International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mechanical Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmecsci

Evaluation of ratcheting behaviour in cyclically stable steels through use of

a combined kinematic-isotropic hardening rule and a genetic algorithm
optimization technique
Atri Nath a,∗, Kalyan Kumar Ray b, Sudhirkumar V. Barai a
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India
b
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: Modeling of material behaviour under strain-controlled and stress-controlled loading for cyclically stable materi-
Uniaxial ratcheting als (CSMs) is generally done using kinematic hardening, neglecting the isotropic hardening component. Although
Cyclic plasticity this approach is able to simulate the hysteresis loops, the quantitative ratcheting characteristics are often not of
Isotropic hardening
the desired accuracy; thus earlier investigators have introduced different modifications in the kinematic hard-
Kinematic hardening
ening component for case to case basis to obtain better agreement to the experimentally observed cyclic-plastic
Steel
Optimization behaviour. Combined hardening models, though used for cyclic softening/hardening materials, have not been
used for cyclically stable materials to the best knowledge of the authors. The primary aim of this study is to
improve the ratcheting predictions for CSMs considering the well-known Chaboche’s combined hardening model
using a new generalized methodology. The initial estimates of the hardening components are obtained from
symmetric strain-controlled tests subjected to their refinement by genetic algorithm based optimization tech-
nique. The Chaboche’s parameters have been evaluated using the proposed methodology for available reported
experimental data on cyclically stable steels to demonstrate the response of materials under stress-controlled and
strain-controlled loading conditions.

1. Introduction to predict cyclic plastic behaviour of cyclic hardening/softening materi-

Materials subjected to cyclic loading usually exhibit hysteresis phe-
nomenon associated with various distinguished characteristics like
ratcheting, Bauschinger effect, and mean stress relaxation. Ratcheting
is the progressive accumulation of deformation or cyclic damage in the
direction of mean stress when a material is subjected to high asym-
metric stress-controlled loading, sufficient to produce plasticity. The
cyclic damage in materials is primarily dependent on the type of load-
ing (uniaxial/multi-axial, proportional/non-proportional, stress/ strain-
controlled), loading rate, geometrical or material discontinuities (sharp
corners, inclusions, defects,), and residual stresses [1–10]. When sub-
jected to symmetric cyclic strain amplitude, a material may behave
either as cyclically stable or cyclically hardening, or cyclically soften-
ing [11]. Typical examples of cyclically stable, hardening and soften-
ing steels are CS1026, SS304 and CS1018 grades respectively [11]. The
modeling approaches to predict ratcheting behaviour of a material usu-
ally account for the nature of the cyclic response of a material under
strain-controlled loading. Typically a combined hardening model (con-
sisting of isotropic hardening and kinematic hardening model) is used
als, while kinematic hardening alone is commonly used for constitutive
modeling of cyclically stable materials.
The suitability of the choice of isotropic hardening and the kinematic
hardening components to simulate the ratcheting behaviour of materi-
als has been studied by various investigators [12–14]. The Chaboche’s
isotropic kinematic hardening (CIKH) model has been adopted to exam-
ine the ratcheting behaviour of various carbon steels [15,16], stainless
steels [15–17], special steels like P91 steel [18], X65 steel [19] and
42CrMo steel [20], aluminum alloys [21,22], copper [23,24] and nickel
alloys [25,26]. The CIKH model has been modified to consider the non-
proportionality effects [27–29], temperature effects [22,30,31], large
strain effects [26] and loading rate dependency [30] on the cyclic plas-
tic behaviour of different materials. The theoretical background behind
the various modifications to the Chaboche’s model has also been sum-
marily discussed by Chaboche [32].
Cyclically stable, hardening, or softening behaviour of a material
is highly dependent on the loading history and the loading magni-
tude [33–35]. Cyclic hardening or softening is usually defined consider-
ing the growth of stress amplitude under strain-controlled symmetric

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: atri@iitkgp.ac.in (A. Nath).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.12.047
Received 8 October 2018; Received in revised form 10 December 2018; Accepted 27 December 2018
Available online 29 December 2018
0020-7403/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

Table 1
Strain amplitude dependent cyclic hardening/softening behaviour for some reported steels.

Grade of steel References Behaviour Remarks

𝜀a < 0.28%: cyclic softening;

SS304 [37] 𝜀a ≈ 0.5%: cyclically stable;
𝜀a > 1%: cyclic hardening.
Lower strain amplitude: cyclic softening
𝜀a = 0.2% and 0.5%: cyclic softening; Middle strain amplitude: cyclic stable
SS304LN [34] 𝜀a < 1.2%: cyclic hardening in initial few cycles followed by cyclic softening; Higher strain amplitude: cyclic hardening
𝜀a > 1.4%: cyclic hardening.
𝜀a = 0.3% to 0.5%: cyclic hardening for 10 cycles, then softening up to failure;
316L [41]
𝜀a = 1.5% to 0.8%: cyclic hardening for 10 cycles, then softening up to
approximately 100 cycles, then stabilized up to failure.

𝜀a = 0.5%: cyclically stable; Lower strain amplitude: cyclic stable

SA333 C-Mn [39]
𝜀a = 0.7% to 1.6%: cyclic hardening. Higher strain amplitude: cyclic hardening.

𝜀a = 0.6%: cyclic stable, then softening;

Lower strain amplitude: cyclic hardening
40Cr3MoV [40] 𝜀a = 0.8%: cyclic hardening, then softening;
Higher strain amplitude: cyclic softening.
𝜀a = 0.9%: cyclic softening from the beginning to the failure.

CS1026 [36] 𝜀a = 1%: cyclically stable.

𝜀a = 0.4%: initially cyclic softening, then stabilized; Cyclically stable.
U71Mn [9]
𝜀a = 0.8%: initially cyclic hardening then stabilized.

cycles; this phenomenon though typically related to the growth or rameters of CIKH model are considered pertinent for this report prior to
shrinkage of the yield surface due to isotropic hardening, is not a unique the presentation of the results and discussion.
material property, as it is dependent on the pre-history and loading. The
reported material behaviour under varying strain amplitudes for some
2.1. Chaboche’s isotropic-kinematic hardening model
steel grades is summarized in Table 1 [9,34,36–40]. The observations in
Table 1 indicate that usually cyclically stable behaviour is preceded by
The yield surface for the combined CIKH hardening model, defined
cyclic softening at lower strain amplitudes, followed by cyclic hardening
using the von-Mises yield criterion, can be expressed as:
at higher strain amplitudes, while some materials behave cyclically sta-
√
ble under all reported strain amplitudes. However, for 40CrMoV steel, 3 ( )
a cyclic stable behaviour is not observed under strain-controlled cycling 𝑓 = (𝑠 − 𝛼) ∶ (𝑠 − 𝛼) − 𝜎𝑦0 + 𝑅 = 0 (1)
2
for the reported range of investigated strain amplitudes. Based on these
observations, one can consider that a cyclic stable state is a dynamic where s is the deviatoric part of the stress tensor, 𝛼 is the deviatoric
meta-equilibrium between strain amplitude dependent hardening and backstress tensor describing the shifting of the yield surface related to
softening. Thus, any postulate to model cyclically stable behaviour of a kinematic hardening, 𝜎 y 0 is the initial radius of the yield surface and R
material with the assumption that the isotropic hardening is completely is the isotropic hardening component describing the change in the yield
absent, demands re-examination. Based on this consideration, this re- surface.
port aims to evaluate ratcheting behaviour of cyclically stable steel with The isotropic hardening rule often termed as Voce isotropic harden-
added consideration of isotropic hardening over kinematic hardening. ing rule [45,46] is considered to be non-linear and is of the form:
The contribution of the isotropic hardening is usually neglected for
𝑅̇ = 𝑏(𝑄 − 𝑅)𝑝̇ (2)
modeling ratcheting behaviour of cyclically stable materials (CSMs) im-
plying consideration of only the kinematic hardening component [42– where Q is the maximum change of size of the yield surface, b con-
44]. The kinematic hardening component is able to simulate the hys- trols the rate of the evolution of yield surface, and 𝑝̇ is the accumulated
teresis loop for strain-controlled loadings for CSMs, but the ratcheting equivalent plastic strain rate defined as [47]:
predictions are often not of sufficient accuracy. In order to achieve im-
( )1∕2
proved accuracy earlier researchers [42,44] have introduced empirical 2
𝑝̇ = 𝜀̇ ∶ 𝜀̇ 𝑝 (3)
modifications into the Chaboche’s kinematic hardening model for ratch- 3 𝑝
eting predictions for case to case basis, but have compromised the ac- where 𝜀̇ 𝑝 is the plastic strain rate.
curacy in simulation of the strain-controlled hysteresis loops. A gener- Chaboche’s kinematic hardening component considers superposition
alized approach is yet to emerge. This investigation attempts to use the of multiple independently evolving backstress components. The kine-
Chaboche’s combined isotropic-kinematic hardening model to describe matic hardening component 𝛼, having usually four non-linearly evolv-
ratcheting characteristics of CSMs in a generalized form considering ing backstress components (𝛼 i ), has been used by many investigators
a modified route. The suggested procedure involves estimation of the [27,47–49] and this can be represented as:
isotropic hardening parameters for CSMs from the strain-controlled sta-
bilized loops followed by refinement of the model parameters using ge- ∑
4

netic algorithm optimization technique. The validation of the proposed 𝛼= 𝛼𝑖

𝑖=1
methodology has been illustrated by analyzing several reported results 2
𝛼̇ 𝑖 = 𝐶 𝜀̇ − 𝛾𝑖 𝛼𝑖 𝑝̇ ; 𝑖 = 1, 2, 3 (4)
on steel from the literature. 3 𝑖 𝑝
2 𝑎
𝛼̇ 𝑖 = 𝐶𝑖 𝜀̇ 𝑝 − 𝛾𝑖 ⟨1 − ( 𝑖 ) ⟩𝛼𝑖 𝑝̇ ; 𝑖 = 4
3 𝐽 𝛼𝑖
2. Some pertinent background
where Ci and 𝛾 i are the nonlinear kinematic hardening parameters, J(𝛼 i )
An overview of the Chaboche’s isotropic-kinematic hardening is the second invariant deviatoric of the ith backstress component, ai is
(CIKH) model and the common methodology for determining the pa- the threshold for dynamic recovery of the ith backstress component.

139
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the evolution of isotropic hardening and
kinematic hardening as superposition of multiple backstresses.
For uniaxial loading, under the combined hardening model, the
stress (𝜎 x ) after the onset of yielding can be expressed as:
∑
4
𝜎𝑥 = 𝜎𝑦 0 + 𝑅 + 𝛼 = 𝜎 𝑦 0 + 𝑅 + 𝛼𝑖 (5)
𝑖=1
and the schematic stress-strain curve following Eq. (5) is shown in Fig. 1.
The formulation of the backstress component in CIKH model is equiv-
alent to that in the Armstrong-Frederick model [50] for i = 1 to 3. The 𝛾 i
parameter in Eq. (4) controls the amount of dynamic recovery for the ith
back stress. The evolution of backstress is linear with the plastic strain
rate when 𝛾 i = 0. Several earlier investigators [43,44,47] have reported
that small nonlinearity to the third backstress component improves the
accuracy of the model for ratcheting simulations. The fourth backstress
term contains a threshold stress value a4 , below which the nonlinear
dynamic recovery component for the backstress is inoperative.
The estimate of isotropic hardening in the CIKH model is gener-
ally made from the change of maximum stress with number of cycles
[48,51]. For cyclically stable materials, estimation of isotropic harden-
ing by this methodology is not possible, as there is no change in the
maximum stress with cycles. Thus most work related to ratcheting pre-
dictions in CSMs take into account only kinematic hardening component
[8,9,43,47,52,53].
The estimation of the hardening parameters from the uniaxial mono-
tonic stress-strain behaviour [55,56] requires the separation of the con-
tribution of the isotropic and kinematic hardening components as il-
lustrated in Fig. 1; the initial estimate of the isotropic hardening com-
ponent, however, is made from the stress-strain response under sym-
metric strain- controlled cycles [41,57,58]. Several investigators have
estimated the hardening parameters only from the stabilized hystere-
sis loops under strain-controlled cycling [47,54]. The latter approach
is simpler because it does not require the stress-strain response under
monotonic loading [27,47].
It is observed that a set of parameters of the CIKH model, which gives
satisfactory predictions in case of monotonic and cyclic strain-controlled
loadings, are not so accurate to predict the stress-controlled cyclic load-
ings [49]. Thus, calibration of the model is required to improve its ac-
curacy for simulating the behaviour of materials under different loading
scenarios [43,44,59].
2.2. Calibration of Chaboche’s plasticity model
The calibration procedure associated with the determination of the
parameters of the Chaboche’s model is based on trial and error ap-
proaches, in which an experimental result is compared with the sim-
ulated one [47,48]. The optimization technique based on Genetic algo-
rithm (GA) has been extensively used for the calibration of the hardening
parameters for materials under cyclic loading for CIKH model [21,59–
61]. The performance of the GA in this calibration procedure, however,
140
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150
is sensitive to the approach for estimating the initial parameters for op-
timization [21,59]. Bari and Hassan [47] have proposed a methodol-
ogy to determine the calibration parameters considering only kinematic
hardening (i.e., completely neglecting any role of isotropic hardening)
for cyclically stable CS1026 steel that provided a good fit to uniaxial
strain-controlled experiments; they divided a stable hysteresis curve in
to various segments for this calibration.
Alternative approaches by several later investigators [42–44,49] to
calibrate hardening parameters while using kinematic hardening model
for improved ratcheting predictions for CSMs usually neglect the contri-
bution of isotropic hardening. These approaches have taken into consid-
eration some variations in the calibration methodology by incorporat-
ing different empirical modifications to the kinematic hardening com-
ponents (𝛼 i s) in order to achieve better accuracy in matching the exper-
imental ratcheting behaviour. It can thus be inferred that the improve-
ment in ratcheting predictions in CSMs is primarily due to the modifi-
cations in the hardening model.
The reported approaches for ratcheting simulations for CSMs, in gen-
eral, have not considered the role of isotropic hardening component but
have considered some modifications related to the kinematic hardening
model for improved predictability. The general applicability of these
modifications has not been carefully examined so far. The present work
makes an attempt to incorporate isotropic hardening for ratcheting sim-
ulations in CSMs with inherent examinations of the general applicability
of CIKH model for a variety of steels. However, adoption of CIKH model
for CSMs to predict cyclic damage behaviour demands evolution of a
methodology to obtain the initial parameter for estimating the isotropic
hardening components; an attempt has been made here to evaluate such
a methodology.
3. Proposed methodology for the analysis using Chaboche’s
model
In order to analyze any cyclic plastic behaviour by the combined
Chaboche’s model with four non-linear backstress components, one has
to deal with a total of 11 parameters considering Eqs. (2) and (4). The
proposed methodology to obtain an initial estimate for the isotropic
hardening and the kinematic hardening components is discussed in the
following. The evolution of isotropic hardening (R) is controlled by the
parameters Q and b, as observed from Eq. 2. The parameters Q and b
in Eq. (2) physically represent the maximum change in the radius of
the yield surface and the exponent controlling the rate of change of the
yield surface respectively; Q is the saturated value of the isotropic hard-
ening component while b indicates the rate of saturation of isotropic
hardening.
The parameter Q can be estimated from the stabilized hysteresis loop
obtained from the results of strain-controlled experiments. A schematic
plot of stabilized hysteresis loop under symmetric strain-controlled cy-
cling (having tension to compression loading) is shown in Fig. 2a. The
magnitude of the segment OA represents the initial yield stress of the
material (𝜎 y 0 ). Point B (Fig. 2a) corresponds to the peak stress in ten-
sion for the stabilized cycle, while point C (Fig. 2a) indicates the location
where the tangent modulus appears to change, and can be considered
as the onset of yielding for the compressive loading. The segment BC
represents axial stress with magnitude twice that of the stabilized yield
stress (2𝜎 y ). D is the point which bisects BC; therefore the magnitude of
the segment BD is equal to the stabilized yield stress (𝜎 y ). The estimate
of Q is obtained as the difference of the stabilized yield stress and the
initial yield stress, i.e.
𝑄 = 𝜎𝑦 − 𝜎𝑦0 = BD − OA (6)
The estimation of Q can also be made utilizing the magnitude of EF
(Fig. 2a) instead of BC, where the peak compressive stress is represented
by the point E, while the point F indicates the location of onset of yield-
ing for the tensile loading. A positive value of Q denotes hardening,
while a negative value of Q indicates softening.
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai
(a)
Fig. 2. Estimation of isotropic hardening components (a) parameter Q, (b) parameter b.
(a)
(c)
The parameter b is typically estimated from the change in stress am-
plitude with number of cycles under strain-controlled experiments for
hardening/softening type materials as shown in Fig. 2b. It is observed
from Fig. 2b that a low value of b (typically in the range of 5–50) will
show the cyclic hardening (for positive Q) or softening (for negative Q)
behaviour, while a high value of b (over 100) stabilizes isotropic hard-
ening/softening rapidly. Thus a high value of b can be used to represent
the cyclic-plastic behaviour for CSMs, where it is considered that the
isotropic hardening/softening is small and stabilizes very quickly (in a
few cycles). The initial value of b is considered as 100 for positive Q,
while for a negative value of Q, the parameter b is taken as 500 in the
proposed methodology.
The influence of the parameters Q and b on the prediction of ratch-
eting behaviour of a material is shown schematically in Fig. 3a-c. In this
parametric study, the peak axial strain (𝜀𝑝𝑥 ) in a cycle is considered as the
ratcheting strain (𝜀r ) and the ratcheting strain for the 50th cycle is con-
sidered as the maximum ratcheting strain (𝜀max 𝑟 ); the latter is considered
141
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150
(b)
Fig. 3. Influence of Q and b on ratcheting be-
haviour (a) variation of maximum ratcheting
strain with Q, (b) variation of maximum ratch-
eting strain with b, (c) ratcheting behaviour
predicted with various combinations of Q and
b.
(b)
because the ratcheting strain is found to stabilize after 40 cycles for the
range of parameters considered in this study. Increase in the saturated
value of isotropic hardening parameter Q, will result in reduction of the
maximum ratcheting strain (𝜀max 𝑟 ) as observed in Fig. 3a. Similarly, con-
sideration of a higher value of b will result in rapid stabilization of the
plastic strains, which leads to lowering of the maximum ratcheting strain
(as observed from Fig. 3b). The ratcheting behaviour predicted with var-
ious combinations of parameters Q and b are illustrated in Fig. 3c which
are in agreement with the observations in Fig. 3a and b.
The presence of kinematic hardening can be established if the maxi-
mum stress in tension (represented by point B, Fig. 2a) and the compres-
sive yield value (denoted by point C, Fig. 2a) are not of equal magnitude.
Kinematic hardening results in shifting of the center of the yield surface
in stress space, here denoted by DG (Fig. 2a), where G is the point where
the stabilized loop intersects the X-axis and D is the midpoint of the BC.
The estimated backstress for the stabilized hysteresis loop (𝛼 sat ) is equal
to the magnitude indicated by the segment DG.
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

Table 2
Chemical composition, prehistory and experimental parameters for the materials.

Chemical Mechanical
composition (%) properties Prehistory Experimental loading rates Reference

C,0.22–0.28; E = 181.5 GPa Heat treated at 706 °C for 2 h and strain control = 4 min/cycles
a followed by furnace cooling
CS1026 Mn,0.6–0.9; Sy = 131 MPa stress control = 2 min/cycle [36]
P < 0.04; S < 0.05 Triangular waveform

C,0.70; E = 215 GPa Hot-rolled bar annealed at 650 °C for 2 h 𝜀̇ for strain control = 0.002 s−1
U71Mn Mn,1.25; Sy = 484.5 MPa 𝜎̇ for stress control = 51 MPa/s [9]
Si,0.22; P < 0.02 Triangular waveform

SA333 C,0.18; Mn,0.9; E = 200 GPa Extracted from pipes 𝜀̇ for strain control = 0.001 s−1
Grade-6 Si,0.02; P,0.02 Sy = 304 MPa 𝜎̇ for stress control = 50 MPa/s [42]
Triangular waveform

E = Elastic modulus, Sy = Yield stress.

a
Chemical composition from ASTM A29/A29M [66].

The initial estimate of the various backstress components has been
made following the methodology suggested by Rahman et al. [59]. For
the first backstress component (𝛼 1 ), a high value of C1 should be taken
to get high initial plastic modulus, as well as a high value of 𝛾 1 should
be considered to stabilize the backstress rapidly [47]. The initial slope
at the start of plastic deformation has been used as an initial estimate of
C1 . The parameter C3 is estimated from the slope of the linear portion at
high strain range [48]; in this case the slope of the segment HB in Fig. 2a.
The estimate of the remaining parameters (C2 , C4 , 𝛾 2 , 𝛾 3 , 𝛾 4 , a4 ) in CIKH
model are done using Eq. 7 following the methodology suggested by
Rahman et al. [59].
𝐶1 𝐶2 𝐶4 𝐶 { ( )}
+ + + 𝑎4 + 𝜎𝑦0 + 𝑄 = 𝜎𝑥 − 3 𝜀𝑥𝑝 − −𝜀𝐿 𝑝 (7)
𝛾1 𝛾2 𝛾4 2
The initial estimate of the parameters obtained by the proposed pro-
cedure is then tuned to the experimental results by Genetic algorithm
optimization technique [59]. A mutation rate of 20% is used in the cur-
rent study. A population size of 500 is used, and the maximum number
of generations is usually taken as 30. The description of the objective
function for the optimization procedure is discussed in Appendix A.
4. Results
An overview of the existing literature suggests that steels exhibiting
cyclically stable behaviour are a few in numbers. The CS1026 [36] and
U71Mn [9] steels are reported as CSMs and the reported results on these
materials have been used in the present study to predict their response
under cyclic strain-controlled and stress-controlled loading using the
proposed methodology. In addition, Paul et al. [42] have reported the
cyclic plastic behaviour of SA333 steel indicating absence of any signifi-
cant cyclic hardening; so this steel is also considered here for examining
the applicablity of the proposed methodology assuming it to be a nearly
CSM. In summary, the steels that have been examined to demonstrate
the performance of the proposed methodology are:
(a) CS1026 steel as reported by Hassan and Kyriakides [36],
(b) U71Mn steel as reported by Kang and Gao [9],
(c) SA333 C-Mn steel as reported by Paul et al. [42]
The chemical compositions, the mechanical properties and the pre-
history of the concerned materials, as well as the experimental condi-
tions, to which these were subjected to for examining their cyclic plastic
behaviour, in the above reports, are summarized in Table 2.
The ratcheting strain, the primary parameter to describe the ratch-
eting behaviour of materials, has been considered differently by dif-
ferent researchers. The cyclic variations of peak strain [36], mean
strain [38,62–64], mean of true strain [19], mean of true plastic strains
[65] have been used as measures of ratcheting behaviour for different
materials. For example, Hassan and Kyriakides [36] have used the peak
axial strain (𝜀𝑝𝑥 ) as a measure of the ratcheting strain (𝜀r ), while Paul
et al. [42] have considered ratcheting strain as the mean of the max-
imum and minimum strains, i.e., 𝜀r = (𝜀max + 𝜀min )/2 in a cycle. In the
present work, the peak axial strain (𝜀𝑝𝑥 ) is considered as the ratcheting
strain for CS1026 steel and U71Mn steel, while the mean strain is con-
sidered as the ratcheting strain for SA333 steel, as the data for peak
strains were not reported by Paul et al. [42]; these selections are with
the view for comparative assessment of the predictions at a later stage.
The re-analyses of the reported results for the three steels are given in
the following subsections.
4.1. Re-examination of ratcheting behaviour of CS1026 steel
Hassan and Kyriakides [36] have reported ratcheting behaviour of
CS1026 steels on specimens which were subjected to 12 cycles under
1% total strain control cycling prior to asymmetric stress-controlled cy-
cles. This pre-history has resulted in carrying forward of the backstress
and the plastic strains in the symmetric strain-controlled cycles to the
ratcheting load step. This preloading history has an effect on the ratchet-
ing characteristics and several investigators [44,67,68] have suggested
that this should be taken into account while modeling cyclic plastic be-
haviour of the material. The reported experimental results by these in-
vestigators related to the asymmetric stress-controlled tests (Table 3)
with constant stress amplitude (HK-Set1), constant mean stress (HK-
Set2), negative mean stress (HK-Set3) and variable stress amplitude (HK-
Set4) have been considered here to assess the potential applicability of
our proposed methodology.
At first, an initial estimate of the parameters for the CIKH model
has been obtained from the strain-controlled hysteresis loop shown in
Fig. 4a. The parameters (b, Q, Ci , 𝛾 i , a4 ) were tuned to simulate the
ratcheting behaviour for the results of Exp2 of HK-Set1 (Table 3) using
the genetic algorithm optimization. The initial estimates of the CIKH
model-parameters obtained by using the proposed methodology as well
as those optimized for simulation of ratcheting behaviour for the re-
sults of Exp2 of HK-Set1 are given in Table 4. The estimated optimized
parameters were next used to simulate the ratcheting behaviour under
other loading scenarios as shown in Fig. 4b–e. The performance of the
proposed methodology has been compared in Fig. 4a–c against those
suggested by Bari and Hassan [47] who have considered only the kine-
matic hardening component.
The stabilized hysteresis loop for 1% symmetric strain amplitude cy-
cles predicted by the proposed methodology is closer to the experimental
results [36] compared to the predictions reported by Bari and Hassan
[47]. For loading scenarios of HK-Set1 and HKset-2 for the asymmet-
rical stress-controlled loading scenarios for CS1026 steel, the current
methodology again qualitatively provides closer ratcheting predictions
than those reported by Bari and Hassan [47]. Predictions obtained by us-
ing CIKH model using the present methodology are able to capture the

142
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

Table 3
Experimental parameters of the asymmetric stress-controlled tests for the examined materials.

Materials Set No. Exp No. Mean stress (𝜎 m ) MPa Stress amplitude (𝜎 a ) MPA

Exp1 28.8
HK-Set1 Exp2 45 220.6
Exp3 63

Exp4 195.1
CS1026 [36]
Exp5 209.3
HK-Set2 44.8
Exp6 221.5
Exp7 229.5

HK-Set3 Exp8 −43.8 215

HK-Set4 Exp9 45 173.7,192.7,211.1,230.9

KG-Set1 Exp1 358 447

U71Mn [9]
KG-Set2 Exp2 359 321,385,449

Exp1 40
P-Set1 Exp2 60 310
Exp3 80
SA333 C-Mn [42]
Exp4 270
P-Set2 Exp5 80 290
Exp3 310

trends in low stress amplitude levels (Exp4 of HK-Set2) as well as for
high stress amplitude levels (Exp7 of HK-Set2) for cycling ratcheting.
The experimental results (Fig. 4b-c) indicate that the ratcheting rates
stabilize after around 15 cycles; the predictions of the cyclic plastic be-
haviour of CS1026 steel by the proposed methodology replicate these
almost identically.
The proposed methodology was next successfully extended to predict
the ratcheting strains for a negative mean stress of −43.8 MPa and ampli-
tude of 215 MPa (HK-Set3) in Fig. 4d. This methodology is also capable
of simulating the ratcheting characteristics under the loading conditions
described for the results of HK-Set4 (a constant mean stress of 45 MPa
but increasing stress amplitude in steps) and is presented in Fig. 4e. In
summary, it can be inferred from the results depicted in Fig. 4a-e that the
current methodology is suitable for describing the stabilized hysteresis
loops under symmetric strain-controlled cycles as well as for predict-
ing the ratcheting behaviour under asymmetric stress-controlled cycles
for CS1026 steel. The current technique is thus capable to capture all
the trends observed for various cyclic loading scenarios for a CSM. The
relative performance of the current methodology has been examined in
Section 5 using quantitative assessments.
4.2. Re-examination of U71Mn steel
The proposed methodology has been used next to re-examine the
experimental results on the cyclic plastic behaviour of U71Mn steel re-
ported by Kang and Gao [9]. These authors have considered the material
as CSM because it appears to attain cyclic stabilization after the first two
cycles under strain-controlled cyclic loading. Kang and Gao [9] have
used a modified Ohno-Wang model [69] for their constitutive modeling
neglecting the isotropic hardening component. The experimental stress
amplitudes and the mean stresses used for the simulation of uniaxial
ratcheting behaviour of U71Mn steel are also incorporated in Table 3.
The proposed methodology has been used to re-examine the reported
experimental results [9], and the obtained parameters for modeling by
CIKH model are summarized in Table 4. The proposed methodology pre-
dicts the stabilized hysteresis loop under strain-controlled cycling better
than that predicted by Kang and Gao [9] as observed in Fig 5a. In ad-
dition, the ratcheting simulations for asymmetric stress-controlled load-
ing for KG-Set1 and KG-Set2 (Table 3) obtained by using the proposed
methodology is comparable to those predicted by Kang and Gao [9] as
illustrated in Fig 5b and c.
4.3. Re-examination of ratcheting behaviour of SA333 steel
A modified kinematic hardening model neglecting isotropic harden-
ing has been used by Paul et al. [42] to demonstrate the behaviour of
SA333 steel under various cyclic loading conditions. Since Paul et al.
[42] have predicted the cyclic-plastic behaviour of SA333 steel neglect-
ing isotropic hardening component, this material can be considered as
approximately a CSM to examine the cyclic damage behaviour using the
proposed methodology. An exponentially decaying function was pro-
posed for the kinematic hardening coefficients and the exponent to de-
scribe the ratcheting characteristics of the steel in the modified kine-
matic hardening model [42]. The experimental stress amplitudes and
the mean stresses used for this study are given in Table 3. The initial
estimate for CIKH model and the final optimized parameters used for
investigations of cyclic damage behaviour of SA333 steel as resulted
from the proposed methodology are given in Table 4. The predictions
for the various cyclic loading states using the obtained parameters (in
Table 4) have been compared against the experimental results in Fig. 6.
The numerical simulations obtained by Paul et al. [42] are also shown
in this figure. The observed results in Fig. 6 qualitatively indicate that
the proposed methodology is potential enough to describe the experi-
mental results on SA333 steel similar or better than that predicted by
Paul et al. [42]. The relative performance of the current methodology
has also been examined in Section 5 using quantitative assessments for
U71Mn and SA333 steels.
5. Discussion
The effect of isotropic hardening on ratcheting behaviour of CSMs
has been neglected by earlier researchers because of two primary rea-
sons. Firstly the kinematic hardening component is considered to be
sufficient to simulate the ratcheting phenomenon [42] of cyclically sta-
ble materials. Secondly, the initial estimate for the isotropic hardening
component of CSMs cannot be estimated from the insignificant change
of stress amplitude with the number of cycles under symmetric strain-
controlled loading. For example, Bari and Hassan [47] considered only
kinematic hardening to simulate ratcheting behaviour for CS1026 steel
and the parameters of the plasticity model were determined by these in-
vestigators from the stabilized hysteresis loops under symmetric strain-
controlled cycling. However, Ramezansefat and Shahbeyk [44] modi-
fied the kinematic hardening model proposed by Chaboche [48] and
the analytical procedure suggested by Bari and Hassan to arrive at better

143
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

Fig. 4. Performance of calibrated parameters for CS1026 (a) symmetric strain-controlled stabilized hysteresis loop, (b) ratcheting simulation with constant stress
amplitude, (c) ratcheting simulation with constant mean stress, (d) ratcheting simulation with negative mean stress, (e) ratcheting simulation with increasing stress
amplitude in steps.

ratcheting predictions for CS1026 steel. Paul et al. [42] examined the
ratcheting behaviour of SA333-Mn steel also considering an alternate
modified kinematic hardening component. In addition, Kang and Gao
[9] analyzed the cyclic plastic behaviour for U71Mn steel, a CSM, using
a modified Ohno-Wang kinematic hardening model and demonstrated
that this model provides satisfactory agreement to the experimentally
obtained results.
The reported ratcheting simulations of CSMs thus, in general, in-
dicate incorporation of some modifications of the originally proposed
kinematic hardening component or modifications in the procedure for
the analysis. Moreover, the parameters for the kinematic hardening ob-
tained by the above investigators are not generalized in nature, and
cannot be used for different loading scenarios like variations in mean
stress and alternating stress in stress-controlled tests vis-à-vis that for

144
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

Table 4
Initial estimate and the optimized parameters of CIKH model obtained by proposed methodology.

Material Initial parameters Optimized parameters

E = 181 GPa, 𝜎 y0 = 129.6 MPa E = 181 GPa, 𝜎 y0 = 129.6 MPa

b = 100, Q = 22 MPa b = 109.32, Q = 29.43 MPa
CS1026 [36] Ci = 1,2,3,4 (MPa) = 413,685, 23,680, 3137, 84,400 Ci = 1,2,3,4 (MPa) = 375,754.9, 15,178.7, 3068.6, 78,792.9
𝛾 i = 1,2,3, 4 = 20,000, 350,0, 6000 𝛾 i = 1,2,3, 4 = 21,902.29, 279.06, 14.29, 4666.64
a4 = 20 MPa a4 = 21.43 MPa

E = 215 GPa, 𝜎 y0 = 484.5 MPa E = 215 GPa, 𝜎 y0 = 484.5 MPa

b = 500, Q = −200 MPa b = 389.6, Q = −178.1 MPa
U71Mn [9] Ci = 1,2,3,4 (MPa) = 100,000, 10,000, 2000, 20,000 Ci = 1,2,3,4 (MPa) = 106,653.7, 29,797.8, 2209.8, 12,813.2
𝛾 i = 1,2,3, 4 = 1000, 300,0, 500 𝛾 i = 1,2,3, 4 = 1181.8, 253.4, 1.08, 398.0
a4 = 300 MPa a4 = 272.8 MPa

E = 200 GPa, 𝜎 y0 = 225 MPa E = 200 GPa, 𝜎 y0 = 225 MPa

b = 100, Q = 20 MPa b = 92.62, Q = 14.45 MPa
SA333 C-Mn [42] Ci = 1,2,3,4 (MPa) = 106,000, 16,800, 1800, 30,000 Ci = 1,2,3,4 (MPa) = 129,261.5, 23,275, 2724.8, 4217.2
𝛾 i = 1,2,3, 4 = 5300, 336,0, 1000 𝛾 i = 1,2,3, 4 = 2397.8, 284.3, 10.8, 3090.9
a4 = 20 MPa a4 = 16.6 MPa

Fig. 5. Experimental vs. prediction by Kang and Gao [9] and proposed methodology for U71Mn (a) symmetric strain-controlled stabilized hysteresis loop, (b)
ratcheting simulations for KG-Set1 of Table 3 (c) ratcheting simulation for KG-Set2.

145
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai
Fig. 6. Experimental vs. prediction by Paul et al. [42] and current methodology for SA333, (a) symmetric strain-controlled stabilized hysteresis loop, (b) ratcheting
simulation with constant stress amplitude, (c) ratcheting simulation with constant mean stress.
strain-controlled tests. A systematic approach for the determination of
the parameters of combined isotropic-kinematic hardening model for
CSMs has been proposed (Section 3) in this study; the estimated param-
eters are able to predict the cyclic plastic behaviour for different loading
scenarios in a generalized manner. The elastic parameters (E and 𝜎 y 0 )
are estimated from the monotonic tensile tests or from the tensile part
of the 1st cycle under strain-controlled loading.
In Section 4, we have qualitatively compared the experimentally
observed strain-controlled stabilized hysteresis loops and the ratchet-
ing behaviour of CS1026, SA333 and U71Mn steels with the predic-
tions using the proposed methodology as well as by the reported ones
[9,36,42,47]. For CS1026 steel, the parameters of kinematic harden-
ing models determined by the procedure proposed by Bari and Hassan
[47] closely simulated the ratcheting behaviour for high stress levels
(Exp2 and Exp3 of HK-Set1, Exp6 and Exp7 of HK-Set2 of Table 3), but
for lower stress levels (Exp1 of HK-Set1, Exp4 and Exp5 of HK-Set2 of
Table 3) the procedure appears to over-predict the ratcheting behaviour
as can be observed in Fig. 4b and c. The modified Ohno-Wang model
[69] used by Kang and Gao [9] appears to over predict the ratchet-
ing behaviour for U71Mn steel, as observed in Fig. 5b. The ratcheting
predictions for SA333 steel reported by Paul et al. [42] with the use
of a modified kinematic hardening model for low stress levels (Exp1
and Exp2 of P-Set1, Exp4 of P-Set2 of Table 3) appear to under-predict
the experimental results (Fig. 6b). The discrepancies in the attempts to
match experimental results with the earlier suggested models possibly
146
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150
have arisen due to the neglect of isotropic hardening. Thus, an attempt
has been made here to describe cyclic plastic behaviour for various ma-
terials using CIKH model with the added consideration that it should be
generalized in nature under varied loading scenarios.
The predictions for the cyclic behaviour of the reported cyclically
stable steels under different loading schemes obtained by using the pro-
posed methodology are indeed qualitatively closer to the experimen-
tal results than by the reported models, which consider only kinematic
hardening component. The improvements for the ratcheting predic-
tions due to the added consideration of isotropic hardening component
is vividly demonstrated in Fig. 7, where the simulations for HK-Set2
(Table 3) for CS1026 steel are shown with and without the isotropic
hardening. However, establishment of the improved accuracy inherent
in the proposed procedure for the prediction of the experimental ratch-
eting characteristics for CSMs by utilizing CIKH model demands a quan-
titative approach. The deviations of the simulated results from the ex-
perimental ones are quantified by using a root mean square error pa-
rameter (Ferror ); as described by Eqs. (A.1) and (A.2) in Appendix A. The
values of Ferror , obtained using the suggested methodology, have been
compiled for various loading scenarios in Fig. 8. The magnitudes of Ferror
estimated for the other reported simulations are also shown in the same
figure for comparison.
The estimated magnitudes of Ferror for predicting the experimental
observations for CS1026 steel using the modified Dafalias-Popov model
[70] used by Hassan and Kyriakides [36] and a modified Chaboche
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai
Fig. 7. Comparison of ratcheting simulations of HK-Set2 (Table 3) with and
without the consideration of the isotropic hardening component in the present
methodology.
type kinematic hardening model used by Ramezansefat and Shahbeyk
[44] have been compared with that obtained by the proposed method-
ology in Fig. 8a. The magnitudes of Ferror (Fig. 8a) estimated by the
present methodology indicates superior predictions to the experimental
results compared to the ones estimated using the methodology suggested
by Bari and Hassan [47] for all loading cases except for Exp7 (HK-Set2,
Table 3) which is for high stress levels. For example, the estimated mag-
nitude of Ferror by the proposed methodology for the low stress level case
Fig. 8. Quantitative comparison of proposed methodology with other reported models for different cyclic loadings (a) for CS1026 steel [36] (b) SA333 steel [42] (c)
for U71Mn steel [9].
147
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150
in Exp4 of HK-Set2 of Table 3 is 3%, while that obtained by Bari and
Hassan [47] approach is 15.2%, almost more than 5 times.
The modifications introduced by Ramezansefat and Shahbeyk [44] in
the Chaboche’s model considering only kinematic hardening component
perform marginally better at higher stress levels, but the accuracy in
predicting strain-controlled behaviour and low stress range ratcheting
are forcibly compromised (Fig. 8a) through the use of an evolving third
backstress dynamic recovery term, 𝛾 3 . The introduction of a varying 𝛾 3 ,
which was adjusted for each loading scenario, makes the parameters of
the kinematic hardening component to be stress-state dependent. More-
over, the introduction of a variable 𝛾 3 [44] results in lower hardening
for lower stress level, thus stabilization is attained faster, which results
in a flatter hysteresis loop, and over-prediction of ratcheting behaviour
for initial cycles and for low stress levels. For the parameters consid-
ered for CS1026 steel, the isotropic hardening component introduced
in the current methodology stabilizes rapidly, and it operates alongside
the kinematic hardening component in the stress range after the onset
of yielding. The additional isotropic hardening influences the ratcheting
simulations in lower stress case of Exp4 HK-Set2 of Table 3 for CS1026
steel by restricting the plastic flow, thus overcoming the problem of
over-prediction due to use of Chaboche’s kinematic hardening alone as
used by Ramezansefat and Shahbeyk [44]. The magnitude of Ferror esti-
mated by the proposed methodology in predicting the strain-controlled
hysteresis loop is 1%, while that by Ramezansefat and Shahbeyk [44] is
4%. For the low stress level ratcheting case of Exp4 HK-Set2 of Table 3,
the Ferror calculated from the predictions by Ramezansefat and Shah-
beyk [44] is 21% compared to 3% computed considering the proposed
methodology.
The modified Dafalias-Popov model [70] used by Hassan and Kyri-
akides [36] considers a shift of the bound stress (𝜎 b ) which translates
along the direction of ratcheting strain, making 𝜎 b to be stress state de-
pendent. The proposed methodology provides closer predictions for the
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150

ter agreement with the reported experimental results than that by the
available predictions in the literature.

Appendix A. Description of the objective function for GA

optimization technique

The accuracy of the different models in predicting the experimental

cyclic plastic behaviour has been quantified using a root mean square
error parameter (Ferror ) defined as:
{ 𝑛 2 }0 . 5
1 ∑ [( exp ) exp ]
𝐹𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 𝜎𝑖 − 𝜎𝑖model ∕𝜎𝑖 for strain − controlled t est s
𝑛 𝑖=1
(A.1)

{ 𝑛 2 }0.5
1 ∑ [( ∗exp ) ∗exp ]
𝐹𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 𝜀𝑟𝑖 − 𝜀∗𝑟𝑖model ∕𝜀𝑟𝑖 for stress − controlled t est s
Fig. 9. Comparison of simulated stabilized hysteresis loop steel by Hassan and
𝑛 𝑖=1
Kyriakides [36] and that obtained by the proposed methodology for CS1026. (A.2)
( )
∗exp exp exp
experimental hysteresis loops as illustrated in Fig. 9, and this observa- 𝜀ri = 𝜀ri + max 𝜀ri × 5% (A.3)
tion is substantiated by the magnitude of the Ferror (Fig. 8a). The mod-
ified Dafalias-Popov (MDP) model performs similar to the CIKH model ( )
considered in the current study in predicting the ratcheting response of 𝜀∗rimodel = 𝜀model
ri
+ max 𝜀model
ri
× 5% (A.4)
CS1026 steel as observed in Fig. 8a; however the set of parameters for where n is the number of data points, 𝜎 i and 𝜀ri
exp exp
are the stress
the MDP model, particularly 𝜎 b is reported as dependent on the experi- and ratcheting strain recorded from experiments and 𝜎 i model and 𝜀ri model
mental data-set, and is not a generalized one. The largest magnitude of are the predicted stress and ratcheting strain using Chaboche’s model.
Ferror obtained using the approach used by Hassan and Kyriakides [36] is 𝜀ri ∗ model and 𝜀ri ∗ exp are the offsets considered to the ratcheting strain to
4%, compared to 3% by the proposed approach. reduce the influence of the errors in ratcheting predictions in the initial
The proposed methodology was next adopted to simulate the exper- cycles. The ratcheting strains in the initial cycles are usually small; nor-
imental strain-controlled hysteresis loops and the ratcheting behaviour malization of the error with the corresponding observed strains results
for U71Mn steel; the accuracy of the predictions is comparable to the in unreasonably large value, although the absolute error is small. A 5%
methodology followed by Kang and Gao [9] (Fig. 8c). The magnitude offset to the corresponding maximum magnitude of the recorded and
of Ferror for the stabilized hysteresis loop obtained by using the current the predicted strains has been used in this study (Eq. (A.4)).
methodology is 0.6% compared to 1.6% obtained by the reported results For the strain control loading, the error has been calculated consider-
of Kang and Gao [9]. Further one can note that Kang and Gao [9] have ing the transition portion of the stabilized hysteresis loop under symmet-
considered the initial yield stress of the material (𝜎 y 0 ) for the ratchet- ric conditions. The maximum and minimum stress values encountered
ing simulations as 220 MPa instead of the yield point of 484.5 MPa as in the cycles are also considered. The points taken into consideration for
reported from tensile tests; the latter magnitude (484.5 MPa) has been strain-controlled loading are shown in Fig. A.1.The Genetic Algorithm
considered in analyzing the cyclic plastic behaviour of U71Mn steel by (GA) optimization technique minimizes the magnitude of Ferror .
the present methodology.
The magnitude of Ferror for the prediction of the experimental obser-
vations for SA333 steel obtained by the present methodology is com-
pared with those obtained by Paul et al. [42] in Fig. 8b. The proposed
methodology provides better accuracy in simulating symmetric strain-
controlled hysteresis loop as well as the ratcheting behaviour under
asymmetric stress- controlled cycles than those reported by Paul et al.
[42].

6. Conclusion

This study satisfactorily demonstrates for the first time the general
applicability of Chaboche’s isotropic-kinematic hardening (CIKH) model
for uniaxial ratcheting simulations for cyclically stable materials (CSMs)
which are conventionally analyzed using only kinematic hardening com-
ponent (KHC); the latter approach often considers various modifications
in KHC, which are not generalized. The adopted methodology to obtain
an initial guess for the isotropic hardening parameters for CSMs is only
from the strain- controlled stabilized loops. The parameters of the CIKH
model have been subsequently optimized using genetic algorithm tech-
nique. The applicability of the proposed methodology has been verified
by satisfactorily predicting the reported results on various steels exhibit-
ing cyclically stable behaviour. The introduction of the isotropic hard-
ening component is shown to improve the accuracy for the prediction
of the ratcheting behaviour of CSMs. Finally, it is demonstrated that the Fig. A.1. Schematic representation of the considered points for error calculation
predicted results by the proposed methodology, in general, are in bet- for the stabilized hysteresis loops.

148
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai
References
[1] Paul SK, Sivaprasad S, Dhar S, Tarafder S. Key issues in cyclic plastic deformation: ex-
perimentation. Mech Mater 2011;43:705–20. doi:10.1016/j.mechmat.2011.07.011.
[2] Kolasangiani K, Farhangdoost K, Shariati M, Varvani-Farahani A. Ratcheting as-
sessment of notched steel samples subjected to asymmetric loading cycles through
coupled kinematic hardening-Neuber rules. Int J Mech Sci 2018;144:24–32.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.05.034.
[3] Hamidinejad SM, Varvani-Farahani A. Ratcheting of 304 stainless steel
under multiaxial step-loading conditions. Int J Mech Sci 2015;100:80–9.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2015.06.013.
[4] Kolasangiani K, Shariati M, Farhangdoost K, Varvani-Farahani A. Ratcheting
progress at notch root of 1045 steel samples over asymmetric loading cycles:
experiments and analyses. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2018;41:1870–83.
doi:10.1111/ffe.12827.
[5] Hamidinejad SM, Varvani-Farahani A. Ratcheting assessment of steel samples un-
der various non-proportional loading paths by means of kinematic hardening rules.
Mater Des 2015;85:367–76. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.153.
[6] Pommier S. Cyclic plasticity and variable amplitude fatigue. Int J Fatigue
2003;25:983–97. doi:10.1016/S0142-1123(03)00137-3.
[7] Kang G, Gao Q, Yang X. Uniaxial cyclic ratcheting and plastic flow properties of
SS304 stainless steel at room and elevated temperatures. Mech Mater 2002;34:145–
59. doi:10.1016/S0167-6636(01)00099-0.
[8] Hassan T, Corona E, Kyriakides S. Ratcheting in cyclic plasticity, part II: multiaxial
behavior. Int J Plast 1992;8:117–46. doi:10.1016/0749-6419(92)90010-A.
[9] Kang G, Gao Q. Uniaxial and non-proportionally multiaxial ratcheting of
U71Mn rail steel: experiments and simulations. Mech Mater 2002;34:809–20.
doi:10.1016/S0167-6636(02)00198-9.
[10] Varvani-Farahani A, Nayebi A. Ratcheting in pressurized pipes and equipment: a
review on affecting parameters, modelling, safety codes, and challenges. Fatigue
Fract Eng Mater Struct 2018;41:503–38. doi:10.1111/ffe.12775.
[11] Hassan T, Kyriakides S. Ratcheting of cyclically hardening and soft-
ening materials: I. Uniaxial behavior. Int J Plast 1994;10:149–84.
doi:10.1016/0749-6419(94)90033-7.
[12] Karvan P, Varvani-Farahani A. Isotropic-kinematic hardening framework to assess
ratcheting response of steel samples undergoing asymmetric loading cycles. Fatigue
Fract Eng Mater Struct 2018:1–12. doi:10.1111/ffe.12905.
[13] Karvan P, Varvani-Farahani A. Ratcheting assessment of 304 steel samples by means
of two kinematic hardening rules coupled with isotropic hardening descriptions. Int
J Mech Sci 2018;149:190–200. doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.09.045.
[14] Feigenbaum HP, Dugdale J, Dafalias YF, Kourousis KI, Plesek J. Multiaxial ratcheting
with advanced kinematic and directional distortional hardening rules. Int J Solids
Struct 2012;49:3063–76. doi:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2012.06.006.
[15] Nip KH, Gardner L, Davies CM, Elghazouli AY. Extremely low cycle fatigue tests
on structural carbon steel and stainless steel. J Constr Steel Res 2010;66:96–110.
doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.08.004.
[16] Rudolph J, Gilman T, Weitze B, Willuweit A, Kalnins A. Using nonlinear kinematic
hardening material models for elastic–plastic ratcheting analysis. J Press Vessel
Technol 2016;138:051205. doi:10.1115/1.4033092.
[17] Dalla Palma M. Modelling of cyclic plasticity for austenitic stainless
steels 304L, 316L, 316L(N)-IG. Fusion Eng Des 2016;109–111:20–5.
doi:10.1016/j.fusengdes.2016.03.064.
[18] Kyaw ST, Rouse JP, Lu J, Sun W. Determination of material parameters for a unified
viscoplasticity-damage model for a P91 power plant steel. Int J Mech Sci 2016;115–
116:168–79. doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2016.06.014.
[19] Fatoba O, Akid R. Uniaxial cyclic elasto-plastic deformation and fatigue failure
of API-5L X65 steel under various loading conditions. Theor Appl Fract Mech
2018;94:147–59. doi:10.1016/j.tafmec.2018.01.015.
[20] Basan R, Franulović M, Prebil I, Kunc R. Study on Ramberg-Osgood and
Chaboche models for 42CrMo4 steel and some approximations. J Constr Steel Res
2017;136:65–74. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2017.05.010.
[21] Agius D, Kajtaz M, Kourousis KI, Wallbrink C, Wang CH, Hu W, et al. Sensitivity
and optimisation of the Chaboche plasticity model parameters in strain-life fatigue
predictions. Mater Des 2017;118:107–21. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2017.01.027.
[22] Wing Cheong MFL, Rouse JP, Hyde CJ, Kennedy AR. The Prediction of isothermal
cyclic plasticity in 7175-T7351 aluminium alloy with particular emphasis on thermal
ageing effects. Int J Fatigue 2018;114:92–108. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2018.05.010.
[23] You JH, Miskiewicz M. Material parameters of copper and CuCrZr alloy
for cyclic plasticity at elevated temperatures. J Nucl Mater 2008;373:269–74.
doi:10.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.06.005.
[24] Hosseini R, Seifi R. Study of hardening and cyclic plastic behaviour around the crack
tip of C(T) specimen made by as-received and annealed copper. Fatigue Fract Eng
Mater Struct 2018:1–12. doi:10.1111/ffe.12862.
[25] Tong J, Zhan ZL, Vermeulen B. Modelling of cyclic plasticity and viscoplastic-
ity of a nickel-based alloy using Chaboche constitutive equations. Int J Fatigue
2004;26:829–37. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2004.01.002.
[26] Algarni M, Choi Y, Bai Y. A unified material model for multiaxial ductile frac-
ture and extremely low cycle fatigue of Inconel 718. Int J Fatigue 2017;96:162–77.
doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.11.033.
[27] Rahman SM, Hassan T, Corona E. Evaluation of cyclic plasticity models in ratcheting
simulation of straight pipes under cyclic bending and steady internal pressure. Int J
Plast 2008;24:1756–91. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2008.02.010.
[28] Bari S, Hassan T. An advancement in cyclic plasticity modeling for multiaxial ratch-
eting simulation. Int J Plast 2002;18:873–94. doi:10.1016/S0749-6419(01)00012-2.
149
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150
[29] Hassan T, Taleb L, Krishna S. Influence of non-proportional loading on ratchet-
ing responses and simulations by two recent cyclic plasticity models. Int J Plast
2008;24:1863–89. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2008.04.008.
[30] Benaarbia A, Rouse JP, Sun W. A thermodynamically-based viscoelastic-viscoplastic
model for the high temperature cyclic behaviour of 9-12% Cr steels. Int J Plast
2018;107:100–21. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2018.03.015.
[31] Ahmed R, Hassan T. Constitutive modeling for thermo-mechanical low-cycle fatigue-
creep stress–strain responses of Haynes 230. Int J Solids Struct 2017;126–127:122–
39. doi:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.07.031.
[32] Chaboche JL. A review of some plasticity and viscoplasticity constitutive theories.
Int J Plast 2008;24:1642–93. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2008.03.009.
[33] Jiang Y, Zhang J. Benchmark experiments and characteristic cyclic plasticity defor-
mation. Int J Plast 2008;24:1481–515. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2007.10.003.
[34] Paul SK, Sivaprasad S, Dhar S, Tarafder S. Cyclic plastic deformation and cyclic
hardening/softening behavior in 304LN stainless steel. Theor Appl Fract Mech
2010;54:63–70. doi:10.1016/j.tafmec.2010.06.016.
[35] Zhao P, Xuan F-ZZ, Wu D-LL. Cyclic softening behaviors of modified 9–12%Cr steel
under different loading modes: Role of loading levels. Int J Mech Sci 2017;131–
132:278–85. doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.07.001.
[36] Hassan T, Kyriakides S. Ratcheting in cyclic plasticity, part I: Uniaxial behavior. Int
J Plast 1992;8:91–116. doi:10.1016/0749-6419(92)90040-J.
[37] Jiang Y, Kurath P. An investigation of cyclic transient behavior and implications on
fatigue life estimates. J Eng Mater Technol 1997;119:161. doi:10.1115/1.2805989.
[38] Yan Z, Wang D, He X, Wang W, Zhang H, Dong P, et al. Deformation behaviors and
cyclic strength assessment of AZ31B magnesium alloy based on steady ratcheting
effect. Mater Sci Eng A 2018;723:212–20. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2018.03.023.
[39] Khutia N, Dey PP, Paul SK, Tarafder S. Development of non Masing characteristic
model for LCF and ratcheting fatigue simulation of SA333 C–Mn steel. Mech Mater
2013;65:88–102. doi:10.1016/j.mechmat.2013.05.016.
[40] Kang GZ, Li Y, Gao Q, Kan QH, Zhang J. Uniaxial ratchetting in steels with different
cyclic softening/hardening behaviours. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2006;29:93–
103. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.00964.x.
[41] Zhou J, Sun Z, Kanouté P, Retraint D. Experimental analysis and constitutive
modelling of cyclic behaviour of 316 L steels including hardening/softening
and strain range memory effect in LCF regime. Int J Plast 2018;107:54–78.
doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2018.03.013.
[42] Paul SK, Sivaprasad S, Dhar S, Tarafder M, Tarafder S. Simulation of cyclic plastic
deformation response in SA333 C–Mn steel by a kinematic hardening model. Comput
Mater Sci 2010;48:662–71. doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2010.02.037.
[43] Mahmoudi AH, Pezeshki-Najafabadi SM, Badnava H. Parameter determination of
Chaboche kinematic hardening model using a multi objective Genetic Algorithm.
Comput Mater Sci 2011;50:1114–22. doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2010.11.010.
[44] Ramezansefat H, Shahbeyk S. The Chaboche hardening rule: a re-evaluation of cali-
bration procedures and a modified rule with an evolving material parameter. Mech
Res Commun 2015;69:150–8. doi:10.1016/j.mechrescom.2015.08.003.
[45] Broggiato GB, Campana F, Cortese L. The Chaboche nonlinear kinematic harden-
ing model: calibration methodology and validation. Meccanica 2008;43:115–24.
doi:10.1007/s11012-008-9115-9.
[46] Chaparro BM, Thuillier S, Menezes LF, Manach PY, Fernandes JV. Material pa-
rameters identification: gradient-based, genetic and hybrid optimization algorithms.
Comput Mater Sci 2008;44:339–46. doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2008.03.028.
[47] Bari S, Hassan T. Anatomy of coupled constitutive models for ratcheting simulation.
Int J Plast 2000;16:381–409. doi:10.1016/S0749-6419(99)00059-5.
[48] Chaboche JL. On some modifications of kinematic hardening to im-
prove the description of ratchetting effects. Int J Plast 1991;7:661–78.
doi:10.1016/0749-6419(91)90050-9.
[49] Rezaiee-Pajand M, Sinaie S. On the calibration of the Chaboche hardening model
and a modified hardening rule for uniaxial ratcheting prediction. Int J Solids Struct
2009;46:3009–17. doi:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2009.04.002.
[50] Armstrong PJ, Frederick CO. A mathematical representation of the multiaxial
Bauschinger effect. Central Electricity Generating Board and Berkeley Nuclear Lab-
oratories, Research & Development Department; 1966.
[51] Yu D, Chen G, Yu W, Li D, Chen X. Visco-plastic constitutive modeling on Ohno–
Wang kinematic hardening rule for uniaxial ratcheting behavior of Z2CND18.12N
steel. Int J Plast 2012;28:88–101. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2011.06.001.
[52] Ohno N, Abdel-Karim M. Uniaxial ratchetting of 316FR steel at room temperature—
part II: constitutive modeling and simulation. J Eng Mater Technol 2000;122:35.
doi:10.1115/1.482762.
[53] Kang G. A visco-plastic constitutive model for ratcheting of cyclically stable
materials and its finite element implementation. Mech Mater 2004;36:299–312.
doi:10.1016/S0167-6636(03)00024-3.
[54] Chaboche JL. Time-independent constitutive theories for cyclic plasticity. Int J Plast
1986;2:149–88. doi:10.1016/0749-6419(86)90010-0.
[55] Kang G, Gao Q, Yang X. A visco–plastic constitutive model incorporated with cyclic
hardening for uniaxial/multiaxial ratcheting of SS304 stainless steel at room tem-
perature. Mech Mater 2002;34:521–31. doi:10.1016/S0167-6636(02)00153-9.
[56] Zhang SL, Xuan FZ. Interaction of cyclic softening and stress relaxation of 9-12% Cr
steel under strain-controlled fatigue-creep condition: Experimental and modeling.
Int J Plast 2017;98:45–64. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2017.06.007.
[57] Khan AS, Jackson KM. On the evolution of isotropic and kinematic hardening with
finite plastic deformation. Part I: compression/tension loading of OFHC copper cylin-
ders. Int J Plast 1999;15:1265–75. doi:10.1016/S0749-6419(99)00037-6.
[58] Fournier B, Sauzay M, Caës C, Noblecourt M, Mottot M. Analysis of the hysteresis
loops of a martensitic steel. Part I: study of the influence of strain amplitude and tem-
perature under pure fatigue loadings using an enhanced stress partitioning method.
Mater Sci Eng A 2006;437:183–96. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2006.08.086.
A. Nath, K.K. Ray and S.V. Barai
[59] Rahman SM, Hassan T, Ranjithan SR. Automated parameter determination of ad-
vanced constitutive models. Comput. Technol. 2005;2:261–72 vol.ASME; 2005.
doi:10.1115/PVP2005-71634.
[60] Franulović M, Basan R, Kunc R, Prebil I. Automation of LCF mate-
rial model parameters’ identification. Comput Mater Sci 2010;48:529–36.
doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2010.02.019.
[61] Franulović M, Basan R, Prebil I. Genetic algorithm in material model param-
eters’ identification for low-cycle fatigue. Comput Mater Sci 2009;45:505–10.
doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2008.11.012.
[62] Wang Y, Yu D, Chen G, Chen X. Effects of pre-strain on uniaxial ratcheting and
fatigue failure of Z2CN18.10 austenitic stainless steel. Int J Fatigue 2013;52:106–
13. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2013.03.007.
[63] Ahmadzadeh GR, Varvani-Farahani AA. kinematic hardening rule to investigate the
impact of loading path and direction on ratcheting response of steel alloys. Mech
Mater 2016;101:40–9. doi:10.1016/j.mechmat.2016.07.010.
[64] Kolasangiani K, Shariati M, Farhangdoost K. Prediction of forming limit curves (FLD,
MSFLD and FLSD) and necking time for SS304L sheet using finite element method
and ductile fracture criteria. J Comput Appl Res Mech Eng 2015;4:121–32.
150
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 152 (2019) 138–150
[65] Yang X. Low cycle fatigue and cyclic stress ratcheting failure behavior of car-
bon steel 45 under uniaxial cyclic loading. Int J Fatigue 2005;27:1124–32.
doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.01.004.
[66] ASTM A29/A29M. Standard Specification for General Requirements for Steel Bars,
Carbon and Alloy, Hot-Wrought, 2016.
[67] Wang Y, Yu D, Chen G, Chen X. Effects of pre-strain on uniaxial ratcheting and
fatigue failure of Z2CN18.10 austenitic stainless steel. Int J Fatigue 2013;52:106–
13. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2013.03.007.
[68] Paul SK, Sivaprasad S, Dhar S, Tarafder S. Cyclic plastic deformation be-
havior in SA333 Gr. 6 C–Mn steel. Mater Sci Eng A 2011;528:7341–9.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2011.06.009.
[69] Ohno N, Wang JD. Kinematic hardening rules with critical state of dynamic re-
covery, part I: formulation and basic features for ratchetting behavior. Int J Plast
1993;9:375–90. doi:10.1016/0749-6419(93)90042-O.
[70] Dafalias YF, Popov EP. Plastic internal variables formalism of cyclic plasticity. J Appl
Mech 1976;43:645. doi:10.1115/1.3423948.