1 s2.0 S0749641903001359 Main

Modied kinematic hardening rule for multiaxial
ratcheting prediction
X. Chen*, R. Jiao
School of Chemical Engineering & Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, PR China
Received in nal revised form 8 May 2003
Abstract
A modied kinematic hardening rule is proposed in which one biaxial loading dependent
parameter o
0
connecting the radial evanescence term [(:n)ndp] in the BurletCailletaud model
with the dynamic recovery term of OhnoWang kinematic hardening rule is introduced into
the framework of the OhnoWang model. Compared with multiaxial ratcheting experimental
data obtained on 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel in the paper and CS1026 steel conducted by
Hassan et al. [Int. J. Plasticity 8 (1992) 117], simulation results by modied model are quite
well in all loading paths. The simulations of initial nonlinear part in ratcheting curves can be
improved greatly while the evolutional parameter o
0
related to plastic strain accumulation is
added into the modied model.
# 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Kinematic hardening rule; Ratcheting; Cyclic plasticity; Multiaxial loading; Constitutive model
1. Introduction
Ratcheting, accumulation of secondary deformation proceeding cycle by cycle
under stress-controlled conditions, is an important factor in designing structure
components. The ratcheting deformation could accumulate continuously with the
increasing number of cycles applied, and it may not cease until fracture. Ratcheting
deformation contributes to material damage and reduces fatigue life (Rider et al., 1995).
Before 1990, all cyclic plasticity models cannot give good simulation of ratcheting.
Later on, a number of papers review the state of the art of modeling the ratcheting
behavior (Chaboche, 1994; McDowell, 1994; Ohno and Wang, 1993a,b; Ohno, 1998;
Bari and Hassan, 2000, 2001, 2002). Ratcheting experiments have been conducted
International Journal of Plasticity 20 (2004) 871898
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijplas
0749-6419/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2003.05.005
* Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +86-22-8789-3037.
E-mail address: xchen@eyou.com (X. Chen).
on dierent materials under various loading conditions (Hassan and Kyriakides,
1992a, 1994a,b; Hassan et al., 1992; Jiang and Sehitoglu, 1994a; Portier et al., 2000;
Bocher et al., 2001; Igaria et al., 2002). Kinematic hardening rules is very important
in cyclic plasticity simulation (Chun et al., 2002; Yoshida and Uemori, 2002; Geng
et al., 2002; Yaguchi et al., 2002). Several kinematic hardening rules have been pro-
posed for predicting of ratcheting under multiaxial loading. The nonlinear kinematic
hardening rule by Armstrong and Frederick (1966) was found to over-predict
ratcheting strain signicantly under multiaxial loading paths. Several authors got
their models by modifying the dynamic recovery term in Armstrong and Frederick
model (Bower, 1989; Chaboche and Nouailhas, 1989a,b; Chaboche, 1991; Yoshida,
2000; Ohno and Wang, 1993a,b; Jiang and Sehitoglu, 1994a,b; McDowell, 1995;
Nomenclature
Deviatoric backstress tensor
d Incremental deviatoric backstress tensor
dp Magnitude of the plastic strain increment tensor
n Unit normal to the yield surface at current stress point
s Deviatoric stress
E Youngs modulus for elasticity
G Shear modulus
H
p
Plastic modulus
N Number of loading cycles
" Strain tensor
c
x
Axial strain
c
xc
Amplitude of axial strain cycle
c
xp
Maximum axial strain in a cycle
c
Circumference strain
c
p
Maximum circumference strain in a cycle
dc
e
Elastic strain increment tensor
dc
p
Plastic strain increment tensor
f Yield surface function
o Axial stress range
n Poissons ratio
Stress tensor
d Incremental stress tensor
o
0
Size of yield surface
o
x
Total axial stress
o
xa
Amptude of axial stress cycle
o
Circumferential stress
o
a
Amplitude of circumferential stress cycle
o
m
Mean of circumferential stress cycle
o
mean
Mean of axial stress cycle
872 X. Chen, R. Jiao / International Journal of Plasticity 20 (2004) 871898
Abdel-Karim and Ohno, 2000). Chaboche (1991) showed that a threshold for
dynamic recovery of back stress is eective for controlling ratcheting in simulation.
Ohno and Wang (1993a,b) introduced a critical state of dynamic recovery, and they
showed that the critical state expresses no or little ratcheting under uniaxial cyclic
loading within the framework of the strain hardening and dynamic recovery format.
Nonlinear forms of the dynamic recovery term were then discussed for simulating
ratcheting appropriately (Ohno and Wang, 1993a,b; Chaboche, 1994; McDowell,
1995) while decaying ratcheting was thus discussed in detail from the view of con-
stitutive modeling by Jiang and Sehitoglu (1996) and by Jiang and Kurath (1996).
In these coupled models based on the Armstrong and Frederick nonlinear
kinematic hardening rule, the plastic modulus (H
p
) is calculated according to the
kinematic hardening rule and the consistency condition. Usually the parameters
are calculated from the hysteresis loops and uniaxial loading responses. These
parameters are, in eect, calibrated to produce a better representation of the
hysteresis loop and uniaxial ratcheting, however they fail to predict multiaxial
ratcheting responses. In order to solve the problem of over-prediction by the existing
models on multiaxial ratcheting responses, many researchers (McDowell, 1995;
Jiang and Sehitoglu, 1996; Voyiadjis and Basurychoedhury, 1998) have attempted to
add multiaxial terms and parameters into the Chaboche or OhnoWang model.
However, these modied models do not improve the simulation of the biaxial
ratcheting responses compared with the OhnoWang model (Bari and Hassan,
2002). Thus Bari and Hassan proposed a modied kinematic hardening rule based
on the idea of Delobelle et al (1995) in the framework of the Chaboche model. Since
the OhnoWang model is regarded as the best model to predict ratcheting by the
researchers (Igaria et al., 2002), it is reasonable to do some modication in the
framework of the OhnoWang model. This study is just to propose an improved
kinematic hardening rule by introducing one multiaxial parameter o
0
to the Ohno
Wang model aiming at investigating the modied model for its validity and applic-
ability of predicting ratcheting under several dierent multiaxial loading paths.
Although rate-dependent constitutive model has been make great progress (Krempl
and Khan, 2003; Ho and Krempl, 2002), but in order to simplify the problem, a
rate-independent model is considered in the paper.
2. Ratcheting experiments
The material used in the study was 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel in the form of round
bar with a diameter of 32 mm after being oil-quenched at 1100

C for 30 min. The
chemical composition of the material is (wt.%): C 0.065, Mn 1.34, Si 0.95, P 0.03, S
0.007, Ni 8.74, Cr 17.54, Ti 0.41. The mechanical properties of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless
steel are shown in Table 1.
The specimen used in this study, given in Fig. 1, has a tubular geometry with
outside and inside diameters of 22 and 18 mm, respectively in the gage section. The
tests were conducted on an Instron tensiontorsion machine with an MTS axial-
torsional extensometer mounted on the outside of the specimen gage section. Strain
X. Chen, R. Jiao / International Journal of Plasticity 20 (2004) 871898 873
and stress was recorded in the personal computer using an automated data acquisition
system. All tests were conducted at room temperature under stress control for axial
loading and under strain control for torsional loading. The frequency of cyclic
loading was 0.5 Hz.
The loading paths in the axial stressshear strain plane ( ,
3
p
plane) used in
ratcheting tests are illustrated schematically in Fig. 2. The controlled parameters are
given in Table 2. These tests consist of a constant-amplitude shear strain cycling
under a constant axial stress (case 1) and a circular axial stressshear strain cyclic
loading with mean axial stress (case 2).
Fig. 1. Specimen geometry (mm).
Table 1
Mechanical properties of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel
o
b
(MPa) o
s0.2
(MPa) [ (%) o
5
(%) E (GPa) G (GPa) v HB
605 310 75 60 193 65.4 0.47 160
Fig. 2. Loading paths in ratcheting experiments.
For 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel, the ratcheting experiments reveal that the rate of
ratcheting continuously decreases as cycling continues, but does not fully shake-
down or cease. The observations of the uniaxial cyclic stressstrain curve for rst 16
cycles reveal very slight cyclic hardening as shown in Fig. 3. In the present study,
therefore, we neglect the cyclic hardening for simplicity.
Generally speaking, non-proportional additional hardening of materials has some
eects on ratcheting and the eects have been taken into account in constitutive
models (McDowell, 1995; Jiang and Sehitoglu, 1996; Jiang and Kurath, 1996).
1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel presents signicant non-proportional additional
hardening under controlled circular strain path (Chen et al., 2001).
However, the non-proportional additional hardening of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel
is not obvious in the experiments of the paper because of axial stress is quite low
under axial stressshear strain cyclic loading. A comparison of torsional stress
strain curves between pure torsion, case 1 and case 2 cyclic loading shows additional
hardening can be neglected (see Fig. 4).
Fig. 3. The rst 16 cyclic stressstrain response of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel under uniaxial cyclic
loading.
Table 2
List of ratcheting experiments
Spec. no. Path c
2
/2 (%) ,
mean
(%) o (MPa) o
mean
(MPa)
M130 Case 1 0.4 0 0 200
M140 Case 2 0.4 0 200 200
M150 Case 2 0.6 0 200 200
3. Description of the constitutive model
It is assumed that the total strain increment is decomposed into an elastic strain
part and a plastic strain part:
dc dc
e
dc
p
1
and that the elastic part obeys Hookes law:
c
e

1 v
E

v
E
tr I 2
The plastic ow rule can be stated as
dc
p

3
2
1
H
p
ds:n h in 3
The material is assumed to follow the von Mises yield criterion, which is given by
f
3
2
s : s o
2
0
0 4
where s
1
3
tr I is the deviatoric stress tensor, is the back stress, and o
0
is
the size of the yield surface, I is a unit tensor.
Fig. 4. Comparison of torsional stressstrain curves of pure torsion, case 1 and case 2 for 1Cr18Ni9Ti
stainless steel.
3.1. OhnoWang model
3.1.1. Model formulation
In order to better describe ratcheting behavior, Ohno and Wang formulated
kinematic hardening rules superposed several AF kinematic hardening rules and
assumed that each component of back stress
i
has a critical state for its dynamic
recovery term. Only after reaching the critical state can the dynamic recovery terms
work fully. According to the way the dynamic recovery term is used before the
critical state, OhnoWang models can be divided into two models (Ohno and Wang,
1993a,b). The initial OhnoWang model is proposed in the following form:
Model I
P
M
1
i
. d
i
,
i
2
3
r
i
dc
p
H f
i
dc
p
:

i
o
i
( )
o
i
!
. f
i
o
i
2
r
2
i
5
where o
i
, is ith component of deviatoric back stress , o
i
is the magnitude of
i
,
o
i

3,2
i
:
i
p
and ,
i
, r
i
, are material constants. H stands for the Heaviside step
function.
In the OhnoWang model (I), before
i
reaches its respective critical value r
i
, each
decomposed hardening rule simulates a linear hardening with a slope (2/3 ,
i
r
i
) and
after that it does not evolve. Consequently, the model becomes a multilinear model
in uniaxial cases. The OhnoWang model (I) produces closed hysteresis loops and
hence cannot produce any uniaxial ratcheting. To eliminate this limitation, Ohno
and Wang proposed a slight nonlinearity for each rule by introducing an exponential
relation and before reaching its critical state the dynamic recovery term is partially
operative. The formula is proposed as follows:
Model II
P
M
i1
i
. d
i
,
i
2
3
r
i
dc
p

o
i
r
i

m
i
i
dc
p
:

i
o
i
( ) !
6
where m
i
is a material constant and when m
i
! 1, the OhnoWang model (II) is
reduced to the OhnoWang model (I). In the OhnoWang model (II), the slight
nonlinearity is introduced by replacing the Heaviside step function with power of m
i
in Eq. (6) and the dynamic recovery term of each decomposed hardening rule always
works in the form of an exponential relation that produces unclosed hysteresis loops
in uniaxial cases, thus allowing uniaxial ratcheting to occur.
Compared with the AF model, each dynamic recovery term of the OhnoWang
models has its critical state and is inhibited in a certain range. Therefore, under
uniaxial and multiaxial conditions, the OhnoWang models can predict smaller
ratcheting strain and in some degree simulate the nonlinear part of a ratcheting
strain accumulation curve that is similar to experiments. Whats more, OhnoWang
models use the term
dc
p
:
i
o
i
( )
in place of dp in the Armstrong and Frederick rule. Although this term is the same
as dp in uniaxial cases, in multiaxial loading cases, dc
p
and
i
,o
i
have dierent
directions and the projection result makes
dc
p
:
i
o
i
( )
smaller than dp. Hence, a model embracing the former term predicts less development
of multiaxial ratcheting strain than a model with the latter term as demonstrated by
Ohno and Wang (1993b).
A large number of decomposed rules should be employed in the OhnoWang
model (II) in order to use several essentially linear hardening rules to simulate a
nonlinear hysteresis curve well. In this study, it is found that eight hardening rules
are sucient to obtain a good stable uniaxial hysteresis loop simulation for
1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel.
3.1.2. Parameter determination
Model parameters are determined by the tensile curve from uniaxial loading
(Ohno, 1998). The uniaxialloading tensile curve is divided into several segments as
shown in Fig. 5 and the corresponding parameters ,
i
, r
i
for each segment can be
determined from the following equations:
Fig. 5. Denition of parameters in the OhnoWang model from uniaxial cyclic stressstrain space.
,
i

1
c
p i
. r
i

o
i
o
i1
c
p i
c
p i1
o
i1
o
i
c
p i1
c
p i

c
p i
For i 6 1 7a
and nally r
i
is determined by using
X
M
i1
r
i
o
0
o
max
7b
where, o
(i)
and c
p(i)
denote stress and plastic strain at the ith point on the monotonic
tensile stress versus plastic strain curve and o
M
o
M1
.
In the OhnoWang model (II), the power m
i
is an important parameter control-
ling ratcheting response and may be determined by a uniaxial ratcheting experiment
response. Predicted ratcheting with dierent m
i
is compared in Fig. 6 from which it
can be seen that as the exponent m
i
increases, the predicted ratcheting decreases,
thus the predicted ratcheting by the OhnoWang model (I) is always smaller than
that by the OhnoWang model (II). That is to say, under the same condition, the
prediction of OhnoWang model (I) is the smallest prediction that can be made by
the OhnoWang model (II). From Fig. 6, it is clear that although the increase of m
i
can give smaller ratcheting simulation, predicted ratcheting by the OhnoWang
model (I) is still much larger than experimental ratcheting strain in the rst 15 cycles.
So it is concluded that the increase m
i
cannot overcome the over-prediction of the
OhnoWang model (II). In this paper a larger m
i
is assumed (m
i
=10) to simulate the
multiaxial ratcheting rst and the shortcoming in the simulation will be solved by
adding terms into the OhnoWang model (see Section 3.2).
Fig. 6. Comparison of experimental ratcheting and predicted ratcheting of the OhnoWang model (II)
with dierent parameter m
i
.
The parameters in the OhnoWang model used in this study for simulations are
presented in Table 3.
3.1.3. Simulations of experimental results
The simulation of the experiments by the OhnoWang model (II) using the above
set of parameters is shown in Figs. 68. As it is known, among many existing
models, the OhnoWang models can describe the uniaxial and torsional hysteresis
curves well but over-predicts multiaxial ratcheting though with a smaller over-
prediction than the Chaboche model, modied models by McDowell, and Jiang and
Sehitoglu (Bari and Hassan, 2002).
From the numerical computation, it is known that under the same condition, the
predicted ratcheting by the OhnoWang model (I) is always smaller than that of the
OhnoWang model (II). But if experimental ratcheting is even much smaller than
the predicted ratcheting by OhnoWang model (I), the OhnoWang models lack
other parameters that can be adjusted to decrease the biaxial ratcheting simulation
and hence cannot satisfactorily simulate some materials ratcheting behavior.
Bari and Hassan (2002) modied the Chaboche model by adding the Delobelle
kinematic hardening rule (Delobelle et al., 1995). Enlightened by their work, a new
kinematic hardening model in the framework of the OhnoWang model can be
supposed, in which one parameter o
0
connecting the radial evanescence term
[(:n)ndp] of the BurletCailletaud model (1986) with the dynamic recovery term of
the OhnoWang model (1993a,b) is proposed in order to improve the ratcheting
simulations under multiaxial loading paths.
3.2. An improved model
In order to simulate the uniaxial ratcheting experiments, Burlet and Cailletaud
(1986) modied the radial evanescence term in the Armstrong and Frederick (1966)
hardening rule as follows:
d
2
3
Cdc
p
, :n ndp. n
of,oo
of
oo
3
2
r
s
o
0
8
The plastic modulus expression obtained from this hardening rule by satisfying the
consistency condition
f
.
0
is the same as that obtained from the Armstrong and

Table 3
Model parameters for 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel
o
0
(MPa) E (MPa) m
i
(i=1$M) o
0
o
o
0
st
[
235 193 000 10 0.07 0.005 8
,
18
=4800, 2400, 1200, 600, 300, 150, 75, 37.5
r
18
=10, 65, 63, 41, 80, 70, l6, 2 MPa
Frederick hardening rule. And under uniaxial loading conditions, the direction of
is the same as that of n and hence the radial evanescence term [(:n)ndp] is reduced
to the dynamic recovery term of Armstrong and Frederick. In addition, because
simulations of uniaxial ratcheting responses depend entirely on the calculation
scheme of the plastic modulus of a model, these two rules produce the same simu-
lation; while for biaxial loading, the radial evanescence term [(:n)ndp] of the Burlet
Fig. 7. Cyclic stable strainstress curves under uniaxial and torsional loading: (a) uniaxial, (b) torsional.
and Cailletaud rule essentially yields a tensor along the plastic strain-rate direction
and the simulation of biaxial ratcheting is like the result of Prager (1956) linear
hardening rule that predicts shakedown ratcheting (Bari and Hassan, 2002).
Between over-prediction ratcheting by the OhnoWang model and shakedown
ratcheting of the Burlet and Cailletaud model, this study obtains a modied
hardening rule incorporating the ideas of both the BurletCailletaud and the Ohno
Wang models with a parameter o
0
as follows:
d
i
,
i
2
3
r
i
dc
p

o
i
r
i

m
i
o
0
i
1 o
0

i
:n n dc
p
:
i
o
i
( ) & '
. i 1. 2. . . . M 9
where, ,
i
, r
i
, m
i
, and o
i
in Eq. (9) is the same as the OhnoWang model. When o
0
=0,
the modied hardening rule is reduced to the BurletCailletaud model that predicts
the shakedown ratcheting; while if o
0
=1, it reverts to the OhnoWang model (II)
that over-predicts ratcheting under multiaxial loading conditions.
Following the consistency condition ( f
.
=0), the plastic modulus is expressed as
follows:
H
p

X
M
i1
,
i
r
i

3
2
o
i
r
i

m
i
i
: n

i
o
i
:n
( ) & '
10
In Eq. (10), it can be seen that the plastic modulus expression (H
p
) does not
include o
0
and o
0
can be determined by a biaxial ratcheting response, so o
0
can inu-
ence biaxial ratcheting simulations without having any eect on both the calculation
of plastic modulus and the simulations of uniaxial ratcheting responses.
Fig. 8. Cyclic stable strainstress curve simulated by OhnoWang model (II) for M130.
Because the plastic modulus expression (H
p
) is independent of o
0
and is the same
as that obtained from the OhnoWang model, all of the parameters of the Ohno
Wang model can be used by the modied hardening rule as presented in Table 3.
The comparison of the Figs. 8 and 9 shows that the stressstain simulations by two
models have no dierences. The simulations by the modied model with dierent o
0
Fig. 9. Cyclic stable strainstress curve simulated by modied model for M130.
Fig. 10. Comparison of experimental ratcheting and predicted ratcheting by the modied model with a
constant o
0
for Ml30.
are presented in Fig. 10 in which we can see that if a larger o
0
is assumed, the modied
model can simulate the initial nonlinear part but cannot provide the subsequent
ratcheting rate trend well, while if a smaller o
0
is assumed, the modied model can
predict the ratcheting rate trend well but cannot simulate the initial nonlinear part of
ratcheting curve. So we can come to the conclusion that the modied model with a
constant o
0
cannot predict a good simulation of the whole ratcheting curve. Hence it
is better to give o
0
an evolutionary character to improve the simulation.
Fig. 11. The inuence of o
0
st
, o
0
o
, and [ on ratcheting strain; (a) o
0
st
, (b) o
0
o
, (c) [.
Fig. 11. (continued)
Fig. 12. Comparison of experimental ratcheting and predicted ratcheting by the modied model with an
evolutional o
0
for M130.
An evolutionary equation for o
0
is proposed as follows:
do
0
[ o
0
st
o
0

dp 11
where, o
0
st
is the saturated value of o
0
and [ is an evolutionary coecient. The initial
value of o
0
is denoted by o
0
o
. The computation for dierent o
0
st
(o
0
o
, and [ are kept
constant) shows that the value of o
0
st
allows adjustment of the slope of ratcheting
rate trend as shown in Fig. 11 (a). The computation for dierent o
0
o
(o
0
st
and [ are
kept constant) reveals that o
0
o
is closely related to the ratcheting rate of the rst
several cycles as shown in Fig. 11 (b) and [ decides the ratcheting evolutive rate as
shown in Fig. 11 (c). So by a biaxial ratcheting experiment curve (see Fig. l2), o
0
o
is
assumed to give a good simulation of the rst ratcheting while o
0
st
is decided by the
ratcheting rate trend and [ is evaluated to well simulate the ratcheting evolution
rate. The value of o
0
st
, o
0
o
, [ and other parameters in the modied model for
1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel are given in Table 3.
In this paper, the simulation results by the modied model with constant o
0
and
evolving o
0
are shown by the curves of modied model-1 and the curves of modied
model-2, respectively.
Comparisons of improved ratcheting simulations of M130, M140 and M150 by
the modied model with evolving parameter o
0
and other parameters of the Ohno
Wang model (II) with experimental data are presented in Figs. 1216.
In order to explore the validity of the modied model with evolving o
0
, some
published experiments data for CS 1026 steel (Hassan et al., 1992) are used in this
paper. Three test paths, axial strain cycle with constant pressure (case 1), bow-tie
cycle (case 2), and reverse bow-tie cycle (case 3), are shown in Fig. 17. Ratcheting
simulation results of the OhnoWang model and material parameters in the Ohno
Wang model can be found in the paper of Bari and Hassan (2000). Compared with
the OhnoWang model, the modied model with constant o
0
=0.6, can give better
simulation of the experiments (see Figs. 18 and 19 in this paper and Fig. 14 of Bari
and Hassan, 2000). The modied model with the constant o
0
simulates the ratcheting
rate trend well as shown in Fig. 18, but fails to predict the initial nonlinear part of
ratcheting curves reasonably (It can be seen from other simulations to experiments
data in other cases of Fig. 19.) So like the simulations of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel,
in order to simulate the initial nonlinear part of ratcheting curves best (see Fig. 19),
an evolving parameter o
0
as in Eq. (11) can be introduced. The values of o
0
st
, o
0
o
, [
and other parameters in the modied model for simulating data of Hassan et al
(1992) are presented in Table 4.
The improved ratcheting simulations of three ratcheting experiments by the
modied model with constant o
0
(Modied model-1) and an evolving parameter o
0
(Modied model-2) are presented in Fig. 19 and compared with the experiments as well.
4. Results and discussion
Evaluation of the Chaboche model, the OhnoWang model and some modied
models based on OhnoWang model by McDowell (1995), Jiang and Sehitoglu
(1996), have demonstrated that most of these models are not robust enough to
simulate the set of biaxial ratcheting responses (Bari and Hassan, 2002). In this
study, a similar conclusion on the OhnoWang model can be obtained (see Fig. 7).
The drawback of these models is believed to be the lack of parameters that can
control the biaxial ratcheting, which leads to the failure of describing the yield
surface normal directions that are decided by the kinematic hardening rule of a
model. In order to simulate the biaxial ratcheting experiments well, it is necessary
Fig. 13. Comparison of experimental and predicted ratcheting for M140: (a) shear stressstrain, (b) axial
ratcheting strain.
for a coupled model to introduce special biaxial terms or parameters o
0
in the kine-
matic hardening rule. As the actual yield surface deforms during plastic loading,
using multiaxial ratcheting responses by calibrating these parameters determined by
a muliaxial experiment will compensate the adverse inuence of the lack of exactness
introduced in the modeling through the assumption of invariant yield surface shape
(Phillips and Tang, 1972; Phillips and Lee, 1979). These terms and parameters
should be recessive under uniaxial conditions but will play an important role in
describing the yield surface normal and thus produce a dierent plastic strain
direction under multiaxial condition. The parameter o
0
in the Delobelle model
introduced by Bari and Hassan into the framework of the Chaboche model has this
Fig. 14. Comparison of experiments and predictions for M140; (a) loading path, (b) axial stressstrain
response, (c) stress response, (d) strain response.
character and the existence of o
0
can improve ratcheting simulations remarkably
(Bari and Hassan, 2002).
This paper introduces the parameter o
0
, which connects the radial evanescence
term [(:n)ndp] in the BurletCailletaud model with the dynamic recovery term of
OhnoWang kinematic hardening rule, into the framework of the OhnoWang
model. The new parameter o
0
is not involved in the plastic modulus calculation
scheme, so the plastic modulus expression of the modied rule is the same as that of
the OhnoWang model and all parameters determined completely from a uniaxial
experiment for the OhnoWang model can be used by the modied rule.
The predicted ratcheting by the modied model was compared with experimental
data of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel for case 1 in Fig. 10. The new parameter o
0
can be
determined by this tensiontorsion experiment and it can adjust the predicted
ratcheting to the range of over-prediction of OhnoWang model and the shakedown
of BurletCailletaud model and predict a smaller biaxial ratcheting compared with
the OhnoWang model. o
0
is eective in adjusting the model to the predicted ratch-
eting when other parameters are kept unchanged. Computations for dierent values
of o
0
show that the ratcheting decreases with decrease of o
0
, as shown in Fig. 10. This
is not surprising since the decrease of o
0
implies that the radial evanescence term
[(:n)ndp] in the modied model becomes more inuential. The modied model with
constant o
0
cannot simulate the initial nonlinear part and the subsequent rate trend
Fig. 15. Comparison of experimental and predicted ratcheting for M150; (a) shear stressstrain, (b) axial
ratcheting strain.
of a ratcheting curve at the same time. So in order to improve the simulation of the
modied model, o
0
is made to evolve with plastic strain accumulation as given by
Eq. (11). According to the ratcheting curve, o
0
0
(the initial value of o
0
) is assumed to
simulate ratcheting curve of the rst several cycles while o
st
0
(the saturated value of
o
0
) can be selected to predict the experimental ratcheting rate trend well and the
evolutional coecient [ can be selected to give a good simulation of the evolutive
ratcheting rate as shown in Fig. 10. Analyzed from the perspective of the modied
model, o
0
is a coecient that denotes the proportional relation between the radial
evanescence term [(:n)ndp] and the dynamic recovery term. The smaller o
0
, the
larger proportion of the radial evanescence term and the smaller the predicted
ratcheting by the modied model. With the evolutional function of o
0
, simulations of
Fig. 16. Comparison of experiments and predictions for M150; loading path, (b) axial stressstrain
response, (c) stress response, (d) strain response.
M140 and M150 by the modied model appear to be in a reasonably better
agreement with experimental data (see Figs. 13l6).
Comparisons of experiments and simulations of stressstrain response are
presented in Figs. 1316 for case 2 under the circular loading path. It can be seen
that the modied model not only predicts the axial ratcheting strain and the stable
stressstrain hysteresis loop with reasonable accuracy, but it also simulates the stress
response, the strain response and axial stressstrain response well to some degree. It
is seen that the modied model can well simulate the evolving relation between axial
stress, axial strain and torsional strain.
In order to conrm the validity of the modied model and the introduction of
parameter o
0
in the model, some experiments data by Hassan et al. (1992) is used to
compare with the simulations by the modied model as shown in Figs. 18 and 19.
We can also nd that the modied model with the constant parameter o
0
cannot
simulate the initial nonlinear part of ratcheting curves well. o
0
is expressed as an
evolutional function of plastic strain accumulation by Eq. (11) in modied model-2.
In Fig. 19, the simulations by the modied model with evolutional o
0
(curves of
modied model-2) are obviously better than those by the model with constant o
0
(curves of modied model-1) in all cases 13. Compared with the OhnoWang
model [see Fig. 14 in the paper of Bari and Hassan (2000)], the simulations of
ratcheting response by the modied model are improved. The modied model can
give good predictions on dierent loading paths such as an axial strain cycle with
constant internal pressure, circumferential strain peaks from bow-tie and reverse
bow-tie cycles, which proves the modied model is valid and robust.
Fig. 17. Loading paths in ratcheting experiments of Hassan et al. (1992).
Fig. 18. Ratcheting predictions by the modied model-1 with constant o
0
, the modied model-2 with
evolutional o
0
and OhnoWang model. The experiment data is obtained from Hassan et al. (1992).
The prediction of ratcheting strain to a high number of cycles and the simulations
of ratcheting on under changeable cyclic loading path are not found in the literature
and this remains an open issue. McDowell (1995) proposed an equation for decay of
Fig. 19. Comparison of experimental and predicted ratcheting by the modied model-1 and the modied
model-2: (a), (b) circumferential strain peaks from case 1; (c) circumferential strain peaks from case 2;
(d) circumferential strain peaks from case 3. Experiment data from Hassan and Kyriakides (1992), Hassan
et al. (1992) and Corona et al. (1996).
Table 4
Model parameters for CS 1026 of Bari and Hassan (2000)
o
0
(ksi) E (ksi) v m
i
(i=1M) o
0
o
o
0
st
[
18.8 26 300 0.302 0.45 0.15 0.6 5
,
112
=45 203, 13 944, 7728, 4955, 3692, 2135, 1230, 585, 295, 119, 50, 20
r
112
=0.707, 2.597, 0.326, 0.076, 2.985, 2.132, 2.825, 3.754, 2.905, 2.076, 1.96, 10
ratcheting strain after 2550 cycles to substitute for the integration of the
constitutive equation over the entire history of loading. Bari and Hassan (2001), and
suggested that it would be necessary to introduce anisotropy into the yield surface to
enhance the predictive capability of ratcheting strain beyond the current assumption
of invariant yield surface shape. The distortion model of subsequent yield surfaces
was introduced into nonlinear kinematic constitutive equations to consistent with
multiaxial ratcheting modeling (Vincent et al., 2002; Francois, 2001). More eorts
are certainly needed for more reliable prediction methods. Thus a comparative
evaluation of the proposed model with other existing models and data in the litera-
tures is desirable. More comprehensive verication of the model and further
improvement remain as future work.
5. Conclusions
Ratcheting tests were conducted on 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel for two non-
proportional loading paths. A modied kinematic hardening rule that incorporates
the radial evanescence term [(:n)ndp] of the BurletCailletaud model with the
OhnoWang kinematic hardening rule is proposed. All parameters except a new
parameter o
0
of the modied rule are the same as those of the OhnoWang models
and o
0
can be determined with a biaxial ratcheting response. The parameter deter-
mination scheme for this modied model is simple and systematic. In order to
improve the simulation to all parts of the ratcheting curves, an evolving parameter o
0
is introduced into the modied model. The model predicts stable stressstrain
behavior of the test material with reasonable accuracy. Ratcheting simulations of
both two types of loading paths are reasonably accurate for experimental data at
low numbers of cycles. In order to conrm the validity of the modied model and
the introduction of the parameter o
0
in the model, simulations to the experiments
data of Hassan et al. (1992) by the modied model with constant o
0
and evolving o
0
have been presented.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge nancial support for this work from National
Natural Science Foundation of China (project Nos. 19872049, 10272080) and
TRAPOYT.
References
Abdel-Kanim, M., Ohno, N., 2000. Kinematic hardening model suitable for ratcheting with steady-state.
International Journal of Plasticity 16, 225240.
Armstrong, P.J., Frederick, C.O., 1966. A Mathematical Representation of the Multiaxial Bauschinger
Eect. CEGB Report No. RD/B/N 731.
Bari, S., Hassan, T., 2000. Anatomy of coupled constitutive model for ratcheting simulation.
Bari, S., Hassan, T., 2001. Kinematic hardening rules in uncoupled modeling for multiaxial ratcheting
simulation. International Journal of Plasticity 17, 885905.
Bari, S., Hassan, T., 2002. An advancement in cyclic plasticity modeling for multiaxial ratcheting
simulation. International Journal of Plasticity 18, 873894.
Bocher, L., Delobelle, P., Robinet, P., Feaugas, X., 2001. Mechanical and microstructural investigations
of an austenitic stainless steel under non-proportional loadings in tensiontorsioninternal and
external pressure. International Journal of Plasticity 17, 14911530.
Bower, A.F., 1989. Cyclic hardening properties of hard-drawn copper and rail steel. Journal of the
Mechanics and Physics of Solids 37, 455470.
Burlet, H., Cailletaud, G., 1986. Numerical techniques for cyclic plasticity at variable temperature. Engi-
neering Computation 3, 143153.
Chaboche, J.L., 1991. On some modications of kinematic hardening to improve the description of
ratcheting eects. International Journal of Plasticity 7, 661678.
Chaboche, J.L., 1994. Modeling of ratchetting: evaluation of various approaches. European Journal of
Mechanics, A/Solids 13, 501518.
Chaboche, J.L., Nouailhas, D., 1989a. Constitutive modelling of ratchetting eects. Part I: experimental
facts and properties of classical models. ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 3,
384390.
Chaboche, J.L., Nouailhas, D., 1989b. Constitutive modeling of ratchetting eects. Part II: possibilities of
some additional kinematic rules. ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 3, 409416.
Chen, X., Tian, T., An, K., 2001. Non-proportional cyclic hardening behaviors of 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless
steel. Acta Mechanica Sinica 33, 698705.
Chun, B.K., Jinn, J.T., Lee, J.K., 2002. Modeling the Bauschinger eect for sheet metals, part I: theory.
Corona, E., Hassan, T., Kyriakides, S., 1996. On the performances of kinematic hardening rules in
predicting a class of biaxial ratcheting histories. International Journal of Plasticity 12, 117145.
Delobelle, P., Robinet, P., Bochen, L., 1995. Experimental study and phenomelogical modelization of
ratcheting under uniaxial and biaxial loading on an austenite stainless steel. International Journal of
Plasticity 11, 295330.
Franc ois, M., 2001. A plasticity model with yield surface distortion for non proportional loading.
Geng, L., Shen, Y., Wagoner, R.H., 2002. Anisotnopic hardening equations derived from reverse-bend
testing. International Journal of Plasticity 18, 743767.
Hassan, T., Kyriakides, S., 1992. Ratcheting in cyclic plasticity, part I: uniaxial behavior. International
Journal of Plasticity 8, 91116.
Hassan, T., Corona, E., Kyriakides, S., 1992. Ratcheting in cyclic plasticity, part II: multiaxial behavior.
Hassan, T., Kyriakides, S., 1994a. Ratcheting of cyclically hardening and softening materials, part I:
uniaxial behavior. International Journal of Plasticity 10, 149184.
Hassan, T., Kyriakides, S., 1994b. Ratcheting of cyclically hardening and softening materials, part II:
multiaxial behavior. International Journal of Plasticity 10, 185212.
Ho, K., Krempl, E., 2002. Extension of the viscoplasticity theory based on overstress (VBO) to capture
non-standard rate dependence in solids. International Journal of Plasticity 18, 851872.
Igaria, T., Kobayashi, M., Yoshida, F., Imatani, S., Inoue, T., 2002. Inelastic analysis of new thermal
ratcheting due to a moving temperature front. International Journal of Plasticity 18, 11911217.
Jiang, Y., Sehitoglu, H., 1994a. Cyclic ratcheting of 1070 steel under multiaxial stress state. International
Jiang, Y., Sehitoglu, H., 1994b. Multiaxial cyclic ratcheting under multiple step loading. International
Jiang, Y., Sehitoglu, H., 1996. Modeling of cyclic ratcheting plasticity, part 1: development of constitutive
relations. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics 63, 720725.
Jiang, Y., Kurath, P., 1996. Characteristics of the Armstrong-Frederick type plasticity models.
Krempl, E., Khan, F., 2003. Rate (time)-dependent deformation behavior: an overview of some properties
of metals and solid polymers. International Journal of Plasticity 19, 10691095.
McDowell, D.L., 1994. Description of nonproportional cyclic ratcheting behavior. European Journal of
Mechanics, A/Solids 13, 593604.
McDowell, D.L., 1995. Stress state dependence of cyclic ratcheting behavior of two rail steels.
Ohno, N., Wang, J.-D., 1993a. Kinematic hardening rules with critical state of dynamic recovery, part I:
formulations and basic features for ratcheting behavior. International Journal of Plasticity 9, 375390.
Ohno, N., Wang, J.D., 1993b. Kinematic hardening rules with critical state of dynamic recovery, part II:
application to experiments of ratcheting behavior. International Journal of Plasticity 9, 391403.
Ohno, N., 1998. Constitutive modeling of cyclic plasticity with emphasis on ratcheting. International
Journal of Mechanical Sciences 40, 251261.
Phillips, A., Tang, J.L., 1972. The eect of loading path on the yield surface at elevated temperatures.
International Journal of Solids Structures 8, 463474.
Phillips, A., Lee, C.W., 1979. Yield surfaces and loading surfaces: experiments and recommendations.
International Journal of Solids Structures 15, 715729.
Portier, L., Calloch, S., Marquis, D., Geyer, P., 2000. Ratcheting under tension-torsion loadings:
experiments and modeling. International Journal of Plasticity 16, 303335.
Prager, W., 1956. A new method of analyzing stress and strain in work hardening plastic solids. Journal of
Applied Mechanics 23, 493496.
Rider, R.J., Harvey, S.J., Chandler, H.D., 1995. Fatigue and ratcheting interactions. International
Journal of Fatigue 17, 507511.
Vincent, L., Colloch, S., Kurtyka, T., Marquis, D., 2002. An improvement of multiaxial ratcheting
modeling via yield surface distortion. ASME Trans. J. Engng Mater. Tech. 124, 402411.
Voyiadjis, G.Z., Basuroychowdhury, I.N., 1998. A plasticity model for multiaxial cyclic loading and
ratcheting. Acta Mechanica 126, 1935.
Yaguchi, M., Yamamoto, M., Ogata, T., 2002. A viscoplastic constitutive model for nickel-base
superalloy, part 1: kinematic hardening rule of anisotropic dynamic recovery. International Journal of
Plasticity 16, 10831109.
Yoshida, F., 2000. A constitutive model of cyclic plasticity. International Journal of Plasticity 16, 359
380.
Yoshida, F., Uemoni, T., 2002. A model of large-strain cyclic plasticity describing the Bauschinger eect
and workhardening stagnation. International Journal of Plasticity 18, 661686.

1 s2.0 S0749641903001359 Main

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

1 s2.0 S0749641903001359 Main

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Modied kinematic hardening rule for multiaxial

is the same as that obtained from the Armstrong and

Você também pode gostar