See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/222863217

Thermoelastic Constant of Thermoelastic Parameter?

Article  in  Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids · December 1987

DOI: 10.1016/0022-3697(87)90071-0

CITATIONS READS

116 364

3 authors, including:

Albert Wong Rhys Jones Ac

Defence Science and Technology Group (DST) Visiting Professor,
36 PUBLICATIONS   703 CITATIONS    466 PUBLICATIONS   6,120 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Modelling the Mechanical Behaviour of Adhesives and Adhesive Joints View project

Additive Manufacturing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Albert Wong on 23 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

J. Phys. Chem. SoNdc Vol. 48. No. 8. pp. 149-153. 1981 0022-3697187 ~3.00 + 0.00
Printed ia Great Britain. 0 1987 Pcrgamon Journnls Ltd.

THERMOELASTIC CONSTANT OR THERMOELASTIC

PARAMETER?
A. K. WONG, R. JONES and J. G. SPARROW
Structures Division, Aeronautical Research Laboratories, P.O. Box 4331, Melbourne 3001, Australia

(Received 8 December 1986; accepted 11 February 1987)

Abstract-Recently, some evidence has been reported in the literature which indicates that the thermo-
elastic ‘constant’ of a material is significantly dependent on the mean stress applied. This paper presents
the theory which supports the possibility of such a phenomenon. It is shown that the stress dependence
of the thermoelastic constant can be explained by the temperature dependence of the elastic properties
of the material. Excellent agreement between the theoretical predictions and experimental data is achieved.
Keywork Thermoelastic parameter, stress dependence, SPATE, residual stress measurement.

1. INTRODUCTION in which To is the absolute temperature of the element

The coupling between mechanical deformation and
thermal energy of an elastic material was documented
as early as 1805 by J. Gough [l], and the first
theoretical treatment of the thermoelastic effect was
published in 1855 by Lord Kelvin [2]. However, the
practical significance of this theory was not fully
realised until 1965 when Belgen [3] showed that the
thermoelastic effect may be used for stress analysis by
means of infrared radiometry. It was concluded that
the thermoelastic constant for structural metals is of
significant magnitude, and that when such material is
subjected to an oscillating stress, the corresponding
temperature oscillation for an adiabatic element may
be detected. Even so, it was not until some ten years
after Belgen’s feasibility study that SIRA Ltd.
(England) [4] was successful in the development of an
infrared radiometric system which was capable of a
spatial resolution of less than 1 mm2 and a tem-
perature resolution of 0.002”C. This extremely high
temperature sensitivity? allows the present system,
marketed under the trade name SPATE 8000 (Stress
Pattern Analysis by measurement of Thermal Emis-
sion), a capability for detecting stress changes of the
order of 1 MPa in steel and 0.4 MPa in aluminium.
The SPATE system detects the changes in infrared
emission in the 8-12 pm band due to the small
temperature changes as a result of an applied cyclic
load. Provided adiabatic conditions are satisfied,
the direct application of the classical thermoelastic
theory gives a convenient expression relating the sum
of the cyclic principle stress amplitudes A.r (s = a,,)
and the cyclic temperature change AT [5], viz.
(1.1)
7 The spatial and temperature resolutions of the current
model of SPATE 8000 are 0.25mm2 and O.OOl”C, re-
spectively.
749
under consideration, and K is known as the thermo-
elastic constant.
For small temperature changes, it is generally
assumed that K is a material constant which is
independent of the applied stress. Thus whilst the
SPATE response should be linearly proportional to
the amplitude of the fluctuating load, it should be
independent of the mean load. However, recent work
of Machin et al. [6] has revealed the thermoelastic
constant, at least for the titanium and aluminium
alloys considered, to be clearly dependent on the
mean load applied. Although this important phenom-
enon has been overlooked by many researchers (in-
cluding the developers of SPATE), evidence for a
stress dependent thermoelastic constant can be found
in many sources. In the field of solid state physics for
instance, it has been well documented that, at least
under large strains, the Griineisen parameter y is
strain dependent (e.g. Refs [7-g]). Since the thermo-
elastic constant and the Griineisen parameter are
related, namely,
K _ (1 - 2V)Y
--9
E
(l-2)
where E and v are the modulus of elasticity and
Poisson’s ratio, respectively, the possibility that K is
also strain dependent (and thus stress dependent) is
clearly seen.
Much experimental work has been carried out by
Bottani and his co-workers (e.g. Refs [lo-121) in
determining the variation of the thermoelastic
constant for alpha-titanium. It was found that the
thermoelastic constant is strongly dependent on the
applied strain, and reasoned that such a phenomenon
is attributed to processes of micro-plasticity. How-
ever, because the coefficient of thermal expansion, a,
for alpha-titanium is extremely sensitive to tem-
perature variations at room temperature (e.g. a
changes from 4.2 x 10T6 ‘C-* at 20.5”C to 8.4 x 1O-6
750 A. K. WON0et al.

‘C-’ at 21.O”Ct), and since c(is directly related to K, (c) Conservation of energy
there is some cause for scepticism in their findings. In~~orating eqns (2.1) and (2.2), the statement
A more direct test on the variability of the thermo- of conservation of energy may be written as:
elastic constant was performed by Belgen [14] in
which specimens were subjected to various tensile po(ti - d) = a& - Qii,
load excursions (increments) from the unstressed
state. It was found that the measured thermoelastic summing over i, j = 1,2,3, (2.3)
constants for the metals tested (steel, titanium, alu-
minum and ma~~ium) were dependent on the stress where 0 is the rate of change of internal energy per
increment. But because different stress increment unit mass, =&is the strain rate, fi is the rate of heat
sixes also infer a different mean stress, it is not clear produced per unit mass by internal heat sources, and
from the results whether the variations in K were Qi is the heat flux through the surface of the body
caused by the magnitude of the stress increment, or whose outward directed normal is n,.
the mean stress, or both. Nonetheless, l3elgen asserts
such “variations are probably due to the effects of
stress on specific heat and/or Poisson’s ratio”.
The purpose of the present paper is to confirm the
stress dependency of the thermoelastic constant from
a,=2fiCij+(As “-@AT)& (2.4a)
a theoretical viewpoint. In the following, the thermo-
elastic effect is re-derived from the basic conservative
and
laws of mechanics and thermodynamics. The present
approach dBers from the existing theory in that the
~=~3~+2~)~, AT=T-Ts, (2.4b)
material properties will not be assumed to be con-
stant, and as a result, it will be shown that the stress
where d is the coefficient of linear thermal expansion,
dependence of the thermoelastic constant may in fact
I and p are the Lame constants, To is the stress-free
be accounted for by the temperature dependence of
temperature, 6, is the Kronecker delta and e = 6ti is
the elastic properties of the material.
the first strain invariant. Equation (2.4a) is generally
known as the Du~mel-Ne~ann law.
The above four laws, together with conditions of
2. THEAIRY
compatibility and boundary conditions, completely
The entire field of continuum mechanics is gov- describe the system. It is seen from eqn (2.4a) that
erned by three basic physical conservative laws, temperature Tand either stress ail or strain co (but not
namely, the laws of conservation of mass, momentum both) may be specified arbitrarily. In the foIlowing, T
and energy. In solid mechanics, an additional consti- and ciz are treated as independent variables.
tutive law relating the stresses to strains and tem- We now introduce the Helmholtx free energy func-
perature is required to fully describe the system. For tion @, viz.
a Hookean material under small quasi-static defor-
mations these equations may be written as: Q, = U - TS, G.5)

where S is the specific entropy.

For an elastic material Q1and 5’ depend only on the
(2.1)
quantities 6ij and T, so that
P =pot

where p and p0 are the strained and unstrained

densities of the material, respectively.

$,j = -PO&, summing over j = 1,2,3, (2.2)

where trr/is the stress tensor, and F, is the body force

per unit mass.
. a@
u=&,%+
. s+ Ts+sl:
aT
(2&b)

Substituting eqn (2.6b) into eqn (2.3), we obtain

t The values of u quoted hem were obtained by a second-
order polynomial interpolation of the data presented by
Salmon (19 at 7.20 and 27°C.
$ Small quasi-static deformation infers that the,defor-
mation is much iess than the dimensions of the body in
question,
_ _ and_ that
__. it happens
. _ bonny sIowly to enable
the neglect or ail mertra &Rzts.
 ~e~~l~tic constant or ~e~~~tic parameter? 751

Since &, and tare arbitrary, and that the expressions materials (see, e.g. Ref. ]ilSl). Now, the substitution
enclosed in the large parentheses are independent of of eqn (2.17) into eqn (2.16) yields
these quantities, it may be coneluded that:

-poc,z++polQ. (2.18)
a@
S-E (2.91
Under adiabatic conditions, with no internal heat
sources, eqn (2.18) reduces to
since the second law of tbe~~yn~ics requires
t
Q,, = p. (15 - Ts). (2.10) PoG-,=
(2.19)
The di~e~ntiation of eqn (2.g) with respect to T
gives Since the choice of the reference spatial axis system
is arbitrary, eqn (2.19) may be simplified by express-
au..
$ = PoeT. (2.11) ing the strains in terms of their principal values c,, uiz.

It then follows from eqn (2.9) that

(2.20)
(2.12)
In the ease of a stress-induced temperature fteld,
an order-of-mag~tude analysis shows that whilst
The substitution of eqn (2.12) into eqn (2.10) yields
(@/aT)ATmay be considered as negligible compared
to b, the terms (&t/dT)q and (an/CJT)e can be of
Qi.t=
T (2.13) significant order. IIence eqn (2.20) becomes

4‘ aa
It is customa~ to define a specific heat at constant
deformation C, such that for gij = 0,
poc&-,= -
( >e+2~Tcjdj.
/I --FTC? (2.21)

Equation (2.21) represents the the~~lasti~ coupling

PoGt= -e*,,+ PO&. (2.14)
between the strain and tem~mture fields. A similar
expression in terms of the stresses may also be
Putting djj = 0 in eqn (2.13) and equating to eqn
obtained by substituting eqn Q.4a) into eqn (2.21)
(2.141, it is clear that
and o~tti~g higher order terms, giving

2+ (1 - 2~)~ an
c,= -ST.

Hence, eqn (2.13) may be rewritten as

(2.15)
poCcT”-
II (
a- --
a?%* aT

From the co~titutive law, eqn (2.4a), we obtain: where s is the first inva~~t of the stress tensor.
Since p = E/2(1 + v) and L = vE/(f + v) (1 - 2v),
it can be shown that eqn (2.22) may be expressed in
S,. (2.17) terms of the modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio,
namely,
The present derivation differs from the existing
theory in that the elastic and thermal properties are v aE i av
not assumed to be constant. This is reasonable as
-$j”i----,T ’ ’
>I
it is well known that such properties can be
strong functions of temperature, and that data for + (l +v>aE-!!? etdt, (2,231
their variations am commonly available for many E2 8T EaT
752 A. K. WONG et rd.

Equation (2.23) is simply a statement of the ther- SPATE response, consider the uniaxially loaded case
moelastic effect relating the temperature field and the where the applied stress consists of a mean com-
stress field. In particular, it may be seen that by ponent s, and a pure sinusoidal component As sin wt.
including the temperature dependence of the elastic That is,
properties, the thermoelastic effect is, contrary to the
classical theory, now a function of both stress and s =s,+As sinwt, (3.1)
stress rate. To illustrate the effects of stress on the
thermoelastic constant more clearly, consider the so that
special case of uniaxial loading in which
s =oAscosot. (3.21
6, =s, a2 = 0, = 0,
The substitution of eqns (3.1) and (3.2) into eqn
and (2.25) yields

d, =s, 6, = d, = 0. (2.24)
poc.;=
- 1 aE
d-~~T(~~+Assinot)
>
wA8ccoso.H
Substituting eqn (2.24) into eqn (2.23) gives
= -(a-j&)obrcosot
p,c&-(a-$$,)i (2.25)

L. ~cO{As)z sin ht. (3.3)

Assuming that both the tem~rat~e and stress +2E2dT
fluctuations are small compared to their mean values
(T, and s,), eqn (2.25) may be linearised to give Integrating eqn (3.3) with respect to t, and appiying
the condition T = T,, when t = 0, we obtain
(2.26)
p,,C,ln(:)= -(a -$gs,)Assinrut
Comparing eqn (2.26) with eqn (l.l), it may be
concluded that the thermoelastic ‘constant’ K may be
+&g(A~)~(l -cos2ot). (3.4)
written as

Expanding the log term in series form about T,, and

noting that AT = T - TocTO, eqn (3.4) becomes

The above shows that K (from hereafter, K will be

referred to as the thermoeiastic parameter rather than
thermoelastic constant) is indeed mean stress de-
pendent, and that for the uniaxial case, the extent of
mean stress dependency is governed by the properties
of a single elastic parameter, the modulus of elas-
ticity. A normal&d measure of the variation of K
with respect to the mean stress may be written as
1 L’K
A__= --- 1 aE (2.28)
k6 as, ciE=i3T
where & = a /( p0 C,) is the usually adopted thermo-
dastic constant.
3. THEORY vs EXPERIMENTS
Since the present work was initiated by the findings
of Machin et al. [6] when using the SPATE 8000
stress analyser, their experimental results make a
natural basis for comparing the theory developed in
section 2. As mentioned previously, the SPATE
system detects the changes in infrared emission, and
therefore the temperature changes, due to an applied
cyclic load. To see how the mean stress affects the
+ -& g (As)~ (1 - cos 2wt). (3.5)
Equation (3.5) represents the response of the tern-
perature field to the applied sinusoidal load. It is
interesting to note that this consists of two oscillatory
components. The first is at the fundamental fre-
quency w, and assuming that a is the dominant
parameter, the negative sign sign&s a phase differ-
ence of 180”. In other words, as the tensile stresses in
the material are increased, the temperature falls, and
as the compressive stresses are decreased, the tem-
perature rises, Note that this component is dependent
on both the mean stress s,,, and the stress amplitude
As. On the other hand, the second harmonic com-
ponent (of frequency 2w) is dependent only on the
stress amplitude, and although the coefficient
iW/i3T(2E)-2 is expected to be comparatively small,
this component can become significant for large
amplitude loads. As far as SPATE is concerned
however, only the fundamental component is de-
tected as signals of all other frequencies are. filtered
 Thermoelastic constant or thennoelastic parameter? 753

Table 1. Comparison of theoretical and measured mean stress dependence of K

@K/as,) h6_’ (MPa-I)
BEIBT
Material (M;a) (MPa/“C) Theory [eqn (2.28)] Experiments [6]
Ti-iiAIaV 9.0 x 10e6 1.11 x 105 -48.0 4.33 x 10-4 4.29 x 1O-4
Al-2024 2.3 x 1O-5 7.2 x IO’ -36.0 3.02 x 1O-4 3.19 x 10-d

out by its processors. Hence, it may be concluded that phenomenon which has, up till now, been over-
the thermoelastic parameter and its dependence on looked. We refer to the second harmonic component
the mean stress as seen by SPATE are therefore as of the temperature signal when a pure sinusoidal load
described by eqns (2.27) and (2.28). is applied. As mentioned earlier, this component can
Although i?E/BTdata are usually much less com- be of significant order when large stress amplitudes
mon as compared to other material properties, such are present. Further, since this component consists
data are available for the titanium alloy Ti-6A1-4V solely of the effects of As and E-2aE/aT, the
[ 151 and the aluminium alloy Al-2024 [16], both of measurement of such component can be used directly
which were considered in the experiments of Machin to determine the parameter E-2aE/aT which con-
et al. [6]. Table 1 lists the data used, and the tributes to the stress dependence of K.
comparison between the theoretically predicted mean The significance of establishing the stress de-
stress dependence and the experimental results for pendence of the thermoelastic parameter is two fold.
these two alloys. Good agreement between theory Firstly, all stress analysis techniques which utilise
and experiment is clearly evident. thermoelastic effects, such as SPATE, must now take
The results also highlight the extent of the vari- the applied mean stress into account. Otherwise,
ability of the thermoelastic parameter. For the ti- substantial errors can be expected. Secondly, and
tanium alloy considered as an example, K can differ perhaps more importantly, the potential for using
by about 43% over a mean stress range of 1000 MPa such techniques for measuring residual stresses within
(e.g. from -500 to 500 MPa). This is indeed a material is now apparent. The pursuance of this
significant, and cannot be regarded as a second-order aspect is currently in progress, and preliminary
effect. results have already proved to be promising.

4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION REFERENCES

The theory presented in this paper has shown that
the thermoelastic parameter can be significantly de-
pendent on the stress applied. Interestingly, and
contrary to intuitive reasoning that this may be. due
to the strain dependence of mechanical and/or ther-
mal properties of the material, it was shown that this
effect may be fully accounted for by the temperature
dependence of the mechanical properties of the
material. Substantiation of the theory was achieved
by good agreement between predicted and experi-
mental results for two structural metals. Further tests
are currently planned on a variety of materials.
Because the theory expresses the mean stress effect
on the thermoelastic parameter explicitly in terms of
a, E and aE/aT, it provides a basis for selecting
materials which should yield interesting results. The
materials selected for further examination include a
brass alloy (855-5-5), whose modulus of elasticity
has a relatively high temperature dependence.
Another alloy which will be considered is invar,
which has an extremely small coefficient of thermal
expansion at room temperature as well as the rare
property that aE/aTds positive. The results of tests
on these and other materials will be the subject of a
subsequent paper.
The analyses have also revealed an interesting
1. Go@ J., Manchester Phil. Mem., 2nd Series 1, 288
(1805).
2. Thomson W. (Lord Kelvin), Q. J. Maths 1, 55 (1855),
reprinted in Phil. Msg. 5, 4 (1878).
3. Belgen M. H., ISA Trans. 6, 49 (1967).
4. Mountain D. S. and Webher J. M. B., Proc. Sot.
Photo-Opt. Inst. Engrs 164, 189 (1978).
5. Boley B. A. and Weiner J. H., Theory of Thermal
Stresses, Wiley, New York (1960).
6. Machin A. S., Sparrow J. G. and Stimson M-G., Strain
23(l), 27 (1987).
7. Davis G. F., j. Phys. Chem. Soli& 34, 1417 (1973).
8. Delannoy M. and Perrin G., J. Phys. Chem. Solids 41,
11 (1980).
9. Sato Y. and Anderson 0. L., J. Phys. Chem. Solia!s41,
401 (1980).
10. Bottani C. E. and Ossi P. M., Phil Mug. A41, 943
(1980).
11. Bottani C. E., Caglioti G. and Ossi P. M., J. Phys. Fll,
541 (1981).
12. Caglioti G., Proc. Int. School of Physics ‘Enrico Fermi’
Course LXXXII, Mechanical and Thermal Behaoiour of
Metallic
- . Materials, North-Holland, Amsterdam (1982).
13. Salmon D. R., Low Temperature Data Ham&ok,
Titanium and Titanium alloys, National Physical Lab-
oratory, Teddington, England, NPL Rept QU 53,
May (1979).
14. Belgen M. H., NASA Contr. Rept. CR-1067, May
(1968).
15. Metals Handbook (9th edn), 3 (1980).
16. Brammer J. A. and Percival C. M., Experimenfal
Mechanics 10, 245 (1970).

View publication stats