Advertisement

Application of extended Mohr–Coulomb criterion to ductile fracture

  • Yuanli Bai
  • Tomasz Wierzbicki
Original Paper

Abstract

The Mohr–Coulomb (M–C) fracture criterion is revisited with an objective of describing ductile fracture of isotropic crack-free solids. This criterion has been extensively used in rock and soil mechanics as it correctly accounts for the effects of hydrostatic pressure as well as the Lode angle parameter. It turns out that these two parameters, which are critical for characterizing fracture of geo-materials, also control fracture of ductile metals (Bai and Wierzbicki 2008; Xue 2007; Barsoum 2006; Wilkins et al. 1980). The local form of the M–C criterion is transformed/extended to the spherical coordinate system, where the axes are the equivalent strain to fracture \({\bar \varepsilon_f}\) , the stress triaxiality η, and the normalized Lode angle parameter \({\bar \theta}\) . For a proportional loading, the fracture surface is shown to be an asymmetric function of \({\bar \theta}\). A detailed parametric study is performed to demonstrate the effect of model parameters on the fracture locus. It was found that the M–C fracture locus predicts almost exactly the exponential decay of the material ductility with stress triaxiality, which is in accord with theoretical analysis of Rice and Tracey (1969) and the empirical equation of Hancock and Mackenzie (1976), Johnson and Cook (1985). The M–C criterion also predicts a form of Lode angle dependence which is close to parabolic. Test results of two materials, 2024-T351 aluminum alloy and TRIP RA-K40/70 (TRIP690) high strength steel sheets, are used to calibrate and validate the proposed M–C fracture model. Another advantage of the M–C fracture model is that it predicts uniquely the orientation of the fracture surface. It is shown that the direction cosines of the unit normal vector to the fracture surface are functions of the “friction” coefficient in the M–C criterion. The phenomenological and physical sound M–C criterion has a great potential to be used as an engineering tool for predicting ductile fracture.

Keywords

Mohr–Coulomb criterion Ductile fracture 3D Fracture locus Crack direction 

References

  1. ABAQUS (2005) User’s manual, version 6.5, Hilbbit, Karlsson and Sorensen Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Areias PMA, Belytschko T (2005) Analysis of three-dimensional crack initiation and propagation using the extended finite element method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 63: 760–788zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bai Y (2008) Effect of loading history on necking and fracture. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2008Google Scholar
  4. Bai Y, Wierzbicki T (2008) A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with pressure and lode dependence. Int J Plast 24(6): 1071–1096zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bai Y, Teng X, Wierzbicki T (2009) On the application of stress triaxiality formula for plane strain fracture testing. J Eng Mater Technol 131(2), April 2009Google Scholar
  6. Bai Y, Luo M, Li Y, Wierzbicki T (2008) Calibration of TRIP steel sheet (RA-K40/70) for fracture. Technical report, Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. Bao Y (2003) Prediction of ductile crack formation in uncracked bodies. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  8. Bao Y, Wierzbicki T (2004) On fracture locus in the equivalent strain and stress triaxiality space. Int J Mech Sci 46(1): 81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bao Y, Wierzbicki T (2005) On the cut-off value of negative triaxiality for fracture. Eng Fract Mech 72(7): 1049–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barlat F, Yoon JW, Cazacu O (2007) On linear transformations of stress tensors for the description of plastic anisotropy. Int J Plast 23(5): 876–896zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barsoum I (2006) Ductile failure and rupture mechanisms in combined tension and shear. PhD thesis, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  12. Barsoum I, Faleskog J (2007) Rupture mechanisms in combined tension and shear—experiments. Int J Solids Struct 44(6): 1768–1786zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Beese A, Luo M, Li Y, Bai Y, Wierzbicki T (2009) Partially coupled anisotropic fracture model for sheets. submitted to Engineering Fracture Mechanics for publicationGoogle Scholar
  14. Bridgman PW (1952) Studies in large plastic flow and fracture. McGraw-Hill, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Cockcroft MG, Latham DJ (1968) Ductility and the workability of metals. J Inst Met 96: 33–39Google Scholar
  16. Coulomb C (1776) Essai sur une application des regles des maximis et minimis a quelues problemes de statique relatifs a lć6architecture. Mem Acad Roy des SciGoogle Scholar
  17. Dunand M, Mohr D (2009) Determination of (multiaxial) ductile fracture properties of trip steel sheets using notched tensile specimens, report 193. Technical report, Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  18. Fossum A, Brannon R (2005) The sandia geomodel: theory and user’s guide. Technical report, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM and Livermore, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. Fossum A, Brannon R (2006) On a viscoplastic model for rocks with mechanism-dependent characteristic times. Acta Geotechnica 1: 89–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gao X, Zhang T, Hayden M, Roe C (2009) Effects of the stress state on plasticity and ductile failure of an aluminum 5083 alloy. Int J Plast 25(12): 2366–2382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gurson AL (1975) Plastic flow and fracture behavior of ductile materials incorporating void nucleation, growth and interaction. PhD thesis, Brown UniversityGoogle Scholar
  22. Hancock JW, Mackenzie AC (1976) On the mechanisms of ductile failure in high-strength steels subjected to multi-axial stress-states. J Mech Phys Solids 24(2–3): 147–160CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  23. Hosford W (1972) A generalized isotropic yield criterion. J Appl Mech 39: 607Google Scholar
  24. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1): 31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Karafillis AP, Boyce MC (1993) A general anisotropic yield criterion using bounds and a transformation weighting tensor. J Mech Phys Solids 41(12): 1859–1886zbMATHCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  26. Korkolis YP, Kyriakides S (2008) Inflation and burst of anisotropic aluminum tubes for hydroforming applications. Int J Plast 24(3): 509–543zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee Y-W (2005) Fracture prediction in metal sheets. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  28. Lund A, Schuh C (2004) The mohr-coulomb criterion from unit shear processes in metallic glass. Intermetallics 12(10–11): 1159–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mackenzie AC, Hancock JW, Brown DK (1977) On the influence of state of stress on ductile failure initiation in high strength steels. Eng Fract Mech 9(1): 167–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Malvern LE (1969) Introduction to the mechanics of a continuous medium. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  31. McClintock FA (1968) A criterion of ductile fracture by the growth of holes. J Appl Mech 35: 363–371Google Scholar
  32. Mohr O (1914) Abhandlungen aus dem Gebiete der Technischen Mechanik (2nd ed). Ernst, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  33. Nahshon K, Hutchinson JW (2008) Modification of the Gurson model for shear failure. Eur J Mech A/Solids 27(1): 1–17zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Palchik V (2006) Application of mohr-coulomb failure theory to very porous sandy shales. Int J Rock Mech Mining Sci 43(7): 1153–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pfestorf M (2005) The application of multiphase steel in the body-in white. In Great designs in 2005 steel seminar presentationsGoogle Scholar
  36. Rice JR, Tracey DM (1969) On the ductile enlargement of voids in triaxial stress fields. J Mech Phys Solids 17: 201–217CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  37. Storen S, Rice JR (1975) Localized necking in thin sheets. J Mech Phys Solids 23(6): 421–441CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  38. Teng X (2004) High velocity impact fracture. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  39. Tvergaard V, Needleman A (1984) Analysis of the cup-cone fracture in a round tensile bar. Acta Materialia 32: 157– 169Google Scholar
  40. Wierzbicki T, Xue L (2005b) On the effect of the third invariant of the stress deviator on ductile fracture. Technical report, Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. Wierzbicki T, Bao Y, Bai Y (2005a) A new experimental technique for constructing a fracture envelope of metals under multi-axial loading. Proceedings of the 2005 SEM annual conference and exposition on experimental and applied mechanics. pp 1295–1303Google Scholar
  42. Wierzbicki T, Bao Y, Lee Y-W, Bai Y (2005b) Calibration and evaluation of seven fracture models. Int J Mech Sci 47(4–5): 719–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wilkins ML, Streit RD, Reaugh JE (1980) Cumulative-strain-damage model of ductile fracture: simulation and prediction of engineering fracture tests, ucrl-53058. Technical report, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Livermore, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  44. Xu B, Liu X (1995) Applied mechanics: elasticity and plasticity. Tsinghua University Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  45. Xue L (2007) Ductile fracture modeling—theory, experimental investigation numerical verification. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  46. Yang F, Sun Q, Hu W (2009) Yield criterions of metal plasticity in diffierent stress states. Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters). 22(2): 123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhao J (2000) Applicability of mohr-coulomb and hoek-brown strength criteria to the dynamic strength of brittle rock. Int J Rock Mech Mining Sci 37(7): 1115–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Impact and Crashworthiness LaboratoryMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.General Electric Global Research CenterNiskayunaUSA

Personalised recommendations