Strain-Rate Effect and Constitutive Models for Q550 High-Strength Structural Steel

  • Hua YangEmail author
  • Xiaoqiang Yang
  • Amit H. Varma
  • Yong Zhu


High-strength structural steel is the tendency in modern construction practice. In this study, quasi-static tension tests and dynamic tests for Q550 with strain rate from 0.00025 to 3831 s−1 were conducted. The results showed that Q550 is dependent on the strain rate, keeping the flow stress increased as the strain rate increases, while Q550 has lower strain-rate sensitivity of flow stress than that of normal mild steel. Based on the experimental data, a proper constant for the key parameter, C, in Johnson–Cook model (J–C) was suggested. Then, a modified J–C model based on a rate-dependent parameter \(C\left( {\dot{\varepsilon }} \right)\) was recommended to consider the influence of strain-rate effect. New constants of D and p governing the dynamic response of steel in the Cowper–Symonds (C–S) model were also suggested. The C–S model and J–C models with suggested constants provided in the paper were proven to have acceptable prediction accuracy for the dynamic increase factor of Q550. These results may be applied to study the dynamical properties of Q550 and related structural components for future engineering applications.


dynamic constitutive models high strain rate high-strength structural steel Q550 split Hopkinson pressure bar 



The authors are grateful for the financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51678194). This work is also supported by China Scholarship Council (Grant No. 201706120260).


  1. 1.
    G. Li, H. Lyu, and C. Zhang, Post-fire Mechanical Properties of High Strength Q690 Structural Steel, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2017, 132, p 108–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Bjorhovde, Performance and Design Issues for High Strength Steel in Structures, Adv. Struct. Eng., 2010, 13(3), p 403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    H.Y. Ban and G. Shi, A Review of Research on High-strength Steel Structures, Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build., 2018, 171(8), p 625–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. Zhang, Y. Li, J. Wang, and Q. Jiang, Effect of Acicular Ferrite on Cracking Sensibility in the Weld Metal of Q690 + Q550 High Strength Steels, ISIJ Int., 2011, 51(7), p 1132–1136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A.M.P. Jesus, R. Matos, B.F.C. Fontoura, C. Rebelo, L.S. Da Silva, and M. Veljkovic, A Comparison of the Fatigue Behavior Between S355 and S690 Steel Srades, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2012, 79, p 140–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    H.C. Ho, X. Liu, K.F. Chung, A.Y. Elghazouli, and M. Xiao, Hysteretic Behaviour of High Strength S690 Steel Materials Under Low Cycle High Strain Tests, Eng. Struct., 2018, 165, p 222–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. Fang, X. Meng, Q. Hu, F. Wang, H. Ren, H. Wang et al., TANDEM and GMAW Twin Wire Welding of Q690 Steel Used in Hydraulic Support, J. Iron. Steel Res. Int., 2012, 19(5), p 79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Yan, J.Y.R. Liew, M. Zhang, and J. Wang, Mechanical Properties of Normal Strength Mild Steel and High Strength Steel S690 in Low Temperature Relevant to Arctic Environment, Mater. Des., 2014, 61, p 150–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Chen, B. Young, and B. Uy, Behavior of High Strength Structural Steel at Elevated Temperatures, J. Struct. Eng., 2006, 132(12), p 1948–1954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    X. Qiang, F.S.K. Bijlaard, and H. Kolstein, Post-fire Mechanical Properties of High Strength Structural Steels S460 and S690, Eng. Struct., 2012, 35, p 1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Kang, M. Suzuki, H. Ge, and B. Wu, Experiment of Ductile Fracture Performances of HSSS Q690 after a Fire, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2018, 146, p 109–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Ban, G. Shi, Y. Shi, and Y. Wang, Overall Buckling Behavior of 460 MPa High Strength Steel Columns: Experimental Investigation and Design Method, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2012, 74, p 140–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Y. Wang, G. Li, S. Chen, and F. Sun, Experimental and Numerical Study on the Behavior of Axially Compressed High Strength Steel Columns with H-section, Eng. Struct., 2012, 43, p 149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Li, G. Li, S. Chan, and Y. Wang, Behavior of Q690 High-strength Steel Columns: Part 1: Experimental Investigation, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2016, 123, p 18–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Li, S. Liu, G. Li, S. Chan, and Y. Wang, Behavior of Q690 High-Strength Steel Columns: Part 2: Parametric Study and Design Recommendations, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2016, 122, p 379–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Wang, S. Afshan, and L. Gardner, Axial Behavior of Prestressed High Strength Steel Tubular Members, J. Constr. Steel Res., 2017, 133, p 547–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M.J. Manjoine, The Influence of Rate of Strain and Temperature on the Yield Stresses of Mild Steel, J. Appl. Mech., 1944, 11, p A-211Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    W.L. Cowell, Dynamic Tests on Selected Structural Steels. No. Ncel-Tr-642, Naval Civil Engineering Lab Port Hueneme Calif, 1969.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R.L. Woodward and R.H. Brown, Dynamic Stress–Strain Properties of a Steel and a Brass at Strain Rates up to 104 per Second, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 1975, 189(1), p 107–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    M.M. Haque and M.S.J. Hashmi, Stress–Strain Properties of Structural Steel at Strain Rates of up to 105 per Second at Sub-zero, Room and High Temperatures, Mech. Mater., 1984, 3(3), p 245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    W. Yu, J. Zhao, and J. Shi, Dynamic Mechanical Behaviour of Q345 Steel at Elevated Temperatures: Experimental Study, Mater. High Temp., 2010, 27(4), p 285–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. Mirmomeni, A. Heidarpour, X. Zhao, C.R. Hutchinson, J.A. Packer, and C. Wu, Mechanical Properties of Partially Damaged Structural Steel Induced by High Strain Rate Loading at Elevated Temperatures—An Experimental Investigation, Int. J. Impact Eng., 2015, 76, p 178–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. Forni, B. Chiaia, and E. Cadoni, Strain Rate Behaviour in Tension of S355 Steel: Base for Progressive Collapse Analysis, Eng. Struct., 2016, 119, p 164–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. Chen, W. Shu, and J. Li, Constitutive Model of Q345 Steel at Different Intermediate Strain Rates, Int. J. Steel Struct., 2017, 17(1), p 127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    J. Chen, J. Li, and Z. Li, Experiment Research on Rate-Dependent Constitutive Model of Q420 Steel, Constr. Build. Mater., 2017, 153, p 816–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    X. Yang, H. Yang, and S. Zhang, Rate-Dependent Constitutive Models of S690 High-strength Structural Steel, Constr. Build. Mater., 2019, 198, p 597–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    N.R.N. Rao, M. Lohrmann, and L. Tall, Effect of Strain Rate on the Yield Stress of Structural Steel, ASTM J. Mater., 1966, 1(1), p 684–737Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    P. Soroushian and K. Choi, Steel Mechanical Properties at Different Strain Rates, J. Struct. Eng., 1987, 113(4), p 663–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. Kassar and W. Yu, Effect of Strain Rate on Material Properties of Sheet Steels, J. Struct. Eng., 1992, 118(11), p 3136–3150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    L.J. Malvar and J.E. Crawford, Dynamic Increase Factors for Steel Reinforcing Bars, 28th Department of Defence Explosive Safety Board Seminar, Orlando, USA, 1998Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    W.E. Luecke, J.D. McColskey, C.N. McCowan, S.W. Banovic, R.J. Fields, T.J. Foecke et al., Mechanical Properties of Structural Steels—Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (NIST NCSTAR 1-3D), Gaithersburg, National Institute of Standard and Technology, USA, 2005Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    G.R. Johnson and W.H. Cook, A Constitutive Model and Data for Metals Subjected to Large Strains, High Strain Rates and High Temperatures, Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Ballistics, Den Haag, The Netherlands, 1983.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    G. Cowper and P.S. Symonds, Strain Hardening and Strain Rate Effects in the Impact Loading of the Cantilever Beams, Technical Report 28, Providence, RI: Brown University, Division of Applied Mathematics, 1957Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    K. Vedantam, D. Bajaj, N.S. Brar, and S. Hill, Johnson–Cook Strength Models for Mild and DP 590 Steels, AIP Conf. Proc., 2006, 845(1), p 775–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    N. Jones, Structural Aspects of Ship Collisions, Structural Crashworthiness, N. Jones and T. Wierzbicki, Ed., Butterworths, London, 1983, p 308–337Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hua Yang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Xiaoqiang Yang
    • 2
    • 3
  • Amit H. Varma
    • 3
  • Yong Zhu
    • 2
  1. 1.Key Lab of Structures Dynamic Behavior and Control of the Ministry of EducationHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  2. 2.School of Civil EngineeringHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinChina
  3. 3.Lyles School of Civil EngineeringPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations