The before closed the cycle between the "given data in simufact" (= material properties from the Simufact material data base) and the "acquired data" (= simulation results of the compression test) by checking the numeric. The better this works, the better is the model (time stepping, friction approach, meshing, ....). If it would not work at all, our software would have a problem.
The second approach to validate your compression test simulation include the method and steps used to conduct from the simulated force-defection-curve to the flow curves of the material. If this is validated you can replace the simulated force-deflection-curve by a measured one and determine the flow curves to be used in the simulation.
This approach works better for a tension test because the (nearly) uniaxial deformation is bigger there. But the steps work with a compression test, too. I may want to stick to the unrealistic friction free constant temperature uniform strain rate simulation first, making the simulation more realistic in later steps coming closer to potential experiments. Which will make the next steps a bit more tricky and ambiguous.
Steps to do, check the Simufact Material Infosheet FlowCurves_en.pdf for some background information and formulas used:
Get the simulated force-defection-curve. About 5 points are fine. If applicable use the distance between 2 particles as "measurement length" for the deflection instead of using the stroke.
Calculate the engineering stresses and strains
Decided which of your points are close enough to a uniform deformation of the workpiece. One with these:
Calculate the true stress and strain
Plot true stress and true strain for the used strain rate and temperature.
Extrapolate the flow curve as applicable.
This is the "experimentally" determined flow curve of your material. It should be close to the flow curve used in the simulation of the experiment.
The before closed the cycle between the "given data in simufact" (= material properties from the Simufact material data base) and the "acquired data" (= simulation results of the compression test) by checking the numeric. The better this works, the better is the model (time stepping, friction approach, meshing, ....). If it would not work at all, our software would have a problem.
The second approach to validate your compression test simulation include the method and steps used to conduct from the simulated force-defection-curve to the flow curves of the material. If this is validated you can replace the simulated force-deflection-curve by a measured one and determine the flow curves to be used in the simulation.
This approach works better for a tension test because the (nearly) uniaxial deformation is bigger there. But the steps work with a compression test, too. I may want to stick to the unrealistic friction free constant temperature uniform strain rate simulation first, making the simulation more realistic in later steps coming closer to potential experiments. Which will make the next steps a bit more tricky and ambiguous.
Steps to do, check the Simufact Material Infosheet FlowCurves_en.pdf for some background information and formulas used:
Get the simulated force-defection-curve. About 5 points are fine. If applicable use the distance between 2 particles as "measurement length" for the deflection instead of using the stroke.
Calculate the engineering stresses and strains
Decided which of your points are close enough to a uniform deformation of the workpiece. One with these:
Calculate the true stress and strain
Plot true stress and true strain for the used strain rate and temperature.
Extrapolate the flow curve as applicable.
This is the "experimentally" determined flow curve of your material. It should be close to the flow curve used in the simulation of the experiment.
