Simulation of low cycle fatigue stress‐strain response in 316LN stainless steel using non‐linear isotropic kinematic hardening model—A comparison of different approaches

• Published in: Fatigue & fracture of engineering materials & structures 2018-02, Vol.41 (2), p.336-347
• Main Authors: Ashraf, Q J, Prasad, Reddy G, Sandhya, R, Laha, K, Harmain, G A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 316LN stainless steel; Austenitic stainless steels; Computer simulation; Finite element method; Hysteresis loops; Kinematics; Low cycle fatigue; Mathematical models; Nonlinear analysis; non‐linear isotropic kinematic hardening; Parameter modification; Plastic deformation; Predictions; simulation of cyclic plasticity; Stainless steel; Stress-strain curves; Stress-strain relationships; Stresses
• ISSN: 8756-758X; 1460-2695
• DOI: 10.1111/ffe.12683

Cyclic stress‐strain response of 316LN stainless steel subjected to low cycle fatigue at strain amplitude of ±0.4% and at 873 K is simulated using finite element analysis with non‐linear isotropic‐kinematic hardening Chaboche model. Four different approaches have been used in simulating cyclic stress response and hysteresis loops: 3 based on Chaboche model‐parameters and the fourth on direct experimental data (stabilized loop and cyclic stress‐strain curve [CSSC]). Among them, simulations performed with direct experimental data have not yielded expected initial cyclic response. The source of data used for evaluation of kinematic‐hardening (KH) parameters determined the extent of closeness between experimental results and Chaboche‐model predictions. KH parameters determined from first‐cycle loop and modified‐CSSC predicted the overall stress‐strain response (from initial to stabilized condition) with reasonable fit, compared with other approaches. All 4 approaches though predicted stabilized response, simulations based on “KH‐parameters from stabilized‐cycle” accurately described stabilized response with coefficient of determination (r2) 0.995.