Haonan Sui, Long Yu, Wenbin Liu, Ying Liu, Yangyang Cheng, Huiling Duan. Theoretical models of void nucleation and growth for ductile metals under dynamic loading: A review[J]. Matter and Radiation at Extremes, 2022, 7(1): 018201

Search by keywords or author
- Matter and Radiation at Extremes
- Vol. 7, Issue 1, 018201 (2022)

Fig. 1. Nucleation occurs at the matrix–particle interface owing to tensile stress.24

Fig. 2. Critical strain of void nucleation at particles.27–31

Fig. 3. Schematic of void nucleation at a particle. Separation occurs at the poles of the particle.27

Fig. 4. (a) 2D configuration of dislocation emission. (b) Stress state at the point of dislocation due to equal biaxial tension σ .20

Fig. 5. Normalized critical emission stress vs normalized radius of void. The three curves represent three different dislocation widths: w = b , w = 1.5b , and w = 2b .20

Fig. 6. 3D configuration of dislocation emission. Variables with subscript 0 are geometric parameters associated with the prismatic dislocation loop (PDL). z 0 = a cos θ cr + w is the equilibrium position of the PDL, ρ 0 = a sin θ cr is the radius of the PDL, and r 0 = z 0 2 + ρ 0 2 and θ 0 = arctan(ρ 0/z 0) specify the position of the PDL.53

Fig. 7. Effect of porosity f on dislocation emission. σ cr/μ and a /b are the normalized critical emission stress and the normalized radius of the void, respectively.53

Fig. 8. Effect of stress triaxiality on dislocation emission. η = 0 and η = 1 correspond to the cases of uniaxial tension and hydrostatic tension, respectively.53

Fig. 9. Simulated free-surface velocity profiles. Two strategies of homogenization modeling are adopted: the p-model assumes that a uniform pressure is applied to all unit cells, while the d-model assumes that a uniform strain rate is prescribed on unit cells. For more details, see Czarnota et al. 76

Fig. 10. J-resistance curves for the growth of a ductile crack.78,102 Results are presented for different tractions T a = 1100 and 1500 MPa and initial void radii a 1 = 1.5 and 5 µ m.78

Fig. 11. Influence of strain rate on spall strength for aluminum samples with different purity.19,103–110

Fig. 12. Material velocity profiles for different shock stress amplitudes.82

Set citation alerts for the article
Please enter your email address