Abstract
AbstractThis note discusses the inconsistencies that are inherent in the postulate of three plane strain mechanisms. It is shown that this postulate violates the principle of invariance and one obtains different results depending on the choice of the reference axes. If formulated in the principal stress space, this postulate requires that the principal stress and principal plastic strain increment directions be coaxial. Constitutive models based on this postulate cannot be used for general loading situations involving principal stress rotation where significant non‐coaxiality is obtained.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
