Premium
Comment on the postulate of three plane strain mechanisms
Author(s) -
Gutierrez Marte,
Lacasse Suzanne
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
international journal for numerical and analytical methods in geomechanics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.419
H-Index - 91
eISSN - 1096-9853
pISSN - 0363-9061
DOI - 10.1002/nag.1610151104
Subject(s) - principal stress , principal (computer security) , plane stress , stress space , principal axis theorem , rotation (mathematics) , plane (geometry) , stress (linguistics) , constitutive equation , space (punctuation) , mathematics , mathematical analysis , classical mechanics , geometry , structural engineering , physics , computer science , engineering , cauchy stress tensor , finite element method , philosophy , linguistics , operating system
This note discusses the inconsistencies that are inherent in the postulate of three plane strain mechanisms. It is shown that this postulate violates the principle of invariance and one obtains different results depending on the choice of the reference axes. If formulated in the principal stress space, this postulate requires that the principal stress and principal plastic strain increment directions be coaxial. Constitutive models based on this postulate cannot be used for general loading situations involving principal stress rotation where significant non‐coaxiality is obtained.