4.7 Article

Influence of non-proportional loading on ratcheting responses and simulations by two recent cyclic plasticity models

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PLASTICITY
Volume 24, Issue 10, Pages 1863-1889

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijplas.2008.04.008

Keywords

constitutive modeling; cyclic hardening; cyclic plasticity; nonproportionality; ratcheting

Funding

  1. Region Haute Normandie
  2. European Community
  3. NSF [DMR-0408910]
  4. INSA de Rouen
  5. Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering at North Carolina State University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aubin and her coworkers conducted a unique set of experiments demonstrating the influence of loading non-proportionality on ratcheting responses of duplex stainless steel. In order to further explore their new observation, a set of experiments was conducted on stainless steel (SS) 304L under various biaxial stress-controlled non-proportional histories. This new set of data reiterated Aubin and her coworkers' observation and illustrated many new responses critical to model development and validation. Two recent and different classes of cyclic plasticity models, the modified Chaboche model proposed by Bari and Hassan and the version of the multi-mechanism model proposed by Taleb and Cailletaud, are evaluated in terms of their simulations of the SS304L non-proportional ratcheting responses. A modeling scheme for non-proportional ratcheting responses using the kinematic hardening rule parameters in addition to the conventionally used isotropic hardening rule parameter (yield surface size change) in the modified Chaboche model is evaluated. Strengths and weaknesses of the models in simulating the non-proportional ratcheting responses are identified. Further improvements of these models needed for improving the non-proportional ratcheting simulations are suggested in the paper. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available