A

GENERAL

THEORY

STABILITY

IN

of

boulldnr~-\XlW

the mrrcnt

partly
proble1n.

shape

pIastit
At

UNIQUENESS

ELASTIC-PLASTIC

1.
JJ111:theory

OF

SCOl%

CJlr

_iNl)

SOLIDS

I.\r%l:

is c~spc~ially c~tlc*crnc~l with the hIlowing

yencric~ stage in a proccs5 of cluasi-stntic distortion

solitls
a

of the body alld the internal clistribution

of strms

arc* suIqxMx1

together with the &sting

state of hardening
Ihc illrremcntal changes in all t hcsc variables
aud mechanicA properties gcncrally.
have now to 11e calculated
for a further inlinitcsimal
variation of the surface
7Vhcn the total strain remains small, :lJld
loads and geometrical
constraints.
to Iin\-e bcch

detcrminecl

already,

the positional
changes and rotatiotw of material clcments are neglected,
the
bol~~~t~a.r~-~.al~~e
probfcm aiways has a. unique solution when the ~vorkl~~~r~leIlingis
~r~oIlot(~~~icand the yield function and plastic potenti~~l are idcnt,icat (XELAS
I!>38 ; a somewhat more rigorous and general proof can be found iu HILL I!%o,
pp. 53-G).
However,

the

really

typical

plastic* problems

involve

changes

in geometry

that cannot be disregarded, and here the question of uniqueness has remained
solids
open until very recently, when :ni answer was given for rigid-plastic
(HILL 195Sa). Broadly speaking, it is found that a unique solution is certain
only when the rate of hardening exceeds a determinable critical \;Llue, depending
on the particular situation.
Tn the present paper a similar result is proved for
an extensive class of elastic-plastic
solids, includin, a metals, with mechanical
properties

wider in important respects than those usually contemplated.

350xsolution, when it is unique, is characterized by an cxtremum principle,
analogous to that for rigicl-plastic
solids (HILL 195Sb).

over,

the

336

A general theory

of uniqueness and stability in elastic-plastic solids

237

In elastic solids the problem of instability is closely related to that of uniqueness

(HILL 1957~) ; in plastic solids the connexion is looser, but still significant.
For
this reason we also investigate
most general
unsatisfactory

the question

of stability

here, and treat it from the

standpoint,
namely via the energy criterion.
Previous work is
in that either the merhanical properties, the field equations. or the

boundary
conditions,
are often not, properly formulated
for a situation whcrc
rotations of material elements are large compared with the strains. Furthermore,
the occurrence of instability
existence of infinitesimally
unjustified

has invariably
near positions

been taken as synonymous

of equilibrium ; this may

when the system is non-1inea.r or non-conservative.

with the
be quite

For these reasons

alone it is hardly surprising that thtoretical predictions of the onset of instability

should often have disagreed markedly with each other and with experiment.
It is not, however,

the present

intention

to review a confused

literature

nor to

attempt any correlation with experiment but to make a fresh start and establish
a broad basic theory free at least from the objections mcntioncd.

2.
The typical

traction

R4srs FOR Amr~Ysrs

boundary-condition

in the Ioad rector on an infinitesimal

changes in its area and orientation.
process of deformation

OF STRESS

considered

surface element

here is that
is assigned,

the change

irrespective

of

Thus, at any stage t during a quasi-static

there is given. not the rate of change of the true traction.

but the rate of change of the nominal traction based on the configuration
at
that instant. To formulate this boundary condition we introduce the unsymmetrical

nominal

stress tensor

szj (t) associated

with

certain

fixed

rectangular

axes.

At any stage t + St subsequent to t, (sij + SSij) AS is the jth component of the

force on the plane element which at t was perpendicular
to the ith axis and of
infinitesimal area AS. Correspondingly,
the force at t + St on a plane area whose
vectorial area was li dS at t has components ( Fi -+ 6Fj) dS where

Fj = 1i sij,
Fi is the nominal traction
condition is then that

SFi := li Ss,.

based on the configuration

at t.

pj = 1; i,
is prescribed.
In equilibrium

and in the absence of body

where x, marks the position

equilibrium

are satisfied

of elements

through

The boundary
(1)

forces.

at stage

the association

stress tensor aijo referred to the same axes.

following the same element,

t. The angular equations of

of sii with the symmetric true

If buO denotes

its rate of change

where vi is the velocity.

This is an immediate specialization
of Murnaghans
well-known formula connecting
the true and nominal stress tensors.

288
Now

R. Hm.

the material

in terms

prop&es

of the t,ruc stress

found by csl~~rirrtent arc git-en,

tensor

with the element, and so having

tensors it is easily shown that

oii ~sw&t~d

spin & furl

v.

in

tht

with rectangular
I+om

first instanw.
axes

the transformation

rotating
ruk

for

where

In an clement
pllfrly
lo~&ti

whose response

t,o any further

il~finitrsimal

c~hange of stress

is

clastir (i.e. an clement. that has cithcr ncv?r yirldcd or is now fX1.H Iy 1111after being plastir). thr isothermal relatioiks l&wren stress-rate
and stzailt-

rate arc taken

to be l~c~ln~~ell~(~usand linear,

ant1 arc writtrtl

as

A general

theory

of uniqueness and stability

recoverable

strain is finite,

subsequent

analysis*.

For a plast,ic element

and indeed

the simplest

=K(E

where cp is the plast,ic part of the strain-rate,

only on strain-history.
Suppose that
EP _

(-I [n (& + Bo)] n

K in thr

is
-

EP)

(7)

and K is a symmetric
when

2.79

solids

there is no need so to restrict

hypothesis

ir +&J

in elastic-plastic

matrix depending

n (i + 80) > 0

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GO

where h is a positive scalar measure of the current rate of workhardening

and
The direction of the plastic strain-rate
depends on cr as well as t,he strain-history.
is specified by the unit vector n, which also depends on c and strain-history
;

n is stipulated

to be deviatoric so that there is no permanent volume

Since B is directly expressible in terms of stress-rate through t,he elastic

change.
moduli,

the equation
n (i + 6~) = 0
cffertively defines those stress-rate vectors that are tangential
a.t the current stress point, and thereby t.he surface clement.

to the yield surface

This does not have

n as its normal and so yielding is affected by the hydrostatic

part of the true
stress. For present purposes no restrictions need be placbed on the shape of the
surface, and in particular we do not make the customary assumption of convexity.
Note that, in view of the definition
requirement that it is satisfied
together with the stress state.
To invert

the relations

of ir, equation

identically

(8) conforms

by a rigid-body

(7), with (s), wvc first remark

((1 + h-l nKn)

to the minimum

spin of the element

that

when

n(ir-+Off)> 0

nh'c= n(& + Bo).

1
provided

1 im17-l nKn > 0.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <o

This inequality

we satisfy

n ,fortiorifor any h > 0

by requiring
nKn

> 0 in a plastic

element.

(9)

That is, the K quadratic form is positive for devintoric vect,ors ; this has the interpretation that a strain-rate in direction n constitutes 1oad;ng. Then, in a plastic
element,

,-+~u=~E-

nKc
____~_

I
i

If the rate of hardening

Ep =

Y > 0,

by

when

n (15 +

Bu)

0
(8)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <0

unreal materials.

more easily for some special

material.

. . . . . . . . . . . < 0.

I 0

*It is of more than acadrmic

also to some

nKE>O
(10)

is zero (8) is replaced

where

(yn.

when

(nh'nd h)lin

interest

that the eventual

For it can happen

kind of unreal material

uniqueness

theorem

that a boundary-value

; this

solution

and extremum

problrm

is solvable

principle

then apply

in the first instance

can then be of use in finding

that for the real

R. HILL

240

with h = 0.
Now in fact the only elastic-plastic

while (IO) st,ill holds,

solids that have brcn studied experimentally

arc the rommon nlctnls.

Thrse hare elastic* moduli so great compared with any
stress supportable
by the material that thcrr is perhaps no point in retaining the
60

term

nor in postulating

any particular

stress-dependence

of K itself

in the

elastic range, though we may still envisage measurable changes in K the to plastic
straining,
espcrially through changes in thr st.ate of anisotropy.
Equations
(7).

(8) and (10) then reducr

normal

to the generally

accept&

to the yield surfac>c (now indepcndcnt~

relations.

of liylrostatk

with n as the unit

stress).

We shall later need to refer to the quantity

(11)
which is a function

of velocity

gradient.

equal

to 3 iii ki/

3~; by (:+). X1orcovc.r.

in view of (6) and (10).

,;..r]
I1

)=

9
t 2Xi,

(jE.

,iii

--

(J7),ihSi)

That the left,-hand differential is pcrfccat cao111dalso he rccognised in advance from

the symmetry, with rcsprc+ t.o interchange of ij and 1~1.of the matrix of cocfficxicnts
in the relations

between .kij and &+/\s,.

stressand Cr*. tr the corresponding
Now 1ct E*, E denote distirirt strain-rates
Wc write AE ~~~E* - E
rates in an element in a givclri rendition and state of stress.
and similarly for the differcnccs of other stnrrcd and unstarred quantitirs.
Note
that when the clement is plastic A 6 and A E. rrgartlctl as siqlc
\-actors. do not
necrssarily
correspond
in thr scnsc of king rclntc~tl hy (10).
I,cwmu

I.

In an elastic

clcnlent
A (b

In a plastics element,

This lemma

for h 2

is used in deriving

thVrc is ttlc iiumr~tliatc itlentit,y

~ Bu) A E

AC K AC.

(1")

0,

thr uniqucncss

crit,crion

(Sec+on

5).

IJroqf.
The equality in (18) holtls when both strain-ratrs
call for additional
holds when n K E* -I o
loading, from (11) and the symmetry of K. Th(~ inqualit,y
and nKE < 0. lor then the left sitk of (13) is

and this exreeds the right side. Finally, if both strain-rat,cs

their difference satisfies (12) and hcncr (13) n fortiori
(with
nK AC = 0).

produce
equality

unloading.
only when

A general theory of uniqueness and stability in elastic-plastic solids

Lemma 1.l.

In an elastic

element

there is the easily verified

2 (~5 + So) Ah + AE K Ae = A [(cr + Bo)

In a plastic

element,

241

identity

l].

(14)

for h > 0,

L(B+Bu)AE+

< A [(c + &J) c].

(nK
nKn + h1

A<KAe-----

(15)

This lemma is used in obtaining the extremum

principle (Section 6). -1 weaker
inequality sufticed in the existing proof of this principle when geometry changes
are neglected (K being positive-definite)
: in that event the square bracket,
is positive by Cauchys inequality,
is omitted from the left side of (15).
Proof.

When

which

nKE > 0 the left side of (15) is equal to

A

EKE _

!KEr

nKn

+ hI

by (10) and the symmetry of K. If n K E* > 0 this is just the right side of (15)
If, however, n K E* < o the right side exceeds
which is therefore an equality.
the left by (nKE*):!,(nKn
+ h).
When nKE < 0 the left side of (15) is equal to
A (EKE) If nKE*

> 0 the right

2:;);.

side of (15) is
A (EKE) -- ;wh

which

exceeds

side of (15)

the

left

is just

since

(n K A E)~ > (n K E*)~.

A (c K E) and

is not

less than

the

If

n K E < 0 the

left

(being

equal

right
when

nKAE=O).
5.

UNIQUENESS CRITERION

We regard the current distribution

of stress in a body as given, together with
For simplicity
body forces are omitted
the material properties
at every point.
since their mode of inclusion is sufticiently
obvious.
The nominal traction-rate
P is specified on a part S, of the current surface and the velocity v on the remainder
SF. These conditions and the field equations (2), (3), (6) and (10) set a boundaryvalue problem for the internal velocity field.
Suppose that there could be two distinct solutions (not differing merely
rigid-body motion when SD = 0) and denote their difference by A v. Then,
(1) and (L), with S and

V as the present

O=

=
where

2(v)

surface

and volume,

A$AvdS==lls,A(~)ric

A(ti

+Bo)AedL-Z(Av)

v.

by a
from

I(. 111I.l.

242
:I suflicient

condition

for

uriiqucncss
A (i

is tlirrdorr

+ 6~) AC /I I

S(Av)

that

A general theory of uni(lueness and St&Sty

I,,

the uniqueness

condition

maximum

being

When

the criterion

bkTHElllUh1

(16) is satisfied.

extremum

the given

values

property.

on

So

the

in class

w1

(18)

implied.

6.

foilowing

243

solids

to give explicitly

(g+j)

/3 = Max

where

- >f3
5%
the u&bra&

can be rearranged

in elastic-plastic

l-)HINC!IPLE

the unique

solution

is characterized

In the class of continuous

velocity

by the

fields taking

functional
1

E(v)dL--

has an absolute

minimurn

when

AV :==v* -

ASA from

in the left-hand

and

(3)

v, where v* is any distinct

A Jtiv+

I? being given

(19)

Jh
With

Jhis,.
the

usual

transformation.

field of the class,

= 1PAVtS.

integral.

From

(3) this

becomes

Now by (14) and (15)

2

(&+&)AE~V+H(A~)<A

There is also the identity

Combining

the

last

three

equations

and using

(16),

which

holds

for w -= A v

by hypothesis,

This

proves

A
the

IJ

(&$&)EdV-~(V)-2

extremum

(Z and B terms discarded,

reduces to a known result

principle.
true
(NILL

I
When

fivC&

geometry

nominal stress-rates
1956, pp. 65-B).

and

>O.
changes
not

are

negiigi blr

distinguished)

it

The minimum is also analytic,

as well as absolute, in the sense that, for any
infinitesimal variation 8 V, the first variation of (19) vanishes when v is the actual
For the inequality
rests on the second-order
term H (6 v) - z(6 V)
solution.
and (by inspection of the proof of lemma II) on the integral of (nr-i &f2/( nKn + h)
over that part of the plastic zone where neither of the actual and varicbtl fields
produce loading.
For the same reasons,

even

when the solution

is not unique

and (16)

is not

K. IIILL

244
satisfied,

the

extremum
It

variation

principle

is essential

and (19).
(6 +
n K

to keep

0 u) E is equal

By contrast,
Further

insight

ness criterion
of solids.

A sufkient

for

all pairs

tinuous

where
some

by

be two

for

to a,zy velocity

tij

the

where

in

(16)

n h E -., 0,

of the plastic

zone.

where

A (kj;

and

in outline.

velocity

depending

is ttierefure

that

taking

only

the

general

the

class

(non-linear)

be

also

continuous

on strain

second

we

values
see

that

history,

derivatives.

l,outld:trv-valIIe

prcscrihed

inlinit~esitnally,

and uniquc-

more

IA

gradient

to the

fields

principle

prohlc~m.

on So.

Us

,it, inlplies

gmdicnt.

on the
3Xi),

hercb only

h tias to be included

nKtj.

thCYJWlll

t,he differeuce

gradient

of

licttl.

value

of velocity

:-

though

functionals

zone

f0I a still

solutions

differing

IllCall

the matter

distinc~t

uniqueness

pairs

sign

sectiondly

velocity

A v is now

the

containing

;uitl

of continuous

ve1ocit.y

part

of the

veloc.it\ _ gradient.

of the

could

function

(23-l), with

stress-rate

derivatives

the

solution,

bctwc~c~n the cxtremum

idea

(20)

corresponding
Now,

basic

first

for

between

the terIn

irrespective

by studying

the

nominal

condition

specializing

each

of the plastic,

in the loading

into the c~onnexion

E is a function
there

distinction

functiond

zone,

(+a11 be gained

continuous

of

to

plastic

between

Supposing

the

to E K E. Only

WC tles~ribe

relations

in respect

and in the part

in the 1Iniqueness
in the

where

in mind
zone

0, is it equal

~z~yz&ere

exists

not.

In tlie elastic

E>

with

principle

may

of cr/ry two

fields,

and the bar denotes

join of tllosc fur tlir two fields.

ii vdue

Front

(21)

101
atld

245

A general theoryof uniclueness and stability in elastic-plastic solids

an extension of the conventional mean-value
(When Cijk, is discontinuous
has to be invoked, and a corresponding
interpretation
placed on (21)).
v is the actual
extremum

unique

solution

a transf(jrmation

of the last equation

theorem
If, now,
gives the

principle
(23)

which has thereby been derived as a consequence of (20).

This is an extension of the systematic procedure of HILL (1956a) for convex
functions E, in that (20) can be satisfied without the integrand itself being always
positive.
This extension was given in essence by HILL (1957c, pp. 233-4) in
connexion with rubber-like solids for which E is a quadratic form whose second
For elastic-plastic
solids E is given by (11)
derivatives arc the elastic moduli.
for
in conjunction
with (6) and (10) ; its second derivatives are discontinuous
velocity

gradients

such that n K E = 0.

7.

STABILITY CRITERION

Suppose that a part of the surface of the body is rigidly constrained and that
constant
nominal tractions
(dead loading)
are maintained
on the remainder
t~ou~~lout, any movement from the position of equilil~riunl at stage t. Let u be
an arbitrary virtual displacement,, during the course of which the nominal stress
changes from sij to sij + 6S, (still referred to stage t). In a further infinitesimal
displacement du the increase in internal energy exceeds the work of the external
forces

by the amount

where S,

V and xi are the surface,

volume

and position

at stage t.

The total
path.'

in reaching the position u is the integral of this over the whole

A sufficient condition for stability at stage t is therefore that

excess

(24)
where the inner integral is taken along any path leading to each geometrically
possible configuration
infinitesimally
near the initial one, These configurations
need not of course be positions of equilibrium since they
attained (if at all) by free motion folIowing a transitory
However,

are envisaged as being

dynamical disturbance.

it may happen that there is a certain path that can be traversed

quasi-

statically under the dead loads ; in this event the integral vanishes, as may be
shown by direct transformation
or equivalently from the virtual work principle.
Of course the integral can vanish in other circumstances also.
In a plastic solid the change in stress is not a single-valued
function of the
total ~lisplacement gradient. and SO (a.& if only for this reason) the integral in
(24) is strongly path-dependent.
=2mong the paths leading to any one final position
the most critical for stability is that which calls for the smallest increase in internal
energy in the body as a whole. In attempting to determine this it seems desirable,
at the outset, to approach the problem by calculating the least increase in energy

w.

246
in bringing each element
sincbc tllis would generally

IfILl.

of the body ~~~~ara~~il~to its final state Of distortion ;

violate the c~ontinuity of tilt: msterial,
the af%uaI Itxst

value may be untlcrestimeted

anti the resulting stability crit.erion bc Over-sutii&xt.
Iknvever, we shall later give a reits0n why this is not the (5~3: here.
In an element after a finite distortion there ih a unique
pendicul~tr directions which were also perpet~flidnr
initidly,
so during

t,he straining.

These

Let A, (r = 1, 2, 3) hc the nntural

lengths
at: every

stage)

triad Of triutunlly lxrthough not ncf*cssaril>

are the principal

tlircf~tiotis in thus c~kntent .
logarithms of t.he ratios of t,ltfL linnl atifl initial

in these

cliref~tions. The Linal distortion

c~~ulfl tx rcaclifd nlotq a pltli
of whidi the true, sttxiti-r:ttc
(based on the f~onfiguration at. that
has principal axes coinfding
with the pritif~ipai dire&kns
anti principal
stage

~Ol~~I~onents proportiotial

to the ,I,%

It seems very probable

the optimum path (at all events to /~.e~~~~l~~urj/~~

states).
has tt0t been f0unfl.
We adopt it here as a hypothf~sis.

t0 second

order,

Iti terms

where p is the density.

that this is actual13

but

Of f*ompOncnts

a rigorOus

proof

referred

to tftc

;ri axes this is

[CQj t ; (Sq,
where,

to second

.- Jij Spjp] hij

order,
Xij

lij

eik

ejk

and

fOr the work Of flistortion per unit initid volurtte on the Optitnum path.
In this
it is t0 be understood that Ssij and afcj/U, arf related in the same way as sij
namely thr0ugh (3) atld (10) if the elemf:nt is plast,ic,
through
atlfl
This expression fur the work is f-x-idcntly obtaincfl dso from
(6) if it is elastic.
:i path iti wlklt the tfisplaccmettt
field tluW.lglt0ut tltt~ tWfty is illcrtWcLl prctpftiOtt;~tcl>* atid ~Ot~tit~uffusI~ (possible if the tnrtteriat is (!Otttl~r~ssibl~~). It follows
that \vf. have f~ert:tittl_v not ~~~.~~~r~stittt~~te~
tltp lc:tst work.
3Zji

&pi,

ill>ll

A general theory

Equation

of uniqueness

(24) can now be replaced

ant1 stability

in elastic-plastic

by

since the admissible fields can tww be regarded indifferently

or velocity.
Equivalently,
by (R) and (I I), the criterion is
2

E (v) rl LY=

(ti + Bo) E d V -

247

solids

as either displacement

.Z (v) > o

(26)

Now it was shown that the boundaryfor all fields v vanishing at t.he constraints.
value problem set by rigid constraints
on So and given nominal traction-rates
on
SF has a unique solution when

A(C,+fkr)A~tlV-

where

A v is the

differencc

of any

A ir. A E are the

differences

of the

Z(Av)>o

pair

of fields

corresponding

(27)

vanishing
stress-rates

at the constraints.
and strain-rates,

but are not necessarily related by (10) in the plastic zone, on account of the nonlinearity
inherent
in the different
behaviour
in loading and unloading.
Consequently
(26) and (27) arc distinct criteria.
Nevertheless.
there is a definite
conncxion
in that (26) is always satisfied when (27) is (but not \-ice versa) ; for
(27) reduces to (26) when one field of a pair vanishes identically.
A partly plastic
state in which the boundary-value
problem has a unique solution is therefore
certuiuly stable ; and even when the solution is not unique the state lnuy still be
stable.
This is the general statement
and proof of a corljccturc
by SIIANLE~
(1946,

1947).

The situation

can be seen more

clearly

when the solid is elastically

and h/p has the same value everywhere in the plastic zone.
Section 5, and supposing that. ,?I < IS,, (26) becomes
h

where

->a
ap

in class

H, (w) = II,

(w) --

isotropic

With the notation

w,

of

(28)

2,~ (nq) d VP,

zone where nq > 0. This formula differs

Since H, > H, for any one firld, ,9 ,> y.. Ihc
critical values cc and /3 can have either sign or vanish.
In the cast ,B > SL> 0, if the rate of hardening is progressively
lowered, keeping
where

LTP is that part of the plastic

from (17)

in that Ha replaces Ha.

everything else fixed, there is reached first the value fi when

uniqueness is no
longer certain and afterwards the value a wllen instability
first occurs.
Thus,
for certain processes of distortion,
a point of bifurcation
can be reached at an
earlier stage than a failure of stability
(supposing,
naturally,
that the rate of
hardening diminishes with continued strain).
Moreover, at such a stable bifurcation the loading

must change

with further
l&dS

where v here dcnotcs

the velocity

= s

dcformatior~
E(v)dV>

in such a way that

in any of the possible

actual

modes.

x.

COllPARISON

\ilTII

~~~c;IU-~I..AS~~~~~
~IIFX)H)

COttsider t.he littiititig form of the prcviutts theorems whett t,tie clast ica ttlduli
are iti~cfit~itel~ ittcreaseci, the currtttt strtsstx itttcf r3t.t. of ltar(l(~ttirt~ being lteld
fixed. K is itow taken t.O he positive-deiittitc.
In the uniqucncss
criterion (16) the functiotd
2 is ittclepcttdcttt of the ttduli
whil(h the asymptotic
form of If is

n K n never vanishes.
H,, is ttever ttegatiw.
and \:tnishcs ottly for it~torlll)rcssible W fields such
itnrf q 3! n in the plastic zone (the l)ro~~or~i[)t~~li~~
For thcsc special fields
and tnagnitude).
since

by the

Schwarz

while fOr all others If,, and N c;~n bc ttde arbkraril?; large anri positive
ing the moduli.
Consequently
the sutIiciettt
condition
for uniqueness
the requirement
that
h$ <!I -- z(w) > 0
.I-

inequality,

by ittcrcasapproaches

.4 general theory
the

outset

in the plastic

of uniqueness and stability

in elastic-plastic

is put zero in the elastic zone while (8) is replaced

zone. There are no inverse relations such as (lo),

249

solids

by h E = (n &) n
for which reason

the boundary value problem uniquely determines the strain-rate

only and not the
stress-rate,
unless S, = 0 (cf. HILL 1956b, p. 248).
The general connexion could not indeed be regarded in advance as automatic,
if only on the ground that a property possessed by all members of a limiting
sequence need not be a property of the limit itself. Not only that, but the setting
of the boundary-value
problem itself for a rigid-plastic
solid is different in that,
if t.he existing stresses arc rcgardrd as gi\.cn. the velocity can not be prescribed
arbitrarily on S,. Conversely. if we choose to regard the velocity on S, as arbitrarily
prescribed, the associated stress in the deformable zone is decided,
the yield surface is convex (HILL 1951) ; if the pre-existing
stress
it would change instant.aneously
(cf. Hrr.r. 1950. pp. 58-9).
Consider, next, the functional

to becomc

consistent

at least when
were different

with the imposed

(19) in the extremum

principle.

velocities

As the elastic

moduli arc increased, the value of the functional is unbounded except for incomprcssible fields v such that E - 0 in the elastic zone and EK n in the plastic zone,
wit,h a non-ne,@Yve

factor

of proportionality,

hE2dV -

Only

such

special

v fields

E(v)

satisfying

the

when
2

its limiting

value

is

Pvns,.
.!

velocity

boundary-conditions

need

be

considered in the principle.

These fields exist and are just the set of virtual modes
for a rigid-plastic
solid under the given surface tractions and velocities. provided
the

latter arc consistent

with thr given internal stress.
Just such a principle
But thr
was proved by HILL (1957b) for a rigid---plastic solid treated on its merits.
minimum is only analytic when the acstual solution involves no unloading (01. cit..
p. 504) ; this is therefore an example of a property not shared by the two solids.
Consider, finally, the stability criterion (26).
In the Iin& as before, we need
only

consider

loads

and

the

set

constraints.

of

virtual

the

This agrees with the results

(HIIJ.

modes

functional

for

a rigid-plastic

solid

under

the

given

becoming

obtained

for a rigid-plastir

solid treated

on its merits

I 957d).

functionals
rigid-plastic

However, for an elastic--plastic

solid the uniqueness and st.ability
differ but the classes of admissible
fields are identical,
while for a
solid the functionals

are the same

but the admissible

classes

differ.

REFERENCES
HILL,

R.

1950
1951

19.x
1937
RkLAN,

E.

.~jlIANLEY, 1.

R.

Mrrthenrnticd
Them1 of Plmticitq
(Clarendon Press, Oxford).
Phil. Mq. 42, 868.
.I. ML&. Plqs. Solids (a) 5, BO ; (b) 4, 247.
J. ;Ilcch. Phys. Solidr (a) 5, 1% ; (b) 5, 30%; (c) 5, 229 ; (d) 6, 1.

9,

1938

I?!.-Archill

1946

J. Arm. Ski. 13, fi?X.

J. .-Iwo. Sci. 14, 261.

1947

116.