You are on page 1of 10

# Professor Ravi-Chandar 1

Constitutive Models for Ductile Materials.

1. Plastic incompressibility of dense materials.
It is generally assumed that volumetric deformation is elastic. This is based on extensive
experimental results of Bridgman. For example, for pure iron,

p p) 10 1 . 2 87 . 5 ( 10
7 7
0

=

v
v

where p is the pressure in kg/cm
2
and v
0
is the volume at 30 C at 1 atm. This implies that at
1000 atm, the volumetric strain is about 0.0006. Thus, volume strains are negligible in
comparison to total strains imposed under conditions of large plastic deformation. Therefore, for
nonporous materials, it is assumed that volumetric strains are elastic (recoverable). This is called
plastic incompressibility. The, the volumetric parts are removed from the total stresses and
strains. This is accomplished by defining a deviatoric stress and deviatoric strain tensors as
follows:

ij kk ij ij
s
3
1
=
ij kk ij ij
e
3
1
=

Here,
ij
is the Kronecker delta and is zero when j 0 and 1 when j i = . Therefore, we expect
that the plastic deformation of materials should be characterized only by the components of the
deviatoric stress and strain tensors.

For small deformations, the components of the strain tensor may be decomposed into an
elastic and inelastic part:

i
ij
e
ij ij
+ =

The, from plastic incompressibility, we have 0 , = =
i
ii
e
ii ii
we have
11 33 22
5 . 0 = = suggesting a Poissons ratio of 0.5. The constitutive behavior for
such inelastic materials is then written as

kk kk
K 3 = ,
ij ij
e e s ) ( = or
ij kk ij ij
K e e + = ) (

) (e is the shear modulus at any strain level and hence can be a function of the deviatoric
strain.

Exceptions to this idea of plastic incompressibility arise in the case of porous materials,
consolidated solids (granular materials, soils etc) and most polymers. Also, in the case of dense
solids near tensile strength limit, or under long term creep deformations, cavitation, and void
growth and coalescence, the idea of plastic incompressibility fails. We will examine an example
of the latter through the Gurson model.
Professor Ravi-Chandar 2

2. Bar under uniaxial stress
Consider a simple experiment: stretch a bar of cross-
elongation and construct the stress-strain curve as
indicated in the figure. The relationship between the
uniaxial stress and uniaxial strain is indicated as:

) ( g =

straight line parallel to the elastic line; complete
r
.
previous maximum stress level is reached. Beyond this
point, continued loading follows the function ) ( g = , thereby exhibiting an increase in the
yield stress with previous deformation; this behavior is called strain hardening. We will consider
wave propagation with such a constitutive law in a later section.

3. Yielding under Multiaxial Stress J
2
Deformation Theory of Plasticity
we may use the above characterization to determine what can happen under multiaxial loading.
This is called the deformation theory of plasticity. It is still necessary to introduce the idea of
plastic incompressibility and generalize the uniaxial stress-strain curve to the multiaxial case. Let

ij
p
ij
s ) , ( =

where is a function of the invariants of the deviatoric stress and strain tensors. The invariants
are given by:

S J s s J J
ij ij
det
2
1
0
3 2 1
= = =

Consider
ij ij
p
ij
p
ij
s s
2
= . Define the von Mises effective stress and the effective plastic strain as

ij ij e
s s
2
3
= ,
p
ij
p
ij
p

3
2
=

Then,
e
p
p
e

2
3
) , ( = . It is now assumed that the relationship between the effective stress and
effective strain is the same as in the uniaxial loading. The multiaxial stress strain relation is then
written as

= g()
Residual plastic
strain
r

Professor Ravi-Chandar 3
ij
e
p
p
ij
s

2
3
=

There is one major drawback in the above representation. Unloading is not permitted; hence we
get away with relating the total plastic strain to the current stress state. In fact, the loading must
be proportional. Variations in the load path are not allowed. However, in problems associated
with wave propagation, fracture, damage, shocks etc, unloading is unavoidable. Thus, we must
evaluate ways in which unloading may be included in the analysis. This results in the so-called
incremental theory of plasticity.

4. J
2
Flow Theory of Plasticity
In order to formulate the flow theory, there are three main ingredients. First, one must identify
the onset of plastic deformation; this is accomplished by the yield criterion. Second, one must
identify whether continued loading occurs; while this is trivial in the one-D case, in the three
dimensional case, this is more involved. Also, for continued loading, the relationship between
the increment in the loading and the increment in the strain must be prescribed as part of the
constitutive law; this is accomplished by the flow rule. Finally, the increase in the yield stress
with continued plastic strain must be specified; this is given by the hardening rule.

4.1. Yield Criterion
The most commonly used yield criterion is the von Mises criterion. This is based on the second
invariant of the deviatoric stress tensor reaching a critical value.

2
2
) ( k J f
ij
=

k is the yield stress in pure shear. The uniaxial yield criterion of Y J
e
= =
2
3 can be related to
the above by establishing the following relationship between the yield stress in shear and tension:
Y k = 3 . There are at least three physical interpretations of this criterion for multiaxial stress
state. First, of course, this correlates exactly with the uniaxial definition of yielding. Second, the
effective stress can be shown to be the shear stress that acts on a plane that makes equal angles
with respect to all three principal coordinates
and further that the normal stress on this plane
is the mean pressure. Finally, the effective
stress is the stress that does work in plastically
deforming the material. In stress space, J
2
= k
defines a circular cylinder that is equally
inclined to the three principal stress axes. This
surface 0 ) ( =
ij
f is called the yield surface
and the function f is called the yield function.
A two-D representation yields an ellipse as
indicated in the figure. Now, we can define
stress states. All current stress states are
contained in 0 ) (
ij
f , with equality holding
only for states that are currently yielded. In
f()=0

2

d
Professor Ravi-Chandar 4
other words, 0 ) ( >
ij
f is not admissible. The following conditions are applied to determine the

0
) (
0 ) ( <

=
ij
ij
ij
d
f
f

0
) (
0 ) ( >

=
ij
ij
ij
d
f
f

0
) (
0 ) ( =

=
ij
ij
ij
d
f
f

You can see easily how this works out in a one-D problem.

4.2. Flow Rule
The next task is to identify the relationship between the stress increment and the plastic strain
increment. This is done as follows: In order for the plastic work to be positive, it is necessary that
0
p
ij ij
d d . This requires that the plastic strain increment be in a direction normal to the yield
surface. Thus,

ij
p
ij
f
d d

=
) (

This equation is called the flow rule. Since the same function that describes the yield criterion is
also used in obtaining the flow rule, this is called the associated flow rule; however, there are
examples of non-associative flow rules as we will see later. As an example, consider the von
Mises criterion. Then we can evaluate the above expression to get:
ij
p
ij
s d d = ; then
ij ij
p
ij
p
ij
s s d d d
2
) ( = . Introducing the definitions of the effective stress and strain increment:
p
ij
p
ij
p
d d d
3
2
= , we get
e
p
d
d

2
3
= , and finally,

ij
e
p
p
ij
s
d
d

2
3
=

If the uniaxial stress-strain curve ) ( g = is used to obtain ) (
p
e
H = , then,

ij
e
e p
ij
s
H
d
d

=
2
3

The above relations are called the Prandtl-Reuss flow equations. The relationship between the
effective plastic strain increment and the effective stress is provided from uniaxial tests and is the
basis of the hardening rule.
Professor Ravi-Chandar 5
Uniaxial Stress State

0
11

0 ,
22 11

Mean Stress: 3
11
=
m

Deviatoric Stress Components:
3 2
11 11
= s , 3
11 33 22
= = s s

von Mises effective stress
( )
2
11
2
33
2
22
2
11
2
2
3
2
3
= + + = = s s s s s
ij ij e

11
d d
e
=

Prandtl-Reuss Equations:

) (
11
11
p
p
H
d
d

= ,
2
11
33 22
p
p p
d
d d

= =

Including the elastic strains, then, the stress
strain relation in uniaxial stress condition is
given as:

) (
11 11
11 11 11
p
p e
H
d
E
d
d d d

+ = + =
2
11 11
33 22
p
p p
d
E
d
d d

= =
Plane-Stress State

0 , , ,
22 12 11

0 , , ,
22 12 11

Mean Stress: ( ) 3
22 11
+ =
m

Deviatoric Stress Components:
3 3 2
22 11 11
= s , 3 3 2
11 22 22
= s
( ) 3
22 11 33
+ = s
12 12
= s

von Mises effective stress
| |
2
31
2
23
2
12 11 33 33 22 22 11
2
2
3
2
3
s s s s s s s s s
s s
ij ij e
+ + + =
=
2
12 22 11
2
22
2
11
3 + + =

12 12 11 22 22 11
22 22 11 11
6
2 2 2

d d d
d d d
e e
+
+ =

Substitute and rearrange to get

| |
12 12 22 22 11 11
2
2
3

d s d s d s d
e
e
+ =
Prandtl-Reuss Equations:

| |
12 12 22 22 11 11
2
11
11
2
) ( 4
9

d s d s d s
H
s
d
e
p
p
+

=
| |
12 12 22 22 11 11
2
22
22
2
) ( 4
9

d s d s d s
H
s
d
e
p
p
+

=
| |
12 12 22 22 11 11
2
12
12
2
) ( 4
9

d s d s d s
H
s
d
e
p
p
+

=
| |
p p p
d d d
22 11 33
+ =

Professor Ravi-Chandar 6
4.3. Hardening Rule
There are many forms of the hardening rule that are used
to capture strain hardening behavior of materials.
Mathematically simple forms are obtained by assuming
linear strain hardening, but a physically more realistic
form is one called the Ramberg-Osgood model. This can
be written as follows:

|
.
|

\
|
+ =
1
1
n
Y E

E is the Youngs modulus, Y is the uniaxial yield stress, n
is the hardening exponent and is a constant. Many other forms are used, especially for
problems associated with high speed impact. Now, the factor H in the Prandtl-Reuss flow rule
may be written as:

1
1

|
.
|

\
|
=

=
n
e
e
p
Y
n
H d
d

Homework: Reduce the J
2
flow theory equations to the case of a plane strain state.

5. Strain Rate Dependence in the Theory of Plasticity
The theory outlined above provides a description of plasticity when strain rate effects are
negligible. However, many materials exhibit a significant dependence of yield and flow
phenomena on the rate at which the deformation is applied. The physical basis for this is
typically derived from phonon-drag (lattice effects) on dislocation motion at very high speeds.
Experimental results indicate that the yield stress in many metallic materials exhibit a significant
increase beyond a critical strain rate as indicated in the figure. Such strain rate effects are also
important in applications where the temperature gets to a significant fraction of the melting
temperature; the temperature increase may
be as a result of operating conditions
(isothermal) or due to rapid heating from
the plastic work (adiabatic). Thus, in
addition to strain rate effects, thermal
softening effects may also have to be
included. In the one-D case, such a
material model may be written as:

) , , ( T g & =

As in the case of the strain rate
independent plasticity, this model must be
calibrated from one dimensional test data (such as the Hopkinson bar and Taylor tests to be
discussed later). For the three-D case, it is easy to generalize the J
2
flow theory to incorporate

n

&
10
5

Professor Ravi-Chandar 7
strain rate and temperature effects through the yield condition and the hardening rule. There are
many different empirical forms that have been used to capture the strain rate and temperature
dependence.

For numerical models, there are many other models that have been proposed; a short list is
provided below.

Lindholm ) log 1 (
0 eff
C & + =
Material constants:
0
, C

Campbell et al.,
(

|
.
|

\
|
+ + =
B
m A
n
Y

&
1 ln 1
Material constants: A, B, m, n.

Hartley-Duffy ( )
( )
p
q
o
B
F
T k
1
1
0
ln
1
(
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
+ =

&

Material constants:

,
0
, p, q, F
0
.

Johnson-Cook ( )
m n
e
T C B A * 1 log 1 ) (
0

(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
+ + =

&

Material constants: A, B, C, n, m. See Table 2 for constants.

room melt
room
T T
T T
T

= * Homologous temperature

EPIC ( ) | |( ) T C C C
e 3 2 1
log ) ( + + = &
Material constants: C
1
, C
2
, C
3

Zerilli-Armstrong
( ) | |( ) T C C C
e 3 2 2
log ) ( + + = & f.c.c metals
( ) | |( ) T C C C
e 3 2 1
log ) ( + + = & b.c.c metals
Material constants: C
1
, C
5

Slightly better correlations with experiments are obtained with the Zerilli-Armstrong model; also
thermal and strain rate effects are not decoupled in this model.

In some of these models, rather than use an yield condition explicitly, the relationship
between the strain rate and current stress-strain state is written directly as:

Professor Ravi-Chandar 8
ij
p
ij
f

=
) (
1
& ,
ij
p
ij
s
2
= & or ) (
2 ij ij
p
ij
s = &

where
i
represent material functions and
ij
represents a back stress (or equilibrium stress).
Expressions for
i
can be obtained easily. Define the second invariant of the plastic strain rate
tensor as
p
D
2
and the second invariant of the deviatoric minus the back stress as
2
J :

p
ij
p
ij
p
D & &
2
1
2
= , ( )( )
ij ij ij ij
s s J =
2
1
2

Then,
2
1
2
2
1
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
J
D
p
and
2
1
2
2
2
|
|
.
|

\
|

=
J
D
p
. The constitutive model is completed by specifying the
dependence of the strain rate on the current stress-strain state. For example, the Bodner-Partom
model prescribes

(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
=
n
p
J
Z
D D
2
2
2
0 2
3
exp

where Z is a hadening parameter. Z may be considered to be constant for strain rates in the range
of 10
6
and 10
8
s
-1
; for lower strain rates, an evolution equation is needed. Substituting through,
we get

2
2
2
0
3 2
1
exp
J
s
J
Z
D
ij
n
p
ij
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|
= &

See figure for an example of the results of Bodner-Partom model. Model constants for some
materials are given in Table 1. Rajendran and Bless found that only n needs to be modified to
account for temperature dependence:

T
B
A n + = or ( )
C
T n " 1 =

where A, B, and C are material constants and T* is the homologous temperature.

Homework: For the Bodner-Partom model, calculate the variation of the yield flow stress on
the plastic strain rate for OFHC copper.

Professor Ravi-Chandar 9

Professor Ravi-Chandar 10
6. Plasticity with Pressure Dependence
There are applications involving extremely high pressures or porous materials where the
influence of pressure on yield and flow behavior cannot be ignored. Many models have been
developed to handle such materials. The simplest is the Mohr-Coulomb model that incorporates a
pressure dependence on yielding:

m
Y Y + =
0

Here, is a coefficient reminiscent of the friction coefficient on slipping interfaces. For shock
wave experiments, a useful form is given below for the shear modulus and the yield strength:

( )
(
(

+ = 300 1
0
3
1
0
0
T
G
G P
G
G
G G
T P

( ) ( )
(
(

+ + = 300 1 1
0
3
1
0
0
T
G
G P
Y
Y
Y Y
T P
n

where v v
0
= is the ratio of the initial to the current volume. Numerous material constants are
involved; note that there is no strain rate dependence. For capturing void growth, Gurson
proposed a model based on cavity expansion calculations. The yield criterion for such materials
is described as

0 1
2
cosh 2
3
2 1
2
2
= + f
Y
I
f
Y
J

where =1 f is the void volume fraction. For f = 0, the Gurson model reduces to the von
Mises yield criterion.