Texture evolution in FCC metals from initially different misorientation distributions under shear deformation
- 137 Downloads
- 2 Citations
Abstract
We applied the crystal plasticity finite element method (CPFEM) based on a rate sensitivity model to examine the subgrain texture evolution of FCC metals under shear deformation. We used two kinds of microstructure models with the same orientation distribution function (ODF) but different spatial arrangements or misorientation distributions (MDs). One contained a great high frequency around low misorientation angles and the other a great high frequency near high misorientation angles. Different misorientation angles among neighboring crystals caused different interactions among them, particularly at the subgrain scale. The difference in MD affected the evolution of texture and average misorientation angles during deformation. The average misorientation angles of the subgrain boundaries increased with shear strain.
Keywords
texture microstructure deformation crystal plasticity finite element methodPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.W. A. Backofen, Trans. AIME. 188, 1454 (1950).Google Scholar
- 2.F. Montheillet, M. Cohen, and J. J. Jonas, Acta metall. 32, 2077 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.J. G. Sevillano, P. V. Houtte, and E. Aernoudt, Z. Metallk. 66, 367 (1975).Google Scholar
- 4.L. S. Toth, P. Gilormini, and J. J. Jonas, Acta metal. 36, 3077 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.G. I. Taylor, J. Inst. Metals 62, 307 (1938).Google Scholar
- 6.A. A. Nazarov, N. A. Enikeev, A. E. Romanov, T. S. Orlova, I. V. Alexandrov, I. J. eyerlein, and R. Z. Valiev, Acta mater. 54, 985 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.N. Hansen, Scripta metall. mater. 27, 1447 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf and N. Hansen, Scripta metall. mater. 25, 1557 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.D. A. Hughes, Q. Liu, D.C. Chrzan, and N. Hansen, Acta mater. 45, 105 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.J.-H. Cho, Adv. Mat. Res. 26–28, 1003 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.V. Rnadle, The Measurement of Grain boundary Geometry, Institute of Physics Publishing (1993).Google Scholar
- 12.ABAQUS version 6.5, Analysis User’s manual, Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen, Pawtucket, RI (2004).Google Scholar
- 13.D. Peirce, R. J. Asaro, and A. Needleman, Acta metall. 31, 1951 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.R. J. Asaro and A. Needleman, Acta metall. 33, 923 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.S. R. Kalidindi, C. A. Bronkhorst, and L. Anand, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 40, 537 (1992).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 16.S.-J. Park, S.-H. Choi, K. H. Oh, and J. A. Szpunar, Mater. Sci. Forum 408-412, 377 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.S.-J. Park, Ph.D. thesis, Seoul National Univ., Seoul, Korea (2000).Google Scholar
- 18.Y.-S. Song, B.-J. Kim, H.-W. Kim, S.-B. Kang, and S.-H. Choi, J. Kor. Inst. Met. & Mater. 46, 135 (2008).Google Scholar
- 19.Y.-S. Song, D.-W. Kim, H.-S. Yang, S.-H. Han, K.-G. Chin, and S.-H. Choi, J. Kor. Inst. Met. & Mater. 47, 274 (2009).Google Scholar
- 20.M. Miodownik, A. W. Godfrey, E. A. Holm, and D. A. Hughes, Acta mater. 47, 2661 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.J. K. Mackenzie, Biometrika 45, 229 (1958).MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 22.P. R. Dawson, D. P. Mika, and N. R. Barton, Scripta mater. 47, 713 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.D. P. Mika and P. R. Dawson, Acta. mater. 47, 1335 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar