Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

Shear properties of a magnetorheological elastomer

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2003 Smart Mater. Struct. 12 139

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0964-1726/12/1/316)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 134.99.128.41
This content was downloaded on 04/12/2013 at 01:14

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING SMART MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
Smart Mater. Struct. 12 (2003) 139–146 PII: S0964-1726(03)58458-0

Shear properties of a magnetorheological

elastomer
G Y Zhou
Mechanics of Machines Lab, School of Mechanical and Production Engineering,
Nanyang Technological University (NTU), 50 Nanyang Avenue, 639798, Singapore

E-mail: gyzhou@ustc.edu

Received 23 July 2002, in final form 2 December 2002

Published 29 January 2003
Online at stacks.iop.org/SMS/12/139

Abstract
This paper presents an experiment testing the damped free vibration of a
system composed of a magnetorheological elastomer and a mass. The goal
of this experiment was to obtain the dependence of the natural frequency
and the damping ratio of the structure on the applied magnetic field. The
shear properties, including the shear storage modulus and the damping
factor, were therefore determined. The experimental results revealed that the
shear storage modulus could reach a value of 60% of the zero-field modulus
and was dominated by the magnetic field, but the change in the damping
factor could be neglected. Furthermore, when the field was moderate and
saturation did not occur, the shear storage modulus increased proportionally
with the applied field. This interesting phenomenon was analysed, and it is
suggested that the subquadratic field dependence, which arises from the
saturation of the magnetization near the poles of closely spaced pairs of
spheres, must be taken into consideration.

1. Introduction the applied magnetic field. Such applications are numerous,

Magnetorheological (MR) materials, which respond to applied
magnetic fields, belong to a specific class of so-called
smart materials because they can respond, via solid-state
electronics and modern control algorithms, to changes in their
environment [1, 2]. They are composed of iron particles
and a low-permeability carrier. Due to induction by an
external magnetic field, a structure will be formed inside
the material [3–7] (magnetorheological fluids (MRFs)) or the
strength of the structure embedded in the material will change
(magnetorheological elastomers (MREs)) [3, 8–10]. Thus
the mechanical property of the material will also change.
For a complete review of MR materials the reader should
consult [2, 3].
The most common MR materials are in the liquid state,
i.e. MRFs, and the rheological properties of these materials
are governed by the magnetic field. The parameter used
to describe the rheological properties is the dynamic yield
stress; one can say MRFs operate within a post-yield regime.
An equivalent expression is that the dynamic yield stress is
dominated by the magnetic field. Applications based on such
materials can benefit from the fact that the dynamic yield
stress can be continuously, rapidly and reversibly changed by
but MRFs also exhibit some shortcomings which hinder their
application, such as deposition and sealing problems and
remnant magnetism [7].
Structurally, MREs can be thought of as solid analogues
of MRFs [2]. MREs are cured under a strong uniaxial
magnetic field, and therefore the iron particles will form chain-
like structures embedded in the matrix [8–10]. Thus, in
applications one often uses the field-dependent modulus of the
material in the design of devices; one can say MREs operate
within a pre-yield regime [2, 8–10]. In the literature this type
of material was first investigated experimentally by Jolly et al
[8]. They built double-lap shear specimens and, by shearing
the outer and inner board under different frequencies, provided
the field-dependent property of the MRE. They also employed
the point-dipole model to calculate the shear modulus. Ginder
et al [9] adopted the same experimental method to study the
above field-dependent mechanical property of MREs but they
used column-like shear equipment. Davis [10] used the finite
element method to analyse the dependence of the effective
shear storage modulus of an MRE on interparticle magnetic
forces. He also employed the point-dipole model but limited
his scope to the saturation, within which his analysis was quite
correct. It should be pointed out that to our knowledge all the

0964-1726/03/010139+08$30.00 © 2003 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 139

G Y Zhou
models used in previous studies are limited to infinitesimal
strain problems. When the matrix of a magnetostrictive
composite is selected from elastic materials such as elastomers
or silicones, the deformation of the matrix can be large
under loading. Further, the interparticle magnetic force will
act as magnetic loading. Therefore, mechanisms of finite
deformation and the magnetic loading in the matrix should
be included in the constitutive relations of magnetostrictive
elastomer composites. The phenomenon will be discussed in
the following sections of this paper.
Borcea and Bruno [11] established a model to describe
the macroscopic magnetomechanical behaviour of composite
materials consisting of a random, statistically homogeneous
distribution of rigid ferromagnetic inclusions embedded firmly
in a non-magnetic elastic matrix. Though their model covers
many properties of such composites, the material investigated
in their study was not an MRE.
Why do MREs attract so much attention? Let us compare
MREs with MRFs. MRF devices used in engineering have a
damping effect. Damping is a process for dissipating energy.
MRF devices are controlled by changing the damping ratio of
the structure since MRF materials operate within the post-yield
regime. MRE materials, however, operate within the pre-yield
regime and one utilizes the field-dependent modulus to design
devices. Therefore MRE devices are used in structures to
adjust the natural frequency, which is affected by the equivalent
stiffness of the structure. To change the natural frequency, one
can prevent the system attaining resonance or other coupled
phenomena. For instance, in a cable-stayed bridge the natural
frequency of the cable may be a multiple of that of the bridge
deck, and therefore the natural frequency of the bridge deck
must be adjusted to avoid a nonlinear effect as a result of
coupling.
In this paper we will present the shear properties, including
the shear storage modulus and damping factor, of an MRE
composed of silicone rubber and carbonyl iron particles with
a volume fraction of about 27%. (Davis [10] reported that an
MRE with such a volume fraction has the maximum change of
shear storage modulus.) We will use the experimental method
of testing the damped free vibration. Using the experimental
results, we point out that the field-dependent modulus is linear
when the applied magnetic field is moderate. This indicates
that the point-dipole model is not appropriate and that the local
saturation of the particles must be taken into consideration.
The damping factor is shown to be independent of the applied
field.
2. Experiment and analysis model
2.1. Experimental set-up
Figure 1 shows a sketch of the excitation system. From the
figure, we can see that the base (7), the upper and the lower
magnetic poles (5 and 11) and the leader (4) make up a closed
magnetic circuit. Thus, when exited by the coil, a uniform
magnetic field will be generated between the two poles (5
and 11). By adjusting the upper fixer (1) and the lower fixer (2)
along the leader, the separation of the upper pole (5) and the
lower pole (11) can be changed. Figure 2 shows a photograph
of the equipment.
140
When an MRE is placed between the magnetic poles,
attached to the surface of lower pole, the magnetic field will
not be uniform. But, if we neglect the edge effect, the average
magnetic induction outside the MRE, B D , is proportional to
that inside MRE, B M R E , as discussed below. The cover board
(10) is attached to the surface of MRE. Because it is made of
brass, there is no magnetic force acting on the cover board. It
just acts as a mass and provides an initial displacement to the
MRE when it is excited by an impulse hammer at point b. An
accelerometer (9) is attached to one edge of the cover board
(10).
In this experiment we used an HP35665A dynamic
signal analyser to record the signal. The impulse hammer
is connected to the analyser’s channel 1 input and the
accelerometer is connected to the analyser’s channel 2 input.
The analyser is instructed to trigger from the signal on
channel 1. Thus, the signal on channel 2, which represents the
damped free vibration of the cover board, is recorded. Note
that the signal represents the acceleration of the cover board.
By analysing the acceleration, the natural frequency and the
damping ratio of the system composed of the MRE and the
cover board can be obtained for different magnetic fields.
In this experiment we used a Hall probe to test the magnetic
induction outside the MRE. The Hall probe is attached to the
lower pole as shown in figure 1.
The main details of the equipment are as follows: the
resistance of the coil is 20
; the number of turns in the coil
is about 4000; when there is nothing between the poles, the
maximum magnetic induction is about 450 mT corresponding
to a 3 A input current; the radius of the poles is 30 mm. The
size of the MRE used in this experiment is 5 mm (thickness)
×10 mm (width) ×55 mm (length). In the experiment, the
separation between the two poles is 7 mm.
2.2. Relationship between B D and B M R E
From the law of magnetic circuits, the equivalent magnetic
circuit of the excitation system is shown in figure 3, where the
magnetomotive potential is εm = N0 Iin (N0 is the number of
turns of the coil, Iin is the input current), Rm0 is the magnetic
resistance of the base, the upper and lower magnetic poles
and the leader, Rm1 is the magnetic resistance of the air gap
between the two poles outside the projection of the MRE, Rm2
is the magnetic resistance of the MRE sample and Rm3 is the
magnetic resistance of the air gap between the upper side of
the MRE sample and the upper magnetic poles.
Magnetic resistance is defined by the following equation:
Rmi = µi µlmi0 Smi , where lmi and Smi are the equivalent length and
the equivalent cross-sectional area respectively of the magnetic
circuit corresponding to the magnetic resistance and µi is the
relative permeability of the corresponding magnetic resistance.
From the size of the equipment used in our study, we
have lm1 = 7 mm (the separation between the two poles),
lm2 = 5 mm (the thickness of the MRE sample; note, we
neglect magnetostriction), lm3 = 2 mm (because the relative
permeability of brass approximately equals that of air), Sm1 =
Sm −S M R E (where Sm is the sectional area of the magnetic poles
and S M R E is that of the MRE sample) and Sm2 = Sm3 = S M R E .
The ratio of the magnetic flux of Rm1 and Rm2 is as follows:
m1 Rm2 + Rm3
= . (1)
m2 Rm1

Figure 1. Sketch of the experimental equipment.
Figure 2. The equipment used in our experiment: (a) overview; (b)
detailed view between the two magnetic poles.
Because mi = Bmi Smi , where Bmi is the magnetic induction
associated with the magnetic resistance, we obtain the
following equation by substituting the dimensions of our
equipment:
Bm1
Bm2 = 5
. (2)
7µ2
+ 27
We should note that the value of Bm1 is detected by the Hall
probe during the experiment and Bm2 is the average magnetic
induction in the MRE sample. To simplify our expression,
hereafter we will use B D , B M R E and µ M R E to denote Bm1 , Bm2
and µ2 respectively. When µ M R E
1, we have B M R E = 27 B D
(It should be stressed that irrespective of how large µ M R E is,
and only if µ M R E does not vary with the applied magnetic field,
B M R E is proportional to B D and all the discussions below are
the same.)
Shear properties of a magnetorheological elastomer
Figure 3. The equivalent magnetic circuit.
2.3. Material
The MRE used in this study is made of RTV silicone rubber
(commercial product manufactured by Kangda Chemical
Plant, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China) and carbonyl iron
particles with an average diameter of 3 µm. The mixture, with
a volume fraction of about 27%, solidifies gradually under a
strong uniaxial magnetic field. Thus, the chain-like structure
along the direction of the magnetic field will remain in the
material.
2.4. Analysis model
The goal of the experiment is to measure the damped free
vibration of the cover board. So in this subsection, we will
establish a model to describe the damped free vibration of
the cover board and derive the relationship between the shear
properties, including the shear storage modulus and damping
factor of the MRE, and the vibration.
In the literature, the damping factor, or the system loss
factor, is used to model the damping mechanism. It is defined
as the ratio of energy dissipated to energy stored by the system
which equals the ratio of the imaginary part to the real part
of the complex modulus [12]. For an MRE, because its
141
G Y Zhou

Figure 4. Model of the vibration system.

mechanical properties are affected by the applied magnetic

field, the damping factor is denoted as βm (B M R E ).
Figure 4 shows a sketch of the vibration system, a cover
board attached to an MRE with a thickness h. The surface
of the MRE is denoted as S. We assume that the board acts
Figure 5. The signals recorded by the analyser during the
as a rigid body and moves along the x direction while the experiment.
vibration and deformation of the MRE are just functions of z
(see figure 4).
We can use a system with a single degree of freedom to
model this situation. The dynamic equation would be:


d2 X G(B M R E )S G(B M R E )S dX
m 2 =− X − βm (B M R E ) m .
dt h h dt
(3)
Because the damping factor of the MRE, βm (B M R E ), has
the following relationship with the damping ratio of the system,
ξd = 12 βm (B M R E ) [13], the natural frequency of the system ω0
MRE)
is given by ω02 = SG(B mh
. Thus, from the natural frequency
and the damping ratio, the general solution of equation (3),
assuming underdamping, is given by
 
X (t) = A exp(−ξd ω0 t) sin 1 − ξd2 ω0 t + ϕ0 (4)
Figure 6. The damped free vibration: experimental data and fitted
where A is a constant and ϕ0 is the initial phase. curve using the theoretical model.
Because the signal to be analysed is the acceleration of
the cover board, using equation (4) the acceleration can be
free vibration and fitting the data using the theoretical model,
expressed as
equation (5), we get the natural frequency and the damping
 
ratio. They are ξd = 0.2260 and ω0 = 1396.3 rad s−1 .
a(t) = A1 exp(−ξd ω0 t) sin 1 − ξd2 ω0 t + ϕ1 (5) The fitted curve and the experimental data points are shown
in figure 6.
where A1 = Aω02 ; ϕ1 is a function of ϕ0 and ξd . Uisng the above method of analysis, the natural frequency
By fitting the experimental data through the theoretical and damping ratio at various amplitudes of applied magnetic
model of equation (5) we can obtain the natural frequency and field are obtained, as shown in figures 7 and 10 respectively.
the damping ratio. Therefore, the shear storage modulus and From figure 7, the natural frequency of the system is
the damping factor of the MRE can also be obtained. ω0 ≈ 1400 rad s−1 in zero field. This is determined by the
host elastomer and the structure embedded in the matrix by
3. Results and discussion the particles. As the magnetic induction increases, the natural
frequency of the system increases with it, until magnetic
Figure 5 shows the signal recorded by the analyser when saturation of the composite occurs. This saturation is seen to
B M R E = 4.55 mT. The upper part shows the signal on occur at around B M R E = 800 mT. This phenomenon reveals
channel 2 (accelerometer) while the lower part shows the signal that the natural frequency is affected by the magnetic force
on channel 1 (hammer). In the figure, the curves to the left between the iron particles inside the material. When saturation
of point A represent the process of excitation while those to occurs, the magnetization of each particle will remain constant.
the right represent the damped free vibration. Because we Thus, the magnetic force between the particles does not change
only need the experimental data for the damped free vibration, with the applied field. Hence, the natural frequency does not
the process of excitation does not affect the result. Using change with the applied field within such a regime. Through
the experimental data form the upper plot for the damped the theoretical model, equation (5), the experimental data can

142

Figure 7. The natural frequency of the vibration system as a
function of the applied magnetic field.
be fitted by the following equation:
ω0 = 1397.6 + B M R E − 8.54 × 10−4 B M2 −7 3
R E + 2.3 × 10 B M R E .
(6)
In the recent literature, the total shear stress of the
composite is assumed as the sum of the composite shear
stress with no field applied and the shear stress induced by
interparticle magnetic forces [8, 10]. If we denote the change
in shear modulus as G = G(B M R E )− G(0), it is desirable to
make the ratio of the magnetically induced change G to G(0)
R E )−G(0)
as large as possible. We define the ratio as ζ = G(B MG(0)
SG(B M R E )
According to ω02 = mh
, we have:
[ω0 (B M R E )]2 − [ω0 (0)]2
ζ = . (7)
[ω0 (0)]2
From equation (6) and the above equation, the ratio as a
function of the average magnetic induction can be obtained,
and is shown in figure 8. From that figure we can see that the
maximum value of the ratio occurs around B M R E = 800 mT,
below which the ratio increases with the magnetic field. The
maximum value for the ratio is about 0.6, which is bigger than
the value reported by Davis [10]. (In his paper, he reported
a maximum ratio of 0.5 when the volume fraction was 27%.)
This is because the host elastomer used here is RTV silicone
rubber and its shear modulus may be smaller than that used in
Davis’ study.
According to the above assumption, G is just the
modulus induced by interparticle magnetic forces. We should
point out that this assumption neglects variation of the shear
modulus of the host elastomer under different magnetic fields
(because of magnetostriction) and the change in the shear
modulus of the host elastomer due to the relative displacement
of the particles induced by the magnetic field. (One can
consult [10], where Davis showed that the zero-field modulus
varies with the ratio of the separation between adjacent
particles in a chain to the diameter of the particles. One can
also consult [3], where the author described how to calculate
the zero-field modulus using finite element methods.)
The host elastomer, rubber, belongs to the family of
viscoelastic materials. The constitutive equation of this kind
Shear properties of a magnetorheological elastomer
Figure 8. The ratio which describes the relative change of the
field-induced modulus, ζ , as a function of the magnetic induction.
of material is significantly nonlinear and it is often described
in terms of the principal extension ratios through the Ogden
strain potential. This means that the shear modulus of the
material is dominated by the stress condition, or strain energy.
When a magnetic field applied, the MRE will deform along the
direction of the field. If we adopt a single-chain model, similar
to that used in [4, 8–10] to analyse the shear stress induced by
interparticle magnetic forces, the total magnetic energy density
(energy per unit volume) is given by
. φ(γ 2 − 2)M 2 d 3p µ0
U= 5
(8)
24r03 (1 + ε)3 (1 + γ 2 ) 2
where M is the magnetization of the particles, d p is the
diameter of the particles, µ0 is the permeability of free space,
φ is the volume fraction of the MRE and r0 , γ = tg θ , ε = r−r
r0
0
represent the relative position of two adjacent particles in
a chain after deformation (see figure 9) when the magnetic
field is applied along the z direction. Let γ = 0 (no shear
strain occurs); the stress induced by the application of a
magnetic field can then be computed by taking the derivative
of the interparticle magnetic energy density with respect to ε
(neglecting high-order terms of ε):
φ M 2 d 3p µ0 φ M 2 d 3p µ0
σB = − ε. (9)
4r03 r03
The second term of equation (9) represents the normal
stress induced by the interparticle magnetic force when
deformation occurs. (Note that this reveals a negative field-
induced modulus which is caused by exchange between the
magnetic energy and the strain energy. This will be explained
in the appendix or see [3].) The first term represents the normal
stress induced by the interparticle magnetic force when there is
no deformation. It is easy to understand that the first term will
act as a load to compress the host elastomer. Thus, the magnetic
field will change the stress condition of the host elastomer, or
the strain energy of the host elastomer, and the shear modulus
of the matrix will change with the magnetic field. The above
explanation is based on the assumption of a single-chain model.
Recently, while studying the magnetomechanical behaviour
143
G Y Zhou
Figure 9. Magnetic interaction between two dipoles.
of composite materials consisting of a random distribution of
ferromagnetic particles embedded firmly in a non-magnetic
elastic matrix, Borcea and Bruno [11] established a theoretical
model to evaluate the overall properties of an MRE in the
important regime in which the volume fraction of the particles
was small. They also reported that, induced by the magnetic
field, the material would be compressed in the directions
orthogonal to the applied field and a compression which arises
in the material for lower applied fields turns into an expansion
for stronger values of the magnetic field. No matter what kind
of composite consisting iron particles and rubber matrix is
used, the stress condition of the host elastomer changes with
the applied field. If we uphold the above assumption, this
means that we neglect the load caused by the magnetic field
acting on the matrix.
Now we analyse the situation when the single-chain
model is valid. To the author’s knowledge, there are
two ways in the current literature to analyse the magnetic
interaction between the particles. One is the point-dipole
model [4, 8–10], in which the local field and the sphere
magnetization are approximated as uniform. This means
that the saturation near the poles at moderate field strengths
and the resulting subquadratic field strength dependence of
the shear modulus are therefore not captured. This model
produces a field-dependent modulus proportional to the square
of the applied magnetic field intensity. The other method is
to consider the subquadratic field dependence arising from
the saturation of the magnetization near the poles of closely
spaced pairs of spheres, which occurs even when the applied
field is well below the saturation magnetization [5, 6]. This
approach yields a field-dependent modulus proportional to the
applied magnetic field intensity from small to moderate field
strengths. For further details of the mechanical properties of
composites under the isolated single-chain model of nonlinear
magnetizable spheres see [14].
We recall our experimental results and neglect the
variation of the shear property of the host elastomer under
different magnetic fields. (The above assumption is valid and
G is just the modulus induced by the interparticle magnetic
force.) From equation (6), we have:
 
1433.3B M R E − 0.711B M 2
RE
ζ = −5.5 × 10 B M R E + 6.1 × 10 B M R E × 10−6 .
−4 3 −7 4
−2 × 10−10 B M5
R E + 2.71 × 10
−14 6
BM R E
It is obvious, when the magnetic induction is the range of
B M R E
800 mT, that the first term in the bracket of the above
144
Figure 10. The damping ratio of the vibration system as a function
of the magnetic induction.
equation dominates. Thus, we can write ζ ∝ B M R E . Because
ζ ∝ G and the magnetic intensity HM R E is proportional
to the magnetic induction, we also can write G ∝ HM R E ,
which can also be found in figure 8. This means, when the field
strength is not very high or is even moderate, that the field-
dependent modulus is proportional to the applied magnetic
field. This behaviour agrees with the predictions of Ginder
and Davis [5] and Ginder et al [6] and reveals that the point-
dipole model is not valid. We can say, therefore, that the
effect of the local saturation of particle magnetization cannot be
neglected, which will have the effect of reducing the magnetic
field in the gaps from the value expected on the basis of linear
magnetostatics.
This phenomenon will be useful in applications. Since one
uses MREs to make isolation system by using their controllable
magnetomechanical properties (changing the shear storage
modulus through adjusting the magnetic intensity), if the
relationship between the shear modulus and the applied
magnetic intensity is linear, it is much easier to design the
control algorithm. The above phenomenon just proves that the
relationship is linear.
Finally we analyse the damping factor of the MRE.
Figure 10 shows the damping ratio of the system as a function of
the magnetic induction. It shows ξd ≈ 0.24 in zero field. This
value is dominated by the host elastomer and the distribution
of the particles embedded in the matrix. As the magnetic field
increases, the damping ratio decreases slightly (below 10%).
This behaviour does not relate to the saturation of the particles
(see figure 10 and consult figure 8). Because of the relationship
between the damping factor and the damping ratio, it is obvious
that the damping factor is also independent of the magnetic
field. The physical meaning of this is that the ratio of the
energy dissipated by the damping mechanism of the MRE to
the elastic energy is not affected by the magnetic field.
4. Conclusion
An MRE is a kind of field-dependent solid-state material which
can avoid sealing and packaging problems when used in the
design of real applications.

From our dynamic experiment we found that the shear
storage modulus is a linear function with respect to the
magnetic field. We compared this phenomenon with current
theoretical models. It was found that the point-dipole model
is not appropriate, while the model that considers the local
saturation of the particles does agree with the experimental
results, which reveals that the local field does affect the shear
storage modulus. Further, it was predicted that the matrix
deformation caused by the interparticle magnetic force should
be included in the constitutive relation of the matrix; hence the
shear property of the matrix containing the embedded particles
(model of a zero-field composite) would be changed. So, when
modelling the shear storage modulus of an MRE the local
saturation of the particles and the effect of the deformation
induced by the magnetic field on the constitutive relations of
the matrix should be taken into consideration.
It has also been reported in this paper that the damping
factor, which describes the ratio of the energy dissipated by the
damping mechanism of the MRE to the elastic energy, does not
change with applied field (we shall be making a further study
of the theoretical explanation for this phenomenon). While
analysing the deformation caused by the magnetic field using
the point-dipole model, we also pointed out that the field-
induced Young’s modulus would be negative. The physical
meaning of this phenomenon is the exchange of magnetic
energy and strain energy of the matrix.
Acknowledgment
The author gratefully appreciates the assistance Mr Sheng Fang
with the experiment.
Appendix. Explanation of the negative field-induced
Young’s modulus
To explain the negative field-induced Young’s modulus, let us
first consider the system shown in figure A.1. The system is
composed of two masses, denoted as A and B respectively, and
a spring. There is an attractive force FAB , which is determined
by a potential function U AB (x), between A and B, where x
is the separation. Further, we assume that the attractive force
decreases with x. When there is no external force acting on
the system, due to the attractive force the spring is compressed
and the equation FAB = ks (x0 − x1 ) is satisfied, where ks is
the stiffness of the spring and x0 is the initial length of the
spring. When an external force F acts on A, the equation
 University of Science and Technology of China
F +ks (x0 − x2 ) = FAB . Because of conservation of the energy,
we also have W F = 12 ks (x0 − x2 )2 − 21 ks (x0 − x1 )2 +U AB (x2 )−
U AB (x1 ), where W F is the work of the force F. So, if we let
x = x2 −x1 and ke f f be the equivalent stiffness of the system,
we have W F = 12 kef f x 2 . Because FAB = dUdxAB x=x 1 and by
 [6] Ginder J M, Davis L C and Elie L D 1996 Rheology of
Taylor series expansion, we have ks − ke f f = − d dxU AB
2
 .

2 x=x 1
d U AB 
2 J. Mod. Phys. B 10 3293–303
Thus, if − dx 2 x=x 1 < 0, the equivalent stiffness ke f f is less
than ks ; otherwise, kef f is bigger than ks .
The physical meaning is also obvious. When
2
− d dxU AB
2
 < 0 and the separation becomes larger, the
x=x 1
variation of the elastic energy is bigger than that of the potential
energy (they are opposite) and the elastic energy stored in the
spring due to the initial compression by FAB will be released.
Shear properties of a magnetorheological elastomer
F
F'AB
A
A
FAB
x2
x1
B B
Figure A.1. The spring–mass system for describing the equivalent
stiffness induced by the interaction potential energy.
Hence, the deformation of the spring will be greater than when
there is no attractive force and the equivalent stiffness is smaller
than ks . When the separation becomes smaller, the variation
of the elastic energy is smaller than that of the potential energy
(they are opposite) and the potential energy will transfer to the
elastic energy. Hence the deformation of the spring will be
larger than when there is no attractive force and the equivalent
stiffness is also smaller than ks .
Now, let us consider the situation of an MRE. Because an
MRE is composed of iron particles and host elastomer, under
the applied magnetic field the particles will act as the mass
of the above system and the elastomer will act as the spring.
The potential energy between the adjacent particles follows as
 2
E 12 = −8πµ0 | M| V1 V2 , where r is the separation and M 
r3
is the magnetization (see figure 9 and the deformation only
occurs along the direction of the magnetic field). It is obvious
that ∂∂rE122 < 0, so the field-dependent modulus is negative (the
equivalent Young’s modulus of the MRE will become smaller
when the applied magnetic field increases).
References
[1] Symans M D and Constantinou M C 1999 Semi-active control
systems for seismic protection of structures: a
state-of-the-art review Eng. Struct. 21 469–87
[2] Carlson J D and Jolly M R 2000 MR fluid, foam and elastomer
devices Mechatronics 10 555–69
[3] Zhou G Y 2002 Mechanical behavior of MR elastomer and the
structure of MRF driven by rotating fields PhD Dissertation
[4] Martin J E and Anderson R A 1996 Chain model of
electrorhelogy J. Chem. Phys. 104 4814–27
[5] Ginder J M and Davis L C 1994 Shear stresses in
magnetorheological fluids: role of magnetic saturation
Appl. Phys. Lett. 65 3410–12
magnetorheological fluids: models and measurements Int.
[7] Zhou G Y and Zhang P Q 2002 Investigation of the dynamic
mechanical behavior of the double-barreled configuration in
a magnetorheological fluid damper Smart Mater. Struct. 11
230–8
[8] Jolly M R, Carlson J D, Munoz B C and Bullions A 1996 The
magnetoviscoelastic response of elastomer composites
consisting of ferrous particles embedded in a polymer
matrix J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 7 613–22
145
G Y Zhou
[9] Ginder J M, Nichols M E, Elie L D and Tardiff J L 1999
Magnetorheological elastomers: properties and applications
Proc. SPIE 3675 131–38
[10] Davis L C 1999 Model of magnetorheological elastomers
J. Appl. Phys. 85 3348–51
[11] Borcea L and Bruno O 2001 On the magneto-elastic properties
of elastomer-ferromagnet composites J. Mech. Phys. Solids
49 2877–919
146
[12] Nashif A D, Jones D I G and Henderson J P 1985 Vibration
Damping (New York: Wiley) pp 46–9, 73–6
[13] Nashif A D, Jones D I G and Henderson J P 1985 Vibration
Damping (New York: Wiley) p 132
[14] Shkel Y M and Klingenberg D J 2001 Magnetorheology and
magnetostriction of isolated chains of nonlinear
magnetizable spheres J. Rheol. 45 351–68