You are on page 1of 39

CAHRS Workshop

Testing for Crash & Safety Simulation


Hubert Lobo DatapointLabs
New York, USA

TestPaks.com

DatapointLabs
Research quality material testing ISO 17025 production environment Results in 5 days (48 hour RUSH service) Web-based quotation & data delivery Domain expertise in CAE material calibration

TestPaks.com

expert material testing


Your CAE data conversion

materials testing

TestPaks = Materials testing + CAE material parameter conversion


metal, plastic, foam, rubber, composites over 20 CAE software codes
TestPaks.com

Topics
A test philosophy for representing rate dependency of materials Experimental technique including sampling and specimen geometries Assessment of crash material data quality, expected trends & validation Specific comments for unfilled and fiberfilled polymers, foams, rubber and metals.
TestPaks.com

Getting pertinent properties


Importance of measuring the right property Artifact free data
Properly designed experiments eg. not using crosshead displacement to calculate strain

Traceable data (ISO 17025)


NIST traceable instruments Certified trained technicians
TestPaks.com

Getting the right samples


Spatial variation
Properties vary with location Forming, stretching, molding

Environmental variation
Ageing and conditioning

Process variation
Degradation from processing Recycled materials
TestPaks.com

Metals
Relatively well behaved Models designed to match behavior Challenges lie with post yield nonMises failure envelopes Scaling of yield surface with strain rate Work of Nakajima, Dubois, Hooputra

TestPaks.com

Plastics
Not well behaved Models not designed for plastics crash simulation Complex models are expensive Can we develop best practices for adapting common models to plastics

TestPaks.com

Plastics Behavior - Basics


Non-linear elasticity Elastic limit well below classical yield point Significant plastic strains prior to yield Post-yield with necking behavior
35 30 25 Engineering Stress (MPa) 20 15 10 5 0 0 .0 5 .0 1 0 .0 1 5 .0 2 0 .0 E n g in e e r in g S tr a in ( % )
d a ta P la s tic Po in t

TestPaks.com

Plastics Rate Effects


Modulus may depend on rate

TestPaks.com

Plastics Rate Effects


Fail strain may be rate dependent

TestPaks.com

Material Testing
Instron servo-hydraulic UTM Dynamic load cell Test at 0.01, 0.1, 1. 10, 100/s strain rates Temperatures: -40 to 150C
tens_slow.mpg

Tens.mpg

TestPaks.com

Test Specimens
ASTM D638Type V Preparation
CNC from plaque CNC from part Molded
E2

gate region

E1

Variability
processing orientation thickness

TestPaks.com

Modeling simple ductile plastics


Modulus is not rate dependent Large strains to failure Post-yield necking Plasticity curves vary with strain rate Failure strain independent of strain rate LS-DYNA, ANSYS, ABAQUS, PAMCRASH
TestPaks.com

Choosing EMOD
35 30 Engineering Stress (MPa) 25 20 15 10 5 0 0.0 5.0 10.0 Engineering Strain (%) 15.0 20.0
data Plastic Point

TestPaks.com

Post-yield with necking (Deihl)


70 60 50 Stress MPa 40

yield point

neck propagation

necking starts
30 20 10 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Strain mm/mm 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

UTM1-39.62-1 UTM1-39.62-2

TestPaks.com

Fail Limitations
When FAIL f(strain rate)

TestPaks.com

Modeling Rate Dependency


Cowper Symonds
Tensile Strength (MPa)
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 Strain Rate(/s) 1.E+01 1.E+02

Does not correlate well with plastics rate dependency

LCSR
Capture model independent behavior

data Cowper Symonds Eyring

TestPaks.com

Eyring Model
Eyring Model
Yield stress v. log strain rate is linear Best form for plastics

Fit yield stress v. log strain rate data to Eyring equation Can submit to LSDYNA MAT24 as table using LCSR
TestPaks.com

MAT24 validation
60 50
LS-DYNA Simulation

40
Stress (MPa)

Tensile Experiment MAT 24 Model

30

20

10

0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15


Strain (mm/mm)

0.2

0.25

0.3

TestPaks.com

Brittle plastics
Modulus is rate dependent Small strains to failure Brittle failure Failure strain decreases with increasing strain rate LSDYNA MAT19

TestPaks.com

Methodology for MAT 19


Determine elastic limit at quasi-static strain rate Use elastic limit for vonMises yield Define failure
failure stress v. strain rate table

TestPaks.com

Ductile-brittle transitions
Non-linear behavior Failure depends on strain rate Models
LS-DYNA MAT89 PAMCRASH 103 Abaqus *ELASTIC *PLASTIC,Rate

TestPaks.com

Fiber Filled Plastics


Digimat MX
Material model reverse engineered from standard experiment

Perform injection-molding simulation Apply Digimat material model to transfer data to crash simulation Crash model has spatially oriented properties
TestPaks.com

Basic Digimat TestPak Protocol


Mold 100X300X3.16mm plaques
Edge gated on 100 mm end Long flow length Fully developed flow Highly fiber orientation

Cut test specimens by CNC 5 specimens each (0, 90 ) Obtain true stress-strain data
TestPaks.com

Advanced Models
MATSAMP (LS-DYNA) Standard rate dependent model Add non-mises failure envelope
Compression Shear

Add triaxiality
Post yield transverse strain

Add unloading
TestPaks.com

Pros and Cons


Better failure envelope modeling Greater cost More complex model Greater simulation accuracy in difficult cases Cost-benefit not certain for general use

TestPaks.com

Foams
Different deformation modes
Crushable Elastic with or without damage Visco-elastic

Large volumetric strain component

TestPaks.com

Effect of Poissons Ratio = 0


Material compacts by eliminating air No lateral deformation Poissons Ratio -> 0 Axial strain volumetric strain True for
open cell foams crushable foams

May not be true for


closed cell foams elastomeric foams
TestPaks.com

Typical Stress-Strain Data


0.050 0.045 0.040 Engineering Stress (MPa) 0.035 Zone 1 0.030 0.025 0.020 0.015 0.010 0.005 0.000 0 20 40 60 80 100 Engineering Strain (%)

Zone 2

Zone 3

TestPaks.com

Test Strategy
Compressive stress-strain
5 decades of strain rate
.01, .1, 1, 10, 100 /s

Temperatures
-100 to 150C
Hisp_comp.mpg

Optional tests
Tensile (for cut-off stress) Shear (as required)
TestPaks.com

Test Instruments

TestPaks.com

PU Foam-stress strain
0 .0 4 0 .0 3 5 0 .0 3 0 .0 2 5 Stress (MPa) 0 .0 2 0 .0 1 /s fi t 0 .1 /s fit 1 /s fi t 1 0 /s fi t 1 0 0 /s fi t

0 .0 1 5 0 .0 1 0 .0 0 5 0 0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 0 .4 0 .5 0 .6 0 .7 S tr a i n ( m m /m m ) 0 .8 0 .9 1

TestPaks.com

PU Foam- rate effects

TestPaks.com

PU Foam recovery
0.030 0.025 Engineering Stress (MPa)
Load

0.020 0.015 0.010 0.005 0.000 0 20 40 60

Unload

80

100

Engineering Strain (%)

TestPaks.com

Conclusions
Choice of material model depends on
material test data situation complexity

Proper selection = reasonable model Simple improvements can add power Validated models represent baseline Models can be tuned for multi-axial loadings
TestPaks.com

TestPaks.com

TestPaks.com

TestPaks.com