Numerical verification for instrumented spherical indentation techniques in determining the plastic properties of materials

Zhang, Taihua; Jiang, Peng; Feng, Yihui; Yang, Rong

doi:10.1557/jmr.2009.0428

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The indentation technique is increasingly used to determine mechanical properties of materials. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] This technique can be used to characterize the graded plastic properties of PGM because it characterizes locally the material from only a small volume of material. Moreover, the indentation test needs no or very simple sample preparation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of homogenous and plastically graded materials with spherical indentation and inverse analysis

Moussa

Bartier²,

Mauvoisin³

et al. 2011

J. Mater. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceThis study investigates spherical indentation of plastically graded materials (PGMs). The hardness of these materials decreases with depth due to microstructural or compositional changes. To predict the behavior of PGM, the knowledge of the plastic properties of the surface and the substrate is necessary. In this work, the spherical indentation technique is applied on carbonitrided steels to obtain their mechanical properties. First, spherical indentation was applied to characterize homogenous materials using inverse analysis. The comparison with tensile test's results shows that the inverse analysis using spherical indentation data is a reliable method to determine the plastic properties of homogeneous materials. In the second part spherical indentation was used to characterize carbonitrided steels using inverse analysis to obtain plastic properties of the surface. The results show that spherical indentation using inverse analysis has a real potential for evaluating mechanical properties of PGM

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of homogenous and plastically graded materials with spherical indentation and inverse analysis

Moussa

Bartier²,

Mauvoisin³

et al. 2011

J. Mater. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These are reviewed in several publications. [ 23,25,26,32,33 ] As two particular formulations are used in the current work, their basis is now summarized here. The effective strain is commonly taken to be given by the expression originally presented by Tabor [ 34 ] in 1948.

ε_{normale} = 0.2 \frac{a_{c}}{R}

where a c is the contact radius.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Appraisal of the Instrumented Indentation Technique and Profilometry‐Based Inverse Finite Element Method Indentation Plastometry for Obtaining Stress–Strain Curves

Campbell¹,

Zhang

Burley³

et al. 2021

Adv Eng Mater

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison is presented between conventional tensile stress‐strain curves and those obtained via two methodologies based on (spherical) indentation. The first, termed Instrumented Indentation Technique (IIT), involves conversion of load‐displacement data to stress‐strain curves via analytical expressions. This has been done using loads below 1 N (“nano”) and in the kN range (“macro”). The other procedure, termed profilometry‐based indentation plastometry (PIP), is based on repeated finite element method (FEM) simulation, using the residual indent profile as the target outcome and obtaining the best fit set of parameter values in a constitutive stress‐strain law. This has been done on a macro scale only. The data from nano‐IIT tend to be very noisy and variable, whereas those from macro‐IIT are more reproducible and less noisy. With one of the two empirical formulations employed, the agreement of the macro‐IIT with experiment is close to being acceptable for the work hardening characteristics, although inferred values of the yield stress are in poor agreement with those from tensile testing. In contrast to this, the PIP procedure provides outcomes that are in close agreement with those from tensile testing, concerning both yield stress and work hardening. The causes of this are explored and discussed.

show abstract

“…These are reviewed in several publications. [1][2][3][4][5] The second is a more rigorous approach, although inevitably more cumbersome. It is based on iterative finite element method (FEM) simulation of the indentation process, systematically changing the values of the parameters in a constitutive plasticity law until optimum agreement is reached between a measured and a modeled outcome-either the load-displacement plot or the residual indent profile.…”

Section: Introduction 1obtaining Stress-strain Curves From Indentation Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Residual Stresses on Stress–Strain Curves Obtained via Profilometry‐Based Inverse Finite Element Method Indentation Plastometry

Burley¹,

Campbell²,

Reiff-Musgrove

et al. 2021

Adv Eng Mater

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper concerns, the effect of (unknown) residual stresses in the near‐surface region of a sample on outcomes of an indentation plastometry technique for obtaining stress–strain relationships, using relatively large spherical indenters. The technique is based on the iterative finite element method (FEM) simulation of indentation, so as to infer the true stress–strain curve of the material (with the target outcome being the profile of the residual indent). It is expected that residual stress levels (if significant compared with the yield stress) are likely to influence the outcome, and indeed this forms the basis of many attempts to measure residual stresses in this way (using a known stress–strain curve). However, there are important issues of sensitivity here, which affect the reliability of such procedures and are also relevant to the accuracy of stress–strain curves inferred from measurements made on samples containing unknown levels of residual stress. Herein, both experimental work on samples with (equal‐biaxial) residual stresses created by the application of external loads and extensive FEM modeling to explore various scenarios are covered. The main conclusion is that the sensitivities involved are in general very low, particularly with relatively deep indentation. Inferred stress–strain curves are thus likely to be quite accurate, even in the presence of relatively high levels of residual stress. Conversely, the measurement of residual stress levels via this procedure is likely to be rather inaccurate, although the reliability is improved using shallow penetration (low ratio of depth‐to‐indenter radius). It is also noted that tensile residual stresses tend to influence outcomes more strongly than compressive ones.

show abstract

Numerical verification for instrumented spherical indentation techniques in determining the plastic properties of materials

Cited by 10 publications

References 31 publications

Characterization of homogenous and plastically graded materials with spherical indentation and inverse analysis

Characterization of homogenous and plastically graded materials with spherical indentation and inverse analysis

A Critical Appraisal of the Instrumented Indentation Technique and Profilometry‐Based Inverse Finite Element Method Indentation Plastometry for Obtaining Stress–Strain Curves

The Effect of Residual Stresses on Stress–Strain Curves Obtained via Profilometry‐Based Inverse Finite Element Method Indentation Plastometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About