0
Technical Briefs

Constitutive Modeling and Rupture Predictions of Al-6061-T6 Tubes Under Biaxial Loading Paths

[+] Author and Article Information
Y. P. Korkolis1

Research Center for Mechanics of Solids, Structures and Materials, WRW 110, C0600, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712

S. Kyriakides, T. Giagmouris, L.-H. Lee

Research Center for Mechanics of Solids, Structures and Materials, WRW 110, C0600, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712

1

Present address: Mechanical Engineering, University of New Hampshire.

J. Appl. Mech. 77(6), 064501 (Aug 19, 2010) (5 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4001940 History: Received January 13, 2010; Revised May 13, 2010; Posted June 09, 2010; Published August 19, 2010; Online August 19, 2010

This brief note reports the results of a set of biaxial experiments on Al-6061-T6 tubes tested to rupture under radial stress paths of combined internal pressure and axial load. The experiments are then simulated with shell-type finite element models, in which several yield functions are calibrated and implemented and their performance evaluated against the experimental results.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

(a) Radial engineering stress paths prescribed and (b) the induced engineering strain paths (●≡limit load; ▲≡rupture)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

(a) Circumferential and (b) axial stress-strain responses of Al-6061-T6 tubes tested to failure

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Two failed specimens tested at different biaxiality ratios: (a) α=0.9 and (b) α=1.1 illustrating the axial and circumferential modes of failure, respectively

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Experimental data representing the initial yield surface (Wp=35 psi–24 kPa) and the three different yield criteria used (von Mises, Hosford, and Yld2000-2D)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Results from numerical simulation of experiment for α=1 using the three plasticity models and the corresponding experimental responses. (a) σx−ε¯x, with strain measured at two locations. (b) σθ−ε¯θ.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Calculated deformed configuration for α=1 after the onset of localization. Shown are contours of current thickness.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison of calculated and measured engineering strain paths for the five loading cases using the three plasticity models: (a) von Mises, (b) Hosford k=8, and (c) Yld2000-2D

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 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