1975
DOI: 10.1115/1.3443256
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subsequent Yield Surfaces for Annealed Mild Steel Under Servo-Controlled Strain and Load Histories: Aging, Normality, Convexity, Corners, Bauschinger and Cross Effects

Abstract: Initial-yield results on SAE 1017 steel are presented for: four different specimens under combined axial load and twisting moment for servo controlled loading; and six different specimens under various combinations of servo controlled axial strain and shear strain. Subsequent yield curves determined by small strain offset multiple probes on a given specimen are presented covering all four quadrants of axial stress-shear stress space. The resulting families of subsequent yield curves allows conclusions to be dr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

1980
1980
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It may also be noted that the loadings (straining) employed in [2, 31 to disturb the yield surface after the first loading involved plastic strains of the order of 0.000,35. These strains are of the same order of magnitude as those used by GUPTA and LAUERT in probing the yield surface yet the plastic strainings in [2,3] caused considerable translations and changes in shape of the subsequent yield surface as reported in [Z, 31. On the other hand, GUPTA and LAUERT [ l ] reported no effect on the subsequent yield curve of probes involving off-set strains even 10 times as much as the plastic strains involved in [2].…”
Section: Discussion Of the Difference In Observationssupporting
confidence: 57%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…It may also be noted that the loadings (straining) employed in [2, 31 to disturb the yield surface after the first loading involved plastic strains of the order of 0.000,35. These strains are of the same order of magnitude as those used by GUPTA and LAUERT in probing the yield surface yet the plastic strainings in [2,3] caused considerable translations and changes in shape of the subsequent yield surface as reported in [Z, 31. On the other hand, GUPTA and LAUERT [ l ] reported no effect on the subsequent yield curve of probes involving off-set strains even 10 times as much as the plastic strains involved in [2].…”
Section: Discussion Of the Difference In Observationssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…I n several instances in [2,3] straining was performed by alternate steps of tension then torsion. The accompanying strain increment vector generally showed no marked change in direction with change in loading direction as would be expected if the loading produced a rounded nose rather than a pointed vertex.…”
Section: Discussion Of the Difference In Observationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…However, details of the experimental conditions and materials involved were insufficient to draw any general conclusions. Michno and Findley (1975) have conducted extensive experiments on SAE-1017 steel. All data were generated for biaxial stress states.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%