7.4.

Plasticity Modeling: Softening Behavior 383

because it can lead to an exaggerative volume expansion for concrete

materials. A nonassociated ftow rule with a variable dilatancy factor
is therefore suggested in the present formulation of the constitutive
stress-strain relation of concrete.

7.4. Plasticity Modeling: Softening Behavior

As discussed in Section 7.1, axial compression tests on concrete specimens
exhibit, in general, the softening behavior of the material in the postfailure
regime. The strain-softening behavior, i.e., the negative slope of the load-
deformation curve, will be considered in the following as a material property
and will be treated by the strain-space plasticity formulation. Before we
do this, we shall first examine some material behaviors shown in Fig. 7.22.

7.4.1. Types of Material Behaviors

7.4.1.1. ELASTIC-PLASTIC SOLlOS
Figure 7.22a shows a stress-strain diagram of a hardening-softening solid,
in which the unloading-reloading lines follow straight !ines that are parallei
to the initial tangent of the stress-strain curve, i.e., the slope of the unload-
ing-reloading line does not change with plastic deformation. This is a typical
behavior of an elastic-plastic solid.

7.4.1.2. PROGRESSlYELy FRACTURING SOLIDS

The behavior described in the previous section is not the case for many
engineering materials such as concrete. For example, the elastic modulus
or the stiffness usually decreases with increasing strainingo This sort of
behavior is considered to be due to microcracking or fracturing. Thus, on
the other extreme, an ideal material model, called a progressively fracturing
solid and shown in Fig. 7.22b, was proposed by Dougill (1975). This ideal
material is perfectly elastic. Upon unloading, the material retums to its
initial stress- and strain-free state; no permanent (plastic) strain occurs.
Since the stiffness degradation behavior is due mainly to fracturing
(microcracking), which is different from s!ip, it cannot be satisfactorily
interpreted within the framework of plasticity. Recognizing the difference
between fracturing and plastic ftow, Dougill (1975, 1976) proposed a theory
called fracturing theory. This idea is further realized in the development of
the more recent so-called damage theory.

7.4.1.3. PLASTIc-FRACTURING SOLIDS

A material exhibiting both plastic deformation and stiffness degradation
behaviors is shown in Fig. 7.22c. Concretes fall into this category, par-
ticularly in their softening range. To account for both behaviors, a combined