Page 1 of 8

European Journal of Applied Sciences – Vol. 11, No. 3

Publication Date: June 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/aivp.113.14959

Partom, Y. (2023). Ductile Materials Stress Upturn at High Strain Rates. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(3). 641-

648.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Ductile Materials Stress Upturn at High Strain Rates

Y. Partom

18 HaBanim, Zikhron Ya'akov 3094017, Israel

ABSTRACT

Ductile materials (mainly metals) exhibit a sharp stress upturn, which is not

specific to a certain type of material, at strain rates around 103 to 104/s. It is

important to consider such stress high-rate upturn when dealing with shock

loading and unloading. Using classical strength models, usually calibrated at not so

high rates, may lead to errors when considering high-rate loading under not so high

pressures. Here we model high-rate upturn on the macroscale. We assume that the

upturn mechanism is also the mechanism responsible for the 4th power law

mechanism, put forward by Swegle and Grady. In the past we calibrated our

overstress dynamic viscoplasticity model for aluminium from 4th power law data.

Here we use this calibration to predict the high-rate stress upturn response.

INTRODUCTION

Ductile materials (mainly metals) exhibit a sharp upturn of stress at strain rates around 103 to

104/s [1-5], which is not specific to a certain type of metal [5, 6]. It is important to consider

stress high-rate upturn when dealing with high-rate loading, such as shock loading and

unloading. Using classical strength models, usually calibrated at not so high rates, may lead to

inaccurate results with high-rate loading at not so high pressure.

Initially it was believed that stress upturn is caused by a transition from thermal activation of

dislocation motion to viscous drag [7, 8]. But later it was proposed that stress upturn is caused

by an increase of dislocation generation rate [9]. An entirely different approach to the

understanding of stress upturn has been put forward by Fan et al. [6]. They derive their theory

analytically on the mesoscale, and verify it with molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. They

find that: 1) at high temperature, stress approaches zero (melting), and at very low

temperature, stress increases dramatically; 2) strain rate influences stress in an opposite way

to that of temperature, similar to time-temperature equivalence of polymers. High-rate loading

is equivalent to low temperature, and hence the upturn; and 3) stress upturn results don’t

depend on details of a specific type of material, which is in general agreement with

experimental data.

Here we model stress upturn on the macroscale. First, we distinguish between total strain rate

and plastic strain rate. In the literature, when plotting stress versus log strain rate, they usually

don’t specify which strain rate they mean, total or plastic strain rate. But total strain rate is not

a state variable, while effective plastic strain rate may be regarded as a hidden (internal) state

variable. Effective plastic strain rate represents the effect of mobile dislocation density and of

average dislocation velocity, as in Orowan’s equation. This leads us to replace the usual Y(deff)

(flow stress as function of effective deformation rate, or strain rate) equation by the flow curve

dp

eff (seq-Yqs), as in our overstress approach to dynamic viscoplasticity [10].

Page 2 of 8

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 642

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 3, June-2023

Next, we assume that the high-rate stress upturn mechanism is also responsible for the 4th

power law mechanism, put forward by Swegle and Grady (SG) [11]. Hints to this effect are made

in [12, 13]. In [14] we calibrated the flow curve of our overstress viscoplastic model to

reproduce the 4th power law data for aluminum given in [15]. Similarly, we show here that the

same overstress flow curve that reproduces the 4th power law response, reproduces the stress

upturn response as well.

In section 2 we revisit our 4th power law modeling.

In section 3 we use our overstress flow curve to reproduce the high-rate stress upturn

response.

REVISITING FOURTH POWER LAW RESPONSE

Since the works of Barker [15] and Grady [11], it has been known that for a steady structured

shock in a viscoplastic material, the following power law holds for many materials:

( )

max

= dmax

= B  (1)

where dmax and  are defined in Fig. 1.

Figure 1. Schematics of a steady structured viscoplastic wave.

This unique response, known as the 4th power law, is usually shown as straight lines (for

different materials) on a log-log plot. In [14] we reproduce the 4th power law response for 6061-

T6 aluminum, using our overstress approach to dynamic viscoplasticity [10]. We solve there a

system of three ODEs, describing the steady viscoplastic wave from a planar impact (uniaxial

strain), as developed by Duvall and coworkers [16]. The system of ODEs is:

Page 3 of 8

643

Partom, Y. (2023). Ductile Materials Stress Upturn at High Strain Rates. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(3). 641-648.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.113.14959

( )

( )

p

2 2

L

2

0

p

2 2

0 L

p

2 2

L

d

U c / U 1

2G

d

U c / U 1

2G

u

d

c / U 1

2G

 −

 =

 −

=

 =

(2)

where =longitudinal stress component, u=particle velocity, U=viscoplastic wave velocity,

cL=longitudinal sound speed, G=shear modulus, =longitudinal strain component, 0=initial

density, P=pressure, and dp=longitudinal plastic deformation rate component.

By our overstress approach to dynamic viscoplasticity [10], dp is given by:

s P

0

Y

q s 1.5s Y

d A

p

=  −

=

(3)

and it can be shown that for the uniaxial strain state:

s s s s

d d d d

2

3

2 ij ij

3

eq

p p

ij

p

3 ij

p 2

eff

= =

= =

(4)

where dp

eff=effective plastic strain rate and seq=equivalent stress. We integrate the system of

equations (3) with a standard ODE solver. We use standard material parameters of aluminum,

and we run the integration code for different levels of the incoming shock. For a given set of the

parameters A, α we obtain a straight line on the log-log plot of  versus the maximum strain

rate, as in the experiments. Changing these parameters, we find that the exponent α controls

the slope  of this line, and the coefficient A controls its vertical position B. In Fig. 2 we show 

as function of α from these computations.