Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Mirhosseini, Shahrzad

  • Google
  • 3
  • 4
  • 0

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (3/3 displayed)

  • 2022Periodic Homogenization in Crystal Plasticitycitations
  • 2021On the multiscale analysis of a two phase material: crystal plasticity versus mean fieldcitations
  • 2021Self-consistent, polycrystal rate-independent crystal plasticity modeling for yield surface determinationcitations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Soyarslan, Celal
1 / 22 shared
Perdahcioglu, Emin Semih
1 / 10 shared
Van Den Boogaard, Ton
3 / 135 shared
Perdahcioglu, Semih
2 / 2 shared
Chart of publication period
2022
2021

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Soyarslan, Celal
  • Perdahcioglu, Emin Semih
  • Van Den Boogaard, Ton
  • Perdahcioglu, Semih
OrganizationsLocationPeople

document

On the multiscale analysis of a two phase material: crystal plasticity versus mean field

  • Perdahcioglu, Semih
  • Van Den Boogaard, Ton
  • Mirhosseini, Shahrzad
Abstract

In this paper, a comparison is made between two multiscale methods, namely crystal plasticity finite element and mean field on a material composed of two phases. Both methods are used to homogenize a given microstructure. In order to obtain macroscopic behavior, in the mean field approach, a Self-Consistent scheme is used to evaluate stress and strain partitioning among the phases. In this method, an average of the fields is estimated and local distributions cannot be captured. In parallel, crystal plasticity simulations on Representative Volume Elements (RVEs) composed of hexagonal grains are performed. In these simulations, grain orientations are attributed randomly respecting Mackenzie's distribution function in order to achieve isotropic behavior and macroscopic hardening is extracted from the simulations. The results on macroscopic hardening of both methods are compared to distinguish the extents of validity of mean field homogenization. In addition to Self- Consistent, other mean field schemes such as Voigt, Reuss and Bound-Interpolation are compared in terms of efficiency and accuracy. The comparison manifests that Self-Consistent scheme is capable of predicting material behavior well.

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • grain
  • phase
  • simulation
  • plasticity
  • isotropic
  • homogenization
  • crystal plasticity