Skip to main content

Abstract

High strain rate of loading combined with multiaxial effects are important factors, which we need to consider in understanding the response of structures subjected to hard-body impact, blast, and detonation. Better design and load mitigation schemes against these factors can be developed based on the simulations that should be more reliable in predictive with such an approach. An important step toward this is a systematic validation of the simulations and various factors explained above and incorporation of these factors into the modeling schemes. Here, we consider the problem of modeling the impact dynamic response of metallic components undergoing hard-body contact and nonlinear elasto-plastic deformation. We consider the influence of triaxiality in the damage models with an example of the Johnson–Cook failure model, which is extensively used in industry for simulating impact, blast response, and crash. The material parameters involved in both the constitutive model and the failure model are estimated from one-dimensional tensile tests with coupons. Two problems arise, one is the material behavior characterized by the yield and plastic flow/hardening and the other is the two- and three-dimensional equivalent from the one-dimensional tests and parametric representation such that an accurate response can be simulated predictably and not merely by adjusting the material parameters in every simulation by knowing an actual test result in advance. The Johnson–Cook failure model has a five-parameter function to describe the plastic strain at failure. It includes the damage state in terms of the stress triaxiality, strain rate, and temperature effects. In the present work, the material constants and damage parameters are experimentally determined using uniaxial tensile tests. Finite-element model of ASTM standard tensile test coupon is modeled using Johnson–Cook material in LS-DYNA and are validated with experimental results for three different strain rates. ASTM standard flexural model is further simulated and validated with experimental results. Varying aspect ratios in flexural models are simulated and are experimentally compared. We observe that material parameters extracted under uniaxial tensile test conditions are not sufficient to model complex phenomenon such as blast, impact, etc., as these models cannot accurately predict damages and failure occurring in mixed mode loading conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. ASTM, E. (1991). 8 M: Standard test method for tension testing of metallic materials (Metric). Annual book of ASTM standards, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  2. ASTM, E. (1982). E290-92-standard test method for semi-guided bend test for ductility of metallic materials. American society for testing and materials.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bai, Y., Teng, X., & Wierzbicki, T. (2009). On the application of stress triaxiality formula for plane strain fracture testing. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 131(2), 21002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bao, Y., & Wierzbicki, T. (2004). On fracture locus in the equivalent strain and stress triaxiality space. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 46(1), 81–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bažant, Z. P. (1974). Three-dimensional harmonic functions near termination or intersection of gradient singularity lines: A general numerical method. International Journal of Engineering Science, 12(3), 221–243.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Benthem, J. P. (1977). State of stress at the vertex of a quarter-infinite crack in a half-space. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 13(5), 479–492.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Borden, M. J. et al. (2016). A phase-field formulation for fracture in ductile materials : Finite deformation balance law derivation, plastic degradation, and stress triaxiality effects. Computer Methods Applied Mechanical Engineering, 312, 130–166. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.09.005.

  8. Børvik, T., Hopperstad, O. S., & Pedersen, K. O. (2010). Quasi-brittle fracture during structural impact of AA7075-T651 aluminium plates. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 37(5), 537–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brar, N. S., et al. (2009). Constitutive model constants for Al7075-T651 and Al7075-T6. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1195(1), 945–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bridgman, P. W. (1952). Studies in large plastic flow and fracture. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chu, C. C., & Needleman, A. (1980). Void nucleation effects in biaxially stretched sheets. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology (Transactions of the ASME), 102(3), 249–256.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gurson, A. L. (1977). Continuum theory of ductile rupture by void nucleation and growth: Part I—yield criteria and flow rules for porous ductile media. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 99(1), 2–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gurson, A. L. (1975). Plastic flow and fracture behavior of ductile materials incorporating void nucleation, growth and coalescence. PhD Dissertation, Brown University.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hallquist, J. O. (2007). LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 970.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hartranft, R. J., & Sih, G. C. (1973). Alternating method applied to edge and surface crack problems. Methods of analysis and solutions of crack problems (pp. 179–238). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson, G. R., & Cook, W. H. (1983). A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on ballistics (pp. 541–547). The Hague: The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson, G. R., & Cook, W. H. (1985). Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 21(1), 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Koplik, J., & Needleman, A. (1988). Void growth and coalescence in porous plastic solids. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 24(8), 835–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lesuer, D. R., Kay, G., & LeBlanc, M. (1999). Modeling large strain, high rate deformation in metals. Engineering research, development and technology.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mackenzie, A. C., Hancock, J. W., & Brown, D. K. (1977). On the influence of state of stress on ductile failure initiation in high strength steels. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 9(1), 167IN13169–168IN14188.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Meyer, H. W. (2006). A modified Zerilli-Armstrong constitutive model describing the strength and localizing behavior of Ti-6Al-4 V.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Meyer, H. W., & Kleponis, D. S. (2001). Modeling the high strain rate behavior of titanium undergoing ballistic impact and penetration. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 26(1), 509–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Needleman, A. (1984). An analysis of ductile rupture in notched bars, (June 2017).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sih, G. C., & Lee, Y. D. (1989). Review of triaxial crack border stress and energy behavior, 12, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sih, G. H., Williams, M. L., & Swedlow, J. L. (1966). Three-dimensional stress distribution near a sharp crack in a plate of finite thickness, California Inst of Tech Pasadena Graduate Aeronautical Labs.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Taylor, G. I. (1934). The mechanism of plastic deformation of crystals. part i. theoretical. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, 145(855), 362 LP–387.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Thomason, P. F. (1985). A three-dimensional model for ductile fracture by the growth and coalescence of microvoids. Acta Metallurgica, 33(6), 1087–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tvergaard, V., & Needleman, A. (1984). Analysis of the cup-cone fracture in a round tensile bar. Acta Metallurgica, 32(1), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Zerilli, F. J. et al. (1994). Constitutive relations for the plastic deformation of metals. AIP conference proceedings (pp. 989–992). AIP.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zerilli, F. J. et al. (1996). Constitutive relations for titanium and Ti-6Al-4 V. AIP conference proceedings (pp. 315–318). AIP.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zerilli, F. J., et al. (1998). Dislocation mechanics based constitutive equation incorporating dynamic recovery and applied to thermomechanical shear instability. AIP Conference Proceedings, 429(1), 215–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Zerilli, F. J., & Armstrong, R. W. (1995). Constitutive equation for HCP metals and high strength alloy steels. High strain rate effects on polymer, metal and ceramic matrix composites and other advanced materials (pp. 121–126).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Zerilli, F. J., & Armstrong, R. W. (1987). Dislocation-mechanics-based constitutive relations for material dynamics calculations. Journal of Applied Physics, 61(5), 1816–1825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Zhang, Z. L., & Thaulow, C. (2000). A complete Gurson model approach for ductile fracture q (October 1998), 67, 155–168.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thankfully acknowledge financial support Pratt and Whitney USA to carry out this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Roy Mahapatra .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hiremath, S.R., Alapur, D., Roy Mahapatra, D. (2018). Stress Triaxiality in Damage Models. In: Gopalakrishnan, S., Rajapakse, Y. (eds) Blast Mitigation Strategies in Marine Composite and Sandwich Structures. Springer Transactions in Civil and Environmental Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7170-6_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7170-6_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-7169-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-7170-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics