Crystallographic texture evolution in bulk deformation processing of FCC metals

Kalidindi, Surya R.; Bronkhorst, Curt A.; Anand, Lallit

doi:10.1016/0022-5096(92)80003-9

Cited by 1,076 publications

(533 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

528

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The description of the kinematics of most crystal plasticity theories follows that originally proposed by Asaro and Rice (1977), which has been widely reported in the computational mechanics literature (for example Pierce et al (1983), Asaro and Needleman (1985), Cuitin˜o and Oritz (1992), Kalidindi et al (1992) and Busso et al (2000)). It relies on the multiplicative decomposition of the total deformation gradient F into an inelastic component F p and an elastic component F e (Lee 1969).…”

Section: Generic Local Crystallographic Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…If the loads applied on the RVE were inhomogeneous, then the homogenized equivalent medium is said to be generalized, and special kinematics and equilibrium equations would apply (for example Besson et al (2002)). Some of the most widely used approaches to link local fields with macroscale phenomena, such as the large deformation and texture evolution of polycrystals, are Taylor-type (for example Kalidindi et al (1992)) or Sachs-type (for example Leffers (2001)) models. The former assumes strain uniformity and can only fulfil compatibility at grain boundaries, but not equilibrium.…”

Section: Homogenization Approaches For Heterogeneous Microstructuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiscale modelling of nanomechanics and micromechanics: an overview

Ghoniem

Busso

Kioussis

et al. 2003

Philosophical Magazine

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in analytical and computational modelling frameworks to describe the mechanics of materials on scales ranging from the atomistic, through the microstructure or transitional, and up to the continuum are reviewed. It is shown that multiscale modelling of materials approaches relies on a systematic reduction in the degrees of freedom on the natural length scales that can be identified in the material. Connections between such scales are currently achieved either by a parametrization or by a 'zoom-out' or 'coarse-graining' procedure. Issues related to the links between the atomistic scale, nanoscale, microscale and macroscale are discussed, and the parameters required for the information to be transferred between one scale and an upper scale are identified. It is also shown that seamless coupling between length scales has not yet been achieved as a result of two main challenges: firstly, the computational complexity of seamlessly coupled simulations via the coarse-graining approach and, secondly, the inherent difficulty in dealing with system evolution stemming from time scaling, which does not permit coarse graining over temporal events. Starting from the Born-Oppenheimer adiabatic approximation, the problem of solving quantum mechanics equations of motion is first reviewed, with successful applications in the mechanics of nanosystems. Atomic simulation methods (e.g. molecular dynamics, Langevin dynamics and the kinetic Monte Carlo method) and their applications at the nanoscale are then discussed. The role played by dislocation dynamics and statistical mechanics methods in understanding microstructure self-organization, heterogeneous plastic deformation, material instabilities and failure phenomena is also discussed.

show abstract

Section: Generic Local Crystallographic Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Homogenization Approaches For Heterogeneous Microstructuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiscale modelling of nanomechanics and micromechanics: an overview

Ghoniem

Busso

Kioussis

et al. 2003

Philosophical Magazine

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An existing crystal plasticity model [77,78], implemented after the works of Kalidindi et al [79], was adapted to the characteristics of γ-TiAl. A short summary is given in the following: the kinematic description of large-strain elasto-plasticity is based on the multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient, F, as F = F * F p , into the plastic part, F p , and F * , containing elastic stretch and rotation [80].…”

Section: Incorporating the γ-Tial Deformation Mechanisms Into An Elasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plastic anisotropy of γ-TiAl revealed by axisymmetric indentation

Zambaldi¹,

Raabe²

2010

Acta Materialia

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Single crystals of γ-TiAl cannot be grown in the near-stoichiometric compositions that are present inside two-phase γ/α 2 -microstructures with attractive mechanical properties. Therefore, the single crystal constitutive behavior of γ-TiAl was studied by nanoindentation experiments in single phase regions of these γ/α 2 -microstructures. The experiments were characterized by orientation microscopy and atomic force microscopy to quantify the orientation dependent mechanical response during nanoindentation. Further, they were analyzed by a 3D crystal plasticity finite element model that incorporated the deformation behavior of γ-TiAl. The spatially resolved activation of competing deformation mechanisms during indentation was used to assess their relative strengths. A convention was defined to unambiguously relate any indentation axis to a crystallographic orientation. Experiments and simulations were combined to study the orientation dependent surface pile-up. The characteristic pile-up topographies were simulated throughout the unit triangle of γ-TiAl and represented graphically in the newly introduced inverse pole figure of pile-up patterns. Through this approach, easy activation of ordinary dislocation glide in stoichiometric γ-TiAl was confirmed independently from dislocation observation by transmission electron microscopy.

show abstract

“…This study aims to provide an unbiased study of the capabilities and limitations of three different types of codes by examining the results obtained from each using identical input conditions. The codes employed are 1) the ViscoPlastic Self-Consistent code 1 (VPSC7b) developed and maintained by C. Tomé and R. Lebensohn at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, hereafter referred to as V; 2) the Material Point Simulator (MPS) code 2 developed by P. R. Dawson, D. E. Boyce and associates at Cornell University, hereafter referred to as C; and 3) two elastic-plastic codes, one each for face-centered cubic and hexagonal close-packed metals, developed by S. Kalidindi and associates at Drexel University 3,4 , hereafter referred to collectively as D.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%