9 Phenomenological Plasticity Models Based on the Notion of an Intermediate Stress-Free Configuration In this chapter we outline a formulation of nonlinear plasticity which, in con- trast with the phenomenological models examined in Chapter 7, is motivated by a well-understood micromechanical picture of single-crystal metal plasticity. A comprehensive exposition of the current status of the micromechanical descrip- tion of single-crystal metal plasticity is in the review article of Asaro [1983]. The basic ideas go back to the fundamental work of Taylor [1938] subsequently ex- panded upon in Hill [1966]; Hill and Rice [1972]; Asaro and Rice [1977]; and Asaro [1979] ‘An essential feature of this micromechanical description is the introduction of an intermediate local configuration, relative to which the elastic response of the material is characterized. From a phenomenological standpoint this notion leads to a local multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient of the form F(X, 1) = F(X, OFX, (9.1.1) for each material point X € B, the reference configuration of the body. ‘Multiplicative decompositions of this type have been considered by Lee and Liu [1967]; Lee [1969]; Kroner and Teodosiu [1972]; Mandel [1964,1974]; Kratochvil [1973]; Sidoroff [1974]; Nemat-Nasser{ 1982]; Agah—Tehrani et al. [1986]; Lubliner [1984,1986]; Simo and Ortiz, [1985]; Simo [1988a]; and others. The objective of this chapter is two-fold: 1. To outline the continuum basis of elastoplastic constitutive models at finite strains based on the notion of an intermediate (Jocal) configuration, as embodied in the multiplicative decomposition (9.1.1). In particular, to motivate the general theory in a concrete setting, we consider in detail the formulation of a J; flow theory based on the multiplicative decomposition. 2, To demonstrate that the notion of an intermediate configuration leads to a remarkably simple class of integration algorithms which include, as a particular case, a straightforward extension of the radial return algorithm of infinitesimal J> flow theory. With the exceptions of Argyris and Doltsinis (1979,1980]; Argyris et 3009.1. Kinematic Preliminaries 301 al, [1979]; Simo and Ortiz. [1985]; and Simo [1988a,]; this approach had not been explored in the computational literature previously. To this date plasticity at finite strains still remains a somewhat controversial subject. Because this monograph is largely concerned with numerical analysis, we have chosen to focus our attention on the computational implications of the multiplicative decomposition (9.1.1) in the simplest possible context afforded by Jy flow theory. From this computational perspective, the following features are noteworthy. i. The stress-strain relationships derive from a stored-energy function, formu- lated relative to the intermediate configuration, which decouples exactly into volumetric and deviatoric parts. ii, The integration algorithm reduces to the classical, radial return algorithm discussed in detail in Chapter 3, in which the elastic predictor is computed exactly by a function evaluation of the stress-strain relationship. ili, In the absence of plastic flow, i.., for elastic response, the algorithm is exact and reduces to the classical update procedure of finite elasticity. iv. As in the infinitesimal theory, the entire algorithmic procedure can be lin- carized leading to a closed-form expression for the algorithmic (consistent) tangent elastoplastic moduli. An outline of this chapter is as follows. First we summarize some kinematic relationships associated with multiplicative decomposition (9.1.1) and the notion of an intermediate configuration. Next, as an important illustration of the general theory, we consider the formulation of J; flow theory within the framework of the multiplicative decomposition. Subsequently, we provide a detailed description of the algorithmic aspects involved in numerical implementation. Finally, we assess the performance of Jp flow theory in a selected number of examples that include comparisons with exact solutions and experimental results and also comparisons with numerical simulations reported in the literature. 9.1 Kinematic Preliminaries. The (Local) Intermediate Configuration In this section we introduce the notion of intermediate configuration and summarize some basic kinematic relationships needed for our subsequent developments. 9.1.1 Micromechanical Motivation. Single-Crystal Plasticity From a micromechanical standpoint, plastic flow in crystalline plasticity can be viewed as a flow of material through the crystal lattice via dislocation motion. This point of view goes back to the work of G.I. Taylor and his associates, e.g., Taylor and Elam [1923, 1925]; and Taylor [1938]; and provides the starting point302 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models for current micromechanical descriptions of plastic flow in metal plasticity, as in Asaro and Rice [1977] and Asaro [1979]. For a crystal with a single slip system denoted by {s,m} with ms = 0 and \ls|| = [lm = 1, the point of view above leads to a micromechanical description illustrated in Figure 9.1. The unit vectors {s, m} are attached to the lattice, and plastic flow is characterized by the tensor F? defined as FP 1+ys@m, (9.1.2) where y is the plastic shearing on the crystallographic slip system defined by {s, m). Then the total deformation of the crystal is decomposed as, F=FF, (9.1.3) where F* is the deformation caused by stretching and rotation of the crystal lattice and F is the total deformation gradient. The plastic slip rate y is defined accord- ing to the Schmidt-resolved shear law. The preceding kinematic description can be extended to the case of several slip systems. We refer to the review article of Asaro [1983] for further details including an up-to-date discussion of several mi- cromechanical models. Here we simply note that proper account of the physical mechanisms underlying plastic flow in crystal plasticity leads rather naturally to a multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient of the form (9.1.3). 9.1.2 Kinematic Relationships Associated with the Intermediate Configuration Motivated by the micromechanical picture of plastic deformation outlined above, for a continuum body with reference placement B C R°, one postulates a local multiplicative decomposition of the form (9.1.1): F(X, 0) = F°(X, 1)F?(X, 1). (9.1.4) Fiaure9.1. Micromechanical aspects ofthe deformation in a single slip crystal. F* “moves” the material through the lattice via dislocation motion, F* rotates and distorts the crystal lattice9.1. Kinematic Preliminaries 303 From a phenomenological standpoint, one interprets F*~! as the local deformation that releases the stresses from each neighborhood O, < ¢g(B) in the current place- ment of the body. Accordingly, itis implicitly assumed that the local intermediate configuration defined by F*~! is stress-free. Note that, globally, the intermedi- ate configuration is incompatible in the same sense as the rotated configuration introduced in Section 7.1.3.2. See Figure 9.2 for an illustration, 9.1.2.1 Lagrangian and Eulerian strain tensors. Following the standard conventions in continuum mechanics discussed in Chapter 7 relative to the reference placement of the body, the right Cauchy-Green tensors are defined as =F'F, and 9.15) Then the corresponding Lagrangian strain tensors become E:=3(c-1), and 0.16) Er=1(c?-1), where 1 denotes the symmetric unit tensor with components 54g in a Cartesian reference system. The fact that C, C? and E, E? are objects associated with the reference configuration is indicated schematically in Figure 9.3. Similarly, associated with the current configuration are the Eulerian tensors b= FF’, ¢ am Oy) Fe k ; O Ficus 9.2. The multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient.304 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models on Fiours 9.3. Examples of Lagrangian and Bulerian strain tensors. and 1.7) ra pT called the total and elastic left Cauchy-Green tensors, respectively. The inverse form of the left Cauchy-Green tensor is called the Finger deformation tensor. In the present context, then* FCF, and 1.8) c= FTF Finally, the Eulerian strain tensors take the form 1 z(l-¢) and 19) (-e), where 1 is the symmetric unit tensor in the current configuration with components 4,5. Since Cartesian coordinates are used throughout our discussion, we use the same symbol for the unit tensor in both the reference and the current configurations. ‘The following relationship is crucial in our analysis. From (9.1.7)2 and (9.1.4), e bo = FFP~pe-T Rp [retee| er, 0.1.10) which, in view of (9.1.5)>, yields bo = FCP1FT. (1.11) Analogous expressions connecting other spatial and Lagrangian strain tensors defined above also hold; see, e.g., Simo and Ortiz [1985], Simo [1988a,b]. * Strictly speaking, one should write 4=(FFT).p-! since bis a spatial object which depends on s=60, and not x € B, Following a standard abuse in notation, we often omit the composition with ~!9.1. Kinematic Preliminaries 305 9.1.2.2. Rates of deformation. ‘We recall only two relationships needed for our subsequent developments. First, note that the total rate of deformation tensor defined by (7.1.37) is alternatively expressed according to (7.1.39) as, a=F"[l¢]Fo SFE @.1.12) Now observe from (9.1.7) and (9.1.9) that ea ie [L-TR'] P= Fer @.1.13) Combining (9.1.12) and (9.1.13), we write symbolically a [Frer] FO 1.14) a By analogy with (7.1.72), d may be viewed a Lie-derivative; see Marsden and Hughes [1983, Chapter 1] or Simo, Marsden, and Krishnaprasad [1988] for a careful definition of this concept. Definition (9.1.14), however, suffices for our purposes. By analogy with (9.1.14), in view of (9.1.11), we set F FC? FT (9.1.15) Lb =F {3 [rvr]} F It can be shown that this formal definition rigorously agrees with the actual definition of the Lie derivative for the tensor b*. To formulate the Jy-plasticity model discussed in detail in the following section, we need to introduce one further kinematic notion. 9.1.3 Deviatoric-Volumetric Multiplicative Split Within the context of the infinitesimal theory, the strain tensor € is decomposed into volumetric and deviatoric parts according to the following standard additive split. Let dev[e] =e — } tell => tr{devle]} =0 (9.1.16) be the strain deviator. Then e= devle] + } tfell (1.17) Se Ti Deviatoric Volumetric part part This additive decomposition, although formally valid, loses its physical content in the nonlinear theory. The correct split takes the following multiplicative form.306 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models 9.1.3.1 Multiplicative decomposition Let F denote the volume-preserving part of the deformation gradient. Accordingly, det{F'] = 1. Further, recall that J := det [F] gives the local volume change. Then set = JNOF = det(F] =1 and (9.1.18) Fa JF. This decomposition was originally introduced by Flory [1961] and has been used by several authors in different contexts: Sidoroff [1974]; Hughes, Taylor and Sackman [1975]; Ogden [1982, 1984]; Simo, Taylor, and Pister [1985]; and Atluri and Reissner [1988]. From (9.1.18), C= FFs IPC = det(€)=1 (9.1.19) Other volume-preserving tensors are defined similarly. To gain further insight into the nature of the decomposition (9.1.18), it is useful to examine the rate form of (9.1.19). For this purpose, recall the standard formula J= JS diw tld] (9.1.20) In view of (9.1.5), (9.1.12), and (9.1.20), time differentiation of (9.1.19) yields 2 3 = 278 [Frar —lFTF way] C= 86 — 28 diy =28pT [a — bata] F, (9.1.21) which is rephrased as, C = 2F "devia. (9.1.22) This expression shows that C is indeed a material deviatoric tensor in the correct sense, since C : C7! = 0, 9.2 Jy Flow Theory at Finite Strains. A Model Problem Inthis section we consider the formulation of the simplest plasticity model: Js flow theory with isotropic hardening. Our objective is to motivate the main features of the general theory and examine its computational implications in the simplest possible context.9.2. Jz Flow Theory at Finite Strains 307 9.2.1 Formulation of the Governing Equations ‘We assume throughout that the stress response is isotropic. Accordingly, the free energy is independent of the orientation of the reference configuration. This as- sumption is introduced at the outset to avoid any controversy concerning the appropriate invariance restrictions on the intermediate configuration. This issue is addressed in the formulation of the general theory; see Simo [1988a,b]. In addition, in accordance with a standard assumption in metal plasticity, we assume that plastic flow is isochoric det F? = det? = 1 => J = det = det Fe (9.2.1) With these two a priori assumptions, we proceed to outline the governing equations of the model 9.2.1.1 Stress response, Hyperelastic relationships Consistent with the assumption of isotropy and the notion of an intermediate stress- free configuration, we characterize the stress response by a stored-energy function of the form W=uU)+ We), Fen pep? 2 yea ye 022) where U : Ry > Ry U {0} is aconvex function of J¢: = det{F¢], We call UJ) and W (6*) the volumetric and deviatoric parts of W respectively. To make matters as concrete as possible, we consider the following explicit forms vu) be[}ue=p- ms‘), u(wb1- 3), where > Oand > Oare interpreted as the shear modulus and the bulk modulus, respectively. Note that, in view of (9.2.1), our definition of b* yields det [e] =1, — (9.2.3) Wey hence, the denomination of the deviatoric part assigned to W. Also note that tb] = t[C"], where C¢ = s° 8 FT RS. (9.2.4) Now let W = U(J*) + W(C*), and observe that for model (9.2.3) W6") = W(C*). Then the Kirchhoff stress tensor is obtained by the general expression 1 OW eT pers ye r jek =IUU Nts, (9.2.5) s 2ae|F the derivation of which is in Simo, Taylor, and Pister [1985]. Note that the uncou- pled, stored-energy function (9.2.2) results in uncoupled volumetric-deviatoric308. 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models stress-strain relationships. From (9.2.4) and (9.2.3), we find that THs pits. pesU)= SUF -ayr", 0.2.6) ss: =devir] = pdevib" Observe that U(J) > +00 and p + too, as J > and J — oo. Further, one can easily show that (9.2.6) reduces (for small strains) to the classical isotropic model of the linearized theory. Remarks 9.2.1. 1. The assumption that the stored-energy function W depends on b° = F°F*T is consistent with models of the type considered by Lee [1969] and Dafalias [1984]. Alternatively, W is expressed as follows. In view of (9.1.11), lb) [eB] = 1: 8 P28 RCP FT] =1:(F CPO) = FTF: CP, (9.2.7) where €? = J?-2€? and C? is defined by (9.1.5)2. From (9.2.7) and (9.1.19), we conclude that wuld] = fC? ~}] (9.2.8) Therefore, (9.2.8) and (9.2.3) imply that W has the form uP) +5 (9.2.9) which formally has the same functional form as models considered by Green and Naghdi (1965, 1966]. For arelated model, see Simo and Ju [1989]. However, notice that W does not generally depend on the difference C — C?, even in the simplest situation afforded by (9.2.3), in contrast with the original proposal of Green and Naghdi [1965]. 2. Further insight into the nature of the stored-energy function (9.2.2)-(9.2.3) is gained by examining its time derivative. First, by the well-known formula for the derivative of a determinant, Je sdet(C) > Je = geese (9.2.10) Second, in view of (9.2.4), from (9.2.3) and (9.2.10), Wa [surance]: Fees dus [ee I 1 bwieyer~)] : $e" 2.11) = [per + nae? (19.2. J Flow Theory at Finite Strains 309 Since C* = F°"F*, a straightforward manipulation of (9.2.11) gives, in view of (9.2.6), the expression Weare [s pt 4 ws? (6 - buon) |: be = [spt + wdevibey] : FmT LOR vid [Rote] 0.2.12) Now recall that the total rate of deformation tensor is defined in terms of C by formula (9.1.12), which makes intrinsic geometric sense, and is identical in structure to the expression within brackets in (9.2.12). Consequently, by analogy with d = 1 F-TCF-", one sets |) => |Wearcd (9.2.13) Equation (9.2.13) is the natural counterpart of the expression W = o : é° in the infinitesimal theory. 3. Identical computations are carried out relative to the reference configuration by taking expression (9.2.9) as the point of departure in place of (9.2.3-(9.2.4). Then an expression is obtained in terms of {C, C?} linear in the strain rates {€, €?}, These observations are consistent with the fact that a form of the constitutive equations in a properly invariant theory should be independent of the description adopted (Lagrangian or Eulerian). a TCR 1 2 9.2.1.2 Yield condition, ‘We consider the classical Mises-Huber yield condition formulated in terms of the Kirchhoff stress tensor as f(r, a) = dev] V3 lor +K (9.2.14) where, as in Chapter 2, oy denotes the flow stress, K > 0 the isotropic hardening modulus, and o the hardening parameter. Nonlinear hardening laws in which K (@) is a nonlinear function of the hardening parameter are easily accommodated in the formulation, as shown below. 9.2.1.3 The associative-flow rule. The crucial step in formulating the model lies in developing the corresponding associative flow rule, Remarkably, as in the infinitesimal theory, given the stored- energy function and the yield condition, the functional form of the corresponding associative flow rule is uniquely determined by the principle of maximum plastic dissipation In the present context, for the Mises-Huber yield condition (9.2.14) and the stored-energy function (9.2.2)-(9.2.3), one can show (Simo [1988a,b]) that the310 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models associative flow rule takes the form cery =—}yu[b] Fn, silisil, si = dev[r] a (9.2.15) Remarks 9.2.2. 1, From (9.2.8) we observe that tr[b*] = C ; C?~! therefore can be expressed as a function of {C, C”}. Further, note that N := F~'nF~T is also a function of {C, C?} asis easily concluded from (9.2.6). Hence, (9.2.15) should be regarded as a flow rule in strain space giving the evolution of C? ~" in terms of {C, C”} 2. The flow rule (9.2.15) can also be expressed entirely in the spatial description Ieading to a somewhat surprising result. In fact, from (9.1.15) and (9.2.15), we obtain Lb! = —2y tld In, (9.2.16) n= s/s 0219 It should be noted that (9.2.16) defines only the deviatoric part of Lyb*; see Simo [1988a,b] for a detailed elaboration of this point. 9.2.1.4 Isotropic hardening law and loading/unloading conditions. As in the linear theory, we assume that the evolution of the hardening variable is governed by the rate equation a= Vty. (9.2.17) where y is the consistency parameter subject to the standard Kuhn—Tucker loading/unloading conditions y20, f(r.) <0, yf(r.a) =0, (9.2.18a) which along with the consistency condition vf(r.0) =0 (9.2.186) complete the formulation of the model. 9.2.1.5 Kinematic hardening model, In addition to the isotropic hardening law considered above, other types of hard- ening response are accommodated in the model by introducing additional internal variables with evolution governed by properly invariant rate equations. In particu- lar, a possible extension to finite strains of the Prager~Ziegler kinematic hardening aw is constructed as follows.9.3, Integration Algorithm for J flow Theory 311 Let g be the back stress interpreted as a spatial second-order (stress-like) con- travariant tensor field. Accordingly, we assume that j transforms objectively under rigid motions superposed on the current configuration, that is Q9Q". forall @ « SO). (9.2.19) Then consider the following evolution equations for the flow rule and the kinematic hardening law Lb? = -y 3b" In, La vy} Hub ln, (9.2.20) n:=(s-@)/is—al. where His the kinematic hardening modulus. As in the linear theory, the Mises yield condition (9.2.14) is modified to accommodate kinematic hardening as fol- lows. Set q := —y/Kor, where o is the isotropic hardening variable with evolution equation (9.2.17). Then, in terms of the hardening variables q = (q. 4). the Mises condition (9.2.14) becomes £7. g) = IIdevir — Ql +9 — VF (0.2.21) 4=—3ky, Equations (9.2.20,21) along with the hyperelastic stress-strain relations (9.2.6) and the Kuhn—Tucker complementary conditions (9.2.18) complete the formulation of the model, 9.3 Integration Algorithm for Jy Flow Theory Inthis section we examine in detail the numerical integration of the model problem outlined in Section 2. It is shown that the resulting integrative algorithm furnishes a canonical extension to finite strains of the classical radial return method of infinitesimal plasticity. Conceptually, the only difference lies in the fact that the clastic predictor (trial elastic state) is evaluated by hyperclastic, finite-strain, stress- strain relationships. 9.3.1 Integration of the Flow Rule and Hardening Law Proper invariance of the integrated constitutive model under superposed rigid body motions on the current configuration is a fundamental restriction placed by the principle of material frame indifference which must be exactly preserved by the integration algorithm. To enforce this restriction, we proceed as in Chapter 7.312 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models 9.3.1.1 Outline of the general procedure. A general procedure that automatically ensures satisfaction of the principle of material frame indifference is as follows: i. Given a properly invariant evolution equation formulated in the spatial descrip- tion, we transform the equation to the convected description by using appropriate tensorial transformations involving the deformation gradient (in a more geometric context, one refers to this tensorial transformation as a pull-back; see e.g. Marsden and Hughes [1994, Chapter 1] or Arnold [1978]). ii, In the convected description, ive., a description in which {C, C?, S} are the basic variables, we perform the time-stepping algorithm according to any se- lected integration scheme, typically the generalized midpoint rule. This results in a discrete form of the evolution equation. iii, We transform the discrete evolution equation back to the spatial description by appropriate tensorial transformations (in a geometric context, we refer to this, transformation as a push-forward). In (9.2.16-9.2.17), we illustrate in detail the application of this general technique with reference to the flow rule and hardening law. 9.3.1.2 Discrete flow rule and hardening law. The given equations of evolution in the spatial description are (9.2.16)-(9.2.17). The transformed evolution equations in the convected description are given by (9.2.15) and (9.2.17) (note that ois a scalar), that is, =—3y[er! Clr nr-7, 93.1) Again we remark that F—!nF—T is casily shown to be a function of {C, C?}. By applying a backward Euler difference scheme, we obtain the discrete evolution equations as we FetattnetPat (9.3.2) Now we complete step iii above by transforming (9.3.2) to the current con- figuration. To this end, a calculation similar to that leading to (9.2.7) now yields wl, = 1: Pes Fh 1:55, FU Faat CP5) = Cra C2 (9.3.3) Similarly, since €?,, = J?57°C?_,, use of (9.1.4) results in the relationship = IR Fy Ch FT, met = mi En Ga9.3, Integration Algorithm for Jy flow Theory 313 CP IRE FC ha Fy =e mat Fra = (Mest)? Bias = IY Bigs = Bay 0.3.4) Now let f,41 and f,.1 denote the relative deformation gradient and its volume- preserving part, respectively, with respect to configurations ¢,(B) and ¢q4.1(B). See Figure 9.4. By definition, int and 3.5) inva = Pavas! = nual)” fost Therefore, proceeding as in the derivation leading to (9.3.4), (9.3.6) Premultiplying (9.3.2) by F,41 and postmultiplying by F7,, along with re- lationships (9.3.3), (9.3.4), and (9.3.6), yield the spatial, discrete, evolution equations: 1 = SnsBiSns — FAY OB; Mins, Mngt 2 = Sut / Sng lls 3. Sny1 = devitaal, O31) Ops = Oy + yay, where we have used the fact that Fz!, = J7!/*Fz!,. Notice that so far we have (Crew inet = Fae ihn” Ins Wiha Fiaure 9.4, ‘Total and relative deformation gradients connecting neighborhoods Ox, Ox,, and O,,,, in B, #4(B), and ¢p41(B), respectively314 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models (Bist n+) ua B nt - ' (eg) n+ 1B) Fiavre 9.5. Update of the current configuration for a given incremental displacement u, n(B) > R’. not used the condition J? = 1, which follows from the assumption of isochoric plastic flow. 9.3.2 The Return-Mapping Algorithm With the preceding developments in hand, we proceed to construct the return- mapping algorithm within the usual computational context which regards the problem essentially as strain-driven. 9.3.2.1 Database and configurational update. Let [f,, fn+1] be the time interval of interest. We assume that the following data is known at time f,: (en. Bi. On), Fn = Den) (9.3.8) Therefore, the Kirchhoff stress tensor 7, is also known through the hyperelastic relationships Tr = PoJnl + w dev[bs), Pn 03.9) Pn = Un), where we have enforced the isochoric constraint J?’ = 1 <=> J* = J. Now let un: pn(B) > RP (9.3.10) be a given incremental displacement field of the configuration ¢y,(B). Therefore the update of the configuration ¢p, (B) is immediately obtained simply by setting King = PreK) = ¥n(X) + tn [Yn(X)] , (9.3.11a) or in a more compact notation, as Pail = Pn Fn o Ps (93.116) The situation is illustrated in Figure 9.59.3, Integration Algorithm for Jy flow Theory 315 9.3.2.2 The trial elastic state, Now we consider a state which is obtained by “freezing” the evolution of plastic flow on [ty, fy.1]. Consequently, the intermediate configuration remains unchanged, ie., [cr cP, (0.3.12) OS On Premultiplying and postmultiplying (9.3.12) by F, ,1 and F7, , , respectively, where Fru = (Den) Jp}, yields, in view of (9.1.11) and definition (9.3.5), the relationship al for Pr = (nah) CE Gusta)” = foot [FoF | Srvibs Srv (0.3.13) Thus, with relationships (9.3.12) and (9.3.13) in hand, we define the trial elastic state by the equations TEL = Pritdnuid + Seth ital = pe devibs.#), Pnvt = U' Inet), (9.3.14) BP = fri Sr opel = On A schematic illustration of the trial elastic state is given in Figure 9.6. Note that the intermediate configuration remains unchanged in this trial-state phase of the algorithm. Remarks 9. 1. The relative deformation gradient f,,,1 is computed directly from the update formula (9.3.11) and definition (9.3.5) in terms of the incremental displacement field as follows. Since Frat = Denes = Dyn + [Ve,tn] Den = [14 Vs,tn] Fae (9.3.15) wiFy! = 1+ Vente, (93.16) from which we obtain the volume-preserving part asf. = (det [fni]) 7? Snsi-316 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models F, Set yA 7 oz XN fa mah) age Ont Ficure 9.6. The trial clastic state kinematic relationships. Note that fy: := 1+ Vajttn is given, 2. Expression (9.3.13) is consistent with the following definition of Bs 8! Bee = fest fey? th att where (9.3.17) FS Fy Pe with Fri i= Ja! Fy v1. A straightforward calculation verifies this result. 9.3.2.3 Discrete governing equations. Loading condition. The discrete governing equations are conveniently written as follows in terms of the trial elastic state defined above. First, by using (9.3.13) and the fact that plastic flow is isochoric, i¢., Jn.1 = J£,,, the discrete evolution equations (9.3.7) are expressed in the equivalent form fan = BE — F Ay 1B; tna. (9.3.19) Oy. = ay + yf FAY On the other hand, the hyperelastic constitutive model (9.2.6) evaluated at time Int Yields, Tot = Pntidnsil + Sn4t, Prev = Suet = MdeviBS :] (0.3.20) yee intl me = . nal Finally, the discrete version of the model is completed by appending the discrete version of the Kuhn—Tucker complementarity conditions (9.2.18) given by Avy 29, fFnty Met) $0, AVS Fatt, Msi) = 0. (9.3.21)9.3, Integration Algorithm for Jy flow Theory 317 As in the linear theory, the systematic exploitation of these unilateral constraint conditions produces the appropriate retum-mapping algorithm. Two alternative situations may arise. i, First consider the case for which 4) < 0, where 7 (ee) Then, the trial elastic state with Ay = 0 satisfies conditions (9.3.21). The remaining equations (9.3.19) and (9.3.20) also hold by construction, Thus, the (rial elastic step is the solution at time fy.1. ii. Alternatively, consider the situation for which pial > 0. It follows that 7," is nonadmissible and, therefore, cannot be the solution at fy41. ‘Accordingly, Tri % Ti and relationships (9.3.20) imply that b,, 4 86!!! Conse- quently from (9.3.19), we conclude that b¢,, # b=! only if Ay > 0. The preceding discussion shows that whether the point x, € y,(B) experiences loading or unloading during the step [t,, fy 1] can be concluded solely on the basis of the trial elastic state according to the conditions feat [ov + Kon] (9.3.22) si na [ £0 elastic step = Ay =0, feet (9.3.23) > 0 plastic step => Ay > 0 The algorithmic procedure is completed by characterizing the solution for Ay > 0 in terms of the trial step as follows. 9.3.2.4 The radial return algorithm. Assume that fi}! > 0 <=> Ay ¢ 0. Since tr[m,.] = 0, taking the trace in (9.3.19), u[be.,] = ufos ei") (9.3.24) Then substituting (9.3.24) in (9.3.19) and using the hyperelastic relationships (9.3.20) yields Snot =H devi 58) — Fu dy [5S] mys — 2yayw [one | tesa (9.3.25) where we have used definition (9.3.14)2 for s‘##|. The determination of Ay > 0 from (9.3.25) now follows the same procedure as in the infinitesimal theory. We SetSp41 = [Sn [n+ and rearrange terms in (9.3.25) to obtain eal pil [lsna-all + 2 dy Jrtnaer = lise eee sca vial Snel met = ota, 03.26) a= tunis]318 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models Then equation (9.3.26); implies (9.3.27) along with the requirement that [lsneall + 2247] = Use (9.3.28) On the other hand, since Ay > 0, we require that f (T..1, +1) = 0, and from (9.2.14), (9.3.19)2, (9.3.22), and (9.3.28), we obtain Isnsall — 3 [oy + Koga] = Isiah — 27d — yf (oy + Kotess) ist — 3 (oy + Kon) = Ay — EK (ans — en) trad inet — 2) Hence where 9.331) Equations (9.3.24), (9.3.27), and (9.3.31) completely determine the discrete gov- ering equations (9,3.19)-(9.3.20) which define the return-mapping algorithm, For the reader’s convenience, a detailed step-by-step implementation of the overall algorithmic procedure is given in BOX 9.1. Remarks 9.3.2. _ 1, The update of bs ., is obtained from (9.3.19) and (9.3.24) as B= Se hae pave (6,5) cet (9.3.32) nl Alternatively, we can employ the following equivalent expression. Solving the elastic constitutive equation for dev{d¢ ,,] and using (9.3.24), se (Gre)]a (0.3.33) ‘This is the update formula in BOX 9.1.BOX 9.1. Return-mapping Algorithm for Jz-Flow Theory. Isotropic Hardening. 1. Update the current configuration Pnti = Pn + ly © Pr (Configuration) Fav = 1+ Veqttn (relative deformation gradient) Fas Py (total deformation gradient) 2. Compute elastic predictor Jnsx = [defn] Snr Bo = fabhh 5) =p aev [951] 3. Check for plastic loading Se = wet — YF Kan + or) IF f%! < 0 THEN ni Set (spi; = (4, & EXIT ELSE GO TO 4, (Retum-mapping) ENDIF 4, The return-mapping algorithm Set: Thy hu (ie) Theat Sut / 2 Cc ite Ay ss compute YS Te KR nes sei /liseeill Return map: Snot = Suh — 2Ayn On) = Oy + FAY Addition of the elastic mean stress Inst = det [Fay] Pnvt =U! (Inst) Stress: Tat = Invi Prvil + Snot Mean stress: 6. Update of intermediate configuration Snyifte + Tp320 9. Phenomenological Plasticity Models 2. Note that the intermediate configuration is defined up to a rigid body rota- tion. In effect, we can compute V¢,, := ,/B5,; uniquely from bf... so that Fé, = Vo,,R¢.,, where R¢,, € SO(3) is an arbitrary rotation ten- sor. The arbitrariness in the rotation part of F* has no effect whatsoever ‘on the computational procedure outlined above, or on the formulation of the model. In this regard, recall that only the symmetric tensor ¢? is de- fined in the infinitesimal theory. The plastic spin w? also remains completely arbitrary. 3. The extension of the algorithm outlined above to nonlinear isotropic hardening is straightforward and follows along lines identical to the infinitesimal theory. Assume that (7, a) = Isl — y § [ov + k@)] (9.3.34) where k : R — Ris the nonlinear hardening function, Then the counterpart of the consistency equations (9.3.30) becomes Fay) += Iss — [For - [VFR + 2 Ay) + 2nay] 0 This expression furnishes a nonlinear equation for Ay which is easily solved by aniterative method. If the derivative k’(@) is easily computed in closed form, a Newton iteration of the form (9.3.35) yt) = ay — so Lar?) | f [av] where 5 © (0, 1] is the line-search parameter and 7’ [Ay] is given by (9.3.36) * Kn + Ay®) Fay) = 2 414 —_ . (0.3.37) ft often proves effective. If —K(a) is convex, often encountered in practice, the method is guaranteed to converge at a quadratic rate with 6 = 1. 4. The implementation of other types of hardening laws follows the procedure outlined in Section 9.3.1.1. In particular, this procedure applies to the kinematic hardening model outlined in Section 9.2.1.5. For further details see Simo [1986, 1988a,b]. 9.3.3 Exact Linearization of the Algorithm As in the linear theory, the algorithm summarized in BOX 9.1 is amenable to exact linearization leading to a closed-form expression for the consistent algorithmic tangent moduli in the finite-strain range. The linearization process is carried out9.4, Numerical Simulations 321 in closed form because of the hyperelastic nature of the stress response. This situation contrasts with the hypoelastic models considered in Chapter 8 for which a closed-form linearization is very difficult to obtain. Conceptually, the basic step involved in deriving the tangent moduli associ- ated with the algorithm in BOX 9.1 is essentially the same as in the general procedure discussed in Chapter 3 in the context of the infinitesimal theory. However, the actual details of the calculation are far more involved because of the nonlinear nature of the kinematic relationships in the finite-strain theory. Since no new insight is to be gained from this elaborate computation we sim- ply quote the final result, summarized for the reader's convenience in BOX 9.2; see Simo [1988a,b] for further details. For extensions to damage, see Simo and Ju 1989] BOX 9.2. Consistent Elastoplastic Moduli for the Radial Return Algorithm in BOX 9.1. 1. Spatial elasticity tensor C for hyperelastic model (9.2.6) C= (U'YI1@1-2IUT+E, C= 2Mfl- 5181) isin @1+1 80) 5 = pdev[b‘], n= s/s. k= pn} ub) 2. Scaling factors [k" = K for linear hardening] wk Bo + a 2p, b= oe spell 1 1s Bo al IAM i 1 ise w-[ gs - 3. Consistent (algorithmic) moduli qcial C3, = O88 — BCR — 278m @ m — 278s sym [n @ devin*]