Effect of hydrostatic stress on the strength differential effect in low-carbon steel sheet
Source abstract
Abstract
The effect of hydrostatic stress on the strength differential effect (SDE) in a 0.8-mm-thick low-carbon steel sheet is experimentally investigated. The in-plane compressive stress-strain curve is approximately 10% higher than the uniaxial tensile stress-strain curve at a strain of 0.15, confirming that the test sample exhibited the SDE. A stack compression test in the thickness direction of the test sample is also performed. The measured through-thickness uniaxial compressive stress-strain curve is found to be higher than the equibiaxial tensile stress–thickness plastic strain curves measured using a cruciform equibiaxial tension test (ISO 16842) and a hydraulic bulge test (ISO 16808), indicating a positive correlation between hydrostatic pressure and flow stress. From these experiments, we conclude that the SDE in a low-carbon steel sheet is caused by the effect of hydrostatic pressure on flow stress. However, the pressure coefficient of the test sample, 50−150 TPa−1, is found to be significantly higher than those for high-strength steel alloys and Fe single crystals (13−23 TPa−1) reported by Richmond and Spitzig (1980). ; 1 ; 1 ; N ; scie ; scopus
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · Metallurgy and Material Forming · Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (28)
Show source-provided references
1. Richmond O, Spitzig WA (1980) Pressure dependence and dilatancy of plastic flow. IUTAM Conference, Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Proc. 15th International Congress of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics. North-Holland Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 377–386
2. Spitzig WA, Richmond O (1984) The effect of pressure on the flow stress of metals. Acta Metall 32:457–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(84)90119-610.1016/0001-6160(84)90119-6 ↗
3. Jung J (1981) A note on the influence of hydrostatic pressure on dislocations. Philos Mag A 43:1057–1061. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141861810823951110.1080/01418618108239511 ↗
4. Bulatov VV, Richmond O, Glazov MV (1999) An atomistic dislocation mechanism of pressure-dependent plastic flow in aluminum. Acta Mater 47:3507–3514. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(99)00154-810.1016/S1359-6454(99)00154-8 ↗
5. Kuwabara T, Morita Y, Miyashita Y, Takahashi S (1995) Elastic-Plastic Behavior of Sheet Metal Subjected to In-Plane Reverse Loading. Proc. Plasticity ‘95, The fifth international symposium on plasticity and its current applications, ed. S Tanimura S, Khan AS. Gordon and Breach Publishers, London, pp 841-844
6. Shirakami S, Kuwabara T, Tsuru E (2017) Axial compressive deformation behavior and material modeling of steel pipe with bending deformation history. J JSTP 58:692–698 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.9773/sosei.58.69210.9773/sosei.58.692 ↗
7. Maeda T, Noma N, Kuwabara T, Barlat F, Korkolis YP (2018) Measurement of the strength differential effect of DP980 steel sheet and experimental validation using pure bending test. J Mater Process Technol 265:247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.02.00910.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.02.009 ↗
8. Koizumi T, Kuroda M (2018) Evaluation of tension-compression asymmetry of a low-carbon steel sheet using a modified classical compression test method. IOP Conf. Series, J Phys 106310.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012167 ↗
9. Alves LM, Nielsen CV, Martins PAF (2011) Revisiting the fundamentals and capabilities of the stack compression test. Exp Mech 51:1565–1572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-011-9480-510.1007/s11340-011-9480-5 ↗
10. ISO 6892-1: 2019 Metallic materials — Tensile testing — Part 1:Method of test at room temperature
11. Noma N, Kuwabara T (2012) Numerical investigation of specimen geometry for in-plane compression tests and its experimental validation. J JSTP 53:574–578 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.9773/sosei.53.57410.9773/sosei.53.574 ↗
12. Kuwabara T, Kumano Y, Ziegelheim J, Kurosaki I (2009) Tension-compression asymmetry of phosphor bronze for electronic parts and its effect on bending behavior. Int J Plast 25:1759–1776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2009.01.00410.1016/j.ijplas.2009.01.004 ↗
13. ISO 16842: 2021 Metallic materials –Sheet and strip – Biaxial tensile testing method using a cruciform test piece
14. An YG, Vegter H (2005) Analytical and experimental study of frictional behavior in through-thickness compression test. J Mat Proc Technol 160:148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.05.02610.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.05.026 ↗
15. Merklein M, Godel V (2009) Characterization of the flow behavior of deep drawing steel grades in dependency of the stress state and its impact on FEA. Int J Mater Forming 2:415–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-009-0506-910.1007/s12289-009-0506-9 ↗
16. Jäckel M, Drossel W-G, Vandermeiren N, Maas F, Coppieters S, Debruyne D (2020) Standardization of flow curve determination for joining by forming, EFB-Forschungsbericht Nr.534. https://www.efb.de/efb-forschungsbericht-nr-534.html-1602681469.html
17. Christiansen P, Martins PAF, Bay N (2016) Friction compensation in the upsetting of cylindrical test specimens. Exp Mech 56 (2016):1271–1279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-016-0164-z10.1007/s11340-016-0164-z ↗
18. Coppieters S, Jäckel M, Kraus C, Kuwabara T, Barlat F (2020) Influence of a hydrostatic pressure shift on the flow stress in sheet metal. Procedia Manuf 47:1245–1249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.19610.1016/j.promfg.2020.04.196 ↗
19. Han H (2002) The validity of mechanical models evaluated by two-specimen method under the unknown coefficient of friction and flow stress. J Mater Process Technol 122:386–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00059-610.1016/S0924-0136(02)00059-6 ↗
20. Steglich D, Tian X, Bohlen J, Kuwabara T (2014) Mechanical testing of thin sheet magnesium alloys in biaxial tension and uniaxial compression. Exp Mech 54:1447–1258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-014-9892-010.1007/s11340-014-9892-0 ↗
21. Coppieters S, Jäckel M, Miyake N, Kraus C, Traphoner H, Kuwabara T, Tekkaya EA (2019) Large strain flow curve identification for sheet metal: process-informed method selection. Forming Technology Forum 2019. 19-20 September 2019, Herrsching/ Ammersee, Germany
22. Mulder J, Vegter H, Ha JJ, van den Boogaard AH (2012) Determination of flow curves under equibiaxial stress conditions. Key Eng Mater 504–506:53–5810.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.504-506.53 ↗
23. Mulder J, Vegter H, van den Boogaard AH (2015) An engineering approach to strain rate and temperature compensation of the flow stress established by the hydraulic bulge test. Key Eng Mater 651–653:138–143. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.651-653.13810.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.651-653.138 ↗
24. Spitzig WA (1979) Effect of hydrostatic pressure on plastic-flow properties of iron single crystals. Acta Metall 27:523–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(79)90004-X10.1016/0001-6160(79)90004-X ↗
25. Gröger R, Bailey AG, Vitek V (2008) A Multiscale modeling of plastic deformation of molybdenum and tungsten: II. tomistic studies of the core structure and glide of 1/2<111> screw dislocations at 0 K. Acta Mat 56: 5401-5411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2008.07.01810.1016/j.actamat.2008.07.018 ↗
26. Gröger R, Racherla V, Bassani JL, Vitek V (2008) Multiscale modeling of plastic deformation of molybdenum and tungsten: II. Yield criterion for single crystals based on atomistic studies of glide of 1/2<111> screw dislocations. Acta Mat 56: 5412-5425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2008.07.03710.1016/j.actamat.2008.07.037 ↗
27. Spitzig WA and Richmond O (1979) Effect of Hydrostatic pressure on the deformation behavior of polyethylene and polycarbonate in tension and in compression. Polymer Engng Sci 19: 1129. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.76019160210.1002/pen.760191602 ↗
28. Nielsen CV and Martins PAF (2021) Metal forming: formability, simulation, and tool design. Academic, Cambridge, pp 231-23310.1016/B978-0-323-85255-5.00006-6 ↗