Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311

www.elsevier.com/locate/msea

Verification of the prediction of deformation-induced anisotropy for

simple deformation modes: uniaxial state and pure shear state of
stress
C.H. Lee a, D.Y. Yang a,*, Y.-S. Lee b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, ME3214, Science Town, Daejeon 305-701, South Korea
b
School of Mechanical Engineering, Kookmin University, 861-1, Chongnung-dong, Songbuk-gu, Seoul 136-702, South Korea

Received 20 November 2001; received in revised form 28 February 2002

Abstract

Deformation texture with preferred orientation is developed by external disturbance applied to the grain during the deformation
process such as rolling. The formation of deformation texture is strongly influencing the mechanical property of the product, and
material anisotropy is observed from the deformation texture, macroscopically. Therefore, the proper consideration and analysis of
deformation texture is required. In the present work, the method for prediction of deformation-induced anisotropy employing the
phenomenological yield potential is proposed. The proposed algorithm is applied to the anisotropic evolution for simple
deformation modes, such as uniaxial stress state and pure shear stress state in X
/Y direction. In order to verify the effectiveness of
the method, the result from the proposed algorithm is then compared with that from the crystallographic texture analysis.
# 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Deformation-induced anisotropy; Barlat’s phenomenological yield potential; Crystallographic texture analysis

1. Introduction yield functions, stress
/strain (or hardening) functions

In the metal forming processes such as extrusion,
drawing, and forging etc. plastic deformation is one of
the major causes for change in mechanical properties.
From the deformation process, orientation of slip
systems is rearranged with preferred orientations. De-
formation-adaptive preferred orientation is also called
‘deformation texture’, and it is expressed by the material
anisotropy in deformed material. Material anisotropy
induced by deformation processes is affected to the
material property and it is major parameter of process
formability.
In order to use the material anisotropy in finite
element (FE) analysis, anisotropy is usually interpreted
as the material constitutive relations with various
methods. Conventional constitutive law which describes
plastic deformations of metals consists of three parts:
* Corresponding author. Tel.: /82-42-869-3214; fax: /82-42-869-
3210
E-mail address: dyyang@mail.kaist.ac.kr (D.Y. Yang).
0921-5093/03/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 1 - 5 0 9 3 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 6 1 - 2
and the associated normality flow rule. Up to date,
anisotropic characteristics are interpreted by selection of
proper yield potential implemented the material aniso-
tropy.
The method of examination of material anisotropy
has two major branches; one is a macroscopic method
using a specimen test such as uniaxial tension or
compression test, and another is microscopic observa-
tion of material properties, using orientation distribu-
tion function (ODF), pole figure. From the macroscopic
observation, material anisotropy is represented by
phenomenological yield potential using the anisotropic
coefficients, moreover, from the result of microscopic
observation, crystallographic orientation is represented
by polycrystal modeling based on crystal plasticity.
However, because of excessive amount of computational
time, the model based on crystal plasticity theory has a
limitation for the application and possible uncertainty in
prediction of complex deformation processes. More-
over, both of experimental approaches involve complex-
ity in application.
 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311
Therefore, the present study is concerned with devel-
opment of anisotropy and change of deformation-
induced mechanical property in deformed material
under the plastic forming process introducing the proper
algorithm for prediction of anisotropic coefficients. The
proposed algorithm is based on the prediction of
anisotropic coefficients in Barlat’s phenomenological
yield potential.
2. Background of the study
2.1. Anisotropy in metal forming
Deformation in polycrystalline materials, like most of
metals, is dominated by the slip system. During defor-
mation, each grain rotates so that active slip directions
become more nearly parallel to the axis of tension with
the result that grains become elongated in the direction
of flow. Deformation of polycrystalline metal is char-
acterized by integration of combined deformations of
individual grains.
Due to deformation, polycrystalline material shows
the non-random distribution of crystal orientations,
which is known as preferred orientation or texture.
Preferred orientation is important because of the effect,
often very marked, which it has on overall macroscopic
properties of materials, i.e. anisotropy. As preferred
orientation develops, the effectiveness of cancellation
diminishes, and the specimen shows directionality in its
macroscopic properties. A strongly developed texture in
a sheet, for example, may result in the considerably
different tensile strength in the transverse direction as
compared with that in the longitudinal direction. There-
fore, the anisotropic characteristic of materials during
plastic forming, has become of increasing interest as the
processing and use of materials are getting more
sophisticated, and more quantitative information is
required in all production and design stages.
2.2. Historical background in application of anisotropy
The study related with material anisotropy may be
categorized into two major branches. One is microscopic
approach by observing crystal plasticity, and the other is
related with experimental observation at the macro-
scopic level. The observed characteristics are so inter-
preted as to be described in the yield potential which
represents the material anisotropy.
2.2.1. Consideration of anisotropy based on crystal
plasticity
The major cause of mechanical anisotropy in poly-
crystalline materials is crystallographic texture, i.e. the
individual crystals tend to rotate towards certain stable
orientations during plastic deformation. Therefore,
303
when the crystal slip system is observed along the
deformation path, it gives important information in
material anisotropy.
Until now, there have been many research works to
describe their characteristics of crystal slip systems.
Some works describe the single crystal deformation
model [1
/5], and then, the single crystal model is then
extended and applied to polycrystals [6
/10]. The
method of approach is relatively accurate but requires
tremendous computation, and it may also result in
unreliable prediction for the analysis of complex plastic
deformation. They are major disadvantages for applica-
tion to industrial problems in the plastic forming
processes.
2.2.2. Consideration of anisotropy based on
phenomenological yield potential
It is well known from the plasticity theory and the
experiments that plastic deformation is described by the
yield surface. The approaches for formulating the yield
surface are divided into two major groups: One
approach is to set the elastic limit using the limit of
some physical properties. For example, von-Mises yield
criterion is based on the limitation of elastic distortion
energy, and Tresca yield criterion is based on the
limitation of maximum shear stress. There are many
kinds of other yield conditions for isotropic approaches.
Another approach is to formulate a proper yield
function, which describes the best approximation of the
data from experimental results or material constants of
material model based on the physical concept. In FE
calculations, the anisotropy of material is usually taken
into consideration through a phenomenological yield
potential. This enables relatively accurate predictions
taking moderate calculation time. Moreover, considera-
tion of deformation-induced characteristics such as
anisotropy has recently become more important to
simulate and observe the plastic forming process be-
cause of the latent anisotropy due to reorientation of
crystal slip system along the deformation process.
Therefore, nowadays, there are many approaches to
describe material anisotropy using the new formulation
of phenomenological yield potential.
This yield function describes the stress states corre-
sponding to yielding of the six-dimensional stress space.
The concepts of the yield surface and plastic potential in
the stress space are based on basic assumptions in the
classical theory of plasticity [11]. A common approach is
to assume that the yield function and plastic potential
are identical, and that the plastic strain rate is normal to
the yield surface, i.e. associated plasticity. One of the
first attempts to take into account the anisotropy of the
material through an anisotropic yield function was
carried out by Hill in 1948 [12,13]. Since then, several
anisotropic yield functions have been proposed i.e. by
304 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311

Hill [14,15], Bassani [16], Budianski [17], Karafillis [18]

and Barlat [19
/21].

2.3. Background and purpose of the study

In the phenomenological yield potential, yield surface

is described by the deformation characteristic such as
stress and strain-rate etc. and several coefficients related
to the material anisotropy. However, anisotropic coeffi-
cients are very sensitive to many parameters such as a
type of the deformation process and the degree of
deformation and so on. Due to dependence on diverse
parameters, the determination of coefficients is mostly
obtained by various macroscopic experimental methods
such as uniaxial tension or compression test with proper
specimen, and microscopic observation is also carried
out using the ODFs and pole figures. When the yield
potential is determined by macroscopic observation
using material test, then it is validated by comparing
the crystal plasticity model using the result of micro-
scopic observation. Therefore, texture measurement is
also an important tool among the traditional material
characterization methods. Texture data are normally
presented in the form of pole figures or ODFs. Both can
be used as inputs in numerical or analytical predictions Fig. 1. Schematic flow chart of the proposed algorithm.
concerned with forming and product properties.
However, experimental methods have some disadvan- yield potential for two-dimensional stress state is thus
tages. For example, when the deep drawing process is selected.
subjected to analysis using the finite element method
(FEM), the experiment to characterize the material
anisotropy is carried out for the initial material pro-
cessed by the forming process, typically rolling. 3. Introduction of the proposed algorithm
Although material anisotropy is observed and applied
to the next forming stage with a proper experimental 3.1. Introduction and basic assumptions in the prediction
method, it is difficult to acquire the information of of anisotropic coefficients
processing stages during the forming process. This
approach has a limitation to consider the material The method of prediction proposed in this study is
anisotropy, and it is only applied to observe the effect based on the prediction of anisotropic coefficients in the
of potential characteristics related with material aniso- Barlat’s phenomenological yield potential. Such predic-
tropy to be developed in the course of analysis for the tion enables an effective simulation of the plastic
next forming stage. forming process considering material anisotropy
From the Ref. [23], an extruded plate of the aluminum throughout the process allowing the implementation in
AA7108 alloy material has been investigated using the the finite-element analysis with considerably smaller
texture analysis and by the uniaxial tensile test. On the computational effort. The present method is a conve-
basis of the experimental results, crystallographic and nient method to predict and implement material aniso-
phenomenological yield surfaces have been calculated. tropy developed during the plastic forming process.
For use in the FE-simulations employing the present The basic assumption of the present study is as
anisotropic material, the Barlat’s phenomenological follows.
yield function is recommended. Therefore, in this study,
Barlat’s stress-based yield potential is employed to a) Yield locus is changed smoothly not abruptly.
predict anisotropic yield potential from deformation b) When material is deformed during the process, yield
during the forming process. In order to check the potential changes with various possibilities of varia-
proposed algorithm, simple deformation modes are tions in anisotropic coefficients.
considered, such as uniaxial stress state and pure shear c) The direction of the change in anisotropic coeffi-
stress state in X
/Y direction. Barlat’s tri-component cients is varied dominantly along the direction of
 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311 305

the yield surface gradient with respect to the

anisotropic coefficients.
d) The size of the change in anisotropic coefficients is
determined by the stabilization of the yield surface
between the upper bound and the lower bound.

Under these assumptions, the algorithm for predic-

tion of anisotropic coefficients is proposed as follows
(Fig. 1).

3.2. Algorithm for prediction of anisotropic coefficients

3.2.1. Basic introduction of Barlat’s tri-component yield

potential
Barlat’s phenomenological yield criterion is used for
many applications in forming of aluminium alloys. The
yield function describes yield stresses in general states of
deformation, which are relative values measured with
respect to a reference yield stress. A typical expression of
the yield function is given as follows:
F F(s) s̄m (1)
where F, s̄ and s are the yield function, effective stress Fig. 2. Comparison of isotropic yield locus.
and Cauchy stress, respectively. The exponent m is a
real positive number. Even if the plastic behavior of
materials is not linear, the associated flow rule given in s?xx  hs?yy
K1  (5)
Eq. (2) can be generalized to represent the behavior of 2
other isotropic and anisotropic materials. sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 
s?xx  hs?yy 2
@F K2  p2 s?xy 2 (6)
o˙ij  l̇ (2) 2
@sij
where a , h, p and m are material constants. This
In order to describe the plastic flow behavior of
anisotropic yield function has been obtained by sum-
orthotropic polycrystals, the yield function must be
ming up two convex functions, ajK1/K2jm /a jK1/
expressed in the six-dimensional stress space. It must
K2jm and (2/a)j2K2jm , and using the linear transforma-
have convexity and normality following the plasticity
tions of stresses. Consequently, it is a convex function
theory. From the current research works [25], hydro-
which generalizes the plane-stress yield function. Lege et
static pressure also plays a key role to the plastic
al. [20] showed that this yield criterion was particularly
deformation process such as extrusion, forging etc.
accurate for the description of the constitutive behavior
Therefore, the yield potential considering the effect of
of 2008-T4 aluminum alloy sheet. In this case, the yield
hydrostatic pressure should be considered in the future.
surface in 2D is represented as follows:
In addition, it must be reduced to Eq. (3) or to an
equivalent formulation in the isotropic case.  1
m m m
2 m
F jS1 S2 j jS2 S3 j jS3 S1 j  2s̄ m
(3) R(u) m m m s̄
ajcosuj  ajhsinuj  (2  a)jcosu  hsinuj
where Si (i/1, 2, 3) represent principal values of stress (7)
tensor.
In this study, special stress conditions such as a where u means a plane angle varying from 08 to 3608.
uniaxial stress state and pure shear state are considered. When m is 2 or 4, it represents von-Mises yield locus,
Therefore, Barlat’s tri-component yield potential is and when m is 1 or
it represents Tresca yield locus.
selected for application. Barlat and Lian [19] proposed The shape of yield potential is determined by the
a yield condition for the case of three-dimensional plane anisotropic coefficients, a , h , p and m and deformation
stress, which is very often assumed in sheet forming characteristics represented by stress, sij . When the initial
problems: isotropy is assumed, the yield potential on P-plane must
show a circular shape. However, from the deformation
F ajK1 K2 jm ajK1 K2 jm (2a)j2K2 jm
along the working path, the deformed material shows
2s̄m (4) the change in microstructural orientation and mechan-
306 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311

ical properties, and the shape change of the yield

potential conforming to the deformation is investigated.
The change can be predicted by employing the stabilized
yield potential which represents the current deformation
state (Fig. 2).

3.2.2. Formulation for prediction of anisotropic

coefficients
As mentioned above, deformation texture evolves by
various deformation processes. Even from the initial
isotropic condition, anisotropy is induced during the
forming process developing the specific directionality as
in extrusion and in rolling, etc. In this work, the
evolution of anisotropic characteristics due to deforma-
tion is studied. If all constants a , h, p and m were
known then the stress-based yield potential is the
function of stress only:
F F(sij ; ci ) (8)
However, the yield potential is treated as a function of
the anisotropic coefficients under certain deformation
i.e.:
Fig. 3. Change of yield potential with variation of parameter, t .
F F(ci ; sij ) F(ci ; sij  known) F?(ci ) (9)
@F m1 m1
When the deformation history is known from the (amjK1 K2 j amjK1 K2 j
result of FE-analysis in a certain deformation process, @p
the yield potential varies with respect to directional ps2xy
m1
constants, a , h , and p can also be known. Therefore, the 2(2a)mj2K2 j ) (12)
K2
prediction of stable yield potential can be implemented
by a proper searching procedure using the gradient The calculated gradient is assumed as a dominant
function @F=@ci :/ direction of change in anisotropic coefficients, and it will
In order to predict the anisotropic characteristics due be used to find the optimal values for anisotropic
to a deformation process, first of all, a proper initial coefficients. Under the assumption of the same stress
guess is required. In most of plastic forming processes, state, the anisotropic yield potential is bounded by the
the initial isotropy of the starting billet is usually Tresca yield potential and the von-Mises yield potential.
assumed. Using the initial guess, the yield potential is From this line of thought, the range of Barlat’s tri-
temporarily determined, and then, the calculation of the component yield potential is assumed as follows:
upper bound and the lower bound is required at the  
same stress state. In this case, von-Mises yield potential @F
RTresca 5RBarlat  Dci 5Rvon-Mises (13)
is used as the upper bound, and Tresca yield potential is @ci
selected as the lower bound. Searching is implemented    
between these boundary values in the direction of the
yield potential gradient with respect to anisotropic
@F
@ci

@F
@ci =k k
@F
@ci
(14)

coefficients. Eq. (10), Eq. (11) and Eq. (12) show the In the Eq. (14), k@F=@ci k means the length of one-
expressions for the yield potential gradients. dimensional gradient vector @F=@ci ; so, [@F=@ci ] repre-
@F m m m
sents a unit vector in the direction of gradient vector,
 jK1 K2 j jK1 K2 j j2K2 j (10) @F=@ci : From Eq. (13), the variation of anisotropic
@a
  coefficients is also calculated as follows:
@F m1 syy (sxx  hsyy )syy
 amjK1 K2 j  Dc?i Dclower t(Dcupper Dclower ) (15)
@h 2 4K2
 
m1 s yy (s  hsyy )syy where, Dclower and Dcupper are determined by Eq. (13),
amjK1 K2 j  xx
2 4K2 and parameter t has the range of 0
/1 (0 5/t 5/1). Then,
the anisotropic yield potential is only varied by the
m1 (sxx  hsyy )syy
2(2a)mj2K2 j (11) parameter ‘t’. In the iteration process, the solution norm
4K2 is examined from the calculation of yield potential with
 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311 307

Fig. 4. Determination of the optimal value of parameter, t .

various values of ti from 0 to 1. From the iteration, the
value of t is obtained by the minimized value of solution
norm. In the iteration process, the solution norm is
defined as follows:
jRi1  Ri j
enorm 
Ri1
Fig. 3 shows the change of the yield potential for
various values of t from 0 to 1 in X
/Y plane. In the
figure von-Mises yield criterion, Tresca yield criterion,
and Barlat’s isotropic yield potential are compared with
the anisotropic yield potential. The dotted line refers to
the paper of Barlat [20], and the coefficient values are
1.25 for a, 1.15 for h , and 1.02 for p , respectively. From
the comparison of the yield potential when the value of t
is 1 and the yield potential for the case of 2008-T4 alloy
sheet with the experimental observation, it shows the
(16) similar trends for the shape change in yield locus.
Fig. 4 shows the variation of the solution norm with
respect to the value of ti from 0 to 1 under the special
stress state like in Eq. (17), and, from the figure, the
value of t is selected as 0.97. Then, the value of t is set as
0.97.

Fig. 5. Change of yield locus under the uniaxial stress state. Fig. 6. Change of yield locus under the pure shear stress state.
308 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311

   
s?xx s?xy s 0 When the first quarter of X
/Y plane in Fig. 5 is
 0 (17)
s?xy s?yy 0 s0 considered (sxx , syy ]/0) in computation, the yield locus
is dominantly changed in the range of in-plane angle
From the above-mentioned consideration, a new
from 458 to 908.
algorithm is proposed to predict the anisotropic yield
potential considering the deformation characteristics.
The prediction of deformation-induced anisotropy is 4.2. Consideration of pure shear stress state
described by the value of anisotropic coefficients in the
phenomenological yield potential. The proposed algo- The following consideration is related with the pure
rithm is now applied to simple deformation modes, such shear stress state as one of the dominant stress states in
as uniaxial state and pure shear state of stress, and the the in-plane stress case. The stress state with pure shear
effectiveness and reliability are considered. The sug- is expressed as follows in Eq. (22), and the related
gested algorithm is checked by comparing the computed coefficient gradient is calculated as Eq. (23), and Eq.
results with the polycrystal model based on crystal (24). In this case, the change of anisotropic coefficients a
plasticity. and p is presupposed:
   
s?xx s?xy 0 t0
 (22)
s?xy s?yy t0 0
4. Application and consideration for simple deformation @F
modes 2(127 )t80 (23)
@a
@F
4.1. Consideration of uniaxial stress state 16(127 )t80 (24)
@p
To begin with, the proposed algorithm is checked for Therefore, the direction vector for searching, [@F=@ci ]
the uniaxial stress state. The uniaxial stress state is given is expressed as follows in Eq. (25).
as shown in Eq. (18) with only tensile stress in the Y -    
@F @F @F
direction. In this case, the direction of change in [0:1221 0 0:9925] (25)
anisotropic coefficients is calculated as Eq. (19), and @a @h @p
the change of anisotropic coefficients is predicted in the The calculated directional vector is applied to find the
case of coefficient h, only. range of variation in anisotropic coefficients. Using the
   
s?xx s?xy 0 0 isotropic initial condition, the range of each coefficient
 (18)
s?xy s?yy 0 s0
@F
 2mhm1 sm0 (19)
@h
Therefore, [@F=@ci ] is expressed as follows in Eq. (20):
   
@F @F @F
 [0 1 0] (20)
@a @h @p
The calculated directional vector is applied to find the
range of variation in anisotropic coefficients. Using the
isotropic initial condition, the range of coefficient, h is
shown as in Eq. (21).
h 0:96160:0426t (21)
Coefficient, h is calculated as 1.0029 by applying the
selected value of parameter t with the stabilized yield
potential (t/0.97). Fig. 5 shows the predicted yield
potential for the given deformation characteristics.
From the change in anisotropic coefficients, the pre-
dicted yield surface is changed dominantly along the
instability point. Therefore, the change of the yield
potential will cause the change in its normal vector that
is related with the strain-rate value in the FE-simulation, Fig. 7. Change of pole figure in the deformation process [22] (a) Initial
and it should be interpreted by the result of deforma- random orientation; (b) 75% uniaxial tension; (c) 75% pure shear in
tion-induced anisotropic characteristics of the material. 1,2-plane.
 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311 309

Fig. 8. Comparison of change in yield potential under the uniaxial stress state (a) Flow potential surface evolution based on crystal plasticity [22]; (b)
Change of yield potential on P-plane.

is shown as in Eq. (26) and Eq. (27) in terms of the
parameter t .
a 0:97330:2962t
p 0:96680:0364t
Anisotropic coefficients a and p are then calculated
similarly as 1.2606 and 1.0021, respectively, by applying
the selected value of parameter t with stabilized yield
potential (t/0.97). Fig. 6 shows the predicted yield
potential incorporating the deformation characteristics.
From the change of anisotropic coefficients, the pre-
dicted yield surface is changed dominantly along the
(26)
instability point. Therefore, the change of yield potential
(27)
will cause the change in its normal vector that is related
with the strain-rate value in the FE-simulation, and this
is interpreted as the deformation-induced anisotropic
characteristics of the material. When the first quarter of
X
/Y plane in Fig. 6 is considered (sxx , syy ]/0), the
310 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311

Fig. 9. Comparison of change in yield potential under the pure shear stress state (a) Flow potential surface evolution based on crystal plasticity [22];
(b) Change of yield potential on P-plane.

yield locus is dominantly changed in the range of in-
plane angle from 08 to 458.
4.3. Comparison with the result from the crystallographic
texture analysis
The result of the proposed algorithm is compared
with the result of prediction using material modeling
based on crystal plasticity. In crystal plasticity, plastic
deformation at macro-level is caused by crystallographic
slip at micro-level. Therefore, in crystal plasticity for the
crystallographic texture analysis, a proper physical
model is required that describes crystallographic kine-
matics by slip mechanism. The accurate constitutive
equation can be obtained by observing the slip phenom-
ena closely, and a crystal model is also required to
explain the hardening mechanism and the change of its
crystal orientation. Fig. 7 shows the change of pole
figure due to the change of crystal orientation by
induced deformation [22].
The change in crystal orientation results in the change
in yield potential. Therefore, the comparison of yield
 C.H. Lee et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A339 (2003) 302
/311 311

locus between the crystal plasticity and the proposed F Barlat’s stress-based yield potential
algorithm is useful to validate the proposed algorithm /o˙ij/ strain-rate component
for prediction of deformation-induced anisotropy. The /l̇/ constant in flow-rule
yield locus is compared between the different states of s, sij Cauchy stress tensor, component
stress. In this case, the yield locus is drawn in the P- m exponent of yield potential F
plane. S1, S2, S3 principal value of stress tensor
Fig. 8 shows the comparison of change in yield locus ci , c anisotropic coefficients, coeffi-
under the uniaxial stress state. Fig. 8(a) shows the result cients vector
obtained by crystal plasticity, and Fig. 8(b) shows the a, h, p components of anisotropic coeffi-
result obtained by the proposed prediction algorithm. In cients
the prediction based on crystal plasticity, the instability ? , s yy
s xx ? , s xy
? deviatoric stress component
point of yield locus along the s3-axis also moves RTresca, RBarlat, radius of yield locus on P-plane
continuously in the clockwise direction, and it is also Rvon-Mises
observed in Fig. 8(b). Moreover, the yield locus between
s3-axis and s2-axis shows more hardening characteris-
tics than other range, and it is also similar to the result
from the crystallographic texture analysis based on
crystal plasticity. References
Finally, Fig. 9 shows the comparison of change in
yield locus under the pure shear stress state. In this case, [1] G.I. Taylor, C.F. Elam, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A108 (1925) 28.
a good agreement of the proposed algorithm is also [2] R. Hill, J.R. Rice, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 20 (1972) 401.
observed when compared with the prediction based on [3] G.I. Taylor, J. Inst. Metals 62 (1938) 307.
[4] D. Peirce, R.J. Asaro, A. Needleman, Acta Metall. 31 (1983)
crystal plasticity model. 1951.
The validity of the proposed algorithm for prediction of [5] G.R. Canova, A. Molinari, C. Fressengeas, U.F. Kocks, Acta
the deformation-induced anisotropy is thus observed by Metall. 36 (1988) 1961.
comparing it with the result based on crystal plasticity. [6] A. Molinari, G.R. Canova, S. Ahzi, Acta Metall. 35 (1987)
2983.
[7] S. Nemat-Nasser, M. Obata, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A407 (1986)
343.
5. Conclusion [8] K.K. Mathur, P.R. Dawson, Int. J. Plasticity 5 (1989) 67.
[9] K.K. Mathur, P.R. Dawson, U.F. Kocks, Mech. Mater. 10 (3)
The proposed method in this study enables the (1990) 183.
consideration of deformation-induced anisotropy from [10] A.M. Maniatty, P.R. Dawson, Y.-S. Lee, Int. J. Numer. Meth.
Eng. 35 (1992) 1565.
the prediction of change of phenomenological yield [11] A.S. Kahn, S. Huang, Continuum Theory of Plasticity, Wiley,
potential that conforms to deformation characteristics. NY, 1995, 142.
Phenomenological yield potentials have been applied to [12] R. Hill, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A193 (1948) 281.
predict the presence of anisotropy in the extruded [13] R. HillR, The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity, Oxford
profiles in some research works [23,24]. In the present Engineering Science Series, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
1950, 318.
study, Barlat’s stress-based tri-component yield poten- [14] R. Hill, Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 85 (1979) 179.
tial is chosen to consider the deformation-induced [15] R. Hill, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 38 (1990) 405.
anisotropy for some deformation modes, such as uni- [16] J.L. Bassani, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 19 (1977) 151.
axial stress state and pure shear stress state. The change [17] B. Budianski, in: G.J. Dvorak, R.T. Shield (Eds.), Anisotropic
of yield potential due to deformation is described by the Plasticity of Plane-isotropic Sheets in Mechanics of Material
Behavior, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984, 15.
variation of anisotropic coefficients. [18] A.P. Karafillis, M.C. Boyce, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 41 (1993)
An algorithm for prediction of deformation-induced 1859.
anisotropy has been proposed and applied to simple [19] F. Barlat, J. Lian, Int. J. Plasticity 5 (1989) 51.
deformation modes. From the comparison with the [20] F. Barlat, D.J. Lege, J.C. Brem, Int. J. Plasticity 7 (1991) 693.
previous study based on crystal plasticity, the validity [21] F. Barlat, Y. Maeda, M. Yanagawa, K. Chung, J.C. Brern, Y.
Hayashida, D.J. Lege, S.J. Murtha, S. Hattori, in: Proceedings of
of the proposed algorithm is checked. The proposed the Fourth International Conference of Computational Plastiticy,
algorithm can thus be applied to FE-analysis of plastic (COMPLAS), Pineridge Press, Barcelona, Spain, 1995, 879.
forming processes. [22] E.Z. Kim, Y.-S. Lee, J. KSME (A) 20 (5) (1996) 1516.
[23] A. Fjeldly, H.J. Roven, Acta Metallurgica. 44 (6) (1996)
3497.
[24] A. Fjeldly, H.J. Roven, Mater. Sci. Eng. A234
/236 (1997)
Appendix A: Nomenclature 606.
[25] J.J. Lewandowski, P. Lowhaphandu, Int. Mater. Rev. 43 (4)
s̄/
/ effective stress (1998) 145.