Illustrated below is the solution to an idealized problem of a linear elastic annulus (blue) subjected to twisting motion caused by rotating the T-bar an angle . The motion is presumed to be applied slowly enough that equilibrium is satisfied.
This simple problem is taken to be governed by the equations of equilibrium , along with the plane strain version of Hooke’s law in which Cauchy stress is taken to be linear with respect to the small strain tensor (symmetric part of the displacement gradient). If this system of governing equations is implemented in a code, the code will give you an answer, but it is up to you to decide if that answer is a reasonable approximation to reality. This observation helps to illustrate the distinction between verification (i.e., evidence that the equations are solved correctly) and validation (evidence that physically applicable and physically appropriate equations are being solved). The governing equations always have a correct answer (verification), but that answer might not be very predictive of reality (validation).
Summarizes the meaning of the deformation gradient tensor, stretches, rotations, etc. Also shows how material line segments, volumes, and area vectors change in response to deformation.
You may download the rest of the document here
Constitutive modeling refers to the development of equations describing the way that materials respond to various stimuli. In classical deformable body mechanics, a simple constitutive model might predict the stress required to induce a given strain; the canonical example is Hooke’s law of isotropic linear elasticity. More broadly, a constitutive model predicts increments in some macroscale state variables of interest (such as stress, entropy, polarization, etc.) that arise from changes in other macroscale state variables (strain, temperature, electric field, etc.).
Constitutive equations are ultimately implemented into a finite element code to close the set of equations required to solve problems of practical interest. This course describes a few common constitutive equations, explaining what features you would see in experimental data or structural behavior that would prompt you to select one constitutive model over another, how to use them in a code, how to test your understanding of the model, how to check if the code is applying the model as advertised in its user’s manual, and how to quantitatively assess the mathematical and physical believability of the solution.
R. Brannon, J.A. Burghardt, D. Bronowski, and S. Bauer
Common isotropic yield surfaces. Von Mises and Drucker-Prager models are often used for metals. Gurson’s function, and others like it, are used for porous media. Tresca and Mohr-Coulomb models approximate the yield threshold for brittle media. Fossum’s model, and others like it, combine these features to model realistic geological media.
This report investigates the validity of several key assumptions in classical plasticity theory regarding material response to changes in the loading direction. Three metals, two rock types, and one ceramic were subjected to non-standard loading directions, and the resulting strain response increments were displayed in Gudehus diagrams to illustrate the approximation error of classical plasticity theories. A rigorous mathematical framework for ﬁtting classical theories to the data,thus quantifying the error, is provided. Further data analysis techniques are presented that allow testing for the effect of changes in loading direction without having to use a new sample and for inferring the yield normal and ﬂow directions without having to measure the yield surface. Though the data are inconclusive, there is indication that classical, incrementally linear, plasticity theory may be inadequate over a certain range of loading directions. This range of loading directions also coincides with loading directions that are known to produce a physically inadmissible instability for any nonassociative plasticity model.
Sanders, A. P. and R. M. Brannon (2011). “Determining a Surrogate Contact Pair in a Hertzian Contact Problem.” Journal of Tribology 133(2): 024502-024506.
Hertzian substitution concept: An arbitrary contact pair (a) with given principal curvatures and orientation, is substituted with a simpler contact pair (b) consisting of a spheroid and a plane
Laboratory testing of contact phenomena can be prohibitively expensive if the interacting bodies are geometrically complicated. This work demonstrates means to mitigate such problems by exploiting the established observation that two geometrically dissimilar contact pairs may exhibit the same contact mechanics. Speciﬁc formulas are derived that allow a complicated Hertzian contact pair to be replaced with an inexpensively manufactured and more easily ﬁxtured surrogate pair, consisting of a plane and a spheroid, which has the same (to second-order accuracy) contact area and pressure distribution as the original complicated geometry. This observation is elucidated by using direct tensor notation to review a key assertion in Hertzian theory; namely, geometrically complicated contacting surfaces can be described to second-order accuracy as contacting ellipsoids. The surrogate spheroid geometry is found via spectral decomposition of the original pair’s combined Hessian tensor. Some numerical examples using free-form surfaces illustrate the theory, and a laboratory test validates the theory under a common scenario of normally compressed convex surfaces. This theory for a Hertzian contact substitution may be useful in simplifying the contact, wear, or impact testing of complicated components or of their constituent materials.
H.W. Meyer Jr. and R.M. Brannon
[This post refers to the original on-line version of the publication. The final (paper) version with page numbers and volume is found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.09.007. Some further details and clarifications are in the 2012 posting about this article]
Simulation results for a reference volume of 0.000512 cm^3 ; sf is the size effect factor
Continuum mechanics codes modeling failure of materials historically have considered those materials to be homogeneous, with all elements of a material in the computation having the same failure properties. This is, of course, unrealistic but expedient. But as computer hardware and software has evolved, the time has come to investigate a higher level of complexity in the modeling of failure. The Johnsone-Cook fracture model is widely used in such codes, so it was chosen as the basis for the current work. The CTH ﬁnite difference code is widely used to model ballistic impact and penetration, so it also was chosen for the current work. The model proposed here does not consider individual ﬂaws in a material, but rather varies a material’s Johnsone-Cook parameters from element to element to achieve in homogeneity. A Weibull distribution of these parameters is imposed, in such a way as to include a size effect factor in the distribution function. The well-known size effect on the failure of materials must be physically represented in any statistical failure model not only for the representations of bodies in the simulation (e.g., an armor plate), but also for the computational elements, to mitigate element resolution sensitivity of the computations.The statistical failure model was tested in simulations of a Behind Armor Debris (BAD) experiment, and found to do a much better job at predicting the size distribution of fragments than the conventional (homogeneous) failure model. The approach used here to include a size effect in the model proved to be insufﬁcient, and including correlated statistics and/or ﬂaw interactions may improve the model.