Abstract
An over-the-counter methodology to predict fracture initiation and propagation in the challenge specimen of the Second Sandia Fracture Challenge is detailed herein. This pragmatic approach mimics that of an engineer subjected to real-world time constraints and unquantified uncertainty. First, during the blind prediction phase of the challenge, flow and failure locus curves were calibrated for Ti–6Al–4V with provided tensile and shear test data for slow (0.0254 mm/s) and fast (25.4 mm/s) loading rates. Thereafter, these models were applied to a 3D finite-element mesh of the non-standardized challenge geometry with nominal dimensions to predict, among other items, crack path and specimen response. After the blind predictions were submitted to Sandia National Labs, they were improved upon by addressing anisotropic yielding, damage initiation under shear dominance, and boundary condition selection.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Atkins AG (1997) Fracture mechanics and metalforming: damage mechanics and the local approach of yesterday and today. In: Rossmanith HP (ed) Fracture research in retrospect: an anniversary volume in honour of G.R. Irwin’s 90th birthday, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp, 327–350
Besson J, Steglich D, Brocks W (2001) Modeling of crack growth in round bars and plane strain specimens. Int J Solids Struct 38:8259–8284. doi:10.1016/S0020-7683(01)00167-6
Boyce BL, Kramer SLB, Bosiljevac TR et al. (2016) The Second Sandia Fracture Challenge: predictions of ductile failure under quasi-static and moderate-rate dynamic loading. Int J Frac. doi:10.1007/s10704-016-0089-7
Boyce BL, Kramer SLB, Fang HE et al (2014) The Sandia Fracture Challenge: blind round robin predictions of ductile tearing. Int J Fract 186:5–68. doi:10.1007/s10704-013-9904-6
Giglio M, Manes A, Mapelli C, Mombelli D (2013) Relation between ductile fracture locus and deformation of phases in Ti–6Al–4V alloy. ISIJ Int 53:2250–2258. doi:10.2355/isijinternational.53.2250
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 24:147–160. doi:10.1016/0022-5096(76)90024-7
Hill R (1948) A theory of the yielding and plastic flow of anisotropic metals. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and physical sciences, vol 193, pp 281–297
McClintock FA (1968) A criterion for ductile fracture by the growth of holes. J Appl Mech 35:363. doi:10.1115/1.3601204
Ohata M, Toyoda M (2004) Damage concept for evaluating ductile cracking of steel structure subjected to large-scale cyclic straining. Sci Technol Adv Mater 5:241–249. doi:10.1016/j.stam.2003.10.007
Pack K, Luo M, Wierzbicki T (2014) Sandia Fracture Challenge: blind prediction and full calibration to enhance fracture predictability. Int J Fract 186:155–175. doi:10.1007/s10704-013-9923-3
Rice JR, Tracey DM (1969) On the ductile enlargement of voids in triaxial stress fields. J Mech Phys Solids 17:201–217. doi:10.1016/0022-5096(69)90033-7
Simulia (2011) Abaqus 6.11 User Manual. Providence, Rhode Island
Acknowledgments
The authors of this paper would like to thank Dr. Sharlotte L.B. Kramer and Dr. Brad Boyce, both of Sandia National Labs, for organizing yet another intellectually stimulating Sandia Fracture Challenge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cerrone, A.R., Nonn, A., Hochhalter, J.D. et al. Predicting failure of the Second Sandia Fracture Challenge geometry with a real-world, time constrained, over-the-counter methodology. Int J Fract 198, 117–126 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-016-0086-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-016-0086-x