Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80 – 81 (1998) 591 – 596

Plastic and viscoplastic damage models with numerical treatment

for metal forming processes
E. Bellenger *, P. Bussy
LMCAO Uni6ersité de Picardie, Pôle Régional de Picardie, IUT, 48 rue d’Ostende, 02100 Saint-Quentin, France

Abstract

Metal forming processes are problems with a multiplicity of non linearities. There are physical non linearities (plasticity,
viscoplasticity, damage), geometrical non linearities (large displacements, large deformations), contact and friction non linearities.
Therefore, numerical simulations of metal forming processes lead to choosing appropriate constitutive equations and a suitable
algorithm to solve these problems. The work presented here treats these difficulties. Firstly, we proposed a stable elasto-plastic
damage model and a stable elasto-viscoplastic (visco) damage model for large transformations. Secondly, we use the large time
increment method in a version adapted to solve non linear geometrical problems with contact and friction. © 1998 Elsevier Science
S.A. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Plasticity; Viscoplasticity; Damage; Large transformations; Numerical treatment

1. Introduction be taken into account because of its preponderance

The presence of finite inelastic deformations in mate-
rials gives rise to many difficulties in computational
structural mechanics. This is the reason why the use of
finite element codes in metal forming industry, e.g. the
sheet metal forming or the forging, is still rare. The
modeling of metal forming processes involves a large
number of non linearities. Firstly, there are geometrical
non linearities with large displacements and large defor-
mations, in addition to conditions of contact and fric-
tion. There are non linearities in material behavior such
as plasticity, viscoplasticity and damage. Plasticity and
viscoplasticity have been well modeled in the past,
whereas damage has not.
However, numerical simulations of metal forming
processes, to be realistic, need to consider the phe-
nomenon of material damage. One purpose of process
optimization is to eliminate, or at least minimize, dam-
age development. This is the case for processes such as
extrusion, forging, rolling or deep drawing. Models
must therefore include damage in order to ensure that it
does not appear. On the other hand, in the operations
of sheet cutting, punching or machining, damage must
* Corresponding author.
over other phenomena such as plasticity or
viscoplasticity.
A large number of damage models have been devel-
oped in order to allow numerical simulation of struc-
tural damage. The implementation of these models in
finite element codes is difficult because it leads to
unstable calculations. Convergence becomes impossible
after limiting points. This problem results from bad
modelization of non convex free energy. Therefore, we
propose a stable elasto-plastic damage model and stable
viscoplastic (visco) damage model for large transforma-
tions. These are extensions of the elastic damage model
developed by Benkrid and Bussy [1], stable to general-
ized standard materials in its formulation for small
perturbations.
Another key problem in the metal forming numerical
simulation, concerns the computational algorithm. This
choice is fundamental because it is the principal reason
of the large calculation cost. The finite element codes
generally use Newton–Raphson methods for solving
non linear problems. These methods are incremental in
time and iterative on each increment. These are more
costly when non linearities accumulate. This is the case
for our problems, which involve several non linearities.
Numerical simulations of metal forming processes with
classical software lead to small, and therefore numer-

0924-0136/98/$19.00 © 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.

PII S0924-0136(98)00166-6
592 E. Bellenger, P. Bussy / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80–81 (1998) 591–596
ous, loading time increments, leading to a large number
of global resolutions.
Unlike classical incremental techniques, the large
time increment method that is used in this paper en-
ables these problems to be simulated without proceed-
ing by small increments. This method was first
introduced by Ladeveze [2] in the context of structural
mechanics. We will use a version proposed in [3], which
is applicable to non linear problems with geometrical
non linearities, contact and friction. This numerical
method does not cut the loading path into small incre-
ments, instead the whole loading path is considered as
only one increment. This strategy makes it easy to
integrate the limit points and gives good prediction of
the post critical behavior. This algorithm has been used
to simulate sheet metal forming [4] and sheet cutting
[5].
2. Constitutive equations including damage
In order to model changes associated with damage,
some approaches were developed. We can distinguish
two major classes: (i) the phenomenological approach
starting with the model of Kachanov, (ii) a microscale–
macroscale approach that intends to construct models
at a macroscale using some considerations from the
microscale.
In this work the phenomenological approach is cho-
sen by using an internal variable to describe the conse-
quences of damage evolution on the elastic properties,
as well as on the plastic or viscoplastic flow properties,
of the material. The scalar damage variable D used by
Lemaitre and Chaboche [6] and many others authors, is
interpreted as the effective area reduction caused by the
distributed microscopic cracks and cavities due to mate-
rial damage. In this work we introduce a new scalar
continuous variable, X, related to the usual damage
variable D bounded by 0 and 1.
D 1
X= [ 1−D =
1− D 1+X
dD must verify the condition D +dD B1, then dX is
not bounded, which avoids numerical problems. X
takes values within the range 0 (for virgin material) to
convex written with the stress tensor ensures stability.
We choose the non linear geometric model proposed in
[7]. It introduces a local rotation R defining the co-rota-
tional configuration. We have to write the damage
model into this co-rotational configuration of the geo-
metrical model. In the following, we begin to present
constitutive laws in small perturbations before we
present their extensions to non linear geometry.
2.1. Stable elastic damage model
The damage model is developed within the general
framework of continuum thermodynamics of irre-
versible processes. To formulate the constitutive equa-
tion, it is necessary to define the free energy and
damage potential as functions of the internal state
variables. This presentation assumes elasticity coupled
with isotropic damage as an isothermal process also.
The model is defined by the specific free energy c(oe, X)
in the following form:
rc(oe, X)= rc1(oe, X)+ rc2(X) (2)
where r denotes the material density, X is the scalar
damage variable; it is the internal variable associated
with the variable Y. oe is the elastic strain tensor.
rc1(oe, X)= 1/2 tr(oe(Ce/1+X)oe) is the elastic damage
free energy. Ce denotes the linear elastic tensor. c2(X) is
a convex function.
The associated thermodynamics forces are:
(c 1 Ce
s= r = o
(oe 1+ X e
(c 1 (c 1 Ce
Y= r + r 2 = − tr oe o + Z(X) (3)
(X (X 2 (1+X)2 e
where s denotes the Cauchy stress tensor; tr( · ) is the
trace of a tensor. From Eq. (3), Y takes the following
(1) form:
1
e s)
Y= Z(X)− tr(sC − 1
(4)
2
The second principle of thermodynamics invites us to
 (corresponding to the complete failure).
In this paper, constitutive equations are based upon
the stable elastic damage model [1] developed in small
perturbations. This convex model belonging to a set of
generalized standard materials allows us to have stable
calculations when a point reaches a critical damage
level. The basic idea in the formulation of this model is
the following. The damage affects essentially the mate-
rial elastic stiffness. It is the coupling between the
model and geometrical non linearities which enables
strain softening to occur. The choice of a damage
write and verify the Clausius–Duhem inequality. To
make a standard generalized model [8] we define a
damage potential of dissipation 8*X (Y). The dissipation
is positive when we introduce the convex potential of
dissipation, which is chosen as the indicator function of
the damage convex defined by the yield function:
1
e s)− Z(X)− Z0 50
fX (Y)= − Y− Z0 = tr(sC − 1
2
(5)
Z0 ] 0 is the initial damage threshold.
 E. Bellenger, P. Bussy / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80–81 (1998) 591–596 593

Fig. 3. Mesh and boundary conditions.

where rc3(p) is a convex function.

The associated thermodynamics forces are:
Fig. 1. Co-rotational model. (c1 Ce (c3
s=r = oe, R= r
(oe 1+ X (p
Damage occurs only when the state of stress reaches
the actual yield function. This corresponds to the satis- Y= r
(c2
+r
(c1 1
=Z(X)− tr oe
Ce
o
  (8)
faction of the yield criterion fX =0. Damage continues (X (X 2 (1+X)2 e
to grow if the yield is continuously satisfied, i.e. if
f: X = 0. 2.2.1. Elasto-plastic damage model
The complementary evolution law is: For the elasto-plastic constitutive law (oin =op), we
use the Prandtl–Reuss behavior law and the damage
(fX
X: = − lX = lX (6) elastic model presented above. We formulate the von
(Y Mises flow criterion in terms of Cauchy stress tensor:
The expression of the multiplier lX is deduced from fp = seq − R(p)− R0 5 0, (9)
the consistency condition fX =0 and f: X =0.
where p; = t0
2/3o; p : o; p, p the accumulated plastic
2.2. Stable inelastic damage models strain is the internal variable associated with the
isotropic hardening variable R. seq =
This presentation assumes elasticity coupled with
32 tr(dev s dev s) with dev s the deviatoric part of the
isotropic damage. We consider only isotropic harden- Cauchy stress tensor. R0 denotes the initial plastic
ing. If o, oe and oin denote, respectively, the total, the hardening threshold.
elastic and the inelastic strain tensors we write o =oe + The second principle of thermodynamics invites us to
oin. The constitutive laws of the model are determined write and verify the Clausius–Duhem inequality. From
by introducing the free energy function c(oe, X, p): Eqs. (7) and (8) this inequality takes the following
form:
rc(oe, X, p)= rc1(oe, X) + rc2(X) + c3(p) (7)
tr(so; p)− Rp; − YX: ] 0, (10)
If we assume damage and plastic processes dissipate
independently (Eq. (10)) must be verified in two parts.
To make a standard generalized model we define a
potential of dissipation 8*(s, R, Y) composed of two
terms. 8*X (Y) concerns the damage dissipation and
8*p(s, R) concerns the plastic dissipation. If absolute

Fig. 2. Comparison of the experimentally obtained stress–time with

predicted theoretically for IN100 in temperature of 1000°C. Fig. 4. Isostress.
594 E. Bellenger, P. Bussy / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80–81 (1998) 591–596

rate independence is sought when modeling the behav- From the computational point of view, the above
ior, Eqs. (5) and (6) are still valid and the plastic constitutive equations (Eqs. (5) and (9)) can be inte-
potential can be chosen as the indicator function of the grated using an elastic predictor/plastic damage correc-
elasticity convex fp. tor algorithm. We assume that at time tn the state
The complementary evolution laws are: variables are known. Given Dun + 1, the displacement
between tn and tn + 1, we can perform an elastic predic-
(fp 3 dev s (fp
o; p = lp = lp , p; = −lp = lp (11) tor, assuming that the plastic and the damage variables
(s 2 seq (R remain frozen. The trial elastic Cauchy stress can be
(fX computed by Eq. (8). If the stress lies outside the elastic
X: = − lX = lX (12) domain fp and the damage domain fX, a damage-plastic
(Y
corrector step is then carried out using a classical radial
where for i= p or X, li ]0 and lifi =0. The plastic and return algorithm [10].
the damage consistency parameters are determined by For the integration of time-dependent behavior laws
the consistency conditions f: i =0 and fi =0. (Eqs. (14) and (16)), the Euler family method is used. It
consists of the following equation:
2.2.2. Elasto-6iscoplastic (6isco) damage model
xtn + 1 = xtn + [(1− u)x; tn + ux; tn + 1]Dt (17)
Unlike plasticity, viscoplasticity (oin =ovp) is a time-
dependent phenomenon. Therefore, a time-dependent Dt is the time increment between tn and tn + 1, u[0, 1],
yield function is introduced, and the stress may depart x {ovp, p, X given by Eq. (16)}.
from the elastic domain. Eqs. (7) and (8) are still valid. Damage and inelastic phenomena evolutions lead to
For viscoplastic dissipation the following particular the definition Cauchy stress tensor at t+ Dt by:
form of 8*vp(s, R) has been proposed in [9]:

8*vp(s, R)=
#
K seq −R(p) − R0 $ n+1
(13)
st + Dt =
Ce
1+ Xt + DX
[Do − Doin + st (1+Xt )] (18)
n +1 K +

K and n are material parameters,  ·  + denotes the 3. Geometric model

positive part.
If we consider for example, that for a constant
applied load the damage evolution is not directly linked
with time as for viscoplasticity, we use Eqs. (5) and (6).
Thus, it is the non linear geometrical phenomenon
coupled with viscoplasticity which allows damage to
grow. In that case the viscoplastic strain rate and the
damage rate take the following forms:
(*vp(s, R) 3 dev s
o; vp = = p; ,
We consider an initial configuration V0. Loads Fd,
are applied to a part (2V0 on its boundary and displace-
ments ud on the part (1V0. The third part (3V0 repre-
sents the set of points that comes into contact. Body
forces density fd is also applied. M0 is a point on V0
which we find at M at the instant t. M is defined by
M= M0 + u(M0, t), where u(M0, t) is the displacement
field (Fig. 1).
Generally, the variables used to describe the constitu-
tives laws in large displacements are not objective. To

# $
(s 2 seq
be objective we choose the non linear geometrical
(* (s, R) s −R(p) −R0 n
model proposed in [7]. It introduces in all points of the
p; = vp = eq (14)
(R K + domain a local rotation R defining the co-rotational
(f referential. This rotation locally transforms the configu-
X: = − l X X ration of V into a rotated configuration V (Fig. 1). R is
(Y
associated to the rotation rate W and defined by the
differential equation and the initial condition:
In order to describe a time-dependent damage evolu-
tion, we introduce a time-dependent yield function for
Á
damage. As for viscoplastic flow, we choose the follow- Ã: T 1
R R= W= (L−L T)
ing particular form for 8*X (Y): Í 2 (19)
Ã
8*X (Y)=
1
Y− Z0N++ 1 (15) ÄR t = 0 = I
N+ 1
Eq. (14) is still valid and damage rate is given by: where W is the rotation rate, L= F: F − 1, F=I+du/

X: =
# 1
e s) −Z(X)− Z0
tr(sC − 1 $ N
(16)
dM0 is the gradient tensor. With this rotation we obtain
the strain rate and the stress tensor in the rotated
2 + configuration.
 E. Bellenger, P. Bussy / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80–81 (1998) 591–596 595

!t =RtR T
(20)
Find s= (u, F, 7, P, q) defined on [0, T]× V checking
Öt[0, T]:
D = RDR T
— (F, 7) kinematically admissible:

t and D denote, respectively, the Kirchhoff stress and du

the strain rate in the rotated configuration. D= F(u)= I+ , 7= u( 3V0, u( 1V0 = ud (21)
dM0
(1/2)(L + L T). Furthermore, t; , the Kirchhoff stress rate
in the rotated configuration, takes the form: t; =Rt JR T,
where t J, denotes the Jaumann derivative of the Kirch-
hoff stress.
We obtain the constitutive laws defined in non linear
geometry by writing into the co-rotational configura-
tion of the geometrical model between t; and D, the
models developed above in small perturbations. Then,
material behavior laws are objective constitutive laws.
4. Numerical treatment
The development of reliable numerical procedures to
predict materials behavior in metal forming processes,
has encountered many serious obstacles. Together with
the non linearity of the material, other important ef-
fects like the unsteady nature of the process, the large
magnitude of the strains and the importance of contact
and friction make the study of metal forming processes
so complex that is analysis justifies the use of sophisti-
cated finite element numerical algorithm, which leads to
large scale computer requirements. Therefore, in order
to reduce the calculation cost we use the large time
increment method [11]. In particular, the version due to
Bussy et al. [3], adapted to solve non linear problems
with contact and friction. The iterative pattern of this
numerical method gives for each iteration a new estima-
tion solution for all the loading history.
4.1. Presentation of the problem
The specificity of a geometrical problem with contact
and friction is the change of the boundary conditions
during the loading. Using a classical incremental al-
gorithm, leads to explicitly determine the boundary
conditions at each increment. To use the large time
increment method it is not possible to conserve in the
global resolution such boundary conditions that are
non linear. To extend the algorithm to contact prob-
lems, the strategy consists of releasing these boundary
conditions and treating these equations as local consti-
tutive relations. Two variables are defined: 7 the dis-
placement vector on (3V0 and q the loading vector on
(3V0. With this strategy, the contact and friction are
treated implicitly. Therefore, a geometrical non linear
problem with contact and friction can be written on the
following form:
— (P, q) statically admissible: Öu*U, U= {u( 1V0 =0}
& tr(P TF*) dV0 +
& q7* d(3V0
& &
V0 ( 3V0
= Fdu* d(2V0 + fdu* dV0 (22)
( 2V0 V0
—Constitutive laws:
F: t = A(Pt, t5 t) and R(q, 7; ) (23)
where A is a material characteristic function and R
represents the contact and friction relations. P=JsF−T
is the first Piola Kirchhoff stress tensor; J= det F.
4.2. The large time increment method
This problem formulation displays, on one hand, (i)
the admissibility relations, Eqs. (21) and (22), which are
linear but not locally, and on the other hand (ii) the
local constitutive relations (Eq. (23)) which involves all
the non linearities (geometrical, material, contact and
friction) of the problem. (i) is called Ad and (ii) is called
G.
This presentation allows us to find the mathematical
framework of the large time increment method. This
version of the algorithm implemented in our finite
element code OPTIFIA uses the variable rates s=
(u; , F: , 7; , P: , q; ). Each iteration is split into two steps.
Firstly, a non linear and local step that enables us to
calculate a solution ŝG (verifying the behavior laws).
Secondly, a global and linear step verifying the kine-
matic and the static admissibilities gives a solution
sn + 1 Ad. The solution of the problem is se  Ad SG.
Therefore, the two steps of the algorithm are
Local step: From sn = (F: n, 7; n, P: n, q; n )Ad find
ŝ= (F.: , 7̂; , P.: , q̂; )G verifying on [0, T]:
F:. = F: n in V0 and q̂; −q; n = − k(7̂; − 7; n ) on (3V0 (24)
F:. t = A(P. t, t5 t) in V0 R(q̂; , 7̂; ) on (3V0 (25)
Global step: From ŝG find sn + 1 = (F: n + 1, 7; n + 1,
P: n + 1, q; n + 1)Ad better than sn verifying on [0, T]:
596 E. Bellenger, P. Bussy / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80–81 (1998) 591–596

du; n + 1 5. Numerical examples

×u; n + 1/F: n + 1 = , u; n + 1( 1V0 =u; d
dM0
Öu* U
& tr([P: n + 1 − P: n ]TF*) dV0
&
V0
+ (q; n + 1 − q; n )7* d(3V0 =0
( 3V0
P:. −P: n + 1 =Ce(F:. − F: n + 1) in V0
q̂; − q; n + 1 = k(7̂; −7; n + 1) on (3V0
k is a positive parameter matrix which has the dimen-
sion of stiffness. Search directions defined by Eqs. (24)
and (27) characterize the large time increment method
version.
In order not to solve the global problem (Eq. (26))
for each time, this problem is decomposed into two
problems. A first space problem, which depends only
on the space variable M0 and a second time problem
which depends only time. Therefore, the solutions are
described by the following forms.
p
u; n + 1(t, M0)− u; n (t, M0) = % gi (t)wi (M0)
i=1
p [2] P. Ladevèze, Sur une famille d’algorithmes en mécanique des
F: n + 1(t, M0)− F: n (t, M0) = % gi (t)ai (M0)
i=1
p META, Swansea, 1990.
7; n + 1(t, M0)−7; n (t, M0) = % gi (t)gi (M0)
i=1
p
P: n + 1(t, M0)− P: n (t, M0) = % hi (t)bi (M0)
i=1
p [7] P. Ladevèze, Sur la théorie de la plasticité en grandes déforma-
q; n + 1(t, M0)− q; n (t, M0) = % hi (t)di (M0)
i=1
The elasto-plastic damage model and the viscoplastic
damage model in large transformations presented
above are implemented in our finite element code OP-
TIFIA. The simulations presented in planar calculation
(26) use the isoparametric triangle with six nodes and three
Gauss points. The first example is an illustration of the
viscoplastic visco damage model in non linear geometry
(see Section 2.2.2) with R(p)= Q(1− e − bp) and
(27)
Z(X)= QX (1−e − bX X). This first application concerns
a square sheet subjected to creep condition at high
temperature for IN100 in 1000°C. Fig. 2 shows strain–
time behavior and the comparison with experimental
results. The second example is a test of the simulation
of sheet cutting with the elasto-plastic damage model in
large transformations (see Section 2.2.1) and unilateral
contact conditions with R(p)=R0 + kp n and Z(X)=
ln(1+ X)/A. Fig. 3 describes the mesh and the
boundary conditions. Fig. 4 shows the isostress.
References
[1] K. Benkrid, P. Bussy, A. Abdali, J. Mater. Proc. Technol. 45
(1994) 521 – 526.
structures, C.R., Acad. des Sci., 300, Serie II, No. 2, 1985.
[3] P. Bussy, P. Rougée, P. Vauchez, The large time increment method
for numerical simulation of metal forming processes, Proc. NU-
[4] P. Bussy, B. Liu, P. Vauchez, New algorithm for numerical
simulation of metal forming processes, Proc. NUMIFORM 92,
Sophia-Antipolis, 1992.
[5] A. Abdali, K. Benkrid, P. Bussy, J. Mater. Proc. Technol. 60
(1996) 255 – 260.
[6] J. Lemaitre, J.L. Chaboche, J. Mech. Appl. 2 (3) (1978) 317–365.
(28) tions, Rapport Interne No. 9 LMT, Cachan, 1981.
[8] B. Halphen, Nguyen Quoc Son, Sur les matériaux standards
généralisés, J. Mécanique, 14 (1975).
with ai (M0)=dwi /dM0 and gi (M0) =wi (M0)( 3V0. gi (t)
and hi (t) are the scalar time functions defined on [0, T].
wi (M0), ai (M0), bi (M0) and di (M0) depend only on the
space variable M0. We find in [3,4,11] all the details to
obtain these unknowns.
[9] J. Lemaitre, J.L. Chaboche, Mécanique des matériaux solides,
DUNOD, 1985.
[10] J.C. Simo, R.L. Taylor, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. 48 (1985)
101 – 108.
[11] P. Boisse, P. Bussy, P. Ladevèze, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 29
(1990) 647 – 663.