Basic Theory of Plasticity

References:

Nielsen, MP, Limit analysis and concrete plasticity, Boca Raton: CRC Press,
1999.
Ghali, A & Neville, AM, Structural analysis: a unified classical and matrix
approach, Intext Educational Publishers, 1972.
Coates RC, Coutie MG, Kong FK, Structural analysis, London: Nelson, 1972.
Hill R, The mathematical theory of plasticity, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950.

The Theory of Plasticity

Rigid-plastic material is defined as a material in which no deformation occurs (at

all) for stresses up to a certain limit, the yield point. For stresses at the yield point,
arbitrarily large deformations are possible without any change in the stresses.

Uniaxial case
In the uniaxial case, the idealized stress-strain relationship of a rod subjected to
tension or compression is shown below:

σ
fy
Permanent plastic
deformation

No ε
deformation
- fy

A rigid-plastic material does not exist in reality. However, it is possible to use the
model when the plastic strains are much larger than the elastic strains.

When the stress reaches the material’s yield stress σ = ±fy, P (1)

The yield condition for this rod is f()=│σ│- fy =0 P (2)

Dr. RKL Su 1
Theories of Failure
In complex stress systems, many theories of failure have been proposed. Some of
them are outlined in detail below, in which fy is the tensile stresses at the elastic
limit in simple tension, and σ1, σ2, σ3 are the principal stresses in the system.

Maximum Principal Stress Theory

According to this theory, failure will occur when the maximum principal stress in
complex system reaches the value of the maximum stress at the elastic limit in
simple tension, i.e. σ1=fy, σ2=fy, σ1=-fy and σ2=-fy.

Shear Strain Energy Theory (by von Mises)

At failure the shear strain energy in the complex system and in simple tension are
equal, i.e. (σ1- σ2)2+(σ2- σ3)2+(σ3- σ1)2=2fy2.
In two dimensional cases, the failure criterion becomes σ12-σ1σ2+σ22=fy2.

For general case

For a general body subjected to a general set of stresses, the above yield condition
has to be generalized.

Generalized stresses are defined as Q1, Q2,…, Qn

The corresponding generalized strains are defined as q1, q2,…, qn

Virtual work per unit volume, area or length of the body is

W= Q1q1+…+ Qnqn P (3)

Note: For uniaxial case, Q1=σ and q1=ε

In 3D continuum, Qi are the components of the stress tensor.
For a plane beam, Qi may be selected as M, V, and N.

The yield condition for the general case is

f(Q1, Q2,…,Qn)=0 P (4)

When the combinations of the generalized stresses Q1, Q2,…satisfy the above
yield condition, the object would subject to possible arbitrarily large strains
without any change in the stresses.

Note: f<0 => stresses can be sustained by the material and has no strain
f>0 cannot occur

Dr. RKL Su 2
When the yield condition is shown graphically in a Q1, Q2,…,Qn- coordinate
system, the condition is corresponding to a surface f = 0 and denoted as the yield
surface. The yield surface is assumed to be closed, convex and differentiable. The
case with two stress components Q1 and Q2 is illustrate below:

Q2 2 2
Q  Q 
f Q1 , Q2    1    2   1  0
b  a   b 

a Q
1

Von Mises’s hypothesis on maximum work: This hypothesis states that given a
strain field (q1, q2,…qn) on the yield surface, the yield stresses corresponding to
the strain field make W =Q1q1+…Qnqn as large as possible.

The principle implies that the actual stress combinations satisfying the yield
condition P(4) should produce the greatest possible work W (or in other words, the
greatest possible resistance against the deformation)

Denote the strains and stresses in vector forms,

Strains   q1 , q2 ,, qn 

Stresses   Q1 , Q2 ,, Qn 

The work is equal to the scalar product

W   

The hypothesis states that if  is assumed to be given,  is to be determined so

that W becomes as large as possible, subjected to the condition f    0 .

As W is attaining maximum for stresses  to be sought, the variation of W is

required to be zero when the stress field is varied. We have,

δW=δQ1q1+…=0 P (5)

The case of two stress components Q1 and Q2 is illustrate below:

Dr. RKL Su 3
 W δW=0

δQ2 ≠ 0 Q2
δQ1≠ 0

Q1

Denoting the variation of the stress field as

   Q1, Q2 ,      Q1  Q1 , Q2  Q2 , P (6)

Since the stress field   also satisfies the condition f = 0 (the stress field is varied
on the yield surface), the variation of yield condition f  f    f    0 . The
corresponding increment can be shown to be approximately equal to the following
expression when Qi  0

f
f  Q1    0 P (7)
Q1
As equations P(5) and P(7) apply to any variation of Qi (i.e. Qi ) on the yield
surface, by comparing the two equations, it is observed that W is stationary (i.e.
δW=0) if and only if

f
qi   , i = 1,2, …n P (8)
Qi

where λ is an indeterminate factor. Based on vector calculus, it can be shown that

 f Q1 , and therefore qi is an outward-directed normal to the yield surface.
Equation P(8) is called von Mises’s flow rule.

Q2
  f  f 
n    i j 
 Q1 Q2 

Q1

f(Q1,Q2)=0

Dr. RKL Su 4
As a consequence of the above results, the given strain  can uniquely determines
a point  on the yield surface, that is, the point where  is a normal to the yield
surface.

The work due to       and the given corresponding strain vector  is,

W   Q1q1    Q1  Q1 q1           P (9)

Since the yield surface is convex, the scalar product    will be negative.
Q2
f(Q1,Q2)=0  
 

Q1

Thus we have W W P (10)

It has shown that apart from a stationary value of W, the normality condition also
leads to a maximum value of W. Furthermore, if the stress field       is
entirely within the yield surface, the following expression applies:
W W P (11)

Comments:
As concrete under tension will be cracked and concrete is not a perfectly plastic
material, the application of the flow rule to reinforced concrete structures will not
give a reliable prediction about the plastic deformation. However, the load
carrying capacity of the concrete structures can be accurately predicted by the
upper bound technique.

Dr. RKL Su 5
Example
A rectangular beam with section b×h of rigid plastic material is considered. The
cross section is loaded by a bending moment M and a normal force N, which are
referred to the center of gravity. Establish the yield condition and verify the von
Mises’s flow rule.

The load-carrying capacity is determined from the stress and strain distributions
shown below:
b
fy

yo M
h
ε
N
θ

fy

Consider horizontal force equilibrium

N  h  2 yo bf y P (12)
y o 1  N 
Rearrange  1 P (13)
h 2  N p 
where the tensile yield load is
N p  bhf y P (14)
Consider moment equilibrium
M  yo bf y (h  yo ) P (15)
Substituting equations P(13) into P(15)
1   N 
2
   
2

M  bh 2 f y 1      M p 1   N   P (16)
4   N p 
    N p 
 
   
where the maximum moment capacity of the beam is
1 2 1
Mp  bh f y  hN p P (17)
4 4
M N
Setting m and n  P (18)
Mp Np
The yield condition can be written based on equation P(16) as

f m, n  m  n 2  1  0 P (19)

Dr. RKL Su 6
where m and n are the generalized stresses. The yield condition of the beam is
shown below:
m, Ξ
(0,1)

(-1,0) (1,0) n, E

(0,-1)

In the following paragraphs, we will verify the von Mises’s flow rule.
The strain at the centroid of section is,

1  1 N 1
    h  y o   h  hn P (20)
2  2 Np 2
Introducing the new quantities for generalized strain (E, Ξ)

Ξ=Mpθ and E=Npε P (21)

The energy dissipation per unit length of the beam is

W  M  N 
M
M p   N N p   m  nE P (22)
Mp Np

from equations P(21), P(20) and P(17), we have

1
E  N p   hN  2M p n  2n P (23)
2

If we set Ξ=λ then E=2 λn P (24)

On the other hand, if we apply the flow rule of equation P(8) on equation P(19),

f f
E  2n and     P (25)
n m

Equations P(23) and P(25) get the same results. The von Mises’s flow rule is
verified.

Dr. RKL Su 7
Fundamental Theorems

Main assumptions for the plastic theory at collapse of structures

(i) Sufficient plastic hinges must be formed to transform the structure into a
mechanism (Mechanism condition)
(ii) Work done by external loads is equal to work absorbed in plastic hinges
(Energy Balance)
(iii) Bending moments anywhere cannot exceed plastic moment (yield
condition)

Theorem 1. Bending moment at collapse remains constant as the structure

deforms.

Theorem 2. The lower bound theorem (or safe theorem or static theorem) states if
a body subject to any external load P’i (i = 1,..n), a stress distribution can be found
which satisfies both the equilibrium condition and the yield condition (f ≤ 0), then
P’i is less than or at most equal to the true collapse load Pi. The stress field of this
kind is called statically admissible.

Proof:

Assume that for the external load P’i, we can find a statically admissible stress
distribution    Q1, Q2 , which is in the body and satisfies both the yield
condition and equilibrium. The strains  and displacement field ui correspond to
the true collapse set. The principle of virtual work gives
Variables
 Pu       dV
i i
V
P (25)
True collapse set
where dV is a volume element, an area element, or a length element.

Denoting the statically admissible stress distribution due to the true collapse load
P as   Q1 , Q2 , , the principle of virtual work gives

 P u      dV
i i
V
P (26)
According to equation P(10),
     P (27)

Therefore  Piui   Pi ui P (28)

When Pi is a proportional loading such that Pi   L Pi ,
L  1 P (29)

Dr. RKL Su 8
The load Pi obtained by the lower bound theorem is less than or equal to the true
collapse load Pi.

Theorem 3. The upper bound theorem (or unsafe theorem or kinematic theorem)
states that the external load P”i obtained from the energy balance of the external
work (from the external load P”i) and the internal work dissipate in plastic flow
due to any assumed kinematically admissible mechanisms (the strains   are
deformed in accordance with the normality condition) is greater than, or at least
equal to, the true collapse load Pi.

Proof:
By assuming a kinematically admission mechanism, the body will deform with a
geometrically admissible displacement field u”i and the corresponding induced
strains   .

Denote the true collapsed load as Pi and the associated statically admissible stress
distribution as   Q1 , Q2 , . (The stresses Qi will be on the yield surface).
According to the principle of virtual work, the virtual work done to deform the
body corresponding to this assumed strain field   is

True collapse set

 P u      dV  D
i i
V
P (30)
Variables

It is however not certain if  obtained from Qi using the flow rule corresponds to
the strains   . Therefore, according to equation P(10),
Determine P”i from
energy balance

 P u      dV       dV   Pu

i i
V V
i i P (31)

where   is the stresses corresponding to the strains   according to the normality

condition. When Pi is a proportional loading such that Pi U Pi ,

From equation P(31)

 P u   Pu   P u

i i i U i P (32)

It can be seem that U≥1. Therefore P”i is greater than or equal to the true collapse
load Pi.

Dr. RKL Su 9
Theorem 4. The uniqueness theorem states that for any load, a distribution of
stresses can be found which simultaneously satisfies (1) the mechanism condition,
(2) the equilibrium condition and (3) the yield condition, then that load is the true
collapse load.

Proof:

Since the stress distribution satisfies the mechanism condition, the upper bound
theorem states that:
P” ≥ P P (33)
Since the stress distribution satisfies the equilibrium condition and the yield
condition, the lower bound theorem states that:
P’ ≤ P P (34)
These two conditions can be satisfied simultaneously only if
P = P”=P’ P (35)

Comments:
(1) The Uniqueness theorem does not guarantee that the collapse mechanism
itself is unique. However, one thing is certain. If there are, say, two
different collapse mechanisms, both of which satisfy the three conditions of
mechanism, equilibrium, and yield, then the loading capacities determined
for the two mechanisms must be the same – they must each be equal to the
true collapse load.

(2) The three theorems of plastic collapse are, strictly speaking, only valid for
rigid-plastic structures, which have zero displacement until the collapse
load is reached. They are, however, applicable to elastic-plastic structures
provided the effects of change of geometry or buckling instability are not
important.

(3) Plastic theorems, which are based on rigid-plastic structures, can allow
internal load redistributions in structures and attain a higher load resistant or
capacity for the structures. However, it is important to note that sufficient
ductility should be provided to the structures to allow sufficient plastic
deformations in the structures for the redistribution of internal loads. Failing
to provide sufficient ductility to the structure and applying the ultimate limit
state method to design the structure may over-estimate the load-capacity of
the structure and leads to an unsafe design.

Dr. RKL Su 10
Example
Determine the critical loads of the following statically indeterminate beam by (A)
lower bound theorem (static theorem) and (B) upper bound theorem (kinematic
theorem). Hence verify the uniqueness theorem.

F
A B C D
a a a
F

(A) Lower Bound Theorem or Static Theorem

Dr. RKL Su 11
 (B) Upper Bound Theorem or Kinematic Theorem

Dr. RKL Su 12