Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A scientific benchmark for elasto-plastic constitutive modeling - Part II : blind predictions, calibration strategies, and benchmark results

  • Lorenz Maier*
  • , Erik Walz
  • , Michael Hofmann
  • , Joana Rebelo Kornmeier
  • , Rongfei Juan
  • , Junhe Lian
  • , Youngung Jeong
  • , Bohye Jeon
  • , Martin Milch
  • , Alper Güner
  • , Emad Maawad
  • , Wolfram Volk
  • , Christoph Hartmann
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Technical University of Munich
  • RWTH Aachen University
  • Changwon National University
  • AutoForm Engineering Deutschland GmbH
  • Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht Centre for Materials and Coastal Research

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
9 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Abstract: This paper presents the second part of the NUMISHEET 2025 scientific benchmark on elasto-plastic constitutive modeling. The study builds on the experimental dataset and benchmark problem definition introduced in Part I. It evaluates 19 blind prediction results submitted by 17 international teams from academia and industry. The benchmark task included calibrating constitutive models for the dual-phase steel DP800HHE, exclusively based on Part I data. The calibrated constitutive models were used to simulate the validation experiment MUC-Test, without prior access to the experimental validation results. The submitted solutions span a broad spectrum of modeling strategies, ranging from different phenomenological hardening models and yield locus formulations to crystal plasticity approaches. A systematic comparison with experimental ground truth data (comprising punch force-displacement curves and local strain distributions) was conducted using normalized error metrics. The results of this study reveal the characteristic strengths and limitations of different modeling approaches. They also highlight the role of anisotropy and hardening law selection. Furthermore, they demonstrate the sensitivity of predictions to calibration strategies. Providing an open dataset, a transparent evaluation methodology, and a comprehensive discussion of outcomes signifies an advancement in reproducibility and objectivity in constitutive modeling. This benchmark serves as a basis for further validation, comparison, and development of constitutive models. Dataset: https://zenodo.org/records/18431261

Original languageEnglish
Article number17
Number of pages25
JournalInternational Journal of Material Forming
Volume19
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2026
MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

Keywords

  • DP800
  • Experimental data
  • Material characterization
  • Material modeling
  • Sheet metal forming
  • Testing

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A scientific benchmark for elasto-plastic constitutive modeling - Part II : blind predictions, calibration strategies, and benchmark results'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this