A comparison between crystal and isotropic strain gradient plasticity theories with accent on the role of the plastic spin

In the small deformation range, we consider crystal and isotropic “higher-order” theories of strain gradient plasticity, in which two different types of size effects are accounted for: (i) that dissipative, entering the model through the definition of an effective measure of plastic deformation peculiar of the isotropic hardening function and (ii) that energetic, included by defining the defect energy (i.e., a function of Nyeʹs dislocation density tensor added to the free energy; see, e.g., [Gurtin, M.E., 2002. A gradient theory of single-crystal viscoplasticity that accounts for geometrically necessary dislocations. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 50, 5–32]). In order to compare the two modellings, we recast both of them into a unified deformation theory framework and apply them to a simple boundary value problem for which we can exploit the Γ-convergence results of [Bardella, L., Giacomini, A., 2008. Influence of material parameters and crystallography on the size effects describable by means of strain gradient plasticity. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 56 (9), 2906–2934], in which the crystal model is made isotropic by imposing that any direction be a possible slip system. We show that the isotropic modelling can satisfactorily approximate the behaviour described by the isotropic limit obtained from the crystal modelling if the former constitutively involves the plastic spin, as in the theory put forward in Section 12 of [Gurtin, M.E., 2004. A gradient theory of small-deformation isotropic plasticity that accounts for the Burgers vector and for dissipation due to plastic spin. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 52, 2545–2568]. The analysis suggests a criterium for choosing the material parameter governing the plastic spin dependence into the relevant Gurtin model.