DISCUSSION

Author's Closure
T h e author wishes to thank Professor Wu for his discussion of the paper. H e stated t h a t the purpose of his discussion was to show t h a t " it is possible to treat the original differential equations in a transformed plane." H e stated further t h a t : "Such an approach takes advantage of the considerable amount of existing information regarding similarity solutions . . . ." These statements are rather confusing. How can one solve t h e original partial differential equations in a transformed plane, and in what way can existing information regarding similarity solutions be used in the solution of new nonsimilar problems? Furthermore he states: " F o r similar problems, the author's method is, in reality, analogous to an iterative method for the solution of the ordinary differential equation t h a t results from t h e similarity consideration." Effecting t h e solution of t h e example, considered by Professor Wu, both in the physical plane and in the transformed plane, clearly shows t h a t t h e only analogous aspect about t h e solution procedures is t h a t they both result in answers to t h e same problem. I n no way is his equation (9) analogous to equation (2) of the original paper as was stated in the discussion. Although the objective of the paper was not to compare the solution in the physical plane with the transformed plane, the use of the 77-plane clearly results in a significant complication in this example. The straightforward finite-difference calculation has been replaced by an iterative solution of a two-point boundaryvalue problem. In addition, this boundary value is specified a t 77 equal to infinity which further complicates the interative procedure. Unless some prior knowledge of t h e approximate value of the unknown initial condition is available, the iterative solution of the boundary-value problem would require considerably more computational effort in order to obtain engineering accuracy. The nonsimilar example presented in t h e discussion demonstrates that a conventional dimensional analysis of the governing equations can lead to t h e relevant dimensionless coordinates x* and y*. However, the procedure described in the original paper was more general. I t gave t h e investigator the option of using the x*-y* plane or t h e rj-s* plane. Having determined the relations between these independent variables (x*, y*, -q, and s*) and the parameters of t h e discrete physical plane {M, N, IS, and i), the investigator can interpret his results in both planes with a negligible increase in computational effort. The rj-s* plane has the advantage of showing the asymptotic approach of the solution to t h e similar solution. If s* is sufficiently small, t h e solution reduces to a function of 77 only. I n addition, knowledge of the relationship between t h e parameters of the discrete physical plane and t) is a prerequisite to t h e use of t h e practical error criterion recently developed by the author. 3

"(o-i - o-2)" + (Q-2 - 0-3)" + (er3 - o-t)""!" _

The discusser would like to add that, except for notation, this criterion is the same as

which was introduced 3 by the discusser. m, Y, and C are related by

T h e material constants

C = (2/3)i'"'(I72)

Author's Closure
I wish to thank Professor Paul for citing his earlier publication of a very similar generalized yield criterion which had escaped my attention. I t should be noted t h a t while t h e two formulations are similar they are not identical. The form of the paper under discussion is (o-i - <r2) + (<72 - 0-3)" + (o-i - o-3)" = 2 F where a\ > cr2 > cr3, rather than t h a t given in t h e discussion. The specification t h a t Ci > <r2 > <r3 makes each term on the left positive. Therefore n may have any value, integer or noninteger between 1 and co. Tresca corresponds to n = 1 as well as and von Mises to n = 4 as well as n = 2. T h e interval 1 < n < 2 : was suggested for describing material behavior as it provides a continuous spectrum of possible loci between those of Tresca and von Mises and it leads to an easier numerical computation rather than the equivalent interval of 4 < n < <=. In Professor Paul's formulation all terms are not positive so t h a t he h a d to specify t h e exponent as an even integer. This results in a series (rather than a continuum) of yield loci, and is : restricted to the range 2 < m < =>.
3 Paul, B., "Macroscopic Criteria for Plastic Flow and Brittle Fracture," Fracture, an Advanced Treatise, Vol. 2, Mathematical -. Fundamentals, ed., Liebowitz, H., Academic Press, N. Y. 1968, p. 346.

Clausing, A. M., "Practical Techniques for Estimating the Accuracy of Finite-Difference Solutions to Parabolic Equations," ASME Paper No. 72-WA/APM-12.

Magnetoelastic Buckling of Beams and Thin Plates of Magnetically Soft Material1

F. C. MOON.2 The authors in this paper attempt t o determine more precisely the initial magnetic field due to the finite size of the plate in t h e magnetic field, whereas in t h e paper b y Moon and Pao [ l ] 3 these effects were not considered. Such a determination of the finite size effects on the buckling of a beam in a magnetic field is a fine contribution, b u t this writer has some doubts as to the correctness of the numerical results published by the authors. The authors claim t h a t a t t h e surface of a plate of relative dimensions, a = 1.0, b 0.083, c = 0.0047, t h e magnetic field . component normal to the plate surface, a t the center of the plate,
1

A Generalized Isotropic Yield Criterion1

B. PAUL.2 Professor Hosford has shown some interesting interpretations and implications of the yield criterion:
1

By D. V. Wallerstein and M. O. Peach, published in the June,

By W. F. Hosford, published in the June, 1972, issue of the JOTJB-

1972, issue of the JOURNAL OF APPLIED MECHANICS, Vol. 39, TKANS.

NAL OF APPLIED MECHANICS, Vol. 39, TKANS. ASME, Vol. 94, Series

E, pp. 607-609. 2 Professor of Mechanical Engineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.

1172 / D E C E M B E R 1972

ASME, Vol. 94, Series E, pp. 451-455. 2 Assistant Professor, Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, N. J. 3 Numbers in brackets designate References at end of Discussion.

Copyright 1972 by ASME

Transactions of the ASME \

Downloaded 01 Feb 2011 to 161.253.104.136. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm