COMPOSITES

SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785
www.elsevier.com/locate/compscitech

The prediction of the dynamic responses of ceramic particle reinforced

MMCs by using multi-particle computational micro-mechanical method
Jiang-Tao Zhang, Li-Sheng Liu, Peng-Cheng Zhai *, Zheng-Yi Fu, Qing-Jie Zhang
State Key Laboratory of Advanced Technology for Materials Synthesis and Processing, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, PR China

Received 26 October 2005; received in revised form 1 February 2007; accepted 7 February 2007
Available online 22 February 2007

Abstract

The computational micro-mechanical method is used to analyze the dynamic mechanical properties of ceramic particle reinforced
MMCs in this paper. The ceramic particles are simulated as circles with different diameters, which are randomly and discontinuously
embedded in the matrix. Both the Johnson–Holmquist damage model and the elastic model are used to characterize the constitutive
behavior of the ceramic material. The results calculated by the two models are compared with each other and also with those of exper-
iments. It is shown that the flow stresses predicted by the Johnson–Holmquist model are in good agreement with those of experiments,
while those predicted by the elastic model are higher than those of experiments. The influences of particles’ volume fraction and overall
strain rates on the dynamic behavior of the composites are studied. The damage of the particles is considered and it is only found in the
composites with high particles’ volume fraction. The damage of the particles can reduce the flow stresses of the composites.
 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: A. Metal matrix composite; B. Mechanical properties; B. Stress–strain curves; C. Computational simulation; C. Damage mechanics

1. Introduction represent the micro-structures of MMCs and used to

Computational micro-mechanical (CMM) [1–3] method
has been widely used to investigate the mechanical proper-
ties of metal matrix composites (MMCs) over the past
10–15 years. CMM is based on constructing the representa-
tion of the real micro-structure of MMCs in the numerical
model to predict their macro-mechanical properties. It can
be used to relate the MMCs’ micro-structural features to
their macroscopic mechanical performance in terms of
deformation mechanisms, strengthening mechanisms and
failure mechanisms [1,2]. However, it is currently difficult
to construct 3D finite element (FE) models with the com-
plete realistic micro-structure of MMCs, such as the realis-
tic particles’ geometries and distribution, and even it is
beyond the computational capabilities. Many simplified
or idealized 2D and 3D CMM models are introduced to
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 27 8765 1820; fax: +86 27 8786 0863.
E-mail address: pczhai@mail.whut.edu.cn (P.-C. Zhai).
research their mechanical properties [1–18].
In the 2D CMM model, the micro-structures of MMCs
are often cut out from the scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) micrograph [3–5], or the particles’ shape is assumed
to be of regular configurations [6–12]. Zhai [3] generated a
2D CMM model with a representative actual micro-struc-
ture and successfully predicted the equivalent elastoplastic
stress–strain curve of SiC/Al composite; Soppa [4] used the
experimentally mapped real micro-structure of 10 vol%
Al2O3/6061 Al composites to build FE model and analyzed
the influence of thermal residual stresses on the deforma-
tion and damage of the composites. Borbély [5] constructed
a multi-particle 2D CMM model to study the effect of par-
ticles’ distribution on the uniaxial stress–strain behavior of
particle reinforced MMCs, and the particles were assumed
to be rectangles with their average distances and directions
taken into consideration in their models. There are also
many artificial 2D micro-structures developed to study
the effect of different factors such as particles’ volume frac-
tion and morphology, interfacial strength, and residual

0266-3538/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.02.002
2776 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785
stress on the mechanical properties of MMCs. Lee [6] used
a fictitious multi-particle cell model to predict the cracking
modes and hardening behavior of MMCs; Schmauder [7]
generated an artificial 2D multi-particle model to study
the effect of thermal residual stress on the damage evolu-
tion of particle reinforced MMCs. Mishnaevsky [8] ana-
lyzed the effect of micro-structure of particle reinforced
MMCs on the equivalent response and damage evolution
with a clustered and uniform particle arrangement. More
utilization of the 2D multi-particle CMM models can be
found in some other papers [9,10]. In these artificial 2D
CMM models, the particles’ shape is always represented
by circle, ellipse or polygon.
As for 3D models, the particles are always represented
by spheres or hexahedrons. Gusev [11] constructed a cubic
shaped unit cell containing up to 64 spherical inclusions to
describe the elastic behavior of particle reinforced poly-
mers, and Watt [12] used unit cell containing 10 particles
to study the effect of the particles’ distribution in MMCs.
Agrawal [13] used a representative cell model to simulate
the thermal residual stress distribution in co-continuous
composites. Han [14] used 3D multi-particle unit cell to
study the mechanical properties and damage initiation of
particle reinforced MMCs.
The different 2D and 3D unit cell models based on the
assumption of periodic particles’ distribution is also widely
utilized to predict the properties of MMCs [15–18], and the
excellent reviews of these models have been done by Farris-
sey et al. [18]. Several researchers also presented the com-
parisons of the analysis results of 2D and 3D CMM
models and the conclusions are diverse [2,19,20].
Although there are numerous experimental reports on
the dynamic responses of MMCs [21–24], the reports on
the application of the CMM method to predict the
dynamic properties of MMCs are very few. Axisymmetric
unit cell model is the main one, which has been used to ana-
lyze the effects of particles’ volume fraction, shape, aspect
ratio, behavior of the matrix [16,17] and interfacial deb-
onding [25] on the dynamic behavior of MMCs. By
curve-fitting the calculated results of the unit cell model,
Bao [16] and Li et al. [17] developed a series of formulae
to calculate the dynamic stress–strain curves of ceramic
particle reinforced Al matrix composites.
However, the unit cell model is constructed on the
assumption that the particles are elastic or rigid spheres
and distributed regularly in the matrix. The experiments
and numerical investigations have revealed that the local
damage evolution of the particles is strongly affected by
the local ceramic particles’ distribution [5,10]. The unit cell
model cannot capture these features. In addition, elastic
and inelastic waves, propagating in the composites upon
impact loading, further complicate the stress distribution
and the damage initiation. Using 2D or 3D multi-particle
CMM models to study the dynamic properties of MMCs
can provide more detailed and authentic information.
The present paper attempts to use artificial multi-parti-
cle 2D CMM model to analyze the dynamic responses of
ductile 6061-T6 Al matrix reinforced with Al2O3 particles.
The damage of the ceramic particles is considered by using
Johnson–Holmquist (JH-2) model [26–29] to characterize
the constitutive behavior of the ceramic material. As a
comparison, the elastic material model is also adopted
for the ceramic material in the calculation. The constitutive
behavior of the matrix material is assumed to follow strain
hardening of the Ramberg–Osgood type, coupled with
power-law strain rate hardening. Attention is mainly paid
to the influences of particles’ volume fraction, damage
and the overall strain rates. The calculated results are also
compared with those of the unit cell formulae [16] and
experiments by Yadav et al. [21].
2. Micro-structure and FE model
The artificial 2D micro-structure and FE mesh are auto-
generated by a program developed on the platform of
Ansys 9.0. PLANE162 element, a plain strain quadrilateral
shell element, is used to mesh the micro-structure, and sin-
gle point Gauss integration is used. The 2D FE calculations
are performed by using the commercial explicit finite ele-
ment code LS-Dyna 970.
The sample used in the simulation is assumed to be a
square. The ceramic particles are represented as circles
and their diameters are varying from 10 lm to 33 lm.
The bonding between the particles and the matrix is
assumed to be perfect in the analysis. The particles’ volume
fraction is assumed to be the ratio of the total area of the
circles to the area of the sample. Random number genera-
tor is used to create the center coordinates and diameters of
the particles. The diameter and center coordinates of each
new particle are determined by the condition that the new
particle is no less than 4 lm apart from all the generated
particles and the sample borders. This procedure is similar
to the one that Mishnaevsky [8] has used to design 2D
micro-structures of MMCs with random particles’ arrange-
ment. The typical micro-structures with different volume
fractions of ceramic particles are shown in Fig. 1.
The accuracy of the FE solution will rise with the
increase of the dimension of the selected samples, and so
will the computer time. The sample with the dimension
of 0.66 mm · 0.44 mm is used by a compromise between
the two factors. There are about 18 particles in the model
for particle volume fraction f = 0.1 and it takes dozens of
seconds to solve the problem for strain rate 1.0 · 104/s in
a Pentium 4 PC with double CPU (2.8 GHz) and 1.0 GB
RAM. And there are about 130 particles in the model for
f = 0.4 and it takes about 24 h to solve the problem for
strain rate 1.0 · 103/s.
As shown in Fig. 2, uniaxial compressive load is simu-
lated by imposing the node velocity u_ y along the negative
y-axis to all the nodes in y = H, given as Formula (1).
The node displacements in y direction at y = 0 are assumed
to be zero as Formula (2). The two sides at x = 0 and x = L
are keeping straight lines by tying the node displacement in
the x direction as Formulae (3) and (4), respectively.
 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785 2777

Fig. 1. Typical micro-structures with different volume fractions (f) of ceramic particles.

Fig. 2. The applied boundary conditions and typical FEM mesh for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.2.

u_ y ðx; H Þ ¼ e_ y ðH þ uy ð0; H ÞÞ on y¼H
uy ðx; 0Þ ¼ 0 on y ¼ 0
u_ x ðx; yÞ ¼ u_ x ð0; 0Þ on x ¼ 0
u_ x ðx; yÞ ¼ u_ x ðL; 0Þ on x ¼ L
where ux, uy are the total displacements in the x and y
directions, respectively. u_ x ; u_ y are the velocity components
in the x and y directions. e_ y is the imposed overall compres-
sion strain rate. H and L are the initial height and width of
the sample, respectively.
The average normal stresses of the elements in the two
ends of the sample (y = 0 and y = H) are taken as the flow
stresses of the samples. The normal strain is calculated by
using the following formula:
ey ¼ lnð1 þ uy ðx; H Þ=H Þ
ð1Þ In the following calculation, 150 time steps are taken to cal-
ð2Þ culate the stress–strain curves of the composites for applied
strains up to 15% and the fixed strain increment is 0.1% at
ð3Þ
each time step. To investigate the effects of particles’ vol-
ð4Þ ume fraction f and overall strain rate, f = 0.1, 0.2 and 0.4
and overall strain rates 1.0 · 103/s, 5.0 · 103/s and
1.0 · 104/s are selected to carry out the analysis.
3. Material models
3.1. Metal matrix
The Al matrix material is assumed to be power-law
strain hardening of the Ramberg–Osgood type, coupled
with power-law strain rate hardening as defined in Formu-
ð5Þ lae (6) and (7):
2778 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785
 g
rs rs
e¼ þ e0
E r0
 p k
r e_
¼1þ
rs e_ 0
where r0, rs and r are the reference stress, quasi-static flow
stress and dynamic flow stress, respectively; E is the
young’s modulus, e0 = r0/E, e_ p is the plastic strain rate,
e_ 0 is a reference strain rate, and k and g are the material
parameters determined by experiments.
This constitutive model of the metal matrix is
implemented in LS-Dyna as material 24 (*MAT_PIECE-
WISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY). The parameters used
here are those in literature [16] and listed in Table 1.
3.2. Ceramic particles
Both the JH-2 model and the elastic model are used
to characterize the constitutive behavior of the ceramic
material. The JH-2 damage model developed by Johnson
and Holmquist has been widely used to simulate the
dynamic responses of the ceramic materials that are sub-
jected to high pressures, high strain rates and large
deformations [26,28,29]. In this model, the material
response is initially considered to be elastic. Under com-
pressive loading, the damage begins to accumulate
within the material when the deviator stress exceeds a
critical value. This damage accumulation is tracked via
a damage parameter D (ranging from 0 to 1). When
the material is subjected to tensile stress, the material
responds elastically until brittle failure occurs at a spec-
ified equivalent stress value [26]. The damage parameter
D is given by:
D ¼ RðDep =epf Þ
Where Dep is the plastic strain increment; epf is the plastic
fracture strain.
Further explanation of the numerical and physical basis
of this model can be found in various well-documented
texts by the original authors and others. This constitutive
model is implemented in LS-Dyna as material 110
(*MAT_JOHNSON_HOLMQUIST_CERAMICS). The
parameters needed in the JH-2 model are those in [26]
and listed in Table 2.
For comparison, the elastic model is also used to charac-
terize the constitutive behavior of ceramic material in this
study. And the results of elastic model are compared with
those of JH-2 model in the following sections.
Table 1
Material parameters of 6061-T6 Al [16]
g k v e_ 0 (/s) E (GPa) r0 (MPa)
5
11.66 0.28 0.25 5.1 · 10 69 275
4. Results and discussion
ð6Þ
To minimize the effect of the mesh density on the calcu-
ð7Þ lated results, the number of the shell elements is increased
progressively until no detectable difference is discovered
in the predicted stress–strain curves. The typical FE model
used in this study is shown in Fig. 2 and there are 5142 ele-
ments totally. Each particle is meshed into 36 shell elements
and the element size on the sample’s borders is 15 lm.
For a given f, three different particles’ distributions have
been generated to calculate the stress–strain curves. It is
shown that the influence of random particle distribution
is very weak. This result is in agreement with the works
of Hom [30] and Bao [31], who find the quasi-static flow
stresses of particle reinforced MMCs is not very sensitive
to the precise arrangement of the particles for f up to 0.4.
Segurado and Llorca [32] also find that the moduli
obtained from different 3D unit cell containing 30 non-
overlapping identical spheres show very little scattering
and the average values can be considered very close to
the ‘‘exact’’ solution to the problem. Therefore, the average
values of the stress–strain curves obtained from the three
micro-structures with different particles’ arrangement are
taken as the solutions.
4.1. Effect of particle volume fraction
The predicted stress–strain curves of the composites
with different f are shown in Fig. 3. For a given strain rate
and ceramic material model, the flow stress of the compos-
ite increases with the increasing of f. Concluded from dif-
ferent literatures [16–18,23,33], the strengthening
mechanisms mainly include: (1) the strength and stiffness
of ceramic particles are much higher than those of metal
matrix; (2) the constraining of the particles to the matrix
ð8Þ is enhanced with the increasing of the ceramic particles
and (3) the plastic flow of the strain hardening matrix also
increases with the increasing of the ceramic particles, and
consequently, the stress level in the matrix as well as in
the particles is improved.
As illustrated in Fig. 3, the calculated flow stresses pre-
dicted by the JH-2 model are lower than those predicted by
the elastic model. Experiments have revealed that ceramic
is strong in compression but weak in tension, and the
strengths of both the intact and damaged ceramic are rate
and pressure dependent. These features are considered in
the JH-2 model, but not in the elastic model. The effects
of these features are significant on the dynamic properties
of the composites. Fig. 4c and Fig. 5c display the effective
stress distributions in the matrix calculated by elastic cera-
mic model for f = 0.2 and 0.4, respectively, and they are
similar to Fig. 4a and Fig. 5a calculated by the JH-2 model.
But in the particles, the effective stresses calculated by the
elastic model as shown in Fig. 4d and Fig. 5d are higher
than those calculated by the JH-2 model as shown in
Fig. 4b and Fig. 5b, respectively. Since the predicted flow
stresses are correlated with the stresses both in the matrix
 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785 2779

Table 2
Material parameters of Al2O3 [26]
a b n c m K1 (GPa) K2 K3
(GPa) (GPa)
0.93 0.31 0.6 0.0 0.6 130.95 0 0
3
d1 d2 Density (kg/m ) Young’s modulus Shear modulus Tensile strength
(GPa) (GPa) (GPa)
0.005 1.0 3700 210.9 90.16 2.0
Hugoniot elastic limit (HEL) HEL Pressure HEL strength Poisson Ratio Beta Reference strain
(GPa) (GPa) (GPa) rate
2.79 1.46 0.01117 0.17 1.0 1.0

600
750
f=0.4
f=0.4
True stress (MPa)

True stress (MPa)

600
450
f=0.2 f=0.1
450 f=0.2 f=0.1

300
JH-2 model 300 JH-2 model
Elasitc model Elasitc model

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.05 0.1 0.15

True strain True strain

Fig. 3. Stress–strain curves for different particle volumes (f) at strain rates (a) 1.0 · 103/s and (b) 1.0 · 104/s.

Fig. 4. Von-Mises effective stress distribution of region (A) in the matrix and particles for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.2.
ðey ¼ 13:5%; e_ y ¼ 1:0  103 =sÞ.

and in the particles, the predicted flow stresses by the elas-
tic model are higher than those by the JH-2 model.
In the case of lower f, e.g. f = 0.1 and 0.2, the tendency
of strain hardening predicted by JH-2 model is similar to
that predicted by the elastic model and the differences of
the flow stresses predicted by the two models almost keep
invariable at the strain higher than 5% as shown in
Fig. 3. The damage of the particles is not found in JH-2
model for different overall strain rates. Therefore, the dif-
ference of the stress distribution in the particles is mainly
2780 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785

Fig. 5. Von-Mises effective stress distribution of region (B) in the matrix and particles for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.4.
ðey ¼ 13:5%; e_ y ¼ 1:0  103 =sÞ.

caused by the different strain rate and pressure dependence
of the two models. Numerous experiments have also
revealed that no damaged particles are found in the com-
posites reinforced with lower ceramic content and these
composites have the same strain hardening as the matrix
[21,22,24,34].
However, for the case of higher f, e.g. f = 0.4, the ten-
dency of strain hardening predicted by JH-2 model is much
weaker than that predicted by the elastic model. This differ-
ence is mainly caused by the particles’ damage. For differ-
ent overall strain rates, the particles’ damage in JH-2 model
occurs as the applied strain attains about 1.5%. Typical
damage distribution of the particles is illustrated in
Fig. 7. The ratio of the damaged ceramic elements to the
total ceramic elements and the average value of damage
parameter D in the damaged elements are given in Fig. 8.

Fig. 6. Von-Mises effective stress distribution of region (A) in the matrix and particles for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.4.
ðey ¼ 13:5%; e_ y ¼ 1:0  104 =sÞ.
 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785 2781

Fig. 7. Distribution of damage parameter D in the particles for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.4 at the applied strain rate
e_ y ¼ 1:0  104 =s. ðey ¼ 13:5%Þ.
Damaged elements/ceramc elements

0.12
0.08
0.1
Average value of D

0.06 0.08

0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.02

0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
Strain Strain

Fig. 8. (a): The ratio of damaged ceramic elements to the total ceramic elements; (b): the average values of damage parameter D in the damaged elements.

Both of them increase with the applied overall strains. The
ceramic particles’ damage can reduce their stiffness and
strength as well as the composites’. Since the ceramic dam-
age is not considered in the elastic model, the tendency of
the strain hardening predicted by the elastic model keeps
the same as those of the composites with lower f.
Due to the effect of the particles’ damage, the flow stres-
ses calculated by JH-2 model almost keep constants and
even begin to decrease at higher strains. This result is in
good agreement with the experiments. Marchi et al. [23]
had measured the quasistatic and dynamic compressive
stress of pure Al matrix reinforced with 40–55% Al2O3 par-
ticles. They found that the micro-structural damage was
dominated by particle cracking, and the fraction of the bro-
ken particles increased with the applied strain. The flow
stress reached a nominal plateau near the strain of 10%
and eventually began to decrease at higher strains.
4.2. Effect of strain rate
For a given f and ceramic material model, the flow stres-
ses of the composites increase with the increasing of the
strain rates as shown in Fig. 3. Lots of experiments have
proved that the composites with rate sensitive matrix have
stronger rate sensitivity than that of the matrix, and con-
cluding from previous studies [16,17,21–23,34], the factors
which affect the rate sensitivity of the composite mainly
include: (1) rate sensitivity of the component materials;
(2) interaction of the matrix and the particles; (3) damage
in the composites; and (4) interaction of dislocations in
the matrix with reinforcements.
The FE simulations disclose that the distribution of the
local strain rate in the matrix is highly non-uniform due to
the constraint of the inclusions. As shown in Fig. 9, the
contours of the local effective strain rate in the matrix in
2782 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785
Fig. 9. Distribution of the effective strain rate in the region (A) for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.2 at the applied strain rate
e_ y ¼ 1:0  103 =s. ðey ¼ 13:5%Þ.
region (A) are displayed for the composites with f = 0.2,
the applied strain is 13.5% and the applied overall strain
rate is 1.0 · 103/s. The local strain rates are much higher
than the applied strain rate in a large part of the matrix.
Especially in the regions near the particle/matrix interfaces,
the maximum local strain rate can even attain 50 times
higher than the applied strain rate in this study. The high
local strain rate leads to higher average strain rate in the
matrix, and consequently results in the enhancement in rate
sensitivity of the composites.
The flow stresses predicted by the elastic model are
much higher than those predicted by JH-2 model and the
difference increases with the increasing of the applied strain
rates as shown in Fig. 3. For both of f = 0.1 and 0.2, when
the applied strain is higher than 5%, the flow stresses pre-
dicted by the JH-2 model keep at about 9.0 MPa and
86 MPa lower than those predicted by the elastic model
when the applied strain rate is 1.0 · 103/s and 1.0 · 104/s,
respectively. As mentioned in Section 4.1, the effective
stresses in the matrix predicted by the two models are very
close, while the effective stresses in the particles predicted
by JH-2 model are lower than those predicted by the elastic
model. Due to the strain rate hardening of the matrix and
the differences of the two ceramic models in strain rate and
pressure dependence, the difference of the predicted stresses
in the particles by the two models is amplified with increas-
ing the applied strain rates. The stress distribution in
matrix predicted by JH-2 model (Fig. 6a) is very similar
to that predicted by elastic model (Fig. 6c). But the stress
in the particles predicted by JH-2 model (Fig. 6b) is obvi-
ously lower than that predicted by elastic model (Fig. 6d)
and the difference is more significant than that between
Fig. 5b and Fig. 5c for e_ y ¼ 1:0  103 =s, f = 0.4 and
ey ¼ 13:5%. As a result, the difference of the predicted
stress–strain curves by the two models is also enhanced
with increasing applied strain rates.
For the composite with f = 0.4, the effect of the parti-
cles’ damage also increases with the applied strain rates.
As shown in Fig. 8, both the ratio of the damaged ceramic
elements to the total ceramic elements and the average val-
ues of the damage parameter D increase with the increasing
of the applied strain rates. The obvious drop of the stress in
the stress–strain curves predicted by the JH-2 model indi-
cates there are some ceramic particles damaged abruptly
at certain strain, such as at the strain of 5.5% in the
stress–strain curve for the strain rate 1.0 · 104/s and 13%
for 1.0 · 103/s. The strains, at which the flow stresses drop
observably, decline with the increasing of strain rates. The
main reason is that the higher stress is transferred from the
matrix to particles during the higher strain rate deforma-
tion and makes more particles damaged at the smaller
strain due to the strain rate hardening of the matrix.
4.3. Damage mechanism
The damage micro-mechanisms of particulate MMCs
generally include (a) particle fracture, (b) debonding of
matrix/particle interfaces and (c) voids nucleation, growth
and coalescence in the matrix. In this paper, (b) and (c) are
not considered.
Different compression experiments [21,22,34] have
revealed that very few particles are fractured in the com-
posites with low particle volume fractions. In the compos-
ites of the metal matrix reinforced with isolated particles,
the interaction of the particles is very weak. The loading
transferred to the particles is mainly via the matrix. Due
to the difference of strength and stiffness of the component
materials, the stress transferred to the particles is generally
less than their fracture strength. In the composite with high
particle volume fraction, however, the loadings can be
transferred between the neighboring particles via the con-
tact points of direct contacted particles or via the narrow
matrix ligaments that have been highly strengthened. As
a result, the stress in the particles is greatly increased and
it even can make the particles damaged.
Previous studies have shown that particles’ cracks in
particulate MMCs are perpendicular to a principal tensile
stress axis [23,33]. As shown in Fig. 10, due to the trans-
verse flow of matrix, the principal tensile stress is generated
in the particle alignments with their directions perpendicu-
 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785 2783

Fig. 10. Maximum principal stress distribution of region (C) for the composite with particle volume fraction f = 0.4. ðe_ y ¼ 1:0  104 =s; ey ¼ 13:5%Þ.

lar to the applied compressive loading. The high tensile
stress is mainly concentrated in the nearest points of the
neighboring particles, which causes the beginning of the
damage evolution at the elements in the particles’ outer
boundaries. Then more elements in the damaged particles
are damaged with the increasing of the applied strain. This
same damage process has been found by Mishnaevsky [8],
who use the artificial 2D models to analyze the damage
evolution in the particle reinforced MMCs. The typical dis-
tribution of the damage parameter D in the composite is
shown in Fig. 7.
The high compressive stress is also generated in particle
alignments with their directions parallel to the applied
compressive loadings as shown in Fig. 10. Coupled with
the effect of the tensile stress in the particles caused by
the transverse flow of the matrix and Poisson effect, some
ceramic particles are cracked along the diameters from
the points which receive the high compression stress, and
even some particles can be comminuted.
Actually, the 2D plane strain simulations can lead to the
different damage mode other than the actual 3D damage
mode. In the 2D plane strain simulation, the particles’
1000
damage runs through the sample along the direction per-
pendicular to plane of the model, but is not localized at
some discrete particles.
5. Comparisons with experimental results
The calculated stress–strain curves with the 2D CMM
models are compared with those of experiments [21] as
shown in Fig. 11. The composite is 20% Al2O3/6061-T6
Al and the diameters of Al2O3 particles are varying from
10 lm to 33 lm. It is obvious that the tendency of strain
hardening and rate sensitivity of the composites can be sim-
ulated by these models. The predicted stress–strain curves
by the CMM models with JH-2 ceramic model are quite
consistent with those of experiments. While for the high
strain rate 105/s, the CMM model with the JH-2 ceramic
model underestimates the flow stress of the composite.
One main reason is the rate sensitivity of the matrix is
1000 Exper. [Yadav]
CMM (JH-2)
CMM (Elastic)
Analysis formulae [Bao]
True stress (MPa)

800

800
True stress (MPa)

600
600

400
Quasistatic
Exper.(Yadav)
200 400
CMM(JH-2)
CMM(Elastic) 10
-5
10
-3
10
-1
10
1
10
3
10
5

0 Strain rates(/s)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15
True strain
Fig. 12. Comparison of the calculated stresses at the strain of 6% by the
Fig. 11. Comparison of the calculated stress–strain curves by the CMM CMM models with those of experiments by S. YADAV [21] and unit cell
models with those of experiments by S. YADAV [21]. formulae of Bao [16].
2784 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785
not a constant at different strain rates [16]. The elastic cera-
mic models overestimate the flow stress of the composite at
different strain rates, especially at the high strain rate.
The stresses at the strain 6% calculated by different
methods are displayed in Fig. 12 at strain rates ranging
from 1.0 · 104/s to 1.0 · 105/s. The results of the unit cell
formulae developed by Bao [16] are also included in Fig. 11
for comparison. The results predicted by CMM models
with JH-2 ceramic model are slightly lower, while those
predicted by the elastic models are higher than those of
experiments. The results calculated by unit cell formulae
are lower than those predicted by the 2D CMM model with
elastic ceramic model and higher than those with the JH-2
ceramic model at the moderate strain rates.
6. Conclusions
The artificial multi-particle 2D CMM models are used
to analyze the dynamic responses and damage mechanisms
of ductile 6061-T6 Al matrix reinforced with Al2O3 parti-
cles. The ceramic particles are simulated as circles with dif-
ferent diameters, which are randomly and discontinuously
embedded in the matrix. Both the Johnson–Holmquist
damage model and the elastic model are used to character-
ize the constitutive behavior of the ceramic material. The
Al matrix material is assumed to be power-law strain hard-
ening of the Ramberg–Osgood type, coupled with power-
law strain rate hardening. The results calculated by the
two models are compared with each other and also with
those of experiments. The results predicted by the CMM
models are compared with those of experiments and unit
cell formulae. It is concluded that:
1. The effects of the particle volume fraction on the pre-
dicted dynamic responses of the particulate MMCs are
coupled with the effect of the applied strain rates.
2. The numerical models with the JH-2 ceramic model can
simulate the dynamic responses of the composites more
accurately than those with elastic ceramic model at mod-
erate strain rate.
3. Damage of the ceramic particles is not found in the com-
posites reinforced with low particle volume fractions
while it is observed in the composites reinforced with
high particle volume fraction. The main reason is the
loading transferring between the particles is enhanced
in the latter. In the composites reinforced with high par-
ticle volume fraction, particles’ damage increases with
the increasing of applied overall strain and strain rate.
The particles’ damage can reduce the strain hardening
and strain rate hardening of the composites.
4. The approximation of plane strain model with elastic
inclusions is too stiff, while that with JH-2 ceramic model
leads to failure mechanisms different from 3D model.
5. The constraint of the particles to the matrix results in
the higher average strain rate in the matrix, and which
leads to the higher rate sensitivity of the composite com-
pared with the matrix.
Acknowledgements
Financial supports are from the Program for New Cen-
tury Excellent Talents in University (No. NCET-04-0725)
and Program for Changjiang Scholars and lnnovative Re-
search Team in University (PCSIRT) supported by the
Ministry of Education of Chain and the National Nature
Science Foundation of China (No. 50272046).
References
[1] McHugh PE, Asaro RJ, Shih CF. Computational modeling of metal
matrix composite materials D III comparison with phenomenological
models. Acta Metall Mater 1993;41:1489–99.
[2] Bruzzi MS, McHugh PE, O’Rourke F, Linder T. Micromechanical
modeling of the static and cyclic loading of an Al 2124 SiC MMC. Int
J Plasticity 2001;17:565–99.
[3] Zhai PC, Zhang QJ, Yuan RZ. Random microstructure finite element
method and its verification for effective properties of composite
materials. J Wuhan Univ Technol (Mater Sci Ed) 2000;15(1):6–12.
[4] Soppa E, Schmauder S, Fischer G, Brollo J, Weber U. Deformation
and damage in Al/Al2O3. Comput Mater Sci 2003;28:574–86.
[5] Borbély A, Biermann H, Hartmann O. FE investigation of the effect
particle distribution on the uniaxial stress–strain behaviour of
particulate reinforced metal–matrix composites. Mater Sci Eng A
2001;313:34–45.
[6] Lee JH, Maeng DY, Hong SI, Wom CW. Predictions of cracking
model and hardening behavior of MMC via FEM. Mater Sci Eng A
2003;339:175–82.
[7] Schmauder S, Weber U, Soppa E. Computational mechanics of
heterogeneous materials – influence of residual stress. Comput Mater
Sci 2003;26:142–53.
[8] Mishnaevsky Jr L, Derrien K, Baptiste D. Effect of microstructure of
particle reinforced composites on the damage evolution: probabilistic
and numerical analysis. Compos Sci Technol 2004;64:1805–18.
[9] Spowart JE, Maruyama B, Miracle DB. Multi-scale characterization
of spatially heterogeneous systems: implications for discontinuously
reinforced metal–matrix composite microstructures. Mater Sci Eng A
2001;307:51–66.
[10] Böhm HJ, Rammerstorfer FG, Weissenbek E. Some simple models
for micromechanical investigations of fiber arrangement effects in
MMCs. Comput Mater Sci 1993;1:177–94.
[11] Gusev AA. Representative volume element size for elastic composites:
a numerical study. J Mech Phys Solids 1997;45:1449–59.
[12] Watt DF, Xu XQ, Lloyd DJ. Effects of particle morphology and
spacing on the strain fields in a plastically deforming matrix. Acta
Metall Mater 1996;44:789–99.
[13] Agrawal P, Conlon K, Bowman KJ, Sun CT, Cichocki FR, Trumble
KP. Thermal residual stress in co-continuous composites. Acta Mater
2003;51:1143–56.
[14] Han W, Eckschlager A, Böhm HJ. The effects of three-dimensional
multi-particle arrangements on the mechanical behavior and damage
initiation of particle-reinforced MMCs. Compos Sci Technol
2001;61:1581–90.
[15] Dong M, Schmauder S. Modeling of metal matrix composites by a
self-consistent embedded cell model. Acta Mater 1996;44(6):2465–78.
[16] Bao G, Lin Z. High strain rate deformation in particle reinforced
metal matrix composites. Acta Mater 1996;44(3):1011–9.
[17] Li Y, Ramesh KT. Influence of particle volume fraction, shape and
aspect ratio on the behavior of particle reinforced metal–matrix
composites at high rates of strain. Acta Mater 1998;46(16):5633–46.
[18] Farrissey L, Schmauder S, Dong M, Soppa E, Poech MH, McHugh
P. Investigation of the strengthening of particulate reinforced
composites using different analytical and finite element models.
Comput Mater Sci 1999;15:1–10.
 J.-T. Zhang et al. / Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 2775–2785
[19] Leggoe JW, Mammoli AA, Bush MB, Hu XZ. Finite element
modeling of deformation in particulate reinforced metal matrix
composites with random local microstructure variation. Acta Mater
1998;46(17):6075–88.
[20] Mishnaevsky Jr L, Dong M, Hönle S, Schmauder S. Computational
mesomechanics of particle-reinforced composites. Comput Mater Sci
1999;16:133–43.
[21] Yadav S, Chichili DR, Ramesh KT. The mechanical response of a
6061-T6 Al/Al2O3 metal matrix composite at high rates of deforma-
tion. Acta Metall Mater 1995;43(12):4453–64.
[22] Chichili DR, Ramesh KT. Dynamic failure mechanisms in a 6061-
T6 Al/Al2O3 metal–matrix composite. Int J Solids Struct
1995;32(17/18):2609–26.
[23] San Marchi C, Cao Fahe, Kouleli M, Mortensen A. Quasistatic and
dynamic compression of aluminum-oxide particle reinforced pure
aluminum. Mater Sci Eng A 2002;337:202–11.
[24] Li YL, Ramesh KT, Chin ESC. Comparison of plastic deformation
and failure of A359/SiC and 6061-T6/Al2O3 metal matrix composite
under dynamic tension. Mater Sci Eng A 2004;371:359–70.
[25] Zhang H, Ramesh KT, Chin ESC. Effects of interfacial debonding on
the rate-dependent response of metal matrix composites. Acta Mater
2005;53:4687–700.
[26] Duane SC, Khahn Bui, Christian Kaufmann. Implementation and
validation of the Johnson–Holmquist ceramic material model in LS-
2785
DYNA. In: Fourth European LS-DYNA users conference-materials
1, 2003; D-1-4760.
[27] Livermore Software Technology Corporation. LS-DYNA Keyword
User’s Manual, 2003, Version 970.
[28] Johnson GR, Holmquist TJ. An improved computational constitutive
model for brittle materials. High Pressure Science and Technology
1993. In: Schmidt SC, Schaner JW, Samara GA, Ross M., editors.
AIP, vol. 2; 1994. p. 981–4.
[29] Holmquist TJ, Templeton DW, Bishnoi KD. Constitutive modelling
of aluminium nitride for large strain, high strain rate, and high
pressure applications. Int J Impact Eng 2001;25:211–31.
[30] Hom CL, McMeeking RM. Plastic flow in ductile materials contain-
ing a cubic array of rigid spheres. Int J Plasticity 1991;7:255–74.
[31] Bao G, Hutchinson JW, McMeeking RM. Particle reinforcement of
ductile matrices against plastic flow and creep. Acta Metall Mater
1991;39(8):1871–82.
[32] Segurado J, Llorca J. A numerical approximation to the elastic
properties of sphere-reinforced composites. J Mech Phys Solids
2002;50:2107–21.
[33] Gustafson TW, Panda PC, Song G, Raj R. Influence of microstruc-
tural scale on plastic flow behavior of metal matrix composites. Acta
Mater 1997;45(4):1633–43.
[34] Zhang H, Ramesh KT, Chin ESC. High strain rate response of
aluminum 6092/B4C composites. Mater Sci Eng A 2004;384:26–34.