Relations between a micro-mechanical model and a damage model for ductile failure in shear

Gurson type constitutive models that account for void growth to coalescence are not able to describe ductile fracture in simple shear, where there is no hydrostatic tension in the material. But recent micro-mechanical studies have shown that in shear the voids are flattened out to micro-cracks, which rotate and elongate until interaction with neighbouring micro-cracks gives coalescence. Thus, the failure mechanism is very different from that under tensile loading. Also, the Gurson model has recently been extended to describe failure in shear, by adding a damage term to the expression for the growth of the void volume fraction, and it has been shown that this extended model can represent experimental observations. Here, numerical studies are carried out to compare predictions of the shear-extended Gurson model with the shear failures predicted by the micro-mechanical cell model. Both models show a strong dependence on the level of hydrostatic tension. Even though the reason for this pressure dependence is different in the two models, as the shear-extended Gurson model does not describe voids flattening out and the associated failure mechanism by micro-cracks interacting with neighbouring micro-cracks, it is shown that the trends of the predictions are in good agreement.