Heterogeneities induced by uniaxial compression and resulting errors in material behavior assessment
Source abstract
Abstract
A numerical investigation on uniaxial compression tests is performed to highlight the heterogeneous nature of the deformation process. Resulting errors on the material behaviors are deduced from the obtained force versus displacement data with the assumption of homogeneous deformation. The numerical study considers a range of strain rates (from 0.01 to 0.5 (s-1)), Coulomb friction coefficients (up to 0.3), and elasto-viscoplastic power law behaviors. The heterogeneous nature is characterized in terms of sample shape, strain, and strain rate heterogeneities. The results show that the final shape of the sample at a given macroscopic strain is influenced not only by the friction coefficient but also by the material properties. The levels of strain and strain rate heterogeneities in the samples can be significant in some conditions, leading to large errors when exploiting the force versus displacement data with the hypothesis of homogeneous strain. The estimations of the strain rate sensitivity parameters are not significantly affected by the strain heterogeneities, but the errors on the strain hardening parameters can be as large as 40 %. The apparent strain hardening parameter appears to be artificially strain rate sensitive. Being systematically lower than the material strain hardening parameter, when measured at lower strain rates, this underestimation will induce a systematic error in the determination of material properties and should be taken into consideration.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Mineral Processing and Grinding
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (20)
Show source-provided references
1. Ockewitz A, Sun DZ, Andrieux F, Mueller S (2012) Simulation of hot extrusion of an aluminum alloy with modeling of microstructure. Key Eng Mater 491:257–264. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.491.25710.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.491.257 ↗
2. Yao Z, Mei D, Shen H, Chen Z (2013) A friction evaluation method based on barrel compression test. Tribol Lett 51(3):525–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11249-013-0164-410.1007/s11249-013-0164-4 ↗
3. Kukhar VV, Klimov ES, Chernenko SM, Balalayeva EY (2020) Correlation of barreling effect with boundary friction coefficient during upsetting of various materials workpieces under processing conditions. Mater Sci Forum 992 MSF:751–756. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.992.75110.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.992.751 ↗
4. Roebuck B, Lord JD, Brooks M, Loveday MS, Sellars CM, Evans RW (2006) Measurement of flow stress in hot axisymmetric compression tests. Mater High Temp 23(2):59–83. https://doi.org/10.1179/mht.2006.00510.1179/mht.2006.005 ↗
5. Wang X, Li H, Chandrashekhara K, Rummel SA, Lekakh S, Van Aken DC, O’Malley RJ (2017) Inverse finite element modeling of the barreling effect on experimental stress-strain curve for high temperature steel compression test. J Mater Process Technol 243:465–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.01.01210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.01.012 ↗
6. Ebrahimi R, Najafizadeh A (2004) A new method for evaluation of friction in bulk metal forming. J Mater Process Technol 152(2):136–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.03.02910.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.03.029 ↗
7. Martínez HV, Coupard D, Girot F (2006) Constitutive model of the alloy 2117–T4 at low strain rates and temperatures. J Mater Process Technol 173(3):252–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.05.05610.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.05.056 ↗
8. Rasti J, Najafizadeh A, Meratian M (2011) Correcting the stress-strain curve in hot compression test using finite element analysis and Taguchi method. Int J ISSI 8(1):26–33
9. Bennett CJ, Leen SB, Williams EJ, Shipway PH, Hyde TH (2010) A critical analysis of plastic flow behaviour in axisymmetric isothermal and Gleeble compression testing. Comput Mater Sci 50(1):125–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2010.07.01610.1016/j.commatsci.2010.07.016 ↗
10. Montheillet F (2009) Métallurgie en mise en forme à chaud. Techniques de l’ingénieur10.51257/a-v1-m3031 ↗
11. Chovet C, Desrayaud C, Montheillet F (2002) A mechanical analysis of the plane strain channel-die compression test: Friction effects in hot metal testing. Int J Mech Sci 44(2):343–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7403(01)00092-310.1016/S0020-7403(01)00092-3 ↗
12. Ludwik P (1909) Elemente der technologischen mechanik10.1007/978-3-662-40293-1 ↗
13. Batra RC, Kim CH (1990) Effect of viscoplastic flow rules on the initiation and growth of shear bands at high strain rates. J Mech Phys Solids 38(6):859–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(90)90043-410.1016/0022-5096(90)90043-4 ↗
14. Notta-Cuvier D, Langrand B, Markiewicz E, Lauro F, Portemont G (2013) Identification of Johnson-Cook’s viscoplastic model parameters using the virtual fields method: Application to titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. Strain 49(1):22–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/str.1201010.1111/str.12010 ↗
15. Campbell JE, Thompson RP, Dean J, Clyne TW (2019) Comparison between stress-strain plots obtained from indentation plastometry, based on residual indent profiles, and from uniaxial testing. Acta Mater 168:87–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2019.02.00610.1016/j.actamat.2019.02.006 ↗
16. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1983) A Constitutive modeling and data for metals subjected to large strain rates and high temperatures
17. Zhou W, Lin J, Balint DS, Dean TA (2021) Clarification of the effect of temperature and strain rate on workpiece deformation behaviour in metal forming processes. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 171:103815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2021.10381510.1016/j.ijmachtools.2021.103815 ↗
18. Gibaud R, Guesnet É, Lhuissier P, Salvo L (2018) Modeling large viscoplastic strain in multi-material with the discrete element method. Int J Mech Sci 136(December 2017):349–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.04410.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.044 ↗
19. Rudnytskyj A, Simon P, Jech M, Gachot C (2020) Constitutive modelling of the 6061 aluminium alloy under hot rolling conditions and large strain ranges. Mater Des 190:108568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.10856810.1016/j.matdes.2020.108568 ↗
20. Sakai T, Jonas JJ (1984) Overview no. 35 dynamic recrystallization: mechanical and microstructural considerations. Acta Metall 32(2):189–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(84)90049-X10.1016/0001-6160(84)90049-X ↗