0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

A Multiscale Analysis of Void Coalescence in Nickel

[+] Author and Article Information
M. K. Jones1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box ME, Mississippi State, MS 39762mkj34@msstate.edu

M. F. Horstemeyer

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mississippi State University, P.O. Box ME, Mississippi State, MS 39762

A. D. Belvin

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida A&M University, 2525 Pottsdamer Street, Tallahassee, FL 32310

1

Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 129(1), 94-104 (Jun 09, 2006) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2400265 History: Received August 19, 2005; Revised June 09, 2006

An internal state variable void coalescence equation developed by Horstemeyer, Lathrop, Gokhale, and Dighe (2000, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., 33(1), pp. 31–47) that comprises void impingement and void sheet mechanisms is updated based on three-dimensional micromechanical simulations and novel experiments. This macroscale coalescence equation, developed originally from two-dimensional finite element simulations, was formulated to enhance void growth. In this study, three-dimensional micromechanical finite element simulations were employed using cylindrical and spherical void geometries in nickel that were validated by experiments. The number of voids, void orientation, and void spacing were all varied and tested and simulated under uniaxial loading conditions. The micromechanical results showed excellent agreement with experiments in terms of void volume fractions versus strain and local void geometry images. Perhaps more importantly, the macroscale internal state variable void coalescence equation did not require a functional form change but just a coefficient value modification.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Tensile specimen geometries for nickel void coalescence experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Cylindrical void contour plots of stress triaxiality (SDV12) and effective plastic strain (SDV9) for (a) and (b) a single void (c) and (d) two voids at a 90deg orientation and 4D spacing, and (e) and (f) two voids at a 45deg orientation and 4D spacing. All plots are at a 24% remote strain.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Cylindrical void finite element results of normalized void area fraction versus engineering strain illustrating higher rates of void growth for the 90deg oriented voids

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Determination of void growth constant m for nickel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Determination of void coalescence constant CD1 for (a) spherical voids and (b) cylindrical voids

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Dimensions of cylindrical and spherical void finite element meshes for (a) one-eighth space analyses and (b) half-space analyses. (c) Examples of a cylindrical and spherical void finite element mesh.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Comparison of experimental and cylindrical void finite element results, where (a) and (b) are remote engineering stress-strain curves and (c) and (d) are void area fraction versus remote engineering strain curves for all cylindrical void geometries

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison of the experimental and finite element cylindrical void shape for (a) a single void, (b) two voids at a 45deg orientation and 4D spacing, and (c) two voids at a 90deg orientation and 2D spacing. The dashed circles are the initial void size and shape.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Spherical void contour plots of stress triaxiality (SDV12) and effective plastic strain (SDV9) for (a) and (b) a single void (c) and (d) two voids at a 90deg orientation and 2D spacing, and (e) and (f) two voids at a 45deg orientation and 2D spacing. All plots are at a 30% remote strain. The upper contour limit in (f) is lowered to reveal a shear band between the voids.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

(a) Normalized void volume fraction versus remote engineering strain illustrating growth of the spherical voids. (b) A portion of the spherical void growth curves showing distinction in the growth of the various spherical void geometries. (c) Remote engineering stress-strain curve representing all the spherical void geometries.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Normalized void fraction versus engineering strain comparing the growth of cylindrical and spherical voids

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In