Skip to main content
Log in

Research of the Gurson damage model of the different yield functions during the deep-drawing process

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Based on the macroscopic constitutive models (MCCM), the Gurson damage model is introduced to build the mesoscopic constitutive models (MSCM) with anisotropy Gurson-Hill1948 and Gurson-Yld2003 damage models. The damage parameters of the Gurson-Hill1948 and Gurson-Yld2003 damage models using orthogonal analysis and inverse computed methods are discussed and compared with experimental and simulation results obtained using the user subroutine VUMAT implemented by Lin. The corresponding sensitivity of the damage parameters was obtained by orthogonal analysis, then these optimized damage parameters could describe the mechanical performance for 08Al sheet with 1 mm thickness. Basically, the simulation results are in accordance with the experiment results. The damage parameters of the Gurson-Hill1948 and Gurson-Yld2003 constitutive models are explored to describe the deep-drawing deforming process, failure performance and obtained equivalent stress, equivalent plastic strain, thickness, damage distribution, and the influence of the friction coefficient during the deep-drawing process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hill R (1948) A theory of the yielding and plastic flow of anisotropy metals. P Roy Soc Lond A Mat 193:281–297

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Barlat F, Brem JC, Yoon JW (2003) Plane stress yield function for aluminum alloy sheets—part 1: theory. Int J Plastic. 19(9):937–963

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Hill R (1979) Theoretical plasticity of textured aggregates. Math Proc Cambridge 85:179–191

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Hill R (1993) A user-friendly theory of orthotropic plasticity in sheet metals. Int J Mech Sci 35(1):19–25

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Barlat F, Lian K (1989) Plastic behavior and stretchability of sheet metals. Part I: a yield function for orthotropic sheets under plane stress conditions. Int J Plastic. 5(1):51–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Aretz H (2005) A non-quadratic plane stress yield function for orthotropic sheet metals. J Mater Process Technol 168(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hosford WF (1972) A generalized isotropic yield criterion [J]. Journal of Applied Mechanics of ASME 39:607–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lin, J, 2010. Study on theory and key technologies of numerical simulation for hydro-mechanical deep drawing process. Dissertation, Xi’an Jiaotong University.

  9. Shang HX, Mohanram A, Olevsky E, Bordia RK (2016) Evolution of anisotropy in hierarchical porous ceramics during sinter-forging. J Eur Ceram Soc 36(12):2937–2945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Xue X, Liao J, Vincze G, Sousa J, Barlat F, Gracio J (2016) Modelling and sensitivity analysis of twist springback in deep drawing of dual-phase steel. Mater Des 90(15):204–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bandyopadhyay K, Panda SK, Saha P, Padmanabham G (2015) Limiting drawing ratio and deep drawing behavior of dual phase steel tailor welded blanks: FE simulation and experimental validation. J Mater Process Technol 217:48–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Taherizadeh A, Green DE, Yoon JW (2011) Evaluation of advanced anisotropy models with mixed hardening evaluation of advanced anisotropy models with mixed hardening for general associated and non-associated flow metal plasticity. Int J Plastic 27(11):1781–1802

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Barlat F, Lege DJ, Brem TC (1991) A six-component yield function for anisotropy materials. Int J Plast 9:693–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Safaei M, Zang SL, Lee MG, Lee MG, Waele WD (2013) Evaluation of anisotropy constitutive models: mixed anisotropy hardening and non-associated flow rule approach. Int J Mech Sci 73:53–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Moayyedian F, Kadkhodayan M (2015) Combination of modified Yld2000-2d and Yld2000-2d in anisotropy pressure dependent sheet metals. Lat Am J Solids Stru 12(1):92–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McClintock FA (1968) A criterion for ductile fracture by the growth of holes. J Appl Mech 35(2):363–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rousselier G (1987) Ductile fracture models and their potential in local approach of fracture. Nucl Eng Des 105(1):97–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tvergaard V (1981) Influence of voids on shear band instabilities under plane strain conditions. Int J fracture 17:389–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Guo JH, Zhao SD, Murakami R-i, Zang SL (2013) Experimental and numerical investigation for ductile fracture of Al-alloy 5052 using modified Rousselier model. Comput Mater Sci 71:115–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Xu F, Zhao SD, Han XL (2014) Using of a modified Gurson model for the failure behavior of the clinched joint on Al6061 sheet. Fatig Fract Eng Mater Struct 37:335–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Malte W, Eric L, Marek H, Jens-Pete M, Soren O (2015) Explicit FEM analysis of the deep drawing of paperboard. Mech Mater 89:202–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lin J, Zhao SD, Zhang ZY, Wang ZW (2009) Deep drawing using a novel hydro-mechanical tooling. Int J Mach Tool Manu 49(1):73–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lin J, Chan LC, Wang L (2010) Prediction of forming limit diagrams based on shear failure criterion. Int J Solids Struct 47(21):2855–2865

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Wen T, Wang H, Yang C, Liu LT (2014) On a reshaping method of clinched joints to reduce the protrusion height. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 71(9–12):1709–1715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Karupannasamy DK, Hol J, De Rooij MB, Meinders T, Schipper DJ (2014) A friction model for loading and reloading effects in deep drawing processes. Wear 318(1–2):27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Zhang SH, Jensen MR, Danckerta J, Nielsen KB, Kang DC, Lang LH (2000) Analysis of the hydro-mechanical deep drawing of cylindrical cups. J Mater Process Technol 103(3):367–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Brosius A, Mousavi A (2016) Lubricant free deep drawing process by macro structured tools. CIRP Ann-Manuf Techn 65(1):253–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fan Xu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xu, F., Lin, J., Zhao, S. et al. Research of the Gurson damage model of the different yield functions during the deep-drawing process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91, 1643–1659 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9873-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9873-9

Keywords

Navigation