A Model of Incompressible Isotropic Hyperelastic Material Behavior Using Spline Interpolations of Tension-Compression Test Data

Endurica 2.
31 Manual
Theory
Introduction
Strain Measures
For various reasons, and at various points in the system, ENDURICA uses several different measures to
describe the strain state. This section provides definitions of the strain measures that are used, and relations
for converting between them.
Deformation Gradient

The deformation gradient F is a linear transformation that transforms a material vector dX in the

undeformed configuration into the corresponding vector dx in the deformed configuration. At a given
material point, the relationship between the deformed and undeformed configurations is completely
specified by the deformation gradient.
 
dx  F dX (1)
Green-Lagrange Strain
The Green-Lagrange strain E is used extensively for calculations in ENDURICA. This is defined in terms
of the deformation gradient F and the identity matrix I as:
E  FT F  I (2)
Nominal ("Engineering") Strain
Many users will find it convenient to specify the strain history in terms of the "nominal" or "engineering"
strain components. The nominal strain is related to the deformation gradient through the right stretch
tensor U. R is the tensor representing the rigid rotation of the material between the deformed and
undeformed configurations.
F  RU (3)
The engineering strain tensor is computed as:
ε  UI (4)
Stress Measures
Whenever ENDURICA reports a stress as output, it is given as nominal stress (i.e. force per unit
undeformed area). However, there are various points internal to the code where Cauchy stress is utilized
Page 22 of 67
The contents of this manual are proprietary, and may only be used under license from Endurica LLC.
Copyright © 2007-2014
Endurica 2.31 Manual
for calculation. This section provides definitions of the stress measures used, and relations for converting
between them.
Cauchy ("True") Stress


The Cauchy stress tensor maps a unit vector
 n , that is the normal to a given cutting plane, to the traction
vector t that acts on the plane. The traction vector is defined as the ratio of the total force vector (on the
plane in question) to the area of the plane, when the area is small enough that the traction may be regarded
as constant over the area.
 
t  σn (5)
The principal values of σ are σi = σ1, σ2, σ3.
Nominal ("Engineering") Stress
The principal engineering stresses Σi (i.e. force per unit original area) may be computed from the principal
Cauchy stresses as follows:
J
i  i (no summation implied) (6)
i
where
J  det(F) (7)
and
λi are the principal stretches.
Stress Calculations
Stress calculations in ENDURICA are made via the theory of Hyperelasticity. The basic premise of this
theory is that the work W done during deformation depends only on the instantaneous state of deformation
relative to the undeformed state. If the instantaneous state of deformation is characterized by the
independent variables I1, I2, and I3, then
W  W ( I1 , I 2 , I 3 , ) (8)
Via this assumption, the stresses can be found by taking appropriate derivatives of equation (8). As fuller
accounts of this theory are widely available (ABAQUS Theory Manual, for example) no further definition
is given here.
Computing Principal Stresses

Principal stresses can be computed as follows.
Page 23 of 67
σ  S  pI (9)
The hydrostatic pressure p may be given, or it may be computed from the strain if dilatation is present. If
the hydrostatic pressure has been specified, then this pressure is directly added to the deviatoric stresses. If
the hydrostatic pressure has not been specified, then it is computed from the dilatation ratio J as
tr(σ) W
p  (10)
3 J
In the case of plane stress, p is selected such that the out-of-plane component of the stress is zero. Note that
p is positive in tension.
The deviatoric part of the stress is
2  W W  W 
S DEV   I1 B  BB (11)
J  I 1 I 2  I 2 
2  W W  W 
S   I1  DEV B  DEV B B  (12)
J  I 1 I 2  I 2 
where
12 
 
B 22  (13)
 2
3 

212  22  32 
tr(B ) 1  
DEV( B )  B    2    
2
2
2
1
2
3  (14)
3 3
 232  12  22 

and
14 
 
BB    4
2  (15)
 34 

214  42  34 
1 
DEV( B B )   2    
4
2
4
1
4
3  (16)
3
 4
23  1  2 
4 4

Page 24 of 67
 212  22  32 

2  W W   
  I1   222  12  32 
3J  I 1 I 2 
 2
23  1   2 
2 2
S  
(17)
214  42  34 
W  
  2 2  1  3
4 4 4

I 2 4 
 2  4
  4
 
 3 1 2 
so…
 W W  2 W 
S11 
2
  I1 
 21  22  32   
214  42  34  (18)
3J  I 1 I 2  I 2 
2  W W  2 W 
S 22  
3J  I 1
 I1
I 2 

 22  12  32 
I 2
 
242  14  34  (19)

2  W W  2 W 
S 33  
3J  I 1
 I1
I 2 

 23  12  22  
I 2

234  14  42  (20)

Models for Deviatoric Hyperelasticity
The principal stress calculations described above require knowledge about the derivatives of the strain
energy density function. This section gives the energy functions and the associated derivatives for each of
the deviatoric hyperelasticity models that are implemented in ENDURICA.
Neo-Hookean
W  C10 ( I1  3) (21)
W
 C10 (22)
I 1
W
0 (23)
I 2
In conjunction with this model for deviatoric hyperelasticity, ENDURICA uses the linear model for
dilatational hyperelasticty.
Arruda Boyce
5
Ci
W  G ( I 1i  3i ) (24)
i 1  2i  2
m
1 1 11 19 519
C1  , C2  , C3  , C4  , C5  , (25)
2 20 1050 7000 673750
Page 25 of 67
W 5
C
 G  i 2i i 2 I 1i 1 (26)
I1 i 1  m
W
0 (27)
I 2
In conjunction with this model for deviatoric hyperelasticity, ENDURICA uses the one parameter non-
linear model for dilatational hyperelasticty.
Mooney Rivlin
W  C10 ( I1  3)  C01 ( I 2  3) (28)

W
 C10 (29)
I 1
W
 C 01 (30)
I 2
In conjunction with this model for deviatoric hyperelasticity, ENDURICA uses the linear model for
Reduced Polynomial
N
W   Ci 0 ( I1  3) i (31)
i 1
W N
  iC i 0 ( I 1  3) i 1 (32)
I 1 i 1
W
0 (33)
I 2
In conjunction with this model for deviatoric hyperelasticity, ENDURICA uses the polynomial model for
Van der Waals
The model is defined by

 ~
3

 2  I  32 
W  G  (m  3)ln(1   )      
2
 
3  2  
(34)

 
where
~
I  (1   ) I1  I 2 , 0   1 (35)
Page 26 of 67
and
~
I 3
 (36)
2m  3
we will need to know that
1
~ 
 1  I  3  2 1 1 1
~   2 
  (37)
I 2  m  3  m  3 2 m  3
2 2
and that
1
~
W G  I  3  2
~   
2  2 
(38)
I
W  1 
 G(2m  3)   1 (39)
   1 
Now we must evaluate:
~ ~ ~
W W I W  I I  W W  
 ~    ~  ~
I I 1  I I 1 I 1  I  I 
~ (40)
I 1
so
~
I
 1  (41)
I 1
giving
 ~
1

W  G  I  3  2  1  1 1 
 1     

  G(m  3) 

2
 1  (42)
I 1   1  2 m  3 
2
 2  2 
 
which simplifies to
 1

W G1    1
 ~
 I 3 2 

      
 (43)
I 1 2  1    2  
 
Now we must evaluate
~
W I  W W  
  ~  ~
 I 
(44)
I 2 I 2  I
~
I
 (45)
I 2
so
 ~
1

W G  1  I 3 2 

      
 (46)
I 2 2 1  2  
 
In conjunction with this model for deviatoric hyperelasticity, ENDURICA uses the one parameter non-
linear model for dilatational hyperelasticty.
Page 27 of 67
Ogden
The model is defined by

2 i
 
N
W  i
 2 i  3 i  3 (47)
 2 1
i 1 i
where
1

i  J  i 3
(48)
and
12 3  1  J (49)
In conjunction with this model for deviatoric hyperelasticity, ENDURICA uses the polynomial model for
Models for Dilatational Hyperelasticity (Hydrostatic Pressure)
The principal stress calculations described above require knowledge about the derivatives of the strain
energy density function. This section gives the energy functions and the associated derivatives for each of
the dilatational hyperelasticity models that are implemented in ENDURICA.
Linear
W
K
J  12 (50)
2
W
 K J  1 (51)
J
p  2W
 K (52)
J J 2
One parameter non-linear
K  J 2 1 
W   ln J  (53)
2 2 
W K  1
 J   (54)
J 2 J
p  2W K  1 
  1  2  (55)
J J 2
2 J 
Page 28 of 67
Polynomial
N
1
W  ( J  1) 2i (56)
i 1 Di
W N
2i
  ( J  1) 2i 1 (57)
J i 1 Di
p  2W N
2i(2i  1)
J

J 2
 
i 1 D
( J  1) 2(i 1) (58)
i
Mullins Effect
A full description of the theory implemented in ENDURICA may be found in the ABAQUS Theory
manual.
Fatigue Life Calculations
The goal of an analysis in ENDURICA is to predict the number of repeated applications of a given loading
history that will occur before the "appearance" of a crack.
Following ideas from Fracture Mechanics, it is regarded that a small crack is initially present in the
material before any load history is applied. The initial crack is not typically observed due to its small size.
As the number of applied cycles increases, the crack increases in size. Eventually, the crack reaches a
specified size that defines the end of the analysis. At this point, the crack is considered to have "nucleated"
or "appeared". The number of cycles required to reach this point is called the crack nucleation life.
This section describes the calculations that have been implemented in ENDURICA for predicting the
fatigue crack nucleation life.
Integration Scheme
The fatigue crack nucleation life, given as the number of times Nf that a specified block of history may be
repeated before the appearance of a crack, is obtained by evaluating the integral
cf 1
Nf   dc (59)
c0 f (T (c, t ))
Before making the calculation, the effective diameter c0 of idealized penny-shaped cracks existing initially
in the material, and the crack diameter cf at failure (i.e. crack nucleation) must be specified.
The function f(T) in the denominator of the integrand in equation (59) defines the rate of crack growth Δc
per application of the block of load history as a function of the applied history of crack driving force T.
The crack driving force is a function of the crack diameter c. For sufficiently small cracks, the function
depends linearly on c. Specifically, the following relationship is presently used in ENDURICA:
T  2Wc c (60)
Page 29 of 67
To define when a crack is to be considered sufficiently small, imagine an infinite region that is strained
homogeneously to a state that is identical to the strain at the point of interest on the part to be analyzed.
Now introduce two identical penny-shaped cracks of diameter c - one in the part and the other in the
unbounded region. If the energy release rates of these two cracks are sufficiently close, then the crack is
small enough. This condition would be likely to fail whenever a crack becomes similar in size (to within
an order of magnitude) to geometrical features of the part to be analyzed. For the purpose of predicting
crack nucleation life, the initial crack size is many orders of magnitude smaller than part features, and so
equation (60) may be expected to provide a reasonable prediction of the crack driving force.
Wc is a parameter that quantifies, for uncracked material, how much of the strain energy density is available
for release due to growth of a crack. Under conditions of simple tension and small strains, this is equal to
the strain energy density. The cracking energy density defined by Mars [2001] provides an approximation
of this quantity for arbitrary states of strain and crack orientation.
Cycle Counting Models
A central task in the evaluation of equation (59) is to determine the amount of crack growth c that would
occur after the application of one block of the loading history, assuming a given crack size - i.e. to
determine the value of f(T). At present, two alternative procedures for analyzing the effect of a single block
of loading history are available: the Simple Min-Max procedure, and the Rainflow procedure.
For purposes of evaluating the crack driving force, it is assumed that the crack size is constant during one
application of the block of loading history.
Simple Min-Max
In this procedure, it is assumed that the loading history can be characterized via a single set of cyclic limits
(i.e. one minimum and one maximum). For simple loading histories, this procedure can be significantly
more efficient than the rainflow procedure. This procedure is not appropriate for loading histories
containing multiple load reversals that occur at varying levels.
The procedure computes the minimum and maximum values of the crack driving force that occur during
one application of the loading history. The R ratio is computed as the ratio of the minimum and maximum
values of the crack driving force.
Tmin  min(T (t )) (61)

Tmax  max(T (t )) (62)
Tmin
R (63)
Tmax
The crack growth occurring during one application of a block is computed via the function dc/dN, which
defines the crack growth law. Crack growth laws that can be specified are defined subsequently.
dc
c  (Tmax , R) (64)
dN
Rainflow
Page 30 of 67
In this procedure, the loading history is parsed via the Rainflow algorithm (Downing and Socie, 1982) into
a list containing M component cycles. Each component cycle is defined by a peak crack driving force Tmax
and an R ratio. This procedure should be used whenever the loading history contains multiple load
reversals that occur at varying levels.
The crack growth occurring during one application of a block is computed as the sum of the individual
crack growth rates associated with each of the component cycles. The crack growth rate associated with
each component cycle is determined via the function dc/dN, which defines the crack growth law. Crack
growth laws that can be specified are defined subsequently.
M
dc
c   (Tmax,i , Ri ) (65)
i 1 dN
Time-Dependent Crack Growth Model
With certain elastomeric materials under some types of conditions, steady, time-dependent crack growth
may play an important part in determining the fatigue crack nucleation life. Such effects may be important
in rubbers that do not strain crystallize, and in situations involving attack by chemical agents (ozone, for
example).
The framework represented by equation (59) can be adapted to incorporate these effects via the suggestion
of Lake and Lindley (1964) that the cyclic and steady components of the crack growth rate can be regarded
as additive:
dc  dc   dc dt 
    (66)
dN  dN  cyclic  dt dN  steady
Here, dt/dN can be recognized as the period of time P required to apply one block of loading history.
Over 1 block of load history, the average rate of steady crack growth dc / dt is given in terms of the
instantaneous crack growth rate dc / dt by
P
dc

0
dc / dtds
(67)
P
dt
0
ds
For a discretely approximated load history containing M points, (67) can be written as
M
dc 1 dc

dt M
 dt (T (t ))
i 1
i (68)
The individual cyclic (dc/dN) and steady (dc/dt) contributions to the total crack growth rate are evaluated
from their respective material models, as described in the next section.
Models for Fatigue Crack Growth Rate
The crack growth laws referenced in equations (64), (65) and (68) define how the rate of crack growth
depends on crack driving forces. This relationship is a defining characteristic of the material that must be
Page 31 of 67
determined via experiments. ENDURICA provides a range of models for representing each component of
the experimentally observed crack growth behavior. As suggested in Figure 1, a modular approach is
adopted that offers a range of sub-models for describing each component of the total crack growth
behavior. To fully define the fatigue behavior of a material, it is required to specify 1) the dependence of
the cyclic crack growth rate under fully relaxing conditions on the peak crack driving force Tmax, 2) the
dependence of the cyclic crack growth rate on R ratio, and 3) the dependence of the steady crack growth
rate on instantaneous crack driving force.
dc
dN
Cyclic Steady
R=0 R>0 Ozone attack ViscoElastic

Gent-
Rupture
Powerlaw Paris
McGrath
Lake- Mars- Powerlaw
Lindley Fatemi
Table
Table
Table Lookup
Lookup
Lookup
Figure 1. Available models for capturing steady and cyclic contributions to the total fatigue crack growth
rate in rubber.
Cyclic Crack Growth Behavior Under Fully Relaxing Conditions
Three models are presently available for describing the dependence of the cyclic (or dynamic) crack growth
rate on peak crack driving force Tmax under fully relaxing (R = 0) conditions. These are: the Power Law
Model, the Lake-Lindley Model, and the Table-Lookup Model.
Note that crack growth due to time-dependent mechanisms may occur in addition to the crack growth that
occurs due to cyclic loading. Models for these effects are described in later sections.
Thomas (Power Law) Model
This model adopts the commonly employed and simple idealization that, below the critical value Tc of
crack driving force, the cyclic crack growth rate dc/dN varies as a power-law function of the peak crack
driving force. Thomas (1958) reported the first instance of this type of relationship for fatigue crack
growth rate. The power law slope is given by F. At the critical value Tc of crack driving force, the rate of
crack growth is assumed to increase discontinuously from a finite value rc to infinity. Figure 2 illustrates
this model. Note that this model does not describe a lower fatigue threshold below which crack growth
does not occur.
F
dc T 
 rc  max  T  Tc (69)
dN  Tc 
Page 32 of 67
dc
 T  Tc (70)
dN
1.E-02
1.E-03 rc
Crack Growth Rate, m/cyc
1.E-04
1.E-05
F
1.E-06
1.E-07
Tc
1.E-08
1.E-09
1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05
Peak Crack Driving Force, J/m 2
Figure 2. The solid curve shows a typical power-law model for representing the cyclic crack growth rate as
a function of the peak crack driving force. The model parameters are the critical crack driving force Tc, the
rate of crack growth rc at the intersection of the power-law function with the vertical asymptote, and the
power-law slope F.
Lake-Lindley Model
The model developed by Lake and Lindley attempts to describe all regimes of fatigue crack growth
behavior, from low to high values of the crack driving force. So long as the peak crack driving force Tmax
remains below the threshold To, crack growth due to cyclic loading does not occur.
dc
0 Tmax  To (71)
dN
Between To and a point of transition Tt, the rate of crack growth increases in linear proportion to the amount
by which Tmax exceeds To. This is described by the following relationship, in which A is a material
parameter.
dc
 A (Tmax  To ) To  Tmax  Tt (72)
dN
After the point of transition, there is a range between Tt and Tc, in which the relationship between the
fatigue crack growth rate and the crack driving force obeys a power-law, which has been described
previously.
Page 33 of 67
F
dc T 
 rc  max  Tt  Tmax  Tc (73)
dN  Tc 
As with the previously described power-law model, beyond Tc, unstable crack growth ensues, and the crack
growth rate is essentially infinite.
dc
 Tmax  Tc (74)
dN
In ENDURICA, the coefficient A is not specified. Rather, the crack driving force at the transition point is
specified. The coefficient A is then computed from the requirement that the crack growth rate should have
the same value on both the right and left sides of the transition point.
F
T 
A (Tt  To )  rc  t  (75)
 Tc 
rTF
A F c t (76)
Tc (Tt  To )
Figure 3 illustrates this model and the physical significance of its parameters.
1.E-02
1.E-03 rc
1.E-04 F
T0
1.E-05
1.E-06
Tt
1.E-07
Tc
1.E-08
1.E-09
1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05
2
Peak Crack Driving Force, J/m
Figure 3. The curve shows a typical instance of the Lake-Lindley model for representing the cyclic crack
growth rate as a function of the peak crack driving force. The model parameters are the critical crack
driving force Tc, the rate of crack growth rc at the intersection of the power-law function with the vertical
asymptote, the power-law slope F, the transition point Tt, and the mechanical fatigue threshold T0.
Page 34 of 67
Table Lookup Model
The most generalized model available in ENDURICA for describing the fatigue crack growth behavior
under fully relaxing conditions is the Table Lookup Model. In principle, this model can represent
experimentally obtained data exhibiting any functional dependence of dc/dN on T.
This model requires as input: 1) the minimum value T0 and the maximum value Tc of the crack driving
force, 2) a list giving the crack growth rates ri, (i = 1,M) at M points. The number of points must fall within
the range 1 < M < 1024. It is assumed that the points are spaced at equal logarithmic intervals, and that the
first and last points correspond to T0 and Tc.
The crack driving force Ti at each point in the list of crack growth rates is given by:
i 1
T  M 1
Ti  T0  c  (77)
 T0 
The rate of crack growth r for a given crack driving force T that falls between data points in the specified
list is interpolated according to the following rule:
log(r1 )  log(r0 )
T  log(T1 ) log(T0 )
r  r0   (78)
 T0 
where T0 and T1 are the crack driving forces from equation (77) that immediately precede and follow the
crack driving force T for which it is desired to find the corresponding crack growth rate r.
Page 35 of 67
1.E-02
1.E-03 r5
r3 r4
1.E-04
1.E-05
T0
1.E-06
r2
1.E-07 r1
Tc
1.E-08
1.E-09
1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05
2
Figure 4. The curve shows an example table look-up model for representing the cyclic crack growth rate as
a function of the peak crack driving force. The model parameters are the critical crack driving force Tc, the
mechanical fatigue threshold T0, and crack growth rates ri (which may be any positive number) at as many
as 1024 equally-spaced (on a log scale) intermediate levels of crack driving force.
Cyclic Crack Growth Behavior Under Non-Relaxing Conditions
The loading histories to be analyzed in ENDURICA are likely to contain cycles that do not fully relax. The
models described in this section provide a means of computing the cyclic crack growth rate when the load
does not fully relax during the cycle (i.e. R > 0).
Three models have been implemented to capture cyclic crack growth behavior under nonrelaxing
conditions. The models all involve the notion that there exists an "equivalent" crack driving force Teq such
that under fully relaxing conditions Teq would give the same rate of crack growth as for a nonrelaxing cycle
with peak crack driving force Tmax and load ratio R. The basic evaluation procedure is thus to use Tmax and
R to find Teq, according to the particular model selected (Paris, Mars-Fatemi, or Table Lookup). Once Teq is
known, one of the models discussed previously for fully relaxing conditions may be applied to find the
crack growth rate.
Paris Model (Default)
In this model, which is likely to be appropriate for non-strain-crystallizing rubbers, it is assumed that the
equivalent crack driving force under fully relaxing conditions is given by:
Teq  T (79)
Page 36 of 67
In terms of the peak crack driving force and R ratio, this is:
Teq  T  Tmax  Tmin  Tmax (1  R) (80)
No material parameters in addition to those already specified for the fully relaxing case are required with
this model.
Mars-Fatemi Model
This model can only be used in combination with the Power Law model for cyclic crack growth rate under
fully relaxing conditions. The model is developed in Mars and Fatemi (2003).
This model assumes that the slope F of the Power Law function given in equation (69) depends on the R
ratio according to the function:
F ( R)  F0 e Fa R  F1 R  F2 R 2  F3 R 3 (81)
F0, F1, F2, F3, and Fa are material parameters that define the R ratio effect.
The model assumes that all of the individual power-law curves (dc/dN vs. Tmax) for each R ratio intersect at
the point rc, Tc.
In this model the equivalent crack driving force under fully relaxing conditions is given by:
F ( R)  F ( R) 
 1 F ( 0 ) 
Teq  T F ( 0)
max Tc
 
(82)
1.E-02
1.E-03 rc
1.E-04
1.E-05
F0 F (R )
Teq Tmax
1.E-06
1.E-07
R0 R increasing
Tc
1.E-08
1.E-09
1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05
2
Figure 5. Schematic view of the dependence on R ratio of the crack growth rate predicted by the Mars-
Fatemi model. At each level of R ratio, powerlaw behavior is predicted. All curves pass through the point
Tc, rc. The powerlaw exponent F depends on the R ratio as illustruated in figure 6.
Page 37 of 67
100
Power-Law Exponent, F
10
F ( R )  F0 e Fa R  F1 R  F2 R 2  F3 R 3
1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
R ratio
Figure 6. Typical dependence of the power-law exponent F on R ratio for the Mars-Fatemi model. The
solid curve is the prediction of equation (81). Data points in this plot are from Lindley (1973).
Time-Dependent Crack Growth Behavior
Under static loading that is less than the critical value of crack driving force at which unstable crack growth
occurs, growth of cracks can occur due to mechanisms involving viscoelastic rupture and / or chemical
attack at a crack tip by scission-inducing agents such as ozone. These mechanisms can also contribute
significantly to the fatigue crack nucleation life under cyclic loading.
In ENDURICA, these effects are incorporated into the total fatigue crack growth rate via equation (68).
This section describes the models that have been implemented for describing how the time rate of steady
crack growth depends on the instantaneous crack driving force, the ozone concentration, and the
temperature.
Ozone and Chemical Attack
Williams Model
The Williams model assumes that, above a small threshold Tz, and below a certain mechanical threshold T0,
crack growth occurs in a time-dependent manner, at a constant rate rz.
Gent-McGrath Model
Exposure to ozone during a long-term fatigue test can significantly increase crack growth rate and shorten
fatigue life. Due to the stress concentration, elastomer network chains at a crack tip are energetically
Page 38 of 67
favorable for reaction with ozone. Ozone reacts with carbon-carbon double bonds in the main polymer
chain, causing scission of the chain. Other chemical agents can attack rubber in a manner similar to ozone.
To describe the effects of ozone and chemical attack on crack growth rate, ENDURICA uses the
idealization described by Gent and McGrath (1965).
Crack growth due to ozone attack occurs whenever the instantaneous crack driving force exceeds a small
threshold, denoted Tz. Tz is typically much smaller than the mechanical fatigue threshold To. The value of
Tz depends strongly on compound formulation, particularly the presence of antioxidants and antiozonants.
For unprotected rubber, Tz ≈ 0.1 J/m2. The presence of antiozonants can increase Tz by a factor of 10 or
more.
Above the threshold value Tz, the rate of crack growth due to ozone attack is independent of the crack
driving force. The particular rate of crack growth depends on the ozone concentration and on the
temperature. Two mechanisms have been found to control the crack growth rate dc/dt. At temperatures
near the glass transition Tg, the crack growth rate is proportional to the temperature Θ, independent of
ozone concentration. At sufficiently high temperatures (Θ-Tg > 100°C), the crack growth rate depends only
on ozone concentration, and is independent of temperature. The total rate of crack growth is given by the
following equations.
1
dc  1 1 
   
dt  R1 R2 
(83)
R1  K z cO3 (84)
Fv (  Tg )
Gv  (  Tg )
R2  K v e (85)
If (  Tg )  0 then dc/dt = 0.
It has been proposed that R1 reflects the rate at which ozone molecules impact elastomer network chains at
the crack tip. It is believed that R2 is related to viscoelastic behavior, through the finite time required to
redistribute crack tip strains, after scission of a network chain. Typical values for the material parameters
are:
cm L
K z  0.8  10 3 (86)
sec mg
cm
K v  0.12  10 12 , Fv  40, Gv  52  C (87)
sec
These constants were derived for a series of butadiene-styrene co-polymers with styrene content in the
range 0-80%. Their applicability to other rubbers is not known.
Note that units expressing ozone concentration in these relations must be consistent with those specified at
each point to be analyzed. As the units may vary from one study to another, and these units may be
unfamiliar to users of this program, the following unit conversion relationship is provided. This relates the
concentration C O3 , given in units of mgO3 / L Air to the concentration in units of parts per million.
 molO3 
 22.4 L   10 6
O3 mg O3 1
CO3 ppm  CO3  (88)
 
 48.0  10 mg O3  mol 
3
Air L Air
Page 39 of 67
It is of interest to note that ozone can be detected by human smell when the concentration reaches a level of
approximately 0.02 - 0.05 ppm. The EPA's website contains some information on the spatial distribution
and history of ozone concentrations (http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/criteria/reldocs/o3text.pdf).
The ozone attack model may be combined with any one model for viscoelastic rupture, and simultaneously
with any of the models for cyclic crack growth.
Viscoelastic Rupture - Power Law
Viscoelastic rupture in ENDURICA can be modeled via the assumption that the time rate of crack growth
varies as a power law function of the crack driving force T.
Fq
dc T  Cq (  0 q )
 rq   e T  Tcq (89)
dt T 
 q 
rq is the time rate of crack growth corresponding to a reference crack driving force Tq. Fq is the powerlaw
slope defining the sensitivity of the crack growth rate to crack driving force. Tcq is a critical value of the
crack driving force, below which the rate of crack growth is zero.
The effect of temperature Θ is assumed to follow an exponential relationship based on a reference

temperature Θq0 and a temperature coefficient Cq.
Viscoelastic Rupture - Table Lookup
The most generalized model available in ENDURICA for describing the time rate of viscoelastic rupture is
the Table Lookup Model. In principle, this model can represent experimentally obtained data to any
desired degree of precision.
This model requires as input: 1) the minimum value T0 and the maximum value Tc of the crack driving
force, 2) a list giving the crack growth rates ri, (i = 1,M) at M points. Presently, the number of points must
fall within the range 1 < M < 1024. It is assumed that the points are spaced at equal logarithmic intervals.
Below T0, the crack growth rate is assumed to be zero. Above Tc, the crack growth rate is assumed to go to
infinity.
The crack driving force Ti at each point in the list of crack growth rates is given by:
i 1
T  M 1
Ti  T0  c  (90)
 T0 
The rate of crack growth r for a given crack driving force T that falls between data points in the specified
list is interpolated according to the following rule:
log(r1 )  log(r0 )
T  log(T1 ) log(T0 )
r  r0   (91)
 T0 
where T0 and T1 are the crack driving forces from equation (77) that immediately precede and follow the
crack driving force T for which it is desired to find the corresponding crack growth rate r.
Page 40 of 67

A Model of Incompressible Isotropic Hyperelastic Material Behavior Using Spline Interpolations of Tension-Compression Test Data

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Model of Incompressible Isotropic Hyperelastic Material Behavior Using Spline Interpolations of Tension-Compression Test Data

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Endurica 2.

Nominal ("Engineering") Strain

The engineering strain tensor is computed as:

Cauchy ("True") Stress

The principal values of σ are σi = σ1, σ2, σ3.

Nominal ("Engineering") Stress

λi are the principal stretches.

Computing Principal Stresses

The deviatoric part of the stress is

 212  22  32 

Models for Deviatoric Hyperelasticity

W  C10 ( I1  3)  C01 ( I 2  3) (28)

Van der Waals

The model is defined by

The model is defined by

Models for Dilatational Hyperelasticity (Hydrostatic Pressure)

One parameter non-linear

Fatigue Life Calculations

Cycle Counting Models

Tmin  min(T (t )) (61)

Time-Dependent Crack Growth Model

Models for Fatigue Crack Growth Rate

R=0 R>0 Ozone attack ViscoElastic

Cyclic Crack Growth Behavior Under Fully Relaxing Conditions

Thomas (Power Law) Model

Table Lookup Model

Cyclic Crack Growth Behavior Under Non-Relaxing Conditions

Paris Model (Default)

Teq  T  Tmax  Tmin  Tmax (1  R) (80)

Time-Dependent Crack Growth Behavior

Ozone and Chemical Attack

Viscoelastic Rupture - Power Law

The effect of temperature Θ is assumed to follow an exponential relationship based on a reference

Viscoelastic Rupture - Table Lookup

You might also like