A.G. Neeman; R.M. Brannon; B. Jeremic; A. Van Gelderand; A. Pang
Top view (Z from above) of eigentensors for Drucker-Prager material, time step 124, colored by minimum stretch eigenvalue.
Visualization of fourth-order tensors from solid mechanics has not been explored in depth previously. Challenges include the large number of components (3x3x3x3 for 3D), loss of major symmetry and loss of positive definiteness(with possibly zero or negative eigenvalues). This paper presents a decomposition of fourth-order tensors that facilitates their visualization and understanding. Fourth-order tensors are used to represent a solid’s stiffness.The stiffness tensor represents the relationship between increments of stress and increments of strain. Visualizing stiffness is important to understand the changing state of solids during plastification and failure. In this work,we present a method to reduce the number of stiffness components to second-order 3×3 tensors for visualization.The reduction is based on polar decomposition, followed by eigen-decomposition on the polar “stretch”. If any resulting eigenvalue is significantly lower than the others, the material has softened in that eigen-direction. The associated second-order eigentensor represents the mode of stress (such as compression, tension, shear, or some combination of these) to which the material becomes vulnerable. Thus we can visualize the physical meaning of plastification with techniques for visualizing second-order symmetric tensors.
The Kayenta geological material model has been enhanced to span a broader range of pressures and loading rates. Temperature dependence of yield strength has been added along with nonlinear thermoelasticity that can accommodate pressure dependence of the shear modulus and entropy dependence of the bulk modulus in a thermodynamically consistent manner. Continue reading
The CSM group has independently confirmed a case study demonstrating the truth of a claim in the literature that any non-associative rate-independent model admits a non-physical dynamic achronistity instability. By stimulating a non-associative material in the “Sandler-Rubin wedge” (above yield but below the flow surface), plastic waves are generated that travel faster than elastic waves, thus introducing a negative net work in a closed strain cycle that essentially feeds energy into a propagating wave to produce unbounded increases in displacement with time.
Sandler-Rubin instability: an infinitesimal pulse grows as it propagates
Analysis and computations have been performed by the Utah CSM group to support experimental investigations of unvalidated assumptions in plasticity theory. The primary untested assumption is that of a regular flow rule in which it is often assumed that the direction of the inelastic strain increment is unaffected by the total strain increment itself. To support laboratory testing of this hypothesis, the general equations of classical plasticity theory were simplified for the case of axisymmetric loading to provide experimentalists with two-parameter control of the axial and lateral stress increments corresponding to a specified loading trajectory in stress space. Loading programs involving changes in loading directions were designed. New methods for analyzing the data via a moving least squares fit to tensor-valued input-output data were used to quantitatively infer the apparent plastic tangent modulus matrix and thereby detect violations of the regular flow rule. Loading programs were designed for validating isotropic cap hardening models by directly measuring the effect of shear loading on the hydrostatic elastic limit.
Michael Braginski (postdoc, Mech. Engr., UofU)
Jeff Burghardt (PhD student, Mech. Engr., UofU)
Stephen Bauer (Manager, Sandia National Labs geomechanics testing lab)
David Bronowski (Sandia geomechanics lab technician)
Erik Strack (Manager, Sandia Labs Computational Physics)
MMS stands for “Method of Manufactured Solutions,” which is a rather sleazy sounding name for what is actually a respected and rigorous method of verifying that a finite element (or other) code is correctly solving the governing equations.
A simple introduction to MMS may be found on page 11 of The ASME guide for verification and validation in solid mechanics. The basic idea is to analytically determine forcing functions that would lead to a specific, presumably nontrivial, solution (of your choice) for the dependent variable of a differential equation. Then you would verify a numerical solver for that differential equation by running it using your analytically determined forcing function. The difference between the code’s prediction and your selected manufactured solution provides a quantitative measure of error.
FORTRAN source code for a program that computes all elastic constants when you give it any two independent ones. Continue reading
A very kewl mnemonic device for recalling thermodynamic identities (the Gibbsian relations, the Maxwell relations, the contact or Legendre transformations, etc.) I am working on a new version of this document that will clarify why property definitions for solids do NOT, in general, reduce to those for fluids when the tensors are isotropic. Stay tuned…
You may download the rest of the document here.