Computational Mechanics

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 203–216 | Cite as

Viscoplastic regularization of local damage models: revisited

Original Paper

Abstract

Local damage models are known to produce pathological mesh dependent results. Regularization techniques are therefore mandatory if local damage models are used for academic research or industrial applications. The viscoplastic framework can be used for regularization of local damage models. Despite of the easy implementation of viscoplasticity, this method of regularization did not gain much popularity in comparison to the non-local or gradient damage models. This work is an effort to further explore viscoplastic regularization for quasi-static problems. The focus of this work is on ductile materials. Two different types of strain rate hardening models i.e. the Power law (with a multiplicative strain rate part) and the simplified Bergström van Liempt (with an additive strain rate part) models are used in this study. The modified Lemaitre’s anisotropic damage model with a strain rate dependency was used in this study. It was found that the primary viscoplastic length scale is a function of the hardening and softening (damage) parameters and does not depend upon the prescribed strain rate whereas the secondary length scale is a function of the strain rate. As damage grows, the effective regularization length gradually decreases. When the effective regularization length gets shorter than the element length numerical results become mesh dependent again. This loss of objectivity can not be solved but the effect can be minimized by selecting a very fine mesh or by prescribing high deformation velocities.

Keywords

Viscoplastic regularization Modified Lemaitre’s damage model Mesh dependency Length scale Bergström van Liempt hardening 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Atzema EH, ten Horn CHLJ, Vegter H (2004) Influence of tooling layout on sheet forming process analysis. In: Neittaanmaki P, Rossi T, Korotov S, Onate E, Periaux J, Knorzer D (eds) Proceeding of European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering. Jyvskyl, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bazant ZP, Jirasek M (2002) Nonlocal integral formulations of plasticity and damage: survey of progress. J Eng Mech 128(11): 1119–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergström Y (1969) A dislocation model for the stress–strain behaviour of polycrystalline α-fe with special emphasis on the variation of the densities of mobile and immobile dislocations. J Mater Sci Eng 5: 193–200Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brunet M, Morestin F, Walter-Leberre H (2005) Failure analysis of anisotropic sheet metal using a non-local plastic damage model. J Mater Process Technol 170: 457–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coenen EWC, Kouznetsova VG, Geers MGD (2012) Novel boundary conditions for strain localization analyses in microstructural volume elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 90(1): 1–21MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cowie JG, Azrin M, Olson GB (1989) Microvoid formation during shear deformation of ultrahigh strength steels. Metall Trans A 20A: 143–153Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Borst R, Sluys LJ, Muhlhaus HB, Pamin J (1993) Fundamental issues in finite element analyses of localisation of deformation. Eng Comput 10(2): 99–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dube J-F, Pijaudier-Cabot G, La Borderie C (1996) Rate dependent damage model for concrete in dynamics. ASCE J Eng Mech 122(10): 939–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Engelen RAB (2005) Plasticity induced damage in metals. Non-local modeling at finite strains. PhD thesis, Technical University of Eindhoven, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Estrin Y, Mecking H (1984) A unified phenomenological description of work hardening and creep based on one-parameter models. Acta Metall 32(1): 57–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fictorie E, van den Boogaard AH, Atzema EH (2010) Influence of punch radius in a nakazima test for mild steel and aluminum. Int J Mater Form 3(1): 1179–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heeres OM, Suiker ASJ, de Borst R (2002) A comparison between the perzyna viscoplastic model and the consistency viscoplastic model. Eur J Mech A/Solids 21: 1–12MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huh H, Kim SB, Song JH, Lim JH (2008) Dynamic tensile characteristics of trip-type and DP-type steel sheets for an auto-body. Int J Mech Sci 50: 918–931MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jirasek M (1998) Nonlocal models for damage and fracture: comparison of approaches. Int J Solids Struct 35(31–32): 4133–4145MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jirasek M, Rolshoven S (2003) Comparison of integral-type nonlocal plasticity models for strain-softening materials. Int J Eng Sci 41(13-14): 1553–1602MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lemaitre J, Desmorat R (2005) Engineering damage mechanics. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leon-Garcia O, Petrov R, Kestens L (2007) Deformation and damage evolution of the microstructure around ti particles in if steel during tensile deformation. Key Eng Mater 348–349: 173–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McVeigh C, Liu WK (2010) Multiresolution continuum modeling of micro-void assisted dynamic adiabatic shear band propagation. J Mech Phys Solids 58: 187–205MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McVeigh C, Vernereya F, Liu WK, Morana B, Olson G (2007) An interactive micro-void shear localization mechanism in high strength steels. J Mech Phys Solids 55: 225–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Needleman A (1988) Material rate dependence and mesh sensitivity in localization problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 67: 69–85MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Niazi MS, Wisselink HH, Meinders T (2012) Viscoplastic regularization of local damage models: a latent solution. Key Eng Mater 504–506: 845–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Niazi MS, Wisselink HH, Meinders T, Huétink J (2011) Failure predictions for dp steel cross-die test using anisotropic damage. Int J Damage Mech. doi:10.1177/1056789511407646
  23. 23.
    Peerlings RHJ, Brekelmans WAM, de Borst R, Geers MGD (1998) Softening, singularity and mesh sensitivity in quasi-brittle and fatigue damage, in nonlocal aspects in solid mechanics. In: Brillard A, Ganghoffer JF (eds) Proceedings of EUROMECH Colloquium 378. Mulhouse, France, pp 94–99Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Peerlings RHJ, de Borst R, Brekelmans WAM, de Vree JHP, Spee I (1996) Some observations on localisation in non-local and gradient damage models. Eur J Mech A/Solids 15: 937–953MATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Peerlings RHJ, de Borst R, Brekelmans WAM, Geers MGD (2002) Localisation issues in local and nonlocal continuum approaches to fracture. Eur J Mech A Solids 21(2): 175–189MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pirali P, Liaghat GhH, Ahmadi MT (2010) Viscoplasticity coupled with nonlocalized damage for incompatibilities due to strain softening. Mechanika 6(86): 17–23Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sluys LJ, de Borst R (1992) Wave propagation and localization in a rate-dependent cracked medium–model formulation and one-dimensional examples. Int J Solids Struct 29(23): 2945–2958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Steglich D, Siegmund T, Brocks W (1999) Micromechanical modeling of damage due to particle cracking in reinforced metals. Comput Mater Sci 16: 404–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tasan CC (2010) Micro-mechanical characterization of ductile damage in sheet metal. PhD thesis, Technical University of Eindhoven, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tasan CC, Hoefnagels JPM, ten Horn CHLJ, Geers MGD (2009) Experimental analysis of strain path dependent ductile damage mechanics and forming limits. Mech Mater 41(11): 1264–1276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tvergaard V, Niordson C (2004) Nonlocal plasticity effects on interaction of different size voids. Int J Plast 20: 107–120MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Liempt P (1994) Workhardening and substructural geometry of metals. J Mater Process Technol 45: 459–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vegter H, ten Horn CHLJ, An Y, Atzema E, Pijlman HH, van den Boogaard TH, Huétink H (2003) Characterization and modelling of the plastic behaviour and its application in sheet metal forming simulation. In: Onate E, Owen DRJ (eds) COMPLAS VII, 7th international conference on computational plasticity. CIMNE, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vysochinskiy D, Coudert T, Reyes A, Lademo OG (2012) Determination of forming limit strains using marciniak-kuczynski tests and automated digital image correlation procedures. Key Eng Mater 504–506: 17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang WM, Sluys LJ (2000) Formulation of an implicit algorithm for finite deformation viscoplasticity. Int J Solids Struct 37: 7329–7348MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang WM, Sluys LJ, de Borst R (1996) Interaction between material length scale and imperfection size for localisation phenomena in viscoplastic media. Eur J Mech A Solids 15: 447–464MATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wang WM, Sluys LJ, de Borst R (1997) Viscoplasticity for instabilities due to strain softening and strain-rate softening. Int J Numer Methods Eng 40: 3839–3864MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Materials innovation institute (M2i)DelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering TechnologyUniversity of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations