By

Zaheer Abbas, Holly Reid & Jonathan

Barrett
 Background & Introduction
◦ Description of Metal
◦ Stress Strain Curve
◦ Void Growth/Nucleation (Eg – Al 6061)
 Objective
◦ Objective statement
◦ Past models used and assumptions
 Background to the Problem
◦ Al-Mg (Automotive Industry)
◦ Scope of the Project
 Methodology
◦ Modeling Technique
◦ Determining the Principal stress & Flow Stress
 Experimentation
◦ Objective
Design & Manufacturing
Testing & Data Capture
 Analysis
Comparison of plots
 Conclusions
 Aluminum

Al-Mg (AA -5182)

◦ Uses
Inner body Panels
Splash Guards
Heat Shields
Air Cleaner trays and Covers
 Mechanical Characteristics
 To Introduce void Growth & Void

coalescence it is important to start with

the basic understanding of stress strain
curve.
 Explanation of Stress Strain Curve
 Stress – Strain Curve
 Void Nucleation & Crack Development
 In the figure below notice de-bonding
from the matrix material and void
development in the crack region.
Void Growth & Nucleation of Second Phase
Particles
 Plastic region and Void Growth

◦ Definition of Voids & Void Coalescence

 The primary objective of this project is to
observe the influence of void ligament
geometry and void coalescence on ductile
fracture.
  Limitation of Present Model
 The theoretical analysis can be

conducted by the following model

developed by Thomason and Benzerga
call the Th-BZ equation.
  
2

   b  
 2
 −1 
σ1   b1 1.3    b1  2 
= 0.1  +  ∗ 1 −  b  
σm   2  b2  
2
b2   b1    2 
λ + 0.1 b  + 0.02 b  
  1  1  1 
b2 
 
 Al-Mg (AA-5182) shows limited formability.
(Due to 2nd Phase Particles)
 The present Model assumes that voids are

homogeneous throughout & neglects shear

effects.
 Scope
• Scope of this project is to study the effects of
void coalescence in ductile fracture.
◦ The tests will be conducted by altering the void
geometry.
 Sample Modeling Technique

Metal sheet
Periodic Array Distribution of Unit cell Single
Unit Cell

Representative
Element
   
2

  b  
σ1    2 b  −1 
 1 1.3    b1  2 
=  0.1  +  ∗ 1 −  b  
σm   2 2
 b2  + 0.02 b2   b1    2  
λ + 0.1 b  b 
  1  1  1  b2 
 
Plastic Limit Load Model (PLL)
σ 1  σ 1  The Local Stress State will be
 σ  ≤  σ  Determined experimentally using
H local PLL Model

σ 1  σ 1 
σ  = σ 
  H   local
If both Homogeneous and
Local stress are equal void
Coalescence will occur
 (

Homogenous
σ1
Pmax
Stress State
σm
Principal Stress σ1 =
A fracture
p
−b ε
p
Flow Stress as a
σ = σ0 + Q∞ (1 − e ) = σ f (ε ) Function of
Effective Plastic
ε1 + ε 2 + ε 3 = 0 Strain
Plastic Strain
Where
R y − final 1
ε 1 = ln 2
R y −initial ε= [(ε 1 − ε 2 ) 2 + (ε 2 − ε 3 ) 2 + (ε 3 − ε 1 ) 2 ] 2
3
ligament − length final
ε 2 = ln
ligament − lengthinitial
Effective Plastic Strain
 Objectives

◦ The primary objective is to observe the influence

of void ligament geometry on ductile facture.

◦ These samples will be designed, fabricated and

tested to investigate the fracture based upon the
size and angle of the inter-void ligament
 Samples were fabricated out of AA5183
rolled sheet metal
 Thickness of metal sheet used in

Experimentation is 1.5 mm
 A total of 72 samples where fabricated in

the Mechanical Engineering Machine shop.

 To Account of Anisotropy all samples were

cut in the rolling direction.

Parameters
R - Radius of the Notch
L – Length of the
Ligament
Θ – Intervoid Angle

Void Aspect Ratio –

Measure of radius in the
y direction compared to
radius in x direction.

Ligament Size Ratio –

Radius of the notch
divided by ½ length of
ligament.
 Inter void Angles
◦ Design of the samples considered different inter-
void angles
Proposed Angles 0 o, 22.5 o, 45 o and 67.5 o
Problems Encountered with higher Angles
 Intervoid Angles
◦ The new Design Inter void Angles Include
 0 o to 45 o with intervals of 15 o
◦ At 0 o Specimen experienced pure tensile stress.
◦ As the Intervoid angles were increased the
specimen experienced both tensile and shear
stress.
 Ligament Size Ratio
◦ Initial Ligament size Ratio considered - 0.125,
0.250 and 0.50 for a ligament size of 48, 24 and
12 mm.
◦ Problems encountered
The inistron machine used for testing has a
maximum allowable width of 25mm.
◦ The new ratios that was used in the experiment
were 0.25, 0.333 and 0.5 giving 24, 18 and 12
mm ligament lengths respectively
 Sample Length
 The sample length were initially designed for 120mm,
and were later changed to 80 mm due to deformation
of the sample.
 12 unique geometries Produced and for
each sample a total of 6 samples created.
 Apparatus Used in Manufacturing
◦ Band Saw, Milling Machine, digital calipers, and
Milling machine with a 6mm notching bit.
◦ AA5182 Metal sheet was used to cut samples
Three samples were cut from each sheet
◦ Edge effect
◦ Samples were labeled on the sheet
◦ A brand new blade was used to cut the samples
from the metal sheet, providing a smooth cut.
 Labeled Sample

Metal Sheet

Samples Before
Notching
 Instron 1332 material testing machine was
used for testing.
 Sample Data Collection Sheet was designed

to collect pre and post dimensions.

      Initial      
Average Thickness  Notch Height  Notch Width  Average Aspect 
Width (mm) Length (mm) Ligament (mm) Ratio
(mm) (mm) (mm)

      Fracture      

Average Thickness  Notch Height  Notch Width  Average Aspect 

Width (mm) Length (mm) Ligament (mm)
(mm) (mm) (mm) Ratio
 Each sample was individually tested to axial
tensile test.
 Specimen were Tested to Fracture.
 Data was Captured.

 ADD PICTURE OF FRACTURED SAMPLE