Identifying simple shear in plane stress states
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Modern phenomenological damage models use Lode parameter L and triaxiality $$\eta $$ to describe the stress state of an isotropic material. Value pairs in the region between $$L, \eta = (0, 0)$$ and $$L, \eta = (0, \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}})$$ in plane stress condition can lead to ambiguous descriptions of the deformation. The case of simple shear is not defined separately. By using the difference in angles between the principal strain and principal stress axes, cases of coaxial stretch superposed with simple shear can be distinguished from cases of coaxial stretch without simple shear. In the case of anisotropic material or large elements, the distinction between these ambiguous cases can be utilized to optimize failure models. This study proposes a method to recover the deformation gradient and shear direction for proportional and non-proportional loading with an elastoplastic von Mises material. The deformation gradient is suitable for distinguishing stress states with simple shear from stress states without simple shear in plane stress condition.
Source: crossref · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Metallurgy and Material Forming
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. Anderson D, Butcher C, Pathak N, Worswick MJ (2017) Failure parameter identification and validation for a dual-phase 780 steel sheet. Int J Solids Struct 124:89–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.06.01810.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.06.018 ↗
2. Bai Y, Wierzbicki T (2008) A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with pressure and Lode dependence. Int J Plast 24(6):1071–1096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2007.09.00410.1016/j.ijplas.2007.09.004 ↗
3. Barsoum I, Faleskog J (2007) Rupture mechanisms in combined tension and shear-Experiments. Int J Solids Struct 44(6):1768–1786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.09.03110.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.09.031 ↗
4. Bažant ZP, Vorel J (2014) Energy-Conservation Error Due to Use of Green-Naghdi Objective Stress Rate in Commercial Finite-Element Codes and Its Compensation. J Appl Mech 81(2):021008. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.402441110.1115/1.4024411 ↗
5. Brünig M, Gerke S, Schmidt M (2016) Biaxial experiments and phenomenological modeling of stress-state-dependent ductile damage and fracture. Int J Fract 200(1–2):63–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-016-0080-310.1007/s10704-016-0080-3 ↗
6. Butcher C, Abedini A (2017) Shear confusion: Identification of the appropriate equivalent strain in simple shear using the logarithmic strain measure. Int J Mech Sci 134:273–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.10.00510.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.10.005 ↗
7. Butcher C, Abedini A (2019) On Phenomenological Failure Loci of Metals under Constant Stress States of Combined Tension and Shear: Issues of Coaxiality and Non-Uniqueness. Metals 9(10):1052. https://doi.org/10.3390/met910105210.3390/met9101052 ↗
8. Cao TS, Gachet JM, Montmitonnet P, Bouchard PO (2014) A Lode-dependent enhanced Lemaitre model for ductile fracture prediction at low stress triaxiality. Eng Fract Mech 124–125:80–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.03.02110.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.03.021 ↗
9. Elliott D (1972) Deformation Paths in Structural Geology. Geol Soc Am Bull 83(9):2621. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1972)83[2621:DPISG]2.0.CO;210.1130/0016-7606(1972)83[2621:DPISG]2.0.CO;2 ↗
10. Ganjiani M, Homayounfard M (2021) Development of a ductile failure model sensitive to stress triaxiality and Lode angle. Int J Solids Struct 225:111066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2021.11106610.1016/j.ijsolstr.2021.111066 ↗
11. Grolleau V, Roth CC, Mohr D (2022) Design of in-plane torsion experiment to characterize anisotropic plasticity and fracture under simple shear. Int J Solids Struct 236–237:111341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2021.11134110.1016/j.ijsolstr.2021.111341 ↗
12. Habibi N, Zhou M, Lian J, Könemann M, Münstermann S (2023) Numerical investigation into effects of fracture behavior on edge cracking sensitivity. J Mater Process Technol 316:117965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.11796510.1016/j.jmatprotec.2023.117965 ↗
13. 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(2–3):147–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(76)90024-710.1016/0022-5096(76)90024-7 ↗
14. Hossack JR (1968) Pebble deformation and thrusting in the Bygdin area (Southern Norway). Tectonophysics 5(4):315–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(68)90035-810.1016/0040-1951(68)90035-8 ↗
15. Hsu TC (1966) The characteristics of coaxial and non-coaxial strain paths. Journal of Strain Analysis. 1(3):216–222. https://doi.org/10.1243/03093247V01321610.1243/03093247V013216 ↗
16. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1985) Fracture characteristics of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1):31–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(85)90052-910.1016/0013-7944(85)90052-9 ↗
17. Lian J, Sharaf M, Archie F, Münstermann S (2013) A hybrid approach for modelling of plasticity and failure behaviour of advanced high-strength steel sheets. Int J Damage Mech 22(2):188–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/105678951243931910.1177/1056789512439319 ↗
18. Liu X, Yan S, Rasmussen KJR, Deierlein GG (2022) Experimental investigation of the effect of Lode angle on fracture initiation of steels. Eng Fract Mech 271:108637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.10863710.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.108637 ↗
19. Lode W (1926) Versuche über den Einfluß der mittleren Hauptspannung auf das Fließen der Metalle Eisen. Kupfer und Nickel Zeitschrift für Physik 36(11–12):913–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0140022210.1007/BF01400222 ↗
20. Lou Y, Huh H, Lim S, Pack K (2012) New ductile fracture criterion for prediction of fracture forming limit diagrams of sheet metals. Int J Solids Struct 49(25):3605–3615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2012.02.01610.1016/j.ijsolstr.2012.02.016 ↗
21. Lou Y, Yoon JW, Huh H (2014) Modeling of shear ductile fracture considering a changeable cut-off value for stress triaxiality. Int J Plast 54:56–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2013.08.00610.1016/j.ijplas.2013.08.006 ↗
22. Means WD (1982) An unfamiliar Mohr circle construction for finite strain. Tectonophysics 89(4):T1–T6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(82)90138-X10.1016/0040-1951(82)90138-X ↗
23. Means WD (1983) Application of the Mohr-circle construction to problems of inhomogeneous deformation. J Struct Geol 5(3–4):279–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8141(83)90016-010.1016/0191-8141(83)90016-0 ↗
24. Mohr D, Marcadet SJ (2015) Micromechanically-motivated phenomenological Hosford-Coulomb model for predicting ductile fracture initiation at low stress triaxialities. Int J Solids Struct 67–68:40–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2015.02.02410.1016/j.ijsolstr.2015.02.024 ↗
25. Passchier CW (1988) The use of Mohr circles to describe non-coaxial progressive deformation. Tectonophysics 149(3–4):323–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(88)90181-310.1016/0040-1951(88)90181-3 ↗
26. Ramberg H (1975) Particle paths, displacement and progressive strain applicable to rocks. Tectonophysics 28(1–2):1–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(75)90058-X10.1016/0040-1951(75)90058-X ↗
27. Ramsay JG, Huber MI. Strain analysis. 7th ed. No. Vol. 1 in The techniques of modern structural geology. London: Academic Press; 2003
28. Roth CC, Mohr D (2016) Ductile fracture experiments with locally proportional loading histories. Int J Plast 79:328–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2015.08.00410.1016/j.ijplas.2015.08.004 ↗
29. Schuster L, Olfert V, Sherepenko O, Fehrenbach C, Song S, Hein D et al (2024) Influences of Weld Nugget Shape and Material Gradient on the Shear Strength of Resistance Spot-Welded Joints. steel research international 95(4):2300530. https://doi.org/10.1002/srin.20230053010.1002/srin.202300530 ↗
30. Traphöner H, Heibel S, Clausmeyer T, Tekkaya AE (2018) Influence of manufacturing processes on material characterization with the grooved in-plane torsion test. Int J Mech Sci 146–147:544–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.05210.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.052 ↗
31. Traphöner H, Clausmeyer T, Tekkaya AE (2021) Methods for measuring large shear strains in in-plane torsion tests. J Mater Process Technol 287:116516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.11651610.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.116516 ↗
32. Vigneshwaran R, Benzerga AA (2023) An analysis of failure in shear versus tension. Eur J Mech A Solids 199:105074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechsol.2023.10507410.1016/j.euromechsol.2023.105074 ↗
33. Wierzbicki T, Xue L (2005) On the effect of the third invariant of the stress deviator on ductile fracture. Technical report, Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
34. Yin Q, Soyarslan C, Isik K, Tekkaya AE (2015) A grooved in-plane torsion test for the investigation of shear fracture in sheet materials. Int J Solids Struct 66:121–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2015.03.03210.1016/j.ijsolstr.2015.03.032 ↗