Constitutivemodelingoflargestraincyclic

plasticity
foranisotropicmetals
FusahitoYoshida
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering
Hiroshima University, J APAN
1: Basic framework of modeling
2: Models of orthotropic anisotropy
3: Cyclic plasticity Kinematic hardening model
4: Applications to sheet metal forming and some
topics on material modeling
Lecture2:Contents
1.Whatistheproblemofanisotropymodeling?
Overviewofsomeexistingyieldfunctions
Why Hill48 is still very popular? Whats the problem?
Polynomial type (Gotoh1977, Hu2007, Soare2008)
Linear transformation of stress tensor BarlatsYld2000-2d
Interpolation of biaxial stress states (Vegter2006)
2.Auserfriendly3Dyieldfunction
Yield function and its material parameter identification
Validation of the model
3.ApplicationtoFEsimulations
Hole-expansion and cylindrical deep drawing
4.Othertypesofmodeling
Bi-axial tension testing machine
(Hiroshima University)
Yield surfaces (equi-plastic work surfaces)
Anisotropies of sheets
(experimental )
Biaxial experiment of sheet metals was first done by Shiratori & Ikegami, J.
Mech & Phys Solids, 16 (1968), 373.
Recently, Kuwabara is active in doing biaxial experiments (e.g., Int J Plasticity,
23 (2007), 385 )
0
45
90
R-value anisotropy
& Flow stress directionality
4 3 2 2
1 2 3
3 4 4
4 5 0
x x y x y
x y y
f A A A
A A


= + +
+ + =
HSS of 980 MPa-DP
r0 =0.73, r45 =0.91, r90 =0.81
IF steel
r0 =2.12, r45 =2.15, r90 =2.89
Hill48 quadratic yield criterion
is acceptable
4 3 2 2
1 2 3
3 4 4
4 5 0
x x y x y
x y y
f A A A
A A


= + +
+ + =
Yield surfaces of steel sheets
Materialmodelsforsheetmetalformingsimulation
Anisotropy+Bauschinger effect(KinematicHardening)
F. Yoshida and T. Uemori: IJ P 18 (2002), 61-686
( ) 0,
p
f Y
f
= =

&

D
Anisotropic
yield function
Plastic potential theory
Kinematic
hardening
Note: Yield function should be a convex function of stress
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Experiment

y

/

x
/
0
590HSS
2
ij
i j
H

=

A yield function is convex if its Hessian matrix:
is positive semi-definite.
Accurate prediction of anisotropy
When using Hill48 yield function for hole-expansion simulation
7
Experiment
2.300
2.150
2.000
1.850
1.700
1.550
1.400
1.250
1.100
0.950
0.800
0.650
0.500
Simulation
R.D.
For yield function, what we need?
Wrong prediction for
the location of necking
Solid Punch
Solid Die
PAD (Shell)
Blank Sheet
(Solid)
3D version of anisotropic yield function (e.g., bottoming,
ironningetc., NUMISHEET2011 Benchmark)
Appropriate (robust and clear) scheme of material
parameter identification
Ogawa & Yoshida: NUMISHEET2011
Summaryofsomeexistingyieldfunctions
Hill48 quadratic function (Convex, 2D, 3D)
2Polynomial type (2D, 3D), e.g., Gotoh(1977)
* Material parameters B1~B9 are identified using either r0, r45
and r90, 0, 22.5, 45, 67.5, 90 and b.
** 3D version by Hu(IJ P 23, 2007, pp. 620)
+Convexity is not always guaranteed (Refer to S. Soareet al.:
IJ P 24(2008), pp. 915) .
2 2 2 2
1 2 3 4 0
3
H x x y y xy
A A A A = + + =
( )
4 3 2 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 5
2 2 2 4 4
6 7 8 9 0
2 3 2
6 9 .
G x x y x y x y y
x x y y xy xy
B B B B B
B B B B


= + +
+ + + =
* Material parameters A1~A4 are identified using either r0, r45
and r90 (Hill48-r) or 0, 45, 90 and b (Hill48-).
Why is Hill48 still very popular in industry?
Whats the problem?
Easy material parameter
identification from r0, r45
and r90 solely.
For weak anisotropy (e.g.,
some HSSsof r =
0.9~1.1) , Hill48 describes
it reasonably well. For an
isotropic sheet, it is
identical to von Mises.
Convex 3D model.
{ }
2 2 2
2 2 2 2
1
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2
1
( ) ( )
3
ij yy zz zz xx xx yy
yz zx xy
f F G H
L M N F G H


= + +
+ + + + +
By Hill48, b is
too large
Experimen
By 4th-order
polynomial type,
too distorted.
0 45 90
2.12, 2.15, 2.89 r r r = = =
Predictionsofrvaluesandflowstressdirectionality
R-value anisotropy is well predicted by Hill48-r, where
parameters are determined using r0, r45and r90.
Stress directionality is well predicted by Hill48- , where
parameters are determined using0,45,90 andb.
0.76
0.8
0.84
0.88
0.92
0.96
1
1.04
1.08
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
von Mises
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Hill'90
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

f
l
o
w

s
t
r
e
s
s
Tensile direction (deg.)
590R
By Hill48-r, too strong
stress directionality
0
45
90
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
von Mises
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Hill'90
R

v
a
l
u
e
Tensile direction (deg.)
590R
By Hill48-, too weak
planar anisotropy
3. Linear transformation of stress tensor (Barlats models)
( ) ( )
1 2 2 1 1 2
2
' ' ' ' ' '2
1,2
2
, 2 2
: , :
1 1
4
2 2
a
a a a
x y x y xy
X X X X X X
X X X X X X


= + =
= = + + +
= =
= + +
X L X L
X
1
, X
2
, X
1
, X
2
Principal values of X', X"
( )
( ) ( ) ( )
89 1 2 1 2 1 0
2
2
1 2
2 2 2 ,
1 1
, ,
2 4
M M M
M
B
x y x y x
a K K a K K a K
K h K h p


= + + + =
= + = + +
Yld89
Yld2000-2d
* Material parameters a, h and p are identified using either r0,
r45 and r90 (Yld89-r) or 0, 45, 90 and b (Yld89-).
* Material parameter are identified usingr0, r45r90, rb, 0, 45, 90, b.
** Extension to 3D is possible, but rather complicated. (Barlat et al.:
IJ P 23, 2007, pp. 1297)
+Convexity is guaranteed
WhatistheproblemofLinearTransformation
based3DyieldfunctionusingPrincipalStresses?
p
k lm
ij
ij k lm ij
X s f f
d d d
X s



= =

%
%
Calculation is not so
straightforward
( ) ( )
2
' ' ' ' ' '2
1,2
1 1
4
2 2
x y x y xy
X X X X X X = + +
2D is OK
4.DescriptionofBiaxialYieldLocus
byBezierInterpolation(Vegter model)
( ) ( )
2
2 2 , 0 1
locus i h i i j h
= + + +
r r r r r r r
Bezier curve
H. Vegter and A. H. van den Boogaard, Int. J. Plasticity 22(2006), pp.557-580.
R.D.
T.D.
1
2
* High flexibility of description of anisotropies.
** Convexity is guaranteed.
+Very difficult to identify all the parameters.
++3D version impossible
A User-Friendly 3D Yield Function:
New Proposition (Yoshida et al., NUMISHEET 2011)
6 5 4 2 3 3 2 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 6 7 6 3
Y x x y x y x y x y x y y
C C C C C C C = + + +
( )
( )
4 3 2 2 3 4 2
8 9 10 11 12
2 2 4 6
13 14 15 16
6
0
9 2 3 2
27 27
x x y x y x y y xy
x x y y xy xy
C C C C C
C C C C

+ + +
+ + +
=
Normal-shear coupling terms
When , this is identical to von Misescriterion.
1 2 16
... 1 C C C = = = =
Normal stress terms
2D version
16 material parameters
Onmaterialparameteridentification
Number of
parameters
Flexibility
&
accuracy
User-friendly
&
Robust
Many
Few
High
Low
Yes
No
Easy parameter
identification
&
Always good results
A scheme of material parameter identification is very important
for models with many parameters.
ConvexYieldFunctionusingStressInvariants
basedontheLinearTransformation
( )
( )
( ) ( )3 ( )2
2 3
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2 2
(1) (2) ( )
27 ,
27/8 9/ 4
1 1
,
2 3
1
... , 1, 2,...,
m m m
m m m m m m m
ij ij ij jk ki
n
J J
J s s J s s s
m n
n

=

= =
= + + + =
% %
% %
% % % % %

Cazacu-Barlat (2001)
Yoshida (2012) for highly flexible description of anisotropy
Description of Anisotropy
based on Linear Transformation
( ) ( ) m m
=
%
s L
( )
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1
0 0 0 3 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 3
m m m m
m m m m
m m m m m
m
m
m
b c c b
c c a a
b a a b
g
h
k
+


+


+
=






L
TwostepMaterialParameterIdentification
0
0.5
1
1.5
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
Simulation
R

v
a
l
u
e
Tensile direction (deg.)

r
C1~C7
Necessary reference points
Others
C8~C15
Step 1am, bm, cm
candidates
Step 2am, bm, cmgm determination
Prediction of yield locus
590HSS
Experimental data 590HSSare from Hashimoto et al.:Tetsu-to-Hagane, 96(2010),27-33.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Experiment
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Gotoh
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida
Normalized yield stress in R.D.
x
/
0
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

y
i
e
l
d

s
t
r
e
s
s

i
n

T
.
D
.

y

/

0
Validation of the Model
0 45 90 0 45 90
0.43, 1.41, 0.61, 1.000, 0.936, 1.047, 1.000
b
r r r = = = = = = =
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Experiment

y

/

x
/
0
Steels
R-values: r Flow stress directionality:
590HSS
0
0.5
1
1.5
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Gotoh
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida
L
a
n
k
f
o
r
d

v
a
l
u
e

r

TensileanglefromR.D. [deg.]
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
1.1
1.15
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Gotoh
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

f
l
o
w

s
t
r
e
s
s

TensileanglefromR.D. [deg.]
Experimental data 590HSSare from Hashimoto et al.:Tetsuto Hagane, 96(2010),27-33.
Predictionsofrvaluesandflowstressdirectionality
-45
0
45
90
135
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Gotoh
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida D
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

p
l
a
s
t
i
c

s
t
r
a
i
n

r
a
t
e

[
d
e
g
.
]
Loading direction [deg.]
Directionofplasticstrainincrement 590HSS
Experimental data 590HSSare from Hashimoto et al.:Tetsu-to-Hagane, 96(2010),27-33.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Experiment
Simulation
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

t
r
u
e

s
t
r
e
s
s

i
n

t
r
a
n
s
v
e
r
s
a
l

d
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
Normalized true stress in rolling direction
Prediction of yield locus
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Experiment
Hill'48-r
Hill'48-
Gotoh
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida
Normalized yield stress in R.D.
x
/
0
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

y
i
e
l
d

s
t
r
e
s
s

i
n

T
.
D
.

y

/

0
IF steel
Experimental data IF steelare from Kitayamaet al.:Tetsu-to-Hagane, 97(2011),221-
219.
0 45 90 0 45 90
2.12, 2.15, 2.89, 1.000, 0.988, 0.992, 1.260
b
r r r = = = = = = =
IFsteelvalue
When usingr0, r45 and r90 for parameter identification
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
Hill48-r
Hill48-
Gotoh-Hu
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida
r
-
v
a
l
u
e

r

Tension axis angle from R.D. [deg]

IF steel
A certain
discrepancy
0
45
90
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Experiment
From 5- data
From 3- data
r
-
v
a
l
u
e

r

Tension axis angle from R.D. [deg]

IF steel
r

0.05
Using 3 r-values
Using 5 r-values
IF steel-value
When using r0, r45 and r90 +r22.5 and r67.5 for parameter identification
26
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
{
( )( ) ( )
}
( )
( )
2
6 5 4
1 2 3
3 4 5 6
3 2
4 5 6 7
2
4 3 2
8 9 10
3 4
2 2 2
11 12
2
13 14
3 6
7 6 3
9 2 3
2
27
Y x z x z y z x z y z
x z y z x z y z x z y z y z
x z x z y z x z y z
x z y z y z xy yz zx
x z x
C C C
C C C C
C C C
C C
C C





= +
+ +
+ +
+ + +
+ ( )( ) ( )
{ }
( )
( )
2 2
2 2 2
15
3
2 2 2 6
16 0
.
27
z y z y z xy yz zx
xy yz zx
C
C


+ + +
+ + + =
By assuming that anisotropies in terms of shear stress components xy
yz and zxare equivalent, no additional parameters to 2D ones are needed for
3D version.
yz and zxare minor components in sheet metal forming
3Dversionofthemodel
* Different from Soareet als3D expression (IJ P 24 (2008), pp.915)
FE simulation of
hole-expansion by LS-DYNA
Experimental data 590HSSare from Hashimoto et al.:Tetsuto Hagane, 6(2010),27-33.
-0.18
-0.16
-0.14
-0.12
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360
Experiment
Hill'48-r
Yld2000-2d (a=6)
Yoshida
T
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

s
t
r
a
i
n

z
Angle fromrolling direction (deg.)
Punch Stroke17.5 mm
D30
Thickness strain distribution
Shell element

R.D.
(deg)
FE simulation of cylindrical
deep drawing of 590R HSS
(Earing)
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Experiment1
Experiment2
Experiment3
Hill'48-r
Gotoh
Yld2000-2d
Yoshida
T
h
e

e
a
r

h
e
i
g
h
t

o
f

e
d
g
e

(
m
m
)
Angle from rolling direction (deg.)
180mm
(deg)
OtherTypesofModeling
1.Nonassociatedflowrule:Plasticpotential isnotthesameas
Yieldfunction F
'
: :
:
2
: :
3
o
F
F
H

=

+

C C
C D
C
( ) 0;
p p
p
Plastic potential
f

= =

&

D
( ) ( ) 0;
: 0
y
y
Yield locus
f F Y R
F
f R

= + =

= =

& &
&
e.g., Stoughton and Yoon, Int J Plasticity 25 (2009)
Non-symmetric matrix
of stress-strain
2. Distortion of Yield Locus
e.g., Shiratori et al. JMPS 27(1979),
Barlat et al., Int J Plasticity 27 (2011)