-
tion and the equation are about 4900 m/s (Figure 6) and
5671 m/s, respectively. It is different from the result con-
cluded by Akbari Mousavi and Al-Hassani [27, 38]. The
difference is associated with the properties of connecting
materials. Materials with lower density may obtain larger
jetting velocity according to the principle of conservation
of energy. Besides, the velocity of jetting may depend on
the particle size. Smaller particle size may produce higher
velocity of jetting.
4.2 Pressure distribution
Figure 5 shows the pressure contour of two plates at a
moment in the simulation. It can be found that the dis-
tribution values of pressure around collision point are
higher than that somewhere else. It is consistent with the

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
588      X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate

AUTODYN-2D v12.0.1 from ANSYS another reason why most parts of jetting come from mag-
Gauge history (ident 0-autodyn) nesium. Once the collision occurs, the pressure increases
rapidly. However, the pressure profiles present an irregu-
8×106
lar fluctuation during the collision.
6×106
(1) Gauge# 15
Pressure (kPa)

(2) Gauge# 5
4×106
4.3 Velocity distribution
6
2×10
Figure 6 shows the velocity contour of two plates at some
0×10 6
moment in the simulation process. It is found that the
highest velocity is at the collision point. The velocity at
-2×106 the collision point is about 4906 m/s, which is higher than
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
×10-4 that predicted by Akbari Mousavi and Al-Hassani [27].
Time (ms) This is due to the difference of collision angle and flyer
plate velocity in simulations. Larger collision angle and
Figure 9: Pressure profiles of combination in flyer and base plate. flyer plate velocity can offer higher potential energy and
kinetic energy, just like increasing the explosive quantity.
AUTODYN-2D v12.0.1 from ANSYS Unlike the actual explosion, in this simulation, the flyer
plate can instantly obtain the highest velocity rather than
Gauge history (ident 0-autodyn)
4 reach the maximum under the detonation loading.
High impact velocity leads to high impact pressure
and high shear stress on the interface, and high pressure,
3
which far exceeds the elastic limit of material, creates
EFF.PLSTN

(1) Gauge# 15 larger plastic deformation. The variation of the velocity

2 (2) Gauge# 5
1 The production of jetting probably relates to the periodic
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
×10-4
Time (ms)
Figure 10: Effective plastic strain profiles of combination in flyer
and base plate.
theory that higher pressure at the collision point makes
the material to be at plastic state and to form jetting.
Figure 9 depicts the pressure graph of two face-to-face
points on the interface. Gauges 5 and 15 are at the upper
surface of base plate and the lower surface of flyer plate,
respectively. The peak value of gauge 5 is higher than that
of gauge 15. The pressure value on the magnesium base
plate can reach 8 GPa, and the value on the aluminum
flyer plate is relatively low, which reaches only 2.5 GPa;
these are much higher than the yield strength of both
alloys, which are 0.19  GPa for magnesium and 0.12  GPa
for aluminum. Therefore, different materials have dif-
ferent maximum pressure values in different simulation
conditions [27, 38]. It may be seen that the deformation of
magnesium is larger than that of aluminum. This may be
profile and material deformation may drive the formation
of wavy interface with gradually increasing amplitude.
disturbance of velocity.
30
4.4 Effective plastic strain and shear stress
distribution
In theory, high impact velocity and collision angle will
lead to large plastic deformation, which in turn generates
a large value of plastic strain and high shear stress on the
interface. Figure 7 shows a narrow band of effective plastic
strain around the contact area. And at the collision point,
the shear strain reaches to maximum value of 11. In other
words, the maximum value occurs at the point with the
highest velocity. A severe plastically deformed zone also
occurs at the collision point. The change of plastic strain
during the collision can be intuitively observed, which
presents the morphology similar with the change of inter-
face waves. It was this changed trend that prompted the
formation of wave.
Figure 10 depicts the effective plastic strain of two
face-to-face points on the interface. The highest effec-
tive plastic strain is nearly 4.0 for magnesium and higher
than the value of nearly 1.1 for aluminum, which is in

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
 X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate      589

agreement with the plot of pressure of the two points. The 5 Conclusions
higher pressure produces larger deformation and makes
larger plastic strain.
In this study, the ANSYS/AUTODYN-2D model of the
Figure 8 shows the distribution of shear stress of
impact/explosive welding makes it possible to under-
two plates. Both sides of the interface suffer the normal
stand more intuitively the main features of the collision.
shear stress and negative shear stress, and their distri-
The wavy interface is reproduced, and the jetting in the
butions are not uniform. The distribution of negative
collision, which mostly originates from the base plate, is
shear stress on the flyer is more than that on the base
also reproduced. The results of the simulation predict the
plate, while distribution of the normal shear stress is
velocity of jetting, which is similarly in agreement with
opposite. Similar results are achieved in simulations
the theoretical values and results of experiment.
with explosive welding [25–27]. However, there are some
The main physical parameters such as pressure, veloc-
differences on the threshold value of shear stress due to
ity, effective plastic strain, and shear stress are analyzed.
material property. Interface has a good bonding when
The velocity and pressure at the collision point are highest
the predicted shear stress is 0.1097 GPa for magnesium
on the whole plates. The simulation indicates that shear
alloys and 0.1096  GPa aluminum alloys. The absolute
stress and effective plastic strain play an important role
value of shear stress on the base plate is larger than that
on the bonding of two metals and the formation of wavy
on the flyer plate. It may prompt the loss of base plate.
interface. A transition from straight to wave occurs when
This agrees with the phenomenon that jetting mostly
plastic strain exceeds a minimum value. The alternation
derives from the base plate. In general, the result of
between the normal and negative shear stress along the
the formation of wavy interface may be the alternation
interface creates the waves, and the amplitude and wave-
between the normal and negative shear stress along the
length of waves are also related with the value of shear
interface.
stress.
High impact velocity and collision angle can make a
large plastic deformation, which in turn generates a large
4.5 Straight to wavy interface
value of plastic strain and high shear stress on the inter-
face. The plastic strain of magnesium is higher than that
The simulation indicates that the size of wave along the
of aluminum in the simulation. This may be the result of
interface is not uniform (Figure 4). It can be observed
larger deformation of base plate than flyer plate.
that the shallower waves appear at the early parts of the
In this study, the simulation indicates that surface
interface, while deeper waves appear in the end. There
wave is produced ahead of the collision point. Due to the
is a transition from straight to wave along the interface.
choice of Von Mises strength model, we were unable to
The waves occur on the interface with higher plastic
describe the distribution of temperature on impact areas.
strain and shear stress. Akbari Mousavi and Burley [26]
Further exploring for improvement and supplement
concluded that there might be a minimum effective
about the formation mechanism of wave interface will be
strain for bonding and for the transition from a straight
needed.
to a wavy interface. But they did not give exact values
for different materials fabricated by explosive welding.
Acknowledgments: The authors gratefully acknowledge
Figure 7 shows a transition from straight to wave when
the support by the Natural Science Foundation Project
the plastic strain is more than 5.8. It can be inferred
of China (No. 51375328). Thanks are also due to Century
that higher impact velocity accompanied by larger
Dynamics for the use of ANSYS/AUTODYN software.
plastic deformation can make an earlier transition. Only
when the plastic strain exceeds the threshold value of
metals under different impact velocity does this transi-
tion occur. The amplitude increases as the shear stress References
increases, and vortex forms in the simulation (Figure 4).
This simulation indicates that surface wave is produced [1] Yang Z, Li JP, Zhang JX. Acta Metall. Sin. 2008, 21, 313–328.
ahead of the collision point. However, the effects of [2] Yan YB, Zhang ZW, Shen W. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2010, 527,
2241–2245.
the disturbance on the size of wave after collision and
[3] Paramsothy M, Hassan SF, Srikanth N. Composites Part A 2009,
the association between the jetting and the formation 40, 1490–1500.
of wave are still not clear. These should be taken into [4] Paramsothy M, Srikanth N, Gupta M. J. Alloys Compd. 2008, 461,
account in a later study. 200–208.

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM
590      X.D. Yuan et al.: Study on the interfacial behavior of Mg/Al plate
[5] Paramsothy N, Hassan SF, Srikanth N. Alloys Compd. 2009,
482, 73–80.
[6] Paramsothy M, Srikanth N. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2008, 494,
436–444.
[7] Habbi MK, Paramsothy M. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2011, 71,
734–741.
[8] Chang H, Zheng MY, Gan WM. Scripta Mater. 2009, 61,
717–720.
[9] Grignon F, Benson D, Vecchio KS. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2004, 30,
1333–1351.
[10] Sato YS, Seung Hwan C. Scripta Mater. 2004, 50, 1233–1236.
[11] Somasekharan AC, Murr LE. Mater. Character 2004, 52, 49–64.
[12] Chen YC, Nakata K. Scripta Mater. 2008, 58, 433–436.
[13] Chizari M, Barrett LM. Comp. Mater. 2009, 46, 828–833.
[14] Acarer M, Gulenc B, Findik F. J. Mater. Sci. 2004, 39,
6457–6466.
[15] Acarer M, Gulenc B. Mater Des. 2003, 24, 659–664.
[16] Kahraman N, Findik F. J. Mater. Process Tech. 2005, 169,
127–33.
[17] Kahraman N, Gulenc B. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2007, 34, 1423–1432.
[18] Durgutlu A, Gulenc B. Mater. Des. 2005, 26, 497–507.
[19] Mousawi SAAA, Sartangi PF. Mater. Des. 2009, 30, 459–468.
[20] Wang YX. Beom HG, Sun M, Lin S. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2011, 38,
51–60.
[21] Findik F. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 1081–1093.
[22] Mousawi SAAA, Al-Hassani STS, Atkins AG. Mater. Des. 2008,
29, 1334–1352.
[23] Wronka B. J. Mater. Sci. 2010, 45, 4078–83.
[24] Akihisa ABE. JSME Int. J. Ser. B 1997, 40, 395–401.
[25] Wang X, Zheng Y. Mater. Des. 2012, 35, 210–219.
[26] Akbari Mousavi AA, Burley SJ. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2005, 31,
719–734.
[27] Akbari Mousavi SAA, Al-Hassani STS. Mater. Des. 2008, 29,
1–19.
[28] Tanaka K. Mater. Sci. Forum 2008, 556, 61–64.
[29] Hayhurst Colin J, Clegg Richard A. Int. J. Impact Eng. 1997, 20,
337–348.
[30] Zhang N, Wang W. Mater. Des. 2015, 65, 1100–1109.
[31] Corbett BM. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2006, 33, 431–40.
[32] Danyluk J. [MD thesis]. Hradfort, USA: Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute, 2011, p. 1–52.
[33] ANSYS Inc. ANSYS/AUTODYN v.12.0. USA: Century Dynamics,
2007.
[34] Blazynsky TZ. Explosive forming welding and compaction.
Applied Science Publishers Ltd, 1983.
[35] Wittman RH. Use of explosive energy in manufacturing metallic
materials of new properties. In: Second int symp, Marianski,
Lazne, Czechoslovakia, 1973.
[36] Wittman RH. In: Proc fifth int conf high ener rate fab, vol. 4(2),
1975, 1–16.
[37] Century Dynamics Inc. SPH User Manual & Tutorial v.4.3. USA:
Century Dynamics, 2005.
[38] Akbari Mousavi AA, Al-Hassani STS. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2005,
53, 2501–2528.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/6/19 12:05 PM