journal article·2012-05Open access

Identification of the continuum damage parameter: An experimental challenge in modeling damage evolution

C.C. Tasan, J.P.M. Hoefnagels, M.G.D. Geers

Acta Materialia· Volume 60· Issue 8

Abstract

To accurately predict ductile failures of new advanced metals, continuum damage models (CDM's) require experimental determination of material-specific damage parameter(s). While various experimental techniques are being used to determine these damage parameter(s), possible systematic errors due to methodological difference in damage definition have yet to be fully revealed. With the aim of finding the most reliable ductile damage quantification strategy for CDM's, this work provides an in-depth comparison of six theoretically-equivalent methodologies by considering measurement accuracy, precision, damage spectrum, spatial resolution, and practicality. It is found that the methodologies that quantify ductile damage from its geometry introduce significant systematic errors, whereas the methodologies that probe the degradation of a mechanical property suffer from low precision and high complexity, especially for high strains and material anisotropy.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Surface Polishing Techniques · Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (26)

Show source-provided references
1. Principles of penetrants
2. Kachanov · Akad Nauk SSR Otd Tekh · 1958 · 8 · 26
3. Lemaitre · Eng Fract Mech · 1987 · 28 · 64310.1016/0013-7944(87)90059-2 ↗
4. Alves · Mech Des Struct · 2001 · 29 · 45110.1081/SME-100107622 ↗
5. Tasan · Mech Mater · 2009 · 41 · 126410.1016/j.mechmat.2009.08.003 ↗
6. Tasan CC et al. In: Proceedings of SEM XI International Conference on Exp Appl Mech; 2008.
7. Louws N. MSc thesis, TU/e, NL; 2008. Available from .
8. Hoefnagels JPM et al. In: Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Fract; 2009.
9. Tasan · Acta Mater · 2009 · 57 · 495710.1016/j.actamat.2009.06.057 ↗
10. Tasan · Scripta Mater · 2010 · 63 · 31610.1016/j.scriptamat.2010.04.018 ↗
11. Tasan CC. PhD thesis. The Netherlands: Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e); 2010. ISBN: 978-90-77172-54-4. Available from .
12. Tasan · Metall Mater Trans A · 2012 · 43A · 79610.1007/s11661-011-1021-4 ↗
13. Tasan · Scripta Mater · 2010 · 62 · 83510.1016/j.scriptamat.2010.02.014 ↗
14. Chae · Mater Sci Eng A · 2004 · 366 · 29910.1016/j.msea.2003.08.040 ↗
15. Horstemeyer · Theor Appl Fract Mech · 2003 · 39 · 2310.1016/S0167-8442(02)00136-2 ↗
16. Morgeneyer · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 167110.1016/j.actamat.2007.12.019 ↗
17. Everett · Scripta Mater · 2001 · 44 · 16510.1016/S1359-6462(00)00561-3 ↗
18. Maire · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 495410.1016/j.actamat.2008.06.015 ↗
19. Pardoen · Acta Mater · 1998 · 46 · 54110.1016/S1359-6454(97)00247-4 ↗
20. Ochsner · Mater Sci Engg A · 2001 · 318 · 32810.1016/S0921-5093(01)01279-5 ↗
21. Lapovok · Int J Fract · 2002 · 115 · 15910.1023/A:1016399111787 ↗
22. Tasan CC et al. In: Proceedings of SEM XI International Conference on Exp Appl Mech; 2008.
23. Straffelini · Mater Sci Eng A · 2002 · 334 · 9610.1016/S0921-5093(01)01776-2 ↗
24. Tang · Scripta Metall Mater · 1995 · 32 · 199310.1016/0956-716X(95)00097-F ↗
25. Oliver · J Mater Res · 1992 · 7 · 156410.1557/JMR.1992.1564 ↗
26. Guelorget · Mater Lett · 2006 · 61 · 3410.1016/j.matlet.2006.03.146 ↗