A dynamic instability, which is relatively unexplored in the literature despite having
been long ago previously asserted to exist for any conventional nonassociated plastic
flow model, is illustrated by means of an example problem. This instability is
related to a condition known as achronicity, in which the wave speed in
plastic loading is greater than that in elastic unloading (making it absolutely
not related to the well-studied phenomena of localization and flutter). The
one-dimensional example problem initializes an elastic-plastic half-space to a initially
quiescent uniform state of prestress that places it in an achronic condition
if a nonassociated flow rule is used. The initial stress state is perturbed
by an axial stress pulse applied at the surface. The problem is first solved
analytically for the case of constant wave speeds, and it is shown to possess a
two-parameter family of nonunique solutions. These solutions are unstable in
that both the amplitude and the width of the propagating pulse increase
linearly with time. The case-study problem technically represents spontaneous
motion from a quiescent state, but it does not violate thermodynamics (as the
energy driving the instability is available from elastic stored energy of the
initial prestress). The example problem is additionally solved numerically for
both constant and nonconstant plastic wave speeds, where the instability is
observed in either case. Furthermore, it is shown that neither the constant
nor the nonconstant wave speed solution converges with mesh refinement,
which therefore represents a numerical inadmissibility associated with the
underlying loss of uniqueness of solution. It is the nonuniqueness of the unstable
solution, not the existence of the instability itself, that is of primary concern.
Unlike conventional localization instability, this achronic instability is not
yet known to be a real phenomenon. This case-study problem illustrates
the need for novel laboratory testing methods sufficient to determine if the
instability is truly physical, or merely an anomalous shortcoming of classical
nonassociated plasticity formulations. Some guidance for appropriate laboratory
testing is presented, with emphasis on why such testing is highly nontrivial
as a result of irreducible uncertainty in direct validation of a regular flow
rule.