Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 19;145(1):011004. doi: 10.1115/1.4054983

Fig. 6.

Verification of frame indifference for an orthotropic fibrous material subjected to cyclical stress, comparing outcomes between a cubic material domain with fixed versus rotating substrates. (a) Comparison of principal natural strains over two cycles of loading. (b) Comparison of maximum principal stress versus maximum principal strain for ten cycles of loading, showing a distinct preconditioning response. (c) The number of generations for two different values of wmin. All results are shown for the central element of a cubic mesh with 3×3×3 elements. The cycle period was 1 s and the time increment was set to 0.025 s (40 time increments per cycle).

Verification of frame indifference for an orthotropic fibrous material subjected to cyclical stress, comparing outcomes between a cubic material domain with fixed versus rotating substrates. (a) Comparison of principal natural strains over two cycles of loading. (b) Comparison of maximum principal stress versus maximum principal strain for ten cycles of loading, showing a distinct preconditioning response. (c) The number of generations for two different values of wmin. All results are shown for the central element of a cubic mesh with 3×3×3 elements. The cycle period was 1 s and the time increment was set to 0.025 s (40 time increments per cycle).