A comparative study of stress update algorithms for rate‐independent and rate‐dependent crystal plasticity

134 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

On the comparison of two approaches to compute material forces for inelastic materials. Application to single-slip crystal-plasticity (2004, methodology): “The underlying numerical formulation is later on applied to single-slip crystal-plasticity with only one possibly active sliding parameter; for detailed discussions on the general algorithmic formulation we refer the reader to Cuitiño and Ortiz [11], Steinmann and Stein [39], Miehe [28,29] and Miehe”
A rate-independent elastoplastic constitutive model for biological fiber-reinforced composites at finite strains: continuum basis, algorithmic formulation and finite element implementation (2002, unknown): “For a solution procedure to circumvent the problem of linearly dependent constraints the reader is referred to, for example, Miehe [32] or Miehe and Schröder [34].”
A gradient-enhanced damage model coupled to plasticity—multi-surface formulation and algorithmic concepts (2018, methodology): “With this method, we conceptually follow the works of Simo et al. (1988), Cuitiño and Ortiz (1993), and Miehe and Schröder (2001), who proposed applications of the active set strategy in the context of non-linear computational inelasticity.”