2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104209
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A finite deformation multiplicative plasticity model with non–local hardening for bonded geomaterials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The FD_Milan model is a non-associative, isotropic hardening finite-deformation plasticity model for structured soils and weak rocks, developed by Oliynyk et al (2021) based on the multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient and on the adoption of a suitable free energy function to describe the elastic response of the material. Its evolution equations in the spatial setting are briefly summarized here: subjected to the Kuhn-Tucker complementarity conditions: r In the above equations, τ and τ are the Kirchhoff stress and its Jaumann objective rate; d is the rate of deformation tensor; d p is the plastic rate of deform ation tensor; a e is the spatial hyperelastic tangent stiffness of the material; γ _ is the plastic multiplier; f and g are the yield function and the plastic potential, respectively (see Oliynyk et al 2021 for details); P s and P t are internal variables; the functions are the plastic volumetric and deviatoric rates of deformation; and ρ , ξ s , and are material s ρ t ξ t constants.…”
Section: Local Versionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The FD_Milan model is a non-associative, isotropic hardening finite-deformation plasticity model for structured soils and weak rocks, developed by Oliynyk et al (2021) based on the multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient and on the adoption of a suitable free energy function to describe the elastic response of the material. Its evolution equations in the spatial setting are briefly summarized here: subjected to the Kuhn-Tucker complementarity conditions: r In the above equations, τ and τ are the Kirchhoff stress and its Jaumann objective rate; d is the rate of deformation tensor; d p is the plastic rate of deform ation tensor; a e is the spatial hyperelastic tangent stiffness of the material; γ _ is the plastic multiplier; f and g are the yield function and the plastic potential, respectively (see Oliynyk et al 2021 for details); P s and P t are internal variables; the functions are the plastic volumetric and deviatoric rates of deformation; and ρ , ξ s , and are material s ρ t ξ t constants.…”
Section: Local Versionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Table 1. Sets of material constants adopted in the CPTu test simulations (see Oliynyk et al 2021 for details on the meaning of each constant).…”
Section: Simulation Programmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then several constitute models developed based on this original approach. For example, [7] showed the C-CASM to model cemented clays whilst more recently [8,9] showed how a large strain formulation of a similar models can be used to simulate CPT in structured clays and soft rocks respectively. In this work the cemented clay and sand model (C-CASM) fully described in [4] is used.…”
Section: The Constitutive Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, amongst various continuum approaches, the Geotechnical Particle Finite Element Method (GPFEM) has recently been shown to be able to manage large deformations and address the complexities of nonlinear soil behaviour [10], [11]. GPFEM has shown to be suitable to investigate CPT installation and interpretation in various soil types [11]- [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%