Evaluation of high-temperature tensile behavior for metal foils by a novel resistance heating assisted tensile testing system using samples with optimized structures

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2021.03.061

Abstract

Abstract:

To evaluate the tensile behavior of metal foils by resistance heating (RH) assisted tensile testing system accurately, this study proposed to embed a digital image correlation (DIC) system with laser speckles for the measurement of full-field strain distribution. Furthermore, the sample structures were optimized to achieve uniform temperature and strain distribution. An infrared camera was used to monitor the temperature distribution. Rectangular samples instead of dog-bone shaped samples were proposed. A model for calculating the temperature distribution was established to optimize the sample structure. The parameters that influence the temperature distribution and tensile behavior were studied. As results, compared to the strain measured by a non-contact extensometer, the maximum deviation of the strain measured by DIC was less than 6% when the nominal strain was larger than 0.013. It is confirmed that the proposed tensile testing system is reliable for measuring the temperature and full-field strain distributions. Sample shape influenced temperature distributions of smaller samples while it almost had no influence on the temperature distributions of larger samples. The temperature difference was not affected by the material type but by the sample size. The proposed rectangular shape was validated to be feasible for RH assisted tensile testing. The sample length was successfully optimized for a more uniform temperature distribution by the established model. Although the tensile deformation was not influenced by the sample shape, the temperature distribution resulted in a non-uniform strain distribution before achieving ultimate tensile strength. Longer effective sample length between two clamping jigs contributed to a more uniform temperature distribution and material deformation. A more accurate evaluation of high-temperature tensile behavior for metal foils can be achieved by the proposed RH assisted tensile testing system using rectangular samples with an optimized structure.

Key words: High temperature, Metal foil, Resistance heating, Sample structure, Tensile behavior

Qiu Zheng, Tsuyoshi Furushima. Evaluation of high-temperature tensile behavior for metal foils by a novel resistance heating assisted tensile testing system using samples with optimized structures[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 94: 216-229.

Figures/Tables 22

Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of heat transfer of a tensile sample: (a) conventional dog-bone shaped sample, (b) proposed rectangular sample, and (c) rectangular sample contacting with jig.

Fig. 2. Illustration of laser speckle patterns under RH at different temperatures.

Fig. 3. Schematic illustration of the proposed novel RH assisted tensile testing system.

Fig. 4. Structures of test samples: (a) width of 4 mm with a dog-bone shape (W4-D), (b) width of 4 mm with a rectangular shape (W4-R), (c) width of 2 mm with a dog-bone shape (W2-D), (d) width of 2 mm with a rectangular shape (W2-R), and (e) width of 2 mm with a rectangular shape and effective length of 25 mm between two clamping areas (W2-R-L).

Fig. 5. Confirmation of temperature measurement: (a) history of the maximum temperature of W4-D samples, (b), (c) and (d) temperature distributions of the sample at the forming temperatures of 160, 300, and 450 °C, respectively.

Fig. 6. Comparison of strains calculated by DIC and by the gauge (obtained from extensometer) at different temperatures for W4-D samples: (a) nominal stress-strain curves, and (b) deviation of the nominal strains in plastic deformation region calculated by DIC.

Fig. 7. Strain field (Euler-Almansi) of pure Ti foils with W4-D structure at different nominal strains under different tensile temperatures of: (a) 160 °C, (b) 300 °C, and (c) 450 °C.

Fig. 8. Conception of normalized position.

Fig. 9. Temperature distribution of samples with different shapes: (a) comparison of W4-D and W4-R samples, and (b) comparison of W2-D and W2-R samples.

Fig. 10. Temperature distribution of samples with different sizes: (a) comparison of W4-D and W2-D samples, and (b) comparison of W4-R, W2-R, and W2-R-L samples.

Fig. 11. Temperature distribution of samples with different materials: (a) comparison of samples with dog-bone shapes (Fig. 4(c), W2-D), and (b) comparison of samples with rectangular shapes (Fig. 4(d), W2-R).

Fig. 12. Maximum temperature difference of all the samples within gauge.

Fig. 13. Illustration of heat transfer model of the rectangular sample.

Table 1 Current density (J: A/mm2) used in the experiments.

	160 °C	300 °C	450 °C
Width 4 mm (W4)	14.55	20.4	26.3
Width 2 mm (W2)	19	26	32.5

Fig. 14. Comparison of theoretically analyzed temperature distribution with experimental results at different forming temperatures for samples of: (a) W4-R, and (b) W2-R.

Fig. 15. Comparison of predicted temperature distributions with experimental results at different forming temperatures for: (a) W4-R-L samples, and (b) W2-R-L samples.

Fig. 16. Predicted temperature distributions of samples with different length: (a) W4, and (b) W2 samples.

Fig. 17. Nominal stress-strain curves of pure Ti foils with different sample structures.

Fig. 18. Full-field Green-Lagrange strain distribution of samples with different structures at UTS: (a) W4-D sample tension at 160 °C, (b) W4-R sample tension at 160 °C, (c) W4-R-L sample tension at 160 °C, (d) W4-D sample tension at 300 °C, (e) W4-R sample tension at 300 °C, (f) W4-R-L sample tension at 300 °C, (g) W4-D sample tension at 450 °C, (h) W4-R sample tension at 450 °C, and (i) W4-R-L sample tension at 450 °C.

Fig. 19. True strain profiles plotted along the centerline of the sample at UTS.

Fig. 20. Average true strain and its standard deviation of the samples at the position of UTS.

Table 2 Comparison of typical and proposed methods for high-temperature tensile testing.

	Typical method			Proposed method
Heating method	Furnace	RH	RH	RH
Sample structure	Short dog-bone	Short dog-bone	Long dog-bone	Long rectangle
Schematic illustration
Measurement of nominal strain	Stroke of machine Inaccurate (×)	Extensometer or DIC system Accurate (○)		DIC system Accurate (○)
Measurement of full-field strain distribution	Not provided (×)	Artificial speckles Inaccurate (×)		Laser speckles Accurate (○)
Clamping of sample	Difficult (×)	Easy (○)	Easy (○)	Easy (○)
Heating/ cooling rate	Slow (×)	Fast (○)	Fast (○)	Fast (○)
Temperature distribution	Uniform (○)	Non-uniform (×)	Uniform (○)	Uniform (○)
Sample preparation	Troublesome (×)	Troublesome (×)	Troublesome (×)	Convenient (○)

References 42

[1]	K. Mori, S. Maki, Y. Tanaka, CIRP Ann. -Manuf.Technol. 54 (2005) 209-212, doi: 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60085-7. DOI
[2]	K. Mori, T. Maeno, H. Yamada, H. Matsumoto, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 89 (2014) 124-131, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2014.10.008. DOI URL
[3]	K. Mori, Y. Okuda, CIRP Ann. -Manuf.Technol. 59 (2010) 291-294, doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2010.03.107. DOI
[4]	T. Maeno, K. ichiro Mori, R. Yachi, CIRP Ann. -Manuf. Technol. 66 (2017) 269-272, doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2017.04.117. DOI URL
[5]	H. Tanabe, M. Yang, Steel Res. Int. (2011) 979-984.
[6]	B. Valoppi, Z. Zhang, M. Deng, A. Ghiotti, S. Bruschi, K.F. Ehmann, J. Cao, Pro-cedia Manuf. 10 (2017) 407-416, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.014. DOI
[7]	D.K. Xu, B. Lu, T.T. Cao, H. Zhang, J. Chen, H. Long, J. Cao, Mater. Des. 92 (2016) 268-280, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.009. DOI URL
[8]	M.J. Kim, K. Lee, K.H. Oh, I.S. Choi, H.H. Yu, S.T. Hong, H.N. Han, Scr. Mater. 75 (2014) 58-61, doi: 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2013.11.019. DOI URL
[9]	K. Liu, X. Huai Dong, W. Shi, Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China (English Ed.) 29 (2019) 735-740, doi: 10.1016/S1003-6326(19)64983-6. DOI
[10]	T. Furushima, K. Manabe, J. Mater. Process. Technol. (2007) 236-240 187-188, doi: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.11.204. DOI
[11]	T. Furushima, K. ichi Manabe, CIRP Ann. 67 (2018) 309-312, doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2018.04.101. DOI URL
[12]	J. Magargee, F. Morestin, J. Cao, J. Eng. Mater. Technol. Trans. ASME. 135 (2013) 1-10, doi: 10.1115/1.4024394. DOI
[13]	Y.C. Zhao, M. Wan, B. Meng, J. Xu, D.B. Shan, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 767(2019), doi: 10.1016/j.msea.2019.138412. DOI
[14]	H.B. Motra, J. Hildebrand, A. Dimmig-Osburg, Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 17 (2014) 260-269, doi: 10.1016/j.jestch.2014.07.006. DOI
[15]	W.L. Chan, M.W. Fu, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 528 (2011) 7674-7683, doi: 10.1016/j.msea.2011.06.076. DOI URL
[16]	Q. Zheng, T. Shimizu, T. Shiratori, M. Yang, Mater. Des. 63 (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2014.06.039. DOI
[17]	T. Lee, J. Magargee, M.K. Ng, J. Cao, Int. J. Plast. 94 (2017) 44-56, doi: 10.1016/j.ijplas.2017.02.012. DOI URL
[18]	J. Li, G. Yang, T. Siebert, M.F. Shi, L. Yang, Opt. Lasers Eng. 107 (2018) 194-201, doi: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2018.03.029. DOI URL
[19]	X. Zhu, M. Yue, Z. Qu, Y. Ma, H. Li, K. Takagi, X. Fang, X. Feng, Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 133 (2019) 133-138, doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2018.09.079. DOI
[20]	K. Liu, X. Dong, H. Xie, F. Peng, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 623 (2015) 97-103, doi: 10.1016/j.msea.2014.11.039. DOI URL
[21]	M. Anwander, B.G. Zagar, B. Weiss, H. Weiss, Exp. Mech. 40 (20 0 0) 98-105, doi: 10.1007/BF02327556. DOI URL
[22]	B.G. Zagar, in: Proceedings of the 20th IMEKO TC2 Symposium on Photonics in Measurement, 9, 2010, pp. 107-111, doi: 10.3788/col201109.071203. 2010. DOI
[23]	M. Shimizu, H. Sawano, H. Yoshioka, H. Shinno, J. Adv. Mech. Des. Syst. Manuf. 9 (2015) JAMDSM0011-JAMDSM0011, doi: 10.1299/jamdsm.2015jamdsm0011. DOI
[24]	Q. Zheng, N. Mashiwa, T. Furushima, Mater. Des. 191 (2020) 108626, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108626. DOI
[25]	Q. Zheng, T. Shimizu, M. Yang, Steel Res. Int. 86 (2015), doi: 10.1002/srin.201400574. DOI
[26]	L.C. Tsao, H.Y. Wu, J.C. Leong, C.J. Fang, Mater. Des. 34 (2012) 179-184, doi: 10. 1016/j.matdes.2011.07.060. DOI URL
[27]	J. Xiao, D.S. Li, X.Q. Li, T.S. Deng, J. Alloys Compd. 541 (2012) 346-352, doi: 10. 1016/j.jallcom.2012.07.048. DOI URL
[28]	Z.Y. Zhang, H. Yang, H. Li, N. Ren, D. Wang, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 569 (2013) 96-105, doi: 10.1016/j.msea.2013.01.055. DOI URL
[29]	T.A. Mcneal, J.A. Beers, J.T. Roth, in: Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, 2009, pp. 1-10.
[30]	H.Y. Xie, Q. Wang, F. Peng, K. Liu, X.H. Dong, J.F. Wang, Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China (English Ed.) 25 (2015) 2686-2692, doi: 10.1016/S1003-6326(15)63892-4. DOI
[31]	X. Wang, J. Xu, D. Shan, B. Guo, J. Cao, Int. J. Plast. 85 (2016) 230-257, doi: 10.1016/j.ijplas.2016.07.008. DOI URL
[32]	X. Wang, J. Xu, Z. Jiang, W.Le Zhu, D. Shan, B. Guo, J. Cao, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 659 (2016) 215-224, doi: 10.1016/j.msea.2016.02.064. DOI URL
[33]	X. Zhang, H. Li, M. Zhan, J. Alloys Compd. 742 (2018) 4 80-4 89, doi: 10.1016/j. jallcom.2018.01.325. DOI URL
[34]	A. Ghiotti, S. Bruschi, E. Simonetto, C. Gennari, I. Calliari, P. Bariani, CIRP Ann 67 (2018) 289-292, doi: 10.1016/j.cirp.2018.04.054. DOI URL
[35]	J. Song, J. Yang, F. Liu, K. Lu, Opt. Lasers Eng. 124 (2020) 105822, doi: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2019.105822. DOI
[36]	N. Mashiwa, T. Furushima, K. Manabe, Procedia Eng 184 (2017) 16-21, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.04.065. DOI URL
[37]	J. Blaber, B. Adair, A. Antoniou, Exp. Mech. 55 (2015) 1105-1122, doi: 10.1007/s11340-015-0009-1. DOI URL
[38]	S. Lee, H.J. Ham, S.Y. Kwon, S.W. Kim, C.M. Suh, Int. J. Thermophys. 34 (2013) 2343-2350, doi: 10.1007/s10765-011-1145-1. DOI URL
[39]	Q. Zheng, T. Shimizu, M. Yang, Mech. Eng. J. 2 (2015) 14-00413-14-00413, doi: 10.1299/mej.14-00413. DOI
[40]	Q. Tang, W. Zhang, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 103 (2016) 1208-1213, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2016.08.028. DOI URL
[41]	Z. Peng, Y. Chen, X. Feng, Int. J. Heat Mass Trans. 130 (2019) 1170-1177, doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.11.027. DOI URL
[42]	X. Wang, J. Xu, D. Shan, B. Guo, J. Cao, Mater. Des. 127 (2017) 134-143, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.04.064. DOI URL