COMMUNICATIONS IN NUMERICAL METHODS IN ENGINEERING, Vol. 13, 963-976 (1997) A FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR PLANE STRESS PROBLEMS WITH LARGE ELASTIC AND PLASTIC DEFORMATIONS E. KIRCHNER,! ST. REESE? AND P. WRIGGERS* "Fachgebiet fr Maschinenelemente und Maschinenakustik, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Magdolnensrase , 164259 Darna. Germany chanik IV, Tectnische Hochschule Darmstadt, Hockscudsrase 1.64289 Darmstad, Gt sttut fr many SUMMARY A two-dimensional finite element method is developed for large deformation plasticity. Principal axes fare used for the description of the material behaviour, and the use of principal logarithmic stretches leads to exact formulae for finite deformation problems with large elastic and plastic strains, An ficient return mapping algorithm and the corresponding consistent tangent are derived and applied to plane sires problems. Two examples show the performance of the proposed formulation, © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Commun, Numer, Meth. Engng, 13, 963-976 (1997) No. of Figures: $ No. of Tables: No. of References: 12 ey Wonos plane stes; finite stress; lite strain plasticity 1. INTRODUCTION Most engineering materials show inelastic behaviour when being submitted to large stresses. The corresponding deformations often become very large, so that geometrically non-linear analysis is required. Strength computations for such devices are mostly based on simplifying assumptions to reduce the complexity of the problem; the most common approach to large deformation is @ non-linear finite element computation. Algorithms for the solution of large strain plasticity problems have been discussed extensively in recent literature, ¢.g. Simo,' Hopperstad? and Wriggers et al.> The assumptions made in this paper concern the problem dimension and the constitutive model. Firstly, the discussion is restricted to the plane stress case, reducing the dimension of the problem from 3 to 2. A similar approach is due to Simo and Taylor,* which is restricted to the geometrically linear regime extending the algorithms by Simo and Taylor’ for elastoplasticity to the plane stress case Secondly, constitutive modelling is performed in the principal axis, as done by Reese,* Simo and Taylor’ and Wriggers er al.° leading to exact expressions for the stress update algorithm and corresponding tangent operators for non-linear plane stress applications. * Correspondence to: P. Wriggers, Institut ie Mechanik IV, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Hochschulstrasse 1, 64259 Darmstadt, Germany CCC 1069-8299/97/120963-14$17-50 Received 30 September 1996 © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.964 E_ KIRCHNER, ST. REESE AND P. WRIGGERS This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 the constitutive equations are summarized briefly. Section 3 covers the description of the developed algorithm for plane stress elasto- plasticity being restricted to the stress update algorithm and its consistent tangent; the finite element implementation is omitted since it is standard. Finally, in Section 4 two examples illustrate the abilities of the presented approach, followed by a short conclusion. 2. CONTINUUM MECHANICAL BACKGROUND In this Chapter the plane stress assumption and the necessary implications are discussed Principal axes are used for the description of the material behaviour, and the constitutive laws for the elastic and plastic deformations are reviewed briefly 2.1. Plane stress assumption Within the framework of this paper, the discussion is focused on the treatment of the classical plane stress assumption 0 wo formulated in terms of the Kirchhoff stress tensor t= PE", P is the first Piola-Kirchhoff stress and F is the deformation gradient. According to the constraint ry; =0, the work conjugate left Cauchy-Green strain 63, does not vanish; it has to be determined in such a way that (1) is satisfied. For lastoplasticity the total strain b,, remains undetermined; the elastic part b§, follows then from the plane stress condition. The shear stresses r,, sind 35 vanish by the assumption of a two-dimensional problem with 9/3 The following form of the deformation g adient F is appropriate here: ay ay 0 av ay ay ay & 2) a c a 0 0 az. ‘The entry Fy, is determined iteratively from 133 =O according to the elastic model; see Section 2.3, For the quadratic stored energy function, F,, can be calculated explicitly. By F from (2) the left Cauchy-Green tensor b=FF" and its spectral decomposition (6) with principal values 22, The eigenvectors associated with the principal values 2? are then by + bap by = (Fy) ) =(cos 9 sind 0)", oO, m=o@ 0 Ht @ = (-sin 8 cos COMMUN. NUMER. METH. ENGNG, VOL. 1, 961-995 (1997 ©1997 John Wiley & Sons, Lid965 FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR PLANE STRESS PROBLEMS, referred to a Cartesian frame in the instantaneous configuration, The angle 9 denoting the orientation of the principal system is 9 = $ tan” ![2h,3/(by, — by)) It is obvious by (3) that 7} is not necessarily the largest eigenvalue of b 2.2. Description in the principal axis For simplicity the constitutive modelling is performed in the principal axis.'7 A Lagrangian rank-2 tensor S, eg. the second Piola—Kirchhoff stress, has a polar representation using the principal values ¢,, i=1, 2, 3, and principal axis N,, If hyperelasticity is assumed for the elastic deformations, then the principal values S, of the second Piola-Kirchhoff tensor § follow from a polyconvex strain energy function HV as aw _ aw 3E 7B © en tensors C= FIP and b; \(C — 1). The principal Kirchhoff i, of S, formulated in terms of the ‘The Zy are the square roots ofthe principal values ofthe Ci the Fy are eigenvalues of the Green-Ligrange tensor E stress fi, Follow by push-forward ofthe principal values‘ cigenvalues 2, ofthe deformation gradient F by p, = 23S, = 4,00/2, Concerning the orientation ofthe different principal systems, it follows from the isotropy ofthe problem that the left Cauchy-Green tensor C and the Kirchhoff stresses ¢ possess the same Spatial principal axis i 1 t= Dimon, © Since logarithmic stretches are introduced in Section 2.4 to describe the plastically deformed configurations, itis helpful to have the following results available. With e,=In 4, it follows by the chain rule that awa) _ aiey FD ae holds, The argument of the strain energy function HY changes in accordance with the form of the stretches adopted; see Section 2.3.2 The stress vector # = (ty py Ty tial" in Cartesian co-ordinates follows by a relation used by Gruttmann and Taylos® and Reese:* a=Rp o ©1997 John Wiley & Sons Li COMMUN. NUMER, METH ENGNG, VOL. 13, 953-976 1987)