Lindegrin 2

This article was downloaded by: [Annamalai University Library]
On: 01 September 2015, At: 22:02

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG
Journal of Thermal Stresses

Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uths20
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING

AND SIMULATION OF
WELDING. PART 2:
IMPROVED MATERIAL
MODELING
Lars-Erik Lindgren
Published online: 29 Jul 2006.
To cite this article: Lars-Erik Lindgren (2001) FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND
SIMULATION OF WELDING. PART 2: IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING, Journal of
Thermal Stresses, 24:3, 195-231, DOI: 10.1080/014957301300006380
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014957301300006380
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions
and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by
Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of
information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,
claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly
in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any

form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-andconditions
Journal of Thermal Stresses, 24:195^231 , 2001

Copyright # 2001 Taylor & Francis
0149-5739 /01 $12.00 + .00
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND SIMULATION OF

WELDING. PART 2: IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING
Lars-Erik Lindgren
Lule University of Technology
and Dalarna University SE-971 87 Lule, Sweden
Simulation of welding has advanced from the analysis of laboratory setups to real
engineering applications during the last three decades. This development is outlined
and the directions for future research are summarized in this review, which consists
of three parts. The material modeling is maybe the most crucial and difcult aspect
of modeling welding processes. The material behavior may be very complex for
the large temperature range considered.
The development of welding procedures is based on performing experiments

(Goldak et al. 1990) and a Welding Procedure Specication (WPS) is the nal result.
The evaluation of a welding procedure is based on joint integrity, absence of defects,
microstructure, and mechanical testing, for example. Computational methods are
rarely used in the process of developing welding procedures. It is expected that
simulations will complement the experimental procedures for obtaining a WPS, since
aspects like residual stresses can then be considered when comparing different
welding procedures. Furthermore, simulations are also useful in designing the manufacturing process as well as the manufactured component itself. Distortions are
usually in focus in the rst case, whereas residual stresses are of interest in the latter
case.
This review concentrates on the simulation of fusion welding processes of
metals. These processes do have several common traits and are therefore similar
to the model. Publications presenting nite element simulations of the mechanical
effects of welding appeared in the early 1970s, and simulations are currently only
used in applications where safety aspects are very important (like aerospace and
nuclear power plants) or when a large economic gain can be achieved. The scope
Received 12 August 1999; accepted 12 April 2000.

This work has been nanced by NUTEK (the Swedish National Board for Industrial and Technical
Development) via the Polhem Laboratory. Its completion has also been made possible by the cooperation
with ABB Atom AB and Volvo Aero Corporation in a project about multipass welding where this review
was one part.
Address correspondence to Professor L.-E. Lindgren, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Lule
University of Technology, SE-971 87 Lule, Sweden. E-mail: lel@cad.luth.se
195
196
L.-E. LINDGREN
of most simulations has been to obtain residual stresses and corresponding

deformations. There are also publications presenting analyses of hot cracking
and other phenomena.
A common concern in the simulation of welding is to account for the interaction
between welding process parameters, the evolution of the material microstructure,
temperature, and deformation. The resultant material structure and deformation
may also be needed, in combination with in-service loads, to predict lifetime and
performance of a component. Therefore, research in this eld requires the collaborative efforts of experts in welding methods, welding metallurgy, material behavior,
computational mechanics, and crack propagation, for example. It is important to
observe that uncertain material properties and net heat input make the success
of simulations signicantly dependent on experimental results (Lindgren 1996).
The review is split into three parts. Part 1 is `Ìncreased Complexity; this is part
2, `Ìmproved Material Modeling. Part 3 is called `Èfciency and Integration.
They all outline the development of simulation of welding and are separated into
sections where different aspects of nite element modeling are the focus. Each section contains some recommendations based on the review and the experience of
the author. It is hoped that this approach will be appropriate for those that are
entering this eld of research and useful as a reference for those already familiar
with this subject.
Material modeling is important for all computational models. The material
model and pertinent data must represent the real material behavior with sufcient
accuracy. What is sufcient depends on the focus of the performed study. This article
shows that there are different requirements depending on the scope of the analysis. It
is also shown how the effect of phase changes has been accommodated in the models.
The inuence of simplications of the material behavior has been studied in several
papers. The simplications are necessary due to both lack of data and numerical
problems when trying to model the actual high-temperature behavior of the material.
IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Material modeling is, together with the uncertain net heat input, one of the major
problems in welding simulation (Goldak 1989, Lindgren 1996). The thermal analysis
is, in general, more straightforward than the mechanical analysis. It entails few
numerical problems, with the exception of the large latent heat during the solidliquid transition, and it is easier to obtain the thermal rather than the mechanical
properties of a solid. McDill et al. (1990) investigated the relative importance of
the thermal and mechanical properties of stainless and carbon steels in welding
simulations. Two bars of dimension 20 in 2 in 0.5 in were ``welded along
the free edge. No xture was used. One bar was made of a stainless steel and
the other of a carbon steel. The resultant radius of curvature was compared with
the computed values for the material properties of carbon steel (MS) or stainless
steel (SS). The results are shown in Table 1. The somewhat unexpected conclusion
was that the thermal properties play a more important role than the mechanical
properties in explaining the different behavior between these steels. This is due
197
Table 1 Curvature for combinations of thermal and mechanical properties (McDill

et al. 1990)
Thermal
Properties
Mechanical
Properties
Radius of Curvature
[m1 ]
A
B
C
D
MS
SS
MS
SS
MS
SS
SS
MS
41.6
11.9
29.6
16.3
Experiment
Experiment
MS
SS
MS
SS
23.3
8.1
Test
to the fact that the thermal dilatation is the driving force in the deformation and the
bar is free to bend. The thermal dilatation is determined by the temperature eld and
is, therefore, strongly inuenced by the thermal properties.
Dependency on Temperature and Microstructure

The complete thermomechanical history of a material will inuence its material properties. However, this can be approximated to a dependency on the current temperature and deformation for many materials. This simplication may be too
large for ferritic steels where solid-state phase transformations occur that will inuence the thermal dilatation and the plastic behavior of the material in a way that
will affect the residual stresses. Different approaches for modeling this dependency
are discussed. Also see the discussion about latent heats in the section ``Properties
for Modeling Heat Conduction and about transformation-induced plasticity in
the section ``Properties for Modeling Plastic Deformation. Leblond et al. (1997)
discuss the consequences of phase transformations. The inuence of the stresses
on the phase transformations are usually ignored and are not discussed in this article.
The simplest and most common approach is to ignore the microstructure change
and assume that the material properties depend only on temperature. The effect of
phase changes may be ignored for austenitic steels (e.g., Ueda et al. 1986, Rybicki
et al. 1977, 1978, Brown and Song 1992a, b) and materials such as copper (Lindgren
et al. 1997) and Inconel (Friedman 1975, Nickell and Hibbitt 1975, Ueda et al. 1991).
But phase changes have also been ignored in the case of ferritic steels (e.g., Ueda and
Yamakawa 1971a, Hibbitt and Marcal 1973, Mok and Pick 1990, Shim et al. 1992,
Michaleris 1996, Ravichandran et al. 1997, Lindgren et al. 1999). Then, for example,
the thermal dilatation is the same during heating and cooling, as in Figure 1a. The
envelope technique and the lumping of weld passes, which are sometimes used
in simulation of multipass welding (see the section `Ìncreasing Complex Models
in Part 1), modify or even completely ignore the temperature history. In some cases
the stresses are only computed during the cooling phase (Hepworth 1980, Free
and Porter Goff 1989). Canas et al. (1996) investigated different simplications
L.-E. LINDGREN
198
Figure 1. Different methods for modeling dependency of thermal dilatation on phase changes in ferritic
steel.
199
of welding analysis and found that an envelope technique for the welding of an
aluminum plate gave acceptable results for the longitudinal residual stresses.
Surprisingly, they found only small differences if they used constant or
temperature-dependent mechanical properties. Mahin et al. (1988) simplied the
cooling phase by articially quenching the welded plate when the maximum temperature reached 600 C. This was done to shorten the cooling time. They used
an explicit code and could not increase the length of their time steps during cooling
but they did not perform this in their later analysis (Mahin et al. 1991) because
it affected the history-dependent internal variables in their material model.
However, there appeared a need to account for the phase transformations for
ferritic steels even if their role was not fully appreciated. The effect of the phase
transformations on the thermal dilatation was included rst by Ueda and
Yamakawa (1971b). Andersson (1978) also accounted for this effect. The effect
on yield limit and Youngs modulus was included by Ueda et al. (1976, 1977).
Ueda et al. (1976) used one curve during heating and another curve for the material
properties during cooling to account for the effect of the phase transformations on
the material properties, as shown in Figure 2. Phase transformations were assumed
to occur instantaneously at specic temperatures. The material became fully
austenized at 750 C during heating, and the austenite decomposed at 600 C.
The latter temperature was the average of the start temperatures for the formation
of bainite and martensite. The material was assumed to lose its strength rapidly just
above 750 C during heating and gained strength just at 600 C during cooling. A
similar approach was also used by Andersson (1978) and other researchers
(Josefson 1982, Jonsson et al. 1985a, Troive et al. 1989, Karlsson and Josefson
1990). It is also based on given property-temperature curves, but the curves were
less idealized than those used by Ueda et al. (1976). Different curves are chosen
in the analysis depending on some characteristics of the temperature history at
the considered point in the model. Usually these characteristics are the peak temperature and the cooling rate between 800 C and 500 C. They are the primary
parameters that determine the obtained microstructure of steels. The cooling rate
is approximately the same in the entire heat-affected zone. Therefore, different
property-temperature curves are chosen during the cooling phase depending on
the peak temperatures (see Figure 1b in the case of thermal dilatation). A single,
common curve is used during the heating phase. Different curves are chosen during
cooling depending on the value of the peak temperature, Tpeak . It is also possible to
interpolate between these curves with respect to the peak temperature instead of
just switching between them. The curves can be obtained from experiments where
test specimens are subjected to some temperature histories typical of the process
and tested at different temperatures (Lindgren et al. 1993) or compiled from
the literature. Voss et al. (1998a, b) suggested that varying cooling rates in the
heat-affected zone can be accounted for by constructing a maximum-temperature
cooling-time diagram. This diagram then gives the microstructure of the material.
The latter can then be used to determine the properties of the material. They only
applied this to the hardness, which was compared with measurements. They
did not use the diagram for any other material properties.
200
L.-E. LINDGREN
Figure 2. Determination of yield stress by Ueda et al. (1976, 1977). Tp is the maximum temperature in
earlier heating cycles and Tc is the maximum temperature in current heating cycle of multipass weld.
Papazoglou and Masubuchi (1982) used a CCT diagram to estimate the phase
changes and the corresponding volume changes. Oddy et al. (e.g., 1989) also estimated the phase transformations and used a mixture rule for the austenite properties
and the decomposition products properties (e.g., pearlite forms austenite, which
decomposes back to bainite). The formation/decomposition is assumed to occur
linearly with temperature within a given temperature interval. Murty et al. (1996)
used a TTT diagram to estimate the transformations that occur in a welded pipe.
This information was used to predict yield stresses and volume changes due to
the phase transformations in the weld metal. This yielded an improvement in
the results when compared to the simulation of the same pipe by Lindgren and
Karlsson (1988), Karlsson and Josefson (1990), and Josefson and Karlsson (1992).
201
The most exible way to include the effect of the temperature history is to compute
the evolution of the microstructure in the material. Each phase is assigned
temperature-dependent properties, and simple mixture rules are used to obtain
the macroscopic material properties. This coupling of thermal, metallurgical,
and mechanical models (TMM) was used by Inoue and Wang (1983), Wang and
Inoue (1983, 1985), Bergheau and Leblond (1991), Devaux et al. (1991), Inoue (1996,
1998), Roelens (1994, 1995a, b), and Brjesson and Lindgren (1998, 1999). The inuence of grain size and microstructure, for example, on the mechanical properties is
discussed by Bhadeshia (1997). An example of a mixture rule is shown in Figure
1c, where the thermal expansion coefcient is given one constant value for austenite
and another value for the other phases. The difference in volume between the
austenite, g, and its decomposition products is accounted for by etr , which, in this
case, is this difference extrapolated to 0 C. The phase change may be approximated
or computed according to some model as discussed previously. The microstructure
model used by Brjesson and Lindgren (1998, 2000) uses the chemical composition
as input, and its prediction can be improved by supplying data from a measured
TTT diagram (Figure 3). Verication of the microstructure model is performed
by comparing with results from CCT curves. The model was applied to the same
multipass weld that was studied by Lindgren et al. (1999). Lindgren et al. (1999)
assumed only temperature-dependent data, whereas Brjesson and Lindgren (2000)
computed the material properties based on the microstructure evolution. Das et
al. (1993) also computed the microstructure but used this only to account for
transformation-induced plasticity (see the discussion in the section about
``Properties for Modeling Plastic Deformation). Dufrene et al. (1996) used simple
models for phase changes between martensite and austenite for the case of
EB-welding. This was combined with mixture rules for the material properties.
However, they do not give any details of the model or the results. Ronda et al. (1995)
formulates TMM models, but no simulations are given in their paper.
Myhr et al. (1997, 1998a) simulated the welding of aluminum tubes and the butt
welding of aluminum plates (Myhr et al. 1998b). They studied the importance of
accounting for the microstructure evolution, namely, strengthening effects of hardening precipitates. The thermal analysis was followed by a computation of the dissolution and recombination of precipitates and nally a mechanical analysis.
The importance of accounting for the inuence of precipitates on the plastic ow
was studied. See also Grong (1994, 1997) for more details.
Recommendations. Once again, the recommendation is to aim for accuracy. The
microstructure evolution is important to include in the material modeling of ferritic
steels since their properties can change a lot due to the phase transformations.
The major inuence is on the thermal dilatation and the yield stress, which can
be modeled as discussed previously. It is a problem to account for phase changes
in the case of multipass welding. One should have the ability to compute the
microstructure and predict the effect on the material properties, or it will be necessary to simplify the history dependency of the material properties to one cycle of
heating and cooling (Ueda et al. 1976) or even ignore it (Lindgren et al. 1999).
It should be noted that the needed number of measured curves, such as for the
202
L.-E. LINDGREN
Figure 3. Measured TTT diagram (solid lines) and computed TTT diagram (dashed lines) from Brjesson
and Lindgren (1997).
thermal dilatation of material subjected to different peak temperatures, depends on

the mesh. The intermediate curves between the heating curve and the curve corresponding to the highest peak temperature all are assigned to integration points
in the heat-affected zone. Thus, it is of no use to have many curves if the model
has just one element across this zone.
Density
Simulation of welding can usually be performed as a quasi-static analysis (see the
section ``Simulation of Welding as a Coupled Problem in part 1). The density,
r, is needed even for a quasi-static analysis because it is multiplied with the heat
capacity in the thermal analysis. Handbooks may give the density as a function
of temperature. This accounts for the volume change due to the thermal dilatation.
However, one must know how the density is handled by the chosen nite element
code. A constant density may be sufcient as input if the code itself computes
the change in density when deformations are computed simultaneously with the temperatures (e.g., in a staggered approach). A temperature-dependent density may be
used for a pure thermal analysis where no deformations are included.
203
Properties for Modeling Heat Conduction

The solution of the heat conduction equation requires heat conductivity, l, and
heat capacity, c. The density was discussed previously. These thermal properties
are temperature dependent. They may also depend on the temperature history
since different phases may have different thermal properties. Furthermore, the
latent heats due to phase changes are needed. These depend on the phase
transformations and thereby on the temperature history and the current
temperature. The discussion in the section ``Dependency on Temperature and
Microstructure describes different approaches on how this latter dependency
can be handled or ignored.
The dependency on temperature is completely ignored by those using
Rosenthals or other analytic solutions (see the section about `Ìmproved Models
for Heat Input in part 1). Free and Porter Goff (1989) and Dong et al. (1997) also
assumed constant thermal properties despite the use of the nite element method
for computing the temperatures. Their statement that large variations in thermal
properties result in very small changes of the transient temperatures is surprising
when considering the data in Figures 4 and 5, for example. It is also inconsistent
with the ndings of McDill et al. (1990). It may be possible to obtain good residual
stresses away from the heat-affected zone with this simplication (Lindgren 1986),
but this is no general conclusion. Dong (1997) and Reed et al. (1997) also used constant thermal properties in their nite element model. Ueda and Yamakawa used
constant thermal properties in their early analyses (1971a, 1971b) but included
the temperature dependency in later papers (e.g. Ueda et al. 1976, 1977). Goldak
et al. (1985) and Moore et al. (1985) discussed and showed the effects of using constant or varying thermal properties.
Most numerical models include the temperature dependency of the thermal
properties but not any effects of the phase transformations other than the associated latent heats. The latent heats due to the solid-solid phase changes are often
ignored and only the heat of fusion is included in the models. The effect of the
latent heats due to the solid phase transformation is shown, for example,
by Dubois et al. (1984). The magnitude of these latent heats can be estimated
from diagrams by Pehlke et al. (1982). They give a latent heat of about
75 kJ/kg for the a-to-g phase change in steels. Murty et al. (1996) used 92 kJ/kg
for the g-to-pearlite phase change and 83 kJ/kg for the g-to-martensite phase
change. The heat of fusion, for example, is 277 kJ/kg for a 1.2% C-steel with
Tsolidus 1387 C and Tliquidus of 1481 C. There is, in general, no problem in
obtaining thermal properties, such as those in Figures 4 and 5 from Richter
(1973). Pehlke et al. (1982) also give data for many materials. See also the
references in Tables 2^4.
The latent heats give effective heat capacitieslatent heat divided by the temperature interval for phase changewhich are large compared to the heat capacity
shown in Figure 5. This makes the heat conduction equation stiff. For example,
a pure metal with a given heat input will experience a temperature increase, but
suddenly, at the melting temperature, the temperature will not increase since the
heat input is consumed by the phase change. This abrupt change in the input-output
204
L.-E. LINDGREN
Figure 4. Heat conductivity for some steels. Data from Richter (1973).
Figure 5. Heat capacity for some steels. Data from Richter (1973).
205
Table 2 Reference with material properties, ferritic steels

Reference
Comments
Tall (1964)
Ueda and Yamakawa (1971a , b)
Ueda and Nakacho (1982)
Ueda et al. (1976, 1977)
Ueda et al. (1988, 1991)
Rybicki and Stonesifer (1980)
Rybicki et al. (1988)
Oddy et al. (1989)
Troive et al. (1989)
Karlsson (1989), Karlsson and Josefson (1990)
Tekriwal and Mazumder (1989, 1991a,b)
Josefson (1982)
Bae (1994)
Ueda (1986, 1991)
Hibbitt and Marcal (1973)
Lobitz (1977)
Shim et al. (1992)
Brown and Song (1992a,b )
Ma et al. (1995)
Andersson (1978)
Argyris et al. (1982, 1985)
Lindgren and Karlsson (1988)
Sheng and Chen (1992), Chen and Sheng
(1991, 1992)
Wikander et al. (1993, 1994)
Yuan et al. (1995)
Michaleris et al. (1995)
Siva Prasad and Sankaranarayana n (1996)
Murty et al. (1994, 1996)
Michaleris and DeBiccari (1997)
Ravichandran et al. (1997)
Taljat et al. (1998)
Hong et al. (1998b)
Kim et al. (1998)
No hardening
No hardening
No hardening, power law creep during annealing
Piecewise linear, isotropic hardening
Kinematic hardening
Creep druing stress relief
Creep during stress relief
Viscoplastic, RambergÔsgood
Viscoplastic, Bodner^Partom and Walker
von Mises, kinematic hardening
relation constitutes a stiff equation. This is the only numerical problem in the nite
element solution of the heat conduction problem. It can be handled in different ways,
including some of the following.
The enthalpy method (Andersson 1978, Jonsson et al. 1985a) can be used to
reduce the aforementioned nonlinearity. Then the enthalpy, heat content, is used
as the primary unknown in the nite element solution. It is dened as
HT
T
0
rct dt
This is a monotonous increasing function w.r.t. the temperature and will reduce the
nonlinearity when latent heats are consumed/released (see, e.g., Karlsson (1986)).
206
L.-E. LINDGREN
Table 3 References with material properties, austenitic steels

Reference
Comments
Ueda et al. (1986)

Ueda et al. (1991)
Rybicki et al. (1977, 1978, 1979, 1986)
Rybicki et al. (1988)
Chidiac and Mirza (1993)
Lejeail (1997)
Troive et al. (1998)
Mahin et al. (1991), Ortega et al. (1998),
Dike et al. (1998)
Piecewise linear, isotropic hardening
Viscoplastic
Kinematic hardening
Rate-dependent, intern variable model with
combined hardening
Table 4 References with material properties, other materials

Material
Reference
Comments
Inconel
Inconel
Ueda et al. (1991)

Friedman (1975), Nickell and
Hibbitt (1975)
Nsstrm et al. (1989, 1992)
Canas et al. (1996)
Feng et al. (1997)
Dong et al. (1998a,b) ,
Yang et al. (1998, 2000)
Michaleris et al. (1997)
Lindgren et al. 1997
Piecewise linear, isotropc hardening
Inconel
Aluminum
Aluminum
Aluminum
Aluminum
Copper
Kinematic hardening
Detailed model at high temperature
Another numerical approach is the ctitious heat source method (Rolph and Bathe
1982) used by Murty et al. (1996). A third approach, used by Lindgren et al. (1999),
is based on an effective heat capacity (Ch 5 in Lewis et al. 1996) and is easy to
implement into a nite element code; it is sometimes also called an enthalpy method.
The heat capacity used in the heat conduction equation is replaced by
ceff
H n H n1
T n T n1
if T n T n1 6 0
where the right superscripts denote time-step counters in the nite element solution
process.
The enthalpy method, Eq. (1), will work even for a pure metal. The other
methods work well for alloys where the melting occurs over a temperature range,
but they may experience problems for pure alloys. The most straightforward
way to reduce the nonlinearity is to extend the temperature range over which
the latent heat is released/consumed. Feng (1994) and Feng et al. (1997) used a more
207
advanced model for the release of latent heat during solidication of aluminum.
Their model gives a higher release of latent heat in the upper part of the Tsolidus
to Tliquidus interval. Otherwise it is typically assumed that the latent heat is evenly
distributed over this interval.
There is a modeling consideration of the melting behavior that sometimes has to
be taken into account in the thermal analysis. The heat in the weld pool is not only
conducted but also convected due to the uid ow. Many analysis imitate this
by increasing the thermal conductivity at high temperatures (e.g. Andersson 1978,
Hepworth 1980, Papazoglou and Masubuchi 1982, Jonsson et al. 1985a, Leung
and Pick 1986, Das et al. 1993, Michaleris and DeBiccari 1997). Ronda and Oliver
(1998) and Voss et al. (1998b) used different conductivities in different directions
at varying locations in the weld pool. This was taken from Pardo and Weckman
(1989).
Recommendations. There is no reason to use the analytic solutions any more since
the numerical simulation of the thermal eld is quite straightforward. It is important
and straightforward to account for the temperature dependency of the thermal properties. Latent heats are also important to include. The use of effective heat capacity
in handling the latent heats works well. If the chosen nite element code does not
have this capability, then it might be necessary to extend the temperature range over
which the latent heat is distributed.
Introduction to Mechanical Properties

It is assumed that the deformation can be decomposed into a number of components.
The increment in total strain is computed from the incremental displacements during
a nonlinear nite element analysis. The elastic part of the strain gives the stresses,
and there are a number of inelastic strain components that can be accounted for.
The decomposition is expressed in terms of strain rates as
p
vp
tp
e_ij e_ eij e_ ij e_ ij e_ cij e_ th
ij e_ij
where e_ij is the total strain rate, e_ eij is the elastic strain rate, e_ pij is the plastic strain rate
c
due to rate-independent plasticity, e_ vp
ij is the viscoplastic strain rate, e_ij is the creep
t
h
strain rate, e_ij is the thermal strain rate consisting of thermal expansion and volume
changes due to phase transformations, and e_tp
ij is the transformation plasticity strain
rate. The additive decomposition of the strain rate can be derived from a
multiplicative decomposition of the symmetric part of the deformation gradient
(Simo 1998). The book by Simo and Hughes (1997) contains detailed discussions
about material modeling and its mathematical framework and computational
implications. The stress increment is computed from strain increments given by
strain rates when using a hypoelastic approach. The stress increment must come
from an objective stress rate in the case of a large deformation analysis. There
are several possibilities w.r.t. large deformation analyses available. The basic
equations are outlined in Appendix A in Part 3 of this review.
208
L.-E. LINDGREN
A welding simulation must at least account for elastic strains, thermal strains,
and one more inelastic strain component in order to give residual stresses. The
plastic, viscoplastic, and creep strains are all of the same nature. They represent
different mathematical models for the plastic deformation (See Figure 9 in the section where the varying plastic phenomena at different temperatures are discussed).
The following sections deal with material properties for the thermoelastic behavior
(_eij e_ eij e_ th
ij ), and thereafter the plastic properties are discussed that give the plastic
tp
c
components (_epij e_ vp
eij ).
ij e_ij ) and then the modeling of transformation plasticity (_
The mechanical analysis requires much more time due to more unknowns per
node than in the thermal analysis. Furthermore, it is much more nonlinear due
to the mechanical material behavior. The mechanical properties are more difcult
to obtain than the thermal properties, especially at high temperatures, and they contribute to the numerical problems in the solution process. This is discussed subsequently in more detail. Nearly all papers about welding simulations include
temperature dependencies of at least some mechanical properties (an exception
is Caas et al. 1994). The treatment of the dependency on the temperature history
was discussed in the section ``Dependency on Temperature and Microstructure.
The high-temperature mechanical behavior is modeled in an approximate way
due to several factors: experimental data is scarce, too-soft material causes numerical problems (Hepworth 1980, Leung and Pick 1986), and it is found that
approximations introduced do not signicantly inuence the resultant residual
stresses. Many analyses use a cut-off temperature above which no changes in
the mechanical material properties are accounted for. It serves as an upper limit
of the temperature in the mechanical analysis. The meaning of using a cut-off temperature may vary since some studies only apply this cut-off to some properties.
Ueda and Yamakawa (1971a, b) did not heat the material higher than 600 C,
and Fujita et al. (1972) limited the maximum temperature to 500 C. Ueda et al.
(1985) assumed that the material did not have any stiffness above 700 C. They called
this the mechanical rigidity recovery temperature, above which the Youngs modulus
was set to zero. It is therefore likely that this corresponds to the cut-off temperature.
Hepworth (1980) used 800 C as a cut-off temperature above which he did not include
any thermal dilatation. Free and Porter Goff (1989) completely ignored the temperature dependency of Youngs modulus, neglected hardening, and used 900 C
as a cut-off temperature. Furthermore, they only followed the cooling phase of
the compiled temperature envelope. Tekriwal and Mazumder (1991a) varied the
cut-off temperature from 600 C up to the melting temperature. The residual
transverse stress was overestimated by 2 to 15% when the cut-off temperature
was lowered.
Properties for Modeling Thermoelastic Deformation

The thermoelastic properties are used to compute the stresses. The stress-strain
relations have to be written in incremental form since the nonlinear analysis is
performed by a time-stepping procedure. Strain increments give stress increments
according to Hookes law. The stress-strain relations are usually separated into volumetric and deviatoric parts. The rst part is purely thermoelastic in the case of
209
incompressible plasticity (see the description of plasticity later). For convenience,

only the rate-independent plastic strain is included in the subsequent equations.
Assuming that the thermoelastic behavior can be described by the linear Hookes
law gives
skk 3Keekk 3Kekk 3et h
sij 2Geeij 2Geij epij
where K E/31 2n is the temperature-dependent bulk modulus, G E/21 n

is the temperature-dependent shear modulus, E is Youngs modulus and n is
Poissons ratio, sij is the stress tensor, sij sij skk dij /3 is the stress deviator tensor,
eij is the total strain tensor, eeij is the elastic strain tensor, eij eij ekkdij /3 is the total
strain deviator tensor, eeij is the elastic strain deviator tensor, eth is the uniaxial
thermal dilatation, and epij epij is the plastic strain tensor, which is equal to the
deviatoric plastic strain tensor for incompressible plasticity. These relations are used
to compute the thermoelastic stress in the absence of plasticity, epij 0, but they are
also used to compute so-called trial stress in computational plasticity. The different
forms of Eqs. (4) and (5), which are needed in a nonlinear analysis, are
dskk 3Kdekk 3deth 3dKeekk 3Kdekk 3deth
dsij 2Gdeeij
dG
sij
G
dK
skk
K
6
7
The equations should be implemented in an incremental form that gives the exact
stresses if the increment is elastic, that is, when Eqs. (4) and (5) are evaluated at
the end of an increment. This requires
Dskk 3K T n1 Dekk 3Deth
Dsij 2GT n1 Deeij
DK n
s
K T n kk
DG n
s
GT n ij
8
9
where the right superscripts denote time-step counters in the nite element solution
process.
The thermoelastic models tried by Argyris et al. (1982) are not in accordance
with this. Their implementation of the thermoelastic behavior is not correct even
in their so-called mixed model since all material properties in the equations corresponding to Eqs. (8) and (9) are evaluated at the beginning of the increment in their
paper.
Different assumptions regarding the high-temperature elastic properties have
been used. Friedman (1975, 1977) assumed a constant bulk modulus. This was
obtained by decreasing the Youngs modulus with temperature and at the same time
increasing Poissons ratio toward 0.5. Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio are
210
L.-E. LINDGREN
shown in Figures 6 and 7 for lower temperatures (Richter 1973). An estimate based
on this data does not support the use of a constant bulk modulus. It seems to decrease
for higher temperatures. Increasing Poissons ratio and assuming incompressibility
in the liquid state have led others (e.g. Hibbitt and Marcal 1973, Andersson 1978,
Josefson 1982, Jonsson et al. 1985a, Cowles et al. 1995, Troive et al. 1998) to increase
Poissons ratio toward 0.5 near the melting temperature. However, there is no reason
to have a continuous increasing bulk modulus up to innity in the liquid state since
there is a phase change occurring during melting and the material can, therefore,
have discontinuous material properties. Leung and Pick (1986) compared an analysis
with a Poissons ratio ranging from 0.24 at room temperature to 0.45 at melting
temperature with an analysis for a constant value of 0.24. They found that the results
were almost identical, but the rst analysis required 50% more computer time.
Tekriwal and Mazumder (1991a) also investigated the inuence of Poissons ratio.
They obtained nearly identical results, but the computer time was about the same
for all variations of Poissons ratio. The extra computer time required in the analysis
by Pick and Leung (1986) was probably due to the selected nite element implementation and not due to the physical problem. The chosen values for Youngs modulus
is an important parameter that affects the residual stresses. If the chosen value at
high temperature is too low, then the nite element analysis will fail. Lindgren
et al. (1999) used 1 GPa as the lower limit for a ferritic steel.
Figure 6. Youngs modulus for some steels. Data from Richter (1973).
211
Figure 7. Poissons ratio modulus for some steels. Data from Richter (1973).
The thermal dilatation, eth , is the total effect of the usual thermal expansion and
the volume changes due to phase changes. The thermal dilatation is the driving force
for the thermal stresses and is therefore an important parameter. Typical values are
given in Figure 8 for slow heating. The inuence of the volume changes due to phase
transformations on the thermal dilatation was discussed earlier in the section
``Dependency on Temperature and Microstructure. Murty et al. (1996) assumed
that the transformation strain is 0.044 when 100% austenite is transformed into
100% martensite and 0.007 if it is transformed into ferrite/pearlite. The solidication
shrinkage is usually ignored. The motivation may be that it will lead to plastic strains
that are removed anyway due to this phase change. The use of a cut-off temperature
will also exclude some thermal dilatation in the high-temperature range. Feng (1994)
and Feng et al. (1997) discuss the modeling of solidication shrinkage for aluminum.
Their study is concerned with solidication cracking, so they cannot resort to too
large simplications in the high-temperature range. Sheng and Chen (1992) and
Chen and Sheng (1991, 1992) also had a detailed model of the near-weld-pool region
where the solidication shrinkage was included.
The implementation of the computation of the thermal dilatation can be done in
different ways. It is important to observe whether thermal dilatation is specied or
thermal expansion coefcient. The latter can vary since some codes want the secant
and other the tangent thermal expansion coefcient. This is due to the way the
incremental thermal dilatation deth is computed. It can be computed directly by
interpolating from a given thermal dilatation curve or by the tangent thermal
212
L.-E. LINDGREN
Figure 8. Thermal dilatation for some steels. Data from Richter (1973).
expansion
deth
det h
dT at dT
dT
10
or the secant thermal expansion

n1
deth an1
Tref ans T n Tref .
s T
11
ABAQUS (Wilkening and Snow 1991) also computes an initial thermal strain
because it does not assume that the initial temperature is the zero-strain state. Thus,
it is important to set this reference temperature equal to the initial temperature given
to the elements added to the model when a weld is laid. Hong et al. (1998a) found the
difference between using the room temperature or the melting temperature as reference temperature to be small when simulating a multipass weld using ABAQUS.
It is not clear if they removed all accumulated plastic strains when the material
melted. This will remove the previous history effects at these elements. The removal
of plastic strains when a material is melting is mandatory (see the next section),
otherwise the chosen reference temperature will give different plastic strains, which
may, depending on the hardening, be visible on the residual stress elds. The correct
approach is to use the zero-stress temperature of an element as the reference
temperature. This is the melting temperature for added ller material.
213
Properties for Modeling Plastic Deformation

The mechanisms for the plastic deformation vary due to the large temperature range
involved. The Ashby diagram (Figure 9) illustrates the changing plastic strain rate
for different stresses and temperatures. However, the time scale is also important
when determining whether rate-dependent plasticity should be included. The argument for using rate-independent plasticity at high temperatures is based on the
involved time scales. This was stated clearly by Hibbitt and Marcal (1973), who
included creep only when considering stress relief. The same was done by Ueda
et al. (1976, 1977) and Josefson (1982). The material has a high temperature during
a relatively short time of the weld thermal cycle, and therefore the accumulated
rate-dependent plasticity is neglected. Bru et al. (1997), who studied the same problem as Roelens (1995a, b), used tensile data for the strain rate of 0.1 sec1 and
the rate-independent plasticity model. Sekhar et al. (1998) show the variation of
yield stress with temperature for two different strain rates. The difference is small
for that particular case except around 700 to 900 C. Most studies in simulation
of welding approximate the yield limit at higher temperatures and try not to make
any elaborate adjustment for expected dominant strain rates since the available data
are scarce. The plastic ow in rate-independent plasticity is determined by the consistency condition, which requires that the effective stress must stay on the yield
Figure 9. Sketch of Ashby diagram (Ashby 1992) illustrating deformation mechanisms and different
strain rates. Different deformation mechanisms in different temperature and stress regimes are shown.
214
L.-E. LINDGREN
surface for a plastic process. This leads to a direct relation between change of plastic
strain and change in stress. The model that has been used most widely for
rate-independent plasticity is the von Mises yield criterion together with the associated ow rule. Thus, the plastic strains are incompressible and are not dependent
on the hydrostatic part of the stresses. The ow rule states that the plastic ow
is orthogonal to the yield surface. This comes from the assumption of maximum
plastic dissipation or Druckers postulate. The ow rule and the yield function
are given as
p
p
eij e_ ij l0
f
lsij aij
sij
12
where l is the plastic parameter that determines the amount of ow, f s sy k, T

is the yield function, s 32 sij aij sij aij is the effective stress, aij is the back
stress or the center of the yield surface that accounts for the kinematic hardening,
sy is the yield limit, and k is an internal variable for the isotropic part of the
hardening. The consistency condition, f
0, is evoked to determine the plastic parameter l. A hardening rule is also needed to determine the amount of plastic ow
and the evolution of the yield strength of the material. There are several accurate
methods for computing the stress increment for inelastic material behavior. The
effective-stress function is a general version of the radial return method that can
accommodate different kinds of inelastic strains (Kojic and Bathe 1987, Josefson
and Lindgren 1997). See also Appendix A of Part 3.
Tall (1964) assumed the material properties to be temperature dependent but no
work hardening was accounted for. Tsuji (1967) assumed a linear decreasing yield
stress and linear, isotropic hardening. Jonsson et al. (1985b) varied the yield limit,
hardening modulus, and thermal dilatation in order to study the inuence on
the residual stresses and the change in gap width in front of the moving arc. They
also assumed isotropic hardening. A higher yield limit and hardening modulus
at low temperatures raised the residual stresses in the weld region. It also affected
the change in gap width as the strength of the tack welds was important in the studied
case. The thermal dilatation had only a smaller inuence on the residual stresses. The
large restraint of the plate against in-plane motion causes the yield strength to be the
limiting, and therefore important, factor for the studied case. McDill et al. (1990)
investigated the inuence of the thermal and mechanical properties on the residual
curvature of a welded bar. They only combined thermal and mechanical properties
of a stainless steel and a low carbon steel and did not vary the individual properties.
For example, a larger plastically deformed region was obtained with lower yield
strength, but the inuence on the curvature was counteracted by lower residual
stresses. All changes affected the residual curvature of the welded bar quite a lot.
It varied from 41.6 to 11.9 m 1 . The case they studied was little restrained, and
therefore it is expected that thermal dilatation together with the temperature distribution is important for the deformation. The latter depends strongly on the
thermal properties. This explains why they found that the thermal properties were
the most important difference between carbon and stainless steels. Bru et al. (1997)
investigated the inuence of the mechanical properties at high temperatures. It
215
was a continuation of the study by Roelens (1995a,b), where microstructure evolution was used to compute the material properties using mixture rules. The yield
stress of the austenite was uncertain due to its dependency on grain size and its rate
dependency. They used von Mises plasticity and the yield limit for a given strain
rate. Furthermore, Roelens (1995a, b) used 1250 C as a cut-off temperature for
strain hardening, thermal strain, and Youngs modulus. This was raised to 1500 C
by Bru et al. (1997). All these modications did not affect the residual stresses signicantly; however, they affected the residual deformation. This is probably due
to the sensitivity of the welding conguration, butt-welded plates, to the deformation
at high temperature during the rst weld pass. This can be seen from Roelens
(1995a, b). It seems that they did not have any restraints or applied gravity loading
that would push the plates toward the welding table and the halves were only initially
connected with one weld.
The material near and in the weld is subjected to reversed plastic yielding during
the cooling phase. Thus, using kinematic, isotropic, or combined hardening will
affect the stresses in this region. Andersson (1978) suspected that his use of isotropic
hardening was one reason for the deviations between experiments and simulations.
However, this is not the case, as is shown in the section `À Welding Simulation
Revisited in Part 3. Bammann and Ortega (1993) investigated the effect of
assuming isotropic and kinematic hardening. They found that the choice of hardening inuences the residual stresses very much in the weld metal, but further away
the different models gave identical results. They used the rate-dependent material
model described later in this section. Devaux et al. (1991) found only small differences in residual stresses between models with isotropic or kinematic hardening.
They studied weld repair with four or six beads. No hardening has been assumed
in some studies (e.g. Ueda and Yamakawa 1971a, b, Hibbitt and Marcal 1973, Ueda
et al. 1976, 1977, Hsu 1977, Jonsson et al. 1985a, Karlsson 1989, Karlsson and
Josefson 1990). Excluding hardening is an approximation, but it can be motivated
in some cases. Karlsson (1989) argues that most plastic strains are accumulated
above 600 C, where the material has nearly no hardening. These plastic strains
are removed during subsequent phase transformations (see discussions later, in
the studied low alloy steel). Finally, the yield limit used at room temperature
was estimated from hardness measurements on the welded plate and therefore
already included the effect of hardening during the nal cooling. Most studies
use linear, isotropic hardening. Friedman (1975, 1977) assumed isotropic hardening
using a power law hardening and Ueda et al. (1991) used piecewise linear, isotropic
hardening. Kinematic hardening (Papazoglou and Masubuchi 1982, Wang and
Inoue 1985, Leung and Pick 1986, Ueda et al. 1986, Mok and Pick 1990, Tekriwal
and Mazumder 1989, 1991a, b, Michaleris 1996, Michaleris and DeBiccari 1997)
and combined hardening (Chakravarti 1986, 1987, Murthy et al. 1994) have been
assumed in some simulations.
The rate-dependent plasticity models use a ow potential surface that determines the plastic strain rate. The effective stress can be outside this surface and
the plastic strain rate is a function of the distance to this surface. The material
behavior is elastic if the stress state is inside the potential surface. The surface does
not exist in the case of creep, e_ cij , which can be considered a special case of
216
L.-E. LINDGREN
viscoplasticity. A general form for the plastic ow, where it is assumed that it is
normal to the potential surface, is
vp
e_ ij Fsij , aij , sf k, T
F
sij
13
where F is the ow potential and sf is the ow stress of the material corresponding to

the yield limit in the case of rate-independent plasticity. Some studies like those of
Argyris et al. (1982, 1985), Inoue and Wang (1983), Wang and Inoue (1985), Chidiac
and Mirza (1993), and Myhr et al. (1998a, b) used a viscoplastic material model.
Wang and Inoue (1985) used a model that represents elastic and viscous
deformation, pure viscous deformation, an incompressible Newtonian uid, and
inviscid behavior. The inviscid behavior is the rate-independent plasticity discussed
previously. Goldak et al (1996, 1997a) discuss the use of different rate dependencies
for the plastic behavior at different temperatures and stresses. They chose to use
different constitutive models for different temperature regions. A linear viscous
model is used at a homologous temperature above 0.8. The homologous temperature
is dened as the current temperature in Kelvin divided by the melting temperature in
Kelvin. Rate-dependent plasticity is used down to a homologous temperature of 0.5
and von Mises plasticity for lower temperatures. Carmignani et al. (1999) discuss
the formulation and numerical implementation of a unied model for plasticity
and viscoplasticity. Mahin et al. (1988, 1991), Winters and Mahin (1991), Ortega
et al. (1992, 1998), and Dike et al. (1998) used a unied creep-plasticity model
by Bammann. They assumed
vp
e_ ij AT sinh
jsij aij j sf k, T sij aij

BT
jsij aij j
14
vp
where sf sf0 T k, k_ HT e_p recovery terms, e_ p 23 e_vp
ij e_ij is the effective
vp
plastic strain rate, and a_ ij hT _eij recovery terms. Ronda and Oliver (1998) compare three different viscoplastic models. The models give different results, but there
is no discussion about their applicability for the studied case and there is no comparison with the often used rate-independent elastoplastic model. Sheng and Chen
(1992) and Chen and Sheng (1991, 1992) used the Bodner^Partom viscoplastic model
and the Walker model. The latter accounts for kinematic hardening. Oddy and
McDill (1999) used a model where rate-independent plasticity and creep damage
were accounted for simultaneously in a simulation of burnthrough during welding
of pressurized pipelines.
They used the previously described von Mises plasticity together with
e_ c f s, T GT
s
1o
15
where o is the damage parameter, f is a function to be discussed, and n is a material

constant. The damage parameter o, assumed to be 0 for undamaged and 1 at creep
217
rupture, is determined by
_
o
C
Dn
1 oZ
16
where D sa1 s1a is a stress-dependent parameter combining the inuence of effective stress and the largest principal stress s1 , Z and n are material parameters,
and a2[0, 1] is a traditional factor. The latter parameters were obtained for one
temperature and extrapolated to other temperatures by assuming that time for
rupture changes with temperature in such a way that the Larson^Millar parameter
is constant. This parameter is given by
L T m logt
17
where T is in Kelvin and t is time. Then the material parameters in Eq. (16) can be
determined at any temperature if data are given for one temperature by
uT n1 T1
C1 Z
C1 1 Z1 T1 /T
10mT1 /T 1
where the subscript 1 denotes test data at temperature T1 . Constant data above 750
were assumed due to nucleation of new grains. Oddy and McDill (1999) assumed m
was 16.4. The function f (s, T) in Eq. (15) was used to adjust the creep rate to data
for the minimum creep rate, which occurs when o 0. They used a relation where
one additional dependency on stress, except the sn term, also was included. The
function had the form
f s, T
A
As
eQR/T sinh
B CT
T
19
and n 3 in Eq. (15).

In general, the ow stress decreases with increasing temperature and increases
with increasing strain rate for a constant microstructure. An Arrhenius type of
equation, eQ/RT , may describe the ow stress decrease with absolute temperature
and it is roughly proportional to a power of strain rate. However, when plastic
deformation is accompanied by precipitation, phase changes, and recrystallization,
for example, then the ow stress changes in a complex manner. An example of
the ow stress for a low carbon steel is shown in Figure 10. The anomaly for higher
strain rates is due to so-called blue shortness. The ow stress for a stainless steel
is given in Figure 11. The strain rate dependency can be seen. High-temperature
data may have to be derived from tests for similar materials due to the lack of data.
The inuence of the material composition is often less important at higher temperatures (Figure 12), but not when carbide formers for added high-temperature strength
are present in the material. The inuence of the yield limit at higher temperatures on
the residual stresses is also less important. This is related to the removal of
accumulated plastic strains during phase transformations. The exclusion of the
rate-dependency of the plastic ow at higher temperatures can be combined with
218
L.-E. LINDGREN
Figure 10. Flow stress for 0.15% C-steel evaluated at a total strain of 0.2 for different strain rates and
temperatures. Data from Suzuki (1968).
Figure 11. Flow stress for austenitic stainless steel evaluated at a total strain of 0.2 for different strain
rates and temperatures. Data from Suzuki (1968).
219
using a higher yield limit than the real yield limit. This may also be benecial for the
numerical stability of the simulations, avoiding large deformations and plastic
strains.
The inuence of the phase transformations on the thermal dilatation and the
yield limit was discussed earlier in the section about ``Dependency on Temperature
and Microstructure. Two other aspects of the phase transformations have to be
modeled: transformation -induced plasticity (TRIP) and change in dislocation
structure. The latter is usually accounted for in the hardening model by the
accumulated effective plastic strain. The modeling of these phenomena is discussed
later in this section.
Experimental measurements of welding residual stresses in alloys with low austenite decomposition temperatures showed that longitudinal stresses can be strongly
affected by phase transformations (Nitschke-Pagel and Wohlfahrt 1992). The combination of an applied stress (Figure 13) and a phase change will give rise to an
additional plastic deformation, TRIP. Fischer et al. (1996, 2000) discusses the subject more thoroughly in the context of martensitic (displacive) transformations. (See
also Bergehau and Leblond (1991).) The transformation plasticity is usually assumed
to be proportional to the deviatoric stresses in the same ways as is assumed standard
plasticity models. It is given by
tp
e_ ij f _etra! b , sa , X_ a! b sij
20
where e_ tra! b is the volume change when transforming from phase a to b, X_ a!b is the
rate of phase change from phase a to b, and sa is the yield limit of the weaker phase
Figure 12. Flow stress for carbon steel at higher temperatures. Data from Suzuki (1968). The strain rate is
10 sec1 and the ow stress is evaluated at e 0.2.
220
L.-E. LINDGREN
Figure 13. Effect of stress applied during martensitic transformation for uniaxial test (Cavallon et al.
1997).
a. Argyris (1982, 1985), Josefson (1985c), and Karlsson (1989) accounted for TRIP
by lowering the yield limit. Denis (1984), Dubois et al. (1984), Leblond et al. (1989),
Leblond (1989), Josefson and Karlsson (1992), and Oddy et al. (1989, 1992)
accounted for TRIP in a more correct way. Oddy et al. (1989) showed that this
may be the explanation for the discrepancies between simulations and measurements
by Hibbitt and Marcal (1973). The effect of different material models on the residual
stresses are shown in Figure 14 for conditions resembling the case studied by Hibbitt
and Marcal (1973). The papers by Leblond et al. (1989) and Leblond (1989) give a
theoretical framework. They did not consider the effect of the stresses on the phase
changes. The paper by Oddy et al. (1992) gives a concise description of TRIP.
Bammann et al. (1995) implement this effect differently by using a multiphase state
variable constitutive model. Fischer et al. (2000) give a more detailed model by
including both the shear associated with the martensitic transformation and its volume change _etra! b to the transformation plasticity. They propose the relation
3
dj _
tp
Xa! b sij
e_ ij K
2 dXa!b
21
where K 5_etra!b 2 34 g2m /6s0y , gm is the transformation shear because of the

0
g
m
m
g
martensitic formation, sy sm
y 1 sy /sy /lnsy /sy is the rate of phase change
m
from phase a to b, sy is the yield limit of martensite, sgy is the yield limit of austenite,
221
Figure 14. Effect of transformation plasticity on welding residual stresses at top surface of weld (Oddy et
al. 1989).
and j(X) is an heuristic function. Equation (21) gives transformation plasticity

because of an accommodation process when martensite if formed. It is called
the ``Greenwood^Johnson effect. There is also an orientation process, the ``Magee
effect. See Fischer et al. (2000) for further details about this and its relation to
kinematic hardening. Further details can be found in Berveiller and Fischer (1997).
Denis (1997) discusses pearlitic, that is, a diffusive transformation, in this book.
An expression of the same type as in Eq. (21) is also used for this process.
Modeling the yield strength of a material that undergoes phase changes poses
some questions. Usually the yield strength is determined by a virgin yield limit
and a hardening contribution due to the deformation. The hardening is due to
the increase in dislocation density. The dislocation structure is represented by
the effective plastic strain in a material model. Then there is a question about
how the dislocation density will change during phase transformations. Several
papers have attempted to account for these effects. Friedman (1975, 1977) and
Papazoglou and Masubuchi (1982) removed the accumulated plastic strains when
the material melted and relieved the accumulated strains by multiplying the previously accumulated plastic strains with a factor due to solid-state transformations.
Sarrazin et al. (1997) also included recrystallization and recovery effects, which
reduced the yield strength of aluminum. It is at least appropriate to remove all
222
L.-E. LINDGREN
accumulated strains when the material melts (Lindgren et al. 1997, Brickstad and
Josefson 1998). Mahin et al. (1991) included the removal of plastic strains during
melting because they had found that this was a source of discrepancy between
simulations and measurements in their earlier work (Mahin et al. 1988). Ortega
et al. (1992) initialized all internal state variables to zero when the material melted.
They also removed the deviatoric stresses, creating a hydrostatic stress state in
the weld pool. This was also done by Dike et al. (1998). Devaux et al. (1991) argued
that it is reasonable that the memory of previous plastic deformation disappears
for all solid-state phase transformations in ferritic steels with perhaps the exception
for the martensite formation. The latter involves very small displacements of the
atoms during the transformations, which they assumed did not affect the dislocations. Brust and Dong (Brust et al. 1997, Dong et al. 1998c) introduced rate
equations applied between an anneal temperature and the melting temperature
for anneal strain. The introduction of these strains corresponds to the removal
of plastic strains as they reduce the hardening. They also applied this to the elastic
strains and thereby reduced the stress. The technique can be used with the element
birth option for multipass welding in order to remove history effects. This is also
discussed by Hong et al. (1998b). However, the uniaxial case discussed by them
is not completely correct. The removal of plastic strains does not imply that the
thermal and elastic strains should also be set to zerothe latter giving zero stress
at this instant in time. Models for recovery processes at higher temperatures, like
Eq. (16), exist, but physical-based models for these processes during phase
transformations are lacking. Physical-based material models are models based
on observations of the actual physical processes, phase changes, and dislocation
processes, for example, that take place during the deformation.
There are no papers where the texture created by the directional solidication in
the weld metal is taken into account. Mahin et al. (1988, 1989) discussed this aspect
w.r.t. the interpretation of the neutron diffraction measurements in the weld metal.
A list of papers where some material properties are included is given in Table 2
for ferritic steels, Table 3 for austenitic steels, and Table 4 for other metals. If
nothing else is stated in the comments, then the model is von Mises rate-independent
plasticity with isotropic hardening and the associated ow rule. Most works rely on
properties compiled from the literature, and a few papers refer to experiments prepared especially for the welding simulations at hand. A discussion of material
modeling with respect to obtaining residual stresses is given by Oddy and Lindgren
(1997).
Recommendations. It is important to have a correct description of the material
behavior in order to have an accurate model. The more important mechanical
properties are Youngs modulus, thermal dilatation, and parameters for the plastic
behavior. The inuence of these properties at higher temperatures is less pronounced
on the residual stress elds. The material is soft and the thermal strains cause plastic
strains even if the structure is only restrained a little as the surrounding, initially cold
material acts as a restraint on the heat-affected zone. A cut-off temperature may
therefore be used. It may also be necessary to simplify the tangent matrix used
in the solution procedure if it is too ill-conditioned. Andersson (1978) and Jonsson
223
et al. (1985a) used only the thermoelastic part of the stiffness matrix at high
temperatures. This reduced the convergence rate, but it may be necessary if the
matrix is too ill-conditioned.
The phase transformation of ferritic steels during cooling may inuence the
residual stresses quite a lot. Therefore, the cut-off temperature should at least
be higher than austenization temperature, but it is better to use a value near the
melting temperature. The inuence of the material properties on stresses and
deformations is dependent on the studied conguration. A rigid structure will
get larger changes in plastic strains, whereas a exible structure will experience different deformation due to different material properties.
The importance of including the effect of phase transformations on the mechanical behavior for ferritic steels is also discussed in the recommendations in the
section ``Dependency on Temperature and Microstructure. The effect of TRIP
on residual stresses depends on the restraint of the structure and at what temperature
the phase changes occur. If, for example, the shrinkage after the martensite formation gives rise to plastic yielding before the weld has cooled completely, then the
residual stress is limited by the yield limit of the hardening material and the difference in the residual stresses between an analysis that includes or ignores the volume
changes due to the phase transformation may be small.
The plastic strains generated at higher temperatures may be removed or reduced
due to phase transformation and thereby reduce the inuence of high-temperature
properties even more. It is preferable that the material is modeled as ideal plastic
at this temperature; otherwise the removal of plastic strains may lower the yield
strength, which in turn will create additional plastic strains if the stress eld is
on the yield surface. The plastic strains that exist during cooling will be the major
remaining effect of the properties at higher temperatures. They will in turn contribute to the hardening of the material. This will also limit the inuence of these plastic
strains. Thus, the use of approximate material data and ignoring the rate dependency
at higher temperatures has been found to affect the residual stresses very little (e.g.
Free and Porter Goff 1989, Bru et al. 1997, Tekriwal and Mazumder 1991a). Many
steels have about the same properties when they become fully austenized at higher
temperatures (Figure 12) if no special carbide formers have been added for special
high-temperature strength. It is appropriate to combine kinematic and isotropic
hardening in order to get accurate residual stresses in the weld metal, but there
may be a problem in obtaining the needed data.
Finally, it should be noted that the requirements of the material model are higher
if the zone near the melt is of particular interest, for example, when hot cracking is
studied. This improved material model should, at the same time, be matched by
a rened spatial and temporal discretization.
FUTURE RESEARCH
The modeling of material behavior at higher temperatures and in the presence of
phase transformations is perhaps the most crucial ingredient in successful welding
simulations. Progress in this eld is dependent on the collaborative efforts from com-
224
L.-E. LINDGREN
putational thermomechanics and material science. This is a eld that must be focused
on by the research community active in the eld of welding simulation. The improvement in material modeling and increasing availability of material parameters will, in
combination with the computational development, increase the industrial use of
welding simulations.
REFERENCES
1. J. Goldak, M. Gu, K. Paramjeet and M. Bibby, Computer simulation of welding processes, ASME
Winter Annual Meeting Symp. on Computer Modeling and Simulation of Manufacturin g
Processes, Production Engineering Division, p. 193, 1990.
2. L-E. Lindgren, The Use of Simulations and the Need of Experiments in Material Processing, The sixth
Cairo International MDP Conference, p. 149, 1996.
3. J. Goldak, Modeling thermal stresses and distortions in welds, Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Trends in
Welding Research, p. 71, 1989.
4. J.M.J. McDill, A.S. Oddy, J.A. Goldak and S. Bennisson, Finite Element analysis of weld distortion in
carbon and stainless steels, Journal of Strain Analysis for Engineering Design, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 51^53,
1990.
5. J.B. Leblond, D. Pont, J. Devaux, D. Nru and J.M. Bergheau, Metallurgical and mechanical
consequences of phase transformation s in numerical simulations of welding processes, in L.
Karlsson (ed.), Modeling in Welding, Hot Powder Forming and Casting, pp. 61^89, 1997.
6. E.F. Rybicki, D.W. Schmueser, R.B. Stonesifer, J.J. Groom and H.W. Mishler, A nite element model
for residual stresses in girth-butt welded pipes, ASME Winter annual meeting Numerical modeling of
manufacturing processes, p. 131, 1977.
7. E.F. Rybicki, D.W. Schmueser, R.B. Stonesifer, J.J. Groom and H.W. Mishler, A nite element model
for residual stresses and deections in girth-butt welded pipes, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology,
vol. 100, August, pp. 256^262, 1978.
8. Y. Ueda, K. Nakacho and T: Shimuzu, Improvement of residual stresses of circumferential joint of
pipe by heat-sink welding, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 108, Feb., pp. 14^23 , 1986.
9. S. Brown and H. Song, Finite element simulation of welding of large structures, J. Eng. for Industry,
vol. 114, pp. 441^451 , 1992.
10. S. Brown and H. Song, Implications of three-dimensional numerical simulations of welding of large
structures, Welding Journal, vol. 114, pp. 55s^62s, 1992.
11. L-E. Lindgren, H-. Haggblad, J.M.J. McDill and A.S. Oddy, Automatic remeshing for
three-dimensional nite element simulation of welding, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics
and Engineering, vol. 147, pp. 401^409 , 1997.
12. E. Friedman, Thermomechanical analysis of the welding process using the nite element method,
ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 97, no. 3, Aug., pp. 206^213 , 1975.
13. R.E. Nickell and H.D. Hibbitt, Thermal and mechanical analysis of welded structures, Nuclear Eng
and Design, vol. 32, pp. 110^120 , 1975.
14. Y. Ueda, K. Iida, M. Saito and A. Okamoto, Finite element modeling and residual stress calculation
for multi-pass single welded joint between a plate and the penetrating pipe, Proc. of the 5th Int.
Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solidication Processes, The Minerals, Metals
& Materials Society, p. 219, 1991.
15. Y. Ueda and T. Yamakawa, Thermal stress analysis of metals with temperature dependent mechanical
properties, Proc. Int. Conf. Mech. Behaviour of Materials, p. 10, 1971.
16. H.D. Hibbitt and P.V. Marcal, A Numerical Thermo-Mechanical Model for the Welding and
Subsequent Loading of a Fabricated Structure, Computers & Structures, vol. 3, pp. 1145^1174 , 1973.
17. D.H.B. Mok and R.J. Pick, Finite element study of residual stresses in a plate T-joint fatigue specimen,
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C, J. Mech. Eng. Sci., vol. 204, no C2, pp. 127^134 , 1990.
18. Y. Shim, Z. Feng, S. Lee, D. Kim, J. Jaeger, J.C. Papritan and C.L. Tsai, Determination of residual
stresses in thick-section weldments, Welding Journa, Sep. , pp. 305s^312s , 1992.
225
19. P. Michaleris, Residual stress distributions for multi-pass welds in pressure vessel and piping
components, ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference, Residual Stresses in Design,
Fabrication, Assessment and Repair, PVP-Vol. 327, p. 17, 1996.
20. G. Ravichandran, V.P. Raghupathy, N. Ganesan and R. Krishnakumar, Prediction of axis shift
distortion during circumferential welding of thin pipes using the nite element method, Welding
Journal Research Supplement, January, pp. 39s^55s, 1997.
21. L-E. Lindgren, H. Runnemalm and M.O. Nasstro m, Numerical and experimental investigation of
multipass welding of a thick plate, Internationa l Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering,
vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 1301^1316 , 1999.
22. J.K. Hepworth, Finite element calculation of residual stresses in welds, in Taylor, Owen and Hinton
(eds), Proc. of Int. Conf. for Non.linear Problems, p. 51, 1980.
23. J.A. Free and R.F.D. Porter Goff, Predicting residual stresses in multi-pass weldments with the nite
element method, Computers & Structures, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 365^378 , 1989.
24. J. Canas, R. Pico n, F. Paris and J.C. Marin, Experimental and numerical analysis of residual stresses in
welded Al-5083-0 aluminium plates, Computers & Structures, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 59^69, 1996.
25. K.W. Mahin, S. MacEwen, W. Winters, W. Mason, M. Kanouff and E.A. Fuchs, Evaluation of
residual stress distributions in a traveling GTA weld using nite element and experimental
techniques, Proc. Modeling of Casting and Welding Processes IV, The Minerals, Metals &
Materials Societ, p. 339, 1988.
26. K.W. Mahin, W. Winters, T.M. Holden, R.R. Hosbons and S.R. MacEwen, Prediction and
measurements o residual elastic strain distributions in gas tungsten arc welds, Welding Journal,
vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 245s^260s , 1991.
27. Y. Ueda and T. Yamakawa, Analysis of thermal elastic-plastic stress and strain during welding by
nite element method, JWRI, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 90-100, 1971.
28. B.A.B. Andersson, Thermal Stresses in a Submerged-Arc Welded Joint Considering Phase
Transformations, ASME J. Engineering Materials and Technology, vol. 100, pp. 356-362. 1978.
29. Y. Ueda, E. Takahashi , K. Fukuda, K. Sakamoto and K. Nakacho, Transient and residual stresses
from multipass welding in very thick plates and their reduction from stress relief annealing,
JWRI, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 179^187 , 1976.
30. Y. Ueda, K. Fukuda, K. Nakacho, E. Takahashi and K. Sakamoto, Transient and residual stresses
from multipass welding in very thick plates and their reduction from stress relief annealing, Proc.
of 3rd Int. Conf on Pressure Vessel Technology, pt II, p. 925, 1977.
31. B.L. Josefson, Residual stresses and their redistribution during annealing of a girth-butt welded
thin-walled pipe, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 104, pp. 245^250 , 1982.
32. M. Jonsson, L. Karlsson and L-E. Lindgren, Deformations and stresses in butt-welding of large plates,
in R.W. Lewis (ed.), Numerical Methods in Heat Transfer, vol. III, p. 35, Wiley, 1985.
33. L. Troive, L. Karlsson, M. Nasstrom, P. Webster and K.S. Low, Finite element simulations of the
bending of a at plate to U-shaped beam cross-section and the welding to rectangular hollow
cross-section and neutron diffraction determination of residual stresses, Proc. of the 2nd Int.
Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 107, 1989.
34. R.I. Karlsson and B.L. Josefson, Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Temperatures and
Stresses in a Single-Pass Butt-Welded Pipe, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 112,
pp. 76^84, 1990.
35. K. Kussmaul, E. Roos and W. Guth, A contribution to the numerical and experimental determination
of residual stresses in welds, Nuclear Engineering and Design, vol. 122, pp. 337^348 , 1989.
36. L-E. Lindgren, A. Carlestam and M. Jonsson, Computational model of ame-cutting, ASME J.
Engineering Materials and Technology, vol. 115, pp. 440-445, 1993.
37. O. Voss, I. Decker and H. Wohlfahrt, Simulation of structural changes in the HAZ during laser beam
welding, Proc. of the 8th Int. Conf. on Computer Technology in Welding, Abington Publishing, p.
239, 1998.
38. O. Voss, I. Decker and H. Wohlfahrt, Consideration of microstructural transformation s in the
calculation of residual stresses and distortion of larger weldments, in H. Cerjak (ed.),
Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 4, Institute of Materials, London, p. 584, 1998.
226
L.-E. LINDGREN
39. V.J. Papazoglou and K. Masubuchi, Numerical analysis of thermal stresses during welding including
phase transformation effects, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 104, August, pp.
198^203 , 1982.
40. A.S. Oddy, J.A. Goldak and M. McDill, Transformation Effects in the 3D Finite Element Analysis of
Welds, Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 97, 1989.
41. Y.V.L.N. Murthy, G. Venkata Rao and P. Krishna Iyer, Numerical simulation of welding and
quenching processes using transient thermal and thermo-elasto-plastic formulations, Computers
& Structures, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 131-154, 1996.
42. L-E. Lindgren and L. Karlsson, Deformations and stresses in welding of shell structures, International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 25, pp. 635^655, 1988.
43. B.L. Josefson. and C.T. Karlsson, Transformatio n plasticity effects in residual stresses in a
butt-welded pipe, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 114, pp. 376^378 , 1992.
44. T. Inoue and Z.G. Wang, High temperature behaviour of steels with phase transformation and the
simulation of quenching and welding processes, Proc. of 4th Int. Conf. Mechanical Behaviour of
Materials, p. 1015, 1983.
45. Z.G. Wang and T. Inoue, A viscoplastic constitutive relationship with phase transformation and the
application to the process of welding, Proc. of the 4th Int. Conf. of Mechanical Behaviour of
Materials, p. 474, 1983.
46. Z.G. Wang and T. Inoue, Viscoplastic constitutive relation incorporating phase transformation ^
application to welding, Material Science and Technology, vol. 1, Oct. pp. 899-903, 1985.
47. J.M. Bergheau, and J.B. Leblond, Coupling between heat ow, metallurgy and stress-strain
computations in steels: the approach developed in the computer code Sysweld for welding or
quenching, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solidication
Processes, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, p. 203, 1991.
48. J. Devaux, D. Pont and J.B. Leblond, Numerical simulation of the repair of a defect-containing zone
by a manual welding procedure, Proc. of ASME 10th Conf. on Offshore and Arctic Engineering
(OMAE), vol. III-A Materials Eng., p. 31, 1991.
49. T. Inoue, Metallo-thermo-mechanics, JWRI, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 69^87, 1996.
50. T. Inoue, Residual stresses and distortion metallo-thermo-mechanics: simulation of engineering
processes incorporating phase transformation , in H. Cerjak (ed.), Mathematical Modelling of
Weld Phenomena 4, Institute of Materials, London, pp. 547, 1998.
51. J-B. Roelens, F. Maltrud and J. Lu, Determination of residual stresses in submerged arc multi-pass
welds by means of numerical simulation and comparison with experimental measurements,
Welding in the World, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 152^159 , 1994.
52. J-B. Roelens, Numerical simulation of multipass submerged arc welding ^ determination of residual
stresses and comparison with experimental measurements, Welding in the World, vol. 35, no. 2,
pp. 110^117 , 1995.
53. J-B. Roelens, Determination of residual stresses in submerged arc multi-pass welds by means of
numerical simulation and comparisons with experimental measurements, in H. Cerjak (ed.),
Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 2, The Institute of Materials, pp. 226^241 , 1995.
54. L. Bo rjesson and L-E. Lindgren, Simulation of multipass welding using mixture rules for prediction of
material properties, NUMIFORM98 The Sixth International Conference on Numerical Methods in
Industrial Forming Processes, p. 351, 1998.
55. L. Borjesson and L-E. Lindgren, Simulation of multipass welding with simultaneous computation of
material properties, will appear in ASME J. Eng. Mater. & Technol., 2001.
56. H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, Models for the elementary mechanical properties of steel welds, in H. Cerjak
(ed.), Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, Th eInstitute of Materials, p. 229, 1997.
57. S. Das, U. Upadhya, U. Chandra, M.J. Kleinosky and M.L. Tims, Finite element modeling of a
single-pass GMA weldment, Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and
Advanced Solidication Processes, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, p. 593, 1993.
58. L. Dufrene, J. Truc and R. Martin, Modeling of thermal stresses during an electron-beam welding
process, Journal of Thermal Stresses, vol. 19, pp. 211^238 , 1996.
59. J. Ronda, H. Murakawa , G.J. Oliver and Y. Ueda, Thermo-mechanical-metallurgical model of
welded steel. Part 2. Finite element formulation and constitutive equations, JWRI, vol. 24,
pp. 93^113, 1995.
227
60. J. Ronda and G.J. Oliver, Consistent thermo-mechano-metallurgical model of welded steel with
unied approach to derivation of phase evolution laws and transformation induced plasticity.
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 189, no. 2, pp. 361^418 , 2000.
61. O.R. Myhr, . Grong, S. Klokkehaug, H.G. Fjr and A.O. Kluken, Process model for welding of
Al-;g-So extrusions Part 1: Precipitate stability, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining,
vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 245-253, 1997.
62. O.R. Myhr, S. Klokkehaug, . Grong, H.G. Fjr and A.O. Kluken, Modeling of microstructure
evolution, residual stresses and distortions in 6082-T6 aluminium weldments, Welding Journal,
vol. 77, no. 7, pp. 286s^292s , 1998.
63. O.R. Myhr, A.O. Kluken, S. Klokkehaug, H.G. Fjr and . Grong, Modeling of microstructure
evolution and residual stresses in processing and welding of 6082 and 7108 aluminium alloys,
Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 233, 1998.
64. Grong, Metallurgical Modelling of Welding, The Institute of Materials, 1994.
65. . Grong, Metallurgical modelling of welding of aluminium alloys, in H. Cerjak (ed.), Mathematical
Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, The Institute of Materials, p. 313, 1997.
66. Y. Dong, J.K. Hong, C.L. Tsai and P. Dong, Finite element modeling of residual stresses in austenitic
stainless steel pipe girth welds, Welding Journa l, pp. 442s^449s , 1997.
67. L-E. Lindgren, Temperature elds in simulation of butt-welding of large plates, Comm. in Appl.
Numer. Methods, vol. 2, pp. 155-164, 1986.
68. P. Dong, Analysis of repair weld residual stresses in vessel-type structures, in H. Cerjak (ed.),
Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, The Institute of Materials, p. 666, 1997.
69. R.C. Reed, H.J. Stone, S.M. Roberts and J.M. Robinson, The development and validation of a model
for the electron beam welding of aero-engine components, Proc. of Inst. of Mech. Eng., Part G, J of
Aerospace Eng., vol. 211, no G:6, pp. 421-428, 1997.
70. J. Goldak, B. Patel, M. Bibby and J. Moore, Computational weld mechanics, AGARD Workshop ^
Structures and Materials 61st Panel meeting, 1985.
71. J.E. Moore, M.J. Bibby and J.A. Goldak, A comparison of the point source and nite element schemes
for computing weld cooling, Welding Research: The State of the Art, Proc. of 1985 Int. Welding
Congress in junction with ASM Materials Week85, p. 1 1985.
72. D. Dubois, J. Devaux and J.B. Leblond, Numerical Simulation of a Welding Operation: Calculation of
Residual Stresses and Hydrogen Diffusion, Fifth International Conference on Pressure Vessel
Technology, vol. II, p. 1210, 1984.
73. F. Richter, Die wichtigsten physikalischen Eigenschaften von 52 Eisenwerkstoffen, Heft 8, Stahleisen
^ Sonderberichte, Verlag Stahleisen, Dusseldorf, Germany, 1973.
74. R.D. Pehlke, A. Jeyarajan and H. Wada, Summary of Thermal Properties for Casting Alloys and Mold
Materials, NTIS PB8321100 3, 1982.
75. L. Karlsson, Thermal stresses in welding, in R.B. Hetnarski (ed.), Thermal Stresses, vol. I, Elsevier
Science Publishers, p. 300, 1986.
76. W.D. Rolph and K-J. Bathe, An efcient algorithm for analysis of non linear heat transfer with phase
changes, Int. J. Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 18, pp. 119^134 , 1982.
77. R.W. Lewis, K. Morgan, H.R. Thomas and K.N. Seetharamu, The Finite Element Method in Heat
Transfer Analysis, Wiley, 1996.
78. Z. Feng, A computational analysis of thermal and mechanical conditions for weld solidication
cracking, Welding in the World, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 340^347 , 1994.
79. Z. Feng, T. Zacharia and S.A. David, On the thermomechanical conditions for weld metal
solidication cracking, in H. Cerjak (ed.), Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, The
Institute of Materials, p. 114, 1997.
80. C.K. Leung and R.J. Pick, The Use of Generalized Plane Strain Elements in the Prediction of Residual
Stresses in Welded Flat Plates, Proc. of the Symposium on The Computer Modelling of Fabrication
Processes and Constitutive Behavior of Metals, p. 563, 1986.
81. P. Michaleris and A. DeBiccari, Prediction of welding distortion, Welding Journa l, vol. 76, no 4, pp.
172s^181s , 1997.
82. J. Ronda and G.J. Oliver, Comparisons of applicability of various thermo-viscoplastic constitutive
models in modelling of welding, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol.
153, no. 3-4, pp. 195^221 , 1998.
228
L.-E. LINDGREN
83. E. Pardo and D.C. Weckman, Prediction of weld pool and reinforcement dimensions of GMA welds
using a nite-element model, Metallurgical Trans B., vol. 20B, pp. 937^946, 1989.
84. J.C. Simo, A framework for nite strain elastoplasticity based on maximum plastic dissipation and the
multiplicative decomposition, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 66, pp.
199-219, 1988.
85. J.C. Simo and T.J.R. Hughes, Computational Inelasticity, Springer Verlag, 1997.
86. J. Canas, R. Picn, A. Blazquez, and J.C. Marin, A simplied numerical analysis of residual stresses in
aluminium welded plates, Welding International, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 39^44, 1994.
87. Y. Fujita, Y. Takeshi, M. Kitamura and T. Nomoto, Welding stresses with special reference to
cracking, IIW Doc X-655-72, 1972.
88. Y. Ueda, Y.C. Kim, C. Chen and Y.M. Tang, Mathematical treatment of phase transformation and
analytical calculation of restraint stress-strain, JWRI, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 153^162 , 1985.
89. P. Tekriwal. And J. Mazumder, Transient and residual thermal strain-stress analysis of GMAW,
ASME J. Engineering Materials and Technology, vol. 113, pp. 336^343 , 1991.
90. J.H. Argyris, J. Szimmat, and K.J. Willam, Computational aspects of welding stress analysis,
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 33, pp. 635^666 , 1982.
91. E. Friedman, Numerical simulation of the gas tungsten-arc welding process, ASME winter annual
meeting, p. 35, 1977.
92. J.H. Cowles, M. Blanford, A.F. Giamei and M.J. Bruskotter, Application of three dimensional nite
element analysis to electron beam welding of a high pressure drum rotor, Proc. of the 7th Int.
Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solidication Processes, The Minerals, Metals
& Materials Society, p. 347, 1995.
93. L. Troive, M. Nasstro m and M. Jonsson, Experimental and numerical study of multi-pass welding
process of pipe-ange joints, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 120, August, 1998,
pp. 244^251 .
94. I.C. Sheng and Y. Chen, Modeling welding by surface heating, ASME J. Engineering Materials and
Technology, vol. 114, no. 4, pp. 439^449 , 1992.
95. Y. Chen and I.C. Sheng, On the solid-uid transition zone in welding analysis, ASME HTD-Vol.
175/MD-Vol. 25.#Heat and Mass Transfer in Solidication Processing, p. 21, 1991.
96. Y. Chen and I.C. Sheng, Residual stress in weldment, J. of Thermal Stresses, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 53^69,
1992.
97. W.W. Wilkening and J.L. Snow, Analysis of welding-induced residual stresses with the ADINA
system, Computers & Structures, vol. 47, no 4/5, pp. 767^786 , 1993.
98. J.K. Hong, C.L. Tsai and P. Dong, Assessment of numerical procedures for residual stress analysis of
multipass welds, Welding Journal, vol. 77, no. 9, pp.372s^382s , 1998.
99. M.F. Ashby, Physical modelling of materials problems, Materials Science and Technology, vol. 8, pp.
102^111 , 1992.
100. D. Bru, J. Devaux, J.M. Bergheau and D. Pont, Inuence of material properties at high temperatures
on the modelling of welding residual stress and deformation state, in H. Cerjak (ed.),
Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, The Institute of Materials, p. 457, 1997.
101. N.C. Sekhar, S.M. Roberts, J.M. Robinson and R.C. Reed, Characterisation of distortion during the
laser welding of waspalloy: modelling and in-situ process monitoring, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf.
on Trends in Welding Research, p. 976, 1998.
102. M. Kojic and K-J. Bathe, The effective-stress-function algorithm for thermo-elasto-plasticity and
creep, Int. J. Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 24, pp. 1509^1532 , 1987.
103. B.L. Josefson and L-E. Lindgren, Modelling of residual stresses, Proc. of 5th Int. Conf. on Residual
Stresses (ICRS-5), p. 1, 1997.
104. L. Tall, Residual Stresses in Welded Plates - a theoretical study, Welding Journal, vol. 43, no. 1, pp.
10s-23s , 1964.
105. I. Tsuji, Transient and residual stresses due to butt-welding of mild steel plates, Memoirs of the Faculty
of Engineering, Kyushu University, vol. XXVII, no. 3, 1967.
106. M. Jonsson, L. Karlsson and L-E. Lindgren, Deformations and stresses in butt-welding of large plates
with special reference to the mechanical material properties, ASME J. Engineering Materials and
Technology, vol. 107, no. 10, pp. 265^270, 1985.
229
107. D.J. Bammann and A.R. Ortega, The inuence of the Bauschinger effect and yield denition on the
modeling of welding processes, Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. on Modeling of Casting, Welding and
Advance Solidication Processes, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, p. 543, 1993.
108. M.B. Hsu, Analysis of welds by the nite element method, ASME winter annual meeting 1977
Numerical Modeling of Manufacturing Processes, p. 97, 1977.
109. C.T. Karlsson, Finite element analysis of temperatures and stresses in a single-pass butt-welded pipe ^
inuence of mesh density and material modelling, Eng. Comput., vol. 6, June, pp. 133^142 , 1989.
110. P. Tekriwal. And J. Mazumder, Thermomechanical analysis of residual strains and stress in a GMA
weld, Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, pp. 91, 1989.
111. P. Tekriwal. And J. Mazumder, Transient and residual thermal strain-stress analysis of arc welding
processes, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solidication
112. A.P. Chakravarti, L.M. Mali and J.A. Goldak, Prediction of distortion and residual stresses in panel
welds, Computer Modelling of Fabrication Processes and Constitutiv e Behaviour of Metals, p.
547, 1986.
113. A.P. Chakravarti , L.M. Malik, A.S. Rao, and J.A. Goldak, Prediction of distortion in overlayed repair
welds, Proc of 5th Int Conf on Numerical Methods in Thermal Problems, p. 1131, 1987.
114. Y.V.L.N. Murthy, G. Venkata Rao and P. Krishna Iyer, Analysis of residual stresses in hemispherical
head to cylindrical shell joints of steam generator by weld cycle simulation, J of Materials Processing
Technology, vol. 44, no. 3-4, pp. 273^280 , 1994.
115. Argyris, J.H., Szimmat, J., Willam, K.J., Finite element analysis of arc-welding processes, in R.W.
Lewis (ed.), Numerical Methods in Heat Transfer, vol. III, pp. 35^58, 1985.
116. S.E. Chidiac and F.A. Mirza, Thermal stress analysis due to welding processes by the nite element
method, Computers & Structures, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 407^412, 1993.
117. J. Goldak, J. Zhou, V. Breiguine and F. Montoya, Thermal stress analysis of welds: From melting
point to room temperature, JWRI, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 185^189 , 1996.
118. J. Goldak, V. Breiguine, N. Dai, E. Hughes and J. Zhou, Thermal stress analysis in solids near the
liquid region in welds, in H. Cerjak (ed.), Mathematical Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, The
Institute of Materials, p. 543, 1997.
119. C. Carmignani, R. Mares and G. Toselli, Transient nite element analysis of deep penetration laser
welding process in a single pass butt-welded thick steel plate, Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 179, pp. 197^214 , 1999.
120. W.S. Winters and K.M. Mahin, PASTA2D Modeling of an axisymmetric stationary Gas Tungsten
Arc weld, Proc. of the 5th Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solidication
121. A.R. Ortega, L.A. Bertram, E.A. Fuchs, K.W. Mahin and D.V. Nelson, Thermomechanical modeling
of a stationary gas metal arc weld: a comparison between numerical and experimental results, Proc. of
the 4th Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 89, 1992.
122. A.R. Ortega, J.J. Dike, J.F. Lathrop, C.H. Cadden, D.R. Folk and J.E. Robles, Analysis and
validation of multi-pass girth welds in pipes, Proc. of the 8th Int. Conf. Modeling of Casting,
Welding and Advanced Solidication Processes, p. 779, 1998.
123. J. Dike, C. Cadden, R. Corderman, C. Schultz and M. McAninch, Finite element modeling of
multipass GMA welds in steel plates, Proc. of the 4th Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research,
p. 57, 1995.
124. A.S. Oddy and J.M.J. McDill, Burnthrough prediction in pipeline welding, Int. J. Fracture, vol. 97, no.
1/4, pp. 249-261, 1999.
125. H. Suzuki, S. Hashizume, Y. Yabuki, Y. Ichihara, S. Nakajima and K. Kenmochi, Studies on the ow
stress of metals and alloys, Report of the Institute of Industrial Science, The University of Tokyo, vol.
18, no. 3, 1968.
126. T. Nitschke-Pagel and H. Wohlfahrt, Residual Stress Distributions after Welding as a Consequence of
the Combined Effect of Physical, Metallurgical and Mechanical Sources in: L. Karlsson, M. Jonson
and L-E. Lindgren (eds.), Proc of IUTAM Symposium Mechanical Effects of Welding, Springer
Verlag, Berlin, p. 123, 1992.
230
L.-E. LINDGREN
127. N. Cavallon, L. Taleb, J.F. Jullien, F. Waeckel, Y. Wadier and L. Moche, Thermomechanical
behaviour of a carbon manganese steel under martensitic transformation , Modelling of residual
stresses, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Residual Stresses (ICRS-5), p. 239, 1997.
128. F.D. Fischer, Q-P. Sun and K. Tanaka, Transformation-induced plasticity (TRIP), Appl. Mech. Rev.,
vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 317^362 , 1996.
129. F.D. Fischer, G. Reisner, E. Werner, K. Tanaka, G. Cailletaud and T. Antretter, A new view on
transformation induced plasticity (TRIP), Int. J. Plasticity, vol. 16, pp. 723^748, 2000.
130. B.L. Josefson, Effects of transformation plasticity on welding residual-stress elds in thin-walled pipes
and thin plates, Materials Science and Technology, Oct. , pp. 904^908, 1985.
131. S. Denis, E. Gautier, A. Simon and G. Beck, Stress Phase Transformation Interactions: Basic
Principles; Modelization and Their Role in the Calculation of Internal Stresses, International
Symposium on the Calculation of Internal Stresses in Heat Treatment of Metallic Materials, vol.
1, p. 157, 1984.
132. J.B. Leblond, J. Devaux and J.C. Devaux, Mathematical Modelling of Transformatio n Plasticity in
Steels I: Case of Ideal-Plastic Phases, Int. J. Plasticity, vol. 5, pp. 551^572 , 1989.
133. J.B. Leblond, Mathematical Modelling of Transformation Plasticity in Steels II: Coupling with Strain
Hardening Phenomena, Int. J. Plasticity, vol. 5, pp. 573^591 , 1989.
134. A.S. Oddy, J.A. Goldak and R.C. Reed, Martensite Formation, Transformation Plasticity and
Stresses in High Strength Steel Welds, Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, 1992.
135. A. Oddy, J. Goldak and M. McDill, Transformation plasticity and residual stresses in single-pass
repair welds, ASME J Press. Vessel Technol., vol. 11, pp. 33^38, 1992.
136. D.J. Bammann, V.C. Prantil and J.F. Lathrop, A model of phase transformation plasticity, Proc. of
the 7th Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solidication Processes, The Minerals,
Metals & Materials Society, p. 275, 1995.
137. M. Berveiller and F.D. Fischer (eds), Mechanics of Solids with Phase Changes, CISM Courses and
Lectures No. 368, Springer, 1997.
138. S. Denis, Considering stress-phase transformation interactions in the calculation of heat treatment
residual stresses, in M. Berveiller and F.D. Fischer (eds), Mechanics of Solids with Phase
Changes, CISM Courses and Lectures No. 368, Springer, p. 293, 1997.
139. E. Sarrazin, K. Dang Van and H. Maitournam, Modelling residual stresses in weldments of
work-hardened aluminium alloys with microstructural effects, in H. Cerjak (ed.), Mathematical
Modelling of Weld Phenomena 3, The Institute of Materials, p. 652, 1997.
140. B. Brickstad and B.L. Josefson, A parametric study of residual stresses in multi-pass butt-welded
stainless steel pipes, Int. J. Press. Vessel & Piping, vol. 75, p. 11^25, 1998.
141. F.W. Brust, P. Dong, and J. Zhang, Inuence of residual stresses and weld repairs on pipe fracture,
Approximate Methods in the Design and Analysis of Pressure Vessels and Piping Component,
PVP-vol. 347, p. 173, 1997.
142. P. Dong, J. Zhang and M.V. Li, Computational modeling of weld residual stresses and distortions - an
integrated framework and industrial applications, ASME, PVP-Vol. 373 Fatigue, Fracture, and
Residual Stresses, p. 137, 1998.
143. J.K. Hong, P. Dong and C.L. Tsai, Application of plastic strain relaxation effect in numerical welding
simulation, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 999, 1998.
144. K.W. Mahin, W. Winters, J. Krafcik, T. Holden, R. Hosbon and S. MacEwen, Residual strain
distributions in gas tungsten arc welds: a comparison between experimental results and weld
model predictions, Proc. of the 2nd Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 83, 1989.
145. A.S: Oddy and L-E. Lindgren, Mechanical modeling and residual stresses, in L. Karlsson (ed.),
Modeling in Welding, Hot Powder Forming and Casting, pp. 31^55, 1997.
146. Y. Ueda and K. Nakacho, Simplifying methods for analysis of transient and residual stresses and
deformations due to multipass welding, JWRI, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 95^103, 1982.
147. Y. Ueda, Y.C. Kim, K. Garatani and T: Yamakita, Mechanical characteristics of repair welds in thick
plate - distribution of three dimensional welding residual stresses and plastic strains and their
production mechanisms, Welding Internationa l, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 33^39, 1988.
148. E.F. Rybicki and R.B. Stonesifer, An analysis for predicting weld repair residual stresses in
thick-walled vessels, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 192, August, pp. 323^331 , 1980.
231
149. E.F. Rybicki, J.R. Shadley, A.S. Sandhu and R.B. Stonesifer, Experimental and computational
residual stress evaluation of a weld clad plate and machined test specimen, ASME J. Engineering
Materials and Technology, vol. 110, October, pp. 297^304, 1988.
150. K-Y. Bae, S-J. Na and D-H. Park, A study of mechanical stress relief (MSR) treatment of residual
stresses for one-pass submerged arc welding of V-grooved mild steel plate, Proc. Instn Mech
Engrs/Part B: Journal of Eng. Manufacture, vol. 208, B:3, p. 217, 1994.
151. D.W. Lobitz, J.D. McClure and R.E. Nickell, Residual stresses and distortions in multi-pass welding,
Proc. of ASME Winter annual meeting, Numerical modeling of manufacturing processes, PVP-PB-025 ,
p. 1, 1977.
152. N-X. Ma, Y. Ueda, H. Murakawa and H. Maeda, FEM analysis of 3-D welding residual stresses and
angular distortion in T-type llet welds, JWRI, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 115^122 , 1995.
153. L. Wikander, L. Karlsson L-E. Lindgren and A.S. Oddy, Plane thermo-mechanical nite element
modeling of welding with special reference to the material behaviour, Int Conf on Modeling and
Control of Joining Processes, 1993.
154. L. Wikander, L. Karlsson, M. Nasstro m and P. Webster, Finite element simulation and measurements
of welding residual stresses, Modelling, Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng, vol. 2, pp. 845^864 , 1994.
155. M.G. Yuan, J. Wang, H. Murakawa and Y. Ueda, Three dimensional nite element analysis of
residual distortions in welded structures, Proc. of the 7th Conf. Modeling of Casting, Welding and
Advanced Solidication Processes, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, p. 257, 1995.
156. P. Michaleris, D.A. Tortorelli and C.A. Vidal, Analysis and optimization of weakly coupled
thermoelastoplastic systems with application to weldment design, Int. J. Numerical Methods in
Eng., vol. 38, pp. 1259^1285 , 1995.
157. N. Siva Prasad and T.K. Sankaranarayanan , Estimation of residual stresses in weldments using
adaptive grids, Computers & Structures, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 1037^1045 , 1996.
158. B. Taljat, B. Radhakrishnan and T. Zacharia, Numerical analysis of GTA welding process with
emphasis on post-solidication transformation effects on residual stresses, Materials Science and
Engineering , vol. A246, pp. 45^54, 1998.
159. Y.C. Kim, K.H. Chang and K. Horikawa, Characteristics of out-of-plane deformation and residual
stress generated by llet welding, JWRI, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 69^74, 1998.
160. E.F. Rybicki and R.B. Stonesifer, Computation of Residual Stresses due to Multipass Welds in Piping
Systems, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 101, pp. 149^154 , 1979.
161. E.F. Rybicki, R.B. Stonesifer and W. Shack, The effect of length on weld overlay residual stresses,
ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping and Computer Eng. Conference, p. 1, 1986.
162. Y. Lejeail, Simulation of a stainless steel multipass weldment, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Residual
Stresses (ICRS-5), p. 484, 1997.
163. M. Nasstrom, P.J. Webster and J. Wang, Residual stresses and deformations due to longitudinal
welding of pipes, Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, p. 109, 1989.
164. M. Nasstrom, L. Wikander, L. Karlsson, L-E. Lindgren and J. Goldak, Combined 3D and shell
modelling of welding, IUTAM Symposium on the Mechanical Effects of Welding, p. 197, 1992.
165. P. Dong, J.K. Hong, J. Zhang, P. Rogers, J. Bynum and S. Shah, Effects of repair weld residual stresses
on wide-panel specimens loaded in tension, ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 120, May, pp.
122^128 , 1998.
166. P. Dong, J.K. Hong and P. Rogers, Analysis of residual stresses in Al-Li repair welds and mitigation
techniques, Welding Journa l, Nov., pp. 439s-445s , 1998.
167. Y. Yang, P. Dong, X. Tian and Z. Zhang, Prevention of welding hot cracking of high strength
aluminium alloys by mechanical rolling, Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding
Research, p. 700, 1998.
168. Y. Yang, P. Dong, J. Zhang and X. Tian, X., A hot-cracking mitigating technique for welding high
strength aluminum alloy, Welding Journal, vol. 79, no 1, pp. 9s^17s, 2000.
169. P. Michaleris, Z. Feng and G. Campbell, Evaluation of 2D and 3D FEA models for predicting residual
stresses and distortion, Proc. of ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conf., Approximate Methods in
the Design and Analysis of Pressure Vessels and Piping Components, PVP-Vol. 347, p. 91, 1997.

Lindegrin 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lindegrin 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lindegrin 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Annamalai University Library]

On: 01 September 2015, At: 22:02

Journal of Thermal Stresses

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any

Journal of Thermal Stresses, 24:195^231 , 2001

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND SIMULATION OF

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

The development of welding procedures is based on performing experiments

Received 12 August 1999; accepted 12 April 2000.

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

of most simulations has been to obtain residual stresses and corresponding

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Table 1 Curvature for combinations of thermal and mechanical properties (McDill

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Dependency on Temperature and Microstructure

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

thermal dilatation of material subjected to different peak temperatures, depends on

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Properties for Modeling Heat Conduction

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Table 2 Reference with material properties, ferritic steels

Creep during stress relief

von Mises, kinematic hardening

Table 3 References with material properties, austenitic steels

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Ueda et al. (1986)

Piecewise linear, isotropic hardening

Table 4 References with material properties, other materials

Ueda et al. (1991)

Piecewise linear, isotropc hardening

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Introduction to Mechanical Properties

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Properties for Modeling Thermoelastic Deformation

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

incompressible plasticity (see the description of plasticity later). For convenience,

sij 2Geeij 2Geij epij

where K E/31 2n is the temperature-dependent bulk modulus, G E/21 n

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING

Downloaded by [Annamalai University Library] at 22:02 01 September 2015

or the secant thermal expansion

IMPROVED MATERIAL MODELING