4.7 Article

On the predictive capabilities of the shear modified Gurson and the modified Mohr-Coulomb fracture models over a wide range of stress triaxialities and Lode angles

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF SOLIDS
Volume 59, Issue 7, Pages 1374-1394

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmps.2011.04.006

Keywords

Ductile fracture; Shear modified Gurson model; Modified Mohr-Coulomb model; Stress triaxiality; Lode angle

Funding

  1. MIT/Industry AHSS fracture consortium

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The predictive capabilities of the shear-modified Gurson model [Nielsen and Tvergaard, Eng. Fract. Mech. 77, 2010] and the Modified Mohr-Coulomb (MMC) fracture model [Bai and Wierzbicki, Int. J. Fract. 161, 2010] are evaluated. Both phenomenological fracture models are physics-inspired and take the effect of the first and third stress tensor invariants into account in predicting the onset of ductile fracture. The MMC model is based on the assumption that the initiation of fracture is determined by a critical stress state, while the shear-modified Gurson model assumes void growth as the governing mechanism. Fracture experiments on TRIP-assisted steel sheets covering a wide range of stress states (from shear to equibiaxial tension) are used to calibrate and validate these models. The model accuracy is quantified based on the predictions of the displacement to fracture for experiments which have not been used for calibration. It is found that the MMC model predictions agree well with all experiments (less than 4% error), while less accurate predictions are observed for the shear-modified Gurson model. A comparison of plots of the strain to fracture as a function of the stress triaxiality and the normalized third invariant reveals significant differences between the two models except within the vicinity of stress states that have been used for calibration. (C) 2011 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