Mechanical Behaviour of Al 6061-T6 Aluminium Alloy Under Large Strain and Failure

  • M. GiglioEmail author
  • A. Gilioli
  • A. Manes
Part of the Advanced Structured Materials book series (STRUCTMAT, volume 35)


Severe and extreme loads, that introduce large strains and failure, are a present challenge in the design of critical mechanical components. Even though full scale testing is a fundamental approach for reliable structural integrity evaluation, numerical simulation is an alternative economical method that is now increasingly chosen especially because of the development of computing performances. In particular, the numerical assessment of the ductile fracture in metallic components represents an innovative and challenging field in the structural integrity scenario. Aerospace, automotive and manufacturing industries have recently boosted their interest in these kinds of simulations with the aim to make these approaches, little by little, reliable also for certifications. Taking the requirement to characterize material for further impact simulations as a starting point, the work described in this chapter contains a complete characterization of the mechanical properties of Al 6061-T6 aluminium alloy as far as material hardening and fracture locus are concerned. The calibration has been carried out through a series of experimental tests on simple specimens. These specimens have similar geometry, but are subjected to different stress triaxiality, thanks to the use of a multiaxial hydraulic test machine. All the experimental tests have been numerically simulated and a complete material constitutive model has been calibrated, which based on the results of these experimental analyses.


Fracture mechanism Mechanical testing Ballistic impact Finite elements 


  1. 1.
    Bao, Y., Wierzbicki, T.: A comparative study on various ductile crack formation criteria. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 126(3), 314–324 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gurson, A.L.: Plastic flow and fracture behaviour of ductile materials incorporating void nucleation, growth and interaction. Ph.D. Thesis, Brown University (1975)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gurson, A.L.: Continuum theory of ductile rupture by void nucleation and growth: part 1-yield criteria and flow rules for porous ductile media. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 99, 2–15 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McClintock, F.A.: A criterion of ductile fracture by the growth of holes. J. Appl. Mech. 35, 363–371 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cockcroft, M.G., Latham, D.J.: Ductility and the workability of metals. J. Inst. Met. 96, 33–39 (1968)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johnson, G.R., Cook, W.H.: Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng. Fract. Mech. 21, 31–48 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brunig, M., Chyra, O., Albrecht, D., Driemeier, L., Alves, M.: A ductile damage criterion at various stress triaxialities. Int. J. Plast. 24, 1731–1755 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coppola, T., Cortese, L., Folgarait, P.: The effect of stress invariants on ductile fracture limit in steels. Eng. Fract. Mech. 76, 1288–1302 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonora, N.: A non-linear CDM model for ductile failure. Eng. Fract. Mech. 58, 11–28 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lemaitre, J.: A continuous damage mechanics model for ductile fracture. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 107, 83–89 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bonora, N., Ruggero, A., Esposito, L., Gentile, D.: CDM modeling of ductile failure in ferritic steels: assessment of the geometry transferability of model parameters. Int. J. Plast. 22, 2015–2047 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bonora, N., Gentile, D., Pirondi, A., Newaz, G.: Ductile damage evolution under triaxial state of stress: theory and experiments. Int. J. Plast. 21, 981–1007 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chiantoni, G., Bonora, N., Ruggero, A.: Experimental study of the effect of triaxiality ratio on the formability limit diagram and ductile damage evolution in steel and high purity copper. Int. J. Mater. Form. 3(1), 171–174 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Colombo, D., Giglio, M.: Numerical analysis of thin-walled shaft perforation by projectile, pp. 1264–1280. Computers & Structures, Elsevier Applied Science (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Follansbee, P.S., Kocks, U.F.: A constitutive description of the deformation of copper based on the use of the mechanical threshold stress as an internal state variable. Acta Metall. Mater. 36(1), 81–93 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goto, D.M., Bingert, J.F., Chen, S.R., Gray III, G.T., Garrett Jr, R.K.: The mechanical threshold stress constitutive strength model description of HY-100. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 31a, 1985–1996 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Campagne, L., Daridon, L., Ahzi, S.: A physically based model for dynamic failure in ductile metals. Mech. Mater. 37, 869–886 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clausen, A.H., Börvik, T., Hopperstad, O.S., Benallal, A.: Flow and fracture characteristics of aluminium alloy AA5083-H116 as function of strain rate, temperature and triaxiality. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 364, 260–272 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Børvik, T., Hopperstad, O.S., Berstad, T., Langseth, M.: A computational model of viscoplasticity and ductile damage for impact and penetration. Eur. J. Mech. A-Solid 20, 685–712 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Johnson, G.R., Holmquist, T.J.: Test data and computational strength and fracture model constants for 23 materials subjected to large strain, high-strain rates, and high temperatures. Technical Report LA-11463-MS, Los Alamos National Laboratory (1989)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lesuer, D.R., Kay, G.J., LeBlanc, M.M.: Modeling large-strain, high rate deformation in metals. UCRL-JC-134118, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zukas, J.A.: High Velocity Impact Dynamics. Wiley, London (1990)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meyers, M.A.: Dynamic Behavior of Materials. Wiley, New York (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bao, Y., Wierzbicki, T.: Bridgman revisited: on the history effects on ductile fracture. J. Mech. Phys. Solids (2004) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Clausing, D.P.: Effect of plastic strain state on ductility and toughness. Int. J. Fract.Mech. 6, 71–85 (1970)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McClintock, F.A.: Plasticity aspects of fracture. In: Liebowitz, H. (Ed.) Fracture, Vol. 3, pp 47-225. Academic Press, New York (1971) Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mirone, G.: Role of stress triaxiality in elastoplastic characterization and ductile failure prediction. Eng. Fract. Mech. 74, 1203–1221 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Driemeier, L., Brunig, M., Micheli, G., Alves, M.: Experiments on stress-triaxiality dependence of material behavior of aluminum alloys. Mech. Mater. 42, 207–217 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li, H., Fu, M.W., Lu, J., Yang, H.: Ductile fracture: experiments and computations. Int. J. Plast. 27, 147–180 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hopperstad, O.S., Börvik, T., Langseth, M., Labibes, K., Albertini, C.: On the influence of stress triaxiality and strain rate on the behaviour of a structural steel. Part I: experiments. Eur. J. Mech. A-Solid 22, 1–13 (2003)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Börvik, T., Hopperstad, O.S., Berstad, T., Langseth, M.: Numerical simulation of plugging failure in ballistic penetration. Int. J. Solids Struct. 38(34–35), 6241–6264 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bao, Y., Wierzbicki, T.: On the cut-off value of negative stress triaxiality for fracture. Eng. Fract. Mech. 72, 1049–1069 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dabboussi, W., Nemes, J.A.: Modeling of ductile fracture using the dynamic punch test. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 47, 1282–1299 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zukas, J.A., Nicholas, T., Swift, H.F.: Impact Dynamics. Wiley, New York (1982)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li, K., Goldsmith, W.: Impact on aluminium plates by tumbling projectiles: experimental study. Int. J. Impact Eng. 18(1), 23–43 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Giudici, L., Manes, A., Giglio, M.: Ballistic impact on a tail rotor transmission shaft for helicopter. In: International Conference Ballistic 2010, Beijing, 17–21 May 2010 (China)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Manes, A., Magrassi, G., Giglio, M., Bordegoni, M.: Reverse engineering of experimental tests results of ballistic impact for the validation of finite element simulations. In: ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference IDETC/CIE (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di MeccanicaPolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations