Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experimental and numerical investigation on plasticity and fracture behaviors of aluminum alloy 6061-T6 extrusions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aluminum alloy 6061-T6 (AA 6061-T6) extrusions have been widely applied in large-span reticulated shells. However, researches on behaviors of the aluminum alloy under large deformation and fracture by means of meso-mechanics are still insufficient. This paper focuses on the plastic and fracture behaviors of AA 6061-T6 extrusions over a wide range of stress states. Experiments on smooth and notched round bars, grooved plates and shear plates are conducted. It is observed that the yield stress decreases as the notch or groove radius decreases. The yield stress under plane strain or pure shear is lower than that under axisymmetric tension. In addition, true stress–true strain data obtained from tensile coupon tests overestimate the hardening behavior at large deformation. To fully describe these experimental observations, a new plastic model considering the pressure dependence, Lode angle effect, and hardening with post-necking correction is proposed. Regarding the ductile fracture, modified Mohr–Coulomb fracture model with damage-induced softening is adopted to predict crack initiation and propagation under different stress states. The material models of plasticity and fracture are numerically implemented into FE code ABAQUS/explicit by the material subroutine VUMAT. It is found that both the overall nominal stress–strain curves and fracture patterns for all specimens are well predicted by the material models. For practical engineering design, recommended reduced values of shear strength and high-triaxiality tensile strength of AA 6061-T6 extrusions are given.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yang L, Wei S, Zhang Q. Aluminum reticulated spatial structures: state of the art and key issues. J Build Struct. 2013;34(2):1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beese AM, Luo M, Li Y, Bai Y, Wierzbicki T. Partially coupled anisotropic fracture model for aluminum sheets. Eng Fract Mech. 2010;77(7):1128–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhao X, Yan S, Chen Y. A review on progressive collapse study for large-span space structures. J Build Struct. 2013;34(4):1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zhu P, Zhang Q, Luo X, Ouyang Y, Yin J. Experimental and numerical studies on ductile-fracture-controlled ultimate resistance of bars in aluminum alloy gusset joints under monotonic tensile loading. Eng Struct. 2020;204:109834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shi M, Xiang P, Wu M. Experimental investigation on bending and shear performance of two-way aluminum alloy gusset joints. Thin Walled Struct. 2018;122:124–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Drucker DC, Prager W. Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design. Q Appl Math. 1952;10(2):157–65.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Spitzig WA, Sober RJ, Richmond O. The effect of hydrostatic pressure on the deformation behavior of maraging and HY-80 steels and its implications for plasticity theory. Metall Trans A. 1976;7(11):1703–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yoon JW, Lou Y, Yoon J, Glazoff M. Asymmetric yield function based on the stress invariants for pressure sensitive metals. Int J Plast. 2014;56:184–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bai Y, Wierzbicki T. A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with pressure and Lode dependence. Int J Plast. 2008;24:1071–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kang L, Ge H, Fang X. An improved ductile fracture model for structural steels considering effect of high stress triaxiality. Constr Build Mater. 2016;115:634–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Drucker DC. Relation of experiments to mathematical theories of plasticity. J Appl Math. 1949;16(4):349–57.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Cazacu B, Barlat F. A criterion for description of anisotropy and yield differential effects in pressure-insensitive metals. Int J Plast. 2004;20(11):2027–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cazacu B, Plunkett F, Barlat F. Orthotropic yield criterion for hexagonal closed packed metals. Int J Plast. 2006;22(7):1171–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gao X, Zhang T, Zhou J, Graham SM, Hayden M, Roe C. On stress-state dependent plasticity modeling: significance of the hydrostatic stress, the third invariant of stress deviator and the non-associated flow rule. Int J Plast. 2011;27(2):217–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bridgman PW. Studies in large plastic flow and fracture. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1952.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhano K, Li Z. Numerical analysis of the stress–strain curve and fracture initiation for ductile material. Eng Fract Mech. 1994;49(2):235–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ling Y. Uniaxial true stress–strain after necking. AMP J Technol. 1996;5:37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jia LJ, Kuwamura H. Ductile fracture simulation of structural steels under monotonic tension. J Struct Eng. 2014;140:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jia LJ, Ge H, Shinohara K, Kato H. Experimental and numerical study on ductile fracture of structural steels under combined shear and tension. J Bridg Eng. 2016;21:1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bai Y, Wierzbicki T. Application of extended Mohr–Coulomb criterion to ductile fracture. Int J Fract. 2010;161:1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. GB/T50429. Code for Design of Aluminium Structures. China Planning Press Beijing, China; 2007.

  22. Aretz H. A consistent plasticity theory of incompressible and hydrostatic pressure-sensitive metals. Mech Res Commun. 2007;34(4):344–351.

  23. Stoughton TB, Yoon JW. A pressure-sensitive yield criterion under a non-associated flow rule for sheet metal forming. Int J Plast. 2004;20:705–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chen H, Salip A. Elasticity and plasticity. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Simo JC, Hughes TJ. Computational inelasticity. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2006.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Drucker DC. A definition of stable inelastic material. Providence: Brown University; 1957.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Wilkins M, Streit R, Reaugh J. Cumulative-strain-damage model of ductile fracture: simulation and prediction of engineering fracture tests. Lawrence Livermore National Lab, CA (USA); Science Applications, Inc., San., 1980.

  28. Glüge R, Bucci S. Does convexity of yield surfaces in plasticity have a physical significance? Math Mech Solids. 2018;23:1364–73.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Li Y, Wierzbicki T. Prediction of plane strain fracture of AHSS sheets with post-initiation softening. Int J Solids Struct. 2010;47:2316–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 51738009) and Scientific and Innovative Action Plan of Shanghai (Grant no. 14DZ2252300).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road, Shanghai, 200092, People’s Republic of China

    Peihua Zhu & Qilin Zhang

  2. State Grid Jiangsu Electric Power Engineering Consulting Co., Ltd., Nanjing, 210000, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China

    Hongjun Xu

  3. Shanghai Tongzheng Aluminum Alloy Structure Engineering Technology Co., Ltd, Shenbin South Road, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

    Yuanwen Ouyang

Authors
  1. Peihua Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qilin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hongjun Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuanwen Ouyang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qilin Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

1.1 Actual sizes

The nominal dimensions of these five types of specimens are illustrated in Fig. 4. Their actual dimensions are listed in the following tables (in mm or mm2).

Smooth round and notched bars

 

Minimum diameter (D1)

Area of critical section

Diameter of clamping section (D2)

Specimen length (L)

SB_1

8.02

50.52

8.98

150.04

SB_2

8.02

50.52

8.98

149.99

NB150-1

5.95

27.84

8.96

150.05

NB150-2

6.03

28.54

8.96

150.02

NB15_2

6.01

28.37

8.98

150.03

NB6_1

6.03

28.56

8.99

150.01

NB6_2

6.07

28.94

8.98

150.01

NB3_1

5.98

28.09

8.99

150.06

NB3_2

6.02

28.46

8.98

149.96

Grooved plates

 

Minimum thickness (t)

Width (W)

Area of critical section

Depth of one groove (h1)

Depth of the other groove (h2)

Specimen length (L)

GP5_2

1.86

40.03

74.46

2.05

2.13

150.41

GP5_3

1.99

39.93

79.46

1.99

1.93

149.90

GP2_1

2.14

40.01

85.62

2.03

1.89

150.09

GP2_2

2.08

39.97

83.14

1.91

2.01

150.09

GP1_3

2.11

40.03

84.46

1.96

2.01

150.03

Pure-shear plates

 

Minimum thickness (t)

Groove length (gL)

Area of critical section

Depth of one groove (h1)

Depth of the other groove (h2)

Specimen length (L)

Width (W)

S00_1

2.07

12.32

25.50

1.85

2.01

150.11

79.97

S00_3

1.93

11.96

23.08

2.13

2.00

150.10

80.04

Dimensions in mm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhu, P., Zhang, Q., Xu, H. et al. Experimental and numerical investigation on plasticity and fracture behaviors of aluminum alloy 6061-T6 extrusions. Archiv.Civ.Mech.Eng 21, 88 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43452-021-00225-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43452-021-00225-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation