Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology

, Volume 33, Issue 9, pp 4245–4254 | Cite as

Evaluation of the prediction ability of ductile fracture criteria over a wide range of drawing conditions

  • Donghyuk Cho
  • Yun-Chan Jang
  • Youngseog LeeEmail author


In this study, we selected six ductile fracture (DF) criteria to assess their capability to predict material fracture when high-alloy steel was cold drawn at a wide range of reduction ratios and die semi-angles in a single-pass drawing process. A user-defined subroutine VUSDFLD for each DF criterion was coded in Fortran and integrated into ABAQUS. Twenty-eight drawing tests were performed using a combination of reduction ratio (r) range (10–49 %) and die semi-angle (α) range (4°–25°). Test results were compared with the results of finite element simulations. The results showed that, if three macroscopic variables (namely, stress triaxiality, maximum principal stress, and equivalent stress) and a cut-off value are combined in a DF criterion, the fracture of the material being drawn can be predicted at a sufficient level. This DF criterion showed a much higher prediction accuracy than the other five DF criteria, especially in the operating region (α < 10° and r > 40 %) where the producer of cold-drawn steel bar (or rod) products prefers to increase productivity and improve quality.


Fracture identification curve Ductile fracture criteria Stress function High-alloy steel Drawbench test 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This research was supported by the Chung-Ang University Graduate Research Scholarship in 2018. And this research was supported by the Chung-Ang University research grant in 2017.


  1. [1]
    T. S. Cao, Models for ductile damage and fracture prediction in cold bulk metal forming processes: A review, Int. J. Mater. Form., 10 (2) (2017) 139–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    N. Alberti, A. Barcellona, A. Masnata and F. Micari, Central bursting defects in drawing and extrusion: Numerical and ultrasonic evaluation, CIRP Ann. — Manuf. Technol., 42 (1) (1993) 269–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Oyane, T. Sato, K. Okimoto and S. Shima, Criteria for ductile fracture and their applications, J. Mech. Work. Technol., 4 (1) (1980) 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    K. Komori, Effect of ductile fracture criteria on chevron crack formation and evolution in drawing, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 45 (1) (2003) 141–160.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. M. Freudenthal, The Inelastic Behavior of Solids, Wiley, New York (1950).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Cockcroft and Latham, Ductility and the workability of metals, J. Inst. Met., 96 (1) (1968) 33–39.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    P. Brozzo, B. De Luca and R. Rendina, A new method for prediction of formability limits of metal sheets, Proc. 7th Biannu. Congr. IDDRG (1972).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. L. Gurson, Continuum theory of ductile rupture by void nucleation and growth: Part I-Yield criteria and flow rules for porous ductile media, J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 99 (1) (1977) 2–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    P. McAllen and P. Phelan, Ductile fracture by central bursts in drawn 2011 aluminium wire, Int. J. Fract., 135 (1–4) (2005) 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. Chaouadi, P. De Meester and W. Vandermeulen, Damage work as ductile fracture criterion, Int. J. Fract., 66 (2) (1994) 155–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. I. Orbegozo, Fracture in wire drawing, Ann. CIRP, 16 (1968) 319–330.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    A. Haddi, A. Imad and G. Vega, The influence of the drawing parameters and temperature rise on the prediction of chevron crack formation in wire drawing, Int. J. Fract., 176 (2) (2012) 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. A. González, D. J. Celentano and M. A. Cruchaga, Assessment of ductile failure models in single-pass wire drawing processes, Int. J. Damage Mech., 27 (9) (2018) 1291–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    R. Tørnqvist, Design of crashworthy ship structures, Ph.D. Thesis, Technical University of Denmark, 103 (June) (2003) 246.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Y. K. Ko, J. S. Lee, H. Huh, H. K. Kim and S. H. Park, Prediction of fracture in hub-hole expanding process using a new ductile fracture criterion, J. Mater. Process. Technol., 187–188 (2007) 358–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    J. R. Rice and D. M. Tracey, On the ductile enlargement of voids in triaxial stress fields, J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 17 (3) (1969) 201–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Y. Huang, Accurate dilatation rates for spherical voids in triaxial stress field, J. Appl. Mech. (1991) 1084–1086.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Y. Bao and T. Wierzbicki, On the cut-off value of negative triaxiality for fracture, Eng. Fract. Mech., 72 (7) (2005) 1049–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Y. Lou, J. W. Yoon and H. Huh, Modeling of shear ductile fracture considering a changeable cut-off value for stress triaxiality, Int. J. Plast., 54 (2014) 56–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Y. Bai and T. Wierzbicki, A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with pressure and Lode dependence, Int. J. Plast., 24 (6) (2008) 1071–1096.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Y. Bai and T. Wierzbicki, Application of extended Mohr- Coulomb criterion to ductile fracture, Int. J. Fract., 161 (1) (2010) 1–20.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Y. Lou, H. Huh, S. Lim and K. Pack, New ductile fracture criterion for prediction of fracture forming limit diagrams of sheet metals, Int. J. Solids Struct., 49 (25) (2012) 3605–3615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Y. Lou, L. Chen, T. Clausmeyer, A. E. Tekkaya and J. W. Yoon, Modeling of ductile fracture from shear to balanced biaxial tension for sheet metals, Int. J. Solids Struct., 112 (2017) 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    D. Mohr and S. J. Marcadet, Micromechanically-motivated phenomenological Hosford-Coulomb model for predicting ductile fracture initiation at low stress triaxialities, Int. J. Solids Struct., 67–68 (2015) 40–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    A. Seupel and M. Kuna, A gradient-enhanced damage model motivated by engineering approaches to ductile failure of steels, Int. J. Damage Mech., 0 (0) (2019) 1–36.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© KSME & Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringChung-Ang UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Gas Facility Technology CenterKOGAS Research InstituteAnsan, Gyeonggi-doKorea

Personalised recommendations