Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (50) (remove)
Keywords
- Finite-Elemente-Methode (5)
- Limit analysis (4)
- Shakedown analysis (3)
- Bruchmechanik (2)
- Analytischer Zulaessigkeitsnachweis (1)
- Anastomose (1)
- Anastomosis (1)
- Biomechanics (1)
- Biomechanik (1)
- Biomedizinische Technik (1)
- Chance constrained programming (1)
- Einspiel-Analyse (1)
- Einspielen <Werkstoff> (1)
- Evolution of damage (1)
- Exact Ilyushin yield surface (1)
- Extension fracture (1)
- Extension strain criterion (1)
- FEM (1)
- Finite element method (1)
- First Order Reliabiblity Method (1)
Institute
- IfB - Institut für Bioengineering (50) (remove)
When confining pressure is low or absent, extensional fractures are typical, with fractures occurring on unloaded planes in rock. These “paradox” fractures can be explained by a phenomenological extension strain failure criterion. In the past, a simple empirical criterion for fracture initiation in brittle rock has been developed. But this criterion makes unrealistic strength predictions in biaxial compression and tension. A new extension strain criterion overcomes this limitation by adding a weighted principal shear component. The weight is chosen, such that the enriched extension strain criterion represents the same failure surface as the Mohr–Coulomb (MC) criterion. Thus, the MC criterion has been derived as an extension strain criterion predicting failure modes, which are unexpected in the understanding of the failure of cohesive-frictional materials. In progressive damage of rock, the most likely fracture direction is orthogonal to the maximum extension strain. The enriched extension strain criterion is proposed as a threshold surface for crack initiation CI and crack damage CD and as a failure surface at peak P. Examples show that the enriched extension strain criterion predicts much lower volumes of damaged rock mass compared to the simple extension strain criterion.
Structural design analyses are conducted with the aim of verifying the exclusion of ratcheting. To this end it is important to make a clear distinction between the shakedown range and the ratcheting range. In cyclic plasticity more sophisticated hardening models have been suggested in order to model the strain evolution observed in ratcheting experiments. The hardening models used in shakedown analysis are comparatively simple. It is shown that shakedown analysis can make quite stable predictions of admissible load ranges despite the simplicity of the underlying hardening models. A linear and a nonlinear kinematic hardening model of two-surface plasticity are compared in material shakedown analysis. Both give identical or similar shakedown ranges. Structural shakedown analyses show that the loading may have a more pronounced effect than the hardening model.