Strength of Materials

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 735–745 | Cite as

Refinement of parameters of the model for nonlocalized damage accumulation to describe deformation of the steel 20

  • V. N. Kucher
Article
First Online:
Received:

We present a method for refining the parameters of the model for nonlocalized damage accumulation in the steel 20 under static deformation, which are determined by variation in elastic modulus and degree of homogeneity of the material, that corresponds to the scatter of hardness characteristics during mass measurements at different stages of repeated static loading.

Keywords

nonlocalized damage model degradation of mechanical properties damage parameter defect of elastic modulus material hardness scatter of hardness characteristics the Weibull coefficient of homogeneity rigidity of the stressed state 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. S. Kobayashi (Ed.), Handbook on Experimental Mechanics, Book 2, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1987).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Lemaitre, Damage Mechanics, The Bath Press (1990).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Barbero., F. Greco, and P. Lonetti, “Continuum damage-healing mechanics with application to soft-heading composites,” Int. J. Damage Mech., 14, No. 1, 51–81 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. A. Lebedev, N. R. Muzyka and N. L. Volchek, “Determination of damage accumulated in structural materials by the parameters of scatter of their hardness characteristics,” Strength Mater., 34, No. 4, 317–321 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. A. Lebedev, N. R. Muzyka, and N. L. Volchek, A Method of Assessment of Material Degradation Due to Damage Accumulation during Operating Time. LM-Hardness Method [in Ukrainian], Patent No. 52107A Ukraine, Issued at 15.01.2003, Bull. No. 1.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. L. Gurson, “Continuum theory ductile rupture by void nucleation and growth. Pt. I: Yield criteria and flow rules for porous ductile media,” J. Eng. Mater. Techn., 99, No. 1, 2–15 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Needelman and V. Tvergaard, “An analysis of ductile rupture in notched bars,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 32, No. 6, 461–490 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    V. T. Troshchenko, A. Ya. Krasovskii, V. V. Pokrovskii, et al., Resistance of Materials to Deformation and Fracture. Handbook [in Russian], Vol. 2, Naukova Dumka, Kiev (1994).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Ya. Leonov and K. N. Rusinko, “Mechanism for the deformation of a semibrittle object,” in: Plasticity and Brittleness [in Russian], Ilim, Frunze (1967), pp. 86–102.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Rousselier, “Ductile fracture models and their potential in local approach of fracture,” Nuclear Eng. Design, 105, No. 1, 97–111 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    N. R. Hansen and H. L. Schreyer, “A thermodynamically consistent framework for theories elastoplasticity coupled with damage,” Int. J. Struct., 31, No. 3, 359–389 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    N. I. Bobyr’, A. P. Grabovskii, A. P. Khalimon, et al., “Kinetics of scattered fracture in structural metals under elastoplastic deformation,” Strength Mater., 39, No. 3, 237–245 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. M. Kàchanov, “On the creep fracture time,” Izv. AN SSSR, No. 8, 25–35 (1958).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu. N. Rabotnov, Creep of Structural Elements [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1966).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. A. Il’yushin, Continuum Mechanics [in Russian], Moscow State University, Moscow (1990).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Krajcinovic and G. U. Foneska, “The continuum damage theory for brittle materials,” J. Appl. Mech., 48, 809–815 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Lemaitre, “A continuous damage mechanics model for ductile fracture,” J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 107, 83–89 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    N. Bonora, D. Gentile, A. Pirondi, and N. Golam, “Ductile damage evolution under triaxial state of stress: theory and experiments,” Int. J. Plasticity, 21, No. 5, 981–1007 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    V. A. Lubarda and D. Krajcinovic, “Some fundamental issues in rate theory of damage-elastoplasticity,” Int. J. Plasticity, 11, No. 7, 763–797 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    G. Z. Voyiadjis and T. Park, “Kinematics description of damage for finite strain plasticity,” Int. Eng. Sci., 37, No. 7, 803–830 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. L. Chow and J. Wang, “An anisotropic theory of continuum damage mechanics for ductile fracture,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 27, No. 5, 547–558 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    G. Voyiadjis and R. K. Abou Al-Rub, “On the coupling of anisotropic damage and plasticity models for ductile materials,” Int. Solids Struct., 40, No. 11, 2611–2643 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. A. Lebedev and N. G. Chausov, New Methods for the Evaluation of the Degradation of the Mechanical Properties of the Metal of Structures in the Process of Operation [in Russian], Kiev (2004).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. A. Lebedev and V. P. Shvets, “Assessment of damage in structural steels by the parameters of scatter of hardness characteristics in loaded and unloaded states,” Strength Mater., 40, No. 3, 29–37 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    GOST 2999-75. Metals and Alloys. The Vickers Hardness Test Method [in Russian], Izd. Standartov, Moscow (1975).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    W. Weibull, “A statistical theory of the strength of materials,” Proc. Roy. Swed. Inst. Eng. Res., No. 151, 1–45 (1939).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    E. J. Gumbel, Statistical Theory of Extreme Values and Some Practical Application, National Bureau of Standards, Washington (1954).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    R. M. Christensen, Theory of Viscoelasticity. An Introduction, Academic Press, New York (1971).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. I. Bobyr and O. M. Maslo, “Generalized phenomenological damage model under complex loading,” NTUU “KPI,” No. 4, 26–29 (2003).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    V. P. D’yakonov, MATLAB 6/6.1/6.5 + Simulink 4/5 in Mathematics and Modeling. Complete User Guide [in Russian], SOLON, Moscow (2003).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    J. Rice and D. Tracey, “On ductile enlargement of voids in triaxial stress fields,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 17, 50–62 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    A. A. Lebedev and V. M., Mikhalevich, “On the choice of stress invariants in solving problems of mechanics,” Strength Mater., 35, No. 3, 217–224 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. N. Kucher
    • 1
  1. 1.Pisarenko Institute of Problems of StrengthNational Academy of Sciences of UkraineKievUkraine

Personalised recommendations