Issue 65
A. Hartawan Mettanadi et al., Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 65 (2023) 135-159; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.65.10
wall, the greater the angle received, the greater the slip that will occur. This caused a decrease in the energy absorption by the specimen.
Figure 22: Deformation progress for each specimen during oblique compression.
100
10 11 12
92.38
PCF MCF
Total Energy Absorbed
88.43
79.09
80
77.13
9.18
71.24
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
7.74
60
50.72
43.92
40
Force (kN)
3.62
23.93
Energy Absorbed (kJ)
20
1.26
0
0
10
20
30
0
10
20
30
Angle of Compression (Degree)
Angle of Compression (Degree)
(a) (b) Figure 23: (a) Results of the PCF and MCF; and (b) Total energy absorption graph for each angle of compression. Summarized results in Fig. 23 show that the largest Peak Crushing Force (PCF) was at an angle of 0°, and it decreased as the pressure angle increased pressure angle. For Total Energy absorption, the 0° angle effectively absorbed the force with a value of 9.18 kJ. For the 10° angle, it still had sufficient ability to absorb 7.74 kJ of energy or 84.31% from the axial angle.
156
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online