CHAP 4

FEA for Elastoplastic Problems

Nam-Ho Kim

1
 Introduction
• Elastic material: a strain energy is differentiated by
strain to obtain stress
– History-independent, potential exists, reversible, no permanent
deformation
• Elatoplastic material:
– Permanent deformation for a force larger than elastic limit
– No one-to-one relationship between stress and strain
– Constitutive relation is given in terms of the rates of stress and
strain (Hypo-elasticity)
– Stress can only be calculated by integrating the stress rate over
the past load history (History-dependent)
• Important to separate elastic and plastic strain
– Only elastic strain generates stress

2
 Table of Contents
• 4.2. 1D Elastoplasticity
• 4.3. Multi-dimensional Elastoplasticity
• 4.4. Finite Rotation with Objective Integration
• 4.5. Finite Deformation Elastoplasticity with
Hyperelastcity
• 4.6. Mathematical Formulation from Finite Elasticity
• 4.7. MATLAB Code for Elastoplastic Material Model
• 4.8. Elastoplasticity Analysis Using Commercial Programs
• 4.9. Summary
• 4.10. Exercises

3
4.2
1D Elastoplasticity

4
 Goals
• Understand difference between elasticity and plasticity
• Learn basic elastoplastic model
• Learn different hardening models
• Understand different moduli used in 1D elastoplasticity
• Learn how to calculate plastic strain when total strain
increment is given
• Learn state determination for elastoplastic material

5
 Plasticity
• Elasticity – A material deforms under stress, but then
returns to its original shape when the stress is removed
• Plasticity - deformation of a material undergoing non-
reversible changes of shape in response to applied forces
– Plasticity in metals is usually a consequence of dislocations
– Rough nonlinearity
• Found in most metals, and in general is a good description
for a large class of materials
• Perfect plasticity – a property of materials to undergo
irreversible deformation without any increase in stresses
or loads
• Hardening - need increasingly higher stresses to result in
further plastic deformation
6
 Behavior of a Ductile Material
Terms Explanation
Proportional limit The greatest stress for which the stress is still proportional to
the strain
Elastic limit The greatest stress without resulting in any permanent strain on
release of stress
Young’s Modulus Slope of the linear portion of the stress-strain curve
Yield stress The stress required to produce 0.2% plastic strain
Strain hardening A region where more stress is required to deform the material
Ultimate stress The maximum stress the material can resist
Necking Cross section of the specimen reduces during deformation
s
Ultimate
stress Fracture

Yield stress

Proportional
limit Young’s
modulus

e
Strain Necking
hardening 7
 Elastoplasticity
• Most metals have both elastic and plastic properties
– Initially, the material shows elastic behavior
– After yielding, the material becomes plastic
– By removing loading, the material becomes elastic again
• We will assume small (infinitesimal) deformation case
– Elastic and plastic strain can be additively decomposed by

e  e e  ep
– Strain energy density exists in terms of elastic strain

U0  21 E(ee )2
– Stress is related to the elastic strain, not the plastic strain
• The plastic strain will be considered as an internal
variable, which evolves according to plastic deformation
8
 1D Elastoplasticity
• Idealized elastoplastic stress-strain behavior
– Initial elastic behavior with slope E (elastic modulus) until yield
stress σY (line o–a)
– After yielding, the plastic phase with slope Et (tangent modulus)
(line a–b).
σ
– Upon removing load, elastic unloading
with slope E (line b-c) b
– Loading in the opposite direction, e a Et
the material will eventually yield E
in that direction (point c)
– Work hardening – more force is o ε
required to continuously deform
in the plastic region (line a-b or c-d) c
d

9
 Work Hardening Models σ b
a
• Kinematic hardening e

– Elastic range remains constant

– Center of the elastic region moves
parallel to the work hardening line o ε
– bc = de = 2oa c
– Use the center of elastic domain d
as an evolution variable σ
e
b
• Isotropic hardening a
– Elastic range (yield stress) increases h
proportional to plastic strain
o ε
– The yield stress for the reversed loading h
is equal to the previous yield stress c
– Use plastic strain as an evolution
variable d

• No difference in proportional loading (line o-a-b)

10
 Elastoplastic Analysis
• Additive decomposition
– Only elastic strain contributes to stress (but we don’t know how
much of the total strain corresponds to the elastic strain)
– Let’s consider an increment of strain: e  ee  ep
– Elastic strain increases stress by s  Eee
– Elastic strain disappears upon removing loads or changing direction

σ σ
Strain hardening slope, Et

Initial loading
Δσ
Elastic σY E
E Reloading E
slope, E
Δεe Δεp
Unloading
εY ε
Δε ε
11
 Elastoplastic Analysis cont.
• Additive decomposition (continue)
– Plastic strain remains constant during unloading
– The effect of load-history is stored in the plastic strain
– The yield stress is determined by the magnitude of plastic strain
– Decomposing elastic and plastic part of strain is an important
part of elastoplastic analysis
• For given stress s, strain cannot be determined.
– Complete history is required (path- or history-dependent)
– History is stored in evolution variable (plastic strain)

o ε 12
 Plastic Modulus
• Strain increment e  ee  ep σ
Strain hardening slope, Et
• Stress increment s  Eee
s
• Plastic modulus H  Δσ
ep σY
E
• Relation between moduli Δεe Δεp

s  Eee  Hep  Et e εY ε
Δε
s s s 1 1 1
    
Et E H Et E H Et
H
EEt EH  E 
H Et   E1 
E  Et EH  E  H  ee ep

• Both kinematic and isotropic hardenings have the same

plastic modulus
13
 Analysis Procedure
• Analysis is performed with a given incremental strain
– N-R iteration will provide u e
– But, we don’t know ee or ep
• When the material is in the initial elastic range, regular
elastic analysis procedure can be used
• When the material is in the plastic range, we have to
determine incremental plastic strain
σ
s Hep
e  ee  ep   ep   ep
E E
H  Δσ
 ep   1 
E
σY
 E
e
 ep  Δεe Δεp
1H/E
εY
Only when the material is on the plastic curve!! Δε
ε
14
 1D Finite Element Formulation
• Load increment
– applied load is divided by N increments: [t1, t2, …, tN]
– analysis procedure has been completed up to load increment tn
– a new solution at tn+1 is sought using the Newton-Raphson method
– iteration k has been finished and the current iteration is k+1

• Displacement increments
– From last increment tn: dk  n 1 k
d  nd  u1 
d 
– From previous iteration: dk  n 1 k 1
d  n 1dk  u2 

u1 u2
P1 P2
x1 x2
L
15
 1D FE Formulation cont.
• Interpolation
 u 
u(x)  [N1 N2 ]  1   N  d
 u2  u  N  d
d  1 1   u1  e  B  d
e 
dx
 u     L    B  d
L   u2 

u  Nd
e  Bd
• Weak form (1 element)
– Internal force = external force

T L T n 1 k 1 T n 1 2  u1 
d 
0
B s Adx d F, d  R d 
 u2 

16
 1D FE Formulation cont.
• Stress-strain relationship (Incremental)
s
n 1
sk 1  n 1
sk  e  n 1
sk  Depe
e
– Elastoplastic tangent modulus

ep  E if elastic
D 
 Et if plastic

• Linearization of weak form


T L T ep  T n 1 T L T n 1 k
d  B D BAdx d  d Fd  B s Adx
 0  0

Tangent stiffness Residual

17
 1D FE Formulation cont.
• Tangent Stiffness
ADep  1 1 
kT 
L  1 1 
• Residual
 n 1 n 1 k 
n 1 k n 1 L
T n 1 k  F1  s A
R  F B s Adx   
0 n 1 n 1 k
 F2  s A 
• State Determination: n 1 sk  f( n s, n ep , ek , )
Will talk about next slides

• Incremental Finite Element Equation

– N-R iteration until the residual vanishes

kT  dk  n 1 k
R
18
 Isotropic Hardening Model
• Yield strength gradually increases proportional to the
plastic strain
– Yield strength is always positive for both tension or compression
Total plastic strain
snY  s0Y  Henp Initial yield stress

– Plastic strain is always positive and continuously accumulated even

in cycling loadings
σ σ
s Yn s Yn
s Y0 s Y0
E E

εp εe ε εp ε

s Yn
s Yn 1 19
 State Determination (Isotropic Hardening)
• How to determine stress
– Given: strain increment (Δe) and all variables in load step n
(E,H, s0Y , sn , enp )

1. Computer current yield stress (pont d)

snY  s0Y  Henp
σ
2. Elastic predictor (point c) σtr c
Δεp
str  Ee str  sn  str σn+1
d
Δσtr s Yn e
s Y0
3. Check yield status RΔσtr E Δεep= (1–R)Δε

σn b
Trial yield function (c – e) a f

ftr  str  sny ε

Δε

ftr  (1  R)Ee
R: Fraction of str to the yield stress
20
State Determination (Isotropic Hardening) cont.
• If ftr  0 , material is elastic
sn 1  str
Either initial elastic region or unloading

• If ftr  0 , material is plastic (yielding)

Either transition from elastic to plastic or continuous yielding
– Stress update (return to the yield surface)
n 1 tr tr σ
s s  sgn(s )Eep
Initial loading
– Update plastic strain
E
enp1  enp  ep
Unloading

Plastic strain increment is unknown Reloading

ε

e  ee  ep

For a given strain increment, how much is elastic and plastic? 21

 State Determination (Isotropic Hardening) cont.
• Plastic consistency condition
– to determine plastic strain increment
fn 1  sn 1  sny1  0
– Stress must be on the yield surface after plastic deformation
 str  sgn(str )Eep  (sny  Hep )  0
tr
σ
 s  sny  (E  H)ep  0 σtr c
Δεp
str  sny ftr σn+1
ep   Δσ s Yn d e
EH EH
s Y0 Δεep= (1–R)Δε
RΔσ E
E
ep  (1  R) e σn b
EH a f
ftr
R 1
str Δε ε

%Note: ep is always positive!! 22

 State Determination (Isotropic Hardening) cont.
• Update stress
sn 1  str  sgn(str )Eep
σ
2
(1  R)E σtr c
sn 1  str  sgn(str ) e
EH Δεp
σn+1
Δσ s Yn d e
Elastic trial Plastic compensation s Y0 Δεep= (1–R)Δε
RΔσ E
(return mapping)
σn a b
f
• Algorithm
1) Elastic trial Δε ε

2) Plastic return mapping

– No iteration is required in linear hardening models

23
 Algorithmic Tangent Stiffness
• Continuum tangent modulus
ep  E if elastic
– The slope of stress-strain curve D 
• Algorithmic tangent modulus  Et if plastic
– Differentiation of the state determination algorithm

alg s  tr s tr
ep
D    sgn( s)E
e e e
ep 1  trf tr E
  sgn( s)
e E  H e EH
alg  E if elastic
D 
 Et if plastic
• Dalg = Dep for 1D plasticity!!
– We will show that they are different for multi-dimension 24
 Algorithm for Isotropic Hardening
• Given: e, E, H, s0Y, sn , enp
1. Trial state str  sn  Ee
snY  s0Y  Henp
ftr  str  snY

1. If ftr  0 (elastic)
n 1
– Remain elastic: s  str , enp1  enp ; exit
2. If ftr  0 (plastic)
ftr
a. Calculate plastic strain: ep 
EH
b. Update stress and plastic strain (store them for next increment)
sn 1  str  sgn(str )Eep enp1  enp  ep

25
 Ex) Elastoplastic Bar (Isotropic Hardening)
• E = 200GPa, H = 25GPa, 0sy = 250MPa
• ns = 150MPa, nep = 0.0001, e = 0.002
• Yield stress: n sY  0 sY  H n ep  252.5MPa
– Material is elastic at tn
• Trial stress:  tr s  Ee  400MPa
tr
s  n s   tr s  550MPa Now material is plastic

• Plastic consistency condition

tr
f
ep   1.322  10 3
EH
• State update
n 1 tr
s s  sgn( tr s)Eep  285.6MPa
n 1
ep  n ep  ep  1.422  10 3
26
 Kinematic Hardening Model
• Yield strength remains constant, but the center of elastic
region moves parallel to the hardening curve
• Effective stress is defined using the shifted stress
s

• Use the center of elastic domain as an evolution variable

n 1  n  sgn()Hep Back stress

σ
σ sn
sn s Y0
E
s Y0
E s Y0  n 1 2s Y0
n 2εp ε
εp εe ε

27
 State Determination (Kinematic Hardening)
• Given: Material properties and state at increment n:
( e, E,H, s0Y , sn , n , enp )

• Elastic predictor
str  sn  Ee,  tr  n , tr  str   tr σ
σtr c
• Check yield status
Trial yield function σn+1
d e
tr tr
f    s0y
tr E
• If ftr  0, material is elastic σn a b

sn 1  str αn+1 g
αn
f
Either initial elastic region or unloading Δε ε

• If ftr  0, material is plastic (yielding)

Either transition from elastic to plastic or continuous yielding 28
State Determination (Kinematic Hardening) cont.
• Updating formulas for stress, back stress & plastic strain
sn 1  str  sgn(tr )Eep n 1   tr  sgn(tr )Hep enp1  enp  ep
• Plastic consistency condition
– To determine unknown plastic strain increment
– Stress must be on the yield surface during plastic loading
fn 1  n 1  s0y  0

 str  sgn(tr )Eep   tr  sgn(tr )Hep  s0y  0

 str   tr  s0y  (E  H)ep  0

tr  sny ftr %Note: the same formula with

ep   isotropic hardening model!!
EH EH

29
 Algorithm for Kinematic Hardening
• Given: e,E,H, s0Y , sn , n , enp
tr n
1. Trial state s  s  Ee
 tr  n
tr  str   tr
ftr  tr  s0Y
2. If ftr  0 (elastic)
n 1
– Remain elastic: s  str , n 1  n , enp1  enp ; exit

3. If ftr  0 (plastic)
ftr
a. Calculate plastic strain: ep 
EH
b. Update stress and plastic strain (store them for next increment)
sn 1  str  sgn(tr )Eep n 1  n  sgn(tr )Hep

enp1  enp  ep

30
 Ex) Elastoplastic Bar (Kinematic Hardening)
• E = 200GPa, H = 25GPa, 0sy = 200MPa
• ns = 150MPa, n = 50MPa, e = −0.002
n
• Since   n s  n   100  0 s Y , elastic state at tn
• Trial stress:
 tr s  Ee  400MPa, tr
s  n s   tr s  250MPa
tr
  n   50MPa, tr
 tr
s tr
  300MPa

• Since trf  tr
  0 s Y  0, material yields in compression
• Plastic strain f tr
ep   0.444  10 3
EH
• State update n 1
s tr
s  sgn( tr )Eep  161.1MPa
n 1 tr
   sgn( tr )Hep  38.9MPa
31
Ex) Elastoplastic Bar (Kinematic Hardening)

32
 Combined Hardening Model
• Baushinger effect
– conditions where the yield strength of a metal decreases when the
direction of strain is changed
– Common for most polycrystalline metals
– Related to the dislocation structure in the cold worked metal. As
deformation occurs, the dislocations will accumulate at barriers
and produce dislocation pile-ups and tangles.
• Numerical modeling of Baushinger effect
– Modeled as a combined kinematic and isotropic hardening

snY1  snY  (1  )Hep n 1  n  sgn()Hep

01
 = 0: isotropic hardening
 = 1: kinematic hardening
33
 Combined Hardening Model cont.
• Trial state
str  sn  Ee
 tr  n
tr  str   tr
ftr  tr  snY
• Stress update
sn 1  str  sgn(tr )Eep
n 1   tr  sgn(tr )Hep
snY1  sny  (1  )Hep

• Show that the plastic increment is the same

ftr
ep 
EH
34
 MATLAB Program combHard1D
%
% 1D Linear combined isotropic/kinematic hardening model
%
function [stress, alpha, ep]=combHard1D(mp, deps, stressN, alphaN, epN)
% Inputs:
% mp = [E, beta, H, Y0];
% deps = strain increment
% stressN = stress at load step N
% alphaN = back stress at load step N
% epN = plastic strain at load step N
%
E=mp(1); beta=mp(2); H=mp(3); Y0=mp(4); %material properties
ftol = Y0*1E-6; %tolerance for yield
stresstr = stressN + E*deps; %trial stress
etatr = stresstr - alphaN; %trial shifted stress
fyld = abs(etatr) - (Y0+(1-beta)*H*epN); %trial yield function
if fyld < ftol %yield test
stress = stresstr; alpha = alphaN; ep = epN;%trial states are final
return;
else
dep = fyld/(E+H); %plastic strain increment
end
stress = stresstr - sign(etatr)*E*dep; %updated stress
alpha = alphaN + sign(etatr)*beta*H*dep; %updated back stress
ep = epN + dep; %updated plastic strain
return;

35
 Ex) Two bars in parallel
• Bar 1: A = 0.75, E = 10000, Et = 1000, 0sY = 5, kinematic
• Bar 2: A = 1.25, E = 5000, Et = 500, 0sY = 7.5, isotropic
• MATLAB program
%
% Example 4.5 Two elastoplastic bars in parallel
% Bar1
E1=10000; Et1=1000; sYield1=5; Rigid 15
E2=5000; Et2=500; sYield2=7.5;
mp1 = [E1, 1, E1*Et1/(E1-Et1), sYield1]; Bar2
mp2 = [E2, 0, E2*Et2/(E2-Et2), sYield2];
nS1 = 0; nA1 = 0; nep1 = 0;
nS2 = 0; nA2 = 0; nep2 = 0;
A1 = 0.75; L1 = 100;
A2 = 1.25; L2 = 100;
tol = 1.0E-5; u = 0; P = 15; iter = 0;
Res = P - nS1*A1 - nS2*A2;
Dep1 = E1; Dep2 = E2;
conv = Res^2/(1+P^2);
fprintf('\niter u S1 S2 A1 A2');
fprintf(' ep1 ep2 Residual');
fprintf('\n %3d %7.4f %7.3f %7.3f %7.3f %7.3f %8.6f %8.6f %10.3e',...
iter,u,nS1,nS2,nA1,nA2,nep1,nep2,Res);

36
 Ex) Two bars in parallel cont.
while conv > tol && iter < 20
delu = Res / (Dep1*A1/L1 + Dep2*A2/L2);
u = u + delu;
delE = delu / L1;
[Snew1, Anew1, epnew1]=combHard1D(mp1,delE,nS1,nA1,nep1);
[Snew2, Anew2, epnew2]=combHard1D(mp2,delE,nS2,nA2,nep2);
Res = P - Snew1*A1 - Snew2*A2;
conv = Res^2/(1+P^2);
iter = iter + 1;
Dep1 = E1; if epnew1 > nep1; Dep1 = Et1; end
Dep2 = E2; if epnew2 > nep2; Dep2 = Et2; end
nS1 = Snew1; nA1 = Anew1; nep1 = epnew1;
nS2 = Snew2; nA2 = Anew2; nep2 = epnew2;
fprintf('\n %3d %7.4f %7.3f %7.3f %7.3f %7.3f %8.6f %8.6f %10.3e',...
iter,u,nS1,nS2,nA1,nA2,nep1,nep2,Res);
end

Iteration u s1 s2 ep1 ep2 Residual

0 0.0000 0.000 0.000 0.000000 0.000000 1.50E+1

1 0.1091 5.591 5.455 0.000532 0.000000 3.99E+0

2 0.1661 6.161 7.580 0.001045 0.000145 9.04E 1

3 0.2318 6.818 7.909 0.001636 0.000736 0.00E+0

37
 Summary
• Plastic deformation depends on load-history and its
information is stored in plastic strain
• Stress only depends on elastic strain
• Isotropic hardening increases the elastic domain, while
kinematic hardening maintains the size of elastic domain
but moves the center of it
• Major issue in elastoplastic analysis is to decompose the
strain into elastic and plastic parts
• Algorithmic tangent stiffness is consistent with the state
determination algorithm
• State determination is composed of (a) elastic trial and (b)
plastic return mapping

38
 1D Elastoplastic Analysis Using ABAQUS
• Material Card
*MATERIAL,NAME=ALLE
*ELASTIC
200.E3,.3
*PLASTIC
200.,0.
220.,.0009
220.,.0029
Plastic strain
Yield stress

39
 1D Elastoplastic Analysis Using ABAQUS
*HEADING 5,2
UniaxialPlasticity 6,2
*NODE,NSET=ALLN 4,1
1,0.,0.,0. 5,1
2,1.,0.,0. 8,1
3,1.,1.,0. 2,3
4,0.,1.,0. 3,3
5,0.,0.,1. 4,3
6,1.,0.,1. *STEP,INC=20
7,1.,1.,1. *STATIC,DIRECT
8,0.,1.,1. 1.,20.
*ELEMENT,TYPE=C3D8,ELSET=ALLE *BOUNDARY
1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 7,3,,.004
*SOLID SECTION,ELSET=ALLE,MATERIAL=ALLE 5,3,,.004
*MATERIAL,NAME=ALLE 6,3,,.004
*ELASTIC 8,3,,.004
200.E3,.3 *EL PRINT,FREQ=1
*PLASTIC S,
200.,0. E,
220.,.0009 EP,
220.,.0029 *NODE PRINT
*BOUNDARY U,RF
1,PINNED *END STEP
2,2
40
• Stress Curve

41
4.3
Multi-Dimensional
Elastoplastic Analysis

42
 Goals
• Understand failure criteria, equivalent stress, and
effective strain
• Understand how 1D tension test data can be used for
determining failure of 3D stress state
• Understand deviatoric stress and strain
• Understand the concept of elastic domain and yield
surface
• Understand hardening models
• Understand evolution of plastic variables along with that
of the yield surface

43
 Multi-Dimensional Elastoplasticity
• How can we generalize 1D stress state (s11) to 3D state (6
components)?
– Need scalar measures of stress and strain to compare with 1D test
– Equivalent stress & effective strain
– Key ingredients: yield criteria, hardening model, stress-strain
relation
• We will assume small (infinitesimal) strains
• Rate independent elastoplasticity- independent of strain
rate
• Von Mises yield criterion with associated hardening model
is the most popular

44
 Failure Criteria
• Material yields due to relative sliding in lattice structures

• Sliding preserves volume plastic deformation is related

to shear or deviatoric part
• Tresca (1864, max. shear stress)
– Material fails when max. shear stress reaches that of tension test
– Tension test: yield at s1 = sY, s2 = s3 = 0
s2 Safe region
s1  s3 s
max   Y  Y sY Failure region
2 2
– Yielding occurs when max  Y –sY
sY s1

–sY
45
 Failure Criteria cont.
• Distortion Energy Theory (von Mises)
– Material fails when distortion energy reaches that of tension test

Ud  Ud (tension test)

– We need preliminaries before deriving Ud

• Volumetric stress and mean strain
sm  31 tr(s)  31 (s11  s22  s33 )

em  31 tr(e)  31 ev  31 (e11  e22  e33 )

• Deviatoric stress and strain

s  s  sm1  Idev : s Iijkl  (ik  jl  il jk ) / 2

e  e  em1  Idev : e Idev  I  31 1  1

46
 Failure Criteria cont.
• Example: Linear elastic material
s  [1  1  2I] : e  D : e

s  (3em )1  2( e  em 1) sm  (3  2)em

 (3  2)em 1  2e s  2e
volumetric deviatoric
Bulk modulus
3  2
• Distortion energy density K
3
U  21 s : e  21 (sm 1  s) : (em 1  e)  23 smem  21 s : e

Ud  21 s : e  1 s
4
:s

47
 Failure Criteria cont.
• 1D Case 2 0
3
0 
 
s11  s sm  31 s 1
s  s 0  3 0 
0 0  1 
 3

Ud  1 s :s 1 2 s2  1 s2
1D 4 4 3 6

• Material yields when

Ud  1 s :s 1 s2  Ud
4 6 Y 1D

• Let’s define an equivalent stress se  3s

2
:s

• Then, material yields when

von Mises stress
se  sY
• Stress can increase from zero to sY, but cannot
increase beyond that
48
 Equivalent Stress and Effective Strain
• Equivalent stress is the scalar measure of 3D stress state
that can be compared with 1D stress from tension test
• Effective strain is the scalar measure of 3D strain state
that makes conjugate with equivalent stress
Ud  21 s : e  21 se ee

Ud  1 s :s 1 s2  21 se ee Effective strain

4 6 e

ee  1 s  1 3s :s  1 3 2e : 2e  2e :e
3 e 3 2 3 2 3

49
 Equivalent Stress and Effective Strain cont.
• 1D Case cont.
1  2
e11  e e22  e33  e em  e
3

2 0 0  2
(1  )e    (1  )e 
e 0 1 0 e : e  6 
3    3 
 0 0 1 

2e 2(1  )
ee  :e  e Effective strain for 1D tension
3 3

ε ε

50
 Von Mises Criterion
• Material yields when se = sY J2  21 s : s
se  3s :s  3J2
2 2nd invariant of s

1
J2   (sx  s y )2  (s y  sz )2  (sz  sx )2   2xy  2yz  2zx
6 

1
J2   (s1  s2 )2  (s2  s3 )2  (s3  s1 )2  In terms of principal stresses
6 

• Yield criterion σ2

s2e  s2Y  3J2  s2Y  0

1
Elastic J 2  3 s Y2 σ1
– 1D test data sY can be used for
multi-dimensional stress state
– Often called J2 plasticity model Yield surface
1
J 2  s Y2
3
51
 Von Mises Criterion cont.
• J2: second invariant of s

J2  21 [s : s  tr(s)2]  21 s : s

Impossible
• Von Mises yield function s2
state
Elastic
state
3J2  s2Y  0 Material
yields
 3s
2
: s  s2Y  0 s1

 s:s 2s 0
3 Y

2s s  2s
 s  3 Y
0 3 Y

radius

Yield function Yield surface is circular in

deviatoric stress space
52
 Example
• Pure shear stress  to yield
x2 τ
0  0
σ    0 0   s τ τ
 0 0 0 
x1
τ

s  s:s  2  2   2

– Yield surface:

2s 1 s2 Safe region
2  3 Y
  sY
3

– Failure in max. shear stress theory

Safe in distortion energy theory C

– Von Mises is more accurate, but s1

D
Tresca is more conservative

53
 Example
• Uniaxial tensile test

s 0 0 2s 0 0 
3
 
s   0 0 0  s   0  31 s 0 
 0 0 0   0 0  31 s 


s  4 s2  91 s2  91 s2  2s
9 3

– Yield surface
2s  2s 0  s  sY Consistent with uniaxial
3 3 Y
tension test

s s

54
 Hardening Model
• For many materials, the yield surface increases
proportional to plastic deformation strain hardening
• Isotropic hardening: Change in radius
• Kinematic hardening: Change in center

Isotropic hardening Kinematic hardening

σ2 σ2

σ1 σ1

Initial yield surface Initial yield surface

55
 Hardening Model cont.
• Isotropic hardening model (linear)
s
sY  s0Y  Hep H
ep
Plastic modulus

ep Effective plastic strain

s0Y Initial yield stress

– H = 0: elasto-perfectly-plastic material
s2
• Kinematic hardening model (linear)
s
– The center of yield surface : back stress 

– Shifted stress:  = s –  s1

  2s 0
3 Y
Radial
–  moves proportional to ep 2He  direction
 3 p

56
 Hardening Model cont.
• Combined Hardening
– Many materials show both isotropic and kinematic hardenings
– Introduce a parameter  [0, 1] to consider this effect
– Baushinger effect: The yield stress increases in one directional
loading. But it decreases in the opposite directional load.
– This is caused by dislocation pileups and tangles (back stress).
When strain direction is changed, this makes the dislocations easy
to move
  2 [s0  (1  )Hep ]  0
3 Y

2 He 
 3 p


– Isotropic hardening:  = 0
– Kinematic hardening:  = 1
57
 Ex) Uniaxial Bar with Hardening
• Calculate uniaxial stress s when ep = 0.1, initial sY = 400
MPa and H = 200 MPa (a) isotropic, (b) kinematic and (c)
combined hardening with  = 0.5
s 0 0 2s 0 0 
3
 
s   0 0 0  s  2s
s   0  31 s 0  3
 0 0 0   0 0  31 s 


a) Isotropic hardening

s  2 ( s0  Hep )  2s  2 (400  200  0.1)  0

3 Y 3 3
s  420 MPa
b) Kinematic hardening

s  2s0 0
3 Y

 s    2s0  2s  2He  2s 0 0
3 Y 3 3 p 3 Y
s  420 MPa 58
 Ex) Uniaxial Bar with Hardening
c) Combined hardening

s  s0Y  (1  )Hep 

2
 3 
 s    23  s0Y  (1  )Hep 
 2s  2 He  2s0  2 (1  )Hep
3 3 p 3 Y 3
0

s  s0Y  Hep  (400  200  0.1)  420MPa

All three models yield the same stress (proportional loading)

59
 Rate-Independent Elastoplasticity
• Additive decomposition
e  e e  ep e  e e  ep From small deformation assumption

• Strain energy (linear elastic)

W(e e )  21 e e : D : e e  21 (e  e p ) : D : (e  e p )
• Stress (differentiating W w.r.t. strain)
W
s  D : e e  D : (e  ep )
e e
s  D : (e  ep )

D  1  1  2I Why we separate volumetric part

from deviatoric part?

D  (  23 )1  1  2Idev
60
 Rate-Independent Elastoplasticity cont.
• Stress cont.
– Volumetric stress: sm  31 tr(s)  (  23 )tr(e)  (3  2)em

– Deviatoric stress: s  2( e  ep ) Why isn’t this

an elastic strain?
• Yield function
– We will use von Mises, pressure insensitive yield function

f( , ep )    2 k(e ) 0
p str
3

– k(ep): Radius of elastic domain sn+1

– ep: effective plastic strain sn

• Elastic domain (smooth, convex) str

sn sn+1

E  ( , ep ) f( , ep )  0  E, f<0
61
 Rate-Independent Elastoplasticity cont.
• Flow rule (determine evolution of plastic strain)
x  (, ep )
ep  gr(s, x)
Plastic variables

– Plastic consistency parameter g : g > 0 (plastic), g =0 (elastic)

• Flow potential g(s, x)
g(s, x) p g(s, x)
r  e g
s s
– Plastic strain increases in the normal direction to the flow
potential
g
s

g3
g2
g1
62
 Rate-Independent Elastoplasticity cont.
• Associative flow rule
– Flow potential = yield function

p f( , x)
e g Unit deviatoric tensor
 normal to the yield surface

f    :  
    N
   : 

p f 
 e g g  gN
 

N determines the direction of plastic strain rate

and g determines the magnitude

63
 Rate-Independent Elastoplasticity cont.
• Evolution of plastic variables (hardening model)
• Back stress 
f( , ep )
  H (ep ) g  H (ep ) gN

Plastic modulus for
kinematic hardening
• Effective plastic strain

ep  2 ep
3
: ep  2
3
ep
– Note: plastic deformation only occurs in deviatoric components

e p  ep ep  gN  g
x  (, ep )
ep  2
3
g  x  gh(s, x)

64
 Rate-Independent Elastoplasticity cont.
• Kuhn-Tucker conditions
– The plastic consistency parameter must satisfy

g0 gf  0 f0

1. Within elastic domain: f  0 g0  gf  0

2. On the yield surface
a. Elastic unloading f  0 g0  gf  0

b. Neutral loading f  0 g0  gf  0

c. Plastic loading (process attempt to violate f ≤ 0)

f=0
f0 g0  gf  0
f=0

Equivalent to gf  0
65
 Classical Elastoplasticity
• Elastoplasticity boils down to how to calculate plasticity
consistency parameter
• Classical plasticity uses the rate form of evolution
relations to calculate it
• Plastic consistency condition gf  0
– g is only non-zero when continues plastic deformation

g0 f(s, x)  0
f f
f(s, x)  :s x  0
s x
f p f
: D : (e  e )   gh  0
s x
f f f
:D:e : D : gr   gh  0 Solve for plastic
s s x consistency parameter
66
 Classical Elastoplasticity cont.
• Plastic consistency parameter
f Assume the denominator is positive
:D:e
s  x if x  0
g x 
f f  0 if x  0
:D:r  h
s x
f
g0  :D:e  0
s
f
:D:e
cos q  s f
E normal
f q s
D:e
s
q < 90o : plastic loading D : e trial stress rate
q = 90o : neutral loading
q > 90o : elastic unloading
67
 Classical Elastoplasticity cont.
• Elastoplastic tangent stiffness (when g > 0)

s  D : (e  ep )
f
s
:D:e
s  D : e  D : gr  D : e  D : r f f
s
:D:r  x
h
 D : r  sf : D 
s   D  f f
:e
 : D : r  x  h 
s 

D : r  sf : D
Dep  D  f
:D:r  f
h Elastoplastic tangent operator
s x

In general, it is not symmetric, but for associative flow rule, it is

68
 Nonlinear Hardening Models
• Nonlinear kinematic hardening model
 ep 
p
  H(ep )e H(ep )  H0 exp     Saturated hardening
 e 
 p 

• Nonlinear isotropic hardening model

k(ep )  s0Y  (s

Y  s 0 
)
Y  1  exp(  ep / e  
p )

69
 Example: Linear hardening model
• Linear combined hardening model, associative flow rule
• 5 params: 2 elastic (, ) and 3 plastic (, H, sY0) variables

k(ep )  s0Y  (1  )Hep   23  Hep

• Plastic consistency parameter

f(s, , ep )  s    2 [s0  (1  )Hep ]  0
3 Y

f f f 2 (1
f :s : ep  N : s  N :    )Hep  0
s  ep 3

 
s  2 e  ep  2e  2gN
  23 Hep  23  HgN
ep  2g
3
70
 Example: Linear hardening model cont.
• Plastic consistency parameter cont.
f  2N : e  2gN : N  23 HgN : N  23 (1  )Hg  0
N:N 1
2N : e N:e N:e
g
2  23 H
– No iteration is required
• Elastoplastic tangent stiffness
s  D : e  D : ep  D : e  gD : N D  (  23 )1  1  2Idev
D : N  2N

2N : e  42 
s  D : e  2N  D  N  N : e
2  3 H 
2 2  3 H
2


Dep
71
 Ex) Plastic Deformation of a Bar
E   sY H 

2.4GPa 1.0GPa 0.2 300MPa 100MPa 0.3

• At tn: purely elastic, s11 = 300 Mpa

• At tn+1: e11 = 0.1, determine stress and plastic variables
• At tn:  300 0 0   200 0 0 
s   0 0 0  MPa, s   0 100 0  MPa
 0 0 0   0 0 100 
• Strain increments

 0.1 0 0   0.08 0 0 
e   0 0.02 0  , e   0 0.04 0 
 0 0 0.02   0 0 0.04 
72
 Ex) Plastic Deformation of a Bar
• Purely elastic at tn: n = 0, nep = 0. n = ns – n = ns
• Trial states:
 360 0 0 
tr
  tr s  n s  2e   0 180 0  MPa
 0 0 180 
tr
  3602  1802  1802  180 6MPa

tr
2 0 0 
 1  
N  tr  0 1 0
 6 
 0 0 1 

• Yield function
f( tr , tr ep )  tr
  2 k( n e )
3 p  180 6  300 2
3
 80 6  0
Plastic state! 73
 Ex) Plastic Deformation of a Bar
• Plastic consistency parameter
2N : e
g  0.0948
2  3 H
2

• Update stress and plastic variables

 385.2 0 0 
n 1
s  n s  D : e  2gN   0 77.4 0  MPa
 0 0 77.4 

 1.54 0 0 
No
n 1
  n   23  HgN   0 0.77 0  MPa equilibrium!!
 0 0 0.77 
n 1
ep  n ep  2g
3
 0.0774
74
 Numerical Integration
• Plastic evolution is given in the rate form
• We will use backward Euler method to integrate it
yn 1  yn
y  f(t, y)  f(tn 1  yn 1 )
t

yn 1  yn  t  f(tn 1  yn 1 ) A-stable
Stable for all t
• Assumptions
– We assume that all variables are known at load step n: sn , xn
– At the current time n+1, u or e is given
• We will use 2-step procedure
1. Predictor: elastic trial
2. Corrector: plastic return mapping (projection onto the yield
surface)
75
 Numerical Integration cont.
1. Elastic predictor
str  sn  2e  tr  n eptr  epn

dev. inc. strain No plasticity

– Shifted stress: tr  str   tr

– Yield function: f( tr , epn )  tr  2 k(en )
p
3
2. Plastic corrector
1. If f < 0 (within the elastic domain)

sn 1  str n 1   tr epn 1  eptr

– Exit

76
 Numerical Integration cont.
2. Plastic corrector cont.
2. If f > 0 (return mapping to yield surface)
unknown
sn 1  str  2 ep ep  gN

sn 1  str  2gN

n 1  tr  H gN

n 1  sn 1  n 1  tr  (2  H )gN

So far, unknowns are g and N  n 1 n 1

• Trial direction is parallel to final direction

n 1  tr   n 1  tr n 1

n 1 tr
N n 1
 tr
Known from trial state
  So, everything boils down to g 77
 Numerical Integration cont.
2. Plastic corrector cont.
– Now the plastic consistency parameter is only unknown!!
– How to compute: stress must stay on the yield surface

f( n 1 , epn 1 )  0

– While projecting the trial stress, sn

the yield surface also varies n sn+1 str
– But, both happen in the same n+1
direction N
f( n , epn )  0
f( n 1 , epn 1 )  0

f(n 1, epn 1 )  n 1  2 k(en 1 )

3 p 0

n 1  tr  (2  H )gN  tr  (2  H )g

78
 Numerical Integration cont.
2. Plastic corrector cont.
– Plastic consistency condition


tr  2  H (epn 1 ) g   2 k(en 1 )
3 p 0

– Nonlinear (scalar) equation w.r.t. g epn 1  epn  2 g

3

– Use Newton-Raphson method (start with g  0, epn 1  epn )


f  tr  2  H (epn 1 ) g   2 k(en 1 )
3 p

df 2 dH dk
 (2  H )  g  23
dg 3 dep dep
f
g  g 
df / dg
epn 1  epn 1  2 g
3

– Stop when f ~ 0
79
 Numerical Integration cont.
• When N-R iteration is converged, update stress
sn 1  sn  2e  2gN
n 1  n  H gN
epn 1  epn  2 g
3

sn 1  sn  D : e  2gN

Dep : e Tangent operator

80
 Difference from the Rate Form
• Rate form (linear hardening)
2N : e f(nh,nep) = 0 ns
2mDe
g trs

2  23 H f(trh,trep)

• Incremental form na

tr  2 k(en )
3 p
2mN:De
g 
2  2H
3

• Two formulations are equivalent when

1. The material is in the plastic state at tn
2. e is parallel to n
• When time increment is very small, these two
requirements are satisfied
81
 Consistent Tangent Operator
• Consistent tangent operator – tangent operator that is
consistent with numerical integration algorithm
s s
Dep  D alg 
e e

Continuum tangent operator Consistent tangent operator

• Differentiate stress update equation

s  D : e  2gN

s g N
 D  2N   2g
e e e

(1) (2)

82
 Consistent Tangent Operator cont
• Term (1) f
f(n 1, epn 1 )  f( n , epn )  0  0
e
f   tr 2 k(en 1 ) 
   (2  H (epn 1 ))g  0
e e  3 p 

 tr ( tr : tr )1/2 1 1 tr 

tr
  2 :
e e 2 tr e

 tr tr tr tr (str  n )

 :  2N   2Idev
e tr e e e

f n 1 g H ep 2 k ep

 2N  (2  H (ep ))  g  0
e e ep e 3 ep e

g
  g 2
2N  2  H (epn 1 )  2H g  2k 0 3
3 ,ep 3 ,ep e e

g 1
 2AN A
 2  H (epn 1 )  2H
3 ,ep
g  23 k,e
p
e 83
 Consistent Tangent Operator cont
• Term (2):
N N  tr tr 
 tr :  (sn  2e  n )  2Idev
e  e e e

N   tr  I tr  tr 1

 tr      I  N  N 
tr
   tr 
 tr
tr
3
tr

N 1 2
 tr  I  N  N  : 2Idev  tr  Idev  N  N 
e  

• Consistent tangent operator

s 2
D alg   D  2N  (2A N)  2g tr  Idev  N  N 
e 

alg 2 42 g
D  D  4 A N  N  tr
 Idev  N  N 


Not existing in Dep 84

 Example
• Linear combined hardening

H (epn 1 )  23 H H,e  0
p

k(epn 1 )  s0Y  (1  )Hepn 1  k(epn )  2 (1

3
 )Hg

• Consistency condition
f  tr   2  23 H  g  2
3  k(e ) 
n
p
2 (1
3 
 )Hg  0

tr  2 k(en )
3 p
 g  No iteration is required
2  2H
3

1 2
 2  H
A 3

85
 Variational Equation
• Variational equation

a( n x; n 1 u, u )  ( u ), u 

a( n x; n 1 u, u )   e( u ) : n 1
s d

– The only nonlinearity is from stress (material nonlinearity)

– Small strain, small rotation
• Linearization
a * ( n x, n 1 uk ; uk , u )  ( u )  a( n x; n 1 uk , u ), u  ,

a * ( n x, n 1 u; u, u )   e( u ) : D alg : e( u) d.

• Update displacement
n 1 k 1 n 1 k
u  u  uk 86
 Implementation of Elastoplasticity
• We will explain for a 3D solid element at a Gauss point
• Voigt notation
{ s }  [s11 s22 s33 s12 s23 s13 ]T
{ e }  [ e11 e22 e33 2e12 2e23 2e13 ]T
• Inputs dI   dI1 dI2 dI3 
T

 
T
sn  sn11 sn22 sn33 sn12 sn23 sn13

xn   n11 
T
n22 n33 n
12 n23 n
13 epn
z
x8 x7 (–1, –1,1) (–1,1,1)

(1, –1,1)
x5 (1,1,1)
x6

x4
x3 (–1,1,–1)
x1
(1, –1,–1)
x3
(1,1,–1)
x2 x
x2
x1 (a) Finite Element (b) Reference Element
87
 Implementation of Elastoplasticity cont.
• Displacement
x = {x, , z}T is the natural coordinates at an integration point
8
u   NI (x)dI  NI,1 0 0 
I 1
 
• Strain  0 NI,2 0 
8
 0 0 NI,3 
BI   
e   BI uI  NI,2 NI,1 0 
I 1  
 0 NI,3 NI,2 
N 0 N 
• Update  I,3 I,1 
n 1
u  n u  u
{ n 1 e }  { n e }  { e }
88
 Return Mapping Algorithm
• Elastic predictor

T
– Unit tensor 1   1 1 1 0 0 0 

– Trial stress str  sn  C  e

tr tr tr
– Trace of stress tr(s)  s11  s22  s33

– Shifted stress tr  str  31 tr(s)  n

– Norm tr  tr 2
(11 tr 2
)  (22 tr 2
)  (33 tr 2
)  2[(12 tr 2
)  (23 tr 2
)  (13 ) ]

– Yield function f  tr  2  s0Y  (1  )Hepn 

3  

89
 Return Mapping Algorithm cont.
• Check yield status
– If f < 0, then the material is elastic

sn 1  s tr D alg  D
– Exit

• Consistency parameter g  f (2  23 H)

• Unit deviatoric tensor N  tr tr

• Update stress sn 1  s tr  2gN

• Update back stress n 1  n  23 HgN

• Update plastic strain epn 1  epn  2 g

3

• Calculate consistent tangent matrix

90
 Implementation of Elastoplasticity cont.
 2 1 1 0 0 0
• Consistent tangent matrix  31 3
2
3
1 0 0

3 3
 3
0
42 42 g  1  1 0
c1  c2  2 0 0

2  23 H tr I dev  3 3 3 
 0 0 0 21 0 0
 
 0 0 0 0 21 0
D alg  D  (c1  c2 )NNT  c2 Idev  1
 0 0 0 0 0 2

• Internal force and tangent stiffness matrix

4 NG 4 4 NG
fint    (BIT sn 1 J )K K KT     (BITDalgBJ J )K K
I 1 K 1 I  1 J  1 K 1

• Solve for incremental displacement

[KT ]{ u}  { f ext }  { fint }

• The algorithm repeats until the residual reduces to zero

• Once the solution converges, save stress and plastic
variables and move to next load step 91
 Program combHard.m
%
% Linear combined isotropic/kinematic hardening model
%
function [stress, alpha, ep]=combHard(mp,D,deps,stressN,alphaN,epN)
% Inputs:
% mp = [lambda, mu, beta, H, Y0];
% D = elastic stiffness matrix
% stressN = [s11, s22, s33, t12, t23, t13];
% alphaN = [a11, a22, a33, a12, a23, a13];
%
Iden = [1 1 1 0 0 0]';
two3 = 2/3; stwo3=sqrt(two3); %constants
mu=mp(2); beta=mp(3); H=mp(4); Y0=mp(5); %material properties
ftol = Y0*1E-6; %tolerance for yield
%
stresstr = stressN + D*deps; %trial stress
I1 = sum(stresstr(1:3)); %trace(stresstr)
str = stresstr - I1*Iden/3; %deviatoric stress
eta = str - alphaN; %shifted stress
etat = sqrt(eta(1)^2 + eta(2)^2 + eta(3)^2 ...
+ 2*(eta(4)^2 + eta(5)^2 + eta(6)^2));%norm of eta
fyld = etat - stwo3*(Y0+(1-beta)*H*epN); %trial yield function
if fyld < ftol %yield test
stress = stresstr; alpha = alphaN; ep = epN;%trial states are final
return;
else
gamma = fyld/(2*mu + two3*H); %plastic consistency param
ep = epN + gamma*stwo3; %updated eff. plastic strain
end
N = eta/etat; %unit vector normal to f
stress = stresstr - 2*mu*gamma*N; %updated stress
alpha = alphaN + two3*beta*H*gamma*N; %updated back stress
92
 Program combHardTan.m
function [Dtan]=combHardTan(mp,D,deps,stressN,alphaN,epN)
% Inputs:
% mp = [lambda, mu, beta, H, Y0];
% D = elastic stiffness matrix
% stressN = [s11, s22, s33, t12, t23, t13];
% alphaN = [a11, a22, a33, a12, a23, a13];
%
Iden = [1 1 1 0 0 0]';
two3 = 2/3; stwo3=sqrt(two3); %constants
mu=mp(2); beta=mp(3); H=mp(4); Y0=mp(5); %material properties
ftol = Y0*1E-6; %tolerance for yield
stresstr = stressN + D*deps; %trial stress
I1 = sum(stresstr(1:3)); %trace(stresstr)
str = stresstr - I1*Iden/3; %deviatoric stress
eta = str - alphaN; %shifted stress
etat = sqrt(eta(1)^2 + eta(2)^2 + eta(3)^2 ...
+ 2*(eta(4)^2 + eta(5)^2 + eta(6)^2));%norm of eta
fyld = etat - stwo3*(Y0+(1-beta)*H*epN); %trial yield function
if fyld < ftol %yield test
Dtan = D; return; %elastic
end
gamma = fyld/(2*mu + two3*H); %plastic consistency param
N = eta/etat; %unit vector normal to f
var1 = 4*mu^2/(2*mu+two3*H);
var2 = 4*mu^2*gamma/etat; %coefficients
Dtan = D - (var1-var2)*N*N' + var2*Iden*Iden'/3;%tangent stiffness
Dtan(1,1) = Dtan(1,1) - var2; %contr. from 4th-order I
Dtan(2,2) = Dtan(2,2) - var2;
Dtan(3,3) = Dtan(3,3) - var2;
Dtan(4,4) = Dtan(4,4) - .5*var2;
Dtan(5,5) = Dtan(5,5) - .5*var2;
Dtan(6,6) = Dtan(6,6) - .5*var2;
93
 Program PLAST3D.m
function PLAST3D(MID, PROP, ETAN, UPDATE, LTAN, NE, NDOF, XYZ, LE)
%***********************************************************************
% MAIN PROGRAM COMPUTING GLOBAL STIFFNESS MATRIX RESIDUAL FORCE FOR
% PLASTIC MATERIAL MODELS
%***********************************************************************
%%
....
%LOOP OVER ELEMENTS, THIS IS MAIN LOOP TO COMPUTE K AND F
for IE=1:NE
DSP=DISPTD(IDOF);
DSPD=DISPDD(IDOF);
%....
% LOOP OVER INTEGRATION POINTS
for LX=1:2, for LY=1:2, for LZ=1:2
%
% Previous converged history variables
NALPHA=6;
STRESSN=SIGMA(1:6,INTN);
ALPHAN=XQ(1:NALPHA,INTN);
EPN=XQ(NALPHA+1,INTN);
....
% Computer stress, back stress & effective plastic strain
if MID == 1
% Infinitesimal plasticity
[STRESS, ALPHA, EP]=combHard(PROP,ETAN,DDEPS,STRESSN,ALPHAN,EPN);
....
%
% Tangent stiffness
if LTAN
if MID == 1
DTAN=combHardTan(PROP,ETAN,DDEPS,STRESSN,ALPHAN,EPN);
EKF = BM'*DTAN*BM;
.... 94
 Summary
• 1D tension test data are used for 2D or 3D stress state
using failure theories
– All failure criteria are independent of coordinate system (must
defined using invariants)
• Yielding of a ductile material is related to shear stress or
deviatoric stress
• Kinematic hardening shift the center of elastic domain,
while isotropic hardening increase the radius of it
• For rate-independent J2 plasticity, elastic predictor and
plastic correct algorithm is used
• Return mapping occurs in the radial direction of deviatoric
stress
• During return mapping, the yield surface also changes
95
4.4
Elastoplasticity with Finite
Rotation

96
 Goals
• Understand the concept of objective rate and frame-
indifference (why do we need objectivity?)
• Learn how to make a non-objective rate to objective one
• Learn different objective stress rates
• Learn how to maintain objectivity at finite rotation
• Understand midpoint configuration
• Understand how to linearize the energy form in the
updated Lagrangian formulation
• Understand how to implement update Lagrangian frame

97
 Elastoplasticity with Finite Rotation
• We studied elastoplasticity with infinitesimal deformation
– Infinitesimal deformation means both strain and rotation are small

u  sym(u)  skew(u)
strain rotation

• We can relax this limitation by allowing finite rotation

• However, the engineering strain changes in rigid-body
rotation (We showed in Chapter 3)
 cos   1 0 0
• How can we use engineering strain e   0 cos   1 0 
for a finite rotation problem?  0 0 0 

• Instead of using X, we can use xn as a reference

(Body-fixed coordinate, not Eulerian but Lagrangian)
• Can the frame of reference move?
98
 Objective Tensor
• We want to take care of the issues related to the moving
reference frame xn (rotation and translation) using
objectivity
• Objective tensor: any tensor that is not affected by
superimposed rigid body translations and rotations of the
spatial frame
• Rotation of a body is equivalent to rotation of coordinate
frame in opposite direction
• Consider two frames in the figure x yz
(rotation + translation)
x
x  Q(t)  x  c(t) P
x
x and x are different by rigid-body motion,
by relative motion between observers xyz
99
 Objective Tensor cont.
• Frame indifference (objectivity)
– Quantities that depend only on Q and not on the other aspects of
the motion of the reference frame (e.g., translation, velocity and
acceleration, angular velocity and angular acceleration)
• Objective scalar f f

• Objective vector v  Qv

• Objective tensor T  Q  T  QT

• In order to use a moving reference, we must use

objective quantities
100
 Example
• Deformation gradient
x  x
F   ( Q(t)  x  c(t))  Q(t)   Q(t)  F
X X X
– F transforms like a vector
• Right C-G deformation tensor
C  F T F  (QF)T ( QF)  FT QT QF  FT F  C
– Material tensors are not affected by rigid-body motion
• Left C-G deformation tensor
Objective
b  FF T  ( QF)(FT Q T )  QFFT Q T  QbQ T
tensor
• Objectivity only applies to a spatial tensor, not
material tensor
• Deformation gradient transforms like a vector because it
has one spatial component and one material component 101
 Velocity Gradient
• In two different frames
Velocity gradient is related to incremental
v v displacement gradient in finite time step
L , L 
x x u
Lt 
x
• Time differentiate of x  Q  x
x  Qv Qx

v  Q  v  QQT x Velocity is not objective

• Spatial differentiation of v
v
L 
x
v x x
 Q   Q  QT 
x x x
Velocity gradient is not objective
 Q  L  QT  Q  QT

102
 Rate of Deformation and Spin Tensor
• Rate of Deformation
d  sym(L) d  sym(L )

d  sym(L )  1
2  Q  L  QT  Q  LT  QT  Q  QT  Q  QT 
Q  QT  1  Q  QT  Q  QT  0

d  Q  21 (L  LT )  QT  Q  d  QT Objective
This is incremental stain
• Spin tensor
W  21 (L  LT ) W  21 (L  LT )

W  21 (L  LT )  21 (Q  L  QT  Q  LT  QT  Q  QT  Q  QT )

W  Q  W  QT  21 (Q  QT  Q  QT )
Depends on the spin of rotating frame
Not Objective
103
 Cauchy Stress Is an Objective Tensor
• Proof from the relation between stresses
1
s FSFT
J
1 1 1  T
T T T
s  FSF  QFSF Q  Q  FSFT  Q  QsQ
T
J J J 
SS

• Proof from coordinate transformation of stress tensor

( b1 ) ( b2 ) ( b3 )
[T T T ]xyz  [s]xyz [b1 b2 b3 ]  [s]xyz [ Q]
y
T
[s]xyz  [Q] [s]xyz [Q] y x

2
b b1
– Coordinate transformation is opposite to rotation x
b3
[s]xyz  [Q][s]xyz [Q]T
z
z
104
 Objective Rate
• If T is an objective tensor, will its rate be objective, too?
– This is important because in plasticity the constitutive relation is
given in terms of stress rate
• Differentiate an objective tensor T  Q  T  QT
T  Q  T  QT  Q  T  Q T  Q  T  Q T
– Not objective due to Q and QT
• Remove non-objective terms using L  Q  L  QT  Q  QT

Q  L Q QL Q T  Q T  LT  LT  Q T

T  (LQ  QL) TQT  QTQT  QT( QT LT  LT QT )

 LQTQT  QLTQT  QTQT  QTQT LT  QTLT QT
 LT  QLTQT  QTQT  TLT  QTLT QT

105
 Objective Rate cont.
• Objective rate
T  LT  QLTQT  QTQT  TLT  QTLT QT

T  LT  TLT  Q( T  LT  TLT )QT

• Thus, T  LT  TLT is an objective rate (Truesdell rate)

• Co-rotational rate (Jaumann rate)

T WT  TW
• Convected rate
T  LT  T  T  L
• These objective rates are different, but perform equally
• When T is stress, they are objective stress rate
106
 Finite Rotation and Objective Rate
• Since constitutive relation should be independent of the
reference frame, it has to be given in terms of
objective rate
• Cauchy stress is an objective tensor, but Cauchy stress
rate is not objective rate
• Instead of rate, we will use increment (from previous
converged load step to the current iteration)
• Consider a unit vector ej in spatial Cartesian coordinates
under rigid body rotation from material vector Ej
T
ej  Q  Ej 1  u u 
W     Q  Q T

2 x x 
 
W: spin tensor
ej  Q  Ej  W  Q  Ej  W  ej Q: rotation tensor

107
 Finite Rotation and Objective Rate cont.
• Cauchy stress in Cartesian coordinates
s  sijei  ej

• Incremental Cauchy stress

s  sij ei  ej  sij ei  ej  sij ei  ej
 sijJ ei  ej  W  (sij ei  ej )  (sij ei  ej )  WT
 ( sijJ  Wik skj  sikWkj ) ei  ej
Effect of rigid body rotation
Jaumann or co-rotational Cauchy stress increment
Objective rate in the rotating frame
Only accurate for small, rigid body rotations

• Constitutive relation

s J  D alg : e s J  s  Ws  sW
108
 Finite Rotation and Objective Rate cont.
• For finite rotation, the spin tensor W is not constant
throughout the increment
• Preserving objectivity for large rotational increments
using midpoint configuration
• Instead of n+1, calculate strain increment and spin at n+½
   uj 
1  ui uj 1  ui 
eij    Wij  
2  xn  1 2 xn  1 2  2  xn  1 2 xn  1 2 
 j i   j i 

How to calculate these?

• Midpoint configuration
n  21
x  21 ( xn 1  xn )  xn  21 u  xn 1  21 u
– We want to rotation stress into the midpoint configuration

u u xn xn 1 2 1 u

  ,  1
xn 1 2 xn xn 1 2
xn 2 xn
109
 Finite Rotation and Objective Rate cont.
• Rotational matrix to the midpoint configuration
Rn 1  Rn R  Rn
dR  W( u)  Rn  1  W( u)  n 1
 WR t 2 2
dt W( u)  tW( u)
Rn  1
 R  (1  21 W)1 (1  21 W)  1  (1  21 W)1 W

• Rotation of stress and back stress

sn  R  sn  RT
This takes care of rigid body rotation
n n T
  R R

• Now, return mapping with these stresses

– Exactly same as small deformation plasticity
110
 Program rotatedStress.m
%
% Rotate stress and back stress to the rotation-free configuration
%
function [stress, alpha] = rotatedStress(L, S, A)
%L = [dui/dxj] velocity gradient
%
str=[S(1) S(4) S(6);S(4) S(2) S(5);S(6) S(5) S(3)];
alp=[A(1) A(4) A(6);A(4) A(2) A(5);A(6) A(5) A(3)];
factor=0.5;
R = L*inv(eye(3) + factor*L);
W = .5*(R-R');
R = eye(3) + inv(eye(3) - factor*W)*W;
str = R*str*R';
alp = R*alp*R';
stress=[str(1,1) str(2,2) str(3,3) str(1,2) str(2,3) str(1,3)]';
alpha =[alp(1,1) alp(2,2) alp(3,3) alp(1,2) alp(2,3) alp(1,3)]';

111
 Variational Principle for Finite Rotation
• Total Lagrangian is inconvenient
– We don’t know how 2nd P-K stress evolves in plasticity
– plastic variables is directly related to the Cauchy stress
• Thus, we will use the updated Lagrangian formulation
• Assume the problem has been solved up to n load step, and
we are looking for the solution at load step n+1
• Since load form is straightforward, we will ignore it
• Energy form
a(x n ; u n 1 , u )   n 1 u : sn 1 d
n 1

– Since the Cauchy stress is symmetric, it is OK to use n 1u

– Both n+1 and sn+1 are unknown
– Nonlinear in terms of u
112
 Variational Principle for Finite Rotation cont.
• Energy form cont.
– Since the current configuration is unknown (depends on displace-
ment) , let’s transform it to the undeformed configuration 0

a(x n ; u n 1 , u )   n 1 u : sn 1 d   ( 0 uF 1 ) : sn 1J d

n 1 0

– Integral domain can be changed by  d   J d J  det(F)

n 1 0

– This is only for convenience in linearization. Eventually, we will

come back to the deformed configuration and integrate at there

– The integrand is identical to T : F where T  J F 1s is the

first P-K stress
– Nonlinearity comes from (a) constitutive relation (hypoelasticity),
(b) spatial gradient (deformation gradient), and (c) Jacobian of
deformation gradient (domain change)
113
 Linearization
• Increment of deformation gradient

  ( x  u)  u
F       0 u
  X   0 X

FF1  1  F1  F10 uF1  F1n 1u

• Increment of Jacobian
J   F  J div( u) Fmn  61 eijk erstFirFjsFkt

eijk eijr  2kr

114
 Linearization cont.
• Linearization of energy form

  ( 0 uF 1 ) : sJ d
0

   ( 0 uF 1 ) : sJ  ( 0 uF 1 ) : sJ  ( 0 uF 1 ) : sJ  d

0
 
1 1 1
 0 
  0 uF n  1 u : s   0 uF :  s   0 uF : sdiv( u)  Jd

 n 1
 n 1 un 1 u : s  n 1 u : s  n 1 u : sdiv( u)  d
T 
 n1 n 1 
 u :  s  s div( u)  s ( n 1  u)  d

AB : C  A : CBT AikBkjCij  AikCijBkj

Use Jaumann objective rate

115
 Linearization cont.
• Linearization of energy form cont.
L[a(x n ; u n 1 , u )]   n 1 u :  s  sdiv( u)  s(n 1 u)T  d
n 1

  n 1 u :  s J  Ws  sW  sdiv( u)  s(n 1u)T  d

 n 1

– Express inside of [ ] in terms of n 1 u

– Constitutive relation: s J  Dalg : e  Dalg : (n 1u)

– Spin term
u um uk
Wimsmj  21 ( x i  xi
)smj  21 smj (ik ml  mk il ) xl
m

 21 (sljik  skjil )[n 1u]kl

simWmj  21 (siljk  sik jl )[n 1u]kl

uk
sij xk
 sijkl[n 1u]kl

uj
sim xm
 sil jk [n 1u]kl
116
 Linearization cont.
• Linearization of energy form cont.
L[a( u, u )]   n 1u :  sJ  Ws  sW  sdiv( u)  s(n 1u)T  d
n 1

1 (s   sjk il  siljk  sik jl )  sijkl

2 jl ik

– Initial stiffness term (we need to separate this term)

s : sym(n 1 u T n 1 u)  s : ( u, u )

u um um um ui uk
srs 21 ( xm  )  s jlik
r xs xr xs xj xl

– Define
*
Dijkl  sijkl  21 (sil jk  s jlik  sik  jl  s jk il )

Rotational effect of Cauchy stress tensor

117
 Linearization cont.
• Linearization of energy form cont.
L[a(x n ; u n 1 , u )]    n 1 u : (D alg  D * ) : n 1 u  s :  u u )  d
n 1
 
 a * (x n , u n 1 ; u, u )

• N-R iteration

a * ( n x, ukn 1 ; uk 1 , u )  ( u )  a( n x; ukn 1 , u ), u  Z

History-dependent Bilinear
(implicit)

118
 Implementation
• We will explain using a 3D solid element at a Gauss point
using updated Lagrangian form
• The return mapping and consistent tangent operator will
be the same with infinitesimal plasticity
• Voigt Notation
{ s }  [s11 s22 s33 s12 s23 s13 ]T
{ e }  [ e11 e22 e33 2e12 2e23 2e13 ]T
• Inputs dI   dI1 dI2 dI3 
T

 
T
n
s  sn11 sn22 sn33 sn12 sn23 sn13

xn   n11 
T
n22 n33 n
12 n23 n
13 epn

119
 Implementation cont.
• In the updated Lagrangian, the derivative is evaluated at
the current configuration (unknown yet)
• Let the current load step is n+1 (unknown) and k+1 N-R
iteration
• Then, we use the configuration at the previous iteration
(n+1, k) as a reference
• This is not ‘true’ updated Lagrangian, but when the N-R
iteration converges, k is almost identical to k+1
• Caution: we only update stresses at the converged load
step, not individual iteration
• All derivatives and integration in updated Lagrangian must
be evaluated at (n+1, k) configuration
• Displacement increment u is from (n+1,0) to (n+1,k)
120
 Implementation cont.
• Stress-displacement matrix (Two approaches)
1. Mapping between current (n+1, k) and reference configurations
 x1 x2 x3       
 x x x   x   x 
   1   
 x x2 x3     1   
J 1  J
     x    
   2  
 x1 x2 x3       
 z z z   x   z 
  3

2. Mapping between undeformed and reference configurations

     
 x   X 
 1   1 n 1u  F10 u
   1   
 x   F  X 
 2   2
     
 x   X 
 3  3

Use this for B matrix 121

 Implementation cont.
1. Obtain midpoint configuration (between k and k+1)
1
xn  1 u  u u xn
 1   
x n 1 2
 2 xn  xn 1 2
xn
xn 1 2

e  sym(n  1 u) W  skew(n  1 u)

2 2

2. Rotation matrix: R  1  (1  21 W)1 W

3. Rotate stresses: sn  R  sn  RT n  R  n  RT
4. Return mapping with sn , n
– This part is identical to the classical return mapping
– Calculate stresses: snk 11, nk 11
– Calculate consistent tangent operator Dalg

122
 Implementation cont.
• Internal force
4 NG This summation is similar to
fint
  (BIT snk 11 J )K K assembly (must be added to the
I 1 K 1
corresponding DOFs)

• Tangent stiffness matrix  s11

s
 22
s11
s22
s11
s22
s12
s12
0
s23
s13
0



 s33 s33 s33 0 s23 s13 
D*   
4 4 NG  s12 s12 0 1
 2 (s11  s22 )  21 s13  21 s23 
KT     [BIT (Dalg  D* )BJ J ]K K  0

 s13
s23
0
s23
s13
 21 s13
 21 s23
 21 (s22  s33 )
 21 s12
 21 s12 

 21 (s11  s33 ) 
I 1 J 1 K 1

• Initial stiffness matrix  NI,1 0 0 

 
4 4 NG  NI,2 0 0 
   [BIG BJG J ]K K
T
KS  N 0 0 
 I,3 
I 1 J 1 K 1  0 NI,1 0 
 
[BIG ]   0 NI,2 0 
s 0 0  0 N 0 
I,3
 
[]   0 s 0   0 0 NI,1 
 
 0 0 s   0 0 NI,2 
9x9  0
 0 NI,3 
123
 Implementation cont.
• Solve for incremental displacement
[KT  KS ]{ dk 1 }  { f ext }  { fint }

• Update displacements
dkn11  dkn 1  dk 1
dk 1  dk 1  dk 1

• When N-R iteration converges

– Stress and history dependent variables are stored (updated) to
the global array
– Move on to the next load step

124
 Program PLAST3D.m
function PLAST3D(MID, PROP, ETAN, UPDATE, LTAN, NE, NDOF, XYZ, LE)
%***********************************************************************
% MAIN PROGRAM COMPUTING GLOBAL STIFFNESS MATRIX RESIDUAL FORCE FOR
% PLASTIC MATERIAL MODELS
%***********************************************************************
....
% Computer stress, back stress & effective plastic strain
elseif MID == 2
% Plasticity with finite rotation
FAC=FAC*det(F);
[STRESSN, ALPHAN] = rotatedStress(DEPS, STRESSN, ALPHAN);
[STRESS, ALPHA, EP]=combHard(PROP,ETAN,DDEPS,STRESSN,ALPHAN,EPN);
....
%
% Tangent stiffness
if LTAN
elseif MID == 2
DTAN=combHardTan(PROP,ETAN,DDEPS,STRESSN,ALPHAN,EPN);
CTAN=[-STRESS(1) STRESS(1) STRESS(1) -STRESS(4) 0 -STRESS(6);
STRESS(2) -STRESS(2) STRESS(2) -STRESS(4) -STRESS(5) 0;
STRESS(3) STRESS(3) -STRESS(3) 0 -STRESS(5) -STRESS(6);
-STRESS(4) -STRESS(4) 0 -0.5*(STRESS(1)+STRESS(2)) -0.5*STRESS(6) -0.5*STRESS(5);
0 -STRESS(5) -STRESS(5) -0.5*STRESS(6) -0.5*(STRESS(2)+STRESS(3)) -0.5*STRESS(4);
-STRESS(6) 0 -STRESS(6) -0.5*STRESS(5) -0.5*STRESS(4) -0.5*(STRESS(1)+STRESS(3))];
SIG=[STRESS(1) STRESS(4) STRESS(6);
STRESS(4) STRESS(2) STRESS(5);
STRESS(6) STRESS(5) STRESS(3)];
SHEAD=zeros(9);
SHEAD(1:3,1:3)=SIG;
SHEAD(4:6,4:6)=SIG;
SHEAD(7:9,7:9)=SIG;
EKF = BM'*(DTAN+CTAN)*BM + BG'*SHEAD*BG;
.... 125
 Ex) Simple Shear Deformation
• Plane-strain square with the velocity gradient at each load
step  0 0.024 0 
 u   E  24GPa,   0.2,
 x    0.02 0 0 
  H  1.0GPa, s0Y  200 3MPa
 0 0 0 
Young = 24000; nu=0.2; mu=Young/2/(1+nu); lambda=nu*Young/((1+nu)*(1-2*nu));
beta = 0; H = 1000; sY = 200*sqrt(3);
mp = [lambda mu beta H sY];
Iden=[1 1 1 0 0 0]';
D=2*mu*eye(6) + lambda*Iden*Iden';
D(4,4) = mu; D(5,5) = mu; D(6,6) = mu;
L = zeros(3,3);
stressN=[0 0 0 0 0 0]';
deps=[0 0 0 0 0 0]';
alphaN = [0 0 0 0 0 0]';
epN=0;
stressRN=stressN; alphaRN=alphaN;epRN=epN;
for i=1:15
deps(4) = 0.004; L(1,2) = 0.024; L(2,1) = -0.02;
[stressRN, alphaRN] = rotatedStress(L, stressRN, alphaRN);
[stressR, alphaR, epR]=combHard(mp,D,deps,stressRN,alphaRN,epRN);
[stress, alpha, ep]=combHard(mp,D,deps,stressN,alphaN,epN);
X(i) = i*deps(4); Y1(i) = stress(4); Y2(i) = stressR(4);
stressN = stress; alphaN = alpha; epN = ep;
stressRN = stressR; alphaRN = alphaR; epRN = epR;
end
X = [0 X]; Y1=[0 Y1]; Y2=[0 Y2]; plot(X,Y1,X,Y2);
126
 Ex) Simple Shear Deformation

250

200

Shear stress (MPa)

150

100

50 Small strain
Finite
rotation
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Shear strain

stress  [0 0 0 212.9 0 0]T

stressR  [43.4 43.4 0 208.2 0 0]T

127
 Summary
• Finite rotation elastoplasticity is formulated using
updated Lagrangian (reference frame moves with body)
• Finite rotation elastoplasticity is fundamentally identical
to the classical plasticity. Only rigid-body rotation is taken
into account using objective stress rate and integration
• We must use an objective stress rate to define the
constitutive relation because the material response should
be independent of coordinate system
• Objectivity only applies for spatial vectors and tensors
• In the finite rotation, the midpoint configuration is used
to reduce errors involved in non-uniform rotation and spin
• Linearization is performed after transforming to the
undeformed configuration
128
4.5
Finite Deformation
Elastoplasticity with
Hyperelasticity
129
 Goals
• Understand the difference between hypoelasticity and
hyperelasticity
• Learn the concept of multiplicative decomposition and
intermediate configuration
• Understand the principle of maximum dissipation
• Understand the plastic evolution in strain space and stress
space
• Learn J2 plasticity in principal stress space

130
 Finite Deformation Plasticity
• So far, we used small strain elastoplasticity theory
• Finite rotation has been taken care of using the deformed
configuration with an objective rate
• However, still, the strain should be small enough so that
the elastic and plastic strains are decomposed additively
• This is fundamental limitation of hypoelasticity
• How can we handle large strain problem?
• On the other hand, hyperelasticity can handle large strain
• However, it is not easy to describe plastic evolution in 2nd
P-K stress. It is given in the current configuration (Cauchy
stress)
• How can we handle it? Transformation between references
131
 Intermediate Configuration
• Let’s take one step back and discuss different references
• Lee (1967) proposed that the deformation gradient can
be multiplicatively decomposed

F( X)  Fe ( X)Fp ( X)

– Remember deformation gradient maps between deformed and

undeformed configurations
FdX  Fe (FpdX)  Fedxp

– Instead of moving directly from 0 to n, the deformation moves

to an intermediate configuration (p) first and then goes to n
– The intermediate configuration is an imaginary one and can be
arbitrary

Additive decomposition: e  ee  ep
132
 Intermediate Configuration cont.
• Fp(X): deformation through the intermediate configuration
(related to the internal plastic variables)
• Fe-1(X): local, stress-free, unloaded process
• Decomposition of F(X) into the intermediate configuration
followed by elastic deformation
F
Undeformed Current
Configuration Configuration

Fp Fe
Elastic
Deformation

Intermediate Configuration 133

 Kirchhoff Stress – Matter of Convenience
• Kirchhoff stress   Js
– This is different from 1st and 2nd P-K stress
– It is defined using Cauchy stress with Jacobian effect (J = |F|)
– When deformation is small J 1  s

– We assume the constitutive relation is given in terms of 

• Why do we use different stress measure?
– By including J into stress, we don’t have to linearize it
– We can integrate the energy form in 0
– But, still all integrands are defined in n

134
 Elastic Domain and Free Energy
• Elastic domain
E   ( , q) f( , q)  0 

– q: stress-like internal variables (hardening properties)

– Isotropy: the yield function is independent of orientation of  and
q (objectivity)
• Free energy function (similar to strain energy density)
  (be , x)

– Elastic left C-G deformation tensor: be  FeFeT


– strain-like internal variables vector: q  
x

– Free energy only depends on Fe, and due to isotropy, be

135
 Dissipation Function
• Dissipation function (ignoring thermal part)
d
D  :d (be , x)  0
dt

– Rate of stress work – rate of free energy change

– Rate of deformation d = sym(L), where velocity gradient L  FF1
– Dissipation is energy loss due to plastic deformation (irreversible)
• Rate of elastic left C-G tensor
– We can’t differentiate be because its reference is p
– Transform to 0 using F = FeFp relation

be  FeFeT  (FFp1 )(FpT FT )  F(Fp1FpT )FT  FCp1FT

be  FCp1FT  FCp1FT  F dt 
d C 1 FT
p 
136
 Rate of Elastic Left C-G Tensor
• Rate of elastic left C-G tensor cont.

be  FCp1FT  FCp1FT  F dt
d C 1 FT
p 
v 1 T T v
Fp Fp F  FFp1FpT FT  LFeFeT  Lbe
X x
T
Cp: plastic right C-G
be L deformation tensor

– Lie derivative: F dtd  Cp1  FT  Lvbe pulling be back to the

undeformed configuration, and after taking a time derivative,
pushing forward to the current configuration (plastic deformation)

• Thus, we have
be  Lbe  be LT  Lvbe

Elastic Plastic
137
 Dissipation Function cont.
• Dissipation function cont.

d
D  :d (be , x)
dt
 
  : d  e : be  x
b x


  : d  e : Lbe  be LT  Lv be
b
 qx
   
  :d2 be : L   2 be  :   1 (Lv be )be1   q  x
be  2 
 be 
      1
 :   2 (Lv be )be   q  x  0
  2 be 1
b  : d   2 b be
 e   e 

For a symmetric matrices, A:BC = AC:B

For a symmetric S and general L, S:L = S:sym(L)

138
 Principle of Maximum Dissipation
• Principle of Maximum Dissipation
– For all admissible stresses and internal variables, the inequality
must satisfy
      1
 :   2 (Lv be )be   q  x  0
D   2 be : d 1
be    2 b be
   e 
– If we consider the material is elastic, then no plastic variable will
change Lvbe  x  0
– In order to satisfy the inequality for any d (especially d1 = - d2)


2 b Constitutive relation
be e

– Total form: constitutive relation is given in terms of stress, not

stress increment
 1
– In addition, we have    be1
be 2
139
 Principle of Maximum Dissipation cont.
• Reduced dissipation function
   1 (L b )b1   q  x  0
 2 b be :  
  2 v e e 
 e 

  :   21 (Lvbe )be1   q  x  0 Plastic

dissipation

• Principle of Maximum Dissipation

– Plastic deformation occurs in the direction that maximizes D

– In classical associative plasticity

D  s : ep  q  x  0

f f
ep  ep  g
s s
140
 Principle of Maximum Dissipation cont.
• Principle of Maximum Dissipation cont.
– For given rates {Lvbe , x}, state variables {, q} maximize the
dissipation function D

D  (    * ) :   21 (Lvbe )be1   ( q  q* )  x  0,  
  * , q*  E

– For classical variational inequality, the dissipation inequality

satisfies if and only if the coefficients are in the normal
direction of the elastic domain (defined by yield function)
• Geometric interpretation f

– All * should reside inside of E q
* 
– Thus, the angle q should be greater
than or equal to 90o
1
E
– In order to satisfy for all  *,  1
(L b )
2 v e e
b
should be normal to yield surface
141
 Principle of Maximum Dissipation cont.
• Evolution equations for multiplicative decomposition

f( , q)  f( , q)
 21 Lv be g be xg
 q

g  0, f( , q)  0, gf( , q)  0.
– Plastic evolution is still in a rate form
– Stress is hyperelastic (total form)
– Plastic evolution is given in terms of strain (be and x)
– We need to integrate these equations

142
 Time Integration
• Given: {Fn ben xn } and u
f
• Relative deformation gradient Fn

xn 1 n
f( x)   1  n u n+1
xn
n 1 n
0
F  fF
u u xn 1
f n
 n 1 n
 Lf
x x x

• First-order evolution equations

 f( , q)
be   Lbe  be LT   2g be

Initial conditions
 f( , q)
xg { f, be , x} t  t  {1, ben , xn }
q n

g  0, f(, q)  0, gf(, q)  0 Strain-based evolution

143
 Time Integration cont.
• Constitutive law
  (be , x)
2 be q
be x
– The constitutive relation is hyperelastic
– Once be is found, stress can be calculated by differentiating the
free energy function. Same for the internal variables
• Elastic predictor (no plastic flow)
– Similar to classical plasticity, we will use elastic predictor and
plastic corrector algorithm
– For given incremental displacement, eliminate plastic flow and push
the elastic, left C-G tensor forward to the current configuration

f tr  f  Fetr  f  Fen Fptr  Fpn

144
 Time Integration cont.
• Elastic predictor cont.
betr  Fetr  FetrT  f  Fen  FenT  fT  fben fT

f tr  f betr  fben fT x tr  xn

• Check for yield status

tr   (betr , xtr )
  2 tr betr qtr  
be  xtr

– If tr < f, trial state is final state and stop

ben 1  betr xn 1  x tr
n 1   tr qn 1  qtr

145
 Time Integration cont.
• Plastic corrector (in the fixed current configuration)
– The solution of y  Ay is y = y0exp(At)
f
be  Lbe  be LT  2g be


Elastic Plastic

 f(  e , q)  g  gt
ben 1  betr exp  2g 
  

n 1 tr f(  e , q)
x x  g
q
g  0, f(, q)  0, g f(, q)  0

– First-order accuracy and unconditional stability

– return-mapping algorithms for the left Cauchy-Green tensor

146
 Spectral Decomposition
• Objective: want to get a similar return mapping algorithm
with classical plasticity
• Return-mapping algorithm for principal Kirchhoff stress
• For isotropic material, the principal direction of  is
parallel to that of be
• Spectral decomposition
3 3
be   i2 nˆi  nˆi   pi nˆi  nˆi
i 1 i 1
ben 1  betr exp  

i : principal stretch be and betr have the

pi : principal Kirchhoff stress
same eigenvectors!!

nˆi : spatial eigenvector Do you remember that

Nˆi  // tr in classical plasticity?
: material eigenvector
147
 Return Mapping in Principal Stress Space
• Principal stress vector p  [p1, p2, p3]T

• Logarithmic elastic principal strain vector

e  [e1 e2 e3]T  [log 1 log 2 log 3]T
Good for large elastic strain
• Free energy for J2 plasticity
ˆ x)
( e, x)  21 [e1  e2  e3 ]2  [e12  e22  e32 ]  K(

• Constitutive relation in principal space

 ˆ 1
ˆ  21
p   ce  e ce  (  23 )1 dev
e
ˆ  [1, 1, 1]T
1 ˆ 1
1dev  1  31 (1 ˆ)

– Linear relation between principal Kirchhoff stress and logarithmic

elastic principal strain
148
 Return Mapping in Principal Stress Space cont.
• Take log on return mapping for be and pre-multiply with ce
3 3 3
be   i2 nˆi nˆi  log(be )   2log(i ) n ˆi ˆi
n   2ei nˆi  nˆi
i 1 i 1 i 1

 f(  e , q) 
ben 1  betr exp  2g 
   

 f( , q) 
 log(ben 1 )  log(betr )  log exp  2g
   

fˆ i
3
f
f(, q)  f( p, q) 

   nˆ  nˆi
i 1 pi

n 1 tr
f̂( p , q)
 2e  2e  2g
p

e n 1 e tr e
f̂( p , q)
 c e  c e  gc 
p
149
 Return Mapping in Principal Stress Space cont.
• Plastic evolution in principal stress space

f̂( p , q)
p  ptr  g c e ptr  ce  etr
p

n 1 n
f̂( p , q)
x  x  g
q

g  0, ˆ  , q)  0,
f( ˆ  , q)  0
g f(
p p

– Fundamentally the same with classical plasticity: Classical

plasticity [s(6×1) and C(6×6)], but here [p(3×1) and ce(3×3)]
– During the plastic evolution, the principal direction remains
constant (fixed current configuration)
– Only principal stresses change

150
 Return Mapping Algorithm
• Deviatoric principal stress
ˆ)1
s  p  31 (p  1 ˆ 1 
dev p

• Yield function
 s
f( , ep )    2 k(e ) 0
3 p t

• Return mapping
ep  0 2
3
ep (t) dt

ptr  ce  etr
 tr  n
np1  ptr  2gN eptr  epn
n 1  tr  gHN n 1 tr
N n 1

 tr
epn 1  eptr  2 g
3

Identical to the classical plasticity

151
 Return Mapping Algorithm cont.
• Plastic consistency parameter
f( n 1 , epn 1 )  n 1  2 k(en 1 )
3 p

 tr  (2  H )g  2 k(en 1 )

3 p 0

– Solve for g using N-R iteration, or directly for linear hardening

– Derivative f 2H 1
 (2  H  3 ,ep
g  23 k,e )  
g p
A
• Recovery
– Once return mapping converged, recover stress and strain

3 3
n 1
  npi1 ˆi
n n  ˆi  pi m
n 1 i
mi  nˆi  nˆi
i 1 i 1

3
ben 1   exp(2ein 1 )mi en 1  etr  gN
i 1
152
 Ex) Incompressible Elastic Cube
• Elastic deformation: x1  X1 , x2  X2 , x3  X3
• Deformation gradient
 0 0  2 0 0
 
F   0  0  , T
b  FF   0 2 0
 0 0    0 0 2 

• Incompressibility: det(F)=1  1/ 
• Eigenvalues and eigenvectors:
1  2 , n1  [1 0 0]T
2   1 , n2  [0 1 0]T
3   1 , n3  [0 0 1]T
• Logarithmic stretches:
T
e   2log   log   log   153
 Ex) Incompressible Elastic Cube
• Stress-strain relation (principal space)
   2     2log    4 log  
   
p      2     log     2 log  
     2    log    2 log  

• Kirchhoff stress
3 2 0 0 
   ipni  ni  2 log   0 1 0 
i1
 0 0 1 

154
 Consistent Tangent Operator
• Relation b/w material and spatial tangent operators
S
D  E : D : E  [FT e( u )F] : D : [FT e( u)F]  e( u ) : c : e( u)
E
Srs
cijkl  FirFjsFkmFlnDrsmn  FirFjsFkmFln
Emn
– FirFjs: transform stress to material frame  = FSFT
– FkmFln: differentiate w.r.t. E and then transform to spatial frame
ij
• But, cijkl  w
F
w T
F
ekl e E

• Let n 1  
3 n 1 i
 m
i 1 pi

• We want c   e , but we have

p alg e 2 42 g

c  c  4 AN  N  [1dev  N  N]
e  tr

155
 Consistent Tangent Operator cont.
• How to obtain c   e using calg  p e ?
• Remember p e contains all plasticity
• Since intermediate frame is reference, we have to use Fe
• Start from stress expression
3 n 1 i
n 1    m
i 1 pi

 
3  3  npi1 i
 n 1 m
c    pi m  
n 1 i
  e  m  pi e 
i
e e  i1 
 i 1  

3 3 npi1 ejtr i
n 1 m
c     tr i
 m  pi 
e e 
 j1 ej
i 1  

(1) (2) (3)

156
 Consistent Tangent Operator cont.
p alg
consistent tangent operator in principal stress
(1) tr
c Same as classical return mapping (3×3)
e

ejtr ejtr
(2)  2Fe FeT  m j
e Ce
These are elastic
mi mi T
(3)  2Fe Fe  2cˆi
e Ce

• Using (1), (2), and (3),

3 3 3

c
e
  cijalgmi  m   2picˆi
j

i  1 j 1 i 1

157
 Incremental Variational Principle
• Energy form (nonlinear)
a( n x; u, u )  s : e( u ) d   s : e( u )J d
n 0

   : e( u ) d
 0

• Linearization

a * ( n x, nbe , u; u, u )    e( u )  c : e( u)    ( u, u )  d

0


• N-R iteration

a * ( n x, n 1 uk 1 ; uk 1 , u )  ( u )  a( n x; n 1 uk , u ), u 

158
 MATLAB Code MULPLAST
function [stress, b, alpha, ep]=mulPlast(mp,D,L,b,alpha,ep)
%mp = [lambda, mu, beta, H, Y0];
%D = elasticity matrix b/w prin stress & log prin stretch (3x3)
%L = [dui/dxj] velocity gradient
%b = elastic left C-G deformation vector (6x1)
%alpha = principal back stress (3x1)
%ep = effective plastic strain
%
EPS=1E-12;
Iden = [1 1 1]'; two3 = 2/3; stwo3=sqrt(two3); %constants
mu=mp(2); beta=mp(3); H=mp(4); Y0=mp(5); %material properties
ftol = Y0*1E-6; %tolerance for yield
R = inv(eye(3)-L); %inc. deformation gradient
bm=[b(1) b(4) b(6);b(4) b(2) b(5);b(6) b(5) b(3)];
bm = R*bm*R'; %trial elastic left C-G
b=[bm(1,1) bm(2,2) bm(3,3) bm(1,2) bm(2,3) bm(1,3)]';
[~,P]=eig(bm); %eigenvalues
eigen=sort(real([P(1,1) P(2,2) P(3,3)]))'; %principal stretch
%
% Duplicated eigenvalues
TMP=-1;
for I=1:2
if abs(eigen(1)-eigen(3)) < EPS
eigen(I)=eigen(I)+TMP*EPS;
TMP=-TMP;
end
end
if abs(eigen(1)-eigen(2)) < EPS; eigen(2) = eigen(2) + EPS; end;
if abs(eigen(2)-eigen(3)) < EPS; eigen(2) = eigen(2) + EPS; end;
%
% EIGENVECTOR MATRIX N*N' = M(6,*)
M=zeros(6,3); %eigenvector matrices
159
for K=1:3
KB=1+mod(K,3);
KC=1+mod(KB,3);
EA=eigen(K);
EB=eigen(KB);
EC=eigen(KC);
D1=EB-EA;
D2=EC-EA;
DA = 1 / (D1 * D2);
M(1,K)=((b(1)-EB)*(b(1)-EC)+b(4)*b(4)+b(6)*b(6))*DA;
M(2,K)=((b(2)-EB)*(b(2)-EC)+b(4)*b(4)+b(5)*b(5))*DA;
M(3,K)=((b(3)-EB)*(b(3)-EC)+b(5)*b(5)+b(6)*b(6))*DA;
M(4,K)=(b(4)*(b(1)-EB+b(2)-EC)+b(5)*b(6))*DA;
M(5,K)=(b(5)*(b(2)-EB+b(3)-EC)+b(4)*b(6))*DA;
M(6,K)=(b(6)*(b(3)-EB+b(1)-EC)+b(4)*b(5))*DA;
end
%
eigen=sort(real([P(1,1) P(2,2) P(3,3)]))'; %principal stretch
deps = 0.5*log(eigen); %logarithmic
sigtr = D*deps; %trial principal stress
eta = sigtr - alpha - sum(sigtr)*Iden/3; %shifted stress
etat = norm(eta); %norm of eta
fyld = etat - stwo3*(Y0+(1-beta)*H*ep); %trial yield function
if fyld < ftol %yield test
sig = sigtr; %trial states are final
stress = M*sig; %stress (6x1)
else
gamma = fyld/(2*mu + two3*H); %plastic consistency param
ep = ep + gamma*stwo3; %updated eff. plastic strain
N = eta/etat; %unit vector normal to f
deps = deps - gamma*N; %updated elastic strain
sig = sigtr - 2*mu*gamma*N; %updated stress
alpha = alpha + two3*beta*H*gamma*N; %updated back stress
stress = M*sig; %stress (6x1)
b = M*exp(2*deps); %updated elastic left C-G
end 160
 Ex) Shear Deformation of a Square
Young = 24000; nu=0.2; mu=Young/2/(1+nu); lambda=nu*Young/((1+nu)*(1-2*nu));
beta = 0; H = 1000; sY = 200*sqrt(3);
mp = [lambda mu beta H sY];
250
Iden=[1 1 1 0 0 0]';
D=2*mu*eye(6) + lambda*Iden*Iden';
D(4,4) = mu; D(5,5) = mu; D(6,6) = mu; 200

Shear stress (MPa)

Iden=[1 1 1]';
DM=2*mu*eye(3) + lambda*Iden*Iden';
150
L = zeros(3,3);
stressN=[0 0 0 0 0 0]';
deps=[0 0 0 0 0 0]'; 100
alphaN = [0 0 0 0 0 0]'; Small strain
epN=0; 50 Finite rotation
stressRN=stressN; alphaRN=alphaN;epRN=epN; Large strain
bMN=[1 1 1 0 0 0]';
alphaMN = [0 0 0]'; 0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
epMN=0; Shear strain
for i=1:15
deps(4) = 0.004; L(1,2) = 0.024; L(2,1) = -0.02;
[stressRN, alphaRN] = rotatedStress(L, stressRN, alphaRN);
[stressR, alphaR, epR]=combHard(mp,D,deps,stressRN,alphaRN,epRN);
[stress, alpha, ep]=combHard(mp,D,deps,stressN,alphaN,epN);
[stressM, bM, alphaM, epM]=mulPlast(mp,DM,L,bMN,alphaMN,epMN);
X(i)=i*deps(4);Y1(i)=stress(4);Y2(i)=stressR(4);Y3(i)=stressM(4);
stressN = stress; alphaN = alpha; epN = ep;
stressRN = stressR; alphaRN = alphaR; epRN = epR;
bMN=bM; alphaMN = alphaM; epMN = epM;
end
X = [0 X]; Y1=[0 Y1]; Y2=[0 Y2]; Y3 = [0 Y3]; plot(X,Y1,X,Y2,X,Y3);

161
 Summary
• In multiplicative decomposition, the effect of plasticity is
modeled by intermediate configuration
• The total form stress-strain relation is given by
hyperelasticity between intermediate and current config.
• We studied principle of max dissipation to derive
constitutive relation and plastic evolution
• Similar to classical plasticity, the return mapping
algorithm is used in principal Kirchhoff stress and
principal logarithmic elastic strain
• It is assumed that the principal direction is fixed during
plastic return mapping

162