#
Our idealized tension test σε diagram appears as
Another phenomenon usually observed if the bar is cycled through ten
$%
$
We also neglect this effect and assume YC = YT .
"
Definition
The material is said to be stable (work hardening or perfectly plas
Drucker's Postulate of Stability and Results
Let the stress be some value σ at a point A of the tension test. Suppose the
*
' WL be the work done by the applied loads,
∆W L = areashaded
∆WL = (σ − σ * )∆ε P ≥ 0 (equality iff ∆ε P = 0 ).
&
If σ * = σ , (i.e. if σ * is at elastic limit) when loads are increased, then
1
∆ω L = ∆σ∆ε P ≥ 0 for stable material.
2
∴ If material is stable, the work done by loads in a cycle of adding and removing
stress is nonnegative and vice versa.
stability ⇔ (σ − σ * )∆ε p ≥ 0 σ < 0 (1)
∆σ∆ε ≥ 0, σ =σ *
If ∆σ causes ∆ε
P
in time ∆t , then in the limit
∆ε P ∆σ
ε = lim ,σ = lim
P
,
∆t → 0 ∆t ∆t → 0 ∆t
( 1 ) is equivalent to
(σ − σ * )ε P ≥ 0
. (1′)
σε P ≥ 0
ε P is plastic strain rate σ is stress rate.
Note : Even through we have assumed the process is rateindependent, it is
convenient to use time as a parameter and work with rates. The con
)
*
*
( 1′ ) from a compression or torsion test. This leads
us to generalize these concepts to general 3dimensional stress states.
2. Generalization of tension test concepts to 3D state of stress
Assumption 1. At any time t, ε ij (x,t ) consists of an elastic part ε ijE and a plastic
part ε ijP so that
ε ij = ε ijE + ε ijP ,
(
,
σ ij = Cijklε klE
or
ε ij = K ijklσ kl
E
with
K ijkl = K klij = K jikl
and
K ijkl do not depend on ε ijP or t.
Note : Such a strain decomposition would not be entirely satisfactory for finite
deformation but it is O.K. for infinitesimal theory.
From the observation of the yield point and the subsequent curve in 1D, we are
lead to the concept of a
Yield surface and loading function.
σ ij can be represented by a point in a 9
For fixed x (position or particle),
dimensional vector space. Take σ 11 ,σ 12 ," as the coordinates of the point σ
referred to a rectangular Cartesian set of axes. Suppose at t = 0, the material is in
the stress free (reference) state. Assume that there is a simply connected
neighborhood of the origin in stress space at t = 0 that contains only elastic states.
That is, for σ ij in this neighborhood, a small change ∆σ ij will cause only an
+
that ∆ε ij = 0 . The boundary of this region (in stress space) we call the initial yield
P

Assumption 2. There exists a loading function f such that at time t if σ ij is such
that
5/6 ∆σ ij if small enough, causes only ∆ε ijE , "elastic state",
,
!
We now derive the consequence of Assumption 3 for general stress states.
Consider a unit cube of material in a homogeneous state σ ij* , ε ij* at time t * .
(Assume each element of cube has same deformation history.) An external agency
changes stress to σ ij (t ) during t * ≤ t ≤ t 3 with
σ ij = σ ij at t = t3
*
The loading cycle is
t * ≤ t ≤ t1" elastic deformation (loading),
t1 ≤ t ≤ t2" plastic states (loading),
t2 ≤ t ≤ t3" elastic unloading.
# σ space, the loading cycle can be represented as in Fig.
The work done by the agency (on the unit cube) is
4
t3
W = ∫ * (σ ij − σ ij* )εij dt
t
t3
= ∫ * (σ ij − σ *
ε +ε
ij )( ij
E P
ij )dt.
t
But
∫ ∫ ∫
t3 t3 t3
(σ ij − σ ε ij ) ij dt
* E
= σ ε
ij ij dt
E
−σ *
ij εijE dt
t *
t *
t *
= I1 − I 2 .
( noteσ ij = Cijkl ε ij )
E
∫ σ ε
t3
I1 = *
E
ij ij dt
t
d 1 E E
∫
t3
= Cijkl ε kl ε ij dt
t* dt 2
=0
σ ij(3) = σ ij* so ε ij E (3) = ε ijE .
*
Since
And εij ≠ 0 only for t1 ≤ t ≤ t2 .
P
'2, I 2 = 0 .
∫ (σ
t2
∴ W= ij −σ ij* )εijP dt ≥ 0 , (by assumption 3)
t1
[
W (t 2 ) = (σ ij − σ ij* )εijP ]
t =t1
(δt ) +
1
2
[
σ ij εijP + (σ ij − σ ij* )εijP ]
t =t1
(δt ) 2 + ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
perpendicular to εij through σ ij . All σ ij* satisfying eq. (2) lie on or to one side of
P
it.
So the yield surface lies on or to one side of the hyperplane perpen
εij
P
(2) gives σ ijεij ≥ 0 for σ ij* on yield surface. Therefore σ ij makes an an ≤ 90D
P
with εij . If angle exceeds 90D , stress point moves inside yield surface and
P
εijP = 0 .
8
Corollary 3.
ε ijP is normal to the yield surface at a regular point of the yield sur
∂f
εij
P
= λ whereλ = λ (x,t ) > 0. (3)
∂σ ij
Loading, Neutral loading, Unloading from plastic state are character
σ ij as follows
∂f
f = 0, σ > 0 , : loading from a plastic state, εijP ≠ 0 ,
∂σ ij ij
∂f
f = 0, σ = 0: : neutral loading from a plalstic state,
∂σ ij ij
∂f
σ ij < 0 . : unloading from a plastic state, εij = 0 .
P
f = 0,
∂σ ij
or equivalently by (3), we get
∂f ∂ f
≠0 if εij ≠ 0
P
∂ε ijP ∂σ ij
∂f
σ ij
∂σ
λ = − ≥0 .
ij
∂ f ∂f
∂σ ij ∂ε ijP
So equation (3) becomes, for loading at a regular point of work harden
∂f
σ
∂f ∂σ pq pq ∂f
εijP = λ = −
∂σ ij ∂f ∂f ∂σ ij
∂σ kl ∂ε klP
together with
∂f
f = 0, σ > 0 .
∂σ ij ij
For neutral loading, σ ij lies in tangential plane
∂f
f = 0, σ = 0
∂σ ij ij
and (4) gives
εijP = 0 .
Note : For a perfectly plastic material, we cannot show λ explicitly, because
∂f ∂f
= 0, σ = 0 .
∂ε ij
P
∂σ ij ij
Vertices and Edges on Loading Surface
(a common occurrence, e.g. Tresca yield surface)
Consider two regular surfaces intersecting in a line given by
f1 (σ ij ) = 0, f 2 (σ ij ) = 0 ,
f1 , f2 depend on the history of the deformation. From stability considerations
εijP lies in the plane defined by and between the two normals to f1 and f2 . So
∂f 1 ∂f
εijP = λ1 + λ2 2
∂σ ij ∂σ ij
λ1 ≥ 0, λ2 ≥ 0 .
σ ij εijP ≥ 0
For unloading, σ ij points inside both yield surface,
εijP = 0 ,
∂f 1 ∂f 2
σ ij < 0, σ < 0 .
∂σ ij ∂σ ij ij
For neutral loading, σ ij points along f1 = 0 or f2 = 0 , or both. εij = 0 , one of
P
∂f1 ∂f 2
σ ij , σ is zero and the other is zero or negative.
∂σ ij ∂σ ij ij
loading, there are two possibilities (with εij ≠ 0 ).
P
f1 = 0 , f2 < 0 . So
∂f 1 ∂f
σ ij + 1P εijP = 0 ( f1 = 0) ,
∂σ ij ∂ε ij
∂f 2 ∂f
σ ij + 2P εijP < 0 ( f2 < 0) ,
∂σ ij ∂ε ij
σ ij εijP ≥ 0, λ1 ≥ 0, λ2 ≥ 0 .
ε ijP , but the indeterminancy is only in
ε ijP .
2) Stress point stays on both loading surfaces. Then λ 1 , λ 2 are re
∂f 1 ∂f
σ ij + 1P εijP = 0 ( f1 = 0) ,
∂σ ij ∂ε ij
∂f 2 ∂f
σ ij + 2P εijP = 0 ( f2 = 0) ,
∂σ ij ∂ε ij
σ ij εijP ≥ 0, λ1 ≥ 0, λ2 ≥ 0 .
From the equation of εij at the vertex,
P
∂f1 ∂f 2
εij = λ1 + λ2
P
.
∂σ ij ∂σ ij
∂f1 ∂f ∂f ∂f
σ ij + 1P λ1 1 + λ2 2 = 0 ,
∂σ ij ∂ε ij ∂σ ij ∂σ ij
∂f 2 ∂f ∂f ∂f
σ ij + 2P λ1 1 + λ2 2 = 0
∂σ ij ∂ε ij ∂σ ij ∂σ ij
or
∂f 1 ∂f 1 ∂ f 1 ∂f 2 ∂ f1
− λ − λ = σ
∂ε ijP ∂σ ij
1
∂ε ijP ∂σ ij
2
∂σ ij ij
. (5)
∂f ∂f ∂ f ∂f ∂f
− 2P 1 λ1 − 2P 2 λ2 = 2 σ ij
∂ε ij ∂σ ij ∂ε ij ∂σ ij ∂σ ij
(5) are solved for λ1 and λ2 which must also satisfy
λ1 ≥ 0, λ2 ≥ 0, σ ij εijP ≥ 0 .
σ ij , which
determine the range of directions for which stress point remains at the vertex. It
may happen that (5) reduce to one equation in which case we can show that
∂f1 ∂f 2 ∂f1 ∂f 2
!
, on the plane containing , are
∂ε ij ∂ε ij
P P
∂σ ij ∂σ ij
parallel and
∂f1 ∂f 2
Summary of developments thus far
Assumption 1
ε ij = ε ijE + ε ijP ,
ε ijE = K ijklσ kl ,
K ijkl = K klij = K jikl .
Assumption 2 Yield surface (loading function), yield conditions f ( σ ij ) = 0
depends on history of deformation.
f < 0" , elastic state
f = 0 . . . plstic state
f > 0" inadmissible
when f < 0 , εij = 0 and while εij ≠ 0 , then f = 0.
P P
Assumption 3 Material is stable
(σ ij − σ ij* )εijP ≥ 0, σ ij εijP ≥ 0 ,
σ ij lies inside or on the current yield surface.
*
#$% %
Unloading σ ij moves stress point inside f = 0, εijP = 0 .
∂f
&
σ < 0 .
∂σ ij ij
∂f ∂f 2
& 1 σ ij < 0, σ < 0 .
∂σ ij ∂σ ij ij
Neutral Loading σ ij moves stress point along current yield surface. For
work hardening materials, εij = 0 and
P
f = 0.
∂f
At regular point, σ = 0 .
∂σ ij ij
∂f ∂f 2
&
1 σ ij , σ vanishes.
∂σ ij ∂σ ij ij
Loading σ ij moves outside current yield surface but yield surface changes so
that f = 0 is satisfied, εij ≠ 0 .
P
∂f
At regular point, σ > 0 ,
∂σ ij ij
∂f
σ rs
∂ f ∂σ
εijP = λ , λ = − rs
≥ 0 .
∂σ ij ∂f ∂f
∂σ kl ∂ε klP
∂f ∂f 2
&
1 σ ij , σ > 0
∂σ ij ∂σ ij ij
εijP lies in a fan formed by adjacent normals
∂f1 ∂f 2
εij = λ1 + λ2
P
.
∂σ ij ∂σ ij
λ1 , λ2 are restricted by λ1 ≥ 0, λ2 > 0, σ ij εijP ≥ 0 and by both or one of
f1 = 0, f2 = 0 , depending on weather or not the stress point remains at the corner.
"