P. 1
Useful Results in continuum mechanics

# Useful Results in continuum mechanics

|Views: 101|Likes:

See more
See less

01/12/2013

pdf

text

original

# Some Useful Results

Biswajit Banerjee
March 22, 2007
1 A spectral decomposition problem
• In one of Simo’s 1992 papers on plasticity [1] (p. 76) we ﬁnd the statement that “An easy calculation then
gives the spectral decomposition”

∂τ
[φ(τ, q)] =
3
¸
A=1

∂β
A
[
´
φ(β
1
, β
2
, β
3
, q)] n
A
⊗n
A
. (1)
Here, τ is the Kirchhoff stress, q is a scalar internal variable, and φ is yield function. The spectral
decomposition of the Kirchhoff stress is given by
τ =
3
¸
A=1
β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
. (2)
Also, isotropy implies that the yield function φ can be expressed in terms of the principal values β
i
of τ such
that
φ(τ, q) =
´
φ(β
1
, β
2
, β
3
, q) . (3)
Let’s try to work out the easy calculation.
Using the chain rule, we have
∂φ
∂τ
=

´
φ
∂β
1
∂β
1
∂τ
+

´
φ
∂β
2
∂β
2
∂τ
+

´
φ
∂β
3
∂β
3
∂τ
or
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1

´
φ
∂β
A
∂β
A
∂τ
. (4)
Also, since
τ = β
1
n
1
⊗n
1
+ β
2
n
2
⊗n
2
+ β
3
n
3
⊗n
3
(5)
using the identity (since the eigenvectors n
A
are orthonormal)
(n
i
⊗n
i
) · (n
j
⊗n
j
) =

0 if i = j
n
i
⊗n
i
if i = j
(6)
we get
τ · (n
1
⊗n
1
) = β
1
n
1
⊗n
1
; τ · (n
2
⊗n
2
) = β
2
n
2
⊗n
2
; τ · (n
3
⊗n
3
) = β
3
n
3
⊗n
3
. (7)
1
Using the identity
(n
i
⊗n
i
) : (n
i
⊗n
i
) = 1 (8)
we then have
[τ · (n
1
⊗n
1
)] : (n
1
⊗n
1
) = β
1
; [τ · (n
2
⊗n
2
)] : (n
2
⊗n
2
) = β
2
; [τ · (n
3
⊗n
3
)] : (n
3
⊗n
3
) = β
3
. (9)
We can simplify these further by using the identities
(A· B) : C = A : (C · B
T
) ; n ⊗n = (n ⊗n)
T
; (n ⊗n) · (n ⊗n) = n ⊗n (10)
to get
τ : [(n
A
⊗n
A
) · (n
A
⊗n
A
)
T
] = τ : [(n
A
⊗n
A
) · (n
A
⊗n
A
)] = τ : (n
A
⊗n
A
) = β
A
; A = 1, 2, 3 (11)
Taking the derivatives of both sides with respect to τ, we get

∂τ
[τ : (n
A
⊗n
A
)] =
∂β
A
∂τ
; A = 1, 2, 3 (12)
Note here that as τ varies, the eigenvectors of τ (i.e., the n
A
s) also vary. So the derivatives will have the form
∂τ
∂τ
: (n
A
⊗n
A
) +τ :

∂τ
(n
A
⊗n
A
) =
∂β
A
∂τ
; A = 1, 2, 3 (13)
or,
I
s
: (n
A
⊗n
A
) +τ :

∂τ
(n
A
⊗n
A
) =
∂β
A
∂τ
; A = 1, 2, 3 (14)
where I
s
is the symmetric fourth-order identity tensor. Therefore,
∂β
A
∂τ
= n
A
⊗n
A
+τ :

∂τ
(n
A
⊗n
A
) . (15)
Plugging (15) into (4), we get
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1

´
φ
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
+

´
φ
∂β
A
τ :

∂τ
(n
A
⊗n
A
) . (16)
Compare equations (16) and (1), shown below for your convenience.
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1

´
φ
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
. (17)
You will see that the derivativ)es of the eigenvectors with respect to τ do not appear in Simo’s equation. This is an
approximation that Simo does not mention in his paper, i.e., that the values of n
A
are kept ﬁxed when evaluating
the derivatives of φ. Or, am I missing something?
Indeed, there is an error in my analysis. Can you ﬁnd out what it is?
Let us now try an alternative proof (hat tip Prof. Andrew Norris).
Since φ(τ) is isotropic, instead of working directly with the eigenvalues β
A
, we can work with the invariants of τ.
2
Recall that the basic invariants of τ are
I
τ
= tr(τ)
II
τ
=
1
2

I
2
τ
− tr(τ
2
)

III
τ
=
1
3

tr(τ
3
) − I
3
A
+ 3 I
A
II
A

(18)
Therefore, the yield function can also be represented as
φ(τ, q) = φ(α
1
, α
2
, α
3
, q) (19)
where
α
1
= tr(τ) ; α
2
=
1
2
tr(τ
2
) ; α
3
=
1
3
tr(τ
3
) . (20)
Differentiating with respect to τ, we get
∂φ
∂τ
=
∂φ
∂α
1
∂α
1
∂τ
+
∂φ
∂α
2
∂α
2
∂τ
+
∂φ
∂α
3
∂α
3
∂τ
. (21)
Now,
∂α
1
∂τ
=
∂[tr(τ)]
∂τ
= 1 ;
∂α
2
∂τ
=
1
2
∂[tr(τ
2
)]
∂τ
= τ ;
∂α
3
∂τ
=
1
3
∂[tr(τ
3
)]
∂τ
= τ
2
. (22)
Therefore,
∂φ
∂τ
=
∂φ
∂α
1
1 +
∂φ
∂α
2
τ +
∂φ
∂α
3
τ
2
. (23)
Let us now express τ in terms of its spectral representation to get
1 =
3
¸
A=1
n
A
⊗n
A
=
3
¸
A=1
β
0
A
n
A
⊗n
A
τ =
3
¸
A=1
β
1
A
n
A
⊗n
A
τ
2
=
3
¸
A=1
β
2
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(24)
Let us also express the α
i
, i = 1, 2, 3 in terms of the spectral representation of τ, i.e.,
α
1
= tr(τ) =
3
¸
A=1
β
A
tr(n
A
⊗n
A
) =
3
¸
A=1
β
A
α
2
=
1
2
tr(τ
2
) =
1
2
3
¸
A=1
β
2
A
tr(n
A
⊗n
A
) =
1
2
3
¸
A=1
β
2
A
α
3
=
1
3
tr(τ
3
) =
1
3
3
¸
A=1
β
3
A
tr(n
A
⊗n
A
) =
1
3
3
¸
A=1
β
3
A
(25)
Therefore,
∂α
1
∂β
A
= 1 = β
0
A
;
∂α
2
∂β
A
= β
A
= β
1
A
;
∂α
3
∂β
A
= β
2
A
. (26)
3
Plugging these into (24) gives
1 =
3
¸
A=1
∂α
1
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
τ =
3
¸
A=1
∂α
2
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
τ
2
=
3
¸
A=1
∂α
3
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(27)
Substituting into (23), we get
∂φ
∂τ
=
∂φ
∂α
1
3
¸
A=1
∂α
1
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
+
∂φ
∂α
2
3
¸
A=1
∂α
2
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
+
∂φ
∂α
3
3
¸
A=1
∂α
3
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(28)
or,
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1
¸
∂φ
∂α
1
∂α
1
∂β
A
+
∂φ
∂α
2
∂α
2
∂β
A
+
∂φ
∂α
3
∂α
3
∂β
A

n
A
⊗n
A
(29)
or,
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1

´
φ
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(30)
We ﬁnally have the correct expression!
• In the operator split algorithm in [1] we have the the following expression for the algorithmic ﬂow rule
b
e
= exp

−2˙ γ∆t
∂φ
∂τ

· (b
e
)
trial
(31)
If the spectral decompositions of b
e
and τ are
b
e
=
3
¸
A=1
λ
2
A
n
A
⊗n
A
; τ =
3
¸
A=1
β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(32)
and
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1

´
φ
∂β
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(33)
show that
(b
e
)
trial
=
3
¸
A=1
¸
λ
2
A
exp

2˙ γ∆t

´
φ
∂β
A
¸
n
A
⊗n
A
. (34)
From (31), we have
(b
e
)
trial
= exp

2˙ γ∆t
∂φ
∂τ

· b
e
= exp

κ
∂φ
∂τ

· b
e
(35)
where
κ := 2˙ γ∆t . (36)
4
Expanding in an inﬁnite series, we have
exp

κ
∂φ
∂τ

= 1 + κ
∂φ
∂τ
+
κ
2
2

∂φ
∂τ

2
+
κ
3
3!

∂φ
∂τ

3
+ . . . (37)
Deﬁne
α
A
:=

´
φ
∂β
A
. (38)
Then,
∂φ
∂τ
=
3
¸
A=1
α
A
n
A
⊗n
A
;

∂φ
∂τ

2
=
3
¸
A=1
α
2
A
n
A
⊗n
A
;

∂φ
∂τ

3
=
3
¸
A=1
α
3
A
n
A
⊗n
A
; . . . (39)
Therefore,
exp

κ
∂φ
∂τ

= 1 +
3
¸
A=1
¸
κ α
A
+
κ
2
2
α
2
A
+
κ
3
3!
α
3
A
+ . . .
¸
n
A
⊗n
A
. (40)
Since
1 =
¸
A
n
A
⊗n
A
(41)
we then have
exp

κ
∂φ
∂τ

=
3
¸
A=1
¸
1 + κ α
A
+
(κ α
A
)
2
2
+
(κ α
A
)
3
3!
+ . . .
¸
n
A
⊗n
A
=
3
¸
A=1
e
κ α
A
n
A
⊗n
A
. (42)
Using the spectrla decomposition of b
e
, we get
exp

κ
∂φ
∂τ

· b
e
=
¸
3
¸
A=1
exp(κ α
A
) n
A
⊗n
A
¸
·
¸
3
¸
B=1
λ
2
B
n
B
⊗n
B
¸
. (43)
From the identity
(n
i
⊗n
i
) · (n
j
⊗n
j
) =

0 if i = j
n
i
⊗n
i
if i = j
(44)
we then get
exp

κ
∂φ
∂τ

· b
e
= e
κ α
1
λ
2
1
n
1
⊗n
1
+ e
κ α
2
λ
2
2
n
2
⊗n
2
+ e
κ α
3
λ
2
3
n
3
⊗n
3
=
3
¸
A=1
λ
2
A
e
κ α
A
n
A
⊗n
A
. (45)
Therefore, from (35)
(b
e
)
trial
=
3
¸
A=1
¸
λ
2
A
exp

2˙ γ∆t

´
φ
∂β
A
¸
n
A
⊗n
A
. (46)
References
[1] J. C. Simo. Algorithms for static and dynamic multiplicative plasticity that preserve the classical return
mapping algorithms of the inﬁnitesimal theory. Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg., 99:61–112, 1992.
5

scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->