Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

Determining the constitutive properties of the heat-affected zone in a resistance spot weld

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

1995 Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 3 391

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0965-0393/3/3/007)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 129.8.242.67
This content was downloaded on 25/07/2015 at 23:12

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 3 (1995) 391416. Printed in the UK

Determining the constitutive properties of the heat-affected

zone in a resistance spot weld

Steven M Zuniga and Sheri D Sheppard

Center for Design Research, Depamnent of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, 560
Panama Street, Stanford. CA 94305.2232, USA

Received 16 July 1994, accepted for publication 19 December 1994

Abstract. A methodology is described for determining the mechanical properties of the heat-
affected zone (HAZ) in a resistance spot weld. To perform detailed finitselement analyses of
spot weld overload failures. it is necessary to have the mechanical properties of the various HAZ
subrones. To this end, simulated I(AZ material samples were fabricated in a process that utilized a
resistance spot welding machine fitted with specially modified electrodes. Tensile tests at several
lo3ding rates were performed on miniature notched-bar specimens machined from the simulated
HAZ material. These tests provided the empirical data h m which the swain hardening capacities
and s m n rate sensitivities of the weld HU were determined through detailed finite-element
analyses of the notched-bar tensile tests.

1. Introduction

Resistance spot welding (RSW) is the primary method of joining automotive structural
components and, consequently, vehicle crashworthiness depends on the weld structural
integrity. Advances in supercomputer technology and the advent of explicit finite-element
codes, such as DYNA3D, make it feasible to include crashworthiness analysis in the early
design stages. However, as noted by Hallquist and Whirley (1989), whether the spot welds
are included in a crashworthiness analysis model can significantly influence the results of the
analysis. Yet, a general, overload failure criterion that is based on the mechanics of the weld
failure process does not exist for resistance spot welds. To develop such a criterion, large-
strain, finite-element simulations of spot-welded joints loaded to failure may be necessary.
These simulations require accurate constitutive properties of the heat-affected zone (HAZ),
since large plastic strains and large local strain rates are likely to develop in the HA2 prior
to crack initiation.
This paper describes a method for determining the constitutive response of the HAZ in
a resistance spot weld. First the simulated HAZ material fabrication procedure is presented.
Then the notched-bar specimen is described, and the results of the notched-bar tensile
tests are summarized. This is followed by a discussion of the flow curve characterization
procedure, which includes a detailed description of the flow curve correction algorithm.
Then the resulting flow curves are presented for the simulated HA2 materials, and a method
is presented for obtaining flow curves for regions of the weld HAZ. Finally, the procedures
for determining the sbain rate sensitivities of the simulated HAZ materials and regions of
the weld HAZ are described along with the corresponding empirical and numerical results.

0965-0393/95/030391+26$19.50 0 1995 IOP Publishing Ltd 391

392 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

2. Simulated llAz material development

The selected material is a zinc-coated, HSLA sheet steel from Inland Steel Corporation,
which meets the specifications of S A E 950X, the nominal sheet thickness is 0.91 mm
(0.036 in). The mechanical properties, including the r values for the three standard
orientations with respect to the rolling direction, are listed in table 1. This material possesses
good formability and weldability as described in SAE Recommended Practice J1392 (SAE
1984). A section of the bare sheet was analyzed for chemical composition, and the results
are presented in table 2. As stated in SAE J1392, the most common alloying elements are
Cb, Ti, and V, but combinations of Cr, Cu,MO, Ni, Si, and Zr can be used with or without
Cb, Ti, and V, as was the case for thk particular steel.

Table 1. Mechanical properties of the S A E 950X steel

Xeld strength Tensile strength Total
W a (ksisi)) W a (ksi)) elongation ro r43 VI r3
369(54) 4?5(62) 0.30 1.41 1.14 1.53 1.30

Table 2. Chemical analysis of the SAE 95OX steel (~1%).

r- M n P -9 9i.
1 .Ni. ..._
M" r_.
r
0.06 0.42 0.023 0.013 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01

2.1. HA2 description

The HA2 is the transition zone between the fusion zone (FZ) and the base metal (BM). It is
a heterogeneous region with steep gradients in material properties. The HAZ can be divided
into several subzones, each with distinct microstructures and mechanical properties. The
varying mechanical properties of the HAZ are the result of the non-uniform heat treatment
applied during the weld thermal cycle. Regions closest to the FZ experience the highest
temperatures and the fastest cooling rates. According to Vogler (1992) cooling rates can
reach 1000C s-I for a weld produced without hold time (hold time refers to the period of
postweld electrode squeeze, and it is expressed in number of cunent cycles at 60 Hz).
A quantitative description of the HA2 is provided by its hardness profile. Figure 1
shows hardness profiles at two distances from the faying surface of two spot welds, one
welded without hold time (no hold), and the other welded with 30 cycles of hold time
(30-cycle hold). These hardness profiles are similar to those obtained by other researchers,
e.g., Sawhill et al (1977). As shown by the hardness profiles, the hardness distribution
across the HAZ is roughly linear, and a significant increase in hardness occurs from the BM
to the FZ over a distance of approximately 1 mm. Note that the increased Fz hardness in the
30-cycle-hold weld is attributed to the quenching effect provided by the postweld, electrode
to sheet contact. Only the HA2 of no-hold welds is subsequently considered.
As discussed by Easterling (1983), the number of HAZ subzones depends on the material,
but the four main subzones in the HAZ of a steel typically are (i) grain coarsened (GCHAZ)
or grain growth, (ii) grain refined (GRHAZ) or recrystallized, (iii) partially transformed, and
 spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 393

Figure 1. Hardness traverses in resistace spot welds welded with no hold time and with 30
cycles of hold time.

(iv) tempered. Optical micrographs of a cross-sectioned resistance spot weld are shown in
figure 2. Figure 2(a) provides an overall view of the FZ, HAz, and BM, while figure 2(b)
provides a closer look at the various microstructures that compose the HAZ. The approximate
boundaries of the F z and HAZ subzones are delineated on the figure.
To facilitate the simulated HAZ development effort, the HAZ was divided into three
material zones so that target hardness values could be established for the simulated HAZ
materials. The first two subzones divide the inner half of the HAz, and, referring to
figure 2(b), correspond approximately to the GcHAZ and GRHAZ. The third subzone spans the
outer half of the HAZ, i.e., the partially transformed region, which is given the designation
THAZ. Dividing the no-hold, hardness profile in figure 1 into three ranges that correspond
to the three subzones described above gives hardness values of (i) GCHAZ, 22&253Hv, (ii)
GRHAZ, 20&226Hv, and (iii) THAZ, 147-200Hv. The average hardness values of the three
subzones, stating with the GCHAZ, are 240, 213 and 174Hv, respectively. These were the
hardness values targeted in the simulated HAZ fabrication process.

2.2. The annular weld fabrication process

The idea for the process used to fabricate the simulated HAZ material occurred while
viewing microsections of several resistance spot welds that did not melt across the central
portion of the weld nugget (WN), i.e., the FZ was annular (or more precisely, toroidal)
shaped. These annular-shaped welds contained an interior region of fairly uniform GRHAZ
material. Motivated by this observation, modified electrode tips were fabricated that, under
proper conditions, produced annular welds that encircled a cylindrical core of simulated HA2
material. A simplified schematic representation of the simulated HAZ core and surrounding
WN is shown in figure 3.
The goal of the simulated HAZ development effort was to generate samples of simulated
HAz material that (i) have hardness values and microstructures representative of the actual
weld HAZ, (ii) have a uniform microstructure, and (iii) are machinable into miniature tensile
specimens. It was assumed that if the simulated HAZ materials have hardness values and
grain sizes that match those of the weld HAZ, then the strengths and ductilities will also
match. To produce samples of simulated HAZ material, a process was developed that utilizes
394 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppan

rngure 1. upcar m,crogrvpns 0, U cross-secIIoe(IreSlSl spor welo L a WBS WelOed Wlt0t

hold time: (a)magnification S O X ; ( h ) magnification 1 0 0 ~ .
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 395

Figllre 3, A SChemanC representation Ot the core and W N in B simulated Hhz sample as produced
in a single sheet.

an RSW machine as a weld thermal simulator. Simulated HAZ material specimens, suitahle
for mechanical testing, were fabricated using this process. The primary incentives for using
the spot welding machine to fabricate simulated HAZ material samples were its availability
and the fact that the process used to fabricate the simulated HAZ material is very close to
the actual welding process.

2.2.1. Experimental procedures. A Sciaky single-phase projection resistance welder,

controlled by a Weltronic controller, produced the welds used in this research. Trial
simulated HA2 specimens, i.e., those used to develop the fabrication procedures, were made
from blanks with approximate dimensions of 38 x 25 mmz (1.5 x 1 in). The longer
dimension was aligned with the rolling direction of the sheet. After the blanks were sheared,
they were cleaned in an ultrasonic methanol bath. The purpose of the bath was to promote
consistent contact resistance among specimen blanks.
Trial welds at various welder settings, along with metallographic examination of
the cross-sectioned trial specimens, provided the weld currentltime combinations that
produced the desired microstructures. The trial simulation specimens were examined
for microstructural features and hardness, and, based on the results, a weld currentltime
combination was selected. Since only a single sheet was used in creating the simulated HAZ
specimens, a WN per se was not formed. However, throughout this paper the process of
using the welder to apply a heat treatment to a specimen blank is called welding, and that
part of the sheet under direct electrode contact is called the weld nugget.
There were two important steps in the welding procedure that merit mentioning:
electrode conditioning and electrode alignment. To obtain more or less steady state electrode
surface conditions, each pair of electrodes was conditioned prior to actually welding a
material specimen. A typical conditioning sequence would involve approximately 10 welds
at currents 1-2 kA helow the actual weld current and then two or three more welds at
the weld current. Obtaining proper alignment between the upper and lower electrodes was
a crucial step in the simulated HAZ fabrication procedure. Misaligned electrodes would
invariably produce a crescent-shaped wN with a similarly distorted HAZ.
396 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

2.2.2. Modified electrode designs. The electrode used in this study is an RWMA class 2
electrode, which was cold formed from copper alloy C15760, and has a truncated cone tip.
This electrode is typical of the type used in automobile production. Modified electrodes
developed in the current work, for the creation of simulated HAZ specimens, contain a
ceramic insert, which was bonded, with an epoxy resin, into a hole drilled in the face of
the electrode. The epoxy resin was applied to the bottom of the insert, where it was kept
at low temperatures by the electrodes' cooling water during welding. In the first design
(design I), the insert was made from a machinable glass ceramic, MACORB. Because
of MACOR's machinability, the electrodes could be machined with the insert in place;
this produced a flush contact surface, and it also permitted limited reuse of the electrodes.
Typically, a pair of electrodes was reworked or discarded after producing four or five
simulated HAZ material samples. Design I, when used with a single sheet of material and
the appropriate weld current and weld time, produced simulated GRHM and THAZ material.
However, this electrode design consistently produced through-thickness cracks at the inner
H A m boundary in attempts to produce CCHM material. Also, the GCHAZ material samples
contained a central region of softer material.
To eliminate the cracks at the inner HA?!." boundary, the electrode tip was redesigned.
In the new design (design II) a groove was added between the ceramic insert and the
copper electrode. Also, the insert material was changed to alumina, since the MACOR
was found to be very susceptible to cracking in the new design. Design I1 eliminated the
through-thickness cracking problem, presumably by allowing the weld to expand at the inner
H A boundary
~ during heat-up. This design was used to produce all subsequent GRHAZ
material. However, once again, it was not possible to produce radially uniform samples of
GCHAZ material. As will be described later, the strain hardening and strain rate sensitivity of
the GCHAZ were obtained by extrapolation from the BM, TLU,, and GRHAZ data. The welder
settings used with both electrode designs I and U are listed in table 3. The nominal welder
settings for welding two sheets of 0.91 mm, galvanized, HSLA grade 50 steel are 11.7 kA
for 12 cycles. For additional details regarding the modified electrodes see the dissertation
by Zuniga (1994).

Table 3. RMS weld current and weld time used in electrode designs I and 11,

Design I Design II

Current Time Cunent Time

Material W) (cycles) Summary
WHA7.
GBIAZ ~
(kA)
- 16
14.2-14.5
(cycles)
12
12
summary
Consistent cncks
Some cracks
- 17
15.9-16.1
16
15
Soft center
OK
MAZ 12.412.6 12 OK - - Not used

2.3. Simulated HAZ materials

Notched-bar specimens suitable for tensile testing were machined from two batches of
simulated HAZ material (the reasons for using notched-bar specimens, rather than smooth-
bar specimens, are discussed in section 3). In the first batch, electrode design I was used
to produce both simulated GRHAZ and simulated THAZ specimens. In the second batch,
electrode design I was used to produce simulated THAZ specimens, while electrode design I1
was used to produce simulated GRHAZ specimens. Figure 4 contains a low-power optical
micrograph that shows the overall shape of the HAZ core in a GRHAZ specimen fabricated
 rignre 4. An optical micrograph showing a plan view of a ORHAZ matena sample.

using electrode design II. In the remainder of this paper, unless specified otherwise, GRHAZ
and THAZ refer to simulated H A 2 materials.
Hardness traverses across the radial and thickness directions of both THAZ and GRHAZ
specimens showed that there was good microstructural uniformity in both the radial and
thickness directions out to a diameter of approximately 2.5 mm. To evaluate the simulated
HAZ materials. an average hardness value was computed from through-thickness hardness
traverses taken near the center of the simulated HAZ core; the average values are 203 k 4
and 185 k 10Hv for the GRHAZ and THAZ, respectively. These hardness values are within
5% and 6%, respectively, of the target values mentioned previously.

3. Notched-bar tensile tests

The tensile tests described in this section utilized miniature notched-bar specimens machined
from the BM, GRHAZ and THAZ materials. A solid-model representation of the notched-bar
specimen is shown in figure 5. A notched-bar specimen, rather than a smooth-bar specimen,
was used for two reasons. First, the depth of the notch was designed such that all plastic
deformation was restricted to the ligament between the notches. In this way, the annular
W N and the HAZ outside the notched region experienced only elastic strains. This made it
possible to derive the flow curves for the simulated HAZ materials by the empirical/FEA-
based approach that is described in section 4. Second, the notched-bar specimens were used
to determine the fracture properties of the GRHAZ as well. The notch promotes through-
thickness necking at the minimum cross-section, which induces a triaxial stress state near the
center. As noted by McClintock (1968). a triaxial stress state promotes microvoid growth,
which leads to ductile fracture. For a description of the fracture characterization effort for
the GRHAZ, refer to the dissertation by Zuniga (1994).
398 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

rtgun: 3. n >"I," IrIUueI "I me ""rcneu-ow lenslle spec"".

3. I . Notched-bar specimen design

The width dimensions of the notched-bar specimen were selected such that yielding would
be restricted to the volume of material between the notches, i.e., the notch ligament. To
satisfy this requirement, the maximum allowable ligament width, wml, was established as
the width for which the maximum applied force would not exceed the force that initiates
yielding in the straight section of a BM specimen. Using this approach, a specimen geometry
that worked for the BM would also work for the simulated HAZ materials, because the material
outside the simulated HAZ core is expected to be stronger (based on hardness measurements)
than the core material.
The width requirement is satisfied if the width ratio W/w,,,, where W is the width of
the straight section, is specified by

w/wmax zz (Stx/Sy)/CB. (1)

In equation (11, S,, and S, are the tensile and yield strengths, respectively, of the BM, and
CB is the correction factor due to Bridgman (1952) for a rectangular bar that has necked. In
the present work, it was assumed that a value of CD based on the undeformed configuration
is applicable at the maximum load. After substituting an approximate expression for Ce
into equation ( I ) , an expression for Wlw,,, as a function of S,,/S, is obtained, namely

(W/Wm,d2 ~ ( 1 f ~u/Sy)(W/Wmm) + jsts/s, = 0. (2)

 ~

Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 399

. GR-HAZ
800

600

400

200

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 0.5

6 (mmj d (mnl

Figure 6. Nominal notch stress against extensometer Figure 7. Nominal notch stress ap3inst extensometer
displacement for selected simulated HAZ and BM displacement for selected simulated HAZ and B M speci-
specimens tested at the quasistatic stroke mte. mens tested at the highest stroke rate (2.54 mm SKI).

Solving equation (2) by using the BM properties S, = 425 MPa and S, = 369 MPa (see
table 1) gives the result
W / w m = 1.62. (3)
Once the width ratio was set, additional constraints were invoked to determine the width
dimensions. In accordance with the weld geometly and equation (3), the width across
the notch ligament was set at w = 1.11 mm. The thickness dimension was reduced
by milling 0.15 mm from each surface to remove surface indentations formed by the
electrodes. Removing material from the sheet surface had the added benefit of improving
the microstructural uniformity in the thickness direction.
3.2. Results of notched-bar tensile fests
This section presents the results of tensile tests of notched-bar specimens machined from
GRHAZ, THAZ, and BM materials. An MTS model 809 test system, controlled by a Digital
Equipment Corporation PDP-11 microcomputer, carried out tbe tensile tests of the notched-
bar specimens. The applied force was measured with a 25 kN capacity load cell, with the
full-scale load range set at 52.2 kN. The applied displacement across the reduced section of
the notched-bar specimen was measured with an extensometer, which has a 7.62 mm gage
length and a full-scale displacement range of 51.14 mm. The specimens were tested under
displacement control at nominal stroke rates of 2.54 x mm SKI,2.54 x lo-' mm s-',
and 25.4 mm s-l.

3.2.1. Quasistatic tests. Figure 6 presents sample plots of measured nominal notch stress
( S ) against extensometer displacement ( d ) for GRHAZ, THAZ. and BM notched-bar specimens
tested at the quasistatic stroke rate (2.54 x mm s-'). Quasistatic tensile tests were
performed on five GRHAZ, five THAZ, and two BM specimens. Strength comparisons based
on the maximum nominal notch stress S,,, indicate that the GRHAZ and THAZ materials
have strengths of 697 MPa and 643 m a , respectively, which are 35% and 24% stronger,
respectively, than the BM value of 517 MF'a. When the final displacement is used as a
measure of ductility, the data indicate that the GRHAZ and THAZ materials are 10% and 14%
less ductile, respectively, than the BM.
400 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

Because of the notch effecr caused by the multiaxial stress state induced by the notch
geometry. mechanical properties, such as yield and tensile strength, cannot be directly
inferred from the results of the notched-bar tensile tests. For example, tensile tests on
ASTME 8 subsize tensile specimens of the base metal give a tensile strength S, = 425 MPa,
but similar tests of notched-bar specimens give S, = 517 MPa.
If the notch effect is independent of the material, a notch correction factor based on BM
data will apply to the simulated HAZ materials as well. A notch correction factor C. defined
as
Cn = SulSm (4)
provides a means for estimating the tensile strengths of the GRHAZ and THAZ materials.
Using the values for S, and S, given above leads to C. = 0.822 for the BM, which
is approximately 10% greater than the Bridgman factor (CB= 0.740) computed for the
undeformed specimen geometry. Utilizing this value for C., along with simulated HAZ data
for ,S, gives estimated tensile strengths of 573 MPa and 528 MPa for the GRHAZ and THAZ
materials, respectively. The estimated Se values will serve as checks on the finite-element
computations described in section 4, where flow curves are extracted from the notched-bar
tensile test data.
3.2.2. Higher-rate tests. Sample S-d curves for the GRHAZ, THAZ,and BM materials tested
at the highest stroke rate (25.4 mm s-') are presented in figure 7, and the results for both
higher-rate tests are summarized in table 4. Four GRHAZ, three THU, and three BM specimens
were tested at each of the two higher stroke rates. The strain rate at the minimum cross-
section, where the plastic deformation is concentrated, was not measured directly, since it
was not practical to measure the instantaneous cross-sectional area between the notches.
Instead, as discussed in section 5, FEA was used to compute the strain rate at the notch,
given the measured extensometer displacement rate.

Table 4. A summary of notched-bar results from the higher-nte tensile tests.

2.54 x lo-' mm s-' 25.4 mm s-'

THAZ 663 1.032 700 1.091

BM 555 1,074 593 1.147

a The higher-rate resub for the CRHAZ were compared with quasistatic results from specimens
fabricated in the same batch (electrode design IO.For this group of specimens. S, = 745 MPa
at the quasistatic rate.

The increase in S, with loading rate is expressed by the quantity Rdgn = SL/S,, where
Rdy0 is termed the dynamic stress ratio, and the prime designates the quantity associated
with the higher loading rate. For each material, the value listed in table 4 for S,, represents
the average among the specimens of a given material, and the value listed for Rdyn was
computed from the average values of S,. The results in table 4 indicate that the GRHAZ
material is less sensitive to loading rate than the THAZ material, which is, in turn, less rate
sensitive than the BM. These results are consistent with those of other researchers, such as
Davies and Magee (1975), who tested several sheet steels, and found that, at a given strain
rate. the ratio of dynamic tensile strength to quasistatic tensile strength decreases as the
quasistatic tensile strength increases.
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 401

4. Flow curve Characterization

FEA provides the means for extracting flow curves from the notched-bar tensile test data.
However, to accomplish this extraction efficiently, an iterative correction procedure is
needed, which can start with a very approximate flow curve and arrive at an acceptable
result in a few iterations. This correction procedure, which is called the flow curve
correction algorithm, corrects the input flow curve based on a comparison between the
engineering stress-displacement curves obtained from FEA and notched-bar tensile tests.
Once the flow curves for the simulated HAZ materials are derived, a method is needed for
interpolating/extrapolating these results to the weld HA2 and E.This allows for modeling
of weld HAZ material zones that do not correspond directly to the simulated HAZ materials.
The interpolatiodextrapolation method is described after the flow curve correction algorithm.
The complete flow curve characterization procedure is summarized in figure 8.

Figure 8. A flow c h m summarizing the flow cume characterization procedure

4.1. The flow curve correction algorithm

It is well known that a hiaxial stress state develops near the center of a notched or necked
tensile specimen subjected to uniaxial loading. The material outside, but adjacent to, the
notch Ligament (or neck) acts to constrain the material in the ligament with the consequence
that triaxial stresses develop in the vicinity of the notch. When triaxial stresses are present,
402 S A4 Zuniga and S D Sheppani

the equivalent stress-equivalent plastic strain curve cannot be computed directly kom tensile
test data: in this case, the average equivalent stress is not equal to the average uniaxial stress.
Consequently, the average uniaxial tensile stress must be adjusted to compensate for the
effect of the triaxial sbess state.
Bridgman (1952) derived analytical correction factors for initially smooth, round-bar
and flat-bar tensile specimens. More recently, several researchers have used numerical
simulation results and experimental data to derive large strain flow curves. In particular,
Norris er al (1978). Matic (1985), and Matic etal (1988) have developed iterative correction
procedures based on numerical simulations of tensile test specimens. These numerical
approaches, which are modern counterparts to Bridgman's analytical correction factor,
make it possible to determine a material's strain hardening response almost to the point
of final fracture. All of the numerical procedures are iterative; the flow curve was modified
repeatedly until an acceptable simulation of the tensile test was obtained. For example,
Norris et al (1978) computed the flow curve for a pressure vessel steel, and showed that
Bridgman's solution overestimated the flow stress by approximately 10% at an equivalent
plastic strain of 1.0.
In the present work, a correction procedure was developed similar in concept to that
developed by Matic (1985); a set of corrections are applied to the current flow curve to
give an updated, or corrected, flow curve. There are, however, three unique aspects to the
present approach. First. as discussed in the previous section, a notched-bar specimen is
used rather than an axisymmetric tensile specimen. Second, strain hardening is described
by a non-linear function rather than a piecewise linear function. Third, a different set of
correction criteria is used. The three key elements of the flow curve correction algorithm
are (i) the strain hardening function, (ii) the consbaint equations. and (iii) the correction
equations. Each of these elements is described in the following three subsections.

4.1.1. The strain hardeningfunction. The exponential strain hardening function proposed
by Voce (1955). modified to include a linear hardening term, as done by Simo (1988), was
used to represent the flow curves in this study. The modified Voce equation is

GQP) = um- (om - uo) exp(-GEP) + HZP (5)

where u(P) is the flow stress, EP is the equivalent plastic strain, and 00, U,, 8, and H are
the material constants determined by the correction algorithm. In this equation, 00 is the
elastic limit stress, U, is the saturation flow stress, 8 is the saturation exponent, and H is
the linear hardening coefficient.
More commonly a power law, strain hardening function

U = KE" (6)
is used to represent a material's strain hardening response. In this equation, G is the flow
stress, K is a material constant, and E is the total true strain. The exponent n is the strain
at which diffuse necking initiates in a smooth, uniaxial, tensile test specimen, i.e., it is the
strain that satisfies the plastic instability criterion

U = du/ds. (7)

As discussed by Koch (1982), the power law usually represents only a portion of the
complete flow curve, since the strain hardening exponent, n, becomes a function of strain
after the onset of diffuse necking.
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 403

4.1.2. The constraint equations. The goal of the flow curve correction procedure is to
determine the four material constants 00, ,,a 6 , and H. To accomplish this, four equations
involving the four unknown constants are required. A suitable set of constraint equations
is obtained by specifying that three selected points on the computed nominal notch stress
(S)+xtensometer displacement ( d ) curve match three analogous points on the experimental
curve determined from the notched-bar tensile tests. It was assumed that enforcing a match
at the three selected points would lead to close agreement at all remaining points on the
two curves. The three selected points are identified by their coordinates in S-d space:
(Sp,dp), (S,,,, d,,,), and (Sf,
df). The subscripts p. m, and f refer to quantities computed at
the proportional limit, the maximum load, and at a point nearfracture, respectively.
The four constraint equations are

sm
P
= Sexp
P (84

The superscripts FEA and exp refer to finite-element analysis and average experimental
results, respectively. The two coordinates, dp and df, that do not appear in equations (8)
are fixed throughout the correction procedure. The objective of the correction algorithm is
to satisfy equations (8).
Measures of the error in the constraint equations are obtained by dividing the
experimentally determined quantities in equations (8) by their analytically determined
counterparts. This gives

erp dFEA
&=dm i (94
where the ratios R are termed constraint error ratios. The correction procedure stops when
all the constraint error ratios are equal to unity to within a specified tolerance.

4.1.3. The correction equations. The constraint error ratios in equations (9) can be computed
once a preliminary E A of the notched-bar tensile test is performed using an initial estimate
of the flowcurve. The corrected material constants, which are to be determined, are denoted
by a tilde. Thus, all of the equations used to determine the material constants have the form
?
. = Z R , where R is the constraint error ratio applied to the quantity Z , and it is understood
that R is computed from the current FEA results.
The first point considered on the S-d curves is at the proportional limit, which is located
at the displacement dp. Under the assumption that yielding initiates when d = dp, the flow
':S and S,"", i.e.,
stress is corrected in proportion to the error between

5(0) = a(0)Rp (10)

404 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

or equivalently,

50 = uoRP (11)

where R, is given by equation (9a).

The first of the two correction equations related to the maximum load point is expressed
in terms of an equivalent plastic strain value EL, defined as the strain that satisfies the Swift
(1952) plastic instability criterion for biaxial stress states

d5/dP = f ( p ) 5 (12)
where 5 is the von Mises equivalent stress, p = &z/&I is the ratio of in-plane principal
>
strain increments ( E , E Z ) and

f ( P ) = 2(P2 + P + V / ( P + 1)(2P2 - P + 2). (13)

The strain 2; is assumed to be proportional to the applied displacement d,, and it is
corrected in proportion to the error between dEP and d p A by

EL = ELRd (14)

where Rd is given by equation (9d). If it is assumed that f ( p ) = 1, then EL is determined

by

U = (du/dip)lg (15)
where the yield condition 5 = U@') has been used. Equation (15) is the biaxial equivalent
of equation (7). E A results indicate that p in the notched-bar specimens varies from
p w -0.5 ( f ( p ) = 1) near the notch surface to p -0.2 (f(p) = 0.92) near the center;
thus assigning f ( p ) = 1 is a good approximation. The strain EL is analogous to the strain
n , except that n includes an elastic component, which is typically a small fraction of the
plastic component.
To enforce the definition of iL during the correction procedure, it is necessary to
substitute equation (14) into equation (15) (expressed in terms of corrected quantities).
The resulting equation, which ensures that the three unknown material constants, 5,,,,8,
and fi, are consistent with the definition of ZL, is

, (e,,,- 50)exp(-@,)
[5,,- + fi23 = [&E,,, - 50)exp(-82:) + k] (16)
where CO is given by equation (1 I), and E?,, is given by equation (14).
The third correction equation corrects the flow stress in proportion to the error between
cp and .
"
,
:
S The correction equation could be written simply as

a(:) =U(Ek)R, (17)

where R, is given by equation (9b). However, equation (17) does not account for the error
in U ( & that is caused by the error in 2:. A correction equation that accounts for the error
in iL is obtained by converting the flow stress, which is the equivalent uniaxial true stress,
to an engineering stress by

5(2:)/exp(iL) = [o(iL)/exp(EL)]R, (18)

 Spot weld HAZ constitutive propelties 405

which can be rewritten as

where the additional correction factor is

- = exp(Ek)/exp(E;).
R,

Recall that Zg was determined from equation (14), so that i?, is known. Note that the true
stress to engineering stress conversion employed in equation (18) ignores the elastic strain
and treats the equivalent plastic strain as a uniaxial strain. By substituting the flow curve
equation, equation (5). into the left-hand side of equation (19), the correction equation is
expressed explicitly in terms of the unknown material constants as

[zm- (3m - 3 0 ) exp(-&L) + gi.9 = C T ( Z : ) ~ ? ~ R ~ . (21)

The final correction equation involves the stress Sf, which corresponds to the
displacement d f near the point of final fracture. The average equivalent plastic strain across
the notch at this displacement is denoted 2.; It is computed from a simple average of the
element centroidal strains. The strain Z; computed from the current finite-element solution
is used to evaluate the flow stress in terms of the corrected material constants. The correction
equation is

3(& = u(.$)Rr (22)

which is expressed explicitly in terms of the unknown material constants as

[zm- (5- - z,,) exp(-Z+ + &,PI =u($)R~. (23)

Equations (16), (21), and (23) form a 3 x 3 system of non-linear equations, which, when
solved simultaneously, yield the corrected material constants &, i, and fi. These three
equations were solved by Newtons method using the FindRoor function in MaihematicaTM.
Recall that 50is determined by equation (11).

4.2. Finite-element models

Finite-element simulations of the notched-bar tensile tests were performed with the ABAQUS
general purpose finite-element code, which is discussed thoroughly by Hibbitt et a1 (1992).
The complete non-linear capabilities of the ABAQUS code were utilized, as both plasticity
and finite deformations were included in the simulations. The notched-bar specimens
were modeled with C3D8 elements, which are three-dimensional, isoparametric, solid
elements with trilinear displacement interpolation functions. These elements use selective
reduced integration to eliminate the well known mesh locking problem associated with the
incompressible, inelastic material response. The selective reduced integration technique is
discussed thoroughly by Hughes (1987).
Figure 9 shows the finite-element mesh used in the flow curve correction procedure.
Initially, three models, which contained 44, 115, and 175 elements, were used in a mesh
convergence study. The 115-element model was determined to be adequate for the flow
curve correction procedure. Since the specimen contains three planes of symmetry, a one-
eighth model was sufficient. Symmetry boundary conditions were applied to the nodes
on the x = 0, y = 0, and z = 0 planes. The loading was applied in the form of an
406 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

Fiyre 9. A notched-bar tensile specimen one-eighth model wilh 115 elements.

enforced displacement boundary condition, with the nodes at the loaded end restrained in
the x direction; this enforced the resiraint provided by the material adjacent to the reduced
section.
The FEAS of the simulated HAZ materials included two material zones, one representing
the HAZ and the other representing the w. The W material was modeled as elastic-
plastic, while the WN was modeled as linear elastic. This is reasonable given the specimen
geometry. AI1 the elastic-plastic materials, i.e., the BM, THAZ, and GRHAZ,were modeled
as normal anisotropidplanar isotropic materials, for which yielding is governed by Hill's
quadratic yield function. The r value for the BM was used for all the elastic-plastic materials
in this study, because r values for the simulated w materials were not determined from
experiments, owing to limitations imposed by the notched-bar specimen geometry.

4.3. Flow c u n w
This section presents the results of the flow curve correction procedure for the BM, T W ,
and GRHAz materials. As the results will show, the flow curve correction procedure was
able to take a very approximate estimate for the initial flow curve and obtain acceptable
results after either one or two iterations of the correction procedure.
Notched-bar tensile specimens of the BM were tested for two reasons. First, in addition
to the GWZ and THAZ, a third material was needed for the strength-hardness correlations
described in subsection 4.4. Second, the results of the flow curve correction procedure
for the BM provide a check on the flow curve correction procedure. For example, tensile
strengths obtained from smooth-bar tensile tests can be compared with the tensile strengths
extracted from the notched-bar tensile tests.
The initial FEA of the BM, notched-bar tensile specimen used the flow curve computed
for the smooth-bar tensile specimen. Based on the results of the initial analysis, the flow
curve was corrected, and a second analysis was run with the new flow curve. Results
from the initial and corrected analyses are shown in figure 10. The results indicate that the
initial analysis increasingly overpredicts the stress beyond the maximum load point. Yet, a
single application of the correction procedure yields an S-d curve that closely matches the
corresponding experimental data.
The initial and corrected flow curves are shown in figure 11. The smooth-bar and
notched-bar flow curves are in close agreement up to about 9 = 0.3, after which the strain
hardening rate for the smooth-bar specimen is higher. Differences between the two flow
curves can be attributed to the strain path dependence of flow curves based on 52 flow
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 407

400
(Mlcnad-bar)
S
(MPW

200
-expedmem
innil
0
400

Figure 10. Computed nominal notch stress-applied dis- Figure 11. Lnitial and corrected BM Row C U N ~ S .
placement histories, baed on the initial and eonected
BM flow CUNeS. compared with representative experi-
mental data.

theory (see Miller and McDowell 1992), as different strain states developed in the smooth
and notched specimens. FEA results reveal that the strain path for a point near the center
of the notched-bar specimens is p = -0.2, which is between the plane strain ( p = 0)
and uniaxial ( p = -0.57) strain paths for a material with r = 1.30. Note that FEAs of
single-weld spot weld specimens reveal that the strain state in the critical region of the HAZ
is also between plane strain and uniaxial tension (Zuniga 1994).
Two additional analyses were run with the corrected BM flow curve. First, to assess
- the influence of the strain rate sensitivity on the S-d curve, a rate-independent plasticity
formulation was tried. Second, to assess the influence of anisotropic yield behavior on the
S-d curve, the material was modeled as isotropic, as well as rate independent. Based on
the results for the EM, the two simulated HAZ materials were modeled as rate-independent,
anisotropic materials in the E A s of the simulated HAZ materials. Modeling the simulated
HA2 materials as rate independent is justified by the experimental results presented in
section 3, where the simulated HAZ materials were shown to be less strain rate sensitive
than the EM. If the simulated HAZ materials were modeled as rate dependent, the flow curve
correction procedure would need to be coupled to the strain rate characterization procedure.
This would unnecessarily complicate the flow curve correction procedure for the simulated
HAZ materials.
The results from the corrected BM analysis were used as the initial data for the THAZ
correction procedure. Even though the BM and THAZ flow curves differ significantly, a
single correction produced good results. Figure 12 plots the S-d curves from the initial
EA, those from the two corrected FEAS, and a representative experimental curve. The THAZ
flow curves for the two corrected analyses are compared with the initial flow curve in
figure 13. The computed tensile strength for the THAZ is 542 MPa, which is just 3% greater
~

than the value estimated from the test data presented in subsection 3.2.1.
The results from the corrected THAZ analysis were used as the initial data for the GRHAz
correction procedure. As was the case for the THAZ, the initial and final GRHAZ flow
curves differ significantly. Again, a single correction produced good results, but a second
correction produced little improvement over the first correction. The GRHAZ flow curves
for the two corrected analyses are compared with the initial flow curve in figure 14. The
408 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

aoo
I
600

200

0.0 0.1 0.2 oa 0.4

d (m)

Figure 12. Computed nominal notch stressapplied displacement histories, based on the initial
and corrected THAZ flow curves, compared with representative experimental dea

800 , eoo

400

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 os 1 0 02 0.4 0.8 0.0

a a

Figure 13. Initial and corrected THAZ flow curves. Flgurr 14. Initial and corrected CRHAZRow curves

computed tensile strength for the GRHAZ is 585 MPa, which is just 2% greater than the
value estimated from the test data presented in subsection 3.2.1.

4.4. Weld HAZ and mflow curves

The flow curves computed in the previous section describe the strain hardening
characteristics of notched-bar tensile specimens fabricated from BM, THAZ, and GRHAZ
materials. These curves are plotted in figure 15. The three materials, BM, THAZ,and
GRHAZ,represent regions in the weld HAZ that have hardness values of approximately 147,
185, and 203Hv, respectively. Recall from figure 1 that the hardness traverses in the no-
hold weld increased continuously from 147Hv at the HAZ/BM boundary to 253Hv at the
~ A boundary.
Z To determine flow curves for regions that do not correspond directly
to the THAz or GRHAZ, a flow curve interpolatiodextrapolation procedure was developed.
 Spot weld HA2 constitutive properries 409

'Ono I
e
,000
,
WP~I

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

e' H.

Figure 15. The flowcurves for the ORHAG mu,and Figure 16. Yield and tensile strengih against hardness
BM. for the h e test materials.

The methodology and results of the flow curve interpolatiodextrapolation procedure are
described below.
The material parameters S and H are computed as follows. First, consider that the values
of H for the BM, THAZ, and GRHAZ materials are 131, 129, and 165 MPa, respectively.
Because of the small variance in H among the three materials, the mean value of 141 MPa
was assigned to all material zones. In other words, H was treated as a material constant
that is not altered by the welding process.
The parameter 6 influences the shape of the non-linear section of the flow curve. To
interpolate or extrapolate flow curves to other HA^ regions, it was assumed that there are
only three flow curve shapes, i.e., there are only three values of S. Values were assigned to
6, based upon hardness, according to the following rules.
(i) BM-shaped curves: if HV < 167 then S = 10.472.
<
(ii) THAZ-shaped cuves: if 167 Hv 6 194 then 8 = 17.180.
(iii) cwwz-shaped curves: if HV > 194 then 6 = 10.893.
It is well established that for many metals an empirical relationship between strength
and hardness exists. Tabor (1951) determined an empirical relation between tensile strength,
Vickers microhardness, V, and Meyer's hardness coefficient, in, as

S, = (V/2.9)[1 - (in - 2)][12.5(in - 2)/[l - (m - 2)]](M-2' (ma). (24)

Tabor also showed that m is related to the strain hardening exponent n simply by

n=m-2. (2.5)

Cahoon et al (1971) derived an analogous relation for the 0.2% offset yield strength. This
relation, which was reported to be valid for aluminum alloys, brass, and steel, is

S, = (V/3)(0.1)(m-2) (MPa). (26)

More recently, Akselsen et a2 (1989) derived strength and hardness relations for the
simulated GCHAZ of two high-strength steels. Their strength-hardness relations result in
minor modifications of the Tabor and Cahoon et al equations.
410 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

Figure 17. The flow c u ~ e sfor the four-subzone HAZ Figure 18. The strain rate sensitivity of the BM,mAA
lZ
discretization. and GRHAZ materials.

Using the material constants derived in subsection 4.3, the 0.2% offset yield (S,) and
tensile (S,) strengths were computed for the BM, THAZ,and GRHAZ materials from equation
(5). by converting the flow stress to engineering stress, as was done in the flow curve
correction procedure. These equations take the form
S, = (U, - (U, - uo)exp(-O.OO;?S) + 0.002H)/exp(0.002 + uo/E) (27)
and
S, = (U, - (um - UO)exp(-GL) + HEL)/exp(EL). (28)
Using the values computed from equations (27) and (28), linear regression analyses of the
strength-hardness data established the following relations:
S, = -14.7 + 2.568H~ (Mpa) (29)
and
S, = 65.8 + 2.563Hv (MPa). (30)
Results from equations (29) and (30) are plotted in figure 16 along with data computed
from the relations of Tabor, Cahoon et al, and Akselsen et al. The data points attributed to
the three references were extracted from equations (24)-(26) by using an n value computed
from n = Zg + u ( Z g ) / E , where E is the elastic modulus. The figure shows that the present
data are in reasonable agreement with data computed from the Tabor and Cahoon er al
equations, since the present So data fall just below the Tabor data, and the present S, data
are a good match to the Cahoon et al data.
After 6 and H are assigned values based on the rules listed above, uo and U, can be
computed as follows. First, the yield and tensile snengths, S, and S,, are computed from
the strength-hardness relations, equations (29) and (30). Then uo and U- are computed
from a 3 x 3 system of non-linear equations formed by equations (27),(28), and
(U- - (U- - uo)exp(-6ZL) + HE;) = -8(um - UO)exp(-8E&,) + H (31)
where $, is the third unknown quantity. Equation (31) is analogous to equation (16), i.e.,
it enforces the definition of EL. Equations (27), (28), and (31) were solved simultaneously
using Newton's method in MalhematicuTM.
In detailed FEAS of spot-welded joints (see Zuniga 1994), the weld HA2 was modeled
with four subzones. The various subzones were assigned hardness values based on a linear
interpolation between the Bhl (Hv = 147) and the FZ (Hv = 253). Figure 17 plots the flow
curves for the four-subzone HAZ.
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 41 1

5. Strain rate sensitivity

A material's sensitivity to strain rate is a critical property under many loading conditions.
For example, under loading conditions where the strain localizes, a material's rate sensitivity
influences the strain level at which the localization occurs. A rate-sensitive material can
redistribute strain away from the region of strain localization. Also, under dynamic loading
conditions, strain rate sensitivity influences the load level associated with a given amount
of deformation. The load required to reach a particular state of deformation increases with
loading rate for a rate-sensitive material.

5.1. Strain rate computation procedure

Section 3 presented experimental results that showed how the maximum nominal notch stress
in the notched-bar specimens increased with increasing applied displacement rate. However,
because of restrictions imposed by the specimen geometry, i.e., rectangular cross-section
and non-uniform thinning, it was not possible to monitor the cross-sectional dimensions
during the tensile tests. Therefore, the experimental data alone do not convey information
about how the maximum stress increases with strain rare. For this reason, a method was
developed for computing the strain rate in the notched-bar specimens. In the strain rate
sensitivity characterization procedure described below, FEA was used to extract information
not otherwise available from the experimental data.
The strain rate sensitivity effect was measured by the increase in the maximum nominal
notch stress, S,, that occurs when specimens are tested at rates greater than the quasistatic
loading rate. As mentioned previously, this increase in S , with loading rate is expressed
by the dynamic stress ratio Rdyn= Sg/S,. where, again, the prime designates the quantity
associated with the higher loading rate. If the amount of deformation at the maximum
load is approximately independent of loading rate, then a dynamic stress ratio based on
engineering stresses is approximately equal to one based on true stresses, i.e.,

s;/s,, 2
!5 a;/a, (32)
where a,,,= 2 is the average, true notch stress computed at the maximum applied force,
Fm. and A is the deformed cross-sectional area. Equation (32) was assumed to hold in the
current study.
The objective of the strain computation procedure was to compute a strain rate that is
consistent with U,,,. A strain rate that satisfies this requirement is based on a logarithmic
strain computed from the entire cross-section, termed the average axial strain E , defined as

E In(Ao/A) (33)
where A0 and A are the cross-sectional areas in the initial and deformed configurations,
respectively. The deformed cross-sectional area is computed from FEA results by summing
the deformed areas, a(k),of each element in the cross-section, i.e.,

k=l

where ne is the number of elements in the cross-section. The derived expression for the
average axial strain is
412 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard
Table 6. Higher-rate strain and displacement rates.
Rate 1 Rate 2

dl 6' 8' it
Material (mms-') (s-') (mms-l) (s-')
BM 0.250 0.380 16.0 24.4
7x47. 0.222 0.334 17.8 26.8
ORHAZ 0.239 0.371 17.4 27.0

where &&! is the plastic strain component in the axial, or longitudinal, direction. For meshes
in which all the elements have the same initial cross-sectional area, equation (35) simplifies
to

The rate-independent FEAS,used to compute the average axial strain in the notched-bar
specimens, are without an inherent time scale. Rather, a time scale is assigned to the analyses
via the extensometer displacement rates d computed from the quasistatic experimental data.
For a constant applied displacement rate, the time increment associated with a displacement
increment Ad is simply

At = Ad f d (37)
and if A s increases linearly with the applied displacement (up to the maximum force) the
average strain rate E is

E = A&/At. (38)
The time increment At and the strain increment A& correspond to the quasistatic
displacement increment associated with the maximum force in the finiteelement simulation.
For the three test materials, the values of d , Ad, Af, A&,and E, are listed in table 5 .

Table 5. Pmmeten involved io the computation of the quasistatic stmhl rate

d Ad A1 i
Materia (mm S-I) (mm) (s) A& (S-')
BM 2.43 x 0.138 57.0 0.2104 0.00369
InAz 2.28 x lo-) 0.093 40.7 0.1396 0.00343
GRHAZ 2 . 3 7 10'
~) 0.092 38.8 0.1424 0.00367

The average axial strain rate at a higher displacement rate d' is computed by assuming
that the corresponding strain rate E' follows the scaling rule

2 = (li'fd).. (39)
Implicit in equation (39) is the assumption that the strain increment scales with the applied
displacement increment independent of the displacement rate. In other words, it was
assumed that a fixed displacement increment leads to fixed amount of strain regardless
of the rate, The two higher displacement rates and the Corresponding strain rates are listed
in table 6 for the three test materials.
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 413
Table 8. A comparison of dynamic stress ratios for lhe three test materials at a stroke rate of
25.4mm SKI.
Matenal Kd,. experimenl Rdynm % error

BM 1.133 1.106 -2.4

m4z 1.091 1.083 -0.7
GmAZ 1.066 1.058 -0.7

5.2.Strain rate sensititsity computations

The strain rate sensitivity effect in the notched-bar specimens is described by the
experimentally based, dynamic stress ratios presented in subsection 3.2.2 and the
corresponding finite-element-based strain rates derived in the previous section. An
empirically derived equation, similar to that used by Bodner and Symonds (1962), is fitted
to these data. The Bodner and Symonds equation is extended to multiaxial stress states by
replacing the uniaxial stress and strain with the equivalent stress and strain (Hibbitt et a/
1992). The result is

hP = D(a/u - 1 ) P (40)
where QP is the equivalent plastic strain rate, ais the rate-dependent equivalent stress, U is
the quasistatic flow stress, and D and p are empirical constants. Equation (40) governs the
strain-rate-induced expansion of the yield surface; this can be more easily seen if equation
(40) is rewritten as

a/a = ( 2 p / D ) p + 1. (41)
The equation used to compute the empirical constants, D and p , for the BM and
simulated HA2 materials is obtained from equation (41) by substituting the empirical quantity
Ray. = S&/S, for a/u, and by substituting the empirical/analytical quantity & for ip,which
gives

+ 1.
Rdyn = ( & / D ) r p (42)
The empirical data points (Rdyn. &) for the thee test materials are plotted in figure 18, along
with equation (42), using the empirical constants listed in table 7.

Table 7. Material wnslants used in the analytical s f rate sensitivity equation

Moterial D (SKI) P
BM 9.158x I @ 4.112
RIA2 1.596x IOs 3.638
O W 1.884x IOs 3.262

The strain rate sensitivity characterization procedure was verified by FEAS of the higher-
rate tensile tests, in which the strain rate sensitivities of the three test materials were
implemented in rate-dependent analyses. As indicated in table 8, the dynamic stress ratios
computed from FEA agree closely with the corresponding experimental data. For each
material, the predicted value for Rdyn was less than the experimentally determined value
by not more than 3%. For the BM and THAZ the predicted and representative experimental
S-d histories are plotted in figure 19.
414 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

S
(MW

Figure 19. Nominal notch stms-applied displacement Figure 20. Dynamic stress ratio against hardness at the
histories for the BM and THAZ mateerids pulled at lhe hvo higher strain rates.
highest rate.

A further check on the strain rate sensitivity characterization procedure is whether the
FEA-computed strain rates match those determined by the scaling equation, equation (39).
For the analysis of the G R W material, the average strain rate during A t , computed by
numerical integration, is E = 24.7 s-I. This value compares reasonably well with the value
& = 27.0 s-' determined by the scaling equation.

5.3. Weld HAZ and EZ strain rate sensirivily curves

The strain rate sensitivity curves computed for the THAZ and GRHAZ do not characterize
the entire HAZ, hut rather they represent the strain rate sensitivities at two locations
within the HAZ. To characterize the strain rate sensitivity of the entire HAZ, an
interpolatiodextrapolation procedure was developed, which is analogous to the procedure
established for the flow curves that was described in subsection 4.4, Once again, hardness
was used as the independent variable in the interpolationlextrapolation procedure.
Dynamic stress ratio, RdP, is plotted against hardness in figure 20. Linear fits to the
hardness data produce two equations, one at each strain rate, that relate Rdyn to hardness:

E = 0.36 s-' Ray. = -7.1778 x 10-4H~ 1.165 + (43)

E = 26 S-' Rdyo = -1.1823 x lO-'Hv + 1.308. (44)

Equations (43) and (44) are used in the interpolatiodextrapolation procedure for strain rate
sensitivity as follows.
For a given location in the weld HAZ, the hardness is determined by linear interpolation
bom the weld, 253Hv,to the base metal, 147Hv. With the hardness known, Rd,,,
can be computed from equations (43) and (44). Then, just as was done for the BM
and simulated HAZ materials, the strain rate sensitivity curve is determined by fitting
equation (42) to the data. Note that the third data point originates from the quasistatic
data, where Rd,.,, = 1 by definition. Figure 21 shows the results of the strain rate
sensitivity interpolatiodextrapolation procedure for the four-subzone H A Z Note that curves
for subzone 1 and the I% are omitted from the figure.
 Spot weld HAZ constitutive properties 415

1.20 VI...., . * ......I . , ......, . . ....,., . . ...q

.Subzone 4 (1W)
0 Subzone 3 (187)

OSubzone 1 (240)

Figure 21. The strain rate sensitivity curves for the four-subrone HAZ discretization

6. Conclusion

To model overload failures in resistance spot-welded joints, a detailed knowledge of the

constitutive properties of the HAZ is required. This paper presented an approach for obtaining
these properties by using experimental results from hardness measurements and tensile
tests, and analytical results from detailed, thresdimensional, elastic-plastic, finite-element
analyses. A method was described for fabricating simulated HAZ specimens by using a
resistance spot weIding machine. With this approach, simulated HAZ material samples that
represented the grain-refined and the partially transfomedltempered HAZ were fabricated
and machined subsequently into miniature notched-bar tensile specimens. Tensile tests of
the notched-bar specimens provided the empirical data needed to determine the HAZ flow
curves and HAZ strain rate sensitivities. Finite-element-based procedures extracted the HAZ
flow curves and the HA2 strain rate sensitivities from the empirical data.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by funding from the General Motors Corporation. Also, seed
funding from Stanfords Center for Materials Research is gratefully acknowledged. The
authors are grateful to Rosemarie Koch, Mike Strange, Michelle Vogler (Failure Analysis
Associates), and Tina Panontin (NASA Ames Research Center) for their assistance with the
experimental portion of this work.

References

Askelsen 0 M, R m i k G, Ons0ien M I and Grong 0 1989 Welding 3. 68 3 5 6 4 2 s

Bodner S R and Symonds P S 1962 J. Appl. Mech 29 719-28
Bridgman P W 1952 Studies in Love PIarlic Flow and Fracture (New York: McGraw-Hill) pp 9-37
Cahoon J R. Broughton W H and Kubak A R 1971 Mefall. Tmns 2 1979-83
Davies R G and Magee C L i975 I Eng, Mater. Tech. 97 151-5
416 S M Zuniga and S D Sheppard

Emerling K E 1983 Inlmdurtim to the Physical Metallurgy of Welding (London: Buttenvorths) pp 104-50
Hallquist 1 0 and Whiiley R G 1989 D Y N A ~ DUser's Manual Lawrence Livemore National Laborntory Repon
ucm-19592 rev 5. p 193
Hibbin, Karlsson and Soremen 1992 ABAQUS User's Manual version 5.2
Hughes T J R 1987 The Finite E l m " Method (Englewood Cliffs, N I Prentice-Hall) pp 21-225
K o c h U F 1982 Mechanical Tesfing for Deformtion Model Development ed R W Rhode and I C Swexcngcu
(American Society for Testing and Materials) pp 121-38
Mafic P 1985 Theor.Appl. Fract. Mech. 4 13-28
Matic P. Kirby G C and Jolles M I I988 Proe. R. Soc. A 417 309-33
McChtock F A 1958 3. Appl. Mech 35 35S771
Narris D M, Moran B, Scudder I K and Quinones D F 1978 J. Mech Phys. Solids 26 1-19
SAE 1984 Society of Automotive Engineers Handbook pp 1.145-8
Sawhill J M, Wamabe H and Mitchell J W 1977 Welding 3. 56 217s-24s
Simo J C 1988 Camput, Mefhods Appl. Mech fig. 68 14
Swift H W 1952 I Mech Phys. Solids 1 1-18
Tabor D 1951 The Hardness of Metals (Oxford: Oxford University Press) p 107
Voce E 1955 Metniiurgia 51 219-25
Vogler M B 1992 PhD Dissenation Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University
Zuniga S M 1994 PhD Dissenation Department of Mechanical Engineering. Stanford University