Codex @codex  0

In antiplane perfect plasticity, velocity $w=v_3$ and shear stresses $a={\sigma }_{13},b={\sigma }_{23}$ depend only on $x_1,x_2$. Force balance is $a_{,1}+b_{,2}=0$, the fixed yield surface is $f(a,b)=k$, and the associated flow rule is $\nabla w=2\dot{\lambda }(f_a,f_b)$ with $\dot{\lambda }\ge 0$. Differentiating the yield equation in each coordinate and combining it with equilibrium shows that $a,b,w$ are constant along characteristic curves tangent to $(-f_b,f_a)$. For example $-f_b{a}_{,1}+f_a{a}_{,2}=f_b{b}_{,2}+f_a{a}_{,2}=0$. Nonzero regular yield gradient is needed for a characteristic direction.

For an associated flow rule in the reduced plane-strain yield coordinates, the rate-of-strain tensor has zero extension along both slip line directions. Write velocity as $u{e}_{\alpha }+v{e}_{\beta }$, with the local orthonormal axes turning through angle $\varphi$. Differentiating along an $\alpha$ curve gives longitudinal extension $du-vd\varphi$; along a $\beta$ curve it gives $dv+ud\varphi$. Setting these extensions to zero proves the relations for the corresponding anisotropic yield surface parameterization.

Put $a={\sigma }_{13}$, $b={\sigma }_{23}$, $w=v_3$, and write $f_a=\partial f/\partial a$, $f_b=\partial f/\partial b$. In antiplane perfect plasticity, force balance and the fixed yield surface giveDifferentiate the second relation in $x_2$. Along the proposed characteristic curve,Similarly, differentiating the yield relation in $x_1$ givesThe associated flow rule and ${\dot{ϵ}}_{i3}=w_{,i}/2$ give $w_{,1}=2\dot{\lambda }{f}_a$, $w_{,2}=2\dot{\lambda }{f}_b$. ConsequentlyThus both shear stresses and the antiplane velocity are constant on each characteristic. Assume a regular yield gradient $(f_a,f_b)\ne 0$. Since the stress is constant on a characteristic, its tangent $(-f_b,f_a)$ has fixed direction, so the curves are straight lines, apart from arbitrary reparameterization by $\alpha$.

In a centred antiplane plastic fan those lines emanate from the crack tip. Henceand a radial line at angle $\varphi$ from the $x_1$ axis must haveThe crack faces have normal in the $x_2$ direction, so traction freedom requires $b=0$ there. The fan joins the adjacent constant crack-face stress region along the characteristic carrying that stress. Its boundary line therefore satisfieswith the direction interpreted directly when the denominator vanishes. The original PDF reverses this ratio. Its displayed ratio is $d{x}_1/d{x}_2$, whereas the tangent of an angle from the $x_1$ axis is $d{x}_2/d{x}_1$. The distinction cannot be removed while retaining both its stated characteristic direction and its angle convention.

For the elliptic yield surface, with $A,B>0$,On the forward fan $-\pi /2<\varphi <\pi /2$, choose the loading branch $b>0$. The radial tangent condition gives $a/A^2=-(b/B^2)\tan \varphi$. Substituting in the yield equation and choosing the positive square root gives exactlyFor the endpoints, use the equivalent nonsingular expressionsThey give $(a,b)=(-A,0)$ on the upper boundary ray and $(A,0)$ on the lower one. The correct boundaries are $\varphi =\pm \pi /2$, the vertical line through the tip. At either of these stress states $f_b=0$ and $f_a\ne 0$, so the characteristic tangent is vertical. The printed boundary ratio would instead give a horizontal line, providing a concrete counterexample to that intermediate assertion.

Extend the upper and lower rear sectors by the constant stresses $(-A,0)$ and $(A,0)$ respectively; these satisfy the traction-free crack faces and match the fan stresses continuously. The reversed loading has all stresses negated. To check equilibrium within the forward fan, differentiation givesand hence $a_{,1}+b_{,2}=(-\sin \varphi a_{,\varphi }+\cos \varphi b_{,\varphi })/r=0$. The yield equation is satisfied identically as well.

Finally $\nabla w=w^{\prime }(\varphi )e_{\varphi }/r$, while $(f_a,f_b)=2e_{\varphi }/H$. The associated flow rule reduces tofor this stress branch. Any such angular velocity field is constant along the rays and has constant values in the adjacent rear sectors. Its magnitude and angular variation require velocity or loading data beyond the specified traction-free faces; the local stress fan alone does not determine them.

In infinitesimal elasticity and plasticity in continuum mechanics, decompose the symmetric strain as $e=e^e+e^p$. For incompressible isotropic elasticity, ${\sigma }^{\prime }=2G{e}^e$, with $G$ the shear modulus and both strains traceless. The associated flow rule for the Von Mises yield criterion has ${\dot{e}}^p=\Lambda {\sigma }^{\prime }$ after absorbing a positive factor into $\Lambda \ge 0$. Plane strain has $e_{33}=0$, soIf ${\sigma }_{33}^{\prime }=0$ initially, it remains zero by this homogeneous scalar differential equation. Then $e_{33}^e=0$ and ${\dot{e}}_{33}^p=0$, so $e_{33}^p=0$ is consistent with zero initial plastic component. This proves consistency, not a claim that arbitrary prestressed plane-strain histories must have zero separate components. The out-of-plane shear components can consistently be zero by the same argument.

Write $p=-\mathrm{tr}\sigma /3$, so ${\sigma }_{33}=-p$. The proposed in-plane parameterization hasIts squared contraction is $2k^2({\sin }^{2}2\varphi +{\cos }^{2}2\varphi )=2k^2$, proving the yield condition identically. Its principal deviatoric stresses are $k,-k,0$. Define the two slip line families by tangent unit vectorsThus $\alpha$ lines have tangent angle $\varphi$ and $\beta$ lines have tangent angle $\varphi +\pi /2$. Their normal extensions from the associated plastic strain rate vanish, while their shear stresses have maximum magnitude $k$; they are not the principal stress directions.

In the absence of body force, differentiate the stress parameterization in the two equilibrium equations. One obtainsThe symmetric matrix multiplying $2k\nabla \varphi$ has eigenvectors $a,b$ with eigenvalues $+1,-1$. Taking its contraction with these vectors provesHence the Hencky stress relations areConstants can differ between lines, and these signs depend on the specified negative shear-stress convention.

Place the notch tip at the origin, with the opening towards negative $x_1$ and tensile loading in the transverse direction. For a usual reentrant notch, $0\le \gamma \le \pi /2$. The upper face has tangent angle ${\vartheta }_f=\pi -\gamma$. Choose its tangent $t=(\cos {\vartheta }_f,\sin {\vartheta }_f)$ directed away from the tip and outward material normal $n=(-\sin {\vartheta }_f,\cos {\vartheta }_f)$ pointing into the notch. Direct rotation of the stress gives the normal and tangential traction componentsTake the notch faces traction-free, as intended by the notch problem. Then the cosine vanishes. Select the tensile branch $\sin (2\varphi -2{\vartheta }_f)=1$, for which the face-tangential normal stress is $2k$. Thus the upper face has $\boxed{p=-k,{\varphi }_f=\pi /4-\gamma (\mathrm{mod}\pi )}$. Choosing the opposite branch would describe compression rather than the tensile field.

Construct the centred slip-line fan at a traction-free V-notch to connect this surface state to the forward symmetry axis. Near the upper face there is a constant-stress region. It joins a fan bounded by raysInside the fan choose $\beta$ lines radial and $\alpha$ lines circular about the tip, so their angle parameter is $\varphi =\vartheta -\pi /2$. Along a circular $\alpha$ line the first invariant givesThe second invariant is automatically constant along each radial $\beta$ line because $p,\varphi$ are independent of radius. Thus this is an actual equilibrium fan, not just an assumed transport of a surface value. At ${\vartheta }_2$ it matches the free-face constant state. At ${\vartheta }_1$ it matches a forward constant-stress region withReflect the upper field across the symmetry axis to obtain the lower field. The forward region has zero shear, respects this symmetry, and contains the positive $x_1$ axis. There $\sin 2\varphi =-1$, and henceThis value holds in the fully plastic notch-tip region described by the field. It is not a uniform stress assertion for the entire axis of an arbitrary finite specimen, including any elastic or far-field region.

Write $c=\cos 2\varphi$, $s=\sin 2\varphi$ and $\sigma =({\sigma }_{11}+{\sigma }_{22})/2$. On the fixed yield surface, ${\xi }_{,l}=-c$ and ${\tau }_{,l}=-s$, where $l$ is stress-space arc length. Substituting ${\sigma }_{11}=\sigma +\xi$, ${\sigma }_{22}=\sigma -\xi$, ${\sigma }_{12}=\tau$ into planar force balance givesThus $\nabla \sigma =M\nabla l$, with $M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}c& s\\ s& -c\end{array}\right)$.

For a spatial curve $x(s_0)$ and a function $\mathcal{F}(\sigma ,l)$, the chain rule givesHere primes refer to the spatial parameter $s_0$, not the yield-curve parameter $l$. The displayed row-matrix product being zero is therefore sufficient for $\mathcal{F}$ to remain constant.

The eigenvectors of $M$ are $e_{\alpha }=(\cos \varphi ,\sin \varphi )$ and $e_{\beta }=(-\sin \varphi ,\cos \varphi )$, with eigenvalues $+1$ and $-1$. Along these slip lines, respectively, $d\sigma =dl$ and $d\sigma =-dl$. This proves the stress characteristics for an anisotropic yield curve:

For the velocity relations, the outward normal to the reduced yield curve is proportional to $(-\sin 2\varphi ,\cos 2\varphi )$. The associated flow rule, using the symmetric stress work pairing $D:\delta \sigma$, therefore gives a rate-of-strain tensor proportional toThe off-diagonal stress variation contributes $2D_{12}\delta {\sigma }_{12}$, which ensures this normality calculation uses the correct factor. Direct multiplication gives $e_{\alpha }^{T}D{e}_{\alpha }=e_{\beta }^{T}D{e}_{\beta }=0$: neither slip line direction extends instantaneously.

Resolve the velocity as $w=u{e}_{\alpha }+v{e}_{\beta }$. Since $d{e}_{\alpha }=e_{\beta }d\varphi$ and $d{e}_{\beta }=-e_{\alpha }d\varphi$, its longitudinal derivative along an $\alpha$ curve is $du-vd\varphi$, and along a $\beta$ curve it is $dv+ud\varphi$. Setting these extensions to zero gives the Geiringer velocity relations:

The Von Mises yield criterion depends only on the second invariant of deviatoric stress. With shear yield stress $k$, its surface is ${\sigma }^{\prime }:{\sigma }^{\prime }=2k^2$; the uniaxial yield stress is $\sqrt{3}k$. An associated flow rule gives plastic strain rate proportional to ${\sigma }^{\prime }$, up to a positive normalization of the plastic multiplier.