Issue 29
G. Gianbanco et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 29 (2014) 150-165; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.29.14
K E
h
/
where
i K is the stiffness matrix for interfaces, defined as
.
i
i
Making the following positions
4
T
T T T b b K S Φ C E CΦ S b b b
d
d
(41)
Φ S Φ S K Φ S Φ S
i
i
b b
i
i
i
b b
k
1
b
k
4
T T i i G S Φ Ψ S i
d
(42)
i
1
k
k
4
F Φ S Φ S K u m T p i i b b i
p
d
(43)
1
k
k
4
4
T T U S Ψ u
T T S Ψ D ε
T Q ε
d
d
(44)
m
i
i
m
i
i
m M
M
k
k
1
1
k
k
the (40) becomes T
0
T T U KU GR R G U U
(45)
m
m
m
m
m U and R , the governing equations of the UC are obtained, in the
Since Eq. (45) has to hold for any arbitrary
following matrix form:
m p m
T K G U F G 0 R U
(46)
In order to evaluate the integrals (41)-(44), the Gauss quadrature rule is adopted with nine sample points in the block domain and three sample points for each interface. Furthermore, it is assumed i i Ψ Φ . In order to be introduced in a step-by-step algorithm, the governing Eq. (46) need to be rewritten in a discrete formulation. A Newton-Raphson procedure is employed at the mesoscale to find the solution of the BVP for a single load step. Each iteration of the load step is divided in an elastic trial predictor stage and a plastic corrector stage.
Consistent tangent stiffness matrix evaluation In the time step , 1 n n t t
m U is assigned. The inverse form of equation
the increment of boundary displacements
system (46) reads
11 U B B F R B B U separable in the two expressions 12 21 22 m
p
m
11 m U B F B U 12 m p
(47)
21 m R B F B U (48) It is clear how nodal displacements and reactions are dependent on two contributes that can be assumed equal to an elastic part (function of m U ) and a plastic part (function of p F ). Recalling (13), (39), (44) and (48) it is simply obtained that 22 p
1
1
T
σ
Q B F
(49)
Q B Q ε
M
M
p
22
21
UC
UC
The macroscopic tangent stiffness matrix is defined as:
158
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker