Work conjugacy error in commercial finite-element codes: its magnitude and how to compensate for it

Most commercial finite-element programs use the Jaumann (or co-rotational) rate of Cauchy stress in their incremental (Riks) updated Lagrangian loading procedure. This rate was shown long ago not to be work-conjugate with the Hencky (logarithmic) finite strain tensor used in these programs, nor with any other finite strain tensor. The lack of work-conjugacy has been either overlooked or believed to cause only negligible errors. Presented are examples of indentation of a naval-type sandwich plate with a polymeric foam core, in which the error can reach 28.8 per cent in the load and 15.3 per cent in the work of load (relative to uncorrected results). Generally, similar errors must be expected for all highly compressible materials, such as metallic and ceramic foams, honeycomb, loess, silt, organic soils, pumice, tuff, osteoporotic bone, light wood, carton and various biological tissues. It is shown that a previously derived equation relating the tangential moduli tensors associated with the Jaumann rates of Cauchy and Kirchhoff stresses can be used in the user’s material subroutine of a black-box commercial program to cancel the error due to the lack of work-conjugacy and make the program perform exactly as if the Jaumann rate of Kirchhoff stress, which is work-conjugate, were used.

[1]  Zdenek P. Bazant,et al.  A correlation study of formulations of incremental deformation and stability of continuous bodies , 1971 .

[2]  F. M. Shuaeib,et al.  Indentation failure of composite sandwich beams , 1997 .

[3]  Z. Bažant,et al.  Which Formulation Allows Using a Constant Shear Modulus for Small-Strain Buckling of Soft-Core Sandwich Structures? , 2005 .

[4]  Wing Kam Liu,et al.  Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures , 2000 .

[5]  J. Rodriguez,et al.  Problem (2) , 1994 .

[6]  Z. Bažant,et al.  Stability and finite strain of homogenized structures soft in shear: Sandwich or fiber composites, and layered bodies , 2006 .

[7]  Z. Bažant,et al.  Stability of Structures: Elastic, Inelastic, Fracture, and Damage Theories , 1993 .

[8]  Anthony M. Waas,et al.  2D elastic analysis of the sandwich panel buckling problem: benchmark solutions and accurate finite element formulations , 2010 .

[9]  H. Hibbitt,et al.  A finite element formulation for problems of large strain and large displacement , 1970 .

[10]  N. Fleck,et al.  Isotropic constitutive models for metallic foams , 2000 .

[11]  A. Waas,et al.  Errors Caused by Non-Work- Conjugate Stress and Strain Measures and Necessary Corrections in Finite Element Programs , 2010 .

[12]  Isaac M Daniel,et al.  Microplane model for stiff foams and finite element analysis of sandwich failure by core indentation , 2001 .

[13]  Vikram Deshpande,et al.  A constitutive model for transversely isotropic foams, and its application to the indentation of balsa wood , 2005 .

[14]  K. Bathe Finite Element Procedures , 1995 .

[15]  R. Ogden Non-Linear Elastic Deformations , 1984 .