GAMM-Mitt. 30, No.

2, 409 429 (2007)

Identification of Material Parameters for Inelastic

Constitutive Models Using Stochastic Methods
Tobias Harth1 and Jurgen

Lehn1
1

Fachbereich Mathematik, Technische Universitat Darmstadt, Schlogartenstrae 7,

64289 Darmstadt, Germany

Received 19 February 2007

Key words Viscoplasticity, material parameters, stochastic simulation, optimization.
The parameters of a constitutive model are usually identified by minimization of the distance between model response and experimental data. However, measurement failures and
differences in the specimens lead to deviations in the determined parameters. In this article we present our results of a study of these uncertainties for two constitutive models of
Chaboche-type. The models differ only by a kinematic hardening variable. It turns out,
that the kinematic hardening variable proposed by Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis yields
a better description quality than the one of Armstrong and Frederick. For the parameter
optimization as well as for the study of the deviations of the fitted parameters we apply
stochastic methods. The available test data result from creep tests, tension-relaxation tests
and cyclic tests performed on AINSI SS316 stainless steel at 600O C. Since the amount
of test data is too small for a proper statistical analysis we apply a stochastic simulation
technique to generate artificial data which exhibit the same stochastic behaviour as the
experimental data.
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

1 Introduction
Constitutive models are applied to describe the response of a material which is subjected to
a given loading history. The models of Bodner and Partom [5, 6], Chaboche [10], Krempl
et al. [27], and Steck [40] are typical examples of so called unified inelastic constitutive
models for isotropic materials.
Inelastic constitutive models usually consist of first order differential equations, which
describe the time-dependent evolution of stress or strain respectively. These equations
contain parameters which have to be determined for a given material by fitting the model
equations to experimental data. Normally, uniaxial experiments like creep tests or tension
tests with or without intermediate relaxation periods are performed. However, measurement failures or differences in the specimens have a great affect on the obtained parameter
fits. Therefore, the estimation of material parameters becomes a problem which has to be
analyzed by statistical methods. A precise statistical investigation requires a large data base
of experimental data. In [3, 7] statistical investigations of the deviations in the experimental data and the resulting uncertainties in the identified parameters are presented. However,
these studies are restricted by a rather small amount of available identification experiments.
To overcome the problem that the amount of test data is not sufficient for a statistical
analysis, we apply a method of stochastic simulation in order to generate artificial data on a
computer which exhibit the same stochastic properties as the measured experimental data.
Thus, a data base of artificial data can be build up which provides a large enough amount
of data. The stochastic simulation method is described and analyzed in detail in [21, 37].
Corresponding author: e-mail: lehn@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de, Phone: +49 6151 16 2188, Fax:
+49 6151 16 6822
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

410

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

The material on which experiments have been performed is AINSI SS316 stainless steel.
It is applied for manufacturing acid resistant parts for the textile industry and chemical
industries and which is used for medical and pharmaceutical applications.
The applied constitutive models and the identification experiments are described in Section 2. We investigate a viscoplastic model of Chaboche [11] and an extended version of
this model where the kinematic hardening variable proposed by Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis [25] is applied instead of the Armstrong and Frederick equation [2]. The models
contain 15 and 17 material parameters, respectively, which have to be determined from
experimental data. Three different types of experiments have been performed: Creep experiments at two different hold stresses, tension-relaxation tests measured at three different constant strain rates and cyclic tension-compression tests performed at three different
strain rates and two different strain amplitudes respectively. Each test has been performed
at 600OC with 12 specimens.
In Section 3 the methods applied for the integration of the model equations and for fitting
the optimal material parameters are briefly introduced. Integration methods for viscoplastic
models have been thoroughly studied e. g. in [23, 38]. For the identification of the model
parameters we apply stochastic methods. The studies performed in [38, 39] have shown that
combined optimization methods yield the best results. We present the algorithm PRINO
which consists of the global cluster-oriented method of Price [35] in combination with the
local optimization strategy of Muller, Nollau, and Polovinkin [33]. More research about
parameter identification can be found e. g. in [4, 9, 26, 28, 30, 31].
In Section 4 the results of the parameter identification from the measured data for the
two considered viscoplastic models are presented. The parameter vector determined simultaneously from the entire test data is called optimal parameter vector, since all available
information about the mechanical properties of the steel SS316 is applied for its identification. However, parameter fits to single experiments are also presented and the results
obtained from the two models are compared.
Usually, stochastic simulations are applied to produce a large amount of parameters as
input of the investigated model in order to investigate the resulting model responses. We
decided to generate artificial data as described in [21, 37], since it is the scatter in these
data, which produces the uncertainties in the parameter fits. A validation and robustness
study of the stochastic simulation method is given in [20, 21]. In [16, 32, 36] similar
applications of stochastic simulations in engineering are given. The identification results
obtained from the artificial data are studied thoroughly in Section 5. A large amount of data
is generated and material parameters are repeatedly determined. The identified parameters
as well as the corresponding model responses are analyzed. The predictions of the models
are then compared with the measured data. A similar study is performed in [22, 37] for the
constitutive model of Chan, Bodner, and Lindholm [14].

2 Model Equations
The equations of a constitutive model describe the relation between stress and strain for a
given material. Since the response of a material to a given loading is strongly dependent
on its mechanical properties, the model contains parameters, which have to be fitted from
experimental data.

2.1 Model of Chaboche

It is observed from experiments that if the absolute value of stress in a material stays below a certain limit Y , then the relation between stress and strain is not rate-dependent.
This behaviour is called elastic and the elastic strain is denoted by e . Usually, the stress
is assumed to be proportional to the strain, which is expressed in Hookes law of linear
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

411

elasticity
= E e ,

(1)

where the modulus of elasticity E is a temperature-dependent parameter for the stiffness of

the material.
When the stress in the material approaches the limit Y or Y respectively, materials
like steel begin to yield, i. e. when the stress is reduced to zero a certain amount of strain
remains. This permanent strain is called plastic strain denoted by p and the limit Y is
called yield stress. It is assumed that the total strain can be additively decomposed into an
elastic and plastic part, such that
= e + p

(2)

holds. If the evolution of strain is time-dependent and if the stress may exceed the yield
stress, then this behaviour is called viscoplastic.
If only overstress is responsible for the evolution of plastic strain, a simple model for
viscoplasticity can be given by a friction element with constant Y connected in parallel
with a nonlinear dashpot which obeys the equation
1

= K n .

(3)

The constants K and n are again free parameters. Hence, the resulting model for plastic
strain, a so called flow rule, is given by


n
f (,Y )
sign() if || > Y ,
p
K
g() = =
(4)
0
otherwise,
with f (, Y ) = || Y . Thus, in viscoplasticity overstress determines the plastic flow,
i. e. plastic strain occurs if the condition f > 0 holds. The function f is called yield
function.
However, from experiments with steel it is known that the yield stress is not a constant
value but dependent on the loading history. When a specimen of a material is subjected
to a tension test an increase of the yield stress is observed, which is called hardening. If a
tension period is followed by compression, then the material has hardened in the tension
period, but it is observed that it has softened in compression. The lower stress limit for
elastic behaviour after a tension-compression experiment has been carried out lies above the
yield stress which would have been observed in a compression test only. This phenomenon
is called Bauschinger effect. Thus, the elastic domain does not only change in size, but it
can also be translated. The translation of the elastic region is called kinematic hardening
and is dependent on the plastic strain, whereas the increase of the size is called isotropic
hardening and is dependent on the accumulated plastic strain. For a virgin material the
center of the elastic domain is initially zero with the limits Y in tension and Y in
compression. Let X(t) and R(t) with X(0) = 0 and R(0) = 0 be variables which describe
kinematic and isotropic hardening respectively, then the function
f (, X, R) = | X| R Y ,

(5)

defines the onset of plastic flow by f > 0 under consideration of hardening effects.
Another phenomenon which has to be taken into account when modeling the behaviour
of steel at high temperatures is a time-dependent recovery process. When a specimen is
subjected to a relaxation test, then a softening of the material is observed in time. This effect
must be considered in the evolution equations for the kinematic and isotropic hardening
variable, respectively. The influence of recovery on the isotropic hardening is a decrease
in size of the elastic region in time, whereas the influence on the kinematic hardening is
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

412

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

a time-dependent translation of the center of the elastic region towards the origin. The
recovery effect is usually negligible at room temperature.
The flow rule of a Chaboche model [11, 29] is defined by equation (4) with hardening
variables as in equation (5). Thus, the flow rule of this model is given by

n
| X| R Y
p
=
sign( X),
(6)
K
with
 = max(0, x).
In [12] the isotropic hardening variable R is defined by the differential equation
R = b (q R) p r Rmr ,

(7)

where the last term is applied for the description of recovery effects at high temperatures
as proposed in [12, 26], since the experimental data were observed at 600 O C. The variable
p denotes the accumulated plastic strain, i. e. p = |p |. The parameter b indicates the speed
of stabilization, whereas the value of the parameter q is an asymptotic value according to
the evolution of the isotropic hardening. In the case of a low plastic strain rate recovery
takes place which is controlled in its intensity by the parameters r and mr .
In order to obtain a more accurate modelling of kinematic hardening we follow the
advice in [11] to consider more than only one variable. We apply a sum of two non-linear
kinematic hardening variables X = X1 + X2 . Their evolution is given by Armstrong and
Frederick type equations [2]
X i = ci p ai Xi p i |Xi |mi sign(Xi )

(i = 1, 2),

(8)

where the last terms as in [12, 26] are considered for recovery effects. The values of the
parameters a1 and a2 denote the speed of saturation and according to these values the
parameters c1 and c2 are asymptotic values of the kinematic hardening variables. The
complete model is stated in Table 1.
Table 1 The constitutive model of Chaboche.

Strain:

(t) = e (t) + p (t)

Hookes Law:

(t) = E e (t)
n

Y
p (t) = |(t)X(t)|R(t)
sign((t) X(t))
K

Flow Rule:

Hardening:
X(t) = X1 (t) + X2 (t)
m
p
X i (t) = ci (t) ai Xi (t) |p (t)| i |Xi (t)| i sign(Xi (t)) (i = 1, 2)
m

R(t)
= b (q R(t)) |p (t)| r R(t) r
Initial Conditions:

p (0) = 0,

Parameters:

Y (Yield Stress)

X1 (0) = 0,

X2 (0) = 0,

R(0) = 0

K, n (Flow Rule)
a1 , a2 , c1 , c2 , b, q (Hardening)
1 , 2 , r , m1 , m2 , mr (Recovery)
A superposition of two kinematic hardening variables leads to a better description, since
each variable covers its own strain range, where it yields a suitable modelling. Hence,
one variable describes the hardening for rather large strains, where the other one models
particularly the transition from the elastic to the plastic domain. Hence, one variable is
stabilizing rapidly.
The model of Chaboche in the form as presented in Table 1 has 15 material parameters,
where Youngs modulus is considered to be a fixed value. Its inelastic part consists of a
system of four ordinary differential equations.
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

413

2.2 Extended Model of Chaboche

In order to improve the description of cyclic behaviour more complex variables for kinematic hardening have to be applied. In [25] an extension of the Armstrong and Frederick
equation is introduced which considers an enhanced dependence on the strain range by an
appropriate positive function g dependent on an additional internal variable S. The kinematic hardening equation becomes
a2
(9)
X 2 = c2 p g(S) X2 p
2 |X2 |m2 sign(X2 ), with g(S) =
1+vS
where the last term in the equation for X2 is again considered for recovery effects. Since
one hardening variable in the previously described Chaboche model stabilizes rapidly and
serves more or less only for modelling purposes we exchange only one of the two hardening
variables to obtain a new constitutive model. The flow rule (6) and the other equations of
the hardening variables stated in (7) and in (8) for i = 1 are not changed. The evolution
equation of the variable S is given by
p
(|X2 | S)
(10)
S =
p0
with initial condition S(0) = 0. In the case v = 0 in equation (9) equation (8) from the
first model is obtained. The full constitutive model is presented in Table 2.
Table 2 The extended constitutive model of Chaboche.

Strain:

(t) = e (t) + p (t)

Hookes Law:

(t) = E e (t)
n

Y
sign((t) X(t))
p (t) = |(t)X(t)|R(t)
K

Flow Rule:

Hardening:
X(t) = X1 (t) + X2 (t)
m
p

X1 (t) = c1 (t) a1 X1 (t) |p (t)| 1 |X1 (t)| 1 sign(X1 (t))

X2 |p (t)| 2 |X2 (t)|m2 sign(X2 (t))
X 2 (t) = c2 p (t) a2
p

1+vS(t)

S(t)
= | p(t)|
(|X2 (t)| S(t))
0
m

R(t)
= b (q R(t)) |p (t)| r R(t) r
Initial Conditions:
Parameters:

p (0) = 0,

X1 (0) = 0,

S(0) = 0,

R(0) = 0

X2 (0) = 0,

Y (Yield Stress)
K, n (Flow Rule)
a1 , a2 , c1 , c2 , v, p0 , b, q (Hardening)
1 , 2 , r , m1 , m2 , mr (Recovery)

This extension of the model of Chaboche has 17 material parameters (without Youngs
modulus) and its inelastic part consists of a system of five differential equations.
It should be noted that both systems of differential equations, the system for the Chaboche
model as well as the system for the extended Chaboche model, have unique solutions for
the loading histories considered in this paper. This was derived by Hans-Dieter Alber from
a result in [1]. More about existence and uniqueness results for constitutive models can be
found in [8, 13].
2.3 Experimental Data
The applied material is the austhenitic steel SS316, which belongs to the group of stainless
steel. The short notation is 1.4404 X2 CrNiMo 18 10.
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

414

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

The available test data consist of measurements from 132 experiments at a constant
temperature of 600O C. Three different types of experiments have been performed, which
are creep tests, tension-relaxation tests, and cyclic tension-compression tests:
Tension-tests with intermediate relaxation. The tension tests are displacement-controlled tests, which have been performed at constant strain rates of 103 s1 , 104 s1
and 105 s1 , respectively. After an increase of strain up to 1% a relaxation period of
15 000 s is initiated. This process is repeated four times such that a maximum strain
of 4% is reached. Each test has been performed with 12 specimens. In Figure 1 the
loading history (idealized) and the resulting measurements of the tension-relaxation
tests at strain rate 103 s1 are presented.
0.045

250

0.04

200

0.03

Stress [MPa]

Strain [ ]

0.035
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01

100
50

0.005
0

150

10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000

Time [s]

a)

10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000

Time [s]

b)

Fig. 1 Loading history a) and measured data b) of the tension-relaxation tests at strain rate 103 s1 .

Tension-compression tests. The tension-compression tests are displacement-controlled

tests, which have been performed at constant strain rates of 103 s1 , 104 s1 and
105 s1 with a maximum strain of 0.25% and 0.5% respectively. Every experiment
consists of 5 tension-compression cycles and has been performed with 12 specimens.
The loading history and the data of the 12 performed tension-compression tests at
strain rate 105 s1 and a maximum strain of 0.5% are presented in Figure 2.
0.006

0.002

Stress [MPa]

Strain [ ]

0.004

0
-0.002
-0.004
-0.006

2000

4000
6000
Time [s]

8000

10000

a)

250
200
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250

2000

4000
6000
Time [s]

8000

5 1

Fig. 2 Loading history a) and measured data b) of the cyclic tests at strain rate 10
mum strain of 0.5%.

10000

b)

and maxi-

Creep tests. Creep tests are stress controlled experiments, where the specimen is
loaded with increasing stress. After 10 seconds the hold stress is reached and the
resulting strain is measured for a duration of 100 and 1000 hours, respectively. The
creep tests with a duration of 100 hours have a stress level of 230 MPa and the creep
tests with a duration of 1000 hours have a stress level of 160 MPa. Both kinds of creep
tests are performed with 12 specimens. In Figure 3 the loading history and the data of
the 12 measured curves of the creep tests with a hold stress of 230 MPa and a duration
of 100 hours are presented.

3 Methods for Parameter Identification

In [38, 39] several methods for numerical integration of the Chan, Bodner, and Lindholm
model [14] are analyzed. The study consists of a comparison of an explicit Euler scheme,
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

415

250

0.08
0.07
0.06

150

Strain [ ]

Stress [MPa]

200

100

0.04
0.03
0.02

50
0

0.05

0.01
0

100000

200000
Time [s]

300000

400000

a)

100000

200000
Time [s]

300000

400000

b)

Fig. 3 Loading history a) and measured data b) of the creep tests with a hold stress of 230 MPa.

an implicit Euler scheme, a Runge-Kutta-Fehlberg method and a generalized Runge-Kutta

method. All methods were implemented with an adaptive step size control. It turned out
that the explicit Euler scheme is most efficient for integrating the constitutive model with
a loading history of tension experiments and that the generalized Runge-Kutta method is
most efficient for the integration with a loading history of a tension-compression or a creep
experiment. We apply exactly the same methods for the Chaboche models. The coefficients
for the generalized Runge-Kutta method are the ones of Shampine given in [34] and the
applied step size control is described in [19].
3.1 Target Function
In [38] and [39] different distance functions are studied and it is shown that the identification results are hardly affected by the choice of such functions. The L2 distance is given
by

k

dL2 () =

(yi yi ())2
(11)
i=1

where is a parameter vector which consists of the parameters of a constitutive model, yi is

the measured value at discrete time ti , yi () is the model response obtained from at time
ti and k is the number of all discrete time points. However, for simultaneous parameter
fits from different types of experiments it is important to apply a distance function which
yields comparable values for the fits from the different experiments. This is the reason why
the relative deviation of the model response to the data
k

1
d() = (
yi2 ) 2 dL2 ()

(12)

i=1

is applied. In order to determine simultaneously the distance between l different experiments and the corresponding model responses dependent on one parameter vector we
define the function G given by
G() =

(j) d(j) (),

(13)

j=1

where d(j) is the distance according to (12) between the data of experiment j and the fitted
model response, calculated with weights (j) > 0. A minimization of the function G yields
one parameter vector such that the distances between the data of the l experiments and
the model responses according to are minimized with respect to the weights (j) . For
an appropriate choice of these weights the number of experiments belonging to different
types of experiments should be considered, thus a choice of (1) = . . . = (l) is not
always suitable. In this work the sum of weights of all creep experiments, all tension
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

416

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

experiments, and all cyclic experiments, respectively, sum up to 13 . Each single experiment
of one kind of experiments gets an equal weight. However, depending on the focus of
a study, another choice of weights could be reasonable, as e. g. higher weights on long
time data would increase the prediction quality for these experiments. It is also possible to
include weights in equation (11) in order to put more emphasis on long term behaviour. The
distance function in (13) is the target function of the optimization process for the parameter
identification.
3.2 Controlled Random Search
In order to minimize the target function (13), we apply the controlled random search algorithm of Price [35] in order to find an initial parameter vector for a local optimization
strategy. In this section the algorithm of this global search is briefly introduced.
Let m be the number of material parameters of the constitutive model and let S Rm
be a convex set, which specifies limits for each parameter. In order to find a start cluster
of N > m parameter vectors, a stochastic search is performed, which randomly generates
M > N trial vectors in S. The start cluster C will consist of the N vectors with the lowest
function values of G. Since we apply a search area of the form
S = [u1 , v1 ] [um , vm ],

ui , vi R,

i = 1, . . . , m,

(14)

a trial vector can be generated component-wise by m independent random numbers uniformly distributed in [ui , vi ]. For every trial vector the target function G defined in (13) is
evaluated.
The optimization step of the algorithm is as follows.
At first, m + 1 vectors
(1) , . . . , (m+1) are randomly chosen from the cluster C and the center of gravity
gr =

1  (i)

m i=1

(15)

of the first m vectors is computed. The reflection of (m+1) at gr

r = 2 gr (m+1)

(16)

leads to a new trial vector if r S. If this is not the case the step is repeated. If
G( (m+1) ) < max G(C), i. e. if the step was successful, then the new trial vector is exchanged by the worst vector C with G() = max G(C), which leads to a modified
cluster C  . The algorithm continues by a repetition of this optimization step with C  instead
of C.
If the step of the algorithm described above was not successful, but the number of successes in relation to the overall number of steps so far is greater than 50%, the cluster
remains unchanged and the step of the algorithm is repeated. If the success rate is lower
than 50% a secondary trial point
s =

1
(gr + (m+1) )
2

(17)

is computed and the optimization step of the algorithm is repeated.

If a total number n0 of steps is reached the algorithm is halted and the vector in the last
modified cluster with the lowest function value of G is stored and is applied as initial vector
for the local optimization strategy. We choose M = 2500, N = 2 m and n0 = 9000 for
the parameters of this global search algorithm.
3.3 Local Optimization
The method for local optimization applied in this work is the stochastic method of Muller,
Nollau, and Polovinkin [33]. This algorithm receives an initial parameter vector start
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

417

which should be close to the location of the minimum of the target function. Initially, this
vector presents the center c of the search domain, where the optimal parameter vector, i. e.
the vector which minimizes the target function, is expected. The vector c is applied as the
first trial vector tr . Thus, initially start = c = tr holds.
The optimization step of the algorithm consists of the generation of a new trial vector
by realizations of normally distributed random variables. Let G be the target function as
defined in equation (13) and let
i = 0

G( tr )
(vi ui ),
G( start )

(18)

where i = 1, . . . , m and 0 denotes a compression factor for the calculation of the values
tr
i . Then the next trial vector is generated component-wise by independent realizations
of normally N ( ci , i2 )-distributed random variables.
tr
If G(
) < G(tr ), then the new center of the search domain is moved to
tr
c
tr
G( )
tr
tr

= +c
start ( ),
G(
)

(19)

where initially c = 1. If the vector

is not contained in S as given in (14), a new vector
is computed by (19) with the factor 2c instead of c. This process is repeated as long as the
new center of the search domain is outside of S, otherwise the optimization step of the
c
tr

algorithm is repeated with the new center

of the search domain instead of c and
instead of tr .
tr
On the other hand, in the the case that G(
) > G( tr ), then a new center of the search
domain is determined by


tr
c = tr + 1 G( )
(20)
(c tr ),
G( start )
c

and the optimization step is repeated with

instead of c .
If a total number n0 of steps is reached the local optimization method is halted. The
last trial vector with the lowest value of the target function is called the optimal parameter
1
.
vector. In this work we choose n0 = 4000 and 0 = 600
The method PRINO is a combined method which consists of the cluster-oriented method
of Price and the local optimzation strategy of Muller, Nollau, and Polovinkin, where the
best parameter vector resulting from the method of Price is applied as initial parameter
vector for the local optimzation strategy. In [38, 39] this method turned out to be much
more efficient than evolution strategies.

4 Identification Results
In this section we investigate the constitutive models by comparison of their model responses obtained by fits to the different kinds of experimental data. We also perform parameter fits simultaneously to all 132 experiments. The obtained parameter vector from the
entire data is called optimal parameter vector, because it yields the best description of the
data. A computation of an optimal parameter vector with the applied numerical methods
takes between 9 and 12 hours on a PC, whereas a parameter fit to only one experiment takes
between 2 and 5 minutes depending on the applied model and experiment.
In Table 3 the optimal parameter vector of the Chaboche model is given. Youngs modulus is fixed to a value of 145 000 MPa, which was computed by linear regression in the
elastic regions of the tension experiments. For this parameter fit to all experimental data
with the Chaboche model, we obtain the value of 7.72% of the target function G defined
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

418

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

Table 3 Optimal parameter vector of the Chaboche model.

a1

c1

a2

c2

3547.78 43006.94 314.07 15655.34 17.03 6.38 62.64 265.70 9.69

1

m1

m2

mr

6.11e-5 2.59 8.34e-9 1.47 3.36e-9 1.79

in equation (13). The evolution of stress and the evolution of the hardening equations for a
tension test at strain rate 104 s1 are stated in Figure 4.
The identified parameters from all 132 experiments for the extended Chaboche model
are given Table 4. The distance value for the fit with this model is 7.03%, which is clearly
better than the result from the fit with the Chaboche model. This fact can only be due to the
kinematic hardening variable of Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis. The evolution of stress
and the evolution of the hardening equations are given in Figure 4 for a tension experiment
at strain rate 104 s1 .
Table 4 Optimal parameter vector of the extended Chaboche model.

a1

c1

a2

c2

p0

3776.96 36920.24 674.75 24979.44 11.36 27.24 17.69 3.26 67.44

q

m1

m2

mr

93.99 32.52 3.82e-4 1.57 1.33e-8 1.08 3.01e-9 1.93

180
140

140

120
100
80
60

120
100
80
60

40

40

20

20

0.005

0.01

Stress
R
X_1
X_2

160

Stress [MPa]

Stress [MPa]

180

Stress
R
X_1
X_2

160

0.015

a)

Plastic Strain []

0.005

0.01

0.015

Plastic Strain []

b)

Fig. 4 Response and evolution of inner variables of Chaboche a) and extended Chaboche model b)
for a tension experiment at strain rate 104 s1 computed with optimal parameter vector.

The improvement from the Chaboche model to the extended Chaboche model results
mainly from the better description of cyclic experiments, what is shown in Table 5, where
the accuracy values of the parameter fits of the two models to all available cyclic experiments, tension-relaxation, and creep experiments are stated. It can be seen, that the kinematic hardening variable of Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis yields a better description than
the Armstrong and Frederick variables in the Chaboche model.
Table 5 Accuracy values of simultaneous fits to the different types of experiments.

constitutive model cyclic tension-relaxation creep all experiments

Chaboche

7.73%

3.98%

4.38%

7.72%

extended Chaboche 6.94%

3.63%

4.18%

7.03%

c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

419

200

0.08

150

0.07

100

0.06

50

0.05

Strain []

Stress [MPa]

Figure 5 shows that the fit of the extended Chaboche model to a cyclic experiment at
strain rate 103 s1 and strain amplitude of 0.25% lies very close to the data. The same
holds for the fit to a creep experiment with a duration of 100 hours. The Chaboche model
and the extended Chaboche model yield very similar model responses for fits to single
creep experiments.

0
-50

0.04
0.03

-100

0.02

-150

0.01

-200
-0.003

-0.002

-0.001

0.001

0.002

0.003

Strain []

100000

a)

200000

300000

400000

Time [s]

b)

Fig. 5 Fit of extended Chaboche model to a cyclic experiment at strain rate 103 s1 and strain
amplitude of 0.25% a) and fit of Chaboche model to a creep experiment with a duration of 100 hours
b).

250

250

200

200
Stress [MPa]

Stress [MPa]

A similar good result as for the fits to cyclic and creep experiments can be obtained from
fits to tension-relaxation experiments. The problem for these tests is, that the model has to
describe not only the tension periods correctly, but also the relaxation periods. In Figure 6
the result of a fit to a tension-relaxation experiment at strain rate 103 s1 is presented.

150
100
50
0

150
100
50

0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045

Strain []

10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000

a)

Time [s]

b)

Fig. 6 Fit of extended Chaboche model to a tension-relaxation experiment at strain rate 103 s1 .

It can be concluded that the applied numerical methods are appropriate for the parameter
identification and that both models describe single experiments of a high accuracy.

5 Analysis of the Parameter Estimator

Since material differences in the test specimens and measurement inaccuracies lead to different results for the identification of parameters, we interpret the process of parameter
identification as a statistical parameter estimation. We are interested in the mean values
and standard deviations of the fitted parameters. In order to perform many parameter fits
and to compute the desired values we apply a stochastic simulation method.
5.1 Stochastic Simulation
The identification experiments consist of scattered data and thus cause uncertainties in the
identified parameters. Since not enough test data is available for a statistical analysis, we
apply a method of stochastic simulation, where artificial data are generated which exhibit
the same properties as the experimental data. By a detailed time series analysis of the test
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

420

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

0.08

0.08

0.07

0.07

0.06

0.06

0.05

0.05

Strain [ ]

Strain [ ]

data it turns out that the behaviour of the scattered data can be modeled by appropriate
stochastic processes. We refer to [20, 37] for a detailed description. The stochastic models
of the data are based on first order autoregressive processes (AR(1)-processes). A validation and robustness study of the simulated data can be found in [20, 21]. In Figure 7 the
measured data of creep experiments with a duration of 100 hours and 12 simulated tests are
shown. It can be seen that the applied simulation method yields reasonable and appropriate
results.

0.04
0.03
0.02

0.03
0.02

0.01
0

0.04

0.01
0

100000

200000
Time [s]

300000

400000

a)

100000

200000
Time [s]

300000

400000

b)

Fig. 7 Measured a) and generated data b) of a creep test with a duration of 100 hours.

5.2 Analysis
In order to analyze the identified parameters artificial data of one experiment of each of
the eleven different kinds of experiments is generated and the material parameters are determined by a simultaneous parameter fit. This process is repeated 250 times, which takes
between 9 and 12 days computation time on a PC. We make the reasonable assumption that
repeated experiments with specimens of the same material are (stochastically) independent.
Thus, for generating the random numbers applied for the stochastic simulations as well
as for the stochastic optimization methods, we apply an inversive congruential generator,
which has better independence properties than the widely used linear congruential generators and is suitable for parallel processing. This type of generator has been introduced by
Eichenauer and Lehn [17]. In this work an explicit inversive congruential generator [18] is
applied, which generates pseudorandom numbers xi , i = 1, 2, . . . , by
xi a i + b (mod p)

(21)

with p = 231 1, a = 50000, b = 1, and where for any x {1, . . . , p 1} the number
x {1, . . . , p 1} is uniquely defined by x x 1 (mod p) and 0 = 0. For a parallel
computation of parameter fits on k computers it is necessary to generate k parallel streams
(j)
of random numbers xi , j = 1, . . . , k, which can be achieved by applying the generators
(j)

xi

a(j) i + b(j)

(mod p),

(22)

where a(j) = 50000 and b(j) = j.

The vector of mean values and the covariance matrix of the parameter fits (l) for
l = 1, . . . , 250 are computed by
250

1  (l)

250
l=1

250

and =

1  (l)
( ) ((l) )T ,
249 i=1

(23)

where T denotes transposition. The components of denote the mean values of the estimated parameters whereas the components of the matrix denote the empirical variances
of the fitted parameters.

In the following analysis the mean values i and the standard deviations ii (ii diagonal entries of ) of the estimated parameters for each constitutive model are presented.
Furthermore, the mean values are compared with the optimal parameter vector from
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

421

Section 4 by relating the distances |i i | to the standard deviations ii . Additionally,

the model responses to the parameter estimates are analyzed and compared with the corresponding stress and strain values of the measured data. As in [22, 37] the results are stated
exemplary for three reference experiments, namely the creep tests with a duration of 100
hours, tension-relaxation tests at strain rate 103 s1 , and cyclic tests with strain amplitude
0.5% and strain rate 105 s1 . The correlation coefficients corresponding to the parameter
estimates for each model have also been computed and a discussion of the results can be
found at the end of this section.
5.3 Analysis of the Chaboche Model
In Table 6 the optimal parameter vector from Section 4 and the mean values and standard
deviations of the 250 performed parameter fits are stated.
Table 6 Optimal parameter vector, mean values, standard deviations, and the relations

|i i |/ ii of the estimated parameters of the Chaboche model computed componentwise.

ii
|i i |/ ii
i parameter
i
i
1
a1
3547.8
3483.9
740.159
0.086
43007
38095
5094.5
0.964
2
c1
3
1
6.11 105 4.77 105 2.422 105
0.553
4
m1
2.59
3.38
0.737
1.072
314.1
300.5
48.357
0.281
5
a2
6
c2
15655
14894
2471.7
0.308
7
2
8.34 109 1.69 108 5.86 108
0.146
1.47
1.41
0.210
0.286
8
m2
9
K
17.03
18.45
6.898
0.206
10
n
6.38
7.13
1.456
0.515
11
q
265.7
245.1
39.135
0.526
12
b
9.69
11.45
3.115
0.565
62.64
62.70
6.078
0.01
13
Y
14
r
3.36 109 1.79 108 1.666 108
0.873
15
mr
1.79
1.56
0.230
1

Although the optimal parameter vector was determined from all 132 experiments simultaneously and the parameter estimates in this section are obtained by identifications from
artificial data of only 11 experiments, there is a good coincidence between the components
of the optimal parameter vector i and the mean values i .
The model responses to the tension-relaxation experiments at strain rate 103 s1 and
the model response to the optimal parameter vector are evaluated in Table 7. It turns out,
that the model response obtained from and the mean values of stresses at the end of
each tension and relaxation period of the model responses obtained from the 250 parameter
estimates (1) , (2) , . . . , (250) coincide well. The comparison with the mean values of
the measured data shows that the model of Chaboche overestimates the stress at all time
instants. However, the model responses at the end of the tension periods are very close to
the values of the measured data. The greatest difference between the stress of the model
response obtained from and the corresponding mean values of stresses of the measured
curves is only 8.91 MPa. The accuracy of the relaxation periods is significantly worse. The
greatest difference of stresses is here even 37.7 MPa. It can be concluded, that the model
of Chaboche describes the relaxation periods not precisely.
In Table 8 the model responses to the creep tests with a duration of 100 hours and
the measured data are presented. The mean values of strains of the experimental data are
underestimated at all time instants by the model responses obtained from the 250 parameter
estimates, except at the first time instant. The same holds for the model response from the
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

422

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

Table 7 Comparison of model responses and experimental data of the Chaboche model
for the tension-relaxation tests at strain rate 103 s1 .

model
responses
measured
data

model
responses
measured
data

time [s]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]
time [s]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]

10
149.39
161.20
139.78
4.408
149.48
141.81
153.13
135.37
5.707
30 030
195.87
208.02
184.97
4.013
194.71
189.27
201.06
180.70
6.214

15 010
134.07
145.12
124.46
3.877
133.41
117.18
122.50
110.58
3.843
45 030
180.32
190.22
172.76
3.215
178.42
149.29
154.76
144.55
3.354

15 020
175.42
188.41
164.20
3.977
174.44
168.63
177.91
162.15
5.056
45 040
213.92
227.84
200.70
4.601
213.00
204.09
219.46
194.84
7.247

30 020
159.94
170.96
153.09
3.147
158.22
136.88
143.18
131.24
3.608
60 040
198.31
211.47
187.49
3.927
196.66
158.96
169.38
155.45
3.921

optimal parameter vector. However, the differences between the predicted strains of the
model responses and the measured ones are small. The model of Chaboche describes creep
tests with a duration of 100 hours accurately.
Table 8 Comparison of model responses and experimental data of the Chaboche model
for the creep tests with a duration of 100 hours.
time [s]
mean value [%]
model
maximum [%]
minimum [%]
responses std dev [%]
opt vector [%]
mean value [%]
measured maximum [%]
minimum [%]
data
std dev [%]

50 000 100 000 150 000 200 000 250 000 300 000 350 000
6.007 6.100
6.175
6.244
6.311
6.376
6.441
7.401 7.525
7.623
7.714
7.802
7.890
7.977
4.906 4.967
5.018
5.067
5.116
5.165
5.213
0.4263 0.4362 0.4451 0.4542 0.4639 0.4742 0.4851
5.976 6.073
6.145
6.210
6.272
6.332
6.392
5.999 6.187
6.327
6.441
6.545
6.655
6.769
6.706 6.863
7.004
7.138
7.259
7.437
7.646
5.233 5.385
5.494
5.590
5.665
5.751
5.817
0.4827 0.5020 0.5178 0.5271 0.5405 0.5594 0.5967

In Table 9 the evaluations of the model responses and the measured data are presented
for the cyclic tension-compression experiments with stain amplitude 0.5% and strain rate
105 s1 . Again the differences of the mean values for the stresses predicted by the model
from the 250 parameter estimates and predicted from the response to the optimal parameter
vector are very small. The greatest difference is only 3.74 MPa at the last time instant.
However, the absolute mean values of the measured data are overestimated by the Chaboche
model for the last two cycles, although the predicted stress (except for the first time instant
at 500 s) is always between the minimum and maximum values of the measured data.
It can be concluded that the model of Chaboche describes all three types of experiments
with high accuracy except relaxation. The model responses from the parameter vectors
(1) , (2) , . . . , (250) coincide well with the ones obtained from .
5.4 Analysis of the Extended Chaboche Model
The mean values and standard deviations of the 250 parameter estimates obtained from
simultaneous fits to the artificial data of one experiment from each of the eleven kinds of
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

423

Table 9 Comparison of the model responses and experimental data of the Chaboche
model for the cyclic tests at strain rate 105 s1 and maximum strain of 0.5%.

time [s]
mean value [MPa]
model
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
responses std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
measured maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
data
std dev [MPa]
time [s]
mean value [MPa]
model
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
responses std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
mean value maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
data
std dev [MPa]

500
120.96
131.61
110.37
4.035
123.38
126.36
132.41
122.71
2.482
5 500
-204.68
-190.05
-218.52
4.777
-206.57
-210.41
-183.32
-225.32
11.669

1 500
-147.72
-138.24
-154.20
2.637
-149.53
-159.47
-143.73
-165.79
6.685
6 500
215.53
232.83
199.41
5.559
217.80
207.03
216.82
185.17
8.514

2 500
163.94
169.80
152.94
2.506
165.54
167.06
172.39
151.04
5.863
7 500
-225.35
-207.40
-245.85
6.316
-228.06
-224.34
-196.72
-242.33
11.715

3 500
-179.16
-167.90
-187.79
3.111
-180.65
-190.76
-166.89
-201.04
9.782
8 500
234.24
257.75
214.78
7.064
237.45
218.92
230.18
195.50
8.667

4 500
192.61
203.46
179.73
3.960
194.24
191.02
199.81
168.70
8.459
9 500
-242.34
-221.62
-268.65
7.813
-246.08
-234.61
-208.31
-252.65
11.231

experiments together with the optimal parameter vector determined in Section 4 are
stated in Table 10.
Table 10 Optimal parameter vector, mean values, standard deviations, and relations

|i i |/ ii of the estimated parameters of the extended Chaboche model computed

component-wise.

ii
|i i |/ ii
i parameter
i
i
1
a1
3777.0
3121.7
405.493
1.616
2
c1
36920
29887
6152.073
1.143
3.82 104 4.55 104 2.444 104
0.299
3
1
4
m1
1.57
3.68
1.712
1.232
674.8
548.1
68.061
1.862
5
a2
6
c2
24979
22590
2626.602
0.91
7
v
11.36
8.55
3.340
0.841
8
p0
27.24
28.26
5.574
0.183
9
2
1.33 108 4.12 108 3.314 108
0.842
10
m2
1.08
1.37
0.366
0.792
11
K
17.69
25.72
10.504
0.764
12
n
3.26
4.75
1.656
0.9
13
q
93.99
112.50
14.86
1.246
14
b
32.52
25.52
6.073
1.153
67.44
69.09
4.806
0.343
15
Y
3.01 109 6.10 109 1.258 108
0.246
16
r
17
mr
1.93
1.84
0.206
0.437

For a few parameters as e. g. a1 and a2 there is a considerable difference between the

mean values of the 250 estimated parameters and the corresponding component of the
optimal parameter vector. However, it must be considered that the parameter estimates
(1) , (2) , . . . , (250) are identified from only one experiment of each kind simultaneously,
whereas the is determined from all twelve available experiments from each kind. Thus,
extreme data have a smaller weight in the computation of the optimal parameter vector.
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

424

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

Moreover, there is a highly non-linear dependence of the model responses on the material
parameters.
In Table 11 the evaluations of the model responses to the tension-relaxation experiments
at strain rate 103 s1 are presented. The values for the stresses obtained from the optimal
parameter vector, except at the ends of the last two relaxation periods, are closer to the
mean values of the measured data than the ones of the Chaboche model investigated in the
previous section. At the ends of the tension periods the mean values of the model responses
from the 250 parameter estimates also yield better results than the ones of the Chaboche
model. However, the extended model of Chaboche also overestimates the stresses at the
ends of the relaxation periods. The greatest difference between the model response from
and the mean values of the model responses from (1) , (2) , . . . , (250) is 4.76 MPa.
Table 11 Comparison of model responses and experimental data of the extended
Chaboche model for the tension-relaxation tests at strain rate 103 s1 .

model
responses
measured
data

model
responses
measured
data

time [s]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std deviation [MPa]
time [s]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
std dev [MPa]

10
148.36
157.71
140.11
3.324
143.60
141.81
153.13
135.37
5.707
30 030
193.96
202.87
185.75
3.256
190.27
189.27
201.06
180.70
6.214

15 010
136.06
146.95
126.80
3.548
132.08
117.18
122.50
110.58
3.843
45 030
181.48
189.17
173.43
2.965
178.60
149.29
154.76
144.55
3.354

15 020
173.14
181.16
164.06
3.184
169.13
168.63
177.91
162.15
5.056
45 040
212.18
226.02
203.47
3.948
208.64
204.09
219.46
194.84
7.247

30 020
160.74
169.90
152.15
3.117
157.53
136.88
143.18
131.24
3.608
60 040
199.63
211.99
191.78
3.558
196.90
158.96
169.38
155.45
3.921

The description of the creep experiments with a duration of 100 hours is not exactly as
good as the description of these data by the Chaboche model. The evaluations of the strain
values for this kind of test is shown in Table 12. The extended model of Chaboche also
underestimates the mean values of the strains obtained from the measured data. However,
a comparison with Table 8 shows that the values for the strains of the two Chaboche models
at the last time instant of the responses from the optimal parameter vectors differ by only
0.144. The mean values of the model responses from the 250 parameter estimates differ
by only 0.106. Thus, it can be concluded that the creep experiments with a duration of 100
hours are described accurately by the extended Chaboche model.
In Table 13 the model responses to cyclic tension-compression experiments with strain
amplitude 0.5% at strain rate 105 s1 are stated. The values for the stresses of the model
response obtained from and the mean values of the model responses from the 250 parameter estimates coincide very well. At the ends of the tension periods these values fit
almost exactly to the mean values of the measured data. In compression however, the extended model of Chaboche underestimates the mean values for the stresses computed from
the measured data. The greatest difference between the mean values from the model responses corresponding to the estimates (1) , (2) , . . . , (250) and the mean values of the
measured data is 11.63 MPa. Thus, the extended Chaboche model describes these tensioncompression experiments with a high accuracy.
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

425

Table 12 Comparison of model responses and experimental data of the extended

Chaboche model for the creep tests with a duration of 100 hours.
time [s]
mean value [%]
model
maximum [%]
minimum [%]
responses std dev [%]
opt vector [%]
mean value [%]
measured maximum [%]
minimum [%]
data
std dev [%]

50 000 100 000 150 000 200 000 250 000 300 000 350 000
5.949 6.031
6.100
6.164
6.223
6.280
6.335
7.402 7.546
7.659
7.763
7.860
7.953
8.043
4.637 4.723
4.802
4.876
4.946
4.978
5.008
0.4484 0.4570 0.4646 0.4724 0.4806 0.4893 0.4984
5.956 6.027
6.077
6.123
6.166
6.208
6.248
5.999 6.187
6.327
6.441
6.545
6.655
6.769
6.706 6.863
7.004
7.138
7.259
7.437
7.646
5.233 5.385
5.494
5.590
5.665
5.751
5.817
0.4827 0.5020 0.5178 0.5271 0.5405 0.5594 0.5967

Table 13 Comparison of the model responses and experimental data of the extended
Chaboche model for the cyclic tests at strain rate 105 s1 and maximum strain of 0.5%.

time [s]
mean value [MPa]
model
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
responses std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
measured maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
data
std dev [MPa]
time [s]
mean value [MPa]
model
maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
responses std dev [MPa]
opt vector [MPa]
mean value [MPa]
mean value maximum [MPa]
minimum [MPa]
data
std dev [MPa]

500
125.21
132.69
117.76
2.885
124.77
126.36
132.41
122.71
2.482
5 500
-199.22
-193.92
-207.90
2.183
-199.71
-210.41
-183.32
-225.32
11.669

1 500
-149.40
-144.15
-155.87
2.196
-149.10
-159.47
-143.73
-165.79
6.685
6 500
206.82
216.20
200.21
2.717
206.91
207.03
216.82
185.17
8.514

2 500
165.76
171.99
160.88
1.944
166.35
167.06
172.39
151.04
5.863
7 500
-213.21
-204.93
-223.23
3.401
-212.85
-224.34
-196.72
-242.33
11.715

3 500
-179.13
-174.12
-186.24
1.856
-179.98
-190.76
-166.89
-201.04
9.782
8 500
218.62
229.47
208.78
4.150
217.77
218.92
230.18
195.50
8.667

4 500
190.11
198.04
185.28
1.893
190.88
191.02
199.81
168.70
8.459
9 500
-223.23
-211.95
-235.95
4.914
-221.88
-234.61
-208.31
-252.65
11.231

The mean value of the distances between the model responses and the measured data of
all 132 experiments with respect to the target function (13) is 9.0%, which is better than
the corresponding value obtained from the Chaboche model, which is 9.51%. This result
coincides with the one obtained in Section 4, where the extended Chaboche model also
yields the best model fits.
From the calculation of the correlation matrices of the model parameters it turns out that
high correlations appear only in a few cases. The parameters of the two Chaboche models
are the yield stress Y , the parameters of the flow rule K and n, the parameters of the
kinematic hardening equations a1 , c1 , a2 , c2 with two additional parameters p0 and v for
the extended Chaboche model, the parameters b and q of the isotropic hardening variable,
and the relaxation parameters 1 , m1 , 2 , m2 , r , mr . Among the correlation coefficients
of the parameters of each model we find only three relevant ones concerning the Chaboche
and four relevant ones concerning the extended Chaboche model. The highly correlated
parameters and their correlation coefficients are stated in Table 14. All other correlation
coefficients are relatively small and thus not of importance.
The parameters a2 and c2 of the Armstrong and Frederick equation of the Chaboche
model and of the Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis equation of the extended Chaboche
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

426

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

Table 14 Relevant correlation coefficients of the parameters of the Chaboche model (left)
and of the extended Chaboche model (right).

Chaboche

extended Chaboche

Parameters Correlation

Parameters Correlation

a 2 , c2

0.893

a 2 , c2

0.688

q, b

-0.817

2 , m 2

-0.701

r , mr

-0.891

q, b

-0.861

r , m r

-0.655

model, respectively, show positive correlations. When the Armstrong and Frederick equation without recovery term is integrated for e. g. a tension experiment, the solution
X2 (p ) =

c2
(1 exp(a2 p ))
a2

(24)

is obtained. This explains the positive correlation of the parameters, since a2 controls the
speed of saturation but the limit for increasing plastic strain is ac22 . Thus, for large a2 the
parameter c2 must be large as well (and vice versa) in order to reach the same limit. For the
extended Chaboche model this correlation is less than it is for the Chaboche model, since
instead of the parameter a2 we have a term containing another inner variable as described
in equation (9). A similar explanation as above for the kinematic hardening can be given
for the negative correlation of the parameters b and q of the isotropic hardening equation.
The solution of the differential equation (7) without recovery term is
R(p) = q (1 exp(b p)).

(25)

Thus, the limit for increasing accumulated plastic strain p is q and the speed of saturation
is given by b. For large values of b the values of q must get smaller, since otherwise the
resulting values of the isotropic hardening equation would be too high especially for small
plastic strains. A deficiency of our experimental data is the lack of saturating cycles for
the tension-compression tests. This means particularly, that the limit q of the isotropic
hardening cannot be determined accurately. Thus, the parameter q can also be used by
the optimization procedure for an adjustment of the model response at low plastic strains
and thus especially for an improvement of the description accuracy. For the negative correlations of the two recovery parameters r and mr (and also 2 and m2 of the extended
Chaboche model) an analogous explanation as above can be given. In the recovery term
r R(t)mr an increase of the exponent mr must be compensated by a decrease of the
factor r and vice versa. This explains also the high variance of the parameter r , since a
change by one standard deviation as stated in Table 6 and in Table 10 can be compensated
by a change of one standard deviation of mr .

6 Conclusion
In this work two viscoplastic constitutive models are investigated and their material parameters are determined by stochastic optimization methods. In Section 4 the optimal parameters obtained from fits to all available data are stated. Furthermore, the description accuracy of the two models are discussed and fits to single experiments as well as to all tension,
creep, and cyclic experiments are presented. It is demonstrated that the applied methods
work appropriately, although up to 17 parameters have to be identified simultaneously. The
same integration and optimization methods have been employed before in [22, 37, 39] for
the parameter identification of the Chan, Bodner, and Lindholm model. The constitutive
models describe the test data of single experiments accurately. The extended Chaboche
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

427

model yields the best fits to the experimental data and it turns out that particularly cyclic
experiments are described much better by this constitutive model. This is due to the kinematic hardening variable of Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis [25], since similar results can
not be achieved by the Chaboche model without this hardening equation.
Since there is not enough experimental data available for statistical investigations, we
present a method of stochastic simulation. This method enables us to generate a large
amount of artificial data with the same stochastic properties as the original experimental
data. In [20, 21] it is shown by applying nonparametric statistical tests that the results
for the parameter fits from experimental data and from artificial data coincide well. Thus,
for the analysis of the parameter estimates in Section 5 we apply only fits to artificial
data generated by the stochastic simulations. It turns out, that relaxation periods are not
described appropriately by both models, when other kinds of experiments are fitted simultaneously. This result was also found for other models in e. g. [15] and in [24], where
a similar Chaboche model is investigated. The description accuracy of the cyclic experiments is the best for the extended Chaboche model, which describes these experiments
very precisely. The presented mean values of the 250 parameter fits coincide well with the
ones of the optimal parameter vectors, although simultaneous fits to only one experiment
from each kind have been performed. The standard deviations of the identified parameters
give a good idea of the obtainable precision, i. e. they show the influence of natural deviations in measured data on the determined parameters. The yield stress Y can be estimated
quite precisely, whereas e. g. some parameters of the fast saturating kinematic hardening
variable X1 can not be determined with high precision. The analysis in Section 5 is closed
with a brief discussion of the correlation coefficients of the parameters obtained from the
250 parameter fits. The parameters a2 and c2 of the Armstrong and Frederick variable in
the Chaboche model and of the Haupt, Kamlah, and Tsakmakis equation in the extended
Chaboche model are strongly correlated. The same holds for the parameters b and q of the
isotropic hardening equation and the recovery parameters r and mr . The yield stress Y
for instance is not highly correlated to the other parameters. In [20, 21] a principal component analysis is presented which yields similar correlation results. Another application for
the stochastic simulations is presented in [20] where a design of experiments is performed
in order to find a combination of experiments which yields accurate parameter estimates by
low test expenses.
Acknowledgements The authors are very indebted to Hans-Dieter Alber for discussions on the
existence and uniqueness of solutions of the constitutive equations given in Section 2. Particularly, we
are very grateful to him for deriving the existence and uniqueness results in both cases, the Chaboche
and the extended Chaboche model, from a result in [1]. Furthermore, we would like to thank DFG
for financial support and Franz Gustav Kollmann for a very stimulating co-operation in SFB 298.
Additionally, we are grateful to a reviewer for his valuable comments and suggestions for further
research.

References
[1] H.-D. Alber, Materials with Memory: Initial-Boundary Value Problems for Constitutive Equations with Internal Variables, series: Lecture Notes in Mathematics Vol. 1682 (Springer Verlag,
Berlin, 1998).
[2] P. J. Armstrong and C. O. Frederick, A Mathematical Representation of the Multiaxial
Bauschinger Effect, CEGB report RD/B/N731 (1966).
[3] I. Babuska, K. Jerina, Y. Li, P. Smith, Quantitative Assessment of the Accuracy of Constitutive Laws for Plasticity with an Emphasis on Cyclic Deformation, Technical Note BN-1146,
University of Maryland, College Park (1993).
[4] Y. Bard, Nonlinear Parameter Estimation (Academic Press, Inc., New York, 1974).
[5] S. R. Bodner and Y. Partom, Constitutive Equations for Elastic-Viscoplastic Strain-Hardening
Materials, Journal of Applied Mechanics 42, 385389 (1975).
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

428

T. Harth and J. Lehn: Identification using Stochastic Methods

[6] S. R. Bodner, Unified Plasticity for Engineering Applications, Mathematical Concepts and
Methods in Science and Engineering 47 (Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York,
2002).
[7] H. Braasch, Analysis of Scattering Material Behaviour in Constitutive Models, Bericht Nr. 9375, Institut fur Statik der Technischen Universitat Braunschweig, 114 (1993).
[8] M. Brokate and P. Krejci, On the Wellposedness of the Chaboche Model, in: Control and Estimation of Distributed Parameter Systems, edited by W. Desch et al.,International Conference
in Vorau, Austria, July 14.-20., 1996, Basel: Birkhauser, ISNM, Int. Ser. Numer. Math. 126,
6779 (1998).
[9] O. Bruhns and D. K. Anding, On the Simultaneous Estimation of Model Parameters Used in
Constitutive Laws for Inelastic Material Behaviour, Int. J. Plasticity 15 (12), 13111340 (1999).
[10] J. L. Chaboche, Viscoplastic Constitutive Equations for the Description of Cyclic and
Anisotropic Behaviour of Metals, Bulletin de lAcademie Polonaise des Sciences, Serie Sc.
et Techn. 15 (1), 3341 (1977).
[11] J. L. Chaboche, Constitutive Equations for Cyclic Plasticity and Cyclic Viscoplasticity, Int. J.
Plasticity 5, 283295 (1989).
[12] J. L. Chaboche and G. Rousselier, On the Plastic and Viscoplastic Constitutive Equations Part
I: Rules Developed with Internal Variable Concept, Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 105,
153158 (1983).
[13] K. Chelminski, Mathematical Analysis of the Armstrong-Frederick Model from the Theory of
Inelastic Deformations of Metals: First Results and Open Problems, Cont. Mech. Thermodyn.
15 (3), 221245 (2003).
[14] K. S. Chan, S. R. Bodner, and U. S. Lindholm, Phenomenological Modelling of Hardening
and Thermal Recovery in Metals, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 110, 18
(1988).
[15] C. Debusmann, Untersuchungen zur Parameteridentifikation fur das phanomenologische Modell nach Nouailhas et al. und das kristallographische Modell nach Meric et al. am Beispiel der
einkristallinen Nickel-Basis-Legierung CMSX-4, Dissertation, Technische Universitat Darmstadt (1999).
[16] I. Doltsinis, Stochastic Analysis of Multivariate Systems in Computational Mechanics and Engineering, (CIMNE, Barcelona, 1999).
[17] J. Eichenauer and J. Lehn, A Non-linear Congruential Pseudo Random Number Generator,
Statistical Papers 27, 315326 (1986).
[18] J. Eichenauer-Herrmann, Statistical Independence of a New Class of Inversive Congruential
Pseudorandom Numbers, Math. Comp. 60, 375384 (1993).
[19] E. Hairer, S. P. Nrsett,and G. Wanner, Solving Ordinary Differential Equations I, (Springer
Verlag, Heidelberg, 1987).
[20] T. Harth, Identification of Material Parameters for Inelastic Constitutive Models: Stochastic
Simulation and Design of Experiments, Dissertation, Technische Universitat Darmstadt (2003).
[21] T. Harth, J. Lehn, and F. G. Kollmann, Identification of Material Parameters for Inelastic Constitutive Models: Stochastic Simulation, in: Deformation and Failure in Metallic Materials,
edited by K. Hutter and H. Baaser, Lecture Notes in Applied and Computational Mechanics 10
(Springer Verlag, 2003), pp. 139167.
[22] T. Harth, S. Schwan, J. Lehn, and F. G. Kollmann, Identification of Material Parameters for
Inelastic Constitutive Models: Statistical Analysis and Design of Experiments, Int. J. Plasticity
20, 14031440 (2004).
[23] G. Hartmann and F. G. Kollmann, A Computational Comparison of the Inelastic Constitutive
Models of Hart and Miller, Acta Mechan. 69, 139165 (1987).
[24] A. Haupt, D. Munz, W. Scheibe, B. Schinke, R. Schmitt, and V. Sklenicka, High Temperature
Creep and Cyclic Deformation Behaviour of AISI 316 L(N) Austenitic Steel and its Modelling
with Unified Constitutive Equations, Nuclear Engineering and Design 162 (1), 1320 (1996).
[25] P. Haupt, M. Kamlah, and Ch. Tsakmakis, Continuous Representation of Hardening Properties
in Cyclic Plasticity, Int. J. Plasticity 8, 803817 (1992).
[26] N. Huber, Anwendung Neuronaler Netze bei nichtlinearen Problemen der Mechanik, Habilitationsschrift, Wissenschaftliche Berichte FZKA 6504 (2000).
[27] E. Krempl, J. J. McMahon, and D. Yao, Viscoplasticity Based on Overstress with a Differential
Growth Law for the Equilibrium Stress, Mechanics of Materials 5, 3548 (1986).
[28] R. Kunkel and F. G. Kollmann, Identification of Constants of a Viscoplastic Constitutive Model
for a Single Crystal Alloy, Acta Mechan. 124, 2745 (1997).
c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

GAMM-Mitt. 30, No. 2 (2007)

429

[29] J. Lemaitre and J. L. Chaboche, Mechanics of Solid Materials (Cambridge University Press,
1990).
[30] R. Mahnken and E. Stein, Parameter Identification for Viscoplastic Models Based on Analytical
Derivatives of a Least-squares Functional and Stability Investigations, Int. J. Plasticity 12 4,
451479 (1996).
[31] R. Mahnken, M. Johansson, and K. Runesson, Parameter Estimation for a Viscoplastic Damage
Model Using a Gradient-Based Optimization Algorithm, Engineering Computations 15 (7),
925955 (1998).
[32] R. Mucke and A. Joksch, Probabilistische Design-Methoden und ihre Anwendung bei der
strukturmechanischen Auslegung von Turbinenschaufeln, Technische Mechanik 20 (1), 6172
(2000).
[33] P. H. Muller, V. Nollau, and A. I. Polovinkin, Stochastische Suchverfahren (Verlag Harry
Deutsch, Thun u. Frankfurt/Main, 1986).
[34] W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in C The Art of Scientific Computing, Second Edition (Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1994).
[35] W. L. Price, A Controlled Random Search Procedure for Global Optimization, in: Towards
Global Optimization 2, edited by L.C.W. Dixon and G.P. Szego (North-Holland Publishing
Company, Amsterdam, 1978), pp. 7184.
[36] R. Reuter and J. Hulsmann, Achieving Design Targets through Stochastic Simulation, Madymo
Users Conference, Paris (2000).
[37] S. Schwan, Identifikation der Parameter inelastischer Werkstoffmodelle: Statistische Analyse
und Versuchsplanung, Dissertation, Technische Universitat Darmstadt (2000).
[38] T. Seibert, Simulationstechniken zur Untersuchung der Streuungen bei der Identifikation der Parameter inelastischer Werkstoffmodelle, Dissertation, Fachbereich Mathematik der Technischen
Hochschule Darmstadt (1996).
[39] T. Seibert, J. Lehn, S. Schwan, and F. G. Kollmann, Identification of Material Parameters for Inelastic Constitutive Models: Stochastic Simulations for the Analysis of Deviations, Continuum
Mechanics and Thermodynamics 12, 95120 (2000).
[40] E. A. Steck, A Stochastic Model for the High-Temperature Plasticity of Metals, Int. J. Plasticity
1, 243258 (1985).

c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim