The classic models for ductile fracture of metals were based on experimental observations dating back to the 1950’s. Using advanced microscopy techniques and modeling algorithms that have been developed over the past several decades, it is possible now to examine the micro- and nano-scale mechanisms of ductile rupture in more detail. This new information enables a revised understanding of the ductile rupture process under quasi-static room temperature conditions in ductile pure metals and alloys containing hard particles. While ductile rupture has traditionally been viewed through the lens of nucleation-growth-and-coalescence, a new taxonomy is proposed involving the competition or cooperation of up to seven distinct rupture mechanisms. Generally, void nucleation via vacancy condensation is not rate limiting, but is extensive within localized shear bands of intense deformation. Instead, the controlling process appears to be the development of intense local dislocation activity which enables void growth via dislocation absorption.
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 third Sandia Fracture Challenge (SFC3) was a benchmark problem for comparing experimental and simulated ductile deformation and failure in an additively manufactured (AM) 316L stainless steel structure. One surprising observation from the SFC3 was the Challenge-geometry specimens had low variability in global load versus displacement behavior, attributed to the large stress-concentrating geometric features dominating the global behavior, rather than the AM voids that tend to significantly influence geometries with uniform cross-sections. This current study reinvestigates the damage and failure evolution of the Challenge-geometry specimens, utilizing interrupted tensile testing with micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) scans to monitor AM void and crack growth from a virgin state through complete failure. This study did not find a correlation between global load versus displacement behavior and AM void attributes, such as void volume, location, quantity, and relative size, which incidentally corroborates the observation from the SFC3. However, this study does show that the voids affect the local behavior of damage and failure. Surface defects (i.e. large voids located on the surface, far exceeding the nominal surface roughness) that were near the primary stress concentration affected the location of crack initiation in some cases, but they did not noticeably affect the global response. The fracture surfaces were a combination of classic ductile dimples and crack deviation from a more direct path favoring intersection with AM voids. Even though the AM voids promoted crack deviation, pre-test micro-CT scan statistics of the voids did not allow for conclusive predictions of preferred crack paths. This study is a first step towards investigating the importance of voids on the ductile failure of AM structures with stress concentrations.
The mounting reliance on computational simulations to predict all aspects of the lifecycle of a mechanical system, from fabrication to failure, has prompted the mechanics community to selfassess its abilities to perform those predictions. Benchmark problems in mechanics that compare simulations that use different computational approaches with experiments have sprung up lately, including the NIST AM-Bench looking at additively manufactured (AM) materials (https://www.nist.gov/ambench),the Contact-Mechanics Challenge (Miiser, 2017) considering adhesion between two nominally flat surfaces, Numisheet providing semiannual benchmarking activities in sheet metal forming (http://numisheet2018.org),and the Sandia Fracture Challenge (SFC) (Boyce, 2014 and Boyce, 2016) investigating ductile failure. The previous SFCs have shown that progress has been made in computations of ductile failure, but improvements still can be made, hence the third Sandia Fracture Challenge (SFC3), the subject of this Special Volume. The most recent installment of SFC is building on previous successes and tackling the difficult problem of fracture in an AM 316L stainless steel structure.
The Sandia Fracture Challenges provide the mechanics community a forum for assessing its ability to predict ductile fracture through a blind, round-robin format where computationalists are asked to predict the deformation and failure of an arbitrary geometry given experimental calibration data. This presentation will cover the three Sandia Fracture Challenges, with emphasis on the third. The third Challenge, issued in 2017, consisted of an additively manufactured 316L stainless steel tensile bar with through holes and internal cavities that could not have been conventionally machined. The volunteer prediction teams were provided extensive materials data from tensile tests of specimens printed on the same build tray to electron backscatter diffraction microstructural maps and micro-computed tomography scans of the Challenge geometry. The teams were asked a variety of questions, including predictions of variability in the resulting fracture response, as the basis for assessment of their predictive capabilities. This presentation will describe the Challenges and compare the experimental results to the predictions, identifying gaps in capabilities, both experimentally and computationally, to inform future investments. The Sandia Fracture Challenge has evolved into the Structural Reliability Partnership, where researchers will create several blind challenges covering a wider variety of topics in structural reliability. This presentation will also describe this new venture.
Modeling material and component behavior using finite element analysis (FEA) is critical for modern engineering. One key to a credible model is having an accurate material model, with calibrated model parameters, which describes the constitutive relationship between the deformation and the resulting stress in the material. As such, identifying material model parameters is critical to accurate and predictive FEA. Traditional calibration approaches use only global data (e.g. extensometers and resultant force) and simplified geometries to find the parameters. However, the utilization of rapidly maturing full-field characterization techniques (e.g. Digital Image Correlation (DIC)) with inverse techniques (e.g. the Virtual Feilds Method (VFM)) provide a new, novel and improved method for parameter identification. This LDRD tested that idea: in particular, whether more parameters could be identified per test when using full-field data. The research described in this report successfully proves this hypothesis by comparing the VFM results with traditional calibration methods. Important products of the research include: verified VFM codes for identifying model parameters, a new look at parameter covariance in material model parameter estimation, new validation techniques to better utilize full-field measurements, and an exploration of optimized specimen design for improved data richness.
This project targeted a full-field understanding of the conversion of plastic work into heat using advanced diagnostics (digital image correlation, DIC, combined with infrared, IR, imaging). This understanding will act as a catalyst for reformulating the prevalent simplistic model, which will ultimately transform Sandia's ability to design for and predict thermomechanical behavior, impacting national security applications including nuclear weapon assessments of accident scenarios. Tensile 304L stainless steel dogbones are pulled in tension at quasi-static rates until failure and full-field deformation and temperature data are captured, while accounting for thermal losses. The IR temperature fields are mapped onto the DIC coordinate system (Lagrangian formulation). The resultant fields are used to calculate the Taylor-Quinney coefficient, β, at two strain rates rates (0.002 s-1 and 0.08 s-1) and two temperatures (room temperature, RT, and 250°C).
Traditionally, material identification is performed using global load and displacement data from simple boundary-value problems such as uni-axial tensile and simple shear tests. More recently, however, inverse techniques such as the Virtual Fields Method (VFM) that capitalize on heterogeneous, full-field deformation data have gained popularity. In this work, we have written a VFM code in a finite-deformation framework for calibration of a viscoplastic (i.e. strain-rate dependent) material model for 304L stainless steel. Using simulated experimental data generated via finite-element analysis (FEA), we verified our VFM code and compared the identified parameters with the reference parameters input into the FEA. The identified material model parameters had surprisingly large error compared to the reference parameters, which was traced to parameter covariance and the existence of many essentially equivalent parameter sets. This parameter non-uniqueness and its implications for FEA predictions is discussed in detail. Lastly, we present two strategies to reduce parameter covariance – reduced parametrization of the material model and increased richness of the calibration data – which allow for the recovery of a unique solution.