Professional Documents
Culture Documents
E , dla < Re
uniaxial state of stress
Re
Bernoullis hypothesis of plane cross-sections.
We use the conditions of equilibrium:
dA N ,
zdA M
The stages of the cross-section work are:
a) b) c) d) e)
Re Re Re Re
-Re -Re
elastic range, the principle of superposition is valid due to linearity of equations
yielding of the first extreme fibers, it is elastic limit of the cross-section bearing capacity,
one-sided yielding in elastic-plastic range,
two-sided yielding, the elastic-plastic range,
full yielding with the plastic hinge arising, it is plastic limit of the cross-section bearing
Re Re
E
o centralna E
z0 z0
0
-Re
capacity.
The elastic-plastic range calculations are the most complicated. The problem consists on
determination of two process parameters from the equations of equilibrium. There are two
regions in the cross-section: elastic and plastic, divided by the plasticity front. The position of
the front, the integral limits, is unknown.
From Bernoullis hypothesis, we have:
0 z .
Two parameters determine the strain distribution: the bar axis strain and its curvature.
Sometimes, it is easier way to apply other parameters, like:
position of neutral axis
1
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
0
( z0 ) 0 z0 ,
- position of the plastic front
Re 0
0 z p Re E z p ,
E
- range of the elastic zone
Re
E Re
E
Only two parameters are independent.
so, the neutral axis halved cross-section (divides cross-section into two equal areas).
From the second condition we get that the plastic limit value of the bending moment is equal
to the sum of static moments of the cross-section halves.
M zdF R zdF R zdF R ( S
e e e A1 S A 2 ) Re S A1 S A 2 .
A1 A2
The condition of equilibrium is valid in every coordinate set. If one axis is the principal
central axis the static moments differ only by their sign, so the formula may be rewritten:
M 2 Re S 0 A1, A 2 .
Similarly to elastic cross-section factor we introduce the plastic cross-section factor as:
W 2 S 0 A1, A 2 .
Examples
triangular cross-section bh
bh 3 3 bh 2
Wel
36 2h 24
h b
the neutral axis: A1 2 A 4 bh h1 , b1
1 1
, so:
2 2
2 2
W 2 S A1 2 12 b1h1 23 h 23 h1 bh 2
6
bh 2 8 2 bh 2
elastic limit M M max Re 81 ql q 27
64
Re
24 l2
plastic limit M M max Re
2 2 2 8 2
6
bh 81 ql q 16 27 bh 2
2 2 2 R ,
l
2
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
q
proportion: 2.34
q
I section
7a
a
10a
a
a
5a
position of the central and neutral axis:
zc 6.5a, z0 7 a , W 90a 3 R
3
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
Introduction
Analyzing the structure, we seek:
limit value of the load that begins the plastic mechanism
stress field corresponding to the equilibrium state and the static boundary conditions
appropriate displacement field or the rate of this field which fulfills kinematic boundary
conditions.
The exact solution fulfills the principle of virtual work.
The work (the power) of stress on the displacements (or their rates) ie equal to the work
(the power) of external forces on the displacements (or their rates).
p u
AT
j j dA F j u j dV
v
v
ij ij dV
Neglecting mass forces, we can write the equation by a coefficient of external forces. The
coefficient has an exact value for true forces.
m p j 0 u j dA ij ij dV
AT v
Lemma
If the limit plastic state is reached and displacements increase under constant load, the
stress remains constant and only plastic (not elastic) strain increases.
Proof: (rate form of principle of virtual work)
A q i u i dA Au q i u i dA V F i u i dV V ij ij dV
l l l l l l l l
4
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
the yield criterion in the form of weak inequality (and in particular, the stress does not
exceed the plasticity limit).
In such case, the multiplier will be different:
m s p j 0 u j dA *ij ij dV
AT v
AT V
From the Druckers stability postulate follows that the sign of the integral on the right side is
nonnegative and:
ms m .
5
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
From the Druckers stability postulate follows that the integral on the right side is
nonnegative. The integral on the left is positive (positive work of internal forces) and the
multiplier of kinematically admissible displacement field is not less than real (exact) value:
mk m .
Example
Find the limit bearing capacity of the truss, where A1 3 cm2, A2 2 cm2, A3 5 cm2,
0 400 MPa.
3 1 3
1 2 3 5 N1 N2 N3
P P
Statically indeterminate truss and the node equilibrium
Static approach
We calculate the bearing capacity of the bars:
N 1 120 kN, N 2 80 kN, N 3 200 kN
The structure becomes a mechanism if two bars reach yield point. There are three
possibilities:
a) N 1 N 1 , N 2 N 2
from the sum of projections, we have:
3 1 3
X 0: 120
34
80
26
N3
34
N 3 150.5 kN
5 5 5
Y 0 : P 120
34
80
26
150.5
34
310.4 kN
6
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
N3
we verify 3 A3
301 MPa 0 (statically admissible scheme)
b) N1 N 1 , N3 N 3
from the projections sum on x axis, we have:
3 1 3
X 0: 120
34
N2
26
200
34
0 N 2 209.9 kN N 2
2 1
Example
Find limit bearing capacity of the beam.
P 2P
D
A B C
2 1 1
Beam scheme
Static approach
7
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
We apply the method of consecutive plastic hinges. The plastic hinges carry on the limit
plastic bending moments, M , which direction correspond with the stretched fibers. To
determine the section of the first hinge we have to have the diagram of bending moments.
Due to its form of linear segments we consider three possible sections only.
a) For the hinge in the section A, we get the statically
M determined beam
P 2P
M M
D RA P , RD 2 P
A B C 4 4
2 1 1
M M
M B 2P , M C 2P
2 4
Because of MB < MC, we assume the next plastic hinge in section C. The limit load and the
bending moment in the section B will be:
P 58 M , M B 34 M M .
The scheme is statically admissible because the bending moment MB is less than plastic limit
moment.
b) For the first plastic hinge at the section B, we have:
P , R P M 2 , M 2M 4 P ,
M 2P RD P M 2 B A
A B C
D
MC P M 2
.
2 1 1 For two possibilities for second hinge we get, at the section A:
P 1 M , M 3 M M (admissible)
4 C 4
Kinematical approach
The most probable sections of plastic hinges are the sections at the intervals ends. To obtain
the kinematic mechanism with one degree of freedom (DOF) we need two plastic hinges.
Only three sections are involved and, consequently, three kinematic schemes.
P 2P
2
P 2P
3
4
P 2P
2
Comparing the external and internal work, we get:
2P 2 P 3M P 1 0.75M
8
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
2P 2 P3 5M P 2 0.625M
2 P 3M P 3 1.5M
The kinematic approach is the upper bound estimation, so we chose the smallest value of
estimation (the beam collapses under the force P 1 , P 2 as well as P 3 ), so the best value is
P 0.625 M . The same result we got from the static approach, so, the result is exact.
Example
Find the limit bearing capacity of the statically undetermined beam.
q
1
l +1
b l-b
Beam and the kinematic scheme of collapse
Similarly as before, two plastic hinges will be necessary to create the kinematical mechanism
with one DOF. One hinge will be at the fixed end but the position of the second hinge is
unknown. We assume hypothetically the second hinge in the middle of the span,
b 12 l , 1 . We get:
0.5l
M
2 qxdx 3 M q 12 .
0 l2
From the static approach the hypothesis give us:
q
RB RC
l
9
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
diagram. The value exceeds the limit bending moment and the scheme is statically not
admissible.
Lets change the sequence of the hinges. For the plastic hinge at the fixe end, we have:
ql M
RB
2 l
and the shear force in the span:
Q( x) R A qx .
From the condition of zero-value of the shear force we get the position of the second hinge:
RA
Q( x) 0 xextr
q
and extreme value of the moment will be:
2
qx R2
M ( xextr ) R A x extr M extr A M
q 2q
Assuming the second hinge created we find the limit load of the beam:
2 2
q l2 M
M ( xextr ) M 3q M 2 0
4 l
We change the equation introducing a new variable:
ql 2
1
4 2 3 1 0 1 0.343, 2 11.66 .
M
Because the static approach gives the lower bound estimation we take the second core and the
corresponding limit load value:
M
q 11.66 .
l2
Similarly, we find from the kinematical scheme the exact value of load capacity. The position
of the hinge at the span we find from the principle of virtual work:
b l b
qxdx q x dx 1 1 1 M 2 1
0 0
4 M M
and finally: q 2
11.66 2
64 2 l l
Both solutions are identical.
Example
Find the limit load of the frame below.
10
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
Portal frame
1. Kinematically admissible schemes of collapse
We verify 3 schemes of collapse: beam type, frame type and mixed:
11
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
Calculation scheme
The shear force changes the sign, the extreme value of the bending moment exceeds
admissible limit value. The scheme is not admissible.
We look for the hinged section at the spandrel beam.
Calculation scheme
we calculate:
M ql 2M
RA , HA ql
l 2 l
and the shear force in the spandrel beam is:
M ql
Q( x) qx 0
l 2
so:
M l
x
ql 2
and:
M ( x ) R A x H A l M 12 qx 2
and in the same time
M ( x) M
so, after the transformations, we have:
2
9 2 M M
q 7q 2 2 0
4 l l
and finally:
M
q 2.96 .
l2
3. We verify the solution by kinematic approach, assuming the kinematic scheme of collapse
with the hinge at the spandrel beam is located at a, to the left from the middle:
l a la
la la
q l qxdx
2
l a qxdx 4M 2M l a
0 0
12
Theory of Plasticity lecture 4, Adam Paul Zaborski
2M 3 0.162 M
q 2.96 2 .
l 2 2 0.1621 0.162 l
The result is the same as from the static approach..
Example
Find the limit load capacity of the beam with variable cross-section capacity: 2M from the
left and M from the right.
13