0 vistas

Cargado por soudah

- Sma Control for Bio-mimetic Fish Locomotio
- Metallic Iplants
- Is Stainless Steel Magnetic or Non-magnetic in External Field
- Texture and microstructure of Cr2O3 and (Cr,Al)2O3 thin ﬁlms deposited by reactive
- 954 Enhancing Vibration and Controls Teachin
- Presentation sur les UAV SMA
- Split Pin Charts Sltp_us
- 17100681 Mechanical Properties of Wires and Its Orthodontic Application
- Hannover Sr 2010
- Issues Related to T91_P91 Steels_RKoripelli
- Final Year Report 0705137a2
- Color Metallography
- 1-s2.0-S0921509313004000-main.pdf
- Diffusion Less
- tmt data.pdf
- 10.11648.j.ijmsa.20130203.14
- Continuum Mechanics
- TA_Weldability of Steels
- Heat Treating of Nodular Irons_ Part One __ KEY to METALS Article
- 4661-32284-1-PB

Está en la página 1de 121

IN SHAPE-MEMORY ALLOYS

Panos Papadopoulos

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley

Acknowledgments

T. Duerig, NDC

V. Imbeni, SRI

Y. Jung, PU

J.M. McNaney, LLNL

R.O. Ritchie, UCB

H.-R. Wenk, UCB

SMA – p.1/108

Outline

OUTLINE OF LECTURES

SMA – p.2/108

Contents-I

C ONTENTS OF PART I

Technological applications

Texture

Experimental results

SMA – p.3/108

Superelasticity

strain

SMA – p.4/108

Superelasticity

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

Tension 6.0%

50 Tension 6.0%

Tension 6.0%

Tension 6.0%

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

ε

eq

SMA – p.5/108

Superelasticity

Ni-Ti

Nitinol (acronym for Nickel Titanium Naval Ordnance

Laboratory) is the most widely used superelastic material.

Cu-Zn-Al

Cu-Al-Ni

Co-Ni-Al

Fe-Mn-Si

SMA – p.6/108

Applications

SMA – p.7/108

Crystallography

diffusionless, reversible, solid-solid transformation between

an austenitic (highly structured) phase and a martensitic

(less structured) phase.

Ti

Ni

SMA – p.8/108

Crystallography

diffusionless, reversible, solid-solid transformation between

an austenitic (highly structured) phase and a martensitic

(less structured) phase.

Ti

Ni

SMA – p.8/108

Crystallography

diffusionless, reversible, solid-solid transformation between

an austenitic (highly structured) phase and a martensitic

(less structured) phase.

Ti

Ni

SMA – p.8/108

Crystallography

the habit plane.

matrix?

austenite

martensite

SMA – p.9/108

Crystallography

the habit plane.

matrix?

Austenite

SMA – p.9/108

Crystallography

the habit plane.

matrix?

Austenite

SMA – p.9/108

Crystallography

the habit plane.

matrix?

Austenite

M2

M1

M2

M1

SMA – p.9/108

Crystallography

deformation?

austenite

1 2 12 1 2 1 2 1

austenite

in turn, gives way to single variant martensite (detwinning).

SMA – p.10/108

Superelasticity

A M

A <− M

A

strain

SMA – p.11/108

Shape-memory effect

deformation

ements

Mf Ms As Af

temperature

SMA – p.12/108

Material

component for manufacturing various biomedical devices.

water-quenching to produce a microstructure that

enhances the superelastic properties.

Transformation temperatures:

As = − 6.36◦ C , Af = 18.13◦ C

Ms = − 51.55◦ C , Mf = − 87.43◦ C

SMA – p.13/108

Material

Optical micrograph of a portion of the cross section of a

thin-walled Nitinol tube (note the polycrystalline structure)

SMA – p.14/108

Material

2500 B2(110)

2000

I (counts)

1500

1000

B2 (200) B2 (211)

500

B19' B2 (310)

B2(100)

0

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

2θ

SMA – p.15/108

Texture

may depend strongly on the preferred lattice orientation of

the crystals, i.e., on the texture of the polycrystal.

mechanical behavior in two ways:

by enabling nucleation of certain variants and not

others).

By inducing anisotropy in the continuum-level elastic

response.

electron diffractometry.

SMA – p.16/108

Texture

stereographic projections of the spherical poles

corresponding to the normal to a given crystal plane, when

the plane is assumed to pass through the center of the

sphere (pole figures).

SMA – p.17/108

Texture

h111i{110}-type sheet texture “wrapped” around the

cylindrical surface, such that the h111i austenite lattice

direction is aligned with the longitudinal axis of the tube.

SMA – p.18/108

Texture

SMA – p.19/108

Experiments

25 mm

Test section

r = 1.5 mm

thickness = 0.20mm

25 mm

Gripping sections

25 mm

thickness = 0.37mm

outer radius = 2.32mm

SMA – p.20/108

Experiments

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

Tension 6.0%

50 Tension 6.0%

Tension 6.0%

Tension 6.0%

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

ε

eq

SMA – p.21/108

Experiments

4000

B2(110)

3500

3000

2500

I (counts)

2000

1500

B2 (211)

1000

B2 (200)

B19' B2 (310)

500

0

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

2θ

SMA – p.22/108

Experiments

shear strain shear strain

2

strain

strain

#

1

"

!

.-,

.0/

.43

765

(a) Tension followed by torsion

%$

)*

&'(

(b) Torsion followed by tension

98

>

==

:;<

tensile strain

D shear strain

strain

.CB

?

.A@

GF

KL

KK

HIJ

Experiments

equivalent Cauchy (true) stress σeq versus the equivalent

Lagrangian strain εeq , namely

q r

2 2 2 4 2

σeq = σt + 3σs , εeq = ε t + εs ,

3

where σt and σs denote the tensile and shearing stress,

while εt and εs denote the tensile and shearing strain.

used for both the tensile and torsional loading.

SMA – p.24/108

Experiments

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50

Tension 0.0%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 0.0%, Torsion 2.0%

0

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03

ε

eq

SMA – p.25/108

Experiments

N itin o l, p u re to rs io n

10000

B2(110

9000

8000

7000

6000

I ( co u n t s )

5000

B2 (211)

4000

3000

2000

B2 (200) B19'

B2 (310)

1000

0

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

2θ

SMA – p.26/108

Experiments

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

Tension 1.05%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 1.5%, Torsion 2.0%

50 Tension 2.0%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 3.0%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 6.0%, Torsion 2.0%

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

ε

eq

SMA – p.27/108

Experiments

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50 Tension 1.05%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 3.0%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 3.0%, Torsion 2.0%

0

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04

ε

eq

SMA – p.28/108

Experiments

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50 Torsion 2.0%, Tension 1.05%

Torsion 2.0%, Tension 3.0%

Torsion 2.0%, Tension 5.8%

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

ε

eq

SMA – p.29/108

Experiments

500

450

400

350

300

σeq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50 Tension 1.5%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 3.0%, Torsion 2.0%

Tension 6.0%, Torsion 2.0%

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

ε

eq

SMA – p.30/108

Closure

phase transformation occurs by nucleation of

martensite twins, followed by detwinning.

especially under non-proportional loading.

plasticity paradigm.

superelastic materials leads to a multiscale problem.

SMA – p.31/108

References

1. J.M. Ball and R.D. James, Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal., 100, pp. 13-52,

(1987) [Non-linearly elastic theory of martensitic

transformation].

2. K.F. Hane and T.W. Shield, Acta Mater., 47, pp. 2603-17, (1999)

[Exhaustive description of the microstructure in NiTi phase

transition].

[Role of texture in NiTi].

A273-275, pp. 149-160, (1999) [A review of biomedical

applications of Nitinol].

Ritchie, Mech. Mat., 35, pp. 969-986, (2003) [Multiaxial

experiments on polycrystal NiTi].

SMA – p.32/108

Contents-II

C ONTENTS OF PART II

modeling

SMA – p.33/108

Nomenclature

Nomenclature:

F : deformation gradient

E : Lagrangian strain tensor

U : Right stretch tensor

: Infinitesimal strain tensor

P : 1st (unsymmetric) Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensor

S : 2nd (symmetric) Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensor

σ : Infinitesimal stress tensor

Q : general rotation tensor

I : second-order identity tensor

SMA – p.34/108

Modeling

transformation can be expressed in the form:

F = F 1 F 2 R3 ,

where

F1 : lattice deformation

F2 : twinning deformation

R3 : rigid rotation

SMA – p.35/108

Modeling

level:

martensite.

austenite

austenite 1

austenite

SMA – p.36/108

Modeling

level:

martensite.

austenite

austenite 1 2 12 1 2 1 2

austenite

SMA – p.36/108

Modeling

level:

martensite, then to detwinned martensite.

austenite

austenite 1 2 12 1 2 1 2 1

austenite

SMA – p.36/108

Modeling

detwinned martensite. In the case of Ni-Ti (cubic to

monoclinic transformation), there are a total of 12

martensite “lattice correspondence variants”, i.e.,

U is the unique stretch tensor, and Qi are the 12 rotations

corresponding to the 12 ways in which a cube maps onto

itself.

the austenite-martensite transformation.

SMA – p.37/108

Modeling

twinned martensite.

one may expect up to 66x8 = 528 martensite “habit plane

variants”.

feasible habit plane variants. These variants can be

obtained by an energy minimization method.

experimentally observed to be dominant.

SMA – p.38/108

Modeling

microscopic deformation gradient takes the form

F12,α = I + gmα ⊗ nα ,

formation displacement, gmα twinned martensite

mα is the unit vector in the

transformation direction,

and nα is the outward unit

normal to the habit plane.

PSfrag replacementsnα

habit plane

SMA – p.39/108

Modeling

elastic-plastic materials.

as an elastic material whose response is parametrized by

the plastic (resp. transformation) variables.

Loading conditions in multi-surface plasticity are

determined per surface, while in martensitic

transformation they are cumulative.

SMA – p.40/108

Modeling

depending on the martensitic volume fractions

n nv

X o

{ξα } = (ξ1 , ξ2 , · · · , ξnv ) | ξβ ≤ 1 , ξ β ≥ 0 ,

β=1

number of potentially present variants.

SMA – p.41/108

Modeling

where Ψ = Ψ̂(E, {ξα }, θ). Here, ρ0 is the mass density,

is the internal energy per unit mass, η is the entropy,

and θ the absolute temperature.

ρ0 ˙ = ρ0 r − Divq0 + S · Ė ,

where r is the heat supply per unit mass and q0 the

referential heat flux vector.

q0 · Grad θ

ρ0 η̇θ ≥ ρ0 r − Divq0 + .

θ

SMA – p.42/108

Modeling

! nv

∂ Ψ̂ X ∂ Ψ̂ ˙

S− · Ė − · ξα ≥ 0 .

∂E α=1

∂ξα

standard process leads to

∂ Ψ̂

S = ,

∂E

that

nv

X ∂ Ψ̂ ˙

Ḋ = (− ) ξα ≥ 0 .

α=1

∂ξα

SMA – p.43/108

Modeling

of variant α, respectively, where Ŷαf < Ŷαr .

Yαr = 0 ⇔ variant α active in reverse transformation

J r (E, θ) = {α | Ŷαr (E, {ξβ }, θ) = 0, ξα > 0} .

SMA – p.44/108

Modeling

dg ef

ij

k

h

h

lo mn

qr

q

p

p

(b)

(a)

(e) (c)

(d)

0

vu

xy

st

x

w

w

}|

z{

~

~

(c)

ONPM

(c)

OVWU

(b)

(a) (b)

(a)

(d)

(d)

(e)

(e)

Q

\[Z

7cb

X

STR

^]

` _

a

Y

SMA – p.45/108

Modeling

∂ Ŷαf X

Ẏαf = · Ė − Qαβ ξ˙β = 0 ,

∂E fβ∈J

f

∂ Ŷ

where Qfαβ = − α are the components of the forward

∂ξβ

coupling matrix (assumed invertible) which quantifies

the coupling between variants during forward transformation.

f

X ∂ Ŷ

ξ˙α = f −1 β

Qβα · Ė .

f

∂E

β∈J

connection with rate-independent plasticity). SMA – p.46/108

Modeling

> 0 ⇔ forward transformation

f

X ∂ Ŷ

Wαf α ·Ė = 0 ⇔ neutral forward transformation .

f

∂E

α∈J

< 0 ⇔ elastic unloading

> 0 ⇔ elastic reloading

r

X ∂ Ŷ

Wαr α ·Ė = 0 ⇔ neutral reverse transformation .

α∈J r

∂E

< 0 ⇔ reverse transformation

SMA – p.47/108

Modeling

forward transformation

X

f ∂ Ψ̂ ˙

(−Yα − ) ξα ≥ 0 .

f

∂ξα

α∈J

X X f −1 f ∂ Ψ̂ ∂ Ŷαf

Qαβ (−Yβ − ) · Ė ≥ 0 ,

f f

∂ξβ ∂E

α∈J β∈J

X f −1 ∂ Ψ̂

Wαf = Qαβ (−Yβf − ).

∂ξβ

β∈J f

SMA – p.48/108

Modeling

transformation function of the form

f ∂ Ψ̂

Y = k− k q − Fc ,

∂ξα

where k(·)kq denotes the standard vector q-norm.

PSfrag replacements

q=1

q=2

q=∞

SMA – p.49/108

Modeling

crystal grain constitutive model?

microstructure over a representative referential volume

element (RVE) V that characterizes the physics of the

martensitic transformation.

austenite

austenite 1 2 12 1 2 1 2

austenite

SMA – p.50/108

Modeling

deformations and let the mechanical part of the Helmholtz

free energy be of the form

nv+1

X 1

ψ(, {ξα }) = ξα ( − tα ) · C( − tα ) + ψm ({ξα }) ,

2 | {z }

|α= {z } mixing

single phases

energy of the mixture as

nv nv

X 1 X

γ(σ, {ξα }) = σ · C−1 σ + ξα σ · tα + . . .

α=1

2 α=1

SMA – p.51/108

Modeling

ensemble and employ a Legendre transformation to write

Z Z

0 0

sup −γ(σ , {ξα }) + σ · dV = ψR (, {ξα }) dV ,

σ0 V V

part of the free energy.

nv nv

1 X X

ψR (¯, {ξα }) = (¯ − ξα tα ) · C(¯ − ξα tα )

2 α=1 α=1

Z

1

in terms of the volume-averaged strain ¯ = dV .

vol(V) V

SMA – p.52/108

Modeling

over the ensemble and again homogenize the elastic part

of the Helmholtz free energy to find that

nv nv nv

1 X X 1 X

ψV (¯, {ξα }) = (¯− ξα tα )·C(¯− ξα tα )− σ̃·ξα tα ,

2 α=1 α=1

2 α=1

stress.

although the existing estimates are generally not very

accurate.

SMA – p.53/108

Modeling

free energy be written as

Ψ = Ψ̂(E, {ξα }, θ) =

nv

1 X

E − Et · C E − Et + B(θ − θ0 ) ξα .

|2 {z } α=1

mechanical | {z }

chemical

chemical energy constant (latent heat of transformation),

and θ0 is the equilibrium temperature.

6-10%).

SMA – p.54/108

Modeling

nv

X

Et = ξα Etα ,

α=1

1

Etα = g(mα ⊗ nα + nα ⊗ mα + gnα ⊗ nα ) ,

2

deformation gradient

Fα = I + gmα ⊗ nα . n

habit plane

SMA – p.55/108

Modeling

transformation functions

∂ Ψ̂ ∂ Ψ̂

Yαf = − − Fc , Yαr = − + Fc ,

∂ξα ∂ξα

respectively.

nv

X

Yαf = Ŷαf (E, {ξβ }, θ) = C E− ξβ Etβ · Etα − B(θ − θ0 ) + F c

,

β=1

nv

X

Yαr = Ŷαr (E, {ξβ }, θ) = C E− ξβ Etβ · Etα − B(θ − θ0 ) − F c

.

β=1

SMA – p.56/108

Modeling

loading conditions simplify to

X

ξ˙α ≥ 0 ,

α∈J f

criterion, it follows that during elastic loading or forward

transformation

X ∂ Ψ̂

c ˙

− − F ξα = 0 .

∂ξα

α∈J f

SMA – p.57/108

Modeling

∂ 2 Ψ̂

= Qαβ = Etα · CEtβ ,

∂ξα ∂ξβ

where the nv × nv coupling matrix [Qα β] is symmetric and

of rank at most 6. This implies that for nv > 6, the matrix

[Qαβ ] is necessarily positive semi-definite.

X ∂ Ψ̂

c ˙

− − F ξα = 0 ,

∂ξα

α∈J f

volume fractions can be cast as a constrained optimization

problem at fixed strain and temperature.

SMA – p.58/108

Modeling

martensitic content {ξα } satisfies

{ξα } = argmin Φf ,

{ξγ }∈J f

nv

X

−ξα ≤ 0 , ξα ≤ 1 .

α=1

X

f

Φ =Ψ+ F c ξα ,

α∈J f

applies to reverse transformation for the functional

P

Φ = Ψ − α∈J r F c ξα .

r

SMA – p.59/108

Modeling

nv

1 t

t

X

E − E · C E − E + B(θ − θ0 ) ξα ,

2 α=1

where now

nvh

X nvl

X

Et = ξαhab Etα + ξβlat Etβ .

α=1 β=1

In the above, nvh and and nvl denote the total number of

habit and lattice correspondence variants, respectively.

SMA – p.60/108

Closure

development of superelastic constitutive models.

superelasticity using micromechanics.

keeping the transformation criteria separate.

as a constraint minimization problem.

remains an open question.

SMA – p.61/108

References

805-842, (1996) [Phenomenological modeling of phase

transformation].

953-980, (1996) [Phenomenological modeling of phase

transformation including detwinning].

1379-1409, (1998) [Micromechanically motivated model

for single crystal]

Sol. Struct., 36, pp. 4289-4315, (1999)

[Micromechanically motivated multivariant modeling]

SMA – p.62/108

Contents-III

SMA – p.63/108

Algorithmic treatment

for a single crystal is set up as follows:

at time tn+1 , determine the state at time tn+1 .”

global momentum balance problem.

material

global (i)

momentum

un+1 (Gauss pt.)

balance

i←i+1

PSfrag replacements i−th iterate

local state

i−th iterate

global state

assemble

SMA – p.64/108

Algorithmic treatment

Unified approach

Determine the phase state by solving a constrained

optimization problem.

Unified treatment of transforming and non-transforming

states

Operator-split approach

Analogy with computational plasticity for

rate-independent materials

Different treatment of transforming and

non-transforming states

SMA – p.65/108

Unified approach

manner.

σeq

PSfrag replacements

ξ¯u = 1

¯ P

ξl = ξα

0 eq

Express the constraint conditions as

nv

X

−ξα ≤ 0 , ξ¯l − ξα ≤ 0 , ξ¯u ≤ 1 ,

α=1

where ξ¯l and ξ¯u are lower and upper values of the total

martensitic volume fraction. SMA – p.66/108

Unified approach

manner.

σeq

PSfrag replacements ¯ P

ξu = ξα

ξ¯l = 0

0 eq

Express the constraint conditions as

nv

X

−ξα ≤ 0 , ξα − ξ¯u ≤ 0 , 0 ≤ ξ¯l ,

α=1

where ξ¯l and ξ¯u are lower and upper values of the total

martensitic volume fraction. SMA – p.66/108

Unified approach

The polytope constraints for nv = 3

SMA – p.67/108

Unified approach

in the form

{ξα } = argmin Φf ,

{ξγ }∈J f

λu , and write

∂Φf

+ λ α + λ l − λu = 0 ,

∂ξα

where

nv

X nv

X nv

X

λα (−ξα ) + λl (ξ¯l − ξα ) + λ u ( ξα − ξ¯u ) = 0 .

α=1 α=1 α=1

SMA – p.68/108

Unified approach

“unloading” (reverse transforming).

Select up to 6 such variants from the set of all nv habit

plane variants.

history-independent) and generally need to be performed

in each loading step!

SMA – p.69/108

Unified approach

nv

1 X X

Φf = E − Et · C E − Et B(θ − θ0 ) ξα + F c ξα ,

2 α=1 f α∈J

∂ 2 Φf

hence is quadratic in {ξα }, and the 24 × 24 Hessian

∂ξα ∂ξβ

is at most of rank 6. This leads to a semi-definite quadratic

programming problem.

active variants at each step.

positive-definite quadratic programming is applied to

determine the active variants and volume fractions.

SMA – p.70/108

Unified approach

candidate active variants. One possibility is to first

determine the extrema of Φf with respect to each variant

separately, i.e., solve

f

∂ Φ̂

Ŷαf (E, ξα , θ) = = 0,

∂ξα

for each ξα , α = 1, . . . , 24. Subsequently, select the 6

variants that correspond to the lowest values of

Φf = Φ̂f (E, ξα , θ).

determine 3 pairs of potentially active variants, as

motivated by experiments.

SMA – p.71/108

Unified approach

counterpart of the first-order conditions

∂Φf

+ λ α + λ l − λu = 0 ,

∂ξα

nv

X nv

X nv

X

λα (−ξα ) + λl (ξ¯l − ξα ) + λ u ( ξα − ξ¯u ) = 0

α=1 α=1 α=1

in matrix form as

[Πn+1 ][ξn+1 ] = [hn+1 ] .

positive-definite and [Πn+1 ] has full row-rank.

SMA – p.72/108

Unified approach

guess of volume fractions and active variants (working set).

values of [ξn+1 ] and [λn+1 ].

then add the most offending constraint to the working

set and go to step 1.

negative, then drop from the working set the constraint

that corresponds to the lowest value over all multipliers

and go to step 1.

SMA – p.73/108

Unified approach

forward transformation state at t = tn+1 are

> 0 ⇔ forward transformation

X f

(ξα,n+1 −ξα,n ) = 0 and λl = 0 ⇔ neutral forward transformation ,

α∈C = 0 and λl > 0 ⇔ elastic unloading

where ξα,n+1

f

is calculated by constrained minimization of Φf .

account for the explicit enforcement of the constraint

¯ P

ξl − α∈C ξα ≤ 0.

SMA – p.74/108

Unified approach

reverse transformation state at t = tn+1 are

< 0 ⇔ reverse transformation

X

r

(ξα,n+1 −ξα,n ) = 0 and λu = 0 ⇔ neutral reverse transformation ,

α∈C = 0 and λu > 0 ⇔ elastic reloading

where ξα,n+1

r

is calculated by constrained minimization of Φr .

account for the explicit enforcement of the constraint

P ¯u ≤ 0.

α∈C ξ α − ξ

SMA – p.75/108

Unified approach

treatment of elastic or transforming states. This implies

that one only needs to check whether the state is “forward”

or “reverse”.

“forward”). and resolve all possible combinations of

forward/reverse loading:

H

HH ∆ξnf

H + 0

∆ξnr HH

H

− !flag ‘reverse’

0 ‘forward’ flag

SMA – p.76/108

Unified approach

lead to non-linear programming. For example, assume

nv

1 t

t

X

Ψ = E−E · C̄ E − E + B(θ − θ0 ) ξα ,

2 α=1

nv

! nv

X X

C̄ = 1 − ξ α Ca + Cm .

α=1 α=1

reduce the problem to one of quadratic programming by

using time-lagging estimates of C̄.

SMA – p.77/108

Operator-split approach

preceding model.

(i)

and the i−th iterate of the displacement un+1 :

(i)

1. Assume that the total strain En+1 is elastic, i.e., there is

no phase forward transformation.

(i)

2a. If Ŷαf (En+1 , {ξβ,n }, θn+1 ) < 0 for all variants α, then the

process in (tn , tn+1 ] is elastic.

(i)

2b. If Ŷαf (En+1 , {ξβ,n }, θn+1 ) ≥ 0 for some variant(s) α, then

there is some phase transformation.

SMA – p.78/108

Operator-split approach

plasticity because of the simplicity of the elastic predictor

and the physical interpretation of the plastic corrector.

micromechanically motivated phase transition models?

SMA – p.79/108

Operator-split approach

transformation) correction. It is sometimes assumed

that

f

∂Y

ξ˙α = κ α

,

∂ξα

which corresponds to an “associated” flow rule.

PSfrag replacements

Y1f = 0

Yf2 = 0

SMA – p.80/108

Operator-split approach

constraints.

ag replacements

f ξ<0

Y >0

Yf =0 ξ=0

multi-dimensional space. In some cases, the

projections indicate unsuitable selection of potentially

active variants.

SMA – p.81/108

Polycrystal modeling

response of polycrystalline superelastic alloys.

Direct simulation

Resolve the polycrystal structure using individual finite

elements. This is a simple, but potentially expensive

approach.

Two-scale analysis

Solve fine-scale boundary-value problem on a

representative domain and extract volume-averaged

stress to be used in a continuum-level simulation. This

approach can radically reduce the computational cost.

SMA – p.82/108

Polycrystal modeling

one needs to utilize the texture information.

earlier. Here, the manufacturing process induces primarily

h111i{110}-type sheet texture “wrapped” around the

cylindrical surface, such that the h111i austenite lattice

direction is aligned with the longitudinal axis of the tube.

¢

¡

SMA – p.83/108

Polycrystal modeling

SMA – p.84/108

Polycrystal modeling

software that handles crystallographic data acquisition.

ω1 ω2 ω3 q (1)

(2) (2) (2)

ω1 ω2 ω3 q (2) ,

··· ··· ··· ···

(i)

where ωI , I = 1, 2, 3, are orientation-defining angles for

the i-th bin and q (i) is the corresponding diffraction

intensity.

SMA – p.85/108

rag replacements

Polycrystal modeling

q0 = q00 q

y

z x 0

00

r =z p

ω2

ω1

p

ω3 r = r0

q000 = y

SMA – p.86/108

Polycrystal modeling

q

p

PSfrag replacements ω0

r

relative to the r axis.

SMA – p.87/108

Polycrystal modeling

texture can be expressed as

Q = Q 3 Q2 Q1 Q0 ,

where

Q0 : rotation by ω0 relative to r ,

Q1 : rotation by ω1 relative to r ,

Q2 : rotation by ω2 relative to q0 ,

Q3 : rotation by ω2 relative to r00 .

Rodrigues formula for rotation in {p, q, r} by ω with respect

to p:

Qr = p ⊗ p + cos ω(q ⊗ q + r ⊗ r) − sin θ(q ⊗ r − r ⊗ q) .

SMA – p.88/108

Polycrystal modeling

from the pole figure data using a random processes

weighted by the diffraction intensities.

location of the grain on the tube.

transformation strains {Etα } of a typical crystal grain are

expressed as

Eta,tex = QEtα QT ,

where Etα are the transformation strains relative to the

austenite (cubic) frame.

SMA – p.89/108

Polycrystal modeling

boundary-value problem at each Gauss point:

problem, determine the mean stress, and use it to define

the constitutive behavior in the macro-scale problem.

SMA – p.90/108

Polycrystal modeling

gradient field F̄ = F in the fine-scale problem.

output the mean 1st Piola-Kirchhoff stress P̄.

Interesting issues:

microstructure)

its variants)

SMA – p.91/108

Numerical simulations

Material parameters:

Martensite Young’s modulus : E = 10.0 GPa

Poisson’s ratio : ν = 0.3

Chemical energy constant : B = 0.607 MPa/◦ C

Temperature : θ − θ0 = 22.3◦ C

Critical force : F c = 7.5 MPa.

[m] = [0.43448, 0.75743, 0.48737]T ,

Numerical simulations

500

450

400

350

300

Teq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

Experment 1

50 Experiment 2

Experiment 3

Simulation

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

Eeq

SMA – p.93/108

Numerical simulations

1

Variant 2

Variant 3

0.9 Variant 11

Variant 19

Variant sum

0.8

0.7

Volume fraction

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

E

eq

SMA – p.94/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

STRESS 3

2.86E+08

3.02E+08

3.19E+08

3.35E+08

3.52E+08

3.68E+08

3.85E+08

4.01E+08

4.18E+08

4.34E+08

4.50E+08

4.67E+08

4.83E+08

Time = 6.00E+01

SMA – p.95/108

Numerical simulations

500

450

400

350

300

Teq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50

Tension 0.0%, Torsion 2.0%

Simulation

0

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03

Eeq

SMA – p.96/108

Numerical simulations

0.12

Variant #15

Variant #23

Variant #11

Variant #19

0.1 Variant Sum

0.08

Vol. Fraction

0.06

0.04

0.02

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03

εeq

SMA – p.97/108

Numerical simulations

600

500

400

Teq (MPa)

300

200

100

Sim (Tension 2.0%, Torsion 2.0%)

0

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035

Eeq

SMA – p.98/108

Numerical simulations

500

450

400

350

300

Teq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50

Experiment

Simulation

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

Eeq

SMA – p.99/108

Numerical simulations

500

450

400

350

300

Teq (MPa)

250

200

150

100

50 Experiment

Simulation with correct texture

Simulation with incorrect texture

0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

Eeq

SMA – p.100/108

Numerical simulations

cut

SMA – p.101/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

MARTENSITE

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

0.00E+00

r = 4Ro

SMA – p.102/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

MARTENSITE

0.00E+00

6.77E-03

1.35E-02

2.03E-02

2.71E-02

3.39E-02

4.06E-02

4.74E-02

5.42E-02

6.09E-02

6.77E-02

7.45E-02

8.13E-02

r = 3Ro

SMA – p.102/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

MARTENSITE

0.00E+00

3.93E-02

7.86E-02

1.18E-01

1.57E-01

1.97E-01

2.36E-01

2.75E-01

3.14E-01

3.54E-01

3.93E-01

4.32E-01

4.72E-01

r = 2Ro

SMA – p.102/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

MARTENSITE

0.00E+00

6.81E-02

1.36E-01

2.04E-01

2.72E-01

3.41E-01

4.09E-01

4.77E-01

5.45E-01

6.13E-01

6.81E-01

7.49E-01

8.17E-01

r = Ro

SMA – p.102/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

MARTENSITE

0.00E+00

6.71E-02

1.34E-01

2.01E-01

2.68E-01

3.35E-01

4.03E-01

4.70E-01

5.37E-01

6.04E-01

6.71E-01

7.38E-01

8.05E-01

r = 2Ro

SMA – p.102/108

Numerical simulations

_________________

MARTENSITE

0.00E+00

2.76E-02

5.52E-02

8.28E-02

1.10E-01

1.38E-01

1.66E-01

1.93E-01

2.21E-01

2.48E-01

2.76E-01

3.03E-01

3.31E-01

r = 3Ro

SMA – p.102/108

Numerical simulations

16

14

12

10

Pressure (MPa)

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

(4Ro−r)/Ro

SMA – p.103/108

Numerical simulations

16

14

12

10

Pressure (MPa)

Stent with incorrect texture

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

(4Ro−r)/Ro

SMA – p.104/108

Numerical simulations

16

Thickness = 0.375mm

Thickness = 0.3mm

Thickness = 0.2mm

14 Thickness = 0.1mm

12

10

Pressure (MPa)

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

(4Ro−r)/Ro

SMA – p.105/108

Numerical simulations

16

Height = 5.0mm

Height = 7.0mm

Height = 8.0mm

14 Height = 10.5mm

12

10

Pressure (MPa)

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

(4Ro−r)/Ro

SMA – p.106/108

Closure

a multi-phase elasticity problem or as a plasticity-like

problem.

makes no algorithmic distinction between elastic

loading and forward transformation.

new physics in the flow-like rule for the evolution of the

variant volume fractions.

or by two-scale modeling.

SMA – p.107/108

References

Engrg., 47, pp. 1123-1168, (2000) [Plasticity-like

algorithmic development for phenomenological theory].

Engrg., 191, pp. 215-238, (2001) [Plasticity-like

algorithmic development for microstructural theory].

Meth. Engrg., 60, pp. 429-460, (2004) [Elasticity-based

algorithmic development for microstructural theory].

Cambridge UP, (2000) [Background on texture

measurement].

SMA – p.108/108

- Sma Control for Bio-mimetic Fish LocomotioCargado porWilliam H. Coral
- Metallic IplantsCargado porJobin Jose
- Is Stainless Steel Magnetic or Non-magnetic in External FieldCargado porSM Waqas Imam
- Texture and microstructure of Cr2O3 and (Cr,Al)2O3 thin ﬁlms deposited by reactiveCargado porRafaela Lopes da Silva
- 954 Enhancing Vibration and Controls TeachinCargado porfrenape591177
- Presentation sur les UAV SMACargado porFabrice Nebesse
- Split Pin Charts Sltp_usCargado porregenteng
- 17100681 Mechanical Properties of Wires and Its Orthodontic ApplicationCargado porMaheswari Suresh
- Hannover Sr 2010Cargado porKaanMert
- Issues Related to T91_P91 Steels_RKoripelliCargado porJohn M. Cavote
- Final Year Report 0705137a2Cargado porNera
- Color MetallographyCargado porJohn Jairo Andrade Bravo
- 1-s2.0-S0921509313004000-main.pdfCargado porEidelsayed
- Diffusion LessCargado porelton
- tmt data.pdfCargado porzilangamba_s4535
- 10.11648.j.ijmsa.20130203.14Cargado porskrmastdilse
- Continuum MechanicsCargado pormurariv
- TA_Weldability of SteelsCargado porSrinu Gangolu
- Heat Treating of Nodular Irons_ Part One __ KEY to METALS ArticleCargado porkumarpankaj030
- 4661-32284-1-PBCargado porAmanda Smith
- Assignement n°4 Group4 finalCargado porAmirhosein Masoumi
- Metallurgy Answer KeyCargado pormalsttar
- Effect of Rolling ParametersCargado porToba
- 169Cargado porAli Ibn
- Guidelines for Hard Facing Onto SteelsCargado pormohamedfiroz
- exampaper-H84ARME1.pdfCargado porIbrahim Dibal
- Development of a Gripper Using SMA WireCargado porvishnu_jo
- A240.pdfCargado porwi
- Asme Ccase SubjectCargado porADAMJSRAO
- Material Ferritic Chrome SteelsCargado porPemburu Jablay

- 9-Realizaciones de FiltrosCargado porsoudah
- Sou Dah 2014Cargado porsoudah
- TeseCargado porsoudah
- bio_137_04_041005(1)Cargado porsoudah
- A unified method for estimating pressure losses at vascular junctionsCargado poraaww2605
- Resistencia de MaterialesCargado porKelber Zelaya
- Resistencia de MaterialesCargado porKelber Zelaya
- Vma.ucr.Metodos NumericosCargado porTomás Opazo Rodríguez
- Discusion Efectos 1a7TCargado porsoudah
- Tema 1 IntroducciónCargado porsoudah
- Apunte de Señales digitales y CuantificacionesCargado porMartín Mura
- An 24Cargado porsoudah
- 22548270 Principios Fisicos de Los Rayos XCargado porMirely Casasus B

- CapitalGate-BuildingEnvelopeCargado porMartin Davis
- Making Bathrooms a Place to Write Your Style Statement EssCargado porEss Ess Bathroom Products Private Limited
- Som Unit i 2 & 16 MarksCargado porSurjith Bharathi Selvakumar
- Midas - Modelos de MateriaisCargado porpaulovribeiro
- BOQ - Fire Alarm and Detection System - Nov 26, 2016Cargado porApollo Castro
- t StressCargado porHilmy Echsan
- SP 401Cargado porazamislam726537
- Manual Install&Owner CPLCargado porRuss DuQuaine
- Mechnical DesignCargado pordcf67my
- Correlated Macrostructural Parameters Weld SMAW Small TubesCargado porAndrea Caldera
- A10-A-PID-VA-718602-201Cargado porzhang
- Plumbing Fixtures and FittingsCargado porAnonymous 4iYnEhFO
- 2856-key-technologies-for-super-tall-building-construction-lotte-world-tower.pdfCargado porbian agni
- Cross-Frame Connection Details for Skewed Steel BridgesCargado porbiomechanics
- WaterlooRegionConsolidatedCourthouse_ltr1Cargado porGeorgiana Stanciu
- Design and Simulation of an Integrated Metal Oxide Based Micro NO2 Gas Sensor.pdfCargado porKashif Nabi
- 51294800-RCC-retaining-wall-BS8110.xlsCargado pormttaib
- 16010 - Electrical Design CriteriaCargado porwafikmh4
- Concrete BarriersCargado portdartnell
- 2539 4046 02 A1001 003_Datasheet for Manual Valve_Rev BCargado porNguyễn Thực
- CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT ANALYSIS(solar energy)Cargado porassi_thaer
- API 610 pumpsCargado poranon_684099349
- 66512773K310 KENMORE ELITE DishwasherCargado poraxof
- Ficha Tecnica Ultramid B3WG5Cargado pormanaswin404
- Lesson PlanCargado porkousikkumaar
- Compressive Strength Test WorksheetCargado porLloyd R. Ponce
- Dac 31903 Unit 1Cargado porkishen972
- EAc4Calculator_LEEDv2-2-Nov_2006.xlsCargado porCésar Santana
- New Microsoft Office PowerPoint PresentationCargado porLovedeep Lovi
- 06_GasGatheringCargado porRyan Araña