Three-dimensional formulations

Petrie and Ito (84) used numerical methods to analyze the dynamic deformation of axisymmetric cylindrical HDPE parisons and estimate final thickness. One of the early and important contributions to parison inflation simulation came from DeLorenzi et al. (85-89), who studied thermoforming and isothermal and nonisothermal parison inflation with both two- and three-dimensional formulation, using FEM with a hyperelastic, solidlike constitutive model. Hyperelastic constitutive models (i.e., models that account for the strains that go beyond the linear elastic into the nonlinear elastic region) were also used, among others, by Charrier (90) and by Marckmann et al. (91), who developed a three-dimensional dynamic FEM procedure using a nonlinear hyperelastic Mooney-Rivlin membrane, and who also used a viscoelastic model (92). However, as was pointed out by Laroche et al. (93), hyperelastic constitutive equations do not allow for time dependence and strain-rate dependence. Thus, their assumption of quasi-static equilibrium during parison inflation, and overpredicts stresses because they cannot account for stress relaxation furthermore, the solutions are prone to numerical instabilities. Hyperelastic models like viscoplastic models do allow for strain hardening, however, which is a very important element of the actual inflation process. 

The use of an FPE, such as that developed in Section IIB, is not appropriate for the study of all aspects of vibrational relaxation, such as dephasing. Nevertheless it is not unrealistic to expect that the effective potential ( (P) of Eq. (2.26) and the relative friction of Eq. (2.34) will also characterize an appropriate three-dimensional formulation. In one dimension the energy diffusion equation of Zwanzig has been found to givea good... 

To obtain Eqs (7.18) and (7.21) we need to assume that f vanishes as x oo faster than x. Physically tliis must be so because a particle that starts at x = 0 cannot reach beyond some finite distance at any finite time if only because its speed cannot exceed the speed of light. Of course, the diffusion equation does not know the restrictions imposed by the Einstein relativity theory (similarly, the MaxweU-Boltzmann distribution assigns finite probabilities to find particles with speeds that exceed the speed of light). The real mathematical reason why/ has to vanish faster than x is that in the equivalent three-dimensional formulation/(r) has to vanish faster than r as r oo in order to be normalizable. 

A three-dimensional formulation of the Bingham plastic was developed by Hohenemser and Prager [H19] in 1932 using the von Mises yield criterion (see Reiner [R4] and Prager [P15]). This employs a deviatoric stress tensor T and has the form... 

Three-dimensional formulations for T including nonlinear viscoelastic integral forms are contained in the papers of White [W9], White and Tanaka [W23], and White and Lobe [W21], These all have the general form of Eq. (70) with [compare Eq. (47)]... 

Note that L2 does not explicitly depend on proper time t, since according to Eq. (3.92) r is uniquely determined by the space-time vector x and the 4-velocity u. For a better comparison between the three-dimensional formulation (Li) and the explicitly covariant formulation (L2) we have employed the velocity v = r (instead of r itself) in Eq. (3.139). Both Lagrangians Li and L2 do not represent physical observables and are therefore not uniquely determined. According to the Hamiltonian principle of least action given by Eq. (2.48), 5S = 0, they only have to yield the same equation of motion. This is in particular guaranteed if even the actions themselves are identical, i.e.. 

We first consider the three-dimensional formulation employing Li. For a free particle we require the usual space-time symmetries and conservation laws to be valid (cf. section 2.2.3) due to spatial translational invariance (i.e., momentum conservation) Li must not explicitly depend on r, due to temporal translational invariance (i.e., energy conservation) it must not explicitly depend on f, and due to rotational invariance it must not depend on the direction of velocity, but only on its magnitude v = v, i.e., L = Ti( ) = here... 

In analogy to our argumentation for the free particle above, we require the three-dimensional formulation of the Lagrangian L = Li r,v,t) to yield exactly the same action S as the explicitly covariant Lagrangian L2 = L2 x, u), i.e., the interaction term has to be rewritten as... 

Equations 9.8 and 9.10b are written for rectilinear flows and infinitesimal deformations. We need equations that apply to finite, three-dimensional deformations. Intuitively, one might expect simply to replace the strain rate dy/dt by the components of the symmetric deformation rate tensor (dv /dy -y dvy/dx, etc.) to obtain a three-dimensional formulation, as in Section 2.2.3, and dr/dt by the substantial derivative D/Dt of the appropriate stress components. The first substitution is correct, but intuition would lead us badly astray regarding the second. Constitutive equations must be properly invariant to changes in the frame of reference (they must satisfy the principle of material frame indifference), and the substantial derivative of a stress or deformation-rate tensor is not properly invariant. The properly invariant... 

In three-dimensional formulation, the condition k1 + k += 0 ov A + BY is satisfied, without loss of generality on setting k = 0, ik = to describe a threefold degenerate state by the magnetic quantum number w/ = 0, 1. Equating all constants to zero, by the mathematical separation of the physically entangled x and y coordinates, not only avoids the use of complex functions, but also destroys the ability to describe the angular momentum of the system. The one-dimensional projection appears as harmonic oscillation, e.g,... 

In the same way that two-dimensional harmonics are complex functions, fourdimensional harmonics are hypercomplex functions or quaternions, also known as spin functions. A spin function represents the four-dimensional analogue of the conserved quantity known as angular momentum in three dimensions. The problem with standard wave mechanics is that on separation of the variables to create a three-dimensional Sturm-Liouville system the spin function breaks down into orbital angular momentum and one-dimensional spin, which disappears in the three-dimensional formulation. 

In the introduction to this chapter we noted that in 1678 Hooke proposed that the force in a springy body was proportional to its extension. It took about ISO years to develop e proper way to determine the three-dimensional state of force or stress and of deformation at any point in a body. In the 1820s Cauchy completed the three-dimensional formulation of Hooke s law. However, because metals and ceramics, which fracture or yield at small deformations, were the main interest at that time only a tensor for small strains... 

In brief, the flow process is described by a three-dimensional formulation of Eyring rate-process kineties, where flow proceeds by shear but the rate of flow is modulated by the hydrostatic conqx>nent of stress beeause of the transition state is expected to be a locally dilated state. Under these conditions the deviatorie bond stretching contribution to the flow stress is a linear function of log strain rate. 

The seminal studies on these complex compounds were conducted by Alfred Werner in an intensive period of work at the turn of the century. A typical example of the problems that Werner addressed lies in the various compounds which can be obtained containing cobalt, ammonia and chlorine. Stable and chemically distinct materials with formulations Co(NH3) Cl3 (n = 4,5 or 6) can be isolated. The concepts of valency and three-dimensional structure in carbon chemistry were being developed at that time, but it was apparent that the same rules could not apply to... 

Most drug-like molecules adopt a number of conformations through rotations about bonds and/or inversions about atomic centers, giving the molecules a number of different three-dimensional (3D) shapes. To obtain different energy minimized structures using a force field, a conformational search technique must be combined with the local geometry optimization described in the previous section. Many such methods have been formulated, and they can be broadly classified as either systematic or stochastic algorithms. 

The simplest formulation of the packing problem is to give some collection of distance constraints and to calculate these coordinates in ordinary three-dimensional Euclidean space for the atoms of a molecule. This embedding problem - the Fundamental Problem of Distance Geometry - has been proven to be NP-hard [116]. However, this does not mean that practical algorithms for its solution do not exist [117-119]. 

---