Using texture components in crystal plasticity finite element simulations

By Dierk Raabe, Franz Roters. 2004

224 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We discuss methods to map crystallographic textures in crystal plasticity finite element simulations. Fourier-type series expansion methods which use spherical harmonic library functions as well as the direct pole figure inversion methods are not well suited to reproduce texture information in a sufficiently localized spherical form onto finite element grids. Mathematically compact Gauss-shaped spherical texture components represent a better approach for including textures in finite element models since they represent an excellent compromise between discreteness (spherical localization), compactness (simple functions), mathematical precision (very good approximation also of complex orientation distribution functions already with small sets of texture components), scalability (the number of used texture components can be systematically varied according to the desired exactness of the texture fit), conceptual simplicity (simple mathematical handling), and physical significance (texture components can be directly linked to characteristic metallurgical mechanisms). The use of texture component functions has also advantages over the use of large sets of discrete single orientations with equal scatter and height since they are more compact, practical, and provide better physical insight into microstructural mechanisms and composition sensitive effects. The article presents a new approach for the mathematical reproduction of such crystallographic texture components in crystal plasticity finite element simulations. It explains in some detail why they are particularly suited for this purpose and how they can be used to map and recover textures in/from plasticity simulations. # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8b1457a2f5099ae2d317e209e64d78a2604c0a24

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

  1. T. Bieler
  2. Haiming Zhang
  3. Ke-Shen Cheong
  4. L. Hantcherli
  5. D. Tjahjanto
  6. E. Busso
  7. Franz Roters
  8. Philip Eisenlohr

Citations in the corpus