Process modeling in machining. Part I: determination of flow stress data

By M. Shatla, C. Kerk, Taylan Altan. 2001

189 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Civil and Structural Engineering, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1bfa436cd68362d6f076ed73c154cafdda9031b7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

1. E. Zeren
2. Tugrul Özel
3. Yigit Karpat
4. V. Gaitonde
5. S. Shahab
6. M. Tawfiq
7. Luís Figueira
8. Mohammad Robiul Hossan

In Civil and Structural Engineering

1. Tugrul Özel
2. E. Zeren
3. Michel Salaün
4. Yigit Karpat
5. É. Rivière-Lorphèvre
6. François Ducobu
7. Enrico Filippi
8. S. Shahab

In Mechanical Engineering

1. Tugrul Özel
2. E. Zeren
3. Yigit Karpat
4. V. Gaitonde
5. É. Rivière-Lorphèvre
6. François Ducobu
7. Enrico Filippi
8. S. Shahab

Citations in the corpus

• SPH method applied to high speed cutting modelling (2007, background): “In general, the Johnson–Cook constitutive model constants A, B, C, n and m are fitted to the data obtained by split Hopkinson pressure bar tests at strain rates up to 103 s 1 and at temperatures up to 600 1C [9].”
• Determination of work material flow stress and friction for FEA of machining using orthogonal cutting tests (2004, methodology): “Shatla et al. [ 11 ] reported that their algorithm is vulnerable finding local convergence as the unrealistic combinations of JC parameters as the solution.”