Constitutive Modeling of Frictional

Materials
CE-637A
Arghya Das
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
Email: arghya@iitk.ac.in
Modelling Cyclic Response of Soil
(Kinematic Hardening)
Limitations of Isotropic Hardening:

( ) ( )
¢ - d ( Yl ) = 0
Y s ij¢ ,Y l = Y s ij¢ - s 0ij

Unable to produce the hysteretic response and cannot predict the pore pressure
build-up during undrained cyclic shear loading.
Advantages of Kinematic Hardening:

Bauschinger effect

( ) ( )
¢ ( Yl ) - d = 0
Y s ij¢ ,Y l = Y s ij¢ - s 0ij
1D Example: Kinematic Hardening
𝜎 𝜎𝑌2
𝐸

𝜎𝑌1 𝜎𝑌2 𝜎𝑌1

(1) (2)
𝐸
𝐴1 𝐴2

𝜀
𝑃
(2)
𝜎 2𝜎𝑌1
𝐸
𝐸
(1)
𝐸

2𝜎𝑌2
𝜎𝑌1 𝜀 𝐸
𝐸 𝜎𝑌2
𝐸
 σ b
Kinematic vs. Isotropic Hardening: a
e
• Kinematic hardening
• Elastic range remains constant
• Center of the elastic region moves o ε
parallel to the work hardening line
c
• Use the center of elastic domain d
as an evolution variable
σ
• Isotropic hardening e
b
• Elastic range (yield stress) increases a
proportional to plastic strain h
• The yield stress for the reversed loading o ε
is equal to the previous yield stress h
c
• Use plastic strain as an evolution
variable d
 σ
Strain hardening slope, Et
Plastic Modulus or Hardening Modulus:
• Strain increment   e  p
Δσ
• Stress increment   Ee σY
E
• Plastic modulus 
H Δεe Δεp
p
• Relation between moduli εY ε
Δε

  Ee  Hp  Et  Et
H
Dee Dep
   1 1 1
    
Et E H Et E H
 f   Ψ  g
T T

EEt H     p
H EH  E   Ψ   ε  σ
Et   E1 
E  Et EH  E  H 
1  f 
T

   dσ
H  σ 
 1D Loading Example: Isotropic vs. Kinematic Hardening
𝐸 = 200GPa, 𝐻 = 25GPa, 𝜎𝑦0 = 250MPa
𝜎 𝑛 = 150MPa, 𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 0.0001, ∆𝜀= 0.002

𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑛 + 𝐸∆𝜀 = 550 MPa
𝜎 𝜎 𝑛+1 ?
𝜎𝑦0 Isotropic Hardening
𝐸 𝜎𝑦𝑛 = 𝜎𝑦0 + 𝐻𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 252.5 MPa
𝐸
𝜎𝑛 Isotropic Yielding
𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝜎𝑦𝑛
𝜀𝑝𝑛 ∆𝜀 𝜀 = 297.5 > 0
 1D Loading Example: Isotropic vs. Kinematic Hardening
𝐸 = 200GPa, 𝐻 = 25GPa, 𝜎𝑦0 = 250MPa
𝜎 𝑛 = 150MPa, 𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 0.0001, ∆𝜀= 0.002

𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑛 + 𝐸∆𝜀 = 550 MPa
𝜎 𝜎 𝑛+1 ?
𝜎𝑦0 Kinematic Hardening
𝐸 𝜎𝑦𝑛 = 𝜎𝑦0 = 250 MPa
𝐸
𝜎𝑛 𝛼𝑦𝑛 = 𝛼𝑦0 + 𝐻𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 2.5 MPa
Kinematic Yielding
𝜀𝑝𝑛 ∆𝜀 𝜀 𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝛼𝑦𝑛 − 𝜎𝑦𝑛
= 297.5 > 0
 1D Loading Example: Isotropic vs. Kinematic Hardening
Plastic update (implicit): 𝜕𝑔
∆𝜀𝑝 = Δ𝜆
𝜕𝝈
𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑘 𝜕𝑔
∆𝜀𝑝 = = 1.322 × 10−3 =
𝜕𝑓 𝒆 𝜕𝑔 𝜕𝑓 𝜕𝒽 𝜕𝑔 𝜕𝝈
𝐸+𝐻 𝑫 −
𝜕𝝈 𝜕𝝈 𝜕𝒽 𝜕𝜺𝒑 𝜕𝝈

𝜎 𝑛+1 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − sign 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐸∆𝜀𝑝 = 285.6 MPa

Isotropic Hardening 𝜎𝑦𝑛+1 = 𝜎𝑦𝑛 + sign 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐻∆𝜀𝑝

= 285.8 MPa

Kinematic Hardening 𝛼𝑦𝑛+1 = 𝛼𝑦𝑛 + sign 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝛼𝑦𝑛 𝐻∆𝜀𝑝

= 35.8 MPa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_function
 1D Unloading Example: Isotropic vs. Kinematic Hardening
𝐸 = 200GPa, 𝐻 = 25GPa, 𝜎𝑦0 = 250MPa
𝜎 𝑛 = 150MPa, 𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 0.0001, ∆𝜀 = −0.002

𝜎
𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑛 + 𝐸∆𝜀 = −250 MPa
𝜎𝑦0
Isotropic Hardening
𝐸
𝐸
𝜎𝑦𝑛 = 𝜎𝑦0 + 𝐻𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 252.5 MPa
𝜎𝑛 Isotropic Yielding
𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝜎𝑦𝑛
𝜀𝑝𝑛 𝜀 = −2.5 < 0

𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 ∆𝜀
Hence elastic 𝜎 𝑛+1 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
 1D Unloading Example: Isotropic vs. Kinematic Hardening
𝐸 = 200GPa, 𝐻 = 25GPa, 𝜎𝑦0 = 250MPa
𝜎 𝑛 = 150MPa, 𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 0.0001, ∆𝜀 = −0.002

𝜎 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑛 + 𝐸∆𝜀 = −250 MPa

𝜎𝑦0
Kinematic Hardening
𝐸
𝜎𝑦𝑛 = 𝜎𝑦0 = 250 MPa
𝐸
𝜎𝑛 𝛼𝑦𝑛 = 𝛼𝑦0 + 𝐻𝜀𝑝𝑛 = 2.5 MPa
𝛼𝑦𝑛+1
Kinematic Yielding
𝜀𝑝𝑛 𝜀 𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝛼𝑦𝑛 − 𝜎𝑦𝑛
𝜎 𝑛+1
∆𝜀 = 2.5 > 0
𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
1D Loading Example: Isotropic vs. Kinematic Hardening
Plastic update (implicit): Kinematic Hardening

𝑓 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙
∆𝜀𝑝 = = 1.111 × 10−5
𝐸+𝐻

𝜎 𝑛+1 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − sign 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐸∆𝜀𝑝 = −247.78 MPa

𝛼𝑦𝑛+1 = 𝛼𝑦𝑛 + sign 𝜎 𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 − 𝛼𝑦𝑛 𝐻∆𝜀𝑝 = 2.22 MPa