Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T10:30:36.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of testing conditions on the compressive plasticity of bulk metallic glasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2016

Yunpeng Jiang*
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China
*
a) Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: ypjiang@nuaa.edu.cn

Abstract

In this paper, the compressive behaviors of Zr-based bulk metallic glass (BMG) were experimentally studied under different testing conditions. To deeply reveal the inherent deformation mechanisms, numerical study was systematically conducted to analyze the shear banding evolution in BMGs, and the effect of testing machine stiffness, contact friction, and sample parallelism on the compressive ductility was therefore elucidated. Among them the effect of contact friction was carefully studied experimentally and the inherent deformation mechanisms was numerically analyzed in terms of the formation of shear bands. Free-volume theory was incorporated into ABAQUS finite element method code as a user material subroutine UMAT. The numerical method was firstly compared with the corresponding experimental results, and then parameter analyses were performed to discuss the impacts of testing conditions on the malleability of the BMG samples. The present work will shed some light on the interpretation of failure mechanisms in BMGs under different loading conditions.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2016 
Figure 0

FIG. 1. (a) Finite element mesh consisting of 5000 CPE4R elements for two-dimensional modeling of plane-strain compression and the exerted boundary conditions during the computation, and (b) contour plot of initial value of free volume.

Figure 1

FIG. 2. Nominal compressive stress–strain curves for the four Zr-based metallic glass specimens without using graphite powder.

Figure 2

FIG. 3. Nominal compressive stress–strain curves for the four Zr-based metallic glass specimens with using graphite powder.

Figure 3

FIG. 4. SEM images on the deformation and fracture morphologies of specimens. (a–c) Specimen without using graphite powder, and (b–d) specimen with applying graphite powder.

Figure 4

FIG. 5. The profiles of BMG specimens before and after fracture.

Figure 5

FIG. 6. Comparisons between numerical modeling and the experiments for Zr-based BMG, here 5000 CPE4R elements are meshed.

Figure 6

FIG. 7. Effect of testing machine stiffness on the stress–strain relations and the corresponding shear banding evolution in the BMG specimens.

Figure 7

FIG. 8. Dependence of the stress–strain relations on the friction coefficient between the BMG sample and testing machine, here the top and bottom surfaces are parallel.

Figure 8

FIG. 9. Contours plot of the shear banding evolution in the BMG samples with various friction coefficients between the specimens and testing machine.

Figure 9

FIG. 10. Dependence of the stress–strain relations on the parallelism between the top and bottom surfaces of BMG sample, here no friction between the sample and testing machine considered.

Figure 10

FIG. 11. Contours plot of the shear banding evolution in the BMG samples with various parallelisms between the top and bottom surfaces of the specimens, and no friction effect is considered.