4.6 Article

Flow and fracture behavior of aluminum alloy 6082-T6 at different tensile strain rates and triaxialities

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 12, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181983

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51405517, U1334208]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hunan [2015JJ3155]
  3. Central South University [ZLXD2017002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to investigate the flow and fracture behavior of aluminum alloy 6082-T6 (AA6082-T6) at different strain rates and triaxialities. Two groups of Charpy impact tests were carried out to further investigate its dynamic impact fracture property. A series of tensile tests and numerical simulations based on finite element analysis (FEA) were performed. Experimental data on smooth specimens under various strain rates ranging from 0.0001 similar to 3400 s(-1) shows that AA6082-T6 is rather insensitive to strain rates in general. However, clear rate sensitivity was observed in the range of 0.001 similar to 1 s(-1) while such a characteristic is counteracted by the adiabatic heating of specimens under high strain rates. A Johnson-Cook constitutive model was proposed based on tensile tests at different strain rates. In this study, the average stress triaxiality and equivalent plastic strain at facture obtained from numerical simulations were used for the calibration of J-C fracture model. Both of the J-C constitutive model and fracture model were employed in numerical simulations and the results was compared with experimental results. The calibrated J-C fracture model exhibits higher accuracy than the J-C fracture model obtained by the common method in predicting the fracture behavior of AA6082-T6. Finally, the Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) of fractured specimens with different initial stress triaxialities were analyzed. The magnified fractographs indicate that high initial stress triaxiality likely results in dimple fracture.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据