This paper describes objective technical results and analysis.

Any subjective views or opinions that might be expressed

in the paper do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Energy or the United States Government.

SAND2014-20333C

2
az/af

0,

Calibration and Evaluation of the Johnson-Cook Strength and

Failure Models for Puncture Simulations of Aluminum Plates
Edmundo Corona, Matthew A. Spletzer, Theresa E. Córdova,
George E. Orient and Lisa A. Deibler

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
111 M AC&C(5
ENERGY Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin
Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energys National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. SAND NO. 2011-XXXXP

Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525.
 Sandia

Problem Schematic National

Laboratories

1.n
rn = 306 lb
d 0.5 in ci
t = 0.5 in
D = 6.75 in
A1 7075-T651

• Determine threshold velocity

• Observe failure mode

2
 Sande

Experimental Results National

laboratories

Plate Test Data

1
Mean = 10.04 ft/s

Std. Dev. = 0.445 ft/s

0.8

:
u 0.6
o
cd

0 0.4
a)

- Test No Fail
0.2
• Test Fail
CDF
PDF
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Impact Speed (Ws)

Threshold velocity: [9.7,10.5] ft/s

3
 Sandia

Puncture Video Record National

Laboratories

T+: -1 .21 9 rri S

m -9 R ate: 7000 D U rat: 0.078 :3
4
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

Johnson-Cook Material Choice

• Initial results overestimated threshold puncture velocity by 60%

• Searched for a model that:

• Accounts for temperature and strain rate effects on material response/failure
• Triaxiality dependence of failure strain can be adjusted
• Has been implemented in a finite element code

• Johnson-Cook model met all the criteria.

• It has also been used by others in puncture applications (Borvik, Weirzbicki) and
reported good results.

5
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

Johnson-Cook Material Characterization

J2 Isotropic hardening, "Strength" Model:
ei)
=[A+ B(seP)]
H 1+ Cln(

T—
=
Trn
Five parameters to calibrate:
A,B, n,C,

Auxiliary parameters that need values:

eo Tr Trn
 Sandia
Naiad

Johnson-Cook Material Characterization laboratories

Failure Model:

sl
'ef =[d1 + cl2ed311 1+ d4 ln 1 + d5

grn
111
0,
-
Five parameters to calibrate:
d1,d2,d3,d4,d5
Damage accumulation:
dET
D=
Ef(Ti
P
e ,eIeo,I)

Failure when D = 1 7
 We
National

Johnson-Cook Failure in Principal Stress Laboratories

Special case:
T = Tr
•
E/)
e = EO
d1 = 0.005 7/ 0
o,
d2 = 0.34
d3 = —1.5

-2\

-2

1 2
-2 a /a
y f
 Uniaxial Tension Test Data Sandia
National
Laboratories

100 100

80 80
Al 7075-T651
Al 7075-T651
Transverse Direction
Engineering Stress

Engineering Stress
60 Rolling Direction 60

40 40
wg-12 ag-10
wg-15 ag- 11
20 wg-16 20 ag-15
wg-18 ag-16
wg-19 ag-19

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.05 0.1 0.15

Enqineerinq Strain Enqineerinq Strain
100

80

Al 7075-T651
Engineering Stress

60
45° Direction

40
945-01
1 945-02
20 g45-03
g45-04
g45-05

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 9

Enaineerina Strain
Uniaxial Tension Edge Detection Data
WG-12 Width After Failure (Perpendicular Direction)
Sandia
National
Laboratories

._ 0-
E 0.05-
t3 0.1
8
. 0.15-
-f- 0.2-
-o
§ 0.25-
01 0:1 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
Gage Direciton (in)
WG-12Width
, Between Yield and Ultimate.(8=0.053)
0255

s 0.25- Perpendicular
._
▪ 0 245-
:2
Ilial.16•11111111.11111111•11.1
1 1m1Pollili dlii.
•
c 0.24-
Through Thickness
I 0_235-

0.23-

0225
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0/ 0.8 0.9 1 1:1
Gage Length (in)

AG-11 Width Between Yield.and Ultimate(8=0

l 049)
0255

0.25-
Through Thickness
Z 0245-
:2 1_1

• 0.24- Perpendicular

I 0.235-

0.23-

0.225
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1:1
Gage Length (in) 10
Uniaxial Tension Test Data Summary Sandia
National
Laboratories
100

80

Engineering Stress (ksi)

60

40

20 wg-16
ag-19
g45-04

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Engineering Strairi

Choice of stress-strain curve to fit: Highest strain to failure

 Fitting Procedure Sandia
National
Laboratories

• Make finite element model of tension test specimen

• Guess values for A, B, n
• Simulate the tension test
• Compare the predicted engineering stress-strain curve to measured one
• Iterate as necessary
• Note the true plastic strain at failure

1 20

1 00

80
A,B n C,Tit

d1 d2, d3, C14, d5

40

-WG —1 6
20 -WG —1 8
True
-Prediction
0.05 01 0.15 0.2 0 25
Strain
12
Notched Specimen Tension Test Data Sandia
National
Laboratories

140 rIR = 0.32

ri = 0.64
120
riR = 1.28
00 riR = 3 2
2

o 80
-3

• 60
O

40

20

0.005 - 0.01 0.015 0.02

DisplacernenVGage Length

13
 Sandia
National
Laboratories
Notched Specimen Tension Test Simulation
• Test performance of plasticity model under non-uniaxial conditions
• Obtain data to assess triaxiality dependence of the plastic strain to failure

1 50 rIR=0.32 04
Experiment
Prediction r/R=0.64
0 Failure in Notched Experiments
rfR= 1 .28 .E 0.3 •Failure in Uniaxial Tests
c2,1
x _R=1
0

r/R=1.28 r/./1164
r/R=3.2

00

0.005 0.01 0.01 5 0 02 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 2 1.4 1.6

Displacement/Gage Length Triaxiality
14
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

Notched Specimen Tension Test Calibration

A,B n, C,
d1, d2, d3 clzt d5

150- r 32 Experiment
0.4- .•. ‘-.High Estimate
. .. -. . High Failure Estimate
Low Failure Estimate
0.35- ()Failure in Notched Experiments R01_64
= Mediunt, \.... •Failure in Uniaxial Tests
'7F2 0.3- , r R=1.28
-,
cr) , r/R=3.2
..) . ,
.(- 0 25- ... \ ,,
rn - ......
rt
1:7_ LoW'...
0.2-
"E . ..-,
a)
Ts •-••••,..,..._
.1. 0.15- .. .,.
= ,,_,
o-
Lu
0.1-

0 05-

0 0.5 1.5 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02

Triaxiality Displacement/Gage Length

15
High Temperature Tension Test Data Sandia
National
Laboratories

Determine values of temperature dependence parameters

90 Al 7075—T651

10
350
0.2 0.4 0.8 1
Engineering Strain
16
 try
,ran.
High Temperature Tension Test Calibration
A,B
d1, d2, d3 d4 d5

90
Al 7075—T651
80 RT

70
Engineering Stress (ksi)

60

50

Tests
Predictions

o0
0. 1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Engineering Strain
 High Strain Rate Tension Test Data Sandia
National
Laboratories

Determine values of strain rate dependence parameters

120

100 Tensile Kolsky Bar Tests

Engineering Stress (ksi)

80

Test 2(1250 lis)

60
Test 4 (1400 lis)
Test 5 (1350 lis)
40
Test 6 (1300 lis)
AG-16 (Static) '
20
AG-19 (Static)

0.02 0.04 0.06 0.1C18 0.1 Ci.12 0.1 Ll-

Engineering Strairi
18
 High Strain Rate Tension Test Data Sada
laboratwies

A,B , C,rn
d1, d2, d3 d4. d5

120 120

Test 4
100 •
100

Simulation

Engineering Stress (ksi)

80 80

60 60

40 40
Static Test WG-16
—Test 4(1400 1/s)
True Static
20 True Dynamic(1400 1/s) 20
Prediction Static
Prediction Dynamic (1400 1/s)
0
0 05 0.1 0.15 02 0 25 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Strain
Engineering Strain

19
 Sandia

Plate Puncture Finite Element Model National

Laboratories

• Explicit Dynamics Symmetry plane,

disp x = 0
• Adiabatic

Fixed boundary,
disp x = disp y = disp z = 0

disp z =

20
 Plate Puncture Results Sandia
National
Laboratories
vo ,ft/s Low Medium High
6 N
6.5 N
7 Y
7.5 Y
8 Y V N'Mu
8.5 Y N
9 Y N N
9.5 Y N N
10 Y Y N
10.5 Y N
11 Y Y
11.5 Y
12 T
,Avg.75%,
Step: Ste0-1 Frame: 50
Total Time: 0.010000

Lv L.
•
 Sandia

Evolution of Johnson-Cook Damage National

Laboratories

Step: Step-1
farifeeTnar: 3CCfiX'' '""'"
Defornedel
,%Z .4eforrietion Scale rect.: .1.00e.1.00

1 ms 2 ms

(a) (b)
00790. Step Time 3.0000S-03 046.77: Step Time;
litTrgdtkIZefemetion

3 ms 3.15 ms

(c) (d)

JCCRT
Avg: 75%)
1.00
0.92
0.83
0.75
0.67
3.2 ms 0.58
0.50
0.42
0.33
0.25
0.17
0.08
0.00
22
 0
3
CQ
CD

3
CD
rE)P
)
s

CT)
 Sandia

10.5 ft/s, No Failure alb National

1-P Laboratories

24
 Sandia

Microstructure of Plug Formation National

Laboratories

• - Element Size

:••
.

•
, ' • 44,'
,

•
25
 High Shear Test Sandia
National
Laboratories

Test predictions against test in high shear regime

26
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

High Shear Test Results and Predictions

Johnson-Cook
Johnson-Cook
(High Failure Fit)
(Mid Failure Fit)
/

Hill's Anisotropic Model

Experiments (No Failure Prediction)

/
/
/
/

0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04

Displacement (in)

27
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

Conclusions
Positive Outcomes:
• Accomplished full calibration of Johnson-Cook strength and failure model

• Puncture predictions have high resemblance to experimental observations

• Accurate prediction of threshold puncture velocity
• Failure sequence leading to plugging reasonably reproduced

28
 drp Sandia
National
Laboratories
Deficiencies:
• Model neglects observed material anisotropy

• Model captures response at high temperature to a first order only

• High shear failure information is scarce

• Material properties in the thickness direction have not been measured

• The element size used in the puncture calculations is way too big
compared to the observed shear bands. (Clearly, however, the model
predicts the onset of a shear instability)

• We are still uncertain whether the very reasonable predictions by the

model are due to good modeling or good luck.

29
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

Observations and Recommendations:

• The Johnson-Cook model provided a reasonable first-order

representation of the observed material behavior, both for response and
failure

• The puncture predictions were reasonable

• It is reasonable to use a properly calibrated Johnson-Cook model as an

initial step in the simulation of similar problems.

• Use of the methods considered here in other problems will provide further
experience and evidence of the soundness of the approach.

30
 Sandia
National
Laboratories

"Essentially, all models are

wrong, but some are useful."

"Remember that all models

are wrong; the practical
question is how wrong do
they have to be to not be
useful."
George E. P. Box (1919-2013)
British mathematician
Statistics professor at Univ. of Wf