Chapter1 1DPlasticityModelsv1 0

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/313678887
Computational Solid Mechanics. Computational Plasticity - Chapter 1.

1D Plasticity Models
Presentation · January 2017

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33391.64160
CITATIONS READS
0 356
1 author:
Carlos Agelet de Saracibar

Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
225 PUBLICATIONS 2,669 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Carlos Agelet de Saracibar on 14 February 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Computational Solid Mechanics
Computational Plasticity
Chapter 1. 1D Plasticity Models
C. Agelet de Saracibar
ETS Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos, Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña (UPC), Barcelona, Spain
International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering (CIMNE), Barcelona, Spain
1D Plasticity Models > Contents
Contents
Contents
1. 1D Rate independent plasticity models
1. Motivation
2. Perfect plasticity model
3. Hardening plasticity model
2. 1D Rate dependent plasticity models
1. Motivation
April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 2

Contents
Contents
1. Motivation
1. Motivation

1D Plasticity Models > Rate Independent Plasticity Models
Motivation
Physical and rheological models: Linear elastic spring

Motivation
Physical model: Rigid block sliding on a rough surface.
Coulomb’s friction law
F < µN ⇔ δ=
0
F = µN ⇔ δ ≠0
F > µN ⇒ no equilibrium
Motivation
Rheological model: Coulomb’s frictional device
σ < σ e ⇒ ∆ε =0
σ= σ e ⇒ ∆ε ≠ 0
σ > σ e ⇒ not admissible
Motivation
Rheological model: Elastic spring + frictional device
σ < σ e ⇒ ∆ε f =0, ∆ε e =∆ε , ∆σ =E ∆ε e , σ =Eε e =E ( ε − ε f )

σ =σ e ⇒ ∆ε e =0, ∆ε f =∆ε , ∆σ =0, σ =Eε e =E ( ε − ε f )
σ > σ e ⇒ not admissible

Motivation
Rheological model: Elastic spring + frictional device

Perfect plasticity model

Hypothesis
Within the framework of the infinitesimal deformation theory,
we introduce the following hypothesis for a 1D rate-independent
linear elastic-perfect plastic model, within the incremental
theory of plasticity:
H1. Additive split of the infinitesimal strain
ε= ε e + ε p
H2. Set of plastic internal variables: plastic strain

E p := {ε p }


H3. Free energy per unit of volume: quadratic elastic potential
ψ= e
(ε ) 2 E (ε )
(ε ) : W= 1 e 2 e
H4. Clausius-Planck inequality. Linear elastic constitutive

equation, and reduced plastic dissipation inequality
The Clausius-Planck inequality for an isothermal process reads,
D := σ ε −ψ ( ε e ) ≥ 0 ∀ε
D=: σ ε − ∂ ε ψ ε=
e
e
( ε ) ε
σ − ∂ ψ ε
 + ∂ ψ
e ε
 p
≥ 0 ∀ε e
σ=
∂ε ψ =
Eε e , D :=
e σ ε p ≥ 0

H5. Space of admissible stresses, elastic domain, and yield
surface. Yield function.
{
σ := σ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y ≤ 0 }
int (  ) := {σ
σ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y < 0}
∂ := {σσ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y = 0}
−σ Y σ σY


H6. Associative plastic flow rule
ε p =
γ > 0 if σ = σY > 0
 p
ε =−γ < 0 if σ =−σ Y < 0
ε p =γ ∂σ f (σ ) =γ sgn (σ ) if γ > 0, f (σ ) =σ − σ Y =0
H7. Kuhn-Tucker loading/unloading conditions

if γ > 0 then f (σ ) =
0 Plastic loading
if f (σ ) < 0 then γ =
0 Elastic loading/unloading
γ ≥ 0, f (σ ) ≤ 0, γ f (σ ) =
0

H8. Plastic consistency condition
if 0 and γ > 0 then f (σ ) =
f (σ ) = 0 Plastic loading
if f (σ=) 0 and f (σ ) < 0 then =
γ 0 Elastic unloading
if f (σ )= 0 then γ ≥ 0, f (σ ) ≤ 0, γ f (σ )= 0
Plastic loading: plastic consistency (or persistency) condition

f (σ ) 0
f (σ ) 0 and γ > 0 ⇒ =
=
f = sgn (σ ) Eε − sgn (σ ) E ε p =
∂σ f σ = sgn (σ ) E ε − γ E =
0
=γ E −1 sgn (σ ) E ε > 0

Trial stress rate
σ=
trial
: E ε, =
σ : σ trial − E ε p
Plastic loading: plastic multiplier (or plastic consistency)

parameter
f = ∂σ f σ = ∂σ f σ trial − ∂σ f E ε p = ∂σ f σ trial − γ E = 0
γ= E −1 sgn (σ ) σ trial > 0

E −1∂σ f σ trial =
γ= E −1 sgn (σ ) σ trial ≥ 0
E −1 ∂σ f σ trial =


Plastic loading/elastic unloading from the yield surface
Case 1
if ∂σ f σ trial < 0 then γ =
0 Elastic unloading
if ∂σ f σ trial < 0 then
if γ > 0 then f = ∂σ f σ trial − γ E < 0, γ f < 0 ⇒ γ =
0
Case 2
if ∂σ f σ trial > 0 then γ > 0 Plastic loading
if ∂σ f σ trial > 0 then
if γ = 0 then f = ∂σ f σ trial − γ E > 0 ⇒ γ > 0, f =
0


Geometric interpretation
σ trial ∂ σ f (σ ) σ trial σ trial ∂ σ f (σ ) σ trial

−σ Y σ σY
Elastic unloading Elastic unloading
Plastic loading Plastic loading


Stress-strain curve for a rate-independent elastoplastic model
with linear elastic and perfect plastic response

Hardening plasticity model

Stress-strain curve: hardening plasticity


Stress-strain curve: Bauschinger effect (kinematic hardening)


Stress-strain curve: isotropic/kinematic hardening


Hypothesis
we introduce the following hypothesis for a 1D rate-independent
elastoplastic model with linear elastic response, and linear
isotropic and kinematic hardening, within the incremental
ε= ε e + ε p
H2. Set of plastic internal variables

E p := {ε p , ξ , ξ }


H3. Free energy per unit of volume: quadratic elastic, isotropic
hardening and kinematic hardening potentials
ψ ( ε e , ξ=
, ξ ) : W ( ε e ) + Π (ξ ) + Π (ξ )
W ( ε ) = E ( ε ) Elastic potential
e 1 e 2
2
1
Π (ξ ) = K ξ 2 Isotropic hardening potential
2
Π (ξ ) =
1
H ξ 2 Kinematic hardening potential
2
E + K + H > 0, E + K > 0, E + H > 0


equation, linear hardening equations and reduced plastic
dissipation
D := σ ε −ψ ( ε e , ξ , ξ ) ≥ 0 ∀ε
D=: σ ε − ∂ ε ψ ε e − ∂ξψ ξ − ∂ξ ψ ξ
e
= ( ε ) ε
σ − ∂ ψ
e ε
 + ∂ ψ ε
 p
− ∂eξψ ξ − ∂ ξ
ψ ξ ≥ 0 ∀ε
σ = ∂ ε ψ = Eε e , q := −∂ξψ = − K ξ , q := −∂ξ ψ = − H ξ
e
D =: σ ε p + qξ + qξ ≥ 0

Linear isotropic hardening
q := −∂ξψ = − K ξ
Nonlinear isotropic hardening

(1) Exponential saturation law + linear isotropic hardening
q := −∂ξψ := − (σ ∞ − σ Y ) (1 − exp ( −δ ξ ) ) − K ξ
(2) Power law
q := −∂ξψ := σ Y − k1 ( k2 + ξ )
m


{
σ := σ , q, q f (σ , q, q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q ≤ 0 }
int (  ) := {σ , q, q
σ f (σ , q , q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q < 0}
∂ := {σ , q, q
σ f (σ , q , q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q = 0}
− (σ Y − q − q ) σ σY − q + q


if γ > 0, f (σ , q, q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q = 0 then
ε p =γ ∂ σ f (σ , q , q ) = γ sgn (σ − q )
ξ = γ ∂ f (σ , q , q ) =
q γ
ξ =
γ ∂ q f (σ , q , q ) =
−γ sgn (σ − q )


if γ > 0 then f (σ , q , q ) =
0 Plastic loading
if f (σ , q, q ) < 0 then γ =
0 Elastic loading/unloading
γ ≥ 0, f (σ , q, q ) ≤ 0, γ f (σ , q, q ) =
0


H8. Plastic consistency condition
if 0 and γ > 0 then f (σ , q, q ) =
f (σ , q , q ) = 0 Plastic loading
if f (σ=, q, q ) 0 and f (σ , q, q ) < 0 the
= n γ 0 Elastic unloading
if f (σ , q , q ) =
0 then γ ≥ 0, f (σ , q, q ) ≤ 0, γ f (σ , q, q ) =
0

f (σ=
, q, q ) 0 and γ > 0 ⇒ f (σ=
, q, q ) 0


f = ∂σ f σ + ∂ q f q + ∂ q f q
= sgn (σ − q ) σ + q − sgn (σ − q ) q
= sgn (σ − q ) Eε − sgn (σ − q ) E ε p − K ξ + sgn (σ − q ) H ξ
=sgn (σ − q ) Eε − sgn 2 (σ − q ) Eγ − K γ − sgn 2 (σ − q ) H γ
= sgn (σ − q ) Eε − γ ( E+K +=
H) 0
( E+K +H ) sgn (σ − q ) E ε > 0

−1
γ=


Trial stress rate
σ=
trial
: E ε, =
σ : σ trial − E ε p
Plastic loading: plastic multiplier parameter

f = ∂σ f σ + ∂ q f q + ∂ q f q
 trial
 p 
= ∂σ f σ − ∂σ f E ε − ∂ q f K ξ − ∂ q f H ξ
=∂σ f σ trial − γ ( E+K +H ) =0
( E+K +H ) ∂σ f σ trial = ( E+K +H ) sgn (σ − q ) σ trial > 0

−1 −1
γ=
( E+K +H ) ( E+K +H ) sgn (σ − q ) σ trial ≥ 0

−1 −1
γ= ∂σ f σ trial =

Case 1
if ∂σ f σ trial < 0 then γ =
0 Elastic unloading
if ∂σ f σ trial < 0 and γ > 0 then
f =∂σ f σ trial − γ ( E+K +H ) < 0, γ f < 0 ⇒ γ =0
Case 2
if ∂σ f σ trial > 0 then γ > 0 Plastic loading
if ∂σ f σ trial > 0 and γ=
0 then
f =∂σ f σ trial − γ ( E+K +H ) > 0 ⇒ γ > 0, f =0


Geometric interpretation
σ trial ∂ f (σ , q, q ) σ trial
σ σ trial ∂ σ f (σ , q , q ) σ trial
− (σ Y − q − q ) σ σY − q + q
Elastic unloading Elastic unloading
Plastic loading Plastic loading


Isotropic hardening
Geometric interpretation: expansion (without translation) of the
yield surface
−σ Y  0 σY
σ
− (σ Y − q ) σ σY − q


Kinematic hardening
Geometric interpretation: translation (without expansion) of the
yield surface
−σ Y  0 σY
σ
− (σ Y − q ) σ σY + q


Isotropic + Kinematic hardening
Geometric interpretation: expansion and translation of the yield
surface
−σ Y  0 σY
σ
− (σ Y − q − q ) σ σY − q + q


with linear elastic and linear isotropic hardening plasticity


with linear elastic and linear kinematic hardening plasticity


with linear elastic, linear isotropic/linear kinematic hardening
plasticity


Reduced plastic dissipation
Plastic dissipation rate per unit of volume
D := σ ε p + q ξ + q ξ
= γ (σ sgn (σ − q ) + q − q sgn (σ − q ) )
= γ ( (σ − q ) sgn (σ − q ) + q )
= γ ( σ − q + q)
= γ ( f (σ , q , q ) + σ Y )
= γ σY ≥ 0


Maximum plastic dissipation principle
Given a strain rate and a rate of the plastic internal variables
=:
E {=
ε, 0, 0} , E { }
 p : ε p , ξ, ξ
the maximum plastic dissipation principle states that the stress

state satisfies
( 
D S, E ≥ D T , E
p
)
p
( ) ∀ T ∈ σ
where,
=S: {=
σ , q, q } , T : {π , p, p}
=  p : SE
D S, E = (
 p, D T , E )
p : TE
p ( )

Maximum plastic dissipation
( )
 p ≥ D T ,E
D S, E p ( ) ∀ T ∈ σ
( p
D S − T ,E ) := ( S − T 
) ≥ 0 ∀ T ∈ σ
E p
Constrained minimization problem
( 
S arg max D T , E p
) ∀T ∈ σ
=
S arg min ( −D (T , E
 )) ∀ T ∈  p
σ


Maximum plastic dissipation, given by,
= p
S arg min −D T , E ( ( )) ∀ T ∈ σ
is equivalent to associative plastic flow rule, Kuhn-Tucker
loading/unloading conditions, and convexity of the yield surface,
given by,
 p= γ ∂ f (S )
E S
γ ≥ 0, f (S) ≤ 0, γ f (S) =
0
(T − S ) ∂ S f (S ) ≤ f (T ) − f (S ) ∀ T


Proof 1. Maximum plastic dissipation implies associative plastic
flow rule and Kuhn-Tucker loading/unloading conditions
Constrained minimization problem
= p
S arg min −D T , E ( ( )) ∀ T ∈ σ
Unconstrained minimization problem: Lagrange multipliers
L ( T , 
E p
, γ ) :=− D ( T , 
E p
) + γ f (T )
S arg min L ( T , 
E p
,γ ) ∀ T


The optimality conditions of the unconstrained minimization
problem yield
∂ TL
=T S=T S
(  p ,γ
T, E ) p
= − ∂ T D T, E ( ) + γ ∂ T f ( T ) T =S
 p + γ ∂ f (S) =0
=− E S
 p= γ ∂ f (S )
E S
γ ≥ 0, f (S) ≤ 0, γ f (S) =
0


Proof 2. Maximum plastic dissipation implies convexity of the
yield surface
Unconstrained minimization problem
(L )  p ,γ ≤ L
S, E ( T , 
E p
, γ ) ∀T
−D (S, E  ) + γ f (S ) ≤ − D (T , E
p  ) + γ f (T ) p
∀T
D (T , E
 ) − D (S, E
p  ) ≤ γ ( f (T ) − f (S ) )
p
∀T
γ (T − S ) ∂ S f (S ) ≤ γ ( f (T ) − f (S ) ) ∀ T
if γ > 0 then (T − S ) ∂ S f (S ) ≤ f (T ) − f (S ) ∀ T

Proof 3. Associative plastic flow rule, Kuhn-Tucker loading/
unloading conditions and convexity of the yield surface implies
maximum plastic dissipation
Using associative plastic flow rule

 p = γ ∂ f (S )
E S
( T − S 
) = γ ( T − S ) ∂ S f ( S ) ∀ T ∈ σ
E p
Using convexity of the yield surface
( T − S ) ≤ γ ( f (T ) − f (S) ) ∀T ∈ σ

E p


Maximum plastic dissipation: elastic unloading (trivial case)
if=γ 0 then ( T − S 
) ≤ 0 and
E p
(
 p ≥ D T ,E
D S, E p) ( ) ∀ T ∈ σ
Maximum plastic dissipation: plastic loading
if γ > 0 then f (S ) =
0 and
( T − S 
) ≤ γ f (T ) ≤ 0 ∀T ∈ σ
E p
(
 p ≥ D T ,E
D S, E p) ( ) ∀ T ∈ σ


Hypothesis
H3. Free energy per unit of volume
equation, linear hardening equations and reduced dissipation


Hypothesis
H3. Free energy per unit of volume
equation, linear hardening equations and reduced dissipation
H6. Maximum plastic dissipation

Contents
Contents
1. Motivation
1. Motivation

1D Plasticity Models > Rate Dependent Plasticity Models
Motivation
Rheological model: dashpot
η
σ σ
ε
ε =ησ
 1

Motivation
Rheological model: elastic spring + frictional device |
dashpot
σY
E
σ σ
η
εe εp
ε= ε e + ε p
σ − σ Y sgn (σ ) =
σ ex := f (σ ) sgn (σ )
ε p
= σ ex
=
1
η
1
η
f (σ ) sgn =
(σ ) 1
η
f (σ ) ∂ σ f (σ )

Hypothesis
we introduce the following hypothesis for a 1D rate-dependent
linear elastic-perfect plastic model, within the incremental
ε= ε e + ε p
H2. Set of plastic internal variables: plastic strain

E p := {ε p }


H3. Free energy per unit of volume: quadratic elastic potential
ψ= (ε ) 2 E (ε )
(ε ) : W=
e 1 e 2 e

equation, and reduced plastic dissipation inequality
D := σ ε −ψ ( ε e ) ≥ 0 ∀ε
D=: σ ε − ∂ ε ψ ε=
e
e
( ε ) ε
σ − ∂ ψ ε
 + ∂ ψ
e ε
 p
≥ 0 ∀ε e
σ=
∂ε ψ =
Eε e , D :=
e σ ε p ≥ 0

H5. Elastic domain, plastic domain, and yield surface. Yield
function.
{
σ := σ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y ≤ 0 }
ext (  ) := {σ
σ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y > 0}
∂ := {σ
σ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y = 0}
−σ Y σ σY


1 1
ε =p
f (σ ) ∂ σ f (σ =
) f (σ ) sgn (σ )
η η
The associative plastic flow rule can be cast as
1
ε =
p
γ sgn (σ ) , γ =f (σ ) ≥ 0
γ ∂ σ f (σ ) =
η
Geometric interpretation: plastic loading
ε = f (σ ) ∂σ f (σ ) = σ − σ Y sgn (σ ) = (σ − σ Y sgn (σ ) )
p 1 1 1
η η η


Closest-point-projection (cpp)
σ Y sgn (σ ) if σ ∈ ext σ
σ * P=
= σ σ 
 σ if σ ∈ σ
Natural relaxation time

τ := E −1η
Associative plastic flow rule
1
=ε p
E −1 (σ − σ *)
τ


Associative plastic flow rule: geometric interpretation
1
=ε p E −1 (σ − σ *)
τ
σ * = PEσ (σ )
−σ Y σY σ
σ * = PEσ (σ )
σ −σ Y σY


Stress-strain curve for a rate-dependent linear elastic, perfect
plastic model


Perzyna model
The associative plastic flow rule given by
1 1
ε =
p
f (σ ) ∂ σ f (σ =
) f (σ ) sgn (σ )
η η
is equivalent to the maximization of a regularized plastic
dissipation, and can be obtained as the solution of the following
unconstrained minimization problem
(
arg min −Dη (π , ε p )
σ= ) ∀π
(σ , ε ) : D (σ , ε ) − 2η f (σ )
1 2
Dη= p p


Perzyna model
Proof. The solution of the unconstrained minimization problem
reads,
(
arg min −Dη (π , ε p )
σ= ) ∀π
(σ , ε ) : D (σ , ε ) − 2η f (σ )
1 2
Dη= p p
∂σ Dη (σ , ε ) :=∂σ D (σ , ε ) −
1
p p
f (σ ) ∂ σ f (σ ) =
0
η
1
ε =
p
f (σ ) ∂ σ f (σ =
) 0
η

Duvaut-Lions model
The associative plastic flow rule given by
1
=ε p E −1 (σ − σ * )
τ
is equivalent to the maximization of a regularized plastic
dissipation, and can be obtained as the solution of the following
unconstrained minimization problem written in terms of the cpp
(
arg min −Dτ (π , ε p )
σ= ) ∀π
Dτ (σ , ε =
) : D (σ , ε ) − 2τ σ − σ *
p 1 p 2
E −1


Closest-point-projection (cpp)
The closest-point-projection is obtained as the solution of the
following constrained minimization probem, written in terms of
the complementary energy
σ * arg min Ξ (σ − τ * ) ∀ τ * ∈ σ
=
Ξ (σ − σ * ) = σ −σ * = (σ − σ * ) E (σ − σ * )
−1
1 2 1
2 E −1 2
Using the Lagrange multipliers method it can be transformed

into the following unconstrained minimization problem
σ * arg min L (σ ,τ* ; λ* ) ∀ τ*
L (σ , σ *; λ* ) :=
Ξ (σ − σ * ) + λ* f (σ * )

Proof 1. The solution of the unconstrained minimization problem
reads,
(
arg min −Dτ (π , ε p )
σ= ) ∀π
Dτ (σ , ε=) : D (σ , ε ) − σ −σ *
p p 1 2
2τ E −1
∂σ Dτ (σ , ε p ) :=
∂ D (σ , ε ) − E (σ − σ * )
σ
p 1
τ
−1
:=ε p − τ1 E −1 (σ − σ * ) =0
1
=ε p
E −1 (σ − σ * )
τ

Proof 2. The solution of the closest-point-projection, obtained as
the solution of an unconstrained minimization probem written in
terms of the complementary energy, reads,
σ * arg min L (σ ,τ* ; λ* ) ∀ τ*
(σ , σ *; λ* ) :=
L Ξ (σ − σ * ) + λ* f (σ * )
∂σ* L (σ , σ *; λ* ) :=∂σ* Ξ (σ − σ * ) + λ* ∂σ* f (σ * )
:=− E −1 (σ − σ * ) + λ* ∂σ* f (σ * ) =0
λ* ≥ 0, f (σ * ) ≤ 0, λ* f (σ * ) = 0


The solution of the unconstrained minimization problem yields
the following results for the closest-point-projection,
− E −1 (σ − σ * ) + λ* ∂σ* f (σ * ) =
0
σ * + Eλ* ∂σ* f (σ * ) =
σ
σ * + Eλ* sgn σ * =σ
σ * sgn σ * + Eλ* sgn σ * =
σ sgn σ
( σ * + Eλ* ) sgn σ * =
σ sgn σ
σ* =
σ − Eλ*, sgn σ * =
sgn σ


For the non-trivial case (plastic loading), using the Kuhn-Tucker
complementarity conditions for the cpp, the Lagrange multiplier
reads,
if λ* > 0 then f (σ * ) = σ * − σ Y = 0
f (σ * ) = σ − E λ* −σ Y = f (σ ) − Eλ* = 0
=λ* E −1 f (σ ) > 0
and the closest-point-projection takes the form,
σ * =σ − Eλ* =σ − f (σ ) =σ Y , sgn σ * =sgn σ
=σ * σ=
* sgn σ * σ Y sgn σ


Hypothesis
we introduce the following hypothesis for a 1D rate-dependent
linear elastic-hardening plasticity model, within the incremental
ε= ε e + ε p

E p := {ε p , ξ , ξ }


H3. Free energy per unit of volume: quadratic elastic, isotropic
hardening and kinematic hardening potentials
ψ ( ε e , ξ=
, ξ ) : W ( ε e ) + Π (ξ ) + Π (ξ )
W ( ε ) = E ( ε ) Elastic potential
e 1 e 2
2
1
Π (ξ ) = K ξ 2 Isotropic hardening potential
2
Π (ξ ) =
1
H ξ 2 Kinematic hardening potential
2
E > 0, E + K + H > 0, E + K > 0, E + H > 0


equation, linear isotropic/linear kinematic hardening, and
reduced plastic dissipation inequality
D := σ ε −ψ ( ε e , ξ , ξ ) ≥ 0 ∀ε
D=: σ ε − ∂ ε ψ ε e − ∂ξψ ξ − ∂ξ ψ ξ
e
= ( ε ) ε
σ − ∂ ψ
e ε
 + ∂ ψ ε
 p
− ∂eξψ ξ − ∂ ξ
ψ ξ ≥ 0 ∀ε
σ = ∂ ε ψ = Eε e , q := −∂ξψ = − K ξ , q := −∂ξ ψ = − H ξ
e
 
D =: σ ε + qξ + qξ ≥ 0
 p


H5. Elastic domain, plastic domain, and yield surface. Yield
function
{
σ := σ , q, q f (σ , q, q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q ≤ 0 }
ext (  ) := {σ , q, q
σ f (σ , q , q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q > 0}
∂ := {σ , q, q
σ f (σ , q , q ) = σ − q − σ Y + q = 0}
− (σ Y − q − q ) σ σY − q + q


γ ∂ σ f (σ , q , q ) =
ε p = γ sgn (σ − q )
γ ∂ f (σ , q , q ) =
ξ = q γ
ξ =
γ ∂ q f (σ , q , q ) =
H7. Plastic multiplier

1
=γ f (σ , q , q ) ≥ 0
η


Reduced plastic dissipation
Plastic dissipation rate per unit of volume
D := σ ε p + q ξ + q ξ
= γ (σ sgn (σ − q ) + q − q sgn (σ − q ) )
= γ ( (σ − q ) sgn (σ − q ) + q )
= γ ( σ − q + q)
= γ ( f (σ , q , q ) + σ Y )
= γ (ηγ + σ Y ) ≥ 0


Perzyna model
The plastic flow rule can be obtained as the solution of an
unconstrained minimization problem, arising from the
maximization of a regularized plastic dissipation, given by,
S= p
arg min −Dη T , E ( ( )) ∀T
(   ) 1
f (S ) ( )
2
Dη=
S, E : D S, E −
p p
2η


The solution of the unconstrained minimization problem, arising
from the maximization of a regularized plastic dissipation, yields
the following plastic flow rule,
S= p
arg min −Dη T , E ( ( )) ∀T
(  ) 1
(
f (S ) )
2
∂SDη S, E :=
p
∂SD S, E −
p
2η
 1
:=−
E p
f (S ) ∂ S f (S ) = 0
η
 1
=E p
f (S ) ∂ S f (S )
η

Duvaut-Lions model
The plastic flow rule can be obtained as the solution of an
unconstrained minimization problem, arising from the
maximization of a regularized plastic dissipation, given by,
S= p
arg min −Dτ T , E ( ( )) ∀T
Dτ = ( )
 p : D S, E
S, E ( )
 p − 1 Ξ (S − S*)
τ
=: D (S, E
 )− S − S* C −1
p 1 2
2τ
=: D (S, E
 )− p 1
2τ (S − S*) C (S − S*) −1
where C := diag { E , K , H }

The solution of the unconstrained minimization problem, arising
from the maximization of a regularized plastic dissipation, yields
the following associative plastic flow rule,
S= p
arg min −Dτ T , E ( ( )) ∀T
(
∂SDτ S, E :=
p
)
 1 −1
∂SD S, E − C (S − S*)
p
( ) τ
 1 −1
:=E − C (S − S*) =0
p
τ
 1 −1
=E p
C (S − S*)
τ

Closest-point-projection
The closest-point-projection (cpp) is obtained as the solution of
the following constrained minimization problem, written in
terms of the complementary energy as,
=
S* arg min Ξ (S − T *) ∀ T * ∈ σ
Ξ (S − S*) = S − S* C −1 = (S − S*) C (S − S*)−1
1 2 1
2 2
Using the Lagrange multipliers method, it can be transformed

into the following unconstrained minimization problem
S* arg min L (S, T *; λ*) ∀ T *
L (S, S*; λ*) :=
Ξ (S − S*) + λ*f (S*)

The solution of the unconstrained minimization problem,
defining the closest-point-projection, yields,
(S, T *; λ*) ∀ T *
S* arg min L
∂S*L (S, S*; λ*) :=∂S*Ξ (S − S*) + λ* ∂S* f (S*)
:=−C −1 (S − S*) + λ* ∂S* f (S*) =
0
S* =S − λ* C ∂S* f (S*)
λ* ≥ 0, f (S*) ≤ 0, λ* f (S*) =
0


S* =S − λ* C ∂S* f (S*)
σ* =σ − λ*E ∂σ* f (σ *, q*, q *) =σ − λ*E sgn (σ * − q *)
q λ*K ∂ q* f (σ *, q*, q *) =−
q* =− q λ*K
q λ*H ∂ q* f (σ *, q*, q *) =+
q * =− q λ*H sgn (σ * − q *)
λ* ≥ 0, f (σ *, q*, q*) ≤ 0, λ* f (σ *, q*, q*) =

0


σ * −q * = σ − q − λ* ( E + H ) sgn (σ * −q *)
σ * −q * sgn (σ * −q *) =σ − q sgn (σ − q )
− λ* ( E + H ) sgn (σ * −q *)
( σ * −q * + λ* ( E + H ) ) sgn (σ * −q *) = σ − q sgn (σ − q )
σ * −q * = σ − q − λ* ( E + H ) , sgn (σ * −q *) = sgn (σ − q )


For the non-trivial case, using the Kuhn-Tucker complementarity
conditions for the cpp, the Lagrange multiplier reads,
λ* ≥ 0, f (σ *, q*, q*) ≤ 0, λ* f (σ *, q*, q*) =
0
if λ* > 0 then f (σ *, q*, q*) = σ * −q* − σ Y + q* = 0
f (σ *, q*, q*) = σ − q − λ* ( E + H ) − σ Y + q*
= σ − q − λ* ( E + H ) − σ Y + q − λ*K
= σ − q − λ* ( E + K + H ) − σ Y + q
= f (σ , q, q ) − λ* ( E + K=
+H) 0
λ* = ( E + K + H ) f (σ , q, q ) > 0
−1


S* =S − λ* C ∂S* f (S*)
σ * =σ − E ( E + K + H ) f (σ , q, q ) sgn (σ − q )
−1
q* =q − K ( E + K + H ) f (σ , q, q )
−1
q* =q + H ( E + K + H ) f (σ , q, q ) sgn (σ − q )
−1


The associative plastic flow rule takes the form,
 1 −1
=E p
C (S − S*)
τ
1 1
(σ − σ *=) ( E+K +H ) f (σ , q, q ) sgn (σ − q )
−1
ε=
p
E −1
τ τ
1 −1 1
ξ= K ( q − q*=
 ) ( E+K +H ) f (σ , q, q )
−1
τ τ
 1 −1 1
ξ = H ( q − q *) =− ( E+K +H ) f (σ , q, q ) sgn (σ − q )
−1
τ τ


The associative plastic flow rule equations can be recast in the
form,
=ε p γ sgn (σ − q )
ξ = γ
ξ =
1 1
( E+K +H ) f (σ , q, q )= f (σ , q, q )
−1
γ=
τ η
where the relaxation time takes the form,
τ := ( E+K +H ) η
−1

View publication stats

Chapter1 1DPlasticityModelsv1 0

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter1 1DPlasticityModelsv1 0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Computational Solid Mechanics. Computational Plasticity - Chapter 1.

Presentation · January 2017

Carlos Agelet de Saracibar

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 2

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 3

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 4

σ < σ e ⇒ ∆ε f =0, ∆ε e =∆ε , ∆σ =E ∆ε e , σ =Eε e =E ( ε − ε f )

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 7

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 8

Perfect plasticity model

H2. Set of plastic internal variables: plastic strain

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 9

Perfect plasticity model

H4. Clausius-Planck inequality. Linear elastic constitutive

Perfect plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 11

Perfect plasticity model

H7. Kuhn-Tucker loading/unloading conditions

Perfect plasticity model

Plastic loading: plastic consistency (or persistency) condition

Perfect plasticity model

Plastic loading: plastic multiplier (or plastic consistency)

γ= E −1 sgn (σ ) σ trial > 0

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 14

Perfect plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 15

Perfect plasticity model

σ trial ∂ σ f (σ ) σ trial σ trial ∂ σ f (σ ) σ trial

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 16

Perfect plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 17

Hardening plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 18

Hardening plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 19

Hardening plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 20

Hardening plasticity model

H2. Set of plastic internal variables

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 21

Hardening plasticity model

E + K + H > 0, E + K > 0, E + H > 0

Hardening plasticity model

Hardening plasticity model

Nonlinear isotropic hardening

(2) Power law

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 24

Hardening plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 25

Hardening plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 26

Hardening plasticity model

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 27

Hardening plasticity model

Plastic loading: plastic consistency (or persistency) condition

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 28

Hardening plasticity model

( E+K +H ) sgn (σ − q ) E ε > 0

April 7, 2015 Carlos Agelet de Saracibar 29

Hardening plasticity model

Plastic loading: plastic multiplier parameter