Numerical simulations of metallic structures undergoing rapid loading into the plastic range require material models that accurately represent the response. In general, the material response can be seen as having four interrelated parts: the baseline response under slow loading, the effect of strain rate, the conversion of plastic work into heat and the effect of temperature. In essence, the material behaves in a thermal-mechanical manner if the loading is fast enough so when heat is generated by plastic deformation it raises the temperature and therefore influences the mechanical response. In these cases, appropriate models that can capture the aspects listed above are necessary. The material of interest here is 304L stainless steel, and the objective of this work is to calibrate thermal-mechanical models: one for the constitutive behavior and another for failure. The work was accomplished by first designing and conducting a material test program to provide data for the calibration of the models. The test program included uniaxial tension tests conducted at room temperature, 150 and 300 C and at strain rates between 10–4 and 103 1/s. It also included notched tension and shear-dominated compression hat tests specifically designed to calibrate the failure model. All test specimens were extracted from a single piece of plate to maintain consistency. The constitutive model adopted was a modular $J_2$ plasticity model with isotropic hardening that included rate and temperature dependence. A criterion for failure initiation based on a critical value of equivalent plastic strain fitted the failure data appropriately and was adopted. Possible ranges of the values of the parameters of the models were determined partially on historical data from calibrations of the same alloy from other lots and are given here. The calibration of the parameters of the models were based on finite element simulations of the various material tests using relatively ne meshes and hexahedral elements. When using the model in structural finite element calculations, however, element formulations and sizes different from those in the calibration are likely to be used. A brief investigation demonstrated that the failure initiation predictions can be particularly sensitive to the element selection and provided an initial guide to compensate for the effect of element size in a specific example.
This is the second part of a two-part contribution on modeling of the anisotropic elastic-plastic response of aluminum 7079 from an extruded tube. Part I focused on calibrating a suite of yield and hardening functions from tension test data; Part II concentrates on evaluating those calibrations. Here, a rectangular validation specimen with a blind hole was designed to provide heterogeneous strain fields that exercise the material anisotropy, while at the same time avoiding strain concentrations near sample edges where Digital Image Correlation (DIC) measurements are difficult to make. Specimens were extracted from the tube in four different orientations and tested in tension with stereo-DIC measurements on both sides of the specimen. Corresponding Finite Element Analysis (FEA) with calibrated isotropic (von Mises) and anisotropic (Yld2004-18p) yield functions were also conducted, and both global force-extension curves as well as full-field strains were compared between the experiments and simulations. Specifically, quantitative full-field strain error maps were computed using the DIC-leveling approach proposed by Lava et al. The specimens experienced small deviations from ideal boundary conditions in the experiments, which had a first-order effect on the results. Therefore, the actual experimental boundary conditions had to be applied to the FEA in order to make valid comparisons. The predicted global force-extension curves agreed well with the measurements overall, but were sensitive to the boundary conditions in the nonlinear regime and could not differentiate between the two yield functions. Interrogation of the strain fields both qualitatively and quantitatively showed that the Yld2004-18p model was clearly able to better describe the strain fields on the surface of the specimen compared to the von Mises model. These results justify the increased complexity of the calibration process required for the Yld2004-18p model in applications where capturing the strain field evolution accurately is important, but not if only the global force-extension response of the elastic–plastic region is of interest.
Impact problems of plate-like parts by punch-like objects with relatively large mass moving at slow speeds of a few feet per second constitute a subset of impact problems of interest at Sandia. This is in contrast to small objects moving in the range of hundreds or thousands of feet per second or higher. The objective of this work is to develop a simple formula that can be used to estimate a lower bound for the puncture energy of metal plates impacted by cylindrical, essentially rigid punches of circular cross-section and at nose. Such geometry is used as a basis in the design of puncture mitigation barriers or procedures. This was accomplished by deriving an expression using non-dimensional analysis and then calibrating it based on tests results in the range of speeds of interest. Lower bounds can then be determined based on confidence intervals or factors of safety.
An initial foray into the design of specimens that can be used to provide data about the quasistatic ductile failure of metals when subjected to shear-dominated (low triaxiality) states of stress was undertaken. Four specimen geometries made from two materials with different ductility (Al 7075, lower ductility and steel A286, higher ductility) were considered as candidates. Based on results from analysis and experimentation, it seems that two show promise for further consideration. Whereas preliminary results indicate that the Johnson-Cook model fit the failure data for Al 7075 well, it did not fit the data for steel A286. Further work is needed to consolidate the results and evaluate other failure models that may fit the steel data better, as well as to extend the results of this work to the dynamic loading regime.
The Thermal-Mechanical Failure project conducted in FY 2018 was divided into three sub projects: 1. Calibration of the uniaxial response of 304L stainless steel specimens at three temperatures (20, 150 and 310°C) and two strain rates (2 x 10-4 and 8 x 10-2 s-1); 2. Measurements of the fraction of plastic work that is converted to heat (Taylor-Quinney parameter) for 304L stainless steel. This fraction is usually assumed to be 0.95 in analysis because data is only available for a few materials; 3. Comparison of the predicted responses by isotropic and kinematic hardening plasticity models in a couple of simplified structural problems. One problem is a can crush followed by pressurization and is loosely associated with a crush-and-burn scenario. The other problem consists of a drop scenario of a thin-walled cylinder that carries a cantilevered internal mass.
This memo concerns calibration of an elastic-plastic J2 material model for Ti-6Al-4V (grade 5) alloy based on tensile uniaxial stress-strain data obtained in the laboratory. In addition, tension tests on notched specimens provided data to calibrate two ductile failure models: Johnson-Cook and Wellman's tearing parameter. The tests were conducted by Kim Haulen- beek and Dave Johnson (1528) in the Structural Mechanics Laboratory (SML) during late March and early April, 2017. The SML EWP number was 4162. The stock material was a TIMETALR® 6-4 Titanium billet with 9 in. by 9 in. square section and length of 137 in. The product description indicates that it was a forging delivered in annealed condition (2 hours @ 1300oF, AC at the mill). The tensile mechanical properties reported in the material certi cation are given in Table 1, where σo represents the 0.2% strain offset yield stress, σu the ultimate stress, εf the elongation at failure and R.A. the reduction in area.
The objective of the work presented here arose from abnormal, drop scenarios and specifically the question of how the accelerations and accumulation of plastic strains of internal components could be a ected by the material properties of the external structure. In some scenarios, the impact loads can induce cyclic motion of the internal components. Therefore, a second objective was to explore di erences that could be expected when simulations are conducted using isotropic hardening vs. kinematic hardening plasticity models. The simplest model that can be used to investigate the objectives above is a two-degree-offreedom mass/spring model where the springs exhibit elastic-plastic behavior. The purpose of this memo is to develop such model and present a few results that address the objectives.
The purpose of the work presented in this memo was to calibrate the Sierra material model Multilinear Elastic-Plastic Hardening Model with Failure (MLEP-Fail) for 1/8 inch thick cast plate of 17-4 steel. The calibration approach is essentially the same as that recently used in a previous memo using data from smooth and notched tensile specimens. The notched specimens were manufactured with three notch radii R = 1=8, 1/32 and 1/64 inches. The dimensions of the smooth and notched specimens are given in the prints in Appendix A. Two cast plates, Plate 3 and Plate 4, with nominally identical properties were considered.
The purpose of the work presented in this memo was to calibrate the Sierra material model Multilinear Elastic-Plastic Hardening Model with Failure, (MLEP-Fail), for 1/8 inch thick plate of 13-8 PH steel in the H1150 condition. Material testing was pursued first, followed by the actual calibration.
This memo addresses the calibration of anisotropic yield functions based on data obtained from a series of uniaxial tension specimens extracted from a tubular Al 7079 circular cylindrical extrusion. Achieving the calibrations completed an important step in the Experimentally Enhanced Computations (ExEC) project. The focus of the project is on novel calibration approaches that will be based on advanced diagnostics and numerical simulations with the intention of reducing the overall calibration effort. The test data used here resulted from traditional tensile tests on specimens cut at 12 orientations within the extrusion. Two anisotropic yield surfaces — Hill’s (1948) and Barlat’s (2005) — were calibrated based on the test data. The methods used to conduct the calibrations are described, and the results show that the material exhibited significant yield anisotropy. The larger number of parameters in Barlat’s yield function allowed it to fit the test data more accurately than Hill’s. Although work remains to assess the sensitivity of the calibrated model parameters to various factors, the methods implemented and the results obtained here provide bases for further work and useful benchmarks for future calibrations to be conducted using the novel approach.
This memo concerns the transmission of mechanical signals through silicone foam pads in a compression Kolsky bar set-up. The results of numerical simulations for four levels of pad pre-compression and two striker velocities were compared directly to test measurements to assess the delity of the simulations. The nite element model simulated the Kolsky tests in their entirety and used the hyperelastic `hyperfoam' model for the silicone foam pads. Calibration of the hyperfoam model was deduced from quasi-static compression data. It was necessary, however, to augment the material model by adding sti ness proportional damping in order to generate results that resembled the experimental measurements. Based on the results presented here, it is important to account for the dynamic behavior of polymeric foams in numerical simulations that involve high loading rates.
The objective of this memo is to present a brief report of the progress achieved during FY2016 on the investigation of ductile failure in the 2013 Sandia Fracture Challenge specimen. The experimental investigation was conducted with both the original steel A286 material used in the fracture challenge as well as with Al 7075-T651. The new results include further microscopy work for the steel A286 specimens, failure criterion verification for both materials and the implementation of a finite element model containing `material imperfections' to simulate the limit load in the response of the steel A286 specimens. Funding used to conduct the work presented here was provided by the ASC V&V program on validation of shear failure (Benjamin Reedlunn, PI) and from Sandia's LDRD program.
Ductile failure of structural metals is relevant to a wide range of engineering scenarios. Computational methods are employed to anticipate the critical conditions of failure, yet they sometimes provide inaccurate and misleading predictions. Challenge scenarios, such as the one presented in the current work, provide an opportunity to assess the blind, quantitative predictive ability of simulation methods against a previously unseen failure problem. Rather than evaluate the predictions of a single simulation approach, the Sandia Fracture Challenge relies on numerous volunteer teams with expertise in computational mechanics to apply a broad range of computational methods, numerical algorithms, and constitutive models to the challenge. This exercise is intended to evaluate the state of health of technologies available for failure prediction. In the first Sandia Fracture Challenge, a wide range of issues were raised in ductile failure modeling, including a lack of consistency in failure models, the importance of shear calibration data, and difficulties in quantifying the uncertainty of prediction [see Boyce et al. (Int J Fract 186:5–68, 2014) for details of these observations]. This second Sandia Fracture Challenge investigated the ductile rupture of a Ti–6Al–4V sheet under both quasi-static and modest-rate dynamic loading (failure in (Formula presented.) 0.1 s). Like the previous challenge, the sheet had an unusual arrangement of notches and holes that added geometric complexity and fostered a competition between tensile- and shear-dominated failure modes. The teams were asked to predict the fracture path and quantitative far-field failure metrics such as the peak force and displacement to cause crack initiation. Fourteen teams contributed blind predictions, and the experimental outcomes were quantified in three independent test labs. Additional shortcomings were revealed in this second challenge such as inconsistency in the application of appropriate boundary conditions, need for a thermomechanical treatment of the heat generation in the dynamic loading condition, and further difficulties in model calibration based on limited real-world engineering data. As with the prior challenge, this work not only documents the ‘state-of-the-art’ in computational failure prediction of ductile tearing scenarios, but also provides a detailed dataset for non-blind assessment of alternative methods.
