Development of a Specimen for In-Situ Diffraction Planar Biaxial Experiments

Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

In this paper, the design of cruciform shaped, planar biaxial loading specimens using finite element analysis, mechanical testing, and digital image correlation is discussed. The specimens were designed to be capable of arbitrary combinations of tension and compression loading. Digital image correlation results from uniaxial tension tests of first-generation specimen infer key design attributes of second-generation specimen. Finite element results are compared with a plane stress analytical formulation and differences between the two are attributed to stress concentration fields originating at the intersection of specimen arms. These results motivate a parametric finite element geometry optimization of second-generation specimen.

Keywords

SEM DIC FEA Planar biaxial Compression 

Nomenclature

E

Young’s modulus

ε11

Strain in the 11 direction

ε22

Strain in the 22 direction

λa

Ratio of 11–22 direction applied surface tractions

λga

Analytical formulation ratio of 11–22 direction gage stresses

λgs

FEA simulation ratio of 11–22 direction gage stresses

ν

Poisson’s ratio

σ11

Stress in the 11 direction

σ11a

Applied surface traction in the 11 direction

σ11ga

Analytical formulation gage stress in the 11 direction

σ11gs

FEA simulation gage stress in the 11 direction

σ22

Stress in the 22 direction

σ22a

Applied surface traction in the 22 direction

σ22ga

Analytical formulation gage stress in the 22 direction

σ22gs

FEA simulation gage stress in the 22 direction

References

  1. 1.
    Metallic materials—sheet and strip—biaxial tensile testing method using a cruciform test piece, ISO 16842:2014Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abu-Farha, F., Hector Jr., L.G., Khraisheh, M.: Cruciform-shaped specimens for elevated temperature biaxial testing of lightweight materials. JOM 61(8), 48–56 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Demmerle, S., Boehler, J.P.: Optimal design of biaxial tensile cruciform specimens. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 41(1), 143–181 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hanabusa, Y., Takizawa, H., Kuwabara, T.: Numerical verification of a biaxial tensile test method using a cruciform specimen. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 213(6), 961–970 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hu, J.-J., Chen, G.-W., Liu, Y.-C., Hsu, S.-S.: Influence of specimen geometry on the estimation of the planar biaxial mechanical properties of cruciform specimens. Exp. Mech. 54(4), 615–631 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kuwabara, T., Kuroda, M., Tvergaard, V., Nomura, K.: Use of abrupt strain path change for determining subsequent yield surface: experimental study with metal sheets. Acta Mater. 48(9), 2071–2079 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Makinde, A., Thibodeau, L., Neale, K.W.: Development of an apparatus for biaxial testing using cruciform specimens. Exp. Mech. 32(2), 138–144 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Makris, A., Vandenbergh, T., Ramault, C., Van Hemelrijck, D., Lamkanfi, E., Van Paepegem, W.: Shape optimisation of a biaxially loaded cruciform specimen. Polym. Test. 29(2), 216–223 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shiratori, E., Ikegami, K.: Experimental study of the subsequent yield surface by using cross-shaped specimens. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 16(6), 373–394 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tiernan, P., Hannon, A.: Design optimisation of biaxial tensile test specimen using finite element analysis. Int. J. Mater. Form. 7(1), 117–123 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yu, Y., Wan, M., Wu, X.-D., Zhou, X.-B.: Design of a cruciform biaxial tensile specimen for limit strain analysis by FEM. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 123(1), 67–70 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Williams, M.L.: On the stress distribution at the base of a stationary crack. J. Appl. Mech. 24, 111–114 (1957)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Irwin, G.R.: Analysis of stresses and strains near the end of a crack transversing a plate. J. Appl. Mech. 24, 361–364 (1957)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sanford, R.J.: A critical re-examination of the westergaard method for solving opening-mode crack problems. Mech. Res. Commun. 6(5), 289–294 (1979)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barber, J.R.: Plane strain and plane stress. In: Barber, J.R. (ed.) Elasticity, 3rd edn, pp. 40–41. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentColorado School of MinesGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations