Anisotropic Continuum Damage Coupled With Finite Plasticity: 1 Contents

Contents Anisotropic Elasticity Anisotropic Damage Anisotropic Damage with Plasticity Outlook References
Anisotropic Continuum Damage

Coupled with Finite Plasticity
Andreas Menzel
Institut of Mechanics
Department of Mechanical Engineering
TU Dortmund
http://www.iofm.de
1
c by Andreas Menzel, 2012.
2
The slids are partly designed as cloze and, in particular within equations, not complete.
AM Anisotropic Continuum Damage Coupled with Finite Plasticity 1
1 Contents
Fig. 1.1: Forming technology machining
Notes
Notes
1 Contents
2 Anisotropic Finite Elasticity
2.1 Basic kinematics and balance of linear momentum
2.2 Invariance under rigid body motions material
symmetry
2.3 Structural tensors ctitious congurations
2.4 Academic numerical example
3 Anisotropic Continuum Damage
3.1 Generalised standard dissipative materials
3.2 Construction of the damage potential
3.3 Algorithmic aspects
4 Anisotropic Damage with Plasticity
4.1 Kinematic framework
4.3 Strain energy and inelastic potential
4.5 Academic numerical examples
5 Outlook
6 References
6.1 General monographs
6.2 Selected articles used for the lecture notes
Notes
Notes
2 Anisotropic Finite Elasticity
Fig. 2.1: Delamination bre-reinforced composite.
nite deformation anisotropic hyper-elasticity
invariance under rigid body motions material symmetry
structural tensors ctitious congurations
academic numerical example
j
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
(X, t)
F, cof(F), J
B
0
B
t
X dX
dA dV
x dx
da dv
Fig. 2.2: Direct motion problem basic kinematics.
2.1 Basic kinematics and balance of linear momentum
material placement spatial placement direct motion map
X B
0
x B
t
x = (X, t) (2.1)
deformation gradient positive determinant cofactor
F =
X
J = det(F) cof(F) =
F
J = J F
t
(2.2)
transformations line elements area elements volume elem.
dx = F dX da = cof(F) dA dv = J dV (2.3)
Notes
Notes
j
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
(X, t)
F
B
0
B
t
L
C

C
l
b

b
Fig. 2.3: Direct motion problem basic kinematics.
spatial velocity gradient material time derivative =
d
dt

X
l =

x
=

X

X
x
=

F F
1
= F

F
1
(2.4)
spatial velocity gradient in material form
L = F
1
l F = F
1

F =

F
1
F (2.5)
right Cauchy-Green tensor Finger tensor
C = F
t
F b = F F
t
C = 2 [ C L]
sym
b = 2 [ l b ]
sym
(2.6)
j
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
t t
X x
(X, t)
F
B
0
B
t
b
t
3
n
-
n
Fig. 2.4: Direct motion Dirichlet problem.
total potential in local and global form
U(F, ; X) = W(F; X) +V (; X) I =
_
B0
U dV (2.7)
Euler-Lagrange eqs. quasi-static balance of linear momentum
I
X
= 0
X
[
F
U ]
U = 0 + bc (2.8)
spatial surface forces quasi-static spatial volume forces
(2.9)
f
sur
=
_
Bt
[
F
U cof(F
1
) ] n da f
vol
=
_
Bt
J
1
U dv
Notes
Notes
j
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
(X, t)
F, P
B
0
B
t
S
b
0
b
t
Fig. 2.5: Direct motion problem linear momentum ux and source.
direct motion linear momentum ux and source
P =
F
W b
0
=
V = J b
t
(2.10)
local form of balance of linear momentum mass conservation
0
=
X
P +b
0

t
=
x
+b
t
(2.11)
stresses Piola Piola-Kirchho Cauchy Kirchho
P S = F
1
P
= P cof(F
1
) = P F
t
= J
(2.12)
j
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
h
F
h
B
h
0
B
h
t
-
J
X
h
B
e
0
s
Fig. 2.6: Discrete direct motion problem nite elements.
quasi-static direct motion problem virtual work
_
B0
wPN dA =
_
B0
X
w : P dV +
_
B0
wb
0
dV w (2.13)
Bubnov-Galerkin approximation for w and shape functions
w
h
B
e
0
=
nen
i=1
N
i
w
i

X
w
h
B
e
0
=
nen
i=1
w
i

X
N
i
(2.14)
quasi-static direct motion problem spatial node point forces
f
h
sur I
= f
h
int I
f
h
vol I
= A
n
el
e=1
_
B
e
0
[
X
N
i
PN
i
b
0
] dV (2.15)
Notes
Notes
j
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
h
F
h
B
h
0
B
h
t
-
J
X
h
B
e
0
s
Fig. 2.6: Discrete direct motion problem nite elements.
residual form
r
h
I
= f
h
int I
f
h
sur I
f
h
vol I
= 0 (2.16)
Newton scheme linearisation Taylor series iteration k
r
h
I k+1
= r
h
I k
+ r
h
I
r
h
I
=
nnp
J=1
dr
h
I
d
h
J

h
J
(2.17)
tangent operator dead loads (2.18)
K
h
IJ
=
dr
h
I
d
h
J
= A
n
el
e=1
_
B
e
0
X
N
i
[ I I ] :
dP
dF

X
N
j
dV
two-point tangent operator conjugate to P
A =
dP
dF
(2.19)
material tangent operator conjugate to S relation to A
E = 2
dS
dC
= F
1
A : [ F
t
I ] C
1
S (2.20)
spatial tangent operator conjugate to relation to E and A
e = J
1
[ F F ] : E : [ F
t
F
t
]
= J
1
[ I F ] : A F
t
I
(2.21)
special dyadic products used second-order tensors U, V , W
[ U V ] : W = U W V
t
[ U V ] : W = U W
t
V
t
(2.22)
Notes
Notes
Fig. 2.7: Symmetry groups reections and rotations.
2.2 Invariance under rigid body motions material sym.
orthogonal group proper orthogonal group
O
3
= Q R
33
: Q Q
t
= I
O
3
+
= Q O
3
: det(Q) = 1
(2.23)
reections rotations
Q(n) = I 2 n n O
3
Q( n) = exp( E
3
n) O
3
+
(2.24)
-
'
&
$
%
'
&
$
%
Q
r
x
2
r
x
1
r
x
2
r
x
1
Fig. 2.8: Isometry superposed spatial rigid body motion.
distance preserving transformation Q
O
3
+
x
2
x
1
= Q
(t) [ x
2
x
1
] s.t. |x
2
x
1
| = |x
2
x
1
|
(2.25)
rearrangement of terms
x
2
= Q
(t) x
2
+c(t) with c(t) = x
1
Q
(t) x
1
(2.26)
Notes
Notes
'
&
$
%
r
X
-
F
'
&
$
%
r
x
-
Q
'
&
$
%
r
x
Fig. 2.9: Isometry superposed spatial rigid body motion.

superposed spatial rigid body motion deformation gradient
(X, t
) = Q
(t) (X, t) +c(t)

F
(X, t
) = Q
(t) F(X, t)
(2.27)
traction vector transformation objective stress tensor function
= Q
(t) [ n] with n
= Q
(t) n so that
= (F
) = (Q
(t) F) = Q
(t) (F) Q
t
(t) (2.28)
'
&
$
%
r
X
'
&
$
%
r
X
-
F
'
&
$
%
r
x
-
Q
'
&
$
%
r
x
Fig. 2.10: Isometry material symmetry.

superposed material Euclidean transformation Q
G O
3
(x, t
) = Q

1
(x, t) +c
f
(x, t
) = Q
F
1
(x, t)
(2.29)
stress functions invariance under srm material symmetry
= (Q
F Q
t
) = (Q
F) = Q
(F) Q
t
S
= S S(Q
F Q
t
) = S(Q
F) = S(F) (2.30)
Notes
Notes
2.3 Structural tensors ctitious congurations
conclusion from invariance under superposed rigid body motions
S(C) = 2
C
W = F
1

F
W = F
1
P as
C
= F
t
F
= F
t
Q
t
Q
F = F
t
F = C
(2.31)
generalised material strain measures n = 1, 2, . . .
nE
n
= C
n/2
I 2 E
0
= ln(C) (2.32)
St.-Venant-Kirchho-type elasticity
W(C) =
1
2
E
n
: E : E
n
S = 2 E
n
: E :
C
E
n
(2.33)
general anisotropy monoclinic symmetry orthotropy
Fig. 2.11: Lattice-related illustration of dierent symmetries.
tensorial basis in R
33
e
i
e
j
=
ij
E
1
= e
1
e
1
E
4
=
2 [ e
1
e
2
]
sym
E
2
= e
2
e
2
E
5
=
2 [ e
2
e
3
]
sym
E
3
= e
3
e
3
E
6
=
2 [ e
1
e
3
]
sym
(2.34)
St.-Venant Kirchho-type elasticity tensor I
sym
=
6
i=1
N
i
E =
6
i,j=1
E
voi
ij
E
i
E
j
=
6
i=1
E
i
N
i
N
i
=
6
j=1\i
E
E
j
I
sym
E
i

E
j
Notes
Notes
anisotropic tensor function integrity basis Q
G O
3
W(C) =

W(I
1,...,n
) with
I
1,...,n
(C) = I
1,...,n
(Q
C Q
t
) Q
(2.35)
isotropic tensor function invariants Q
O
3
W(C, A
1,...,m
) =

W(I
1,...,n
) with
I
1,...,n
(C, A
1,...,m
) = I
1,...,n
(Q
C Q
t
, Q
A
1,...,m
) Q
(2.36)
structural tensors A
1,...,p
example: transverse isotropy
A = v v
.
= const and |v| = 1
I
1
= tr(C) I
2
= tr(C
2
) I
3
= tr(C
3
)
I
4
= tr(C A) I
5
= tr(C
2
A) with tr() = : I
(2.37)
dX
a
C
a
I
S
a
TB
a
-
F
a
'
&
$
%
dX
C A
S
B
0
TB
0
-
F
'
&
$
%
dx
I a
B
t
TB
t
Fig. 2.12: Fictitious isotropic conguration linear tangent map F
a
.
basic homogenisation equivalent strain energy covariance
W(C
a
, I) = W(C, A) = W(I, a) (2.38)
transformation relations
F
t
I F = C F
t
a
C F
a
= C
a
F
1
a F
t
= A F
1
a
A F
t
a
= I
(2.39)
three invariants isotropic ctitious conguration
I
CA
1
= tr(C
a
) = C
a
: I = tr(C A) = C : A = tr(a) = I : a
I
CA
2
= tr(C
2
a
) = tr(C A C A) = tr(a
2
) I
CA
3
= . . . (2.40)
Notes
Notes
S
a
TB
a
-
F
a
'
&
$
%
F
a
S
a
F
t
a
= S
B
0
TB
0
-
F
'
&
$
%
F S F
t
=
B
t
TB
t
Fig. 2.13: Fictitious isotropic conguration stress transformations.
Finger-type energy metric (2.41)
A = F
a
F
t
a
=
3
i=1
A
i
n
A
i
n
A
i
isotropy
A
1
=
A
2
=
A
3
trans. iso.
A
1
>
A
2
=
A
3
orthotropy
A
1
>
A
2
>
A
3
Piola-Kirchho-type stresses Kirchho stresses
S
a
= 2
3
i=1
W
I
CA
i
I
CA
i
C
a
= 2
3
i=1
i
W
I
CA
i
I [ C
a
I ]
i
S = 2
3
i=1
W
I
CA
i
I
CA
i
C
= 2
3
i=1
i
W
I
CA
i
A [ C A]
i
= 2
3
i=1
W
I
CA
i
I
CA
i
I
= 2
3
i=1
i
W
I
CA
i
a [ I a]
i
(2.42) AM Anisotropic Continuum Damage Coupled with Finite Plasticity 21
strain measures for n = 2
E
a
=
1
2
[ C
a
I ] E =
1
2
[ C I ] e =
1
2
[ I b
1
] (2.43)
St.-Venant-Kirchho-type elasticity isotropic ctitious cong.
W =
1
2
tr
2
(E
a
) + tr(E
2
a
) =
1
2
tr
2
(E A) + . . .
=
1
8
[ I
CA
1
3 ]
2
+
1
4
[ I
CA
2
2 I
CA
1
+ 3 ]
(2.44)
St.-Venant-Kirchho-type mat. stresses elasticity tensors
S
a
= tr(E
a
) I + 2 I E
a
I
E
a
= I I + [ I I +I I ]
S = tr(E A) A + 2 A E A
E = AA+ [ AA+AA]
J = tr(e a) a + 2 a e a
J e = a a + [ aa +aa]
(2.45)
Notes
Notes
dX
a
TB
a
-
F
a
'
&
$
%
dX
B
0
TB
0
-
F
'
&
$
%
dx
B
t
TB
t
Fig. 2.14: Helmholtz decompositions incompatibility of F
a
(X).
decomposition of a vector eld u(X)
u(X) =
X
v +
t
X
w +u
c
with u
c
= const (2.46)
decomposition of a tensor eld T(X) = u
i
(X) e
i
U(X) =
X
v +
t
X
W +U
c
with U
c
= const (2.47)
deform. gradient F
X
cof(F) = 0 linear tangent map F
a
dx = F dX v = W = 0 U
c
= 0
dX = F
a
dX
a
v
a
,= 0 W
a
,= 0 U
a c
,= 0
(2.48)
X
Y
Z
X
Y
Z
(a) deformed mesh view on x-y plane and y-z plane
0 40 80 120
16
8
0
8
f 10
3
u
t
o
p
u
top
1
u
top
2
u
top
3
0 40 80 120
16
8
0
8
f 10
3
u
t
o
p
u
top
1
u
top
2
u
top
3
(b) u
top
vs. |f| orthortopy and isotropy.
Fig. 2.15: Cook-type problem A = I +
1
2
n
A
2
n
A
2
+
1
4
n
A
3
n
A
3
.
Notes
Notes
3 Anisotropic Continuum Damage
Fig. 3.1: Heterogeneities inclusions fatigue fracture.
cont. damage mechanics degradation of material properties
introduce F
a
or damage metric A as internal variable
ctitious conguration remains un-damaged covariance
academic numerical example
C
a
I
TB
a
-
F
a
'
&
$
%
C A
B
0
TB
0
-
F
'
&
$
%
I a
B
t
TB
t
Fig. 3.2: Fictitious un-damaged isotropic conguration.
strain energy covariance internal variable F
a
respectively A
W(C
a
, I) = W(C, A) = W(I, a) (3.1)
dissipation inequality isothermal conditions
T = P :

F

W =
_
P
F
W
:

F
Fa
W :

F
a
=
1
2
S :

C

W =
_
1
2
S
C
W
:

C
A
W :

C 0
(3.2)
Notes
Notes
S
a
Z
a
TB
a
-
F
a
'
&
$
%
S Z
B
0
TB
0
-
F
'
&
$
%
z
B
t
TB
t
Fig. 3.3: Fictitious un-damaged isotropic conguration.
Piola-Kirchho stresses Piola-Kirchho-type driving stresses
S = 2
C
W Z =
A
W so that T = Z

A 0 (3.3)
eective Piola-Kirchho-type stresses
S
a
= F
1
a
S F
t
a
= [ F
1
a
F
1
a
] : S
Z
a
= F
t
a
Z F
a
= [ F
t
a
F
t
a
] : Z
(3.4)
isotropic ctitious conguration

W(I
CA
1
, I
CA
2
, I
CA
3
) covariance
C
C
W =
A
W A so that Z =
1
2
C S A
1
(3.5)
I Z
a
TB
a
-
F
a
'
&
$
%
A Z
B
0
TB
0
-
F
'
&
$
%
a z
B
t
TB
t
Fig. 3.4: Fictitious isotropic conguration damage evolution.
admissible elastic domain
E =
_
Z
=
a
(Z; A) Y
0
0
_
(3.6)
associated evolution equations
A =

Z
(3.7)
Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions consistency condition
0 0

= 0

= 0 (3.8)
Notes
Notes
3.2 Construction of the damage potential
general damage potential isotropic tensor function i = 1, 2, 3
a
(Z; A) =

a
(I
1,...,10
)
I
i
= tr(Z
i
) I
i+3
= tr(A
i
)
I
7
= tr(C A) I
8
= tr(C
2
A)
I
9
= tr(C A
2
) I
10
= tr(C
2
A
2
)
(3.9)
ctitious isotropic conguration three invariants i = 1, 2, 3
a
(Z; A) =

a
(I
ZA
1,2,3
)
I
ZA
i
= tr
_
[Z A]
i
_ (3.10)
quadratic form cf. St.-Venant Kirchho elasticity
a
=
1
2

A
[I
ZA
1
]
2
+
A
I
ZA
2
a
=
A
I
ZA
1
A+ 2
A
A Z A
2
ZZ
a
=
A
AA+
A
[ AA+AA]
(3.11)
dierent combinations of elasticity and continuum damage
(i) iso. elasticity A[
t0
I iso. damage
A
= 0
(ii) initial iso. elas. A[
t0
I aniso. damage
A
,= 0
(iii) aniso. elasticity A[
t0
/ I quasi iso. dam.
A
= 0
(iv) aniso. elasticity A[
t0
/ I aniso. damage
A
,= 0
Notes
Notes
numerical integration Euler backward t = t
n+1
t
n
A
n+1
= A
n
+ t

A
n+1
= A
n
+
Z
n+1
(3.12)
residual form evolution equation evolution criterion
R
A
= A
n+1
A
n

Z
n+1
= 0
R
=
n+1
= 0
(3.13)
higher-order s-stage Runge-Kutta methods Butcher array
A
i
= A
n
+
i
s
j=1
a
ij

Zj
j
A
n+1
= A
n
+
s
i=1
b
i

Zi
i
(3.14)
local Newton algorithm J = R
R =
_
R
A
R
_
=
_
A
_
J =
dR
d
(3.15)
local Newton algorithm owchart
given quantities: F
n+1
, A
n
if
n+1
[
An
> 0 then
dowhile |R| > tol
compute J
solve J = R for
update

+
compute R
enddo
endif
(3.16)
Notes
Notes
rst-order approximation of derivatives Voigt-type notation
local Jacobian example: J
AA
= dR
A
/dA
A
(kl)
= A+

2
_
e
(k)
e
(l)
+e
(l)
e
(k)
R
A
(kl)
= R
A
_
A
(kl)
, Z(A
(kl)
)
_
J
AA
ij(kl)
=
1
_
R
A
ij(kl)
R
A
ij
(3.17)
global tangent operator example: E = 2 dS/dC
F
(kl)
= F +

2
_
F
t
e
(k)
e
(l)
+F
t
e
(l)
e
(k)
S
(kl)
=

S
_
F
(kl)
, A(F
(kl)
)
_
E
ij(kl)
=
1
_

S
ij(kl)
S
ij
(3.18)
X
Y
Z
u
0 5 10
u
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
F
Fig. 3.5: Cracked plate under mode-3-type loading.
category (iv) anisotropic elasticity anisotropic damage
scalar anisotropy measure coaxiality of second-order tensors
(, ) =
| |
| | | |
(3.19)
Notes
Notes
X Y
Z
X Y
Z
X Y
Z
A
3

_
A, A[
t0
_

_
C, S
_
Fig. 3.6: Smallest damage eigen-value anisotropy measures.
4 Anisotropic Damage with Plasticity
Fig. 4.1: CT-specimen fracture ductile damage with plasticity.
fracture ductile continuum damage plasticity hardening
nite plasticity framework anisotropic continuum damage
isotropic ctitious conguration single surface inelasticity
Notes
Notes
Fig. 4.2: Poly-crystal pearlitic steel single-crystal slip systems.
micro-cracks along grain boundaries and within grains
phenomenological plasticity framework texture evolution
deformation-induced anisotropy evolution and degradation
academic numerical examples
'
&
$
%
C CS
B
0
TB
0
j
-
F
(X, t) '
&
$
%
I I
B
t
TB
t
P
P
P
Pq
F
p
C
e
M
e
A M
a
K M
k
TB
p
1
F
e
I
TB
a
1
F
a
I
TB
k
P
P
P
Pi
F
k
Fig. 4.3: Multiplicat. decomp. linear damage and hardening map.
Notes
Notes
4.1 Kinematic framework
multiplicative decomposition material isomorphism
F = F
e
F
p
J = J
e
J
p
J
e
, J
p
> 0 (4.1)
damage metric kinematic hardening proportional hardening
A = F
a
I F
t
a
K = F
t
k
I F
1
k
(4.2)
Green-Lagrange-type strain measures C
e
= F
t
e
I F
e
E
e
=
1
2
[ C
e
I ] E
k
=
1
2
[ K I ] (4.3)
transformation of velocity gradient to TB
p
T
B
p
F
1
e
l F
e
= F
1
e

F F
1
p
= F
1
e

F
e
+

F
p
F
1
p
= L
e
+L
p
(4.4)
damage and hardening related velocity-gradients-type tensors
L
a
=

F
a
F
1
a
= F
a

F
1
a
L
k
=

F
k
F
1
k
= F
k

F
1
k
(4.5)
metric-type tensors vs. inelastic velocity-gradients-type tensors
C
e
= 2 [ C
e
L
e
]
sym
K = 2 [ K L
k
]
sym
A = 2 [ L
a
A]
sym
(4.6)
strain energy covariance internal variables F
p
, F
a
, F
k
,
W(C
e
, K, A, ) = W
e
(C
e
, A) + W
k
(K, A) + W
() (4.7)
Notes
Notes
transformation of stress power
P :

F =
_
F
t
e
P F
t
p
:
_
F
1
e

F F
1
p
=
_
C
e
S
e
:
_
F
1
e

F
e
+

F
p
F
1
p
(4.8)
dissipation inequality isothermal conditions
T = P :

F

W(C
e
, K, A, )
=
_
C
e
S
e
:
_
L
e
+L
p
Ce
W :

C
e

K
W :

K
A
W :

A
W
=
_
M
e
2 C
e

Ce
W
: L
e
+M
e
: L
p
+ M
k
: L
k
M
a
: L
a
Y 0
(4.9)
Mandel-type stresses
M
e
= 2 C
e

Ce
W M
k
= 2 K
K
W M
a
= 2
A
W A
(4.10)
simplied single surface model for damage with plasticity
damage an plasticity are assumed to evolve at the same time
one Lagrange multiplier KKT and consistency conditions
0 0

= 0

= 0 (4.11)
admissible elastic domain reduced stresses M
r
= M
e
M
k
E =
_
(M
r
, Y )
=
p
(M
r
) [ Y
0
+ Y ] 0
_
(4.12)
inelastic potential
in
(M
r
, M
a
, Y ) = (M
r
, Y ) +
a
(M
a
) (4.13)
evolution equations
L
p
=

Me
in

L
a
=

Ma
in
L
k
=

M
k
in
=

in
(4.14)
Notes
Notes
4.3 Strain energy and inelastic potential
strain energy invariants covariance i = 1, 2, 3
W
e
(C
e
, A) =

W
e
_
I
CeA
1,2,3
_
I
CeA
i
= tr
_
[ C
e
A]
i
_
W
k
(K, A) =

W
k
_
I
KA
1,2,3
_
I
KA
i
= tr
_
[ K A]
i
_
(4.15)
St.-Venant Kirchho-type model linear and exp. saturation
W
e
=
1
8

_
I
CeA
1
3
2
+
1
4

_
I
CeA
2
2 I
CeA
1
+ 3
W
k
=
1
4
H
3
_
I
KA
2

1
3
[I
KA
1
]
2
_
_
_ (4.16)
W
= [ Y
Y
0
]
_
+ H
1
1
exp(H
1
) H
1
1
+
1
2
H
2
2
damage potential M
a
= 2
A
W A i = 1, 2, 3
a
(M
a
) =

a
_
I
Ma
1,2,3
_
with I
Ma
i
= tr
_
M
i
a
_
(4.17)
Mandel-type damage stress are symmetric with respect to A
pull-back to isotropic ctitious conguration i = 1, 2, 3
M
a
= F
t
a
M
a
F
t
a
=

Ma
i
n
a i
n
a,i
= M
t
a
(4.18)
alternative formulation of
a
in terms of eigen-values
a
(M
a
) =

a
_
Ma
1,2,3
_
=

a
_

Ma
1,2,3
_
with
Ma
i
=

Ma
i
(4.19)
Rankine-type damage potential =
1
2
[ +[ [ ]
a
(M
a
) =
_

3
i=1
Ma
i

D+1
_ 1
D+1
0 with D 0 (4.20)
Notes
Notes
eective Mandel-type stresses M
e
= C
e
S
e
M
e
e
.
=
_
F
t
a
C
e
F
1
a
S
e
M
e
r
.
= M
e
e
M
k
(4.21)
plastic potential invariants i = 1, 2, 3
I
M
e
r
i
= tr
__
M
e
r
i
_
with
tr
_
M
e
e
_
= C
e
:
_
F
1
a
S
e
F
t
a
. . .
(4.22)
von-Mises-type plastic potential
p
_
M
e
r
_
=
_
3
2
I
M
e
r dev
2
with
dev
=
1
3
tr() I (4.23)
visco-plasticity N 1 non-linear kin. hardening a =
3
2
Y
0
_
N
L
k
=

M
k
in
+ a K
1
M
t
k
(4.24)
exponential integration Euler backward t = t
n+1
t
n
F
p n+1
= exp( L
p n+1
) F
p n
F
k n+1
= exp( L
k n+1
) F
k n
F
a n+1
= exp(L
a n+1
) F
a n
n+1
=
n
+

n+1
(4.25)
local Newton algorithm J = R
R =
_
_
R
p
R
k
R
a
R
_
=
_
_
F
p
F
k
F
a
_
J =
dR
d
(4.26)
Notes
Notes
4.5 Academic numerical examples
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-400
-200
0
200
400
(a) no dam. rate-indep.
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-400
-200
0
200
400
(b) damage rate-indep.
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-800
-400
0
400
800
(c) no dam. rate-dep.
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-800
-400
0
400
800
(d) damage rate-dep.
Fig. 4.4: F = I + e
1
e
2
initial isotropy
12
vs. .
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-1800
-1200
-600
0
600
1200
(a) no dam. rate-indep.
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-1800
-1200
-600
0
600
1200
(b) damage rate-indep.
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-1800
-1200
-600
0
600
1200
(c) no dam. rate-dep.
s
h
e
a
r
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
f
C
a
u
c
h
y
s
tr
e
s
s
-0.5 -0.25 0 0.25 0.5
-1800
-1200
-600
0
600
1200
(d) damage rate-dep.
Fig. 4.5: F = I + e
1
e
2
initial orthotropy
12
vs. .
Notes
Notes
Y
Z
X
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
X
Y Z
Fig. 4.6: Torsion of a rod initial orthotropy discretisation
deformed mesh for [ 0

2
] drawing by St.-Venant.
t
o
r
s
io
n
a
l
m
o
m
e
n
t
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
(a) torsional moment vs.
lo
n
g
it
u
d
in
a
l
f
o
r
c
e
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
(b) longitudinal force vs.
Fig. 4.7: Torsion of a rod rate-dependent anisotropic damage
non-linear kinematic hardening torsion angle .
Notes
Notes
Y
Z
X
4500
4167
3833
3500
3167
2833
2500
2167
1833
1500
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
4500
4167
3833
3500
3167
2833
2500
2167
1833
1500
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
4500
4167
3833
3500
3167
2833
2500
2167
1833
1500
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
4500
4167
3833
3500
3167
2833
2500
2167
1833
1500
X
Y Z
Fig. 4.8: Torsion of a rod |
e dev
|
2
,0
|M
e
r dev
|
2
,0
.
Y
Z
X
0.9000
0.8889
0.8778
0.8667
0.8556
0.8444
0.8333
0.8222
0.8111
0.8000
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
0.9000
0.8889
0.8778
0.8667
0.8556
0.8444
0.8333
0.8222
0.8111
0.8000
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
0.0050
0.0046
0.0041
0.0037
0.0032
0.0028
0.0023
0.0019
0.0014
0.0010
X
Y Z
Y
Z
X
0.0080
0.0072
0.0064
0.0057
0.0049
0.0041
0.0033
0.0026
0.0018
0.0010
X
Y Z
Fig. 4.9: Torsion of a rod
A
3
2
,0
(A, A[
t0
)
2
,0
.
Notes
Notes
5 Outlook
anisotropic yield functions deformation induced anisotropic
p
= M
e
r
: H : M
e
r
with

A
p
(C
e
, A, . . . ) and
H = A
p
A
p
+
1
9
tr(A
2
p
) I I
1
3
_
I A
2
p
+A
2
p
I
non-local damage and plasticity

multi-surface inelasticity
global energy gradient terms
microcrack-opening-closure eects
C
e
=
Ce
i
n
Ce
i
n
Ce
i
I
+
= 1
_
_
Ce
i
_
n
Ce
i
n
Ce
i
C
+
e
= I
+
C
e
I
+
. . . 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
2
3
11
/
y
2
2
/
y
6 References
6.1 General monographs
J. Besson, G. Cailletaud, J.-L. Chaboche and S. Forest. Non-Linear
Mechanics of Materials. Springer, 2010.
J.P. Boehler, editor. Applications of Tensor Functions in Solid
Mechanics. Number 292 in CISM Courses and Lectures. Springer, 1987.
J. Bonet and R.D. Wood. Nonlinear Continuum Mechanics for Finite
Element Analysis. Cambridge 1997.
P.G. Ciarlet. Mathematical Elasticity Volume 1: Three Dimensional
Elasticity. North-Holland, 1988.
E.A. de Souza Neto, D. Peric and D.J.R. Owen. Computational
Methods for Plasticity. Wiley, 2008.
A. Ibrahimbegovic. Nonlinear Solid Mechanics. Springer, 2009.
J.E. Marsden and T.J.R. Hughes. Mathematical Foundations of
Elasticity. Dover, 1994.
J.C. Simo and T.J.R. Hughes. Computational Inelasticity. Springer, 1998.
G.Z. Voyiadjis and P.I. Kattan. Damage Mechanics. Taylor &Francis, 2005.
P. Wriggers. Nonlinear Finite Element Methods. Springer, 2008.
Notes
Notes
6.2 Selected articles used for the lecture notes
M. Ekh and A. Menzel. Ecient iteration schemes for anisotropic
hyperelasto-plasticity. Int. J. Numer. Methods Engng., 66:707721,
2006.
M. Ekh, A. Menzel, K. Runesson, and P. Steinmann. Anisotropic
damage with the MCR eect coupled to plasticity. Int. J. Engng. Sci.,
41:15351551, 2003.
P. Haupt and Th. Kersten. On the modelling of anisotropic material
behaviour in viscoplasticity. Int. J. Plasticity, 19:18851915, 2003.
G. Johansson, A. Menzel, and K. Runesson. Modeling of anisotropic
inelasticity in pearlitic steel at large strains due to deformation induced
substructure evolution. Euro. J. Mech. A/Solids, 24(6):899918, 2005.
H. Lammer and Ch. Tsakmakis. Discussion of coupled elastoplasticity
and damage constitutive equations for small and nite deformations.
Int. J. Plasticity, 16:495523, 2000.
F.A. Leckie and E.T. Onat. Tensorial nature of damage measuring
internal variables. In J. Hult and J. Lemaitre, editors, Physical
NonLinearities in Structural Analysis, pages 140155. IUTAM
Symposium Senlis/France 1980, Springer, 1981.
A. Menzel, M. Ekh, K. Runesson, and P. Steinmann. A framework for
multiplicative elastoplasticity with kinematic hardening coupled to
anisotropic damage. Int. J. Plasticity, 21:397434, 2005.
A. Menzel, M. Ekh, P. Steinmann, and K. Runesson. Anisotropic
damage coupled to plasticity: Modelling based on the eective
conguration concept. Int. J. Numer. Methods Engng., 54(10):
14091430, 2002.
A. Menzel and P. Steinmann. A theoretical and computational setting
for anisotropic continuum damage mechanics at large strains. Int. J.
Solids Struct., 38(52): 95059523, 2001.
A. Menzel and P. Steinmann. On the comparison of two strategies to
formulate orthotropic hyperelasticity. J. Elasticity, 62: 171201, 2001.
A. Menzel and P. Steinmann. On the spatial formulation of anisotropic
multiplicative elastoplasticity. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech.
Engrg., 192: 34313470, 2003.
A. Menzel and P. Steinmann. Geometrically nonlinear anisotropic
inelasticity based on ctitious congurations: Application to the
coupling of continuum damage and multiplicative elastoplasticity. Int.
J. Numer. Methods Engng., 56: 22332266, 2003.
Notes
Notes
C. Miehe. Numerical computation of algorithmic (consistent) tangent
moduli in largestrain computational inelasticity. Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Engrg., 134: 223240, 1996.
C. Miehe. A constitutive frame of elastoplasticity at large strains based
on the notion of a plastic metric. Int. J. Solids Struct., 35(30):
38593897, 1998.
C. Miehe and E. Stein. A canonical model of multiplicative
elastoplasticity: Formulation and aspects of the numerical
implementation. Euro. J. Mech. A/Solids, 11: 2543, 1992.
P.M. Naghdi. A critical review of the state of nite plasticity. Z.
angew. Math. Phys., 41: 315394, 1990.
F. Sidoro. Description of anisotropic damage application to elasticity.
In J. Hult and J. Lemaitre, editors, Physical NonLinearities in
Structural Analysis, pages 237244, 1981.
P. Steinmann, C. Miehe, and E. Stein. Comparison of dierent nite
deformation inelastic damage models within multiplicative elasto-
plasticity for ductile materials. Comput. Mech., 13: 458474, 1994.
B. Svendsen. On the modeling of anisotropic elastic and inelastic
material behaviour at large deformation. Int. J. Solids Struct., 38(52):
95799599, 2001.
Notes
Notes

Anisotropic Continuum Damage Coupled With Finite Plasticity: 1 Contents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Anisotropic Continuum Damage Coupled With Finite Plasticity: 1 Contents

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Anisotropic Continuum Damage Coupled With Finite Plasticity: 1 Contents

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Contents Anisotropic Elasticity Anisotropic Damage Anisotropic Damage with Plasticity Outlook References

Anisotropic Continuum Damage

Fig. 2.9: Isometry superposed spatial rigid body motion.

(t) (X, t) +c(t)

Fig. 2.10: Isometry material symmetry.

non-local damage and plasticity

You might also like