- 23,709
- 5,927
For large deformation situations, the stretch ratio is not ambiguous,, but the strain is.Juanda said:To be honest I don't remember being taught about stretch ratios while I was in university. It might be a language issue. It's not that I don't understand it. I checked the formula and I know what it is.
Simply I think we don't have a specific word to define that. It could also be I simply don't remember the name though. We just used forces, stress, strain, and displacements. I actually don't see much added value in incorporating the stretch ratio into the mix of variables that already seem to fully define the situation but my conception might change as I learn more.
In fact, I thought you swapped from ##\epsilon## to ##\lambda## to indicate we're tackling question 2 about the balloon instead of question 1 about the tank.Yeah, after noticing the difference between strain and stretch ratio I see how it makes sense.I guess that'd be a reason to try using stress ratio instead of strain.
No. I already specified the functionality: ##x=x(x_0,y_0,z_0)##, same for y and z. So, $$dx=\frac{\partial x}{\partial x_0}dx_0+\frac{\partial x}{\partial y_0}dy_0+\frac{\partial x}{\partial z_0}dz_0$$same for dy and dz.Juanda said:Wouldn't I need to know the functions for ##x##; ##y##; ##z## to be able to answer that question?
For example,
$$x=x_0+1$$
So every point moves 1 unit to the right. Now I can check where that neighboring point you described would end up by inputting that into the previous expression.
$$x=x_0+dx_0+1$$
Is that what you meant with your question?
Let ##(ds)^2## be the square of distance between the two closely neighboring material points in the deformed configuration of the body. Please express ##(ds)^2## in terms of ##dx_0, \ dy_0,\ and\ dz_0## (not dx, dy and dz). That is, in terms of the differential differences of the coordinates of the two material points in the undeformed configuration of the body.