A Multi-Phase Modeling Framework Suitable for Dynamic Applications

Barton, Nathan R.; Luscher, Darby J.; Battaile, Corbett Chandler.; Brown, Justin; Buechler, Miles A.; Burakovsky, Leonid; Crockett, Scott; Greeff, C. W.; Mattsson, Ann E.; Prime, Michael B.; Schill, W.

doi:10.3390/met12111844

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper calibrates and validates the strength-specific "foundation" for applying the Common Model of Multi-phase Strength and Equation of State (CMMP) 19 to tin (Although the title has changed, this paper is the "in preparation" Ref. 42 in Ref.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…19.). The CMMP 19 framework was recently developed to address the multiphysics problem of simulating multiphase strength along an arbitrary thermomechanical path. To put our work into context for the reader, we outline all the components of the CMMP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12,21 Kinetics models for tin are outside of the scope of the experiments presented in this work and have received attention elsewhere. 12,19,22 The next two elements of the CMMP concern strength are controlled by deviatoric (i.e., shear) deformations and are the focus of the calibration efforts in this work. (3) Density and temperature-dependent shear moduli for each solid phase relate elastic deviatoric strains to deviatoric stresses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of the difficulty of measuring stress-strain curves in non-ambient phases, the multiphase model framework allows a simple description of their strength as a scaled value of the strength model in an ambient phase. 19 The scalar scale factor can potentially be calibrated by simulating high-pressure experiments that are sensitive to strength but do not give explicit calibration data like a stress-strain curve. This pragmatic approach gives some experimental basis for the model but makes simplifying assumptions about hardening and rate-and temperature dependence that should be unique to each phase.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Preliminary versions of the CMMP calibration presented here were used to model the strength of polycrystalline tin across phase boundaries, 7,12,19 used a framework similar to CMMP, albeit with different constitutive ingredients, including a combined multiphase Birch-Murnagahan equation of state and the Steinberg-Guinan 23 strength model to simulate the longitudinal wave speed 28 and the free surface velocity from plate impact experiments that crossed the β-γ phase boundary in tin. 6 Here, we calibrate a shear modulus model for most solid phases of tin using density functional theory (DFT) calculations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Calibration and validation of the foundation for a multiphase strength model for tin

Nguyen,

Burakovsky,

Fensin

et al. 2024

Journal of Applied Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, the Common Model of Multi-phase Strength and Equation of State (CMMP) model was applied to tin. Specifically, calibrations of the strength-specific elements of the CMMP foundation were developed with a combination of experiments and theory, and then the model was validated experimentally. The first element of the foundation is a multi-phase analytic treatment of the melt temperature and the shear modulus for the solid phases. These models were parameterized for each phase based on ab initio calculations using the software VASP (Vienna Ab initio Simulations Package) based on density functional theory. The shear modulus model for the ambient β phase was validated with ultrasonic sound speed measurements as a function of pressure and temperature. The second element of the foundation is a viscoplastic strength model for the β phase, upon which strength for inaccessible higher-pressure phases can be scaled as necessary. The stress–strain response of tin was measured at strain rates of 10−3 to 3×103s−1 and temperatures ranging from 87 to 373 K. The Preston–Tonks–Wallace (PTW) strength model was fit to that data using Bayesian model calibration. For validation, six forward and two reverse Taylor impact experiments were performed at different velocities to measure large plastic deformation of tin at strain rates up to 105s−1. The PTW model accurately predicted the deformed shapes of the cylinders, with modest discrepancies attributed to the inability of PTW to capture the effects of twinning and dynamic recrystallization. Some material in the simulations of higher velocity Taylor cylinders reached the melting temperature, thus testing the multiphase model because of the presence of a second phase, the liquid. In simulations using a traditional modeling approach, the abrupt reduction of strength upon melt resulted in poor predictions of the deformed shape and non-physical temperatures. With CMMP, the most deformed material points evolved gradually to a mixed solid–liquid but never a fully liquid state, never fully lost strength, stayed at the melt temperature as the latent heat of fusion was absorbed, and predicted the deformed shape well.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%