Symposium: Effect of Multiaxial Stresses on Metals - Work-hardening and Rupture in Metals (Metals Tech., Oct. 1946, T. P. 2072, with discussion)

In the past 15 years there has been a great deal of interest in the fundamentals of plastic flow and rupture in metals and a number of papers have presented substantial advances toward a fundamental insight into the mechanism of these two processes. This paper is an appraisal of the present position with respect to the following: 1. The relative importance of shear and hydrostatic stresses in controlling the plastic flow of metals. 2. The relative importance of shear and hydrostatic stresses in determining the amount of flow before rupture in metals. 3. The use of generalized strains in determining the effect of plastic flow on the work-hardening of metals. FundamentalS Involved in Plastic Flow In attempting to devise a quantitative description of plastic flow in metals, it has been customary to assume that metals are homogeneous and isotropic. The fact that neither of these assumptions is correct complicates the experimental appraisal of relations developed. Nevertheless, as will be shown, metals are close enough '0 being isotropic and homogeneous so that considerable insight into the mechanism of plastic flow can be obtained. The assumptions of isotropy and homogeneity allow both the elastic and plastic behavior of metals to be described in terms of 12 variables—six being stress variables, and six being strain variables. From this viewpoint, it should be possible to represent the stress-strain relations in the plastic range for metals by a surface in 12 dimensions. One boundary of this surface would be the surface of transition from elastic to plastic behavior; the other would be the surface of rupture. These two surfaces would be joined by the surface of plastic flow. The shape of this composite surface would depend on the test temperature and speed of straining This paper is concerned only with results obtained at constant temperature and constant speed of straining. While such a representation is conceivable, the demonstration of such a surface would present almost insurmountable obstacles. The most fruitful simplification of this concept has been the recognition that the behavior of metals in the plastic region is primarily a result of shear stresses and strains. Based on this viewpoint, it is possible to utilize stress and strain invariants that are independent of hydrostatic components to define an effective stress and strain. In effect, this amounts to reducing the task of representing stresses and strains in 12 dimensions to one of representation in two dimensions. The two invariants (one for stresses and one for strains) that have received most attention are the following: q2 = ½[(Txx= - Tyy)2 + (Tyy - Tzz)2 + (Tzz - Txx)2 + 3(Txy2 + Tyz2 + 7xx2) [1]