Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
(2)
where
pl
c is the incremental plastic strain tensor, and
is the
plastic flow factor. For the von Mises yield criterion, the yield
function f is the equivalent Mises stress:
( )( ) ' '
2
3
) ( o o o o = S S f
(3)
where S is the deviatoric stress tensor, and o' is the deviatoric
backstress tensor. Substitution of Equation (3) into (2) obtains:
( ) o c ' = - S
pl
(4)
This incremental plastic strain plus the incremental elastic
strain determine the incremental total strain for the material.
Different plastic hardening laws have been developed to
describe the evolution of the backstress tensor o and the
equivalent stress
0
o . Three commonly used plastic hardening
models considered herein are outlined next.
Isotropic Hardening Model
The often used isotropic hardening model assumes that
the yield surface enlarges equally in all directions. As its yield
center has no kinematic shift, the backstress tensor is zero:
0 = o (5)
This model is widely used for elastic-plastic stress analysis of
metallic materials under monotonic loading. However, it is
inappropriate for cyclic loading because it cannot simulate the
Bauschinger effect or anisotropy induced by work hardening.
Linear Kinematic Hardening Model
The linear kinematic hardening model is a simple
kinematic scheme that assumes a constant hardening modulus.
When temperature dependence is omitted, the evolution of the
backstress tensor o is defined by the Ziegler hardening law:
( )
pl
C c
o
o o o =
0
1
(6)
where
o is the backstress change rate tensor,
pl
c
is the
equivalent plastic strain rate, and C is the kinematic hardening
modulus. For the simple tension, C is the tangential modulus
of stress-strain response,
pl
p
d d E c o / =
. In this model, the
equivalent stress defining the yield surface size remains
constant, i.e.
0
0
o o =
, where
0
o
is the initial yield stress at
zero plastic strain. The linear kinematic hardening model can
simulate the Bauschinger effect and anisotropy.
Copyright 2012 by ASME
3
Combined Nonlinear Isotropic/Kinematic Hardening
Model
The combined nonlinear isotropic/kinematic hardening
model was developed based on the work of Lemaitre and
Chaboche [11]. The evolution of yield surface consists of two
components: an isotropic hardening component and a
nonlinear kinematic hardening component. The isotropic
hardening behavior defines the equivalent stress, describing
the size of the yield surface as a function of the equivalent
plastic strain. This evolution can be expressed as the simple
exponential law:
( )
pl
b
e Q
c
o o
+ = 1
0
0
(7)
where Q and b are the material parameters that must be
calibrated from the cyclic test data. Q defines the maximum
change in the size of elastic range and b is the rate at which
the size of the yield surface changes as the plastic strain
develops. When
0
0
o o =
, this model reduces to a nonlinear
kinematic hardening model.
The nonlinear kinematic hardening component of this
combined model considers the Bauschinger effect by
describing the translation of the yield surface in stress space
through the effect of the backstress, such that straining in one
direction reduces the yield stress in the opposite direction.
This law is defined as an additive combination of a purely
kinematic term and a relaxation term, which introduces the
nonlinearity:
( )
pl pl
C c c
o
o o o o =
1
0
(8)
where C and are the material constants that need to be
calibrated from cyclic test data. C is the initial kinematic
hardening modulus, and defines the rate at which the
kinematic hardening modulus decreases as plastic deformation
develops. If C and become zero, Equation (8) reduces to
Equation (5) for the isotropic hardening model. If is zero,
Equation (8) reduces to Equation (6) for the linear kinematic
hardening model.
Integration of Equation (8) over a half cycle of tensile
stress-strain curve gives backstress:
( )
pl
e
C
c
o
= 1
(9)
with the uniaxial stress then expressed as:
( ) ( )
pl pl
e
C
e Q
b c c
o o
+ + = 1 1
0
(10)
In general, the combined hardening model can account for
the Bauschinger effect, ratcheting, relaxation of the mean
stress, and cyclic hardening with plastic shakedown. This
plastic constitutive model incorporates several material
parameters that are usually determined from the cyclic stress-
strain test data. Chapter 11 of ABAQUS Standard Users
Manual [12], which covers inelastic mechanical properties,
provides detailed calibration procedures for these parameters,
and input methods for the cyclic test data for such plastic
hardening models.
NONLINEAR FEA SIMULATION OF ELBOW UNDER
CYCLIC BENDING
Differences that arise from the use of the three plastic
hardening models have been assessed via a benchmark
analysis that considered the response of a 90
o
elbow set
between two straight equal length pipe segments that were
end-capped. This scenario was evaluated via nonlinear FEA
simulation under cyclic bending. The average cross-sectional
radius of the elbow is R = 203.2 mm (8 inches), the pipe wall
thickness is t = 12.7 mm (0.5 inches), the elbow radius to
cross-sectional radius ratio is R
b
/R = 3, and the bend parameter
is
1875 . 0 /
2
= = R t R
b