| dc.contributor.author | A Lagzdiņš | |
| dc.contributor.author | V Tamužs | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-05-09T00:06:30Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-05-09T00:06:30Z | |
| dc.date.copyright | March, 2002 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2002 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0003-6900 | |
| dc.identifier.other | AMREAD-25802#166_1.pdf | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/126198 | |
| dc.description.abstract | First of all, here are some comments on the microplane model MP1. On the microplane level, the yield condition is given by the function (5.11) 1Display Formulaf(σ)=σD2+σL2+σM2−k2=0It should be stressed that, for obtaining a global yield condition from the local one, some global criterion independent of the chosen coordinate system must be used eg, Display Formulamaxn f(σ,n)=0or Display FormulaS+f(σ,n)ds(n)=c>0,where n is a normal to the unit sphere S, and S+ is the domain on S where Display Formulaf(σ)≥k2.Criterion (2) defines a surface (in the σ-space) of the first onset of global plasticity, criterion (3)—a surface of more extended plasticity. It is clear that, for k>0, the S+⊂S and S+ may never coincide with the full unit sphere. | |
| dc.publisher | The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) | |
| dc.title | Some comments on the paper “Microplane constitutive model and metal plasticity” (Brocca M and Bažant ZP, 2000, Appl Mech Rev53(10) 265–281) | |
| dc.type | Journal Paper | |
| dc.journal.volume | 55 | |
| dc.journal.issue | 2 | |
| dc.journal.title | Applied Mechanics Reviews | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1115/1.1448525 | |
| dc.journal.fristpage | 166 | |
| dc.journal.lastpage | 167 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 0003-6900 | |
| dc.keywords | Plasticity | |
| dc.keywords | Metals AND Constitutive equations | |
| dc.tree | Applied Mechanics Reviews:;2002:;volume( 055 ):;issue: 002 | |
| dc.contenttype | Fulltext | |