Abstract
The present study is devoted to extending Barlat’s famous yield criteria to tension–compression asymmetry by a novel method originally introduced by Khan, which can decouple the anisotropy and tension–compression asymmetry characteristics. First, Barlat (1987) isotropic yield criterion, which leads to a good approximation of yield loci calculated by the Taylor–Bishop–Hill crystal plasticity model, is extended to include yielding asymmetry. Furthermore, the famous Barlat (1989) anisotropic yield criterion, which can well describe the plastic behavior of face-centered cubic (FCC) metals, is extended to take the different strength effects into account. The proposed anisotropic yield criterion has a simple mathematical form and has only five parameters when used in planar stress states. Compared with existing theories, the new yield criterion has much fewer parameters, which makes it very convenient for practical applications. Furthermore, all coefficients of the criterion can be determined by explicit expressions. The effectiveness and flexibility of the new yield criterion have been verified by applying to different materials. Results show that the proposed theory can describe the plastic anisotropy and yielding asymmetry of metals well and the transformation onset of the shape memory alloy, showing excellent predictive ability and flexibility.
Highlights
In modern industry, virtual manufacturing technology is one of the most efficient methods to reduce production cycles and improve the quality of products
In order to model the plastic behavior of anisotropic materials, Hill proposed the first orthotropic yield criterion, which reduces to von Mises criterion for isotropic conditions [10]
As Barlat’s two famous yield criteria, Barlat (1987) criterion for isotropic materials [20] and Barlat (1989) criterion for anisotropic materials [21] are very successful in modeling plastic behavior of metals, an attempt was made to extend them to tension–compression asymmetry
Summary
Virtual manufacturing technology is one of the most efficient methods to reduce production cycles and improve the quality of products. In order to model the plastic behavior of anisotropic materials, Hill proposed the first orthotropic yield criterion, which reduces to von Mises criterion for isotropic conditions [10]. Compared to the tremendous anisotropic yield functions proposed for materials with equal tension and compression, criteria that can model both plastic anisotropy and yielding asymmetry are still lacking. As Barlat’s two famous yield criteria, Barlat (1987) criterion for isotropic materials [20] and Barlat (1989) criterion for anisotropic materials [21] are very successful in modeling plastic behavior of metals, an attempt was made to extend them to tension–compression asymmetry. Tricomponent yield surfaces for isotropic FCC metals calculated by Taylor–Bishop–Hill crystal plasticity model shows that a coupling should exist between shear and normal components of the stress tensor [21].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
