2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-44070-5_5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Advanced Models for the Prediction of Forming Limit Curves

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 149 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The stress triaxiality is one of the primary factors that influence the coalescence of voids [22]. Furthermore, the triaxiality of the stress state is known to considerably affect the amount of plastic strain which a material may undergo before ductile failure occurs [23].…”
Section: Effects Of Triaxiality Stress On the Three-layer Sheetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The stress triaxiality is one of the primary factors that influence the coalescence of voids [22]. Furthermore, the triaxiality of the stress state is known to considerably affect the amount of plastic strain which a material may undergo before ductile failure occurs [23].…”
Section: Effects Of Triaxiality Stress On the Three-layer Sheetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the region inside the band and the region outside the band. During deformation, two conditions are to be fulfilled [32]: (i) the continuity of the strain rate along the band; (ii) the mechanical equilibrium on the interface between the above mentioned two regions.…”
Section: Marciniak-kuczyński Model (Mk-model)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to accurately predict the forming limit, the M-K model can be combined with a ductile fracture criterion (DFC), for example, the well-known Gurson model and Gurson–Tvergaard–Needleman model [ 29 , 30 , 31 ]. This type of M-K+DFC model has been discussed briefly in the reviews of Banabic et al [ 25 , 32 ] and Zhang et al [ 33 ]. However, the computational cost of a combination of the M-K model and a physical DFC is much more expensive than the traditional M-K model [ 34 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%