Bresler–Pister yield criterion: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
(19 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Continuum mechanics|cTopic=[[Solid mechanics]]}} |
|||
The |
The '''Bresler–Pister yield criterion'''<ref>Bresler, B. and Pister, K.S., (1985), ''Strength of concrete under combined stresses'', ACI Journal, vol. 551, no. 9, pp. 321–345.</ref> is a function that was originally devised to predict the strength of [[concrete]] under multiaxial stress states. This yield criterion is an extension of the [[Drucker–Prager yield criterion]] and can be expressed on terms of the stress invariants as |
||
:<math> |
:<math> |
||
\sqrt{J_2} = A + B~I_1 + C~I_1^2 |
\sqrt{J_2} = A + B~I_1 + C~I_1^2 |
||
Line 5: | Line 6: | ||
where <math>I_1</math> is the first invariant of the Cauchy stress, <math>J_2</math> is the second invariant of the deviatoric part of the Cauchy stress, and <math>A, B, C</math> are material constants. |
where <math>I_1</math> is the first invariant of the Cauchy stress, <math>J_2</math> is the second invariant of the deviatoric part of the Cauchy stress, and <math>A, B, C</math> are material constants. |
||
Yield criteria of this form have also been used for [[polypropylene]] |
Yield criteria of this form have also been used for [[polypropylene]]<ref>Pae, K. D., (1977), ''The macroscopic yield behavior of polymers in multiaxial stress fields'', Journal of Materials Science, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1209-1214.</ref> and [[foam|polymeric foams]].<ref>Kim, Y. and Kang, S., (2003), ''Development of experimental method to characterize pressure-dependent yield criteria for polymeric foams.'' Polymer Testing, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 197-202.</ref> |
||
The parameters <math>A,B,C</math> have to be chosen with care for reasonably shaped [[ |
The parameters <math>A,B,C</math> have to be chosen with care for reasonably shaped [[yield surface]]s. If <math>\sigma_c</math> is the yield stress in uniaxial compression, <math>\sigma_t</math> is the yield stress in uniaxial tension, and <math>\sigma_b</math> is the yield stress in biaxial compression, the parameters can be expressed as |
||
:<math> |
:<math> |
||
\begin{align} |
\begin{align} |
||
Line 14: | Line 15: | ||
C = & \left(\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}(\sigma_t+\sigma_c)}\right) |
C = & \left(\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}(\sigma_t+\sigma_c)}\right) |
||
\left(\cfrac{\sigma_b(3\sigma_t-\sigma_c) -2\sigma_c\sigma_t}{4\sigma_b^2 + 2\sigma_b(\sigma_t-\sigma_c) - \sigma_c\sigma_t} \right) \\ |
\left(\cfrac{\sigma_b(3\sigma_t-\sigma_c) -2\sigma_c\sigma_t}{4\sigma_b^2 + 2\sigma_b(\sigma_t-\sigma_c) - \sigma_c\sigma_t} \right) \\ |
||
A = & \cfrac{\sigma_c}{\sqrt{3}} + |
A = & \cfrac{\sigma_c}{\sqrt{3}} + B\sigma_c -C\sigma_c^2 |
||
\end{align} |
\end{align} |
||
</math> |
</math> |
||
Line 21: | Line 22: | ||
!Derivation of expressions for parameters A, B, C |
!Derivation of expressions for parameters A, B, C |
||
|- |
|- |
||
|The |
|The Bresler–Pister yield criterion in terms of the principal stresses <math>\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3</math> is |
||
:<math> |
:<math> |
||
\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left[(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2+(\sigma_2-\sigma_3)^2+(\sigma_3-\sigma_1)^2\right]^{1/2} - A - B~(\sigma_1+\sigma_2+\sigma_3) - C~(\sigma_1+\sigma_2+\sigma_3)^2 = 0~. |
\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left[(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)^2+(\sigma_2-\sigma_3)^2+(\sigma_3-\sigma_1)^2\right]^{1/2} - A - B~(\sigma_1+\sigma_2+\sigma_3) - C~(\sigma_1+\sigma_2+\sigma_3)^2 = 0~. |
||
Line 37: | Line 38: | ||
\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~\sigma_b - A + 2B\sigma_b - 4C\sigma_b^2 = 0 ~. |
\cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~\sigma_b - A + 2B\sigma_b - 4C\sigma_b^2 = 0 ~. |
||
</math> |
</math> |
||
Solving these three equations for <math>A,B,C</math> gives us |
Solving these three equations for <math>A,B,C</math> (using Maple) gives us |
||
:<math> |
|||
\begin{align} |
|||
A := & \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~\cfrac{\sigma_c\sigma_t\sigma_b(\sigma_t+8\sigma_b-3\sigma_c)} {(\sigma_c+\sigma_t)(2\sigma_b-\sigma_c)(2\sigma_b+\sigma_t)} \\ |
|||
B := & \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~\cfrac{(\sigma_c-\sigma_t)(\sigma_b\sigma_c+\sigma_b\sigma_t-\sigma_c\sigma_t-4\sigma_b^2)}{(\sigma_c+\sigma_t)(2\sigma_b-\sigma_c)(2\sigma_b+\sigma_t)} \\ |
|||
C := & \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~\cfrac{3\sigma_b\sigma_t-\sigma_b\sigma_c-2\sigma_c\sigma_t}{(\sigma_c+\sigma_t)(2\sigma_b-\sigma_c)(2\sigma_b+\sigma_t)} |
|||
\end{align} |
|||
</math> |
|||
|} |
|||
{| border="0" |
|||
|- |
|||
| valign="bottom"| |
|||
[[Image:Bresler Pister Yield Surface 3Da.png|240px|none|thumb|Figure 1: View of the three-parameter Bresler–Pister yield surface in 3D space of principal stresses for <math>\sigma_c=1, \sigma_t=0.3, \sigma_b=1.7</math>]] |
|||
| valign="bottom"| |
|||
[[Image:Bresler Pister Yield Surface 3Db.png|260px|none|thumb|Figure 2: The three-parameter Bresler–Pister yield surface in the <math>\pi</math>-plane for <math>\sigma_c=1, \sigma_t=0.3, \sigma_b=1.7</math>]] |
|||
| valign="bottom"| |
|||
[[Image:Bresler Pister Yield Surface sig1sig2.png|240px|none|thumb|Figure 3: Trace of the three-parameter Bresler–Pister yield surface in the <math>\sigma_1-\sigma_2</math>-plane for <math>\sigma_c=1, \sigma_t=0.3, \sigma_b=1.7</math>]] |
|||
|- |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
== Alternative forms of the Bresler-Pister yield criterion == |
== Alternative forms of the Bresler-Pister yield criterion == |
||
In terms of the equivalent stress (<math>\sigma_e</math>) and the mean stress (<math>\sigma_m</math>), the |
In terms of the equivalent stress (<math>\sigma_e</math>) and the mean stress (<math>\sigma_m</math>), the Bresler–Pister yield criterion can be written as |
||
:<math> |
:<math> |
||
\sigma_e = a + b~\sigma_m + c~\sigma_m^2 ~;~~ \sigma_e = \sqrt{3J_2} ~,~~ \sigma_m = I_1/3 ~. |
\sigma_e = a + b~\sigma_m + c~\sigma_m^2 ~;~~ \sigma_e = \sqrt{3J_2} ~,~~ \sigma_m = I_1/3 ~. |
||
</math> |
</math> |
||
The Etse-Willam<ref>Etse, G. and Willam, K., (1994), |
The Etse-Willam<ref>Etse, G. and Willam, K., (1994), ''Fracture energy formulation for inelastic behavior of plain concrete'', Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol. 120, no. 9, pp. 1983-2011.</ref> form of the Bresler–Pister yield criterion for concrete can be expressed as |
||
:<math> |
:<math> |
||
\sqrt{J_2} = \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~I_1 - \cfrac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}~\left(\cfrac{\sigma_t}{\sigma_c^2-\sigma_t^2}\right)~I_1^2 |
\sqrt{J_2} = \cfrac{1}{\sqrt{3}}~I_1 - \cfrac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}~\left(\cfrac{\sigma_t}{\sigma_c^2-\sigma_t^2}\right)~I_1^2 |
||
Line 52: | Line 70: | ||
where <math>\sigma_c</math> is the yield stress in uniaxial compression and <math>\sigma_t</math> is the yield stress in uniaxial tension. |
where <math>\sigma_c</math> is the yield stress in uniaxial compression and <math>\sigma_t</math> is the yield stress in uniaxial tension. |
||
The GAZT yield criterion<ref>Gibson, L. J., Ashby, M. F., Zhang, J., and Triantafillou, T. C. (1989). |
The [[Material failure theory|GAZT yield criterion]]<ref>Gibson, L. J., [[M. F. Ashby|Ashby, M. F.]], Zhang, J., and Triantafillou, T. C. (1989). ''Failure surfaces for cellular materials under multiaxial loads. I. Modelling.'' International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 635–663.</ref> for plastic collapse of foams also has a form similar to the Bresler–Pister yield criterion and can be expressed as |
||
:<math> |
:<math> |
||
\sqrt{J_2} = \begin{cases} |
\sqrt{J_2} = \begin{cases} |
||
Line 64: | Line 82: | ||
<references/> |
<references/> |
||
== See also == |
|||
⚫ | |||
*[[Yield surface]] |
|||
*[[Yield (engineering)]] |
|||
*[[Plasticity (physics)]] |
|||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Bresler Pister Yield Criterion}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
[[Category:Solid mechanics]] |
[[Category:Solid mechanics]] |
||
[[Category:Yield criteria]] |
Latest revision as of 11:36, 28 August 2023
Part of a series on |
Continuum mechanics |
---|
The Bresler–Pister yield criterion[1] is a function that was originally devised to predict the strength of concrete under multiaxial stress states. This yield criterion is an extension of the Drucker–Prager yield criterion and can be expressed on terms of the stress invariants as
where is the first invariant of the Cauchy stress, is the second invariant of the deviatoric part of the Cauchy stress, and are material constants.
Yield criteria of this form have also been used for polypropylene[2] and polymeric foams.[3]
The parameters have to be chosen with care for reasonably shaped yield surfaces. If is the yield stress in uniaxial compression, is the yield stress in uniaxial tension, and is the yield stress in biaxial compression, the parameters can be expressed as
Derivation of expressions for parameters A, B, C The Bresler–Pister yield criterion in terms of the principal stresses is If is the yield stress in uniaxial tension, then
If is the yield stress in uniaxial compression, then
If is the yield stress in equibiaxial compression, then
Solving these three equations for (using Maple) gives us
Alternative forms of the Bresler-Pister yield criterion
[edit]In terms of the equivalent stress () and the mean stress (), the Bresler–Pister yield criterion can be written as
The Etse-Willam[4] form of the Bresler–Pister yield criterion for concrete can be expressed as
where is the yield stress in uniaxial compression and is the yield stress in uniaxial tension.
The GAZT yield criterion[5] for plastic collapse of foams also has a form similar to the Bresler–Pister yield criterion and can be expressed as
where is the density of the foam and is the density of the matrix material.
References
[edit]- ^ Bresler, B. and Pister, K.S., (1985), Strength of concrete under combined stresses, ACI Journal, vol. 551, no. 9, pp. 321–345.
- ^ Pae, K. D., (1977), The macroscopic yield behavior of polymers in multiaxial stress fields, Journal of Materials Science, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1209-1214.
- ^ Kim, Y. and Kang, S., (2003), Development of experimental method to characterize pressure-dependent yield criteria for polymeric foams. Polymer Testing, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 197-202.
- ^ Etse, G. and Willam, K., (1994), Fracture energy formulation for inelastic behavior of plain concrete, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol. 120, no. 9, pp. 1983-2011.
- ^ Gibson, L. J., Ashby, M. F., Zhang, J., and Triantafillou, T. C. (1989). Failure surfaces for cellular materials under multiaxial loads. I. Modelling. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 635–663.