Non-isothermal thermomechanical

metallurgical model and its application to

welding simulations
T. Schenk*1,2, I. M. Richardson1,3, M. Kraska2 and S. Ohnimus2
This paper presents a thermomechanical metallurgical macroscopic model for steels. The model
is based on an existing model that is extended for non-isothermal behaviour in combination with
phase transformations. The model and its numerical implementation in ABAQUS are described
using vector notation for stress and strain tensors. Model parameters are presented for the dual
phase steel DP600 and the structural steel S355. For DP600, thermomechanical model
parameters, i.e. hardening and strain rate dependency, have been obtained by fitting
temperature and strain rate dependent tensile tests. A metallurgical model was implemented
using data obtained from phase field models for the austenite growth and continuous cooling
transition diagrams for phase transformations from austenite to low temperature phases. The
model is applied to welding simulations of DP600 overlap joints and S355 T joints. The final
distortion is compared to experiments and it is shown that the model presented is able to
reproduce the experimental results very well.
Keywords: Thermomechanical metallurigcal model, Welding simulation, Sensitivity analysis, Phase transformation, Finite element analysis, Material
properties for DP600 and S355

Introduction material state after welding, it is necessary to implement

Ferritic steels undergo solid phase transformations if
they are subjected to appropriate thermal cycles. This
can be useful in the production of steels having
advantageous material properties, e.g. high formability
and high tensile strength. For instance, dual phase (DP)
steels have become an important industrial material due
to the combination of mechanical properties derived
from selected phases.1 Many DP steels for automotive
applications possess a microstructure consisting of up to
20% martensite in a soft ferrite matrix. The martensite
fraction is obtained by careful selection of the material
chemistry and heat treatment, and leads to a material
with a high tensile strength and acceptable elongation.
Dual phase steels have low yield strengths, and hence
exhibit early plastification, which is favourable for
forming processes, especially for complex components.
The material properties can change significantly due
to thermal treatment, which is of importance especially
when the material is welded, i.e. locally melted and
resolidified; the microstructure changes severely and is
usually completely different to the initial microstructure.
Hence, in order to perform accurate predictions of the
1
Materials Innovation Institute M2i, Mekelweg 2, NL-2628CD Delft, The
Netherlands
2
INPRO GmbH, Hallerstrae 1, D-10587 Berlin, Germany
3
Technical University of Delft, Faculty of 3ME, Mekelweg 2, NL-2628CD
Delft, The Netherlands
*Corresponding author, email tobias.schenk@inpro.de
a model which is able to describe all relevant effects for
high temperature treatment.
This paper presents a thermomechanical metallurgi-
cal model for DP600 and S355 based on the Chaboche
model2,3 which is also referred to as unified plasticity
model.4 Ratcheting and recovery, e.g. Ref. 5, are not
considered in this paper. The numerical integration of
the model is described using the general return
mapping algorithm6 which provides the consistent
tangent required for the equilibrium iterations in finite
element (FE) simulations in order to obtain an optimal
quadratic convergence. The algorithm applied here is a
non-isothermal extension of the modular algorithm
developed in Ref. 7. It is presumed that only the local
material response has to be calculated. Detailed over-
views of incremental objective algorithms and splits of
the deformation gradient into rotation tensor and
deformation tensor in order to obtain the strain tensor
are given in Refs. 8 and 9. The implementation of
phase transformations is described in detail with a
focus on the implementation as required for the FE
software package ABAQUS.10 For cooling, continuous
cooling transition (CCT) diagrams have been applied
while the austenitisation on heating is modelled in a
way to fit the results for phase field modeling as
obtained in Ref. 11.
The model presented in this paper is applied for
welding simulations of DP600 overlap joints and for
S355 T Joints. The mechanical model parameters
for DP600 have been obtained by tensile tests for

2009 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining

Published by Maney on behalf of the Institute
Received 10 September 2008; accepted 30 October 2008
DOI 10.1179/136217108X386563 Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2009 VOL 14 NO 2 152
 Schenk et al. Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application

1 mm sheets in the rolling and transverse directions. An


anisotropy factor is included in the model in order to LaT
Deth
ij ~ a T
z DT DTdij (4)
account for the different yield strength in these direc- LT
tions. For the modelling of the S355 steel, the experi- where aT is the temperature dependent coefficient of
mental data has been taken from Ref. 12, and is thermal expansion. The phase strain increment is
sufficient to model temperature as well as strain rate addressed in the next chapter. The following section
dependency. In order to validate the model, the final addresses the calculation of the plastic strain increment.
distortion obtained after welding is compared to
experiments for two different clamping conditions. Plastic strain increment
In order to determine the plastic strain increment, the
plastic potential w and the accumulated plastic strain
Thermomechanical model increment p have to be known
In the following, an updated Lagrange formalism is
Lw
assumed using Cauchy (true) stresses and true strains (see Depl ~ Dp (5)
Ref. 13). This formulation is also applied in ABAQUS. Ls
The plastic potential is calculated using the equivalent
stress sEQ, the yield stress sY and the isotropic
Formulation hardening variable R
Metals subjected to a multi-axial total strain etot react by
building up a multi-axial stress s against the strain. The w~sEQ {sY {R (6)
strain and the stress tensor are represented by 363 The equivalent stress is calculated using the extension of
matrices possessing nine components, three direct and the von Mises stress for anisotropic plasticity due to
six for shearing. However, the stress and strain tensors Hill17,18
are symmetric due to force equilibrium and hence, they
contain only six independent constants. For isothermal sEQ ~(S{a):M:(S{a)
1=2 (7)
plasticity, there is a connection between incremental
where a and M are the kinematic hardening and the Hill
stresses and strains as given by14
anisotropy tensor respectively. For isotropic plasticity,
Ds~CDeel ~C(Detot {Dep {Deph {Deth ) i,j,k,l~1:::3 the Hill tensor can be replaced by M~3=2:1. The yield
(1) function defines a surface in the deviatoric stress space,
e.g. a sphere for isotropic plasticity. The material
where eel, ep, eph and eth refer to the elastic, plastic, phase response changes from elastic to plastic if the stress
and thermal strains respectively. For non-isothermal state exceeds this surface. The viscoplastic strain rate
plasticity, this equation is to be extended to include :
p~Dp=Dt is calculated by
derivatives with respect to temperature
: w
LC LDeel p~S Tn , SxT~(xzjxj)=2 (8)
Ds~ DTeel zC DTzCDeel (2) K
LT LT where K and n are the viscoplastic viscosity and
For isotropic elasticity, which is assumed in the present Nortons exponent for viscous flow. It is generally
paper, the components of the elastic stiffness tensor C reasonable to include viscoplastic effects in the model
are functions of Youngs modulus E and Poissons ratio since for higher homologous temperatures of T/TM<0?3
n.15 The stress tensor may be decomposed into the to 0?5, where TM is the melting temperature, metals
deviatoric stress tensor S and the hydrostatic stress show an increasing amount of stress dependency on the
tensor p with s5Szp and the components applied load.1921 In the performed tensile tests for
DP600, for instance, it was found that strain rate
1
pij ~pDij p~ skk dependency sets in above 400uC. This corresponds to a
3 (3) homologous temperature of 0?28. For lower homolo-
S~s{p gous temperatures, the viscosity can be set to a low
value, e.g. 110 MPa s1/n, in order to emulate elasto-
This is suitable due to the fact that the hydrostatic stress plastic behaviour. The derivative of the plastic potential
p is assumed to yield no plastic deformations in metals, with respect to the stresses, as required in equation (5),
and inelastic deformations are supposed to yield no are also referred to as flow direction
volume change. Therefore, models for plasticity are
often defined in terms of deviatoric stresses. However in Lw 1
n~ ~ M(S{a) (9)
general, it might also be necessary to include plastic Ls sEQ
compressibility, e.g. for porous material.16
For isotropic and kinematic hardening, an exponentially
In FE simulations, the total strain etot, the stress state saturating function of the accumulated plastic strain is
s and the temperature T at the beginning of the assumed. The constitutive equations are given by
increment at time t are given and the stress state
szDs at time tzDt at the end of the time increment has 1 LSR
DR~AR (SR {R)DpzR DT
to be calculated as function of the total strain incre- SR T
ment and the temperature increment DT. In order to   (10)
2 : 1 LSa
determine the elastic strain increment from the total Da~Aa Sa n{a Dpza DT
3 Sa T
strain increment, it is necessary to determine the plastic,
phase and thermal strain increments. The thermal strain where AR, Aa are the isotropic and kinematic slope, and
increments are calculated by SR and Sa the isotropic and kinematic saturation value

Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2009 VOL 14 NO 2 153

 Schenk et al.
1 Meaning of model parameters
respectively. The equation for the kinematic hardening
includes the dependency on the load direction.
According to Ref. 22, it is assumed that the slope is
not temperature dependent for thermodynamic reasons.
Experiments often show, also in the present paper, that
this is not always the case. Hence, it has to be verified
that the variation of the slope with respect to the
temperature is small in order to allow the application of
this formulation and to avoid large errors.
Such a saturating approach accounts for the increase
of the hardening during first yielding and the effect of
dynamic recovery for higher dislocation densities, see
Ref. 23. If the saturation value becomes very large, the
hardening approach corresponds to Pragers rule for
linear hardening.24
Figure 1 shows the meaning of the plastic model
parameters regarding a usual stressstrain curve. All
parameters have a meaning in the sense that it is in
principal possible to estimate their values from a stress
strain curve without using optimisation methods.
However, in most cases optimisation methods are
applied in order to fit the model parameters to
experiments, e.g. Refs. 25 and 26.
A nice discussion of the determination of material
parameters for this kind of material models is given in
Ref. 27. It is very common to perform tests only in one
direction, i.e. either tension or compression. Usually
these tests are repeated for different strain rates if rate
dependence is included. The experimental data obtained
from such tests is not sufficient in order to distinguish
between kinematic and isotropic hardening. Therefore,
cyclic tests should be performed. A rule of thumb for the
determination of the plastic material properties is
presented in Refs. 29 and 30. According to these works,
the optimal strategy is to perform cyclic tests for
different strain rates. If it is not possible to perform
cyclic tests, but there is a cyclic load in the simulation, as
is the case for welding simulations, a suitable strategy
would be to compare the simulations for both kinematic
and isotropic hardening and choose the hardening
approach whose results match the experiments most
closely.
The material behaviour is described using a set of
ordinary differential equations (ODE) of first order.
This ODE has been solved using the general return
mapping algorithm.6 In particularly, the formulation
presented in Ref. 7 has been applied and extended for
the case of non-isothermal plasticity.
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining
Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application
2 Parameterised CCT
Phase transformation
Most steels are not only subjected to solidliquid
transitions, but also to solidsolid transitions.23 This is
always the case if there is a solid state configuration
possessing a lower energy than the current configura-
tion. Continuous cooling transition diagram are applied
on cooling of the steel in order to determine the phase
transformation from the high temperature equilibrium
phase state austenite to other phases such as ferrite,
bainite, or martensite. However, this is only an
approximation and one has to keep in mind that CCT
diagrams are valid only for a constant cooling rate
which is not the case in welding.
In order to model phase transformations during
cooling, the CCT diagram has to be parameterised. In
principle, there is a lower limit MS below which
martensite growth starts and all remaining austenite
will transform to martensite (or eventually remain as
austenite as is the case for TRIP steels), and a higher
limit Ac1 above which austenitisation occurs. Formulas
for the calculation of the austenite start temperature as
function of the steel composition can be taken from
Refs. 30 and 31. The martensite start temperature can be
estimated from Ref. 32.
In between these two limits, phase transformation
from austenite to ferrite or bainite can occur. The
boundaries of the domains where these phases grow
have been modelled as functions of the temperature T
and the time t using an inverse parabolic approach
T(t)~+a(t{t0 )1=2 zT0 twt0
T(t)~max(T,TUp ) (11)
T(t)~min(T,TLow )
where a, t0, T0, TLow and TUp are a scaling factor, the
start time for the transition, an orientation parameter,
the lower temperature limit and the upper temperature
limit for the phase respectively. If the current state (T,t)
is within the domain of any phase, this phase grows.
Figure 2 shows an example of such a parameterised
CCT diagram. In order to determine t0 in simulations, it
is important to track at each material point, i.e.
integration point in the FE grid, when the CCT diagram
becomes valid. According to Ref. 33, the employed CCT
diagram becomes valid as soon as the temperature drops
below Ac3.
2009 VOL 14 NO 2 154
 Schenk et al.
3 Tensile tests for DP600 at room temperature in both
directions
For the phase transformation from austenite to ferrite
or bainite, the equation of LeBlond34 is applied
_  {t
Pi (T,t)~ P(T) 1{exp (12)
t
_ more complex than the opposite case, and is in general
where Pi(T) is the current phase fraction of phase i, P(T)
is its equilibrium phase fraction, t is a growth parameter,
t is the time and T is the current temperature. The
equilibrium fraction of phase i is here set to the current
fraction of phase i plus the austenite phase fraction. This
equation can be rewritten in a differential form
_ !
: P(T){Pi (T)
Pi (T,t)~ (13)
t validated by experiments in the future.
which can be solved within each time increment using an
implicit integration scheme
Pi (T,t)zPi (TzDT,tzDt):Dt=t
Pi (TzDT,tzDt)~ (14)
1zDt=t
For large temperature increments, substeps can be
applied in order to increase the accuracy. The growth
parameter t has been set to a constant value although it
is generally temperature dependent.35 Its value has been
determined using the numbers in the CCT which
mention the phase fraction after a certain time in the
related domain. The diffusionless transition from
austenite to martensite is described by the time
independent KoistinenMarburger equation36
_ that the work hardening in the rolling direction is larger
PM (T)~ P(1{exp{bM (Ms {T)
) TfMs (15)
Here, P is the sum of the present martensite and
austenite fractions. The growth parameter bM has been
determined in a way to match the empirical formulae
given in Ref. 32. An estimated value of bM50?011/K is
given in Ref. 37. It is generally reasonable to model
volume expansion and contraction due to phase
transformations as well as the influence of martensite
on the yield stress. The martensite volume fraction fM
has a strong influence on the yield stress, as shown in
Refs. 38 and 39. In Ref. 40, a value of dsY/
dfM<830 MPa has been determined for the dependence
of the yield stress on the martensite volume fraction at
room temperature. This value is also applied in the
simulations. The volume change from austenite to ferrite
is assumed to be 1?4% and from austenite to martensite
1%. The total volume V, the volume change DV and
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining
Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application
4 Anisotropy factor for DP600
the incremental phase strain Deph is determined using
a linear mixing rule involving the fraction Pi of each
phase i
X
nPhases X
nPhases
1 DV
V~ Vi Pi , DV ~ Vi DPi , Deph ~ 1 (16)
3 V
i~1 i~1
Modelling austenite growth from any other phase is
not fully understood. Here, a temperature dependent
austenite growth from martensite has been assumed
using bM as growth parameter. This is superposed by a
time dependent growth from ferrite and bainite where
the growth parameter has been set to b520/K in order to
obtain a good agreement to the results of the phase field
predictions for welding of DP600 as obtained from
Ref. 41. This is a rough approximation and should be
Parameters
Here the material properties for DP600 and S355 in
accordance with the presented model are applied for the
welding simulations presented in the next section.
Thermomechanical model parameters
The temperature dependent plastic model parameters
for the dual phase steel DP600 have been obtained using
tensile tests of 1 mm sheets from room temperature up
to 1000uC for different strain rates. The tests have been
performed in both the rolling direction and the
transversal direction. Figure 3 shows the results of
the tensile tests at room temperature. It can be seen
than in the transverse direction. Hence, an anisotropy
factor f has been applied
sY,Rolling ~ sY,0 (1zf )
sY,Transversal ~ sY,0 (1{f ) (17)
sY,Thickness ~ sY,0
This anisotropy factor decreases for increasing tempera-
tures. It has been implemented in a way that this factor
decreases monotonically in time, i.e. it will not increase
again on cooling. Figure 3 shows the temperature
dependent anisotropy factor for DP600 as obtained
from the experiments. The calculated r values of the
sample are r0051?35 and r9050?82 which are in the range
of values found in the literature.42
DP600 has also been considered for welding simula-
tions in Refs. 43 and 44, where material properties have
been presented as well. For thin sheets, the material
2009 VOL 14 NO 2 155
 Schenk et al. Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application

5 Elastic material parameters for DP600 and S355 8 Viscoplastic material parameters for DP600 and S355:
values for DP600 have been measured in experiments

Figures 58 show the temperature dependent elastic,

plastic and thermodynamic model parameters for
DP600 and S355 respectively.

Phase transformation parameters

For the modelling of phase transformations, the CCT
diagram numbers 9 and 24 from Ref. 33 have been
applied for DP600 and S355. Table 1 lists all required
parameters as extracted from the CCT diagrams for the
two intermediate phases.
6 Thermodynamic material parameters for DP600 and
S355 Welding simulations
The welding process modelled here is gas metal arc
welding including filler material addition. First, the
transient temperature distribution is calculated during
welding. Using the temperature, the phase fractions and
thermal strains in the material can be determined. The
thermal strains and the volumetric changes due to phase
transformations lead to stresses and deformations of the
workpiece. In both cases, the temperature distribution is
measured using thermocouples and modelled as input
for the mechanical metallurgical analysis.
In order to model the heat input due to the welding
torch, a Goldak heat source46 has been implemented in
7 Elastoplastic material parameters for DP600 and S355:
ABAQUS in the user subroutine DFLUX. Contact
values for DP600 have been measured in experiments
conductance, temperature dependent surface radiation
and convection have been implemented using the
properties can differ from production to production, i.e. GAPCON and SFILM subroutines. Therefore, model
from batch to batch, and hence, it is reasonable to parameters have been obtained from Ref. 43. For more
measure the properties at least at room temperature for detailed explanations, also about the addition of filler
validation. material in the model, see Ref. 47.
The experimental data for S355 has been obtained The final distortion after welding and subsequent
from Ref. 12. There, anisotropy has been neglected since cooling is shown for both materials. As shown in
there is no data available for modelling. For both steels, Ref. 48, the clamp stiffness and the clamp release time
Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio and the thermal have both a significant influence on the predicted
coefficient of expansion have been obtained from welding distortion. In order to minimise the clamping
Ref. 45 by choosing the chemical composition which influence, the clamps have been released immediately
matches best to DP600 and S355 respectively. The after welding.
plastic material parameters have been fitted using the fit
software FitMe.21 For DP600, the experimentally Table 1 Phase transformation parameters
measured curves have been used while for S355 the
curves have been taken from Ref. 12. DP600 S355
The thermodynamic material properties, i.e. specific
Parameter Ferrite Bainite Ferrite Bainite
heat, density, and thermal conductivity have been
obtained from Ref. 45 as well. Owing to a lack of a (T/s1/2) 40 90 40 70
experimental data, the hardening behaviour has been t0, s 5?3 1?5 13?0 7?0
modelled as isotropic hardening. However, case studies T0, K 635 500 665 470
are presented in the next section where the hardening TLow, K 600 MS5460 630 MS5420
TUp, K 670 600 700 630
has been switched to kinematic hardening and the
t, s 29 4 45 12
difference is compared.

Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2009 VOL 14 NO 2 156

 Schenk et al. Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application

contact models, see Ref. 48. In the present paper, for the
contact modelling, a linear relationship has been
employed between the contact pressure and the over-
closure. The slope applied is k51000 MPa mm21.
Coulomb friction has been modelled assuming a friction
coefficient of m50?3 which correspond to values found
in literature.4951

DP600 overlap joint

9 Mesh and geometry applied for simulations
The contact between clamps and workpiece has been
modelled explicitly by five clamps from the top and two
base clamps below on which the workpiece is fixed
before welding. The clamping pressure at each clamp is
set to 15 bar which corresponds to the experimental
conditions. The weld seam is already included in the
mesh and the profile has been modelled according to
cross-sections from the welded sample. Applying rigid
contact formulations often leads to convergence pro-
blems, and usually the simulation is more stable if soft
contact formulations are applied. For an overview of
Figure 9 shows the mesh and the geometry applied for
the welding simulations of the overlap joint. Two sheets
(200 mm long, 80 mm wide, 1 mm thick) have been
placed in an overlap configuration with an overlap of
10 mm. The model consists in total of about 26 000
volume elements.
Figure 11 show the welding distortion as obtained
from experiments. The second buckling mode has been
found with a buckling amplitude of 15?9 mm. Here,
hardening can be modelled either as isotropic or
kinematic hardening. In order to investigate which
hardening model should be employed, the simulations
have been performed for both cases. Figure 11 show the
welding distortion predicted from simulations. In both
cases, the second buckling mode has been obtained. The
buckling amplitude is 18?3 mm for isotropic hardening
and 14?9 mm for kinematic hardening. Using isotropic
hardening over estimates the distortion amplitude by
15%. If kinematic hardening is employed, the distortion
amplitude is under estimated by 6%. The deviation is
about 10% which is still acceptable for welding simula-
tions. Both hardening assumptions result in acceptable
predictions, but it is likely that this deviation can be
reduced by a more realistic mixed hardening model.
Therefore, cyclic material tests have to be performed
which is a very complicated task for thin sheets.

10 Measured buckling distortion for DP600 overlap joint (scaling is in mm)

11 Predicted buckling distortion for DP600 overlap joint assuming isotropic work hardening (left) and kinematic work
hardening (right) (scaling is same as in Fig. 10)

Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2009 VOL 14 NO 2 157

 Schenk et al.
a ferrite; b martensite; c bainite
12 Calculated phase fractions after welding
Figure 12 shows the final phase fractions at the centre
line as obtained after the simulations. Initially, the
material consists of 85% ferrite and 15% martensite. At
the end of the welding step, there is almost no ferrite in
the molten zone, also the fraction in the heat affected
zone is reduced significantly. The martensite fraction is
decreased 5%. The material which did not transform to
martensite transformed to bainite mostly and partly to
ferrite. Figure 13 shows an etched part in the centre of
the fusion zone using LePeras reagent.52 The martensite
volume fraction in the fusion zone has been determined
to 5%2%. This agrees well with the simulations.
However, the predicted bainite volume fraction is some
per cent larger than the measured fraction. In the HAZ,
measurements show that the predicted martensite
volume fraction is underestimated. The reason for this
is that austenite growth is overestimated by the present
transformation model. Hence, the CCT diagram might
be employed to model the transformation, but one has
to be careful with the austenitisation on heating of the
material.
S355 T joint
Figure 14 shows the mesh applied for the welding
simulations of a T joint. The sizes of the base and top
plate are 300615066 mm and 30068066 mm respec-
tively. The model has a total of about 28 000 volume
elements.
13 Experimentally determined phases in fusion zone
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining
Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application
Figures 15 and 16 shows the welding distortion of the
base plate as obtained from simulations and experi-
ments. In the experimental measurements, the distortion
has been measured for the base plate in the out of plane
direction. In both numerical and experimental studies,
the distortion is dominated by angular distortion which
is superposed by some bending distortion. The max-
imum and minimum measurable distortion amplitudes
are 0?23 and 20?34 mm respectively. The equivalent
values obtained from the simulations are 0?45 and
0?5 mm. The deviation between experiments and simu-
lation is about 10%.
Isotropic and kinematic hardenings have also been
compared for the case of the T joint. Unlike the results
obtained for the DP600 lap joint, the distortion in this
case is not significantly dependant on the assumed
hardening model. Hence, isotropic hardening is used in
the simulations for simplicity and in order to reduce the
computational time.
Analysis of influencing variables
In order to investigate the robustness of the model, an
analysis has been performed to determine the dependency
of the final welding distortion on different influencing
variables. Table 2 shows an overview of the case studies
performed and the deviations obtained compared to the
previously presented results.
Switching between kinematic hardening and isotropic
hardening (case 1) changes the results significantly, and
hence the kind of hardening the material shows should
14 Geometry of T Joint
2009 VOL 14 NO 2 158
 Schenk et al. Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application

15 Measured buckling distortion for base plate of S355 T joint (scaling is in mm)

be included Conversely, neglecting the anisotropy factor

(case 2) does not affect the solution very strongly. The
addition of the fillet (case 4), i.e. setting the real
mechanical properties at the very beginning of the
simulation, does not affect the results strongly for the
lap joint but has a significant influence for the T Joint.
The reason might be that the amount of deposited
material for the T Joint is much larger, and hence its
influence in the simulation is greater.
Neglecting phase transformations seems to have no
strong influence (cased 5 and 6). However, the influence
of phase transformations on the distortion is strongly
dependent on the assumed volume change due to the
16 Predicted angular distortion for S355 T joint (scaling
martensite transformation (cases 7 and 11). The volume is same as in Fig. 15; magnication factor for distor-
change and stiffness change might oppose each other, as tion is 650)
can be seen for the T Joint. This should be considered
carefully before simplification of the model.
400uC, the hardening parameters are ramped down
The application of a higher mesh density (case 8)
linearly to zero at 1000uC. Such an approach is
shows that the mesh resolution is sufficient, i.e. the mesh
interesting since tensile tests are often available at room
is close to h-convergence. If a very coarse mesh is
temperature only. The results show that for the present
employed (case 9), i.e. one third less elements, the results case studies, the application of the master curves does
can change strongly, e.g. see Ref. 53. As found in this not change the results significantly.
work, a too coarse mesh resolution might even change
the buckling shape in general. Hence, a mesh analysis
should always be performed in order to hedge the model Conclusions
results. In this paper, the extension of a plasticity model to non-
Applying a master curve (case 10) refers to employ the isothermal conditions is presented. The material model
hardening parameters at room temperature up to 400uC, is based on the Chaboche model for viscoplastic material
where the material usually starts to soften. Above behaviour. A metallurgical model based on CCT

Table 2 Deviations of results to presented reference models: low, moderate, high and very high refer to changes of ,5,
510%, 1025 and .25% respectively

Case Description Lap joint T Joint

1 Switch to kinematic hardening Very high Low

2 Set anisotropy factor to zero Low
3 No strain rate dependency Low Low
4 Fillet added at very beginning Moderate High
5 No phase volume change Moderate High
6 No phase volume and stiffness change Moderate Moderate
7 2% volume change austeniteRmartensite Low High
8 Higher mesh density 2120% Low Low
9 Very coarse mesh 267% Very high High
10 Master curve Moderate Moderate
11 Difference between cases 4 and 6 High Very high
12 Friction coefficient to m50?5/m50?1 Low Low

Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2009 VOL 14 NO 2 159

 Schenk et al.
diagrams for phase transformations on cooling and
phase field modelling for austenitisation on heating has
been presented. Model parameters for the thermome-
chanical and the metallurgical model have been pre-
sented for the dual phase steel DP600 and the structural
steel S355. The model parameters have mostly been
combined from different literature sources. For DP600,
tensile tests have been performed in order to model the
anisotropic behaviour for thin sheets and the viscoplas-
tic behaviour at higher homologous temperatures.
The model has been applied successfully for welding
simulations of gas metal arc welding of DP600 overlap
joints and S355 T Joints. The temperature distribution
on welding and subsequent cooling has been measured
in experiments and applied as boundary condition for
the simulations. Clamping conditions have been mod-
elled realistically using contact formulations. The
results out of plane distortions have been compared to
experiments. In both cases, there is a good agreement
between simulations and measurements and hence, it
could be shown that the presented material model is
adequate.
In order to investigate the robustness of the model, an
analysis has been performed with regard to various
parameters. It was shown that some model parameters
have larger impacts than others. However, the impact is
dependent on certain assumptions, e.g. the assumed
volume change from austenite to martensite. Hence, in
order to create a reliable model, a detailed knowledge of
such parameters is indispensable.
Acknowledgement
This research was carried out under the project number
MC8?06256 in the framework of the Research Program
of the Materials innovation institute M2i (www.m2i.nl),
the former Netherlands Institute for Metals Research.
References
1. Salzgitter AG: www.salzgitter-flachstahl.de.
2. J.-L. Chaboche: Int. J. Plast., 1986, 2, (2), 247302.
3. J.-L. Chaboche: Int. J. Plast., 1989, 5, 247254.
4. J. Lemaitre and J.-L. Chaboche: Mechanics of solid materials;
1994, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
5. J.-L. Chaboche: Int. J. Plast., 1991, 7, 661678.
6. J. Simo and T. Hughes: Computational inelasticity; 1998, New
York, Springer.
7. T. Seifert and T. Schenk: Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 2007,
196, (1720), 22692283.
8. T. Hughs and J. Winget: Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 1980, 15,
18621867
9. G. Weber: Computational procedures for a new class of finite
deformation elastic-plastic constitutive equations, PhD thesis,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA,
1988.
10. ABAQUS Inc.: www.abaqus.com.
11. R. G. Thiessen: Physically-based modelling of material response to
welding, PhD thesis, TU Delft, Delft, The Netherlands, 2006.
12. U. Peil and M. Wichers: Stahlbau, 2004, 73, (6), 400416.
13. M. A. Crisfield: Non-linear finite element analysis of solids and
structures, Vol. 1; 1991, New York, J. Wiley & Sons.
14. G. Mase: Continuum mechanics, 1st edn; 1969, New York,
McGraw-Hill.
15. G. Mase: Schaums outline of continuum mechanics, 1st edn;
1969, New York, McGraw-Hill.
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining
Non-isothermal thermomechanical metallurgical model and its application
16. D. Gross and T. Seelig: Bruchmechanik: mit einer Einfuhrung in
die Mikromechanik, 3rd edn; 2001, Berlin, Springer Verlag.
17. R. Hill: Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A, 1948, 193A, 281.
18. D. Banabic: Formability of metallic materials, 1st edn; 2000,
Berlin, Springer.
19. A. Bhattacharyya, D. Rittel and G. Ravichandran: Metall. Mater.
Trans. A, 2006, 37A, 11371145.
20. G. Hahn: Acta Met., 1962, 10, 727738.
21. T. Schenk: Deformation behavior of tungsten and crack propaga-
tion in thin tungsten wires, Master thesis, Fraunhofer IWM,
Freiburg, Germany, 2006.
22. D. L. McDowell: Int. J. Plast., 1992, 8, 695728.
23. G. Gottstein: Physikalische Grundlagen der Materialkunde, 3rd
edn; 2007, Berlin, Springer Verlag.
24. W. Prager: J. Appl. Phys., 1949, 20, 235.
25. F. Fossum: J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 1997, 119, 337.
26. R. Mahnken and E. Stein: Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng., 1994, 2,
597616.
27. M. Rodriguez: Characterization of tungsten wires, Master thesis,
Fraunhofer IWM Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany, 2005.
28. T. Seifert: Identification of material parameters using instrumen-
ted indentation test data, Master thesis, University of Stuttgart,
Stuttgart, Germany, 2003.
29. S. Sandfeld: Comparative study for use of numerical and
analytical gradients in parameter identification, Master thesis,
University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, 2005.
30. K. W. Andrews: J. Iron Steel Inst., 1965, 203, 721727.
31. B. Donnay, J. C. Herman, V. Leroy, U. Lotter, R. Grossterlinden
and H. Pircher: Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Modelling of metal rolling
process, London, UK, December 1996, The Institute of Materials,
2335.
32. W. Steven and A. G. Haynes: J. Iron Steel Inst., 1956, 183, 349
359.
33. P. Seyffarth, B. Meyer and A. Scharff: Groer Atlas Schwei-
ZTU-Schaubilder; 1992, Dusseldorf, DVS-Verlag.
34. J. LeBlond and J. Devaux: Int. J. Plast., 1989, 5, 551572.
35. A. Murugaiyan, A. Saha Podder, A. Pandit, S. handra, D.
Bhattacharjee and R. K. Ray: ISIJ Int., 2006, 46, (10), 14891494.
36. D. Koistinen and E. Marburger: Acta Metall., 1959, 7, 5960.
37. H. H. Pan and G. J. Weng: J. Therm. Stress., 1992, 15, (1), 123.
38. U. Liedl, S. Traint and E. A. Werner: Comput. Mater. Sci., 2002,
25, 122128.
39. A. Ekrami: Mater. Lett., 2005, 59, 20702074.
40. R. G. Davies: Metall. Trans. A, 1978, 9A, 671679.
41. R. G. Thiessen: Physically-based modelling of material response to
welding, PhD thesis, TU Delft, Delft, The Netherlands, 2006.
42. S. Zang, J. Liang and C. Guo: Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 2007, 47,
(11), 17911797.
43. E. van der Aa: Local cooling during welding: prediction and
control of residual stresses and buckling distortion, PhD thesis,
TU Delft, Delft, The Netherlands, 2007.
44. C. Schwenk: FE-Simulation des Schweiverzugs laserstrahl-
geschweiter dunner Bleche; 2007, Berlin, BAM.
45. F. Richter: Die wichtigsten physikalischen Eigenschaften von 52
Eisenwerkstoffen; 1973, Dusseldorf, Stahleisen Sonderberichte.
46. J. Goldak: Metall. Trans. B, 1984, 15B, 299305.
47. T. Schenk, I. Richardson, G. Eer, M. Kraska and S. Ohnimus:
Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on Thermal forming and welding
distortion, Bremen, Germany, April 2008, BIAS, 8396.
48. G. Kloosterman: Contact methods in finite element methods,
PhD Thesis, TU Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands, 2002.
49. Y. Kang, Y. Shun and X. Wang: Proc. Conf. NUMISHEET 96,
Dearborn, MI, USA, SeptemberOctober 1996, Ohio State
University, 6164.
50. A. Matuszak: J. Mater. Process. Technol., 2000, 106, 107111.
51. V. Samper and E. Felder: Proc. 16th Leeds-Lyon Symp. on
Tribology, Lyon, France, September 1989, Institut National des
Science Appliquees des Lyon, 271279.
52. F. S. LePera: Metallography, 1979, 12, 263268.
53. T. Schenk, S. Ohnimus, M. Kraska and I. M. Richardson: Proc.
17th Int. Conf. on Computers in welding technology and
manufacturing, Cranfield, UK, June 2008, Cranfield University.
Paper 38, published on CD.
2009 VOL 14 NO 2 160