metals
Review
Plastic Deformation Behavior of Metal Materials: A Review of
Constitutive Models
Xiangdong Jia * , Kunming Hao, Zhan Luo and Zhenyu Fan
Citation: Jia, X.; Hao, K.; Luo, Z.; Fan,
Z. Plastic Deformation Behavior of
Metal Materials: A Review of
Constitutive Models. Metals 2022, 12,
2077. https://doi.org/10.3390/
met12122077
Academic Editor: Kyriakos I.
Kourousis
Received: 22 October 2022
Accepted: 30 November 2022
Published: 3 December 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Metals 2022, 12, 2077. https://doi.org/10.3390/met12122077
College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
* Correspondence: jiaxd.good@163.com or jiaxd.good@njfu.edu.cn
Abstract: The deformation behavior of metal materials in plastic forming is intimately related to
deformation conditions, which are greatly affected by deformation rate, forming temperature, and
plastic variables. Macroscopic mechanical properties research is an important basis and technical
means to analyze the process parameters and deformation process of metal plastic forming. Therefore,
to reveal the influence mechanism of macroscopic mechanical properties of metal materials, and estab-
lish material constitutive models under different deformation conditions, it is of great significance to
choose reasonable forming parameters and prevent forming defects. There are substantial variances
in the macroscopic mechanical characteristics of different materials in the deformation process. In
order to accurately predict its deformation behavior, the phenomenological constitutive model, the
microscopic constitutive model reflecting the microscopic deformation mechanism, and the artificial
neural network constitutive model based on the neural network were constructed respectively on
the basis of macroscopic mechanical tests and microscopic microstructure tests. On the basis of the
existing research results, the advantages and disadvantages of phenomenological constitutive model,
microscopic constitutive model, and neural network constitutive model are compared and analyzed,
respectively. The research results of this paper will provide support for the selection of constitutive
models for reasonably predicting the deformation behavior of metal materials.
Keywords: plastic deformation; constitutive models; phenomenological models; microscopic models;
neural network
1. Introduction
In recent years, with the rapid development of aviation, space flight, automobile and
other fields, higher requirements have been put forward for the forming quality and service
life of metal parts. The metal plastic forming process is the main forming technology
for thin-walled and key stressed parts. Therefore, the formulation of suitable process
parameters based on the plastic deformation behavior of materials is the key to the quality
control of metal plastic forming [1,2].
In the process of metal plastic forming, the flow behavior of material is highly affected
by deformation temperature, deformation velocity, and deformation amount. Especially
in the thermoplastic forming process, the plastic deformation behavior of the material is
the result of the combined action of work hardening and temperature softening, and is
greatly affected by strain, strain rate, and forming temperature. On the one hand, under the
conditions of given thermodynamic parameters, the deformation of materials is accompa-
nied by microstructure evolution; on the other hand, the change of microstructure during
plastic deformation also causes the change of flow stress of materials. Therefore, revealing
the plastic deformation mechanism of metal materials under complicated deformation
conditions is of great significance for the formulation and optimization of reasonable plastic
forming process parameters [3–7].
In order to accurately predict the flow behavior of metal materials under deformation,
a large number of studies have been carried out in recent years, and constitutive models
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/metals
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 2 of 33

have been established on this basis; the constitutive models can describe the effects of strain
rate, forming temperature, strain and strain rate on the deformation behavior of materials
during deformation. However, due to the obvious nonlinear characteristics of the plastic de-
formation behavior of the material during the plastic deformation process, it is difficult for
a single constitutive model to fully describe the influence of all deformation parameters [8].
Therefore, it is the focus of research on material deformation behavior to create new
constitutive models or alter existing constitutive models with the use of macroscopic and
microscopic test data. Nonlinear flow behavior of different metals or alloys under many
impact factors consider the particular influence of deformation process parameters.
In the plastic deformation process, the change of microstructure is the main reason for
the change of macroscopic mechanical properties under different deformation conditions.
When the deformation reaches a certain degree, with the increase of deformation, the
microscopic damage of the material continues to accumulate and expand [8], which makes
the macroscopic mechanical properties of the material change significantly.
The accumulation of damage during plastic deformation is the main cause of forming
failure, which will also lead to premature fatigue failure of parts. Therefore, the prediction
of plastic deformation damage accumulation is also an important factor to be considered
in the design of forming process parameters. The damage evolution of metal materials
during plastic deformation can be separated into two components: one is the growth of
the original hole of the material, and the other is the nucleation and growth of new holes
during deformation. Based on continuum damage theory, the accumulation of stress–strain
is the main factor of plastic deformation damage. With the development of the research
on the plastic deformation damage theory, the research on the deformation behavior of
materials gradually changes from macro to micro. In the establishment of the constitutive
model, in addition to considering the macroscopic deformation characteristics, the micro-
scopic parameters are gradually introduced to characterize the microscopic deformation
mechanism of materials.
The most commonly used constitutive models can be divided into three categories:
phenomenological model, microscopic model, and artificial neural network model [9,10].
Because of few parameters and it being easy to be established, the phenomenological
model is the most important model in the engineering application, such as the Arrhenius
constitutive equation, the Johnson–Cook (J–C) model, Fields–Backofen (FB) Model, Hansel–
Spittel Model, and Molinari–Ravichandran Model. However, the phenomenological model
cannot directly reflect the influence of material microscopic parameters on macroscopic
mechanical properties. The microscopic model is based on the microscopic deformation
mechanism of materials, such as the Zerilli–Armstrong Model (ZA Model), Preston–Tonks–
Wallace (PTW) Model, Rusinek–Klepaczko (RK) Model, and the Cellular Automaton (CA)
Model. Although the microscopic model directly reflects the influence of the microscopic
parameters on the macroscopic performance, the microscopic model has more parameters
compared with the phenomenological model, and it is more difficult to determine the model
parameters. The artificial neural network model can be used to predict the flow stress of
materials under complex deformation conditions, which avoids the difficult problem of
material parameter determination of the traditional constitutive model, and is suitable for
finite element simulation of the material deformation process.

2. Phenomenological Model
Based on the experimental data, the phenomenological model can determine the
influence of stress, strain, temperature, and strain rate on the material deformation be-
havior through data fitting and other technical means, so as to construct a constitutive
relationship model that can reflect the macroscopic deformation behavior of materials.
Although the parameters of the phenomenological model are relatively few, it is easy
to obtain by experimental means, and the phenomenological model does not consider
the influence of material composition, grain size, dislocation density, and other factors
on material properties. Therefore, it cannot reveal the micro-deformation mechanism of
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 3 of 33

materials, which limits the application of the model. Usually, the prediction accuracy of the
phenomenological model is high in the limited strain rate and temperature range, and the
model cannot accurately reflect the deformation behavior of the material after exceeding
the range.

2.1. Johnson–Cook (J–C) Model

The Johnson–Cook model (J–C) is a typical representative of the phenomenological
model, which is widely used in industrial production and material property prediction
research [11]. As shown in Equation (1), the J–C model assumes that the material is
isotropic and decouples the work hardening effect, strain rate effect, and temperature effect
to simplify the constitutive equation, and the parameters of J–C model can be calibrated by
uniaxial tensile or compressive tests of materials:
. m 
 T − T0
 
 ε
σe = A + Bεnp 1 + C ln . 1− (1)
ε0 Tm − T0

where σe is the Von-Mises equivalent stress, A is the yield stress (MPa) under the reference
strain rate, B is the hardening coefficient (MPa), C is the strain rate sensitivity coefficient, n
is the hardening exponent, m is the temperature sensitivity coefficient, εp is the equivalent
.
plastic strain, ε is the strain rate (s−1 ), ε p is the reference strain rate (s−1 ), T is the actual
temperature, T0 is the ambient temperature, and Tm is the melting point temperature of
the material.
When the deformation temperature T of the material is basically the same as the
ambient temperature T0 , and the material is loaded under quasi-static conditions, the flow
stress of the material only needs to consider the effect of strain hardening on the stress.
Thus, the J–C model can be simplified as
 
σe = A + Bεnp (2)

The relationship between the equivalent stress σe and the equivalent plastic strain εp
in Equation (2) can be adapted to all stress states, and the three parameters A, B, and n are
coupled with each other.
The material parameters in the J–C model can be determined by fitting with less
experimental data; however, this will not take into account the influence of complex
stress states on material properties. When the traditional model parameter calibration
method is used to determine the model parameters, there will be a large error between the
numerical simulation results and the actual deformation of the material under complex
stress conditions. In order to reduce this difference, Ru [12] took 6005A-T6 aluminum alloy
as the research object and obtained the optimal solution of J–C model parameters based on
the test data under different stress states with the help of the inversion calibration method
based on a genetic algorithm.
The J–C model assumes that thermal softening, strain rate hardening, and strain
hardening are three independent phenomena, which can be isolated from each other
without considering the effect of the interaction among the three. That is to say, the original
J–C model does not include any historical effect of thermal or strain rate. Although the J–C
model can easily realize the calibration of parameters, it can only describe the relationship
at the macro level such as strain rate, temperature, flow stress, and strain. It lacks the
essence of material deformation and cannot describe the flow stress of material from the
micro deformation mechanism of material. It can only describe the relationship of strain
rate, temperature, flow stress, and strain at the macroscopic level, but cannot represent the
microscopic deformation mechanism of the material.
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 4 of 33

Zhang [13] modified the original J–C model by considering the effect of forming
temperature on strain hardening behavior of IC10 alloy. The modified J–C model can be
expressed as
. 
T − T0
   
∗ n ε
σe = A 1 − + B( T )ε p 1 + C ln . (3)
Tm − T0 ε0
where
T − T0
T∗ = (4)
Tm − T0
B( T ∗ ) is a temperature effect function, which can be defined as

σbr (1 − T ∗m1 ) − σ0.2r (1 − T ∗m )

B( T ∗ ) = n (5)
(ε br (1 + P1 × T ∗ − P2 × T ∗ P3 ))

where m1 , P1 , P2 , and P3 are material constants. σbr is the fracture stress at room temperature.
εbr is the fracture strain at room temperature.
The flow stress of IC10 alloy was fitted by the modified J–C model, and the fitting
results
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW are shown in Figure 1. The results show that the flow stress predicted by38the
5 of
modified J–C model is in good agreement with the experimental results, but the prediction
accuracy is poor when the temperature is 800 ◦ C, and the strain rate is 0.0001 s−1 .
1400 (a) 1600
(b)
1200 1400
1200
1000
Stress(MPa)
Stress(MPa)

1000
800
800
600
600
400 400
Experimental Experimental
200 Modified J−C predicted 200 Modified J −C predicted

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Plasticity Strain(%) Plasticity Strain(%)

1400 (c) 1400 (d)

1200 1200
1000
Stress(MPa)

1000
Stress(MPa)

800 800

600 600
400 400
Experimental Experimental
200 200 Modified J−C predicted
Modified J− C predicted
0 0
2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
Plasticity Strain(%) Plasticity Strain(%)

Figure The
1. 1.
Figure Thepredicted
predictedresults
results of IC10
IC10 alloy
alloybased
basedononthe
the modified
modified J–CJ–C model
model [13],[13], (a) T = 25
(a) T=25℃,𝜀̇ = ◦ C,
. −1 −1 . −1 −1 . −1
ε = 0.00001s , (b) T = 600 C, ε = 0.0001s , (c) T = 700 C,ε = 0.0001s , (d) T = 800 ◦ C,
0.00001𝑠 , (b) T=600℃,𝜀̇ = ◦
0.0001𝑠 , (c) − 1
T=700℃,𝜀̇ = 0.0001𝑠 ◦ , (d) T=800℃,𝜀̇ −
= 10.0001𝑠 .
.
ε = 0.0001s−1 .
Lin and Chen [14] studied the deformation behavior of 42CrMo alloy steel under hot
compression
Lin and Chen based onstudied
[14] Johnson–Cook and Zerili–Armstrong
the deformation behavior of(JC–ZA)
42CrMocoupled
alloy steelmodel,
under andhot
established based
compression the relationship between flow
on Johnson–Cook and stress, strain rate, and
Zerili–Armstrong forming
(JC–ZA) temperature:
coupled model, and
established the relationship between flownstress, strain rate, and
 = A + B exp −C3T + C4 * ( ) (
forming temperature:
(6) ) Com
.∗
 
n nece
σ = ( A + Bε ) exp −C3 T + C4 T ε (6)
where A, B, n, C3, and C4 are material parameters. σ is equivalent stress. ε is equivalent
strain. T is the absolute temperature. 𝜀̇ ∗ = 𝜀̇/𝜀̇0 is dimensionless strain rate.
Since about 3–5% plastic deformation energy is retained in the material as storage
energy, this will increase the temperature of the sample; thus, Equation (6) can be modi-
fied to

 = ( A1 + B1 n ) exp −C3 (T + T ) + C4 (T + T ) ln    (7)

  

 = ( A + B ) exp  −C3T + C4T   
n
(6)
 

Metals 2022, 12, 2077

where A, B, n, C3, and C4 are material parameters. σ is equivalent stress. ε is equivalent
5 of 33
strain. T is the absolute temperature. 𝜀̇∗ = 𝜀̇/𝜀̇0 is dimensionless strain rate.
Since about 3–5% plastic deformation energy is retained in the material as storage
energy, this will increase the temperature of the sample; thus, Equation (6) can be modi-
where A, B, n, C3 , and C4 are material parameters. σ is equivalent stress. ε is equivalent
to T is the absolute temperature. ε. ∗ = ε/
fiedstrain. . .
ε is dimensionless strain rate. 0
Since about 3–5% plastic deformation energy is retained in the material as storage energy,
 the
this will increase A1 + B1 n exp
= temperature (
−sample;
of the C3 T +thus,
TEquation)
+ C4 T(6)+can
Tbelnmodified (
   to (7) ) ( )
.∗
h i
σ = ( A1 + B1 εn ) exp −C3 ( T + ∆T ) + C4 ( T + ∆T ) ln ε (7)
The flow stress of 42CrMo steel obtained by JC-ZA is shown in Figure 2. Since the JC-
ZA modelThenot only
flow considers
stress the strain
of 42CrMo hardening
steel obtained by phenomena, butin
JC-ZA is shown also considers
Figure thethe
2. Since cou-
pling effect
JC-ZA of temperature
model and strain
not only considers rate on
the strain the flowphenomena,
hardening behavior, the
butaccuracy of thethe
also considers pre-
diction results
coupling of the
effect model is improved.
of temperature and strain rate on the flow behavior, the accuracy of the
prediction results of the model is improved.
180 120
(a) T=1223K (b) T=1423K 1
1 50s
160 50s
100
True Stress (MPa)

True Stress (MPa)

140
1
10s 1
120 80 10s

100
1 60
1s
1s 1
80 Predicted
40 Measured
60
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
True strain True strain

Figure 2. Flow stress comparison curves of 42CrMo, (a) 1223 K; (b) 1423 K [14].
Figure 2. Flow stress comparison curves of 42CrMo, (a) 1223 K; (b) 1423 K [14].
Under the condition of high strain rate, since the thermal effect of plastic deformation
is Under the condition
significantly correlatedofwith
high strain
the strainrate,
rate,since the thermal
the original effect
J–C model of plastic
cannot reflectdeformation
the strain
is significantly correlated
rate effect under the highwith
strainthe strain
rate. rate, the
Therefore, the original
predictionJ–C modelofcannot
accuracy reflect
J–C model willthe
strain rate effect
be reduced. underthis
To solve theproblem,
high strain
Vural rate. Therefore,
and Caro the prediction
[15] modified accuracy
the strain rate of J–C
sensitivity
model will beCreduced.
parameter in J–C model to improve
To solve the prediction
this problem, Vural andaccuracy
Caroof themodified
[15] model. Thethemodified
strain rate
J–C model of Vural and Caro makes temperature directly couple with
sensitivity parameter C in J–C model to improve the prediction accuracy of the model. strain hardening.
The modified J–C model of Vural and Caro makes temperature
. . directly couple with strain
C = C1 ( Tr∗ ) p + C2 H ε, εt , k


(8)
hardening.
 . 
1 1 1
( )
. . ε
( )

p
C 2= C12 Tr k+lnCε.2tH = 1, +t ,ek−2k ln (ε/
H ε, εt , k = + tanh . .
εt )
(9)
(8)
∗ T − Tr
1 T1 = Tr− Tr   1 (10)
H (  ,  t , k ) = + tanh  k ln  = −2 k ln (  /  t ) (9)
where T is room temperature. T2
. .
2
r is the 
reference   +
temperature.
t 1 e C1 represents the rate
sensitivity parameter (ε < εt ) under quasi-static strain rate at room temperature. C2
represents the increase of rate sensitivity 𝑇 − 𝑇𝑟 under dynamic strain rate, which
∗ parameter
. . 𝑇 =
is the transition strain rate (ε > εt ) between quasi-static deformation zone and dynamic
(10)
𝑇
. 𝑟. − 𝑇 𝑟
deformation zone, usually 102 –103 s−1 . H ε, εt , k is the smooth approximation of the

where T step
Heaviside is room temperature.
function and changes Tr is the reference
continuously temperature.
near C1strain
the transition represents
rate. k the rate
is the
proportional
sensitivity factor. (𝜀̇ < 𝜀̇𝑡 ) under quasi-static strain rate at room temperature. C2 rep-
parameter
Based
resents the on theof
increase tensile tests and compressive
rate sensitivity tests, Vural
parameter under and strain
dynamic Caro [15]
rate,determined
which is the
the parameters of the modified J–C model of 2139 Aluminum Alloys. By enhancing the
coupling effect between temperature and strain hardening, the flow stress changes related
to rate and temperature were better captured, as shown in Figure 3. Comparing the tensile
test results with the compression test results, the strain rate sensitivity under dynamic state
is enhanced through smooth and continuous transition.
 factor.
Based on the tensile tests and compressive tests, Vural and Caro [15] determined the
parameters of the modified J–C model of 2139 Aluminum Alloys. By enhancing the cou-
pling effect between temperature and strain hardening, the flow stress changes related to
rate and temperature were better captured, as shown in Figure 3. Comparing the tensile
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 6 of 33
test results with the compression test results, the strain rate sensitivity under dynamic
state is enhanced through smooth and continuous transition.

600
(a) -60 650
(b)
RT 600
500
100

True Stress(MPa)
550

True Stress(MPa)
400 500
200
450
300 EXP_RT_0.01(1/s)
400 Modified JC_RT_0.01(1/s)
EXP_RT_2850(1/s)
200 350
Modified JC_RT_2850(1/s)
300 300 EXP_RT_1000(1/s)
100 Modified JC_RT_2850(1/s)
250 EXP_200C_3300(1/s)
ε = 10-4 s-1
Modified JC_200C_3300(1/s)
0 200
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14
True Strain True Strain
Figure
Figure 3. Vural
3. Vural andand
Caro Caro modified
modified J–C model
J–C model [15], [15], (a) temperature
(a) temperature dependence
dependence of flowofstress
flow at
stress
10−4 at
10 −4 s−1 reference strain rate; (b) effects of strain rate and temperature under dynamic loading.
s reference strain rate; (b) effects of strain rate and temperature under dynamic loading.
−1

2.2. Khan–Huang (KH), Khan–Huang–Liang (KHL), Khan–Liang–Farrokh (KLF) Models

2.2. Khan–Huang (KH), Khan–Huang–Liang (KHL), Khan–Liang–Farrokh (KLF) Models
In 1992, Khan and Huang [16] proposed a viscoplastic constitutive model (KH model)
In 1992, Khan and Huang [16] proposed a viscoplastic constitutive model (KH model)
to simulate the behavior of coarse-grained Al1100 alloy in a wide strain rate range:
to simulate the behavior of coarse-grained Al1100 alloy in a wide strain rate range:
 
p
J 2 = f1 ( 2 ) f 2 D2
J2 = f 1 (ε 2 ) f 2 D2p (11)
(11) ( )
p
where J2 is the second invariant of the stress deviator, D2 is 𝑝the second invariant of plastic
where J2 is the second invariant of the stress deviator, 𝐷2 is the second invariant of
deformation rate, and ε2 is the equivalent strain.
plastic deformation rate, and ε2 is the equivalent strain.
In a one-dimensional case, Equation (11) can be rewritten as
In a one-dimensional case, Equation (11) can be rewritten as
.

σ = g1 ( ε ) g2 ε (12)
 = g1 ( ) g2  (12) ( )
where
1
where 3 2
g1 (ε) = [3 f 1 ( ε2 )] = σ0 + E∞ ε − ae−αε (13)
4
1
3
g1 (g) (=ε. )[3=f1[(f (32ε. )]
2 2 2=  + E 1 − ae
−
1
 .
(13)
2 42 4 )] =0 n 1
(14)
ln(ε)
[1 − p ]
ln( D0 )
1
3 1
where g1 (ε) represents  ) = [ f 2 ( between
g 2 (correlation
the  )] = stress and plastic strain at the reference
2 2
.
ln( ) von-Mises
4 rate. σ[1represents (14) ε
strain rate. g2 ε is a function of the strain
.
− p
]n1 equivalent stress,
is the cumulative plastic strain, and ε is the equivalent ln(plastic
D0 ) strain rate. D is the upper
p
0
limit of arbitrary strain rate. n, E∞ , σ0 , and α are material constants.
Yu et𝑔al.
where 1 (𝜀) represents
[17] used thethe KHcorrelation
model to between
describe stress andbehavior
the flow plastic strain at the steel,
of DP600 refer- as
ence strain rate. 𝑔 (𝜀̇ ) is a function of the strain rate. σ represents von-Mises
shown in Figure2 4. The results show that the KH model can almost perfectly describe the equivalent
correlation between the stress and plastic strain under the strain rate 10−4 s−1 . However,
the KH model neglects the coupling effect of strain and strain rate on work hardening, and
does not consider the effect of temperature, so there is a large error between the predicted
results of KH model and the measured results of mechanical properties of DP600 steel at
high strain rate (600 s−1 ).
In view of the above shortcomings, Equation (12) is modified to better describe the
effect of strain rate on flow stress:
.p .p p
σ = f (ε p , ε ) = σ0 fˆ2 (ε ) + E∞ p − ae−αε (15)
 steel at high strain rate (600 s−1).

Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 37

1000 1
1600s

800
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 𝑝
stress, ε is the cumulative plastic strain, and 𝜀̇ is the equivalent plastic strain rate. 𝐷0 is 7 of 33

Stress(MPa)
10 4s 1
600 of arbitrary strain rate. n, 𝐸∞ , σ0, and α are material constants.
the upper limit
Yu et al. [17] used the KH model to describe the flow!behavior of DP600 steel, as
400 Experimental date .p m
shown in Figure 4. The resultsKhan-Huang
show that  . the
p
 KH model can ε almost perfectly describe the
ˆf 2 model = 1 +under
ε strain D ln the
. (16)
correlation between the stress and plastic ε0 p strain rate 10 s . However,
−4 −1
200
the KH model neglects the coupling effect of strain and strain rate on work hardening,
.p .p
where
and does not is flow stress,
σ 0consider ε p isofplastic
the effect strain, so
temperature, represents
ε there the error
is a large current strain the
between rate, ε0 is the
pre-
dicted results0.00of KH 0.05 0.10
model and0.15 0.20
the measured 0.25
results of mechanical properties of DP600ˆ  . p 
reference strain rate, Plastic
and m is
strain the material constant. The relation curve between f 2 ε
steel at high strain rate (600 s−1). .p .p
and dimensionless parameter ln ε /ε0 is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 4. Comparison of KH model predictions and experimental data at different strain rates [17].
1000 1
1600s
In view of the above shortcomings, Equation (12) is modified to better describe the
effect
800 of strain rate on flow stress:
Stress(MPa)

10 4s 1

 = f ( p ,  p ) =  0 fˆ2 ( p ) + E p − ae−
p
600
(15)
400 Experimental date
m
p 
fˆ2 ( p ) = 1 + D ln  p 
Khan-Huang model
(16)
 0 
200

0 𝑝
where
0.00 σ
is 0.10
flow stress,
0.05 0.15 𝜀 𝑝 is plastic
0.20 0.25 strain, 𝜀̇ 𝑝 represents the current strain rate, 𝜀̇0
Plastic strain
is the reference strain rate, and m is the material constant. The relation curve between
𝑝
𝑓2̑ (𝜀̇𝑝 ) 4.and
Figure dimensionless
Comparison of KH parameter ln𝜀̇𝑝 ⁄𝜀̇and
model predictions 0 isexperimental
shown in Figure 5. different strain rates [17].
data at
Figure 4. Comparison of KH model predictions and experimental data at different strain rates [17].

In view of the above shortcomings, Equation (12) is modified to better describe the
effect of strain rate on flow stress:

 = f ( p ,  p ) =  0 fˆ2 ( p ) + E p − ae−
p
(15)

m
p 
fˆ2 ( p ) = 1 + D ln  p  (16)
 0 
𝑝
where σ is flow stress, 𝜀 𝑝 is plastic strain, 𝜀̇ 𝑝 represents the current strain rate, 𝜀̇0
is the reference strain rate, and m is the material constant. The relation curve between
𝑝 𝑝
𝑓2̑ (𝜀̇𝑝Figure
) and 5.
dimensionless
The relation curve 𝑓ˆ̑ (𝜀̇⁄𝑝.𝜀̇p)0and
betweenln𝜀̇
parameter is shown . p in
ln𝜀̇ 𝑝 /𝜀̇
𝑝 Figure 5.
. [17].
p
Figure 5. The relation curve between f22 ε and lnε 0/ε0 [17].
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 37
With the help of the modified model (Equations (15) and (16)), the rheological prop-
With the help of the modified model (Equations (15) and (16)), the rheological proper-
erties of DP600 steel were predicted at strain rates of 10−−33 s−1−, 110−2 −
s−12 , 500 s −1, 1100 s−1, and
ties of−1DP600 steel were predicted at strain rates of 10 s , 10 s−1 , 500 s−1 , 1100 s−1 ,
1600 s , respectively, and the predict results are shown in Figure 6. Compared with the
and 1600 s−1 , respectively, and the predict results are shown in Figure 6. Compared with
experimental results, the modified KH model can better describe the deformation behav-
the experimental results, the modified KH model can better describe the deformation
ior of DP600 steel at a high strain rate.
behavior of DP600 steel at a high strain rate.
1600s 1
1000 1100s 1
500s 1

800 10 2s 1

10 3s 1
Stress(Mpa)

600
𝑝
Figure 5. The relation curve between 𝑓2̑ (𝜀̇ 𝑝 ) and ln𝜀̇ 𝑝 /𝜀̇0 [17].
Experimental date
400
With the help of the modified modelmodel
New constitutive (Equations (15) and (16)), the rheological prop-
erties of200
DP600 steel were predicted at strain rates of 10 −3 s−1, 10−2 s−1, 500 s−1, 1100 s−1, and
1600 s−1, respectively, and the predict results are shown in Figure 6. Compared with the
0
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24
Plastic strain

Figure
Figure 6. Comparison
6. Comparison of the
of the newnew constitutive
constitutive model
model prediction
prediction datadata
and and experimental
experimental datadata
[17]. [17].

Khan and Liang [18] modified the relationship between 𝐽2 and 𝐷2𝑃 in the original
KH model by considering the influence of temperature effect on the mechanical properties
of materials, and established a new KHL constitutive model, as shown in Equation (18):
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 8 of 33

Khan and Liang [18] modified the relationship between J2 and D2P in the original KH
model by considering the influence of temperature effect on the mechanical properties of
materials, and established a new KHL constitutive model, as shown in Equation (18):
 
p
J2 = f 1 ε 2 , D2 f 2 ( T ) (17)
" . !n #
ln ε .
σ = A+B 1− p ε n0
ec ln ε (1 − T ∗m ) (18)
ln D0
T − Tr
T∗ = (19)
Tm − Tr
 
p
where T is the absolute temperature. ε is equivalent plastic strain. f 1 ε 2 , D2 is a function
characterizing the coupling effect of strain and strain rate on work hardening. Tr is the
reference temperature. Tm is the melting temperature of the material, A, B, n, n0 , and m are
fitting parameters based on test data.
In 2000, Khan et al. [19] introduced the Hall–Petch relation into the KHL model, and
replaced constant A (yield stress of material under reference strain rate) with the Hall–Petch
relation. The modified KHL model comprehensively characterized the effects of grain size,
work hardening, rate, and temperature on the plastic deformation behavior of materials.
The modified KHL model was as follows:
  .  n1 
p

  ln ε . p !c
k n ε
σ =  a+ √ + B 1 − p
 (ε )  ×
0
(1 − T ∗ m ) (20)
 
p . p∗
d ln D0 ε

k
σy = a + √ (21)
d
where σy is yield stress, d is the average grain size of polycrystalline, and a and k are
material constants.
Khan et al. [20] used the modified KHL constitutive model (Equation (20)) compared
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW with J–C model, as shown in Figure 7. The results show that the prediction accuracy
9 of of
37the
modified KHL model for the rheologiacal characteristics of Ti-6AL-4V alloy is significantly
higher than that of the J–C model.

1600
1900s 1,296K

1400
10 3s 1,296K

1200
σ [Mpa]

2700s 1,598K
1000
3100s 1,798K

800 3700s 1,998K

600 Symbol:Experiments
Solid Line:Correlations with KHL model
Dotted Line:Correlations with JC model
400
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
 p

Figure
Figure 7. The
7. The modified
modified KHLKHL model
model compared
compared with
with J–CJ–C model
model [19].
[19].

However, when the deformation temperature of the constitutive Equation (20) is lower
However, when the deformation temperature of the constitutive Equation (20) is
than the reference temperature, the temperature term (1 − T ∗m ) will return to a negative
lower than the reference temperature, the temperature term (1 − 𝑇 ∗𝑚 ) will return to a neg-
value, which will make the model unable to predict the viscoplastic response of the material
ative value, which will make the model unable to predict the viscoplastic response of the
below room temperature. Therefore, in order to characterize the mechanical properties of
material below room temperature. Therefore, in order to characterize the mechanical
properties of metal materials at low temperature, Khan [20] revised Equation (20), and the
modified flow stress model is shown as follows:

k   B  ln ( ) 
 n1
 p c
m
      Tm − T 
p
 n0
 = a+ 1 + 1 −  p (22)
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 9 of 33

metal materials at low temperature, Khan [20] revised Equation (20), and the modified flow
stress model is shown as follows:
  .   n1 
p

ln . p !c 
ε Tm − T m
  
k  B n
p 0 ε
σ = a + √ 1 + 1− ( ε )  × . p∗ (22)

p

d a ln D0 ε Tm − Tr

k1
f or 0 ≤ d−0.5 ≤ d∗−0.5
(
k a1 + √
a+ √ = d (23)
k2
d a2 + √ f or d∗−0.5 ≤ d−0.5
d

where T is the absolute temperature, Tm is the melting temperature, Tr is the reference

temperature,a and k are material constants, and can be determined from experiments at a
.
strain rate of ε = 1. d* is defined as the reference grain size when the yield stress begins
to increase significantly. a1 , a2 , k1 , and k2 are constants based on the yield stress and grain
size (d− 0.5 ).
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW As the grain size of the material decreases to the nanometer range, the strain hardening
10 of 37
behavior also increases. The modified constitutive Equation (22) is very close to the
experimental results of nanocrystalline aluminum, as shown in Figure 8.
800

700
0.0001s 1,40nm

600 1s 1,60nm
0.0001s 1,50nm
500
σ [Mpa]

0.0001s 1,60nm
400

300
0.0001s 1,80nm

200 0.0001s 1,120nm

0.0001s 1,4500nm

100 Symbols:Experiments results

Line:Correlations
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

 p

Figure
Figure 8. Prediction
8. Prediction results
results of of mechanical
mechanical properties
properties of of nanocrystalline
nanocrystalline aluminum
aluminum based
based onon
thethe KHL
KHL
model [20].
model [20].

Based
Based onon
thethe
KHLKHL model,
model, Farrokh
Farrokh and and
KhanKhan [21] established
[21] established a newaviscoplastic
new viscoplastic
con-
constitutive equation Khan–Liang–Farrokh (KLF) model (Equation (24)) related to grain
stitutive equation Khan–Liang–Farrokh (KLF) model (Equation (24)) related to grain size
size and temperature:
and temperature:
.  
p
   
. p !c 
( )
  n2 ln
 n2 ε
     p −c T
      

k d T no Tm
1−d      T −T 
m p ε
a + n∗ +B ε T  × . no
d  =  a +d0  + B  ln Dp1 − T
ln P

  ( )
σ= k (24)
 m   P ε p∗  Tm − Tr m
       
   (24)  
 d0  .   ln ( D )   T      p   Tm − Tr 
n
 d  0 p
 p
0  
where εp is plastic strain. ε is the current strain rate. σ is the flow stress. Tm represents
thewhere
melting temperature
εp is plastic of the
strain. material.
𝜀̇𝑝 is T isstrain
the current ambient rate.temperature. Tr is the reference
p . p∗σ is the flow stress. Tm repre- ∗
temperature. D is the
sents the melting temperature
0 optional upper limit strain rate. ε
of the material. T is ambient temperature. is the reference strain
Tr is the rate. n
reference
temperature. 𝐷0 is the optional upper limit strain rate. 𝜀̇ is the reference strain rate. d𝑛0∗ is
is the material 𝑝 following the Hall–Petch relationship. d𝑝∗ is the average size of grains.
is the
the grain sizefollowing
material of coarse the
grains. a, k, B, nrelationship.
Hall–Petch o , n1 , n2 , c, and
d ismtheareaverage
the material constants
size of grains. dof0 is
the
KHL model.
the grain size of coarse grains. a , k, B, no, n1, n2, c, and m are the material constants of the
With the help of the above theoretical models, the uniaxial compressive deformation
KHL model.
behavior of help
With the mechanically milled
of the above ultrafine
theoretical grain the
models, anduniaxial
nanocrystalline Cu deformation
compressive and Al under
quasi-static and dynamic strain rates was investigated [21], as shown in Figures 9 and 10.
behavior of mechanically milled ultrafine grain and nanocrystalline Cu and Al under
The KLF model can well capture the variation of yield stress and work hardening behavior
quasi-static and dynamic strain rates was investigated [21], as shown in Figures 9 and 10.
with grain size (to large strain), and can respond to different grain sizes (from coarse grain
The KLF model can well capture the variation of yield stress and work hardening behavior
with grain size (to large strain), and can respond to different grain sizes (from coarse grain
to nanocrystalline materials), different strain rates (quasi-static to dynamic), and different
temperatures (low temperature and high temperature).
 the grain size of coarse grains. a , k, B, no, n1, n2, c, and m are the material constants of the
KHL model.
With the help of the above theoretical models, the uniaxial compressive deformation
behavior of mechanically milled ultrafine grain and nanocrystalline Cu and Al under
quasi-static and dynamic strain rates was investigated [21], as shown in Figures 9 and 10.
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 10 of 33
The KLF model can well capture the variation of yield stress and work hardening behavior
with grain size (to large strain), and can respond to different grain sizes (from coarse grain
to nanocrystalline materials), different strain rates (quasi-static to dynamic), and different
to nanocrystalline materials), different strain rates (quasi-static to dynamic), and different
temperatures (low temperature
temperatures (lowand high temperature).
temperature and high temperature).

500
1200 (a) (b)
75nm(20-h milled)
1000 32nm(10-h milled) 400

True Stress(MPa)
True Stress(MPa)

27nm(20-h miled)22nm(30-h milled) 82nm(10-h milled)

800 300
166nm(5-h milled)
600
51nm(5-h milled) 118nm(2-h milled) 200
400 693nm(un-milled)
720nm(un-milled)
100
s 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
200 350nm(0.5-h milled) Symbols:Experimental date 11 of 37
Symbols:Experimental date Solid lines:Model correlations
Solid lines:Model correlations 0
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
True Plastic Strain True Plastic Strain
Figure 9. Prediction results of the KLF model under different mean particle sizes [21], (a) Cu; (b)
Al.
Figure 9. Prediction results of the KLF model under different mean particle sizes [21], (a) Cu; (b) Al.

700
1200 (a) (b)
1860s 1 - Adiabatic 600 1
2470s - Adiabatic
1000
True Stress(MPa)

1
1s - Isothermal 500
True Stress(MPa)

800 1s 1- Isothermal
400
10 4s 1 - Isothermal 10 4s 1
600 10 2s 1 - Isothermal 10 2s 1
- Isothermal - Isothermal
300
400 200

200 Symbols:Experimental date

100 Symbols:Experimental date
Solid lines:Model correlations Solid lines:Model correlations
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
True Plastic Strain True Plastic Strain

Figure 10. Prediction results of the KLF model under different strain rates [21], (a) Cu (d = 32 nm);
Figure 10. Prediction results of the KLF model under different strain rates [21], (a) Cu (d = 32 nm);
(b) Al (d = 82 nm).
(b) Al (d = 82 nm).
2.3. Fields–Backofen (FB) Model
2.3. Fields–BackofenIn(FB) Model
1957, Fields and Backofen [22] proposed the FB model for most metal materials:
In 1957, Fields and Backofen [22] proposed the FB model for most metal materials:
·
 σ = kεn εm
(25)
 = k  n (25)
m
where k is the strength coefficient, n is the strain hardening index, and m is the strain rate
where k sensitivity index.
is the strength coefficient, n is the strain hardening index, and m is the strain
The FB model is widely used to describe the stress–strain relationship, and can be
rate sensitivity index.
The FB used
modeltoisexpress
widelythe work
used hardening
to describe thephenomenon
stress–strain in the processand
relationship, of plastic
can bedeformation
through the strain hardening index (n) and strain rate sensitive
used to express the work hardening phenomenon in the process of plastic deformation index (m).
through the strainBased on theindex
hardening FB model,
(n) andCheng et al.sensitive
strain rate [23] studied
indexthe uniaxial tensile deformation
(m).
Based on the FB model, Cheng et al. [23] studied the uniaxial tensile of
behavior of an AZ31 magnesium alloy sheet under strain rates 0.1–0.0001 s−1 and de-
deformation
formation temperatures of 423–573 K, as shown in Figure 11. By comparing the predicted
behavior of an AZ31 magnesium alloy sheet under strain rates of 0.1–0.0001 s−1 and defor-
results of FB model with the experimental results, the predicted results are in good agree-
mation temperatures of 423–573 K, as shown in Figure 11. By comparing the predicted
ment with the experimental results at low temperature and high strain rate. However, the
results of FB model with the experimental results, the predicted results are in good agree-
rheological deformation of AZ31 magnesium alloy sheet at higher temperature and lower
ment with the experimental results at low temperature and high strain rate. However, the
strain rate shows obvious recrystallization softening characteristics; the FB model cannot
rheological deformation of AZ31 magnesium alloy sheet at higher temperature and lower
characterize the softening behavior of the material.
strain rate shows obvious recrystallization softening characteristics; the FB model cannot
characterize the softening behavior of the material.

250 =0.0001s 1
423K
)

Metals 2022, 12, 2077
mation temperatures of 423–573 K, as shown in Figure 11. By comparing the predicted
results of FB model with the experimental results, the predicted results are in good agree-
ment with the experimental results at low temperature and high strain rate. However, the
rheological deformation of AZ31 magnesium alloy sheet at higher temperature and lower
strain rate shows obvious recrystallization softening characteristics; the FB model cannot
11 of 33
characterize the softening behavior of the material.

250 =0.0001s 1
423K

True Stress(MPa)
200

150 473K

100 523K

Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 50 573K 12 of 37

0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
In view of theTrue
inaccuracy of the softening description of the FB model, Zhang [24]
Plastic Strain
and Chen [25] introduced a softening term into
Figure 11. Flow stress curve of AZ31 magnesium the[23].
alloy FB model to characterize the softening
Figure 11. Flow stress curve of AZ31 magnesium alloy [23].
behavior of materials in the process of plastic deformation, and modified the FB model on
In view
this basis. Theof the inaccuracy
modified FB model of established
the softening description
is shown of the FB model, Zhang [24]
below:
and Chen [25] introduced a softening term into the FB model to characterize the softening

behavior of materials in the process of nplastic deformation, and modified the FB model (26)on
 = K   m
exp(bT + s )
this basis. The modified FB model established is shown below:
·dln
σ = Kεsn=εm exp(bT + sε) (27)
(26)
d
dlnσ
=the strain hardening index, m is the strain rate
where K is the strength coefficient, ns is (27)
dε
sensitivity index, b is material constant, and T is the absolute temperature. s represents the
where K is
softening theofstrength
ratio coefficient,
magnesium n isincreasing
alloy with the strain of the strain.index, m is the strain rate
hardening
sensitivity index, b is material constant, and T is the absolute temperature. s represents the
The modified magnesium model was used to predict the deformation behavior of
softening ratio of magnesium alloy with increasing of the strain.
AZ31 magnesium alloy [23], as shown in Figure 12. The results showed that the modified
The modified magnesium model was used to predict the deformation behavior of
FB model could better characterize the softening behavior of the material during plastic
AZ31 magnesium alloy [23], as shown in Figure 12. The results showed that the mod-
deformation.
ified FB model could better characterize the softening behavior of the material during
plastic deformation.

250 =0.0001s 1
True Stress(MPa)

423K
200

150 473K

100 523K

50 573K

0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
True Plastic Strain
Figure 12. The stress prediction results of AZ31 magnesium alloy based on the modified FB
Figure 12. The stress prediction results of AZ31 magnesium alloy based on the modified FB model
model [23].
[23].
2.4. Hansel–Spittel Model
2.4. Hansel–Spittel Model
In 1978, Hansel and Spittel [26] combined the classical strain rate power-law model
withInthe
1978, Hansel and
Hollomon and Spittel [26] combined
Swift model, treatingthe
theclassical strain rate
corresponding power-law
material model
constants as
with the Hollomon and Swift model, treating the corresponding material constants
functions of strain and temperature. Based on this, a new equation of thermal deformation as
functions ofisstrain
flow stress and temperature. Based on this, a new equation of thermal deformation
proposed:
flow stress is proposed:
. m3 m /ε .m T
σ = Aem1 T εm2 ε e 4 (1 + ε)m5mTTem6 ε ε 7 T m8 (28)
 = Ae   e
m1T m2 m3 m4 /
(1 +  )
5 m6 m7T m8
e  T (28)

where A is the stress intensity coefficient, m1 is the temperature-dependent coeffi-

cient, m2 is the strain strengthening coefficient, m3 is the strengthening coefficient of strain
rate, m4 is the strain softening coefficient, m5 is the temperature-dependent strain strength-
ening coefficient, m6 is strain correlation coefficient, m7 is the strengthening coefficient of
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 12 of 33

where A is the stress intensity coefficient, m1 is the temperature-dependent coefficient, m2

Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW is the strain strengthening coefficient, m3 is the strengthening coefficient of13strain of 37 rate, m4
is the strain softening coefficient, m5 is the temperature-dependent strain strengthening
coefficient, m6 is strain correlation coefficient, m7 is the strengthening coefficient of strain
rate related to temperature, and m8 is the temperature coefficient.

( ) ( )
Due to the numerous parameters
m1T m2 of m3 them4 /Hansel–Spittel
 m5T m6model, it is very difficult for
sinh  = Ae   e 1 + 
regression analysis. Therefore, Spigarelli and El Mehtedie[27] modified Equation (28) to
(29)

reduce the regression coefficient and make it have better prediction ability:
Under thermal deformation conditions, the strain rate sensitivity of material flow
stress decreases with the increase of strain. However, ·the Hansel–Spittel model is not suf-
sinh(ασ) = Aem1 T εm2 εm3 em4 /ε (1 + ε)m5 T em6 ε (29)
ficient to describe the change of strain rate sensitivity under given temperature and strain
conditions; Brown
Underproposed a modified Hansel–Spittel
thermal deformation conditions, the model (Equations
strain (30)–(32))
rate sensitivity to de-
of material flow
scribe the strain rate sensitivity more accurately [28]. In the Brown modified
stress decreases with the increase of strain. However, the Hansel–Spittel model model, the is not
stress component is describe
sufficient to assumedthe to change
be temperature-independent
of strain rate sensitivity under
undera given
given strain (or
temperature and
steady state) condition; thus, the parameters m 7 andm8 were neglected to simplify the con-
strain conditions; Brown proposed a modified Hansel–Spittel model (Equations (30)–(32))
stitutivetomodel:
describe the strain rate sensitivity more accurately [28]. In the Brown modified model,
the stress component is assumed to be temperature-independent under a given strain (or
( ) ( )
m5T m6
sinh thus,
steady state) condition; = Ae m T m2 m3 m4 /
  e m17 +and
the1 parameters  m 8ewere neglected (30)
to simplify the
constitutive model:
 Q 
 exp A1m1 T,εmfor
sinh(ασ) ==Ae 2 ε 3
e 4 (0.8
. m m /ε
1 + ε ) m5 T e m6 ε (31) (30)
 RT 
 
. Q
 Q ε exp
RT (  ) 1, for   0.8
= A σ, f or ασ < 0.8 (31)
 exp   = A2 exp (32)
 RT   
. Q
ε exp = A2 exp( βσ), f or ασ < 0.8 (32)
RT
where σ is the flow stress, T is the absolute temperature, A, A2, and β are the material
constant, n is the
where strain
σ is the rate
flowsensitive
stress, Tindex,
is the Rabsolute
is the molar constant of
temperature, A,gas
A2 ,Rand
= 8.31 J/mol·
β are theK,material
α is the stress level
constant, parameter,
n is the strain and
rate Q is the activation
sensitive index, R isenergy of the
the molar material.
constant of gas R = 8.31 J/mol·K,
Theαresults showlevel
is the stress that the modified
parameter, andHansel–Spittel modelenergy
Q is the activation can better
of thecharacterize
material. the
rheological properties of CoCrFeMnNi alloy than the original Hansel–Spittel
The results show that the modified Hansel–Spittel model can better model, as
characterize the
shown in Figure 13, where the real lines represent simulated data, and the virtual
rheological properties of CoCrFeMnNi alloy than the original Hansel–Spittel model, as lines
represent experimental
shown in Figuredata.
13, where the real lines represent simulated data, and the virtual lines
represent experimental data.
800
1000 (a) (b)
700
800 600
Stress(Mpa)

Stress(Mpa)

500
600
400
400 300
200 200 200
200 400 400
600 100 600
0 800 800
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Strain( ) Strain( )

Figure
Figure 13. 13. The rheological
The rheological properties
properties of CoCrFeMnNi
of CoCrFeMnNi alloy
alloy [28], [28],s(a)
(a) 0.01 0.011 ss−
−1; (b)
1
−1. ; (b) 1 s
−1 .

2.5. Arrhenius Model

2.5. Arrhenius Model
The Arrhenius equation is widely used to describe the relationship between flow
Thestress
Arrhenius equation
and strain is widely
rate and used to
deformation describe the
temperature relationship
under between deformation
high temperature flow
stress and strain rate and deformation temperature under high temperature deformation
conditions. In the exponential equation, the Zener–Hollomon parameter is used to represent
conditions. In the exponential
the influence equation,
of temperature and the Zener–Hollomon
strain parameter
rate on the deformation is usedMoreover,
behavior. to repre- a more
sent the influence of temperature and strain rate on the deformation behavior. Moreover,
a more accurate approximation between the Zener–Hollomon parameter and the flow
stress is obtained by hyperbolic function. The Arrhenius constitutive equation is as fol-
lows [29]:
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 13 of 33

accurate approximation between the Zener–Hollomon parameter and the flow stress is
obtained by hyperbolic function. The Arrhenius constitutive equation is as follows [29]:

 A1 σn1 , ασ < 0.8


.
ε= A exp( βσ), ασ < 1.2 (33)
 2
A[sinh(ασ)]n exp[− Q/( RT )], f or all σ

where A1 , A2 , A, n1 , n, α and β are material constants, Q is the activation energy of

deformation (K J/mol), R is a general gas constant (8.31 J/(mol · K )), σ is flow stress. The
relationship between α, β and n1 can be expressed as α = β/n1 .
According to the definition of hyperbolic function, the flow stress σ can be written as
a function of Z parameter:
(  "  #1/2 
1 Z 1/n Z 2/n 
σ = ln + +1 (34)
α A A 

In recent years, many scholars [30,31] have determined the flow stress of different
metals and alloys during thermal deformation by the Arrhenius model. Since the Arrhenius
model does not consider the influence of strain on flow stress, the prediction accuracy of
this model is not high under large deformation conditions. By constructing the polynomial
relationship between the model parameters Q, A, N, and α and the strain, respectively. The
modified Zener-Hollomon model coupled with the influence of temperature, strain rate,
and deformation was established [32], as shown in Equations (35) and (36):

Q = B0 + B1 ε + B2 ε2 + B3 ε3 + B4 ε4 + B5 ε5


n = D0 + D1 ε + D2 ε2 + D3 ε3 + D4 ε4 + D5 ε5


(35)

 InA = E0 + E1 ε + E2 ε2 + E3 ε3 + E4 ε4 + E5 ε5
α = F0 + F1 ε + F2 ε2 + F3 ε3 + F4 ε4 + F5 ε5


 
0 . 4/3 QR
Z =ε exp (36)
T
1 .
ln Z 0 = ln Z +
ln ε (37)
3
 #1/2 
 1/n " 0 2/n
1  Z0 Z 
σ = ln + +1 (38)
α  A A 

2.6. Molinari–Ravichandran Model

In 2005, Molinari and Ravichandran proposed a phenomenological constitutive model
(MR model) that can describe the flow behavior of metals under various loading condi-
tions [33,34]. The MR model is based on a single internal variable δ, which is related to
the characteristic length of the microstructure formed during metal deformation. The
.
flow stress σ is expressed as a function of the inherent resistance σ̂0 and strain rate ε of
the material:
 .  m1
ε
σ = σ0 . (39)
ε0
 
δ0
σ̂0 = σ̂ (d) (40)
δ
.
where ε0 is the reference strain rate, d is the average grain size, and m represents the
parameter of instantaneous strain rate sensitivity dependent on temperature. The reduction
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 14 of 33

of the internal characteristic length δ with an increase of increasing equivalent plastic strain
ε, which can be expressed by the following phenomenological evolution equation:

dδ δr h 2 i
=− δ − δs δ (41)
dε δs

where δr is a dimensionless parameter characterizing the refinement rate of microstructure.

δs is the saturation length at relatively large strains, which both can be a function of strain
rate and temperature.
Assume δr and δs are constants, which is the case for constant strain rate and tempera-
ture. Equation (41) can be expressed as follows:
   
δs δs
= 1− 1− exp(−δr ε) (42)
δ δ0

where δ0 is the initial internal characteristic length. However, when the saturation of the
“microstructural length” reaches the limiting value δs , the flow stress will also be induced
to reach saturation values.
The laws proposed for δr and δs can be based on the theory of thermally activated
processes or on empirical relations depending on temperature and strain rate:
"  . ξ r   − vr #
ε T
δr = δr0 1 + ar . (43)
εr0 T0
"  . ξ s  −vs #
ε T
δs = δs0 1 − as . (44)
εs0 T0

where δs and δs0 are the saturation values of effective microstructure length δ and the
reference values at zero strain rate, respectively. The material constants αs , ξ s , and vs control
the strain rate and the dependence of δs on temperature; similarly, δr depends on δr0 , αr , ξ r ,
and vr .
In order to avoid negative values of the MR model at relatively low strain rates,
Molinari and Durrenberger [35] proposed a new phenomenological model (DMR model).
The flow stress is defined as the sum of the internal stress representing the long-term
interaction and the thermally activated effective stress:
 h  . i1/m . 
ε0 ε0
 σ
re f a − bT ln . , a − bT ln . ≥0
σth = ε  .ε (45)
 0 , a − bT ln εε.0 ≤ 0

In the isothermal condition, Durrenberger [35] pointed out that Equation (45) can be
simplified as
 v∗   . 1/m
T0 ε0
σth = σre f a − b ln . (46)
T ε
.
where σref is a reference stress, T0 is the reference temperature, ε0 is the reference strain-rate,
ν* is the temperature sensitivity, a and b are material constants, and m characterizes the
instantaneous rate sensitivity.
The DMR model is considered to be able to accurately describe the thermal and
viscoplastic response behavior of metals under harsh loading conditions [36]. Based on the
DMR model, the strain rate sensitivity simulation and experimental data of four kinds of
sheets for automobile forming are compared as shown in Figure 14 (Circle points represent
experimental data, real lines represent simulation data) [36]. It can be seen that the DMR
model can effectively describe the strain hardening effect of materials under different strain
plastic rates.
 coplastic response behavior of metals under harsh loading conditions [36]. Based on the
DMR model, the strain rate sensitivity simulation and experimental data of four kinds of
sheets for automobile forming are compared as shown in Figure 14 (Circle points repre-
sent experimental data, real lines represent simulation data) [36]. It can be seen that the
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 DMR model can effectively describe the strain hardening effect of materials under differ- 15 of 33
ent strain plastic rates.

900
(a) (b)
1200
800

True stress(Mpa)
700
True stress(Mpa)

1000
ε=0.12
ε=0.15
600
ε=0.07
800
ε=0.08
ε=0.04
500 ε=0.02
ε=0.03
600
400
ε=0.01

400 300
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 104 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 104
Log(strain-rate)(s 1) Log(strain-rate)(s 1)

1200
(c) 1600 (d) ε=0.4
1100
1400
True stress(Mpa)

True stress(Mpa)

1000

900 1200 ε=0.2

800 ε=0.15 1000

ε=0.1
700 ε=0.08 800
ε=0.02
600
ε=0.03 600
500
ε=0.01 400
400
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 104 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 104
Log(strain-rate)(s 1) Log(strain-rate)(s 1)

Figure 14. The prediction

Figure 14. Theresults basedresults
prediction on thebased
DMR on
model [36], (a)
the DMR TRIP800;
model (b) TRIP800;
[36], (a) DP600; (c)(b)
TRIP700;
DP600; (c) TRIP700;
(d) Fe-Mn. (d) Fe-Mn.

2.7. Comparison and Analysis of Phenomenological Models

In addition to the above widely used models, there are many phenomenological con-
stitutive models. Due to the limitation of the length of the paper, other phenomenological
constitutive models are not introduced in detail in this paper.
In order to facilitate readers to understand the features and applicable conditions of
the phenomenological constitutive model introduced in the article, the main features of
each model are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. The characteristics of the phenomenological constitutive model.

Model Name Characteristics and Application Conditions

1. The model has few parameters and is easy to solve
Johnson–Cook (J–C) Model 2. The influence of deformation temperature and strain rate is taken into account
3. Easy model correction, modified J–C model

1. It consists of elastic component and plastic component

Khan–Huang (KH) Model 2. Applicable to a wide range of strain rates (10−5 –104 s−1 )
3. Temperature effects are not taken into account

Khan–Huang–Liang (KHL) Model 1. The modified model of the KH model

2. Consider the temperature effect of deformation
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 16 of 33

Table 1. Cont.

Model Name Characteristics and Application Conditions

1. The modified model of the KHL model
Khan–Liang–Farrokh (KLF) Model 2. Both temperature effect and strain rate effect are taken into account
3. The grain size effect of the material is considered

1. Both temperature effect and strain rate effect are taken into account
Fields–Backofen (FB) Model 2. The model has few parameters
3. The parameter fitting process is simple

1. Combined the classical strain rate power-law model with the Hollomon and
Hansel–Spittel Model Swift model
2. The effects of both temperature and strain rate are considered
3. The model can be solved by regression analysis

1. The influence of strain rate and temperature at high temperature is considered

Arrhenius Model 2. It can predict the peak stress of the material
3. The modification of model parameters can be suitable for large deformation

1. The effects of temperature, strain rate, and grain size are considered
Molinari–Ravichandran Model comprehensively
2. Based on the microscopic characteristics of the material
3. The DMR model can characterize the thermal and viscoplastic behavior

3. Constitutive Model Based on Microscopic Characteristics

The phenomenological model can obtain the corresponding model parameters through
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW the fitting and the regression analysis of experimental data, which makes the process 18 of 37of
solving the model easy. However, under the extreme deformation conditions, such as
large deformation and high temperature, the phenomenological model cannot character-
ize the effect of the change of microstructure on the macroscopic mechanical properties
In the thermal deformation process, the plastic deformation behavior of the material
of materials [37].
can be divided into four stages, as shown in Figure 15. In the first deformation stage (stage
In the thermal deformation process, the plastic deformation behavior of the material
1), the accumulation and multiplication of dislocations are the main reasons for material
can be divided into four stages, as shown in Figure 15. In the first deformation stage (stage
hardening. However, in the second stage of deformation (stage 2), the temperature effect
1), the accumulation and multiplication of dislocations are the main reasons for material
and strain hardening simultaneously affect the flow stress of the material. In this stage,
hardening. However, in the second stage of deformation (stage 2), the temperature effect
the strain hardening effect plays a leading role, and the strain hardening rate of the mate-
and strain hardening simultaneously affect the flow stress of the material. In this stage, the
rial gradually decreases due to the effect of temperature effect. In the third stage of defor-
strain hardening effect plays a leading role, and the strain hardening rate of the material
mation (stage
gradually 3), withdue
decreases theto
increase of of
the effect deformation
temperature amount, dislocations
effect. In accumulate
the third stage con-
of deformation
tinuously
(stage 3),and
withgrain boundary
the increase of energy storage
deformation increases,
amount, which enhances
dislocations dynamic
accumulate recrys-
continuously
tallization (DRV) under temperature and reduces strain hardening effect.
and grain boundary energy storage increases, which enhances dynamic recrystallization In the fourth
stage (stage 4), strain hardening, dynamic recovery, and dynamic re-crystallization
(DRV) under temperature and reduces strain hardening effect. In the fourth stage (stage are4),
relatively balanced, and the flow stress of the material is in the steady state deformation
strain hardening, dynamic recovery, and dynamic re-crystallization are relatively balanced,
stage.
and the flow stress of the material is in the steady state deformation stage.

StageⅣ

StageⅢ
Hardening rate
True stress

StageⅡ Stress-strain relation

Hardening rate

StageⅠ

Stage0

True strain
Figure 15. Stage division of typical stress–strain relationship in HEAs [38].
Figure 15. Stage division of typical stress–strain relationship in HEAs [38].

Based on the above micro deformation theory, He [38] believed that the total strain
rate 𝜀̇ in isothermal deformation was composed of elastic strain rate 𝜀̇𝑒 and inelastic part
𝜀̇𝑖𝑛 , and proposed a multi-scale constitutive model based on dislocation density to de-
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 17 of 33

Based on the above micro deformation theory, He [38] believed that the total strain
. .e
rate ε in isothermal deformation was composed of elastic strain rate ε and inelastic part
. in
ε , and proposed a multi-scale constitutive model based on dislocation density to describe
the thermal deformation behavior of HEAs materials. As shown in Equations (47) and (48):
. .e . in
ε = ε +ε (47)

−∆G
 
. in ρcm bλv a 3
ε = exp S (48)
m kT 2σeq
where ρcm is the dislocation density, b is magnitude of the Burgers vector, λ is the average
distance, v a denotes the attempt frequency, m is the Taylor orientation factor, ∆G is the
activation energy, k is the Boltzmann constant, T is the absolute temperature, σeq is the
equivalent stress, and S is the deviatoric part of local stress tensor.

3.1. Zerilli–Armstrong Model (ZA Model)

The ZA model takes into account the effects of strain hardening, strain rate hardening,
and temperature softening on the plastic deformation behavior of metals and alloys, and is
one of the most widely used dislocation density models. The ZA model divides the flow
stress into thermal component and athermal component, as shown in Equation (49) [39]:

σ = σa + σth (49)

The athermal component σa considering the effect of grain size is expressed as

σa = C0 + kl 1/2 (50)

where l is the average grain size, k is the Hall–Petch constant, C0 is the fitting parameter.
The thermal stress component σth can be calculated by Equations (51) and (52):

M∆G0 − βT
σth = e (51)
Ab
.
β = −C3 + C4 ln ε (52)
where M is the direction factor, ∆G0 is the free energy of thermal activation at an absolute
temperature of zero, A is the thermal activation area at at an absolute temperature of zero,
b is the Burgers vector, β is a parameter related to strain rate. For BCC materials, A is
a constant, that is, the deformation activation energy of BCC material is not affected by
plastic strain. For FCC materials, the relationship between A and plastic strain can be
expressed as ε1/2 .
Therefore, according to the Equations (50)–(52), the constitutive equation of Z-A model
can be expressed as
.

σ = C0 + C1 exp −C3 T + C4 T ln ε + C5 εn , for BCC materials (53)
1 .

σ = C0 + C2 ε 2 exp −C3 T + C4 T ln ε , for FCC materials (54)
where C0 , C1 , C2 , C3 , C4 , C5 , and n are fitting parameters. It can be seen from Equations (53)
and (54) that the strain hardening index is affected by strain rate and temperature for FCC
materials, while for BCC materials, the strain hardening index is constant.
The ZA constitutive model does not fully realize the coupling effect of temperature,
strain, and strain rate. Therefore, some improved ZA models have been proposed in
recent years. Zhang et al. [40] proposed an improved flow stress model of IC10 alloy
considering the effects of temperature, strain rate, and strain on the flow behavior of
IC10 alloy under a wide range of temperature and strain rate deformation conditions, as
shown in Equations (55) and (56). Moreover, the flow behavior of IC10 under different
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 18 of 33

deformation conditions is predicted by the modified model, and the prediction results
are shown in Figure 16. The results show that the modified ZA model can predict the
rheological behavior of metal materials more accurately:
  .  
ε
σ = C0 + C1 exp −C300 T + C40 T ln . f ( T ) + C5 εn , for BCC materials (55)
r ( ε )r ( ε )
  .  
1 ε
σ = C0 + C2 ε exp
2
00
−C3 T + C40 T ln . f ( T ) , for FCC materials (56)
r ( ε )r ( ε )

tals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW r (ε) = ρ0 + Mε 20 of 37 (57)

where ρ0 is the initial dislocation density of materials. M is the material constant related to
the increase rate of dislocation density. C0 , C1 , C2 , C”3 , C’4 , and n are fitting parameters.

1600 (a)
T=293K 1400 (b) T=293K
1400
 =0.01s 1
Flow Stress(Mpa)

=0.0001s 1

Flow Stress(Mpa)
1200 1200
1000 1000
800 800
600 600
Experiment Curve
400 Experiment Curve
Z A Model Predicted Curve 400
200 Z A Model Predicted Curve
modified Z A Model Predicted Curve
200 modified Z A Model Predicted Curve
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0
Plastic Strain(%) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Plastic Strain(%)

1400 (c) T=873K 1400 (d) T=973K

1200  =0.001s 1
1200 =0.0001s 1
Flow Stress(Mpa)

Flow Stress(Mpa)

1000 1000

800 800

600 600
Experiment Curve Experiment Curve
400 400
Z A Model Predicted Curve Z A Model Predicted Curve
200 modified Z A Model Predicted Curve 200 modified Z A Model Predicted Curve
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Plastic Strain(%) Plastic Strain(%)

Figure 16. The prediction results of IC10 alloy based on the modified ZA model [40]. (a) T = 293 K,
. . .
Figure 16. Theε = 0.001 s−results
prediction 1 , (b) Tof=IC10
293 alloy = 0.0001
K, ε based s−1modified
on the , (c) T = ZA K◦ C, ε[40].
873model = (a)
0.001 s−1 K,
T=293 , (d) T = 973 K,
.
𝜀̇ = 0.001𝑠 −1ε, =
(b)0.0001 −1 . 𝜀̇ = 0.0001𝑠 −1 , (c) 873 K℃, 𝜀̇ = 0.001𝑠 −1 , (d) T=973 K, 𝜀̇ = 0.0001𝑠 −1 .
T=293sK,

In order
In order to better to better characterize
characterize the of
the flow stress flow
D9stress
alloy of D9 alloy
under under
the high the high temperature,
temperature,
based on the J–C model, Samantaray [41] modified the ZA model (Equation (54)) (Equation
based on the J–C model, Samantaray [41] modified the ZA model by con- (54)) by
considering the coupling effect of temperature, strain, strain rate,
sidering the coupling effect of temperature, strain, strain rate, and temperature on flowand temperature on flow
stress. The stress.
modifiedThemodel
modified modelby
proposed proposed by Samantaray
Samantaray is shown inisEquation
shown in(58),
Equation
and the(58), and the
predicted
predicted results results
of D9 alloyof D9shown
are alloy are shown17:
in Figure in Figure 17:

( ) (
. .

 = C1 + C2σn =exp )( ) (
(C1 + C2 εn ) exp{−(C3 + C4 ε) ( T − Tr ) + (C5 + C6 ( T − Tr )) ln ε/εr
− C3 + C4 T − Tr + C5 + C6 T − Tr ln  /  r (58)
(58)
( )) ( )
where 𝜀̇𝑟 and 𝑇𝑟 are the reference strain rate and the reference temperature, respectively.
C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, and n are all material constants, and they can be obtained by fitting
experimental data.
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 19 of 33

.
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW where εr and Tr are the reference strain rate and the reference temperature, 21 ofrespectively.
37
C1 , C2 , C3 , C4 , C5 , C6 , and n are all material constants, and they can be obtained by fitting
experimental data.
1 1
Strain rate=0.001s Strain rate=0.01s
400 Experimental date
Experimental date 400
350 Predicted date Predicted date
True Stress(Mpa) 350
300

True Stress(Mpa)
300
250
250
200
200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
True Strain True Strain

1 1
Strain rate=0.1s Strain rate=1s
550
450 Experimental date Experimental date
Predicted date 500 Predicted date

True Stress(Mpa)
400 450
True Stress(Mpa)

350 400
300 350
250 300
250
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
True Strain True Strain
Figure 17. The predicted flow stresses of D9 alloy based on the Samantaray modified model [41].
Figure 17. The predicted flow stresses of D9 alloy based on the Samantaray modified model [41].
3.2. Preston–Tonks–Wallace (PTW) Model
3.2. Preston–Tonks–Wallace (PTW)
In 2003, Preston et al.Model
[42] proposed a numerical simulation model of metal plastic flow
In 2003, Preston
suitable et al. [42] load
for explosive proposed a numerical
and high-speed simulation
impact. At low model
strainofrate,metal theplastic
dependence of
plastic
flow suitable forstrain rate load
explosive on applied stress is inimpact.
and high-speed the form AtoflowArrhenius,
strain rate, but
thethe activation energy is
dependence
of plastic singular
strain rate at on
zero stress, stress
applied so theisdeformation
in the form rate disappearsbut
of Arrhenius, at the
thisactivation
limit. The energywork hardening
effect is modeled as a generalized Voce law. The constitutive
is singular at zero stress, so the deformation rate disappears at this limit. The work hard- model of the low strain rate
region can be expressed as
ening effect is modeled as a generalized Voce law. The constitutive model of the low strain
rate region ( can be(expressed  as " #))
τ̂s − τ̂y τ̂s − τ̂y
   
1
pθψ
τ̂ = τ̂s + s0 − τ̂y ln 1 − 1 − exp − pτ̂s exp −
exp − p −1 (59)
p   s0 −τ̂y ˆs − ˆy  s0 − τ̂y p  s0 −ˆsτ̂y− ˆy     
 
ˆ = ˆs + ( s0 − ˆy ) ln 1 − 1 − exp  − pˆs
1
 exp −  exp  − p  − 1  
where pψ is the plastic 
  
strain, p

 is a s0 − ˆy 
dimensionless 
 ( s0 − ˆy ) parameter,
material


(59)
ˆy  θ is determined
s0 −and
 
 by
the slope of work hardening data. τ̂ is the normalized flow stress. τ̂s is the work hardening
where ψ is the stress
saturated plasticunder
strain, p is a dimensionless
thermal materialτ̂parameter,
activation condition, and θ is deter-
y is the yield stress,
mined by the slope of work hardening data. 𝜏̂ is the normalized flow stress. 𝜏̂ 𝑠 is the
. !#
work hardening saturated stress under thermal activation condition, ̂𝜏𝑦 is the yield
"
γξ
stress, τ̂s = s0 − (s0 − s∞ )er f k T̂ ln . (60)
ψ
 "   . !#
ˆs = s0 − ( s0 − s ) erf kTˆ ln    γξ (60)
τ̂y = y0 − (y0 −y∞ )er f    ψ.
k T̂ ln (61)

where Ψ is the plastic strain rate. s0 and s∞ˆ are  

.
ˆy = y0 − ( y0 − y ) erf kT ln  thevalues

of τ̂s when temperature is
(61)
    of τ̂ y when temperature is zero
zero and infinite, respectively. y0 and y∞ are the values

and infinite, respectively. k and γ are dimensionless material constants. T̂ = T/Tm (T is
where 𝛹̇ is the plastic strain rate. s0 and s∞ are the values of 𝜏̂ 𝑠 when temperature is
zero and infinite, respectively. y0 and y∞ are the values of ̂𝜏𝑦 when temperature is zero
and infinite, respectively. k and γ are dimensionless material constants. 𝑇̂ = 𝑇/𝑇𝑚 (T is
2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 37

deformation temperature, Tm is melting temperature). 𝜉̇ is the equivalent scaling factor,

Metals 2022, 12, 2077and it can be defined as 20 of 33

1 1
1 4𝜋𝜌 ⁄3 𝐺 ⁄2
𝜉̇ = ( ) ( ) . (62)
deformation temperature,2Tm3𝑀 is melting 𝜌 temperature). ξ is the equivalent scaling factor,
and it can be defined as
1  1
where ρ is material density, M is atomic mass, . 1 G4πρ
is the3shear
G modulus of material,

2

which is the function of density and temperature, ξ = 𝐺 = 𝐺 (1 − 𝛼𝑇̂), where G0 is the shear (62)
2 3M 0 ρ
modulus at absolute temperature, and α is the temperature dependence coefficient.
where ρ is material density, M is atomic mass, G is the shear
modulus of material, which is
Under ultra-high strain rate loading under strong shock wave, the relationship be-
the function of density and temperature, G = G0 1 − α T̂ , where G0 is the shear modulus
tween plastic strain rate and critical shear stress satisfies an exponential function, and the
at absolute temperature, and α is the temperature dependence coefficient.
yield stress is equal to the saturation stress. Therefore, the model can be expressed as fol-
Under ultra-high strain rate loading under strong shock wave, the relationship be-
lows:
tween plastic strain rate and critical shear stress satisfies an exponential function, and
the yield stress is equal to the saturation stress. Therefore, the model can be expressed
 
as follows: ˆs = ˆy = A   . !β (63)
  ξ
τ̂s = τ̂y = A . (63)
where A and β are the material constants. ψ
In order where
to maintain
A andthe
β arecontinuity of theconstants.
the material model, the saturation stress and yield stress
in the transition zone fromtothe
In order low-strain
maintain rate region
the continuity of to
thethe high-strain
model, rate region
the saturation stressare
and yield stress
expressed as in the transition zone from the low-strain rate region to the high-strain rate region are
expressed as

   "   . !#  
( ˆ )
 s = max  s0 − s0 − s erf  kT ln    , s0  γξ  
ˆ
 
. !β 
(64)
 τ̂s = maxs0 − (s0 − s∞ )erf kT̂ ln  
 ψ
.   , s0 (64)
ψ  γξ
.



   "  . !# y   . y2 
ˆy = max  y0 − ( y0 − y ) erf  kT ln    , minγξy1 ( ) 2 
ˆ

. !β

 , so  ψ   (65) ψ
τ̂y = max y0 − (y0 − y∞ )erf k T̂ ln .
 
, min y1( . ) ,so (65)

    γξ
. 
 ψ γξ
In order to explain the to
In order strain hardening
explain at 0–10
the strain
6 s−1 strain rate, Kim
hardening at 0–106 s−1[43] usedrate,
strain the Voce
Kim [43] used the
equation to modify the strain hardening term in the original PTW model,
Voce equation to modify the strain hardening term in the original PTW and the modi-model, and the
fied constitutive equation
modified is shown in
constitutive Equations
equation (66) and
is shown in(67). Compared
Equations (66) with
and the
(67).other
Compared with
constitutive models, the constitutive
the other Kim’s modified PTW model
models, can better
the Kim’s describe
modified PTWthe deformation
model be- describe the
can better
havior of tantalum in a wider
deformation strain, of
behavior strain rate, and
tantalum in atemperature
wider strain,range,
strainasrate,
shown
andin Figure
temperature range, as
18. shown in Figure 18.

(a) (b)
1
600 EXP,1073K,2900s
600
1
MPTW,1073K,2900s
Stress(Mpa)
Stress(Mpa)

400 400

200 EXP,473K,2800s-1
200
EXP,873K,2200s-1
MPTW,473K,2800s-1
MPTW,873K,2200s-1
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Equivalent Strain Equivalent Strain

Figure 18. The predicted flow stresses of tantalum based on the modified PTW model [43].
Figure 18. The (a)
predicted .
flow . .
T=473 K, ε =stresses
2800 s−of
1 , tantalum
T = 873 K,based on the
ε = 2200 s−1modified PTWK,model
, (b) T = 1073 [43].
ε = 29, 001(a)
s −1 .
T=473 K, 𝜀̇ = 2800𝑠 −1 , T=873 K, 𝜀̇ = 2200𝑠 −1 , (b) T=1073 K, 𝜀̇ = 29001𝑠 −1 .
.
− Bε )
τ̂ = τ̂y + AeC log ε(1−e (66)
where τ̂ is the initial yield stress, and it can be expressed as
. !# . !β
 " 
 γξ ε 
τ̂y = max y0 − (y0 − y∞ )er f k T̂ ln . , y0 . (67)
 ε γξ 
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 21 of 33

where A, B, and C are material constants. A represents the maximum strain hardening at
unit strain rate, B represents the saturation velocity of control hardening, and C represents
the dependence of maximum hardening on strain rate.

3.3. Rusinek–Klepaczko (RK) Model

Considering the influence of strain hardening, strain rate sensitivity, temperature
effect and other factors on the material deformation process, Rusinek and Klepaczko [44]
proposed a viscoplastic constitutive model (RK model), which decomposed the flow stress
σ into the sum of internal stress σu and effective stress σ*:
 .p  E( T ) h  p . p   . p i
σ εp, ε , T = σu ε , ε , T + σ∗ ε , T (68)
E0
   
T Tm
E( T ) = E0 1 − exp θ ∗ 1 − (69)
Tm T
where E0 , Tm , and θ* represent the elastic modulus, melting point temperature, and charac-
teristic assimilation temperature of the material at absolute zero, respectively.
The internal stress σu can be expressed as
 .p  . p  .p
σu ε p , ε , T = B ε , T (ε 0 + ε p )n(ε ,T ) (70)

. p   . −v
T εmax
B ε , T = B0 log . p (71)
Tm ε
" . p !#
.  T ε
n ε, T = n0 1 − D2 log . (72)
Tm εmin
where B0 and D2 are material parameters. v is the temperature sensitive coefficient. n0 is
. .
the strain hardening index at absolute zero. εmin and εmax are the minimum strain and
maximum strain rate accepted by material, respectively.
The effective stress can be obtained according to the Arrhenius equation, as shown in
Equation (73):
.     . m∗
∗ ∗ T εmax
σ ε, T = σ0 1 − D1 log . p (73)
Tm ε
In the effective stress equation, σ* is the effective stress at absolute zero. D1 is the material
parameters. m* is a constant allowing the definition of strain rate and temperature dependence.
Aiming at the problem that the original RK model cannot accurately describe the
viscoplastic behavior of aluminum alloy, Rusinek et al. [45] modified the RK model. They
defined the macroscopic negative strain rate sensitivity (NSRS) and viscous resistance,
and added a negative strain rate sensitivity term on the basis of the original RK model, as
shown in Equation (74):
 .p  E( T ) h  p . p  .   . p i
σ = εp, ε , T = σµ ε , ε , T + σ∗ ε, T + σns ε , T (74)
E0
. p 
where σns ε , T is the stress component of NSRS, which depends on the strain rate
and temperature:
. "   . p !#
. p  εtrans Tm ε
ns
σns ε , T = σ0 · log .p 1 − D3 · log . (75)
ε T εmax

In the above formula, σ0ns and D3 are material parameters, which describe the stress
drop caused by the interaction of dynamic strain aging (DSA) with strain rate and tempera-
 temperature:

  trans    Tp    p 
 ns (  p
T )
 =
 
 ns ( p , T ) =  0ns  log  trans
, ns
0  
log  
 1 − D 
3  
 
 log  
1 −D3p    log   T     max (75)
T m
(75)
p   
m

    T    max  
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 22 of 33
In the above formula, 𝜎0𝑛𝑠 and D3 are material parameters, which describe the stress
𝑛𝑠
In the above caused by𝜎0theand
drop formula, D3 are material
interaction of dynamicparameters, which
strain aging describe
(DSA) withthe stress
strain rate and tem-
drop causedperature,
by the interaction of dynamic strain aging (DSA) with strain rate and tem-
respectively. . 𝜀̇𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠 is the turning point from positive to negative strain rate sen-
perature, respectively.
sitivity, 𝜀̇𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠
ture, respectively.
which canisbe
the is the point
turning
εtrans
obtained turning
by point
from
fitting from to
positive
experimentalpositive
negativeto negative
results. strain ratestrain
sen-rate sensitivity,
sitivity, which which becan
canBased be
obtained obtained
by by
fitting fitting experimental
experimental results.results.
on the Equations (74) and (75), the viscoplastic behavior of AA5083 aluminum
Based on the was
alloy Based
Equations on (74)
the Equations
researched, and (75), the
as shown (74) and (75),
inviscoplastic
Figure the
19 and viscoplastic
behavior
Figure behavior
of AA5083
20. It can ofthat
bealuminum
seen AA5083 aluminum
the analytical
alloy was
alloy was researched, as researched,
shown in Figureas shown
19 and in Figures
Figure 20. It19 and
can be 20.
seen Itthat
canthe
be analytical
seen that the analytical
prediction results are consistent with the experimental results under different strain rates,
prediction
prediction results areresults results with
consistent are consistent
thethat with theresults
experimental experimental
under results under
different different strain rates,
and the also prove the effectiveness of the model is strain rates,correctly
describing the
and the results and
alsothe results
prove also prove that the effectiveness of the model is describing correctly the
DSA effect [45].that the effectiveness of the model is describing correctly the
DSA effect [45].DSA effect [45].
(a) 700 (b) 700
1 1
(a) 700 0.00041s (b) 700
T=300K 122s T=300K
1 600

Equivalent stress,σeq (Mpa)

1 600
Equivalent stress,σeq (Mpa)

0.00041s T=300K 122s T=300K

600 Extended RK model

Equivalent stress,σeq (Mpa)

600 Extended RK model
Equivalent stress,σeq (Mpa)

Extended
500 RK model 500
Extended RK model
500 500
400 400
400 10% 400
10%
10%300 300
10%
300 Experiments 300
200 Experiments
Experiments 200
200 Experiments
200
100 100
100 Isothemal Condition Material:AA5083 Isothemal Condition Material:AA5083
100
Isothemal Condition
0 Material:AA5083 0
Isothemal Condition Material:AA5083
0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.6 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Equivalent
0.4 plastic 0.6εeq ( )
0.5 strain, 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Equivalent
0.4 plastic 0.6 εeq ( )
0.5 strain,
Equivalent plastic strain, εeq ( ) Equivalent plastic strain, εeq ( )

Figure
Figure 19.19. NSRS
NSRS description
description using
using extended
extended RKRK model
model [45],
[45], (a)(a) 0.00041
0.00041 s−1s; −
(b) 122 s−1. s−1 .
1 ; (b) 122
Figure 19. NSRS description using extended RK model [45], (a) 0.00041 s−1; (b) 122 s−1.
700
700 εp =0.045 0.0017s 1
Validity of the model
εp =0.045 0.0017s 1
Equivalent stress,σeq (Mpa)

600
Validity of the model
Equivalent stress,σeq (Mpa)

600
T/T=0.3=Troom T/Tm=0.05
500
T/T=0.3=Troom T/Tm=0.05
500
400 Extended RK model
400 Extended RK model
300 10%
300 10%
200
200 Experiments
Experiments
100
100 Material:AA5083
0 Material:AA5083
0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0 100 200 300 400 Temperature，T(K)
500 600 700
Temperature，T(K)
Figure
Figure 20.20. Temperature
Temperature sensitivity
sensitivity description
description using
using thethe extended
extended RKRK model
model [45].
[45].
Figure 20. Temperature sensitivity description using the extended RK model [45].
Another extension of the RK model is by adding a viscosity component related to the
strain rate on the basis of the the equivalent Huber–Misses stress σ of the original model.
In this way, the viscous resistance effect of face-centered cubic metal at high deformation
rate is characterized. As shown in Equation (76),
 .p  E( T ) h  p . p   . p i  . p
σ εp, ε , T = σµ ε , ε , T + σ∗ ε , T + σath ε (76)
E0
 . p
where σath ε is the stress component accounting for the viscous resistance which is just
 . p
dependent on strain rate. σath ε can be specifically expressed as
 . p h  . p i
σath ε = χ · 1 − exp −α · ε (77)

M2 B
α= (78)
ρm b2 τy
where M is the Taylor factor, B is the resistance coefficient, ρm is the mobile dislocation
density, and b is the magnitude of the Burgers vector, χ is a material constant, α represents an
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 23 of 33

effective damping coefficient affecting the dislocation motion, and τ y denotes the effective
damping coefficient that affects the dislocation motion.
In 2010, Rusinek et al. [10] proposed a modified RK model based on physical concepts.
Compared with the original RK model, the internal stress σu is defined as a constant Y in the
new model, and the effect of plastic strain is considered in the effective stress component σ*:
 .p  E( T ) 
σ εp, ε , T = σµ + σ∗ + σvs

(79)
E0

where E(T) is an expression for the temperature-dependent Young’s modulus, as shown

in Equation (80). E0 , Tm , and θ ∗ are Young’s modulus, melting point temperature, and
characteristic assimilation temperature of the material at absolute zero, respectively. σµ the
internal stress of the material, in Equation (79), and the internal stress σµ is equal to the flow
stress Y of the materials without deformation, namely σµ = Y. σ* is effective stress of the
material, and the expression is shown in Equation (81). σvs is the viscous stress component,
and its expression as shown in Equation (82):
   
T Tm
E( T ) = E0 1 − exp θ ∗ 1 − ,T > 0 (80)
Tm T

where Tm and θ ∗ are melting point temperature and characteristic assimilation temperature
of the material at absolute zero, respectively:
   .  ξ1
 .p  T εmax 2
∗ p p n
σ ε , ε , T = B(ε ) 1 − ξ1 log .p (81)
Tm ε
where ξ 1 and ξ 2 are material constants describing temperature and rate sensitivities of the
.
material, respectively. εmax the maximum strain-rate level for material:

M2 B . p
 . p   
σvs ε = χ · 1 − exp − ε (82)
ρm b2 τy

3.4. Cellular Automaton (CA) Model

In the dynamic re-crystallization (DRX) process, the accuracy of nucleation parameters
is the key factor to simulate the micro-structure evolution. Goetz et al. [46] proposed the
cellular automaton model (CA model) to describe the microstructure evolution during
dynamic recrystallization. With plastic deformation, dislocation density evolution can be
expressed by the following equation:

dρ √ √
= k1 ρ − k2 ρ (83)
dε
where k1 and k2 are model parameters representing strain hardening and dynamic recovery,
respectively. When the dislocation density exceeds the critical value ρc of DRX nucleation, a
new atomic nucleus is formed on the grain boundary. For two-dimensional cellular automa-
ton model, I(ρ>ρc ) is defined as the number of nuclei formed per unit time. For boundary
cells with dislocation density exceeding the critical value, the nucleation probability PN in
the time step ∆t is
I · ∆t
PN = (84)
NCA
1
NCA = (85)
LCA
where NCA is the number of cells along the unit boundary length. LCA is cell length.
 Metals 2022, 12, 2077 24 of 33

Transformation probability PG can be expressed as

vi · ∆t
PG = (86)
LCA

In order to ensure that PN and PG are less than 1, an upper limit of ∆t must be set.
Therefore, the upper limit of ∆t can be defined as the ratio of cell size LCA to the maximum
growth rate vmax , namely,
L k2 LCA
∆t = CA = 2 2 (87)
vmax mτk1
The study of dynamic re-crystallization behavior by CA method is 1 based on the
physical metallurgical principles. However, it is difficult to accurately estimate the nu-
cleation rate due to the complexity of DRX and limitation of experiments. The method
proposed in the literature [47–51] can be used to identify the value of model parameters and
explore their correlation with thermomechanical process parameters, which will contribute
to the development of thermomechanical process analysis model. With the help of the new
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW model parameter prediction method, Jin et al. [47] studied the microstructure evolution
27 of 37
and flow stress behavior of oxygen-free high-conductivity (OFHC) copper during DRX at
the temperature of 775 K and the strain rate of 0.002 s−1 ; the results are shown in Figure 21.

120
T=500K

100 ε=0.002s 1
σ/MPa

80

60

40
Measured
Simulated
20
Simulated

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

ε
Figure 21. Comparison of simulated strain curves of OFHC copper [47].
Figure 21. Comparison of simulated strain curves of OFHC copper [47].
3.5. Steinberg–Guinan (SG) Model and Steinberg–Lund (SL) Model
3.5. Steinberg–Guinan (SG) Model and Steinberg–Lund (SL) Model
Although the influence of strain rate has been taken into account for most constitutive
Although
models, the influence
the constitutive of strain
models rate has
mentioned beencannot
above taken accurately
into account for most
reflect constitu-
the deformation
tive models,
behavior ofthe constitutive
materials undermodels mentioned
high strain above cannot
rate conditions, suchaccurately
as impact reflect the defor-In
and explosion.
mation
order tobehavior of materials
accurately describe under high straincharacteristics
the deformation rate conditions,of such as impact
materials underand explo-
high strain
sion.
rate In
andorder to accurately
high-pressure describe
coupling. the deformation
Steinberg characteristics
et al. [52] proposed of materialsmodel
the SG constitutive underin
high
1980.strain
In therate
SGand high-pressure
model, coupling.
the shear modulus Steinberg
G and et al. Y
yield stress [52] proposed
of the material theare
SGexpressed
consti-
tutive model in
as functions of 1980. In the
pressure SG model,
P and the shear
temperature T: modulus G and yield stress Y of the ma-
terial are expressed as functionsof pressure  0 P and temperature T:
G0 T

GP P
G = G0 1 + + ( T − 300) (88)
  GGP 0 Pη 1/3 GTG0
G = G0 1 +    1 3 + (T − 300 )  (88)
  G  Y0 P P
n 0 
G0  G0 T

Y = Y0 [1 + β(ε + ε i )] 1 + + ( T − 300) (89)
Y0 η 1/3 G0
n   Y(90)
The SG model needs to satisfy Equations   and
P (91): G 
Y = Y0 1 +  ( +  i ) 1 +   1 3 + (T − 300 ) T 
P
(89)
Y0 [1 + β(ε +εY 0 n 
≤ Ymax G0  (90)
i )]

The SG model needs to satisfy Equations

G = Y = 0,(90)
T≥ and
Tm(91): (91)

Y0 1 +  (  +  i )   Ymax
n
(90)

G =Y =0, T T (91)
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 25 of 33

where G0 and Y0 are shear modulus and yield stress at temperature T = 300 K, presser P = 0
and strain ε = 0, respectively. η is the volume compression ratio of the material during
deformation, η=V 0 /V. G’P is the first partial derivative of shear modulus G with respect to
pressure P, G’T is the first partial derivative of shear modulus G with respect to temperature
T, Y’P is the first partial derivative of yield stress Y with respect to pressure P. β and n are
strain hardening parameters. Ymax is the maximum allowable value of material flow stress
Y during strain hardening. εi is the initial strain, usually εi = 0. εi is the plastic strain of
the material.
Under the condition of high-speed impact, Steinberg believed that the softening effect
caused by the increase of temperature counteracts the hardening effect caused by the strain
rate. When the strain rate is greater than 105 s−1 , the flow stress of the material reaches
the maximum value. Therefore, the expression of SG model has nothing to do with strain
rate and cannot characterize the mechanical properties of materials at low strain rate. To
overcome this shortcoming, Steinberg and Lund [53] introduced the calculation method of
strain rate in the HM model into the SG model and established the Steinberg–Lund model
(SL model), which decomposed the yield stress Y into thermal stress component YT and
non-thermal stress component YA :

 .

 G ( P, T )
Y = YT ε p , T + YA f ε p (92)
G0
.
.
where YT ε p , T
is the thermally activated part of the yield strength and is a function of ε p

n
and T. YA f ε p is the non-thermal part of the flow stress, f ε p = Y0 [1 + β(ε + ε i )] . G(P,
T) is the shear modulus associated with temperature T and pressure P:
( "  # ) −1
YT 2

. 1 2UK C2
εp = exp 1− + (93)
C1 KT YP YT

ρLabv
C1 = (94)
2w2
D
C2 = 2 (95)
ρb
where YP is the Peierls–Nabarro resistance to plastic deformation of metal. ρ is the dislo-
cation density. b is the Burgers vector. w is the width between the dislocation rings. v is
the Debye frequency. L is the length of the dislocation. D is the resistance coefficient. K is
Boltzmann’s constant. UK is the energy required to form dislocation rings on a dislocation
segment of length L.
Compared with the SG model, the SL model combines the microscopic deformation
mechanism with the macroscopic mechanical properties, and it can be used to fit the plastic
deformation properties of metal materials with strain rates of 10−4 and 106 s−1 .
However, the SG model or SL model can comprehensively reflect the dependence
of the shear modulus and yield strength of the material on pressure and temperature.
However, the physical mechanism of material deformation under strong impact conditions
is very complex, so the applicability of the model has always been the focus of scholars’
research and exploration [54,55]. In recent years, in order to better describe the dependence
of shear modulus and yield strength on temperature and pressure, the revision of SG model
based on physical deformation characteristics of materials has become one of the focus of
scholars’ attention and research [56,57].

3.6. Comparison and Analysis of Microscopic Constitutive Models

Based on dislocation dynamics and thermal activation theory, the microscopic constitu-
tive model combines strain hardening, temperature, and strain rate effects with dislocation
motion and plastic deformation. However, the deformation mechanism of materials under
different deformation conditions is very different. Moreover, the applicable conditions and
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 26 of 33

characteristics of the microscopic constitutive model are different. In order to facilitate

the application of the model, the characteristics and application conditions of common
microscopic constitutive models described in this paper are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. The characteristics of microscopic constitutive model.

Model Name Characteristics and Application Conditions

1. Based on the dislocation dynamics theory
2. The influence of deformation temperature, strain rate, and the average size of
Zerilli–Armstrong Molde grains are taken into account
(ZA Model) 3. The influence of crystal structure is distinguished
4. It can be used to characterize the plastic deformation behavior of the thermal
activated region

1. The effect of strain rate mechanism is considered, dislocation slip region,

Preston–Tonks–Wallace (PTW) Model
Rusinek–Klepaczko Model
(RK Model)
transition region, and ultra-high strain rate region
2. Applicable to a wide range of strain rates
3. It can characterize the nonlinear dislocation effect under impact load
1. The flow stress is decomposed into internal stress and effective stress
2. The influence of temperature on Young’s modulus is considered
3. The temperature effect and strain hardening are considered simultaneously
4. The modified RK model can describe the viscoplastic behavior of FCC material

1. Based on physical metallurgical principles

Cellular Automaton Model 2. It can describe the microstructure evolution during dynamic recrystallization
(CA Model) 3. The effects of temperature and strain rate on dynamic recrystallization
are considered
1. The effects of temperature and pressure are considered
Steinberg-Guinan Model
2. The effect of strain rate is not considered
(SG Model)
3. It is suitable for high strain rate (>105 s−1 ) and high-pressure conditions

Steinberg-Lund Model 1. The effects of temperature and pressure are considered

(SL Model) 2. The flow stress is the sum of the thermal and non-thermal stress components
3. It can be used over a relatively wide range of strain rates (10−4 –106 s−1 )

4. Artificial Neural Network Model (ANN Model)

In general, the thermal deformation behavior of materials is usually described by the
phenomenological model or dislocation density model mentioned above. However, the
deformation behavior of materials at high temperature and strain rate is highly nonlinear,
and many factors affecting flow stress are also nonlinear, which results in low accuracy of
flow stress predicted by the regression method and limited scope of application.
Artificial neural network (ANN) is the most suitable method for solving the problem
which is difficult to solve by the traditional calculation method. The main advantage of this
method is that there is no need to assume a mathematical model. At present, the artificial
neural network model is widely used in industrial production and academic research [58,59].

4.1. Back-Propagation (BP) Neural Network

The BP (back-propagation) algorithm is one of the most commonly used feedforward
neural network learning algorithms in materials modeling. The BP model has strong
capacity for learning, generalization, fault tolerance, and nonlinear mapping. The typical
structure of BP model is schematically illustrated in Figure 22, which consists of one input
layer, one output layer, and one or more hidden layers [59–63].
In the BP model, the number of nodes in the input layer depends on the number of
parameters affecting the actual deformation of the material, and the output layer parameter
is the true stress of the material. The selection of the number of hidden layer neurons is a
complex and important problem, which will have a great impact on the performance of the
BP neural network. If the number of hidden layer neurons is too small, the BP network
 In the BP model, the number of nodes in the input layer depends on the number of
parameters affecting the actual deformation of the material, and the output layer param-
eter is the true stress of the material. The selection of the number of hidden layer neurons
is a complex and important problem, which will have a great impact on the performance
of the BP neural network. If the number of hidden layer neurons is too small, the BP net-
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 27 of 33
work cannot converge during model training. On the contrary, if there are too many neu-
rons in the hidden layer, the training data will be over-fitted, which will prolong the learn-
ing time of the network and reduce the generalization ability of the network. There is no
cannot
rigid converge
rule to find theduring
numbermodel training.inOn
of neurons thethe contrary,
hidden if there
layer, but itare toobemany
can neurons in
determined
the hidden layer, the training data will be over-fitted,
according to empirical Equation (96) [59] or Equation (97) [60]: which will prolong the learning time
of the network and reduce the generalization ability of the network. There is no rigid rule
M = n+m +a
to find the number of neurons in the hidden layer, but it can be determined according (96) to
empirical Equation (96) [59] or Equation (97) [60]:
√
k
MM = = n+m+a (96)
10 n + m (k ) (97)
M= (97)
10(n + m)
where M is the number of hidden layer neurons, n is the number of neurons in the
where
input Mmisisthe
layer, thenumber
numberofofhidden
neurons layer
in the outputnlayer,
neurons, is theanumber of neurons
is a positive integerin the input
ranging
layer, m is the number of neurons in the
from 1 to 10, and k is the number of training set. output layer, a is a positive integer ranging from 1
to 10, and k is the number of training set.
Back propagation of error

Input Layer Hidden Layer Output Layer

1

Temperature

Strain
Strain rate Flow stress
Direction of sample
Grain size

Other parameters
N

Forward feed of function

Figure 22. Schematic diagram of the BP neural network model.

Figure 22. Schematic diagram of the BP neural network model.
In addition to the number of hidden layer neurons, other structural parameters of
BPInneural
addition to the number
network, such asof hidden
the number layer neurons,layers,
of hidden other transfer
structural parameters
function, andof BP
training
neural network, such as the number of hidden layers, transfer function, and training
function, will also have a great impact on the convergence speed and accuracy of the neural func-
tion, will also
network have[61,62].
model a great The
impact on thefunction
Sigmoid convergence speed
is usually andasaccuracy
used of thefunction
the excitation neural of
network
hidden layer neurons, and the Purelin function as the excitation function of output of
model [61,62]. The Sigmoid function is usually used as the excitation function layer
hidden layerThe
neurons. neurons,
outputandOpjthe Purelin
of the function
p training as the
sample excitation
unit j from the function of output
input layer to thelayer
hidden
neurons. Thebe
layer can output Opj ofas
expressed the p training sample unit j from the input layer to the hidden
layer can be expressed as

1
O pj = f Nj = (98)
( ) 1 + exp −1 ∑ wij X j + θ j


Opj = f N j =
1 + exp − layer,
where Nj is the input of jth neuron in the hidden (
wij wX j is+the
ij
)
 j connection
 weight
(98)
between
the input layer and the hidden layer, Xj is the output of jth neuron in the input layer to the
hidden layer, and θ j is the threshold of the input layer to the hidden layer.
Through modifying the connection weight among different layers and the threshold
among different neurons, the high precision modeling with complex nonlinear characteris-
tics can be completed. However, in order to realize the prediction of material flow stress, it
is necessary to train the BP model with the help of experimental data.
Since the experimental data were measured in different units and value ranges, such
as temperature, strain, strain rate, and stress, if the experimental data are directly used
for model training, the convergence speed and accuracy of the model will decrease, or
even not converge [63,64]. Therefore, the input and output of training samples and test
samples based on experimental data must be normalized into dimensionless units before
training. Through normalization processing, all input and output data are converted into
numbers between 0 and 1, so as to eliminate the difference of orders of magnitude between
experimental data of different dimensions.
 based on experimental data must be normalized into dimensionless units before training.
Through normalization processing, all input and output data are converted into numbers
between 0 and 1, so as to eliminate the difference of orders of magnitude between exper-
imental data of different dimensions.
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 In addition, the choice of the training function and parameters of the neural network 28 of 33
model also has a great influence on the convergence speed and prediction accuracy. When
the tansig and purelin functions are selected as network inter-layer transfer functions, the
trainlm function of the Levenberg–Marquardt
In addition, the choice of the algorithm is used
training function andasparameters
a trainingof
function to network
the neural
optimize the BPmodel also hasthis
algorithm; a great
willinfluence on the
effectively convergence
reduce speed and
the number prediction accuracy.
of iterations of the When
model and improve the tansig and purelin functions
the convergence speed andareaccuracy
selected as network inter-layer transfer functions, the
[61–63].
trainlm function of the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm is used as a training function to
optimize the BP algorithm; this will effectively reduce the number of iterations of the model
4.2 Applications of (BP) Neural Network
and improve the convergence speed and accuracy [61–63].
At present, the ANN model has been widely used to predict the microstructure evo-
4.2. Applications
lution and mechanical propertiesof (BP) Neural materials
of metal Network in plastic deformation. Sheikh et al.
[65] used the artificial
Atneural network
present, the ANNmodel
modeltohaspredict the flow
been widely usedstress of aluminum
to predict alloy evolu-
the microstructure
(AA5083), trainedtionthe
and mechanical
neural network properties of metal
with the materials and
feedforward in plastic
backdeformation.
propagationSheikh
algo-et al. [65]
used the
rithm, and calculated theartificial neuralcurves
stress–strain network in model to predict
different regions,the flow were
which stress compared
of aluminum alloy
with the experimental data to verify the reliability of the prediction, as shown inpropagation
(AA5083), trained the neural network with the feedforward and back Figure algo-
rithm, and calculated the stress–strain curves in different regions, which were compared
23.
with the experimental data to verify the reliability of the prediction, as shown in Figure 23.

400
Predicted
400 Predicted
1
Experimental
Strain Rate=0.001s Experimental
350
1
Strain Rate=0.001s
350

300
300
True Stress(MPa)
True Stress(MPa)

1
Strain Rate=0.01s 250 Strain Rate=0.01s 1
250

200
200

150 150
Room Tempearture Tempearture=145

100 100
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
True Strain
True Strain

Figure 23. Comparison of prediction results between experimental data and non-sampling results [65].
Figure 23. Comparison of prediction results between experimental data and non-sampling results
[65]. Yan et al. [66] established the Arrhenius constitutive equation and artificial Neural
network (ANN) model to study the flow behavior of Al-6.2Zn-0.70Mg-0.30Mn-0.17Zr
aluminum alloy; the experimental and computational results are shown in Figure 24.
The results show that the well-trained neural network model can describe the real stress–
true strain curve well. Sabokpa et al. [67] have successfully predicted the mechanical
properties of AZ81 magnesium alloy under different temperature conditions by using the
BP algorithm, and pointed out that the BP network model can reflect the complex nonlinear
relationship between the ultimate properties of alloys and the deformation temperature.
In addition, Li et al. [68] and Haghdadi et al. [69] also compared the prediction ability of
the traditional constitutive model and the BP model for different metal materials, and their
research results showed that the prediction ability of the BP model was more accurate than
that of the traditional constitutive model.
However, the BP neural network has some inherent flaws, such as the need to learn a
large number of sample data to ensure the prediction accuracy, the slow learning speed, and
tendency of falling into local minimum value and network instability [70–73]. Therefore,
it is necessary to optimize the BP neural network to obtain a more accurate and reliable
network model and better prediction performance. Ding et al. [74] used the genetic al-
gorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm to optimize BP neural
2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 32 of 37

Metals 2022, 12, 2077 29 of 33

Yan et al. [66] established the Arrhenius constitutive equation and artificial Neural
network (ANN) model to study the flow behavior of Al-6.2Zn-0.70Mg-0.30Mn-0.17Zr alu-
minum alloy; the experimental
network, respectively.and computational
On this basis, the flow results
stress are shown
of 6061 in Figure
aluminum alloy24. Thedifferent
under
results showheat
thattreatment
the well-trained neural network model can describe the real stress–true
conditions was predicted, as shown in Figure 25. Although the particle
strain curve swarm
well. Sabokpa et al.(PSO)
optimization [67] have successfully
algorithm predicted
is similar the mechanical
to the genetic algorithm,proper-
but the particle
ties of AZ81swarm
magnesium alloy (PSO)
optimization underalgorithm
different hastemperature conditions
fewer parameters, by using
simpler the BP
principles, and easier
algorithm, and pointed out that
implementation. Gaothe BP[75]
et al. network
used themodel can reflect
BP model the complex
optimized by the nonlinear
genetic algorithm
relationship(GA) to predict
between the plastic
the ultimate deformation
properties behavior
of alloys and theof NiCoCrFe
deformationhigh-entropy
temperature.alloy in the
− 4 − 1
In addition, range of large
Li et al. strain
[68] and rate (10 et
Haghdadi –6000 s ).also
al. [69] Thecompared
research results show that ability
the prediction the GA-BP
of model
hasconstitutive
the traditional higher prediction
modelaccuracy.
and the BP The optimized
model BP model
for different canmaterials,
metal avoid the and
complex
theirphysical
deformation
research results showedmechanism of the material
that the prediction ability andof easily
the BP predict
modelthewasplastic
moredeformation
accurate behav-
ior of the metal under the complex
than that of the traditional constitutive model. deformation conditions such as high strain rate and
high temperature.
60
70 (b)
(a)
50 623K
60

True stress/MPa
673K
True stress/MPa

40
50
723K
30 773K
40
20
623K Constitutive equation 30
673K Constitutive equation
10 prediction
723K prediction
ANN model prediction 20
773K ANN model prediction
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
True strain True strain

100 120
(c) (d)
100
80
True stress/MPa
True stress/MPa

80
60
60
40
40
623K Constitutive equation 623K Constitutive equation
tals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20
673K prediction 673K prediction 33 of 37
723K ANN model prediction 20 723K ANN model prediction
773K 773K
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
True strain
True strain
deformation mechanism of the material and easily predict the plastic deformation behav-
ior of the metal under
Figure 24. The theofcomplex
predicted results deformation conditions such as high
of aluminum alloy based on ANN molde [66],strain
(a) 0.01rate and0.1 s−1 ;
s−1 ; (b)
Figure 24. The predicted
− 1
results
− 1
aluminum alloy based on ANN molde [66], (a) 0.01 s−1; (b) 0.1 s−1;
(c) high temperature.
(c) 1 s ; (d) 10 s .
1 s−1; (d) 10 s−1.

However, the BP neural network has some inherent flaws, such as the need to learn
a large number of sample data to ensure the prediction accuracy, the slow learning speed,
and tendency of falling into local minimum value and network instability [70–73]. There-
fore, it is necessary to optimize the BP neural network to obtain a more accurate and reli-
able network model and better prediction performance. Ding et al. [74] used the genetic
algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm to optimize BP neural
network, respectively. On this basis, the flow stress of 6061 aluminum alloy under differ-
ent heat treatment conditions was predicted, as shown in Figure 25. Although the particle
swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is similar to the genetic algorithm, but the particle
swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm has fewer parameters, simpler principles, and easier
implementation.
FigureGao
25. et
Theal.prediction
[75] usederror
theand
BP error
model optimized
ratio of neural by the genetic
network algorithm
model (the data from [74]),
Figure 25. The prediction error and error ratio of neural network model (the data from [74]), (a)
(GA) to predict the plastic
(a) prediction deformation
error; (b) predictionbehavior
error ratio.of NiCoCrFe high-entropy alloy in the
prediction error; (b) prediction error ratio.
range of large strain rate (10−4–6000 s−1). The research results show that the GA-BP model
The ANN model has high prediction accuracy of and can be easily optimized by a
has higher prediction accuracy. The optimized BP model can avoid the complex physical
The ANN model
computer. Thehas
ANN high prediction
model accuracy
is especially suitableof for
anddynamic
can be response
easily optimized bymechan-
of material a
computer. The ANN model is especially suitable for dynamic response of material me-
chanical properties under complex deformation conditions. These characteristics deter-
mine that the artificial neural network model is suitable for finite element simulation of
the material deformation process. In modern scientific research, the finite element numer-
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 30 of 33

ical properties under complex deformation conditions. These characteristics determine

that the artificial neural network model is suitable for finite element simulation of the
material deformation process. In modern scientific research, the finite element numerical
simulation plays an increasingly important role in many fields [76,77]. However, the ac-
curacy of numerical simulation results is closely related to geometric boundaries such as
material models.
In the numerical simulation model of aluminum alloy deformation behavior, Stof-
fel [77] used the ANN constitutive model instead of the traditional physical constitutive
model to accurately predict the dynamic response of the aluminum alloy sheet sample
under impact load. Bobbili [78] applied the ANN constitutive model to ABAQUS numerical
simulation software and successfully predicted the dynamic impact deformation behavior
of Ti-13NB-13Zr titanium alloy.
However, the prediction accuracy of the ANN model is greatly affected by the training
database, so it is necessary to have a large enough test results database to train the model,
which will lead to the increase of the test cost. Therefore, based on the limited test data, a
numerical simulation method is developed which can quickly build a database for neural
network model training. This will be an effective way to improve the prediction accuracy
and application of a neural network model. For example, Gao [75] used the crystal plastic
finite element model to build a training database, which is an effective means.
The ANN model has obvious advantages in finite element simulation. However, the
ANN model cannot reflect the action mechanism of various internal influencing factors
during plastic deformation of materials, and also cannot replace the physical constitu-
tive model. Therefore, the physical constitutive model and ANN model will have their
respective advantages in different application fields.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, the constitutive models of metal material are reviewed. According to
their different mechanisms and characteristics, they can be divided into three types, namely
the phenomenological model, microscopic model, and artificial neural network model. For
each model, typical examples are given and their applicable conditions, advantages, and
disadvantages are analyzed:
(1) The phenomenological model can be used to determine the constitutive relationship
model of materials by means of regression analysis of experimental data. The solution
process is relatively simple, but it cannot reflect the microscopic deformation mechanism of
materials. Therefore, it is necessary to continuously modify to couple the effects of strain,
strain rate, and temperature on the deformation behavior of materials.
(2) The microscopic constitutive model based on thermodynamics and dynamics
theory can accurately characterize the microscopic deformation mechanism of materials
under complex deformation conditions, and it also can accurately predict the flow stress of
materials. However, compared with the macroscopic constitutive model, the microscopic
constitutive model has more material parameters, which requires more complex exper-
iments and processing methods. Therefore, the engineering application of the model is
limited to a certain extent.
(3) As a new method, the artificial neural network (ANN) models are increasingly
used to predict the flow stress of materials under complex deformation conditions, and it is
suitable for finite element simulation of the material deformation process. However, the
application of the ANN models largely depends on the training database, and cannot reflect
the action mechanism of various internal influencing factors during plastic deformation
of materials.

Author Contributions: X.J., methodology, investigation, review and editing, and supervision. K.H.,
original draft preparation and visualization. Z.L., visualization and review. Z.F., visualization and
review. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 31 of 33

Funding: The research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52205384),
the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2021M291604), the Jiangsu Postdoctoral Research Fund-
ing Program (2021K258B), the High-Level (Higher Education) Science Foundation of Nanjing Forestry
University (GXL2018020), and the Youth Science and Technology Innovation Foundation of Nanjing
Forestry University (CX2018027).
Conflicts of Interest: No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and the
manuscript is approved by all authors for publication. The work submitted was original research,
has not been published previously and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere in whole
or in part. All the authors listed have approved the manuscript.

References
1. Xiao, J.; Li, D.S.; Li, X.Q.; Deng, T.S. Constitutive modeling and microstructure change of Ti–6Al–4V during the hot tensile
deformation. J. Alloys Compd. 2012, 541, 346–352. [CrossRef]
2. Ashtiani, H.R.R.; Parsa, M.H.; Bisadi, H. Constitutive equations for elevated temperature flow behavior of commercial purity
aluminum. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2012, 545, 61–67. [CrossRef]
3. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, M.S.; Zhong, J. Study of metadynamic recrystallization behaviors in a low alloy steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol.
2008, 209, 2477–2482. [CrossRef]
4. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, M.S.; Zhong, J. Effects of deformation temperatures on stress/strain distribution and microstructural evolution of
deformed 42CrMo steel. Mater. Des. 2008, 30, 908–913. [CrossRef]
5. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, M.S.; Zhong, J. Constitutive modeling for elevated temperature flow behavior of 42CrMo steel. Comput. Mater.
Sci. 2007, 42, 470–477. [CrossRef]
6. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, M.S.; Zhong, J. Study of static recrystallization kinetics in a low alloy steel. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2008, 44, 316–321.
[CrossRef]
7. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, M.S. Study of microstructural evolution during static recrystallization in a low alloy steel. J. Mater. Sci. 2009,
44, 835–842. [CrossRef]
8. Pu, B.; Song, P.; Li, W.B.; Yao, W.J.; Wang, X.M. Plastic deformation behavior and constitutive modeling of Cu-50Ta alloy during
hot compression. Mater. Res. Express 2022, 9, 016517. [CrossRef]
9. Shin, H.; Kim, J.B. A Phenomenological Constitutive Equation to Describe Various Flow Stress Behaviors of Materials in Wide
Strain Rate and Temperature Regimes. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 2010, 132, 021009. [CrossRef]
10. Rusinek, A.; Rodriguez-Martinez, J.A.; Arias, A. A thermo-viscoplastic constitutive model for FCC metals with application to
OFHC copper. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2009, 52, 120–135. [CrossRef]
11. Gao, Y.L.; Sun, X.M. On the parameters of dynamic deformation and damage models of aluminum alloy 6008-T4 used for
high-speed railway vehicles. Explos. Shock. Waves 2021, 41, 118–129.
12. Ru, Y.F.; Zhang, L.L.; Liu, W.; Chen, G.; Dou, W.Y. Inverse Determination Method of Johnson-Cook Model Parameters Based on
the Stress State Test of Notched Specimens. J. Mech. Eng. 2021, 57, 60–70.
13. Zhang, H.J.; Wen, W.D.; Cui, H.T. Behaviors of IC10 alloy over a wide range of strain rates and temperatures: Experiments and
modeling. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2008, 504, 99–103. [CrossRef]
14. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, X.M. A combined Johnson–Cook and Zerilli–Armstrong model for hot compressed typical high-strength alloy
steel. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2010, 49, 628–633. [CrossRef]
15. Vural, M.; Caro, J. Experimental analysis and constitutive modeling for the newly developed 2139-T8 alloy. Mater. Sci. Eng. A
2009, 520, 56–65. [CrossRef]
16. Khan, A.S.; Huang, S.J. Experimental and theoretical study of mechanical behavior of 1100 aluminum in the strain rate range
10-5 -104 s-1 . Int. J. Plast. 1992, 8, 397–424. [CrossRef]
17. Yu, H.D.; Guo, Y.J.; Zhang, K.Z. Constitutive model on the description of plastic behavior of DP600 steel at strain rate from 10−4
to 103 s−1 . Comput. Mater. Sci. 2009, 46, 36–41. [CrossRef]
18. Khan, A.S.; Liang, R.Q. Behaviors of three BCC metal over a wide range of strain rates and temperatures: Experiments and
modeling. International Journal of Plasticity, 1999, 1 A combined Johnson–Cook and Zerilli–Armstrong model for hot compressed
typical high-strength alloy steel. Int. J. Plast. 1999, 5, 1089–1109. [CrossRef]
19. Khan, A.S.; Suh, Y.S.; Kazmi, R. Quasi-static and dynamic loading responses and constitutive modeling of titanium alloys. Int. J.
Plast. 2004, 20, 2233–2248. [CrossRef]
20. Khan, A.S.; Suh, Y.S.; Chen, X.; Takacs, L.; Zhang, H. Nanocrystalline aluminum and iron: Mechanical behavior at quasi-static
and high strain rates, and constitutive modeling. Int. J. Plast. 2006, 22, 195–209. [CrossRef]
21. Farrokh, B.; Khan, A.S. Grain size, strain rate, and temperature dependence of flow stress in ultra-fine grained and nanocrystalline
Cu and Al: Synthesis, experiment, and constitutive modeling. Int. J. Plast. 2008, 25, 715–732. [CrossRef]
22. Fields, D.S.; Bachofen, W.A. Determination of strain hardening characteristics by torsion testing. ASTM Proc. Am. Soc. Test. Mater.
1957, 57, 1259–1272.
23. Cheng, Y.Q.; Zhang, H.; Chen, Z.H. Flow stress equation of AZ31 magnesium alloy sheet during warm tensile deformation. J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 208, 29–34. [CrossRef]
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 32 of 33

24. Zhang, X.H. Experimental and Numerical Study of Magnesium Alloy during Hot Working Process. PhD Thesis, Shanghai
Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China, 2003.
25. Chen, Y.Y.; Li, M.Q.; Li, L. Kinetic variables based constitutive model for high temperature deformation of Ti-46.5Al–2Nb–2Cr. J.
Mater. Res. Technol. 2021, 15, 3525–3537. [CrossRef]
26. Yoo, J.D.; Kim, M.C.; Kim, E.J.; Razali, M.K.; Joun, M.S. Flow stress characterization of magnesium alloys at elevated temperatures:
A review. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 2047, 012002. [CrossRef]
27. Spigarelli, S.; El Mehtedi, M. A New Constitutive Model for the Plastic Flow of Metals at Elevated Temperatures. J. Mater. Eng.
Perform. 2014, 23, 658–665. [CrossRef]
28. Brown, C.; McCarthy, T.; Chadha, K.; Rodrigues, S.; Aranas, C., Jr.; Saha, G.C. Constitutive modeling of the hot deformation
behavior of CoCrFeMnNi high-entropy alloy. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2021, 826, 141940. [CrossRef]
29. Shi, H.; McLaren, A.J.; Sellars, C.M.; Shahani, R.; Bolingbroke, R. Constitutive equations for high temperature flow stress of
aluminium alloys. Mater. Sci. Technol. 1997, 13, 210–216. [CrossRef]
30. Guan, S.K.; Wu, L.H.; Wang, L.G. Flow stress and microstructure evolution of semi-continuous casting AZ70 Mg-alloy during hot
compression deformation. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2008, 18, 315–320. [CrossRef]
31. Chae, D.; Koss, D.A. Damage Accumulation and Failure of HY-100 Steel.Metallurgical and Materials Transactions, A. Phys. Metall.
Mater. Sci. 2001, 32, 2985–2994.
32. Lin, Y.C.; Chen, M.S.; Zhong, J. Effect of temperature and strain rate on the compressive deformation behavior of 42CrMo steel. J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 2007, 205, 308–315. [CrossRef]
33. Molinari, A.; Ravichandran, G. Constitutive modeling of high-strain-rate deformation in metals based on the evolution of an
effective microstructural length. Mech. Mater. 2005, 37, 737–752. [CrossRef]
34. Naderi, M.; Durrenberger, L.; Molinari, A.; Bleck, W. Constitutive relationships for 22MnB5 boron steel deformed isothermally at
high temperatures. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2007, 478, 130–139. [CrossRef]
35. Durrenberger, L.; Molinari, A. Modeling of Temperature and Strain-Rate Effects in Metals Using an Internal Variable Model. Exp.
Mech. 2009, 49, 247–255. [CrossRef]
36. Durrenberger, L.; Molinari, A.; Rusinek, A. Internal variable modeling of the high strain-rate behavior of metals with applications
to multiphase steels. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2008, 478, 297–304. [CrossRef]
37. Cerik, B.C.; Choung, J. Rate-dependent combined necking and fracture model for predicting ductile fracture with shell elements
at high strain rates. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2020, 146, 103697. [CrossRef]
38. He, X.; Liu, L.; Zeng, T.; Yao, Y. Micromechanical modelling of work hardening for coupling microstructure evolution, dynamic
recovery and recrystallization: Application to high entropy alloys. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2020, 177, 105567. [CrossRef]
39. Zerilli, F.J.; Armstrong, R.W. Dislocation-mechanics-based constitutive relations for material dynamics calculations. J. Appl. Phys.
1987, 61, 1816–1825. [CrossRef]
40. Zhang, H.; Wen, W.; Cui, H.; Xu, Y. A modified Zerilli–Armstrong model for alloy IC10 over a wide range of temperatures and
strain rates. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2009, 527, 328–333. [CrossRef]
41. Samantaray, D.; Mandal, S.; Borah, U.; Bhaduri, A.K.; Sivaprasad, P.V. A thermo-viscoplastic constitutive model to predict
elevated-temperature flow behaviour in a titanium-modified austenitic stainless steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2009, 526, 1–6. [CrossRef]
42. Preston, D.L.; Tonks, D.L.; Wallace, D.C. Model of plastic deformation for extreme loading conditions. J. Appl. Phys. 2002, 93, 211.
[CrossRef]
43. Kim, J.B.; Shin, H.H. Comparison of plasticity models for tantalum and a modification of the PTW model for wide ranges of
strain, strain rate, and temperature. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2009, 36, 746–753. [CrossRef]
44. Rusinek, A.; Klepaczko, J.R. Shear testing of a sheet steel at wide range of strain rates and a constitutive relation with strain-rate
and temperature dependence of the flow stress. Int. J. Plast. 2001, 17, 87–115. [CrossRef]
45. Rusinek, A.; Rodríguez-Martínez, J.A. Thermo-viscoplastic constitutive relation for aluminium alloys, modeling of negative
strain rate sensitivity and viscous drag effects. Mater. Des. 2009, 30, 4377–4390. [CrossRef]
46. Goetz, R.L.; Seetharaman, V. Modeling Dynamic Recrystallization Using Cellular Automata. Scr. Mater. 1998, 38, 405–413.
[CrossRef]
47. Jin, Z.Y.; Juan, L.; Cui, Z.S.; Wei, D.L. Identification of nucleation parameter for cellular automaton model of dynamic recrystal-
lization. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2010, 20, 458–464. [CrossRef]
48. Ren, Z.; Pu, Z.P.; Liu, D.R. Prediction of grain-size transition during solidification of hypoeutectic Al-Si alloys by an improved
three-dimensional sharp-interface model. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2022, 203, 111131. [CrossRef]
49. Zhao, Y.; Pu, Z.; Wang, L.; Liu, D.R. Modeling of Grain Refinement and Nucleation Behavior of Mg-4Y-0.5Zr (wt.%) Alloy via
Cellular Automaton Model. Int. J. Met. 2021, 16, 945–961. [CrossRef]
50. Song, Y.; Jiang, H.; Zhang, L.; He, J.; Zhao, J. Integrated model for describing the microstructure evolution of the inoculated
Al-Zn-Mg-Cu alloys in continuous solidification. Results Phys. 2021, 26, 104465. [CrossRef]
51. Gu, C.; Lu, Y.; Ridgeway, C.D.; Cinkilic, E.; Luo, A.A. Three-dimensional cellular automaton simulation of coupled hydrogen
porosity and microstructure during solidification of ternary aluminum alloys. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 13099. [CrossRef]
52. Steinberg, D.J.; Cochran, S.G.; Guinan, M.W. A constitutive model for metals applicable at high-strain rate. J. Appl. Phys. 1980,
51, 1498–1504. [CrossRef]
53. Steinberg, D.J.; Lund, C.M. A constitutive model for strain rates from 10-4 to10-6S-1. J. Appl. Phys. 1989, 65, 1528. [CrossRef]
Metals 2022, 12, 2077 33 of 33

54. Zaretsky, E.B.; Frage, N.; Ratzker, B.; Kalabukhov, S.; Mayseless, M. Impact response of a tungsten heavy alloy over 23–1100 ◦ C
temperature range. J. Appl. Phys. 2021, 129, 125902. [CrossRef]
55. Brown, J.L.; Knudson, M.D.; Alexander, C.S.; Asay, J.R. Shockless compression and release behavior of beryllium to 110 GPa. J.
Appl. Phys. 2014, 116, 411. [CrossRef]
56. Li, W.; Kou, H.; Zhang, X.; Ma, J.; Li, Y.; Geng, P.; Wu, X.; Chen, L.; Fang, D. Temperature-dependent elastic modulus model for
metallic bulk materials. Mech. Mater. 2019, 139, 103194. [CrossRef]
57. Yang, X.; Zeng, X.; Wang, F.; Zhao, H.; Chen, J.; Wang, Y. A modified Steinberg-Cochran-Guinan model applicable to solid-liquid
mixed zone along the principle Hugoniot. Mech. Mater. 2021, 155, 103775. [CrossRef]
58. Mishra, S.K.; Brahma, A.; Dutta, K. Prediction of mechanical properties of Al-Si-Mg alloy using artificial neural network. Sādhanā
2021, 46, 139. [CrossRef]
59. Singh, K.; Rajput, S.K.; Mehta, Y. Modeling of the hot deformation behavior of a high phosphorus steel using artificial neural
network. Mater. Discov. 2017, 6, S2352924517300078. [CrossRef]
60. Zhong, M.J.; Wang, K.L.; Lu, S.Q. Study on high temperature deformation behavior and BP neural network constitutive model of
MoNb alloy. J. Plast. Eng. 2020, 27, 177–182.
61. Jain, R.; Jain, A.; Rahul, M.R.; Kumar, A.; Dubey, M.; Sabat, R.K.; Samal, S.; Phanikumar, G. Development of ultrahigh strength
novel Co–Cr–Fe–Ni–Zr quasi-peritectic high entropy alloy by an integrated approach using experiment and simulation. Materialia
2020, 14, 100896. [CrossRef]
62. Lin, Q.Q.; Peng, D.S.; Zhu, Y.Z. Establishment of constitutive relationship model for 2519 aluminum alloy based on BP artificial
neural network. J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. 2005, 12, 380–384. [CrossRef]
63. Yu, Y.; Pan, Q.; Wang, W.; Huang, Z.; Xiang, S.; Lin, G.; Yan, J.; Liu, B. Microstructure Evolution and Constitutive Analysis of
Al-Mg-Si-Ce-B Alloy during Hot Deformation. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2022, 31, 4707–4720. [CrossRef]
64. Mi, X.; Tian, L.; Tang, A.; Kang, J.; Peng, P.; She, J.; Wang, H.; Chen, X.; Pan, F. A reverse design model for high-performance and
low-cost magnesium alloys by machine learning. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2022, 201, 110881. [CrossRef]
65. Sheikh, H.; Serajzadeh, S. Estimation of flow stress behavior of AA5083 using artificial neural networks with regard to dynamic
strain ageing effect. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 196, 115–119. [CrossRef]
66. Yan, J.; Pan, Q.L.; Li, A.D.; Song, W.B. Flow behavior of Al–6.2Zn–0.70Mg–0.30Mn–0.17Zr alloy during hot compressive
deformation based on Arrhenius and ANN models. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2017, 27, 638–647. [CrossRef]
67. Sabokpa, O.; Zarei-Hanzaki, A.; Abedi, H.R.; Haghdadi, N. Artificial neural network modeling to predict the high temperature
flow behavior of an AZ81 magnesium alloy. Mater. Des. 2012, 39, 390–396. [CrossRef]
68. Li, H.Y.; Wei, D.D.; Li, Y.H.; Wang, X.F. Application of artificial neural network and constitutive equations to describe the hot
compressive behavior of 28CrMnMoV steel. Mater. Des. 2012, 35, 557–562. [CrossRef]
69. Haghdadi, N.; Zarei-Hanzaki, A.; Khalesian, A.R.; Abedi, H.R. Artificial neural network modeling to predict the hot deformation
behavior of an A356 aluminum alloy. Mater. Des. 2013, 49, 386–391. [CrossRef]
70. Rao, K.P.; Prasad, Y.K.D.V. Neural network approach to flow stress evaluation in hot deformation. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1995,
53, 552–566. [CrossRef]
71. Wang, Y.J.; Wang, K.L.; Liu, S.Q. Hot Deformation Behavior and Forging Process Optimization of MoLa Alloy Based on Polar
Reciprocity Model. Rare Met. Mater. Eng. 2018, 47, 2225–2231.
72. Zhang, J.P.; Gao, P.F.; Fang, F. An ATPSO-BP neural network modeling and its application in mechanical property prediction.
Comput. Mater. Sci. 2019, 163, 262–266. [CrossRef]
73. Wan, P.; Wang, K.L.; Lu, S.Q. Constitutive modeling of Ti-2.7Cu alloy based on strain compensation and PSO-BP neural network.
J. Eng. 2019, 47, 113–119.
74. Ding, F.j.; Jia, X.D.; Hong, T.J.; Xu, Y.L. Flow Stress Prediction Model of 6061 Aluminum Alloy Sheet Based on GA-BP and PSO-BP
Neural Networks. Rare Met. Mater. Eng. 2020, 49, 1840–1853.
75. Gao, T.J.; Zhao, D.; Zhang, T.W.; Jin, T.; Ma, S.G.; Wang, Z.H. Strain-rate-sensitive mechanical response, twinning, and texture
features of NiCoCrFe high-entropy alloy: Experiments, multi-level crystal plasticity and artificial neural networks modeling. J.
Alloys Compd. 2020, 845, 155911. [CrossRef]
76. Yuan, D.; Chen, J.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Liu, S.; Jiang, H.; Qian, N. Thermal Performance of the Thin Heat Pipe for Cooling of
Solid-State Drives. Metals 2022, 12, 1786. [CrossRef]
77. Stoffel, M.; Bamer, F.; Markert, B. Neural network based constitutive modeling of nonlinear viscoplastic structural response. Mech.
Res. Commun. 2019, 95, 85–88. [CrossRef]
78. Bonnili, R.; Madhu, V. Constitutive modeling and fracture behavior of a biomedical Ti-13Nb-13Zr alloy. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2017,
700, 82–91.