Fractional Derivative Constitutive

Models for Finite Deformation

Masataka Fukunaga1
P.T. Lecturer
College of Engineering,
of Viscoelastic Materials
Nihon University,
Koriyama, Fukushima 963-8642, Japan A methodology to derive fractional derivative constitutive models for finite deformation
e-mail: fukunaga@apple.ifnet.or.jp of viscoelastic materials is proposed in a continuum mechanics treatment. Fractional
derivative models are generalizations of the models given by the objective rates. The
Nobuyuki Shimizu method of generalization is applied to the case in which the objective rate of the Cauchy
MotionLabo Inc., stress is given by the Truesdell rate. Then, a fractional derivative model is obtained in
TSK Boulevard 302, 9-1, Kanari-Sunada, terms of the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor and the right Cauchy-Green strain ten-
Onahama, Iwaki, sor. Under the assumption that the dynamical behavior of the viscoelastic materials
Fukushima 971-8135, Japan comes from a complex combination of elastic and viscous elements, it is shown that the
e-mail: nshim@motionlabo.com strain energy of the elastic elements plays a fundamental role in determining the frac-
tional derivative constitutive equation. As another example of the methodology, a frac-
tional constitutive model is derived in terms of the Biot stress tensor. The constitutive
models derived in this paper are compared and discussed with already existing models.
From the above studies, it has been proved that the methodology proposed in this paper
is fully applicable and effective. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4028438]

1 Introduction
Dynamical properties of continuous media are explained using
a combination of elastic components and viscous components. In
a Newtonian fluid, the elastic component is the pressure due to
volume change (or the hydrostatic pressure in the incompressible
fluids) and the viscous component is due to internal friction. The
elastic properties of solids are composed of volume change and
deviatoric change. In these media the dynamical properties of
elastic components are described by the stress due to strain, while
the dynamical properties of viscous components are described by
the stress due to the rate of deformation or the rate of strain. It is
well known that there are many materials that cannot be explained
by a simple combination of a finite number of elastic and viscous
components. For these materials, constitutive equations can often
be simplified by introducing one or a few components given by
fractional order stress–strain relations [1–6]. In the linear regime,
the fractional order stress–strain relation is given by
r ¼ l0 Dqa e
where r and e are the stress and the strain, respectively, and l0
is a positive material constant. The fractional derivative of a
function f(t) is defined by (see Refs. [7–9])
ðt
d ðt  sÞq
Dqa f ðtÞ ¼ f ðsÞds
dt a Cð1  qÞ
for 0 < q < 1, where C(s) is the gamma function of argument s.
This definition is known as the Riemann–Liouville derivative.
Another important definition of fractional differentiation is the
Caputo derivative defined by Eq. (9) [10]
ðt
 ðt  sÞq ð1Þ
Dqa f ðtÞ ¼ f ðsÞds
a Cð1  qÞ
1
Corresponding author.
Contributed by the Design Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND NONLINEAR DYNAMICS. Manuscript received March
23, 2014; final manuscript received August 25, 2014; published online April 9, 2015.
Assoc. Editor: J. A. Tenreiro Machado.
The Riemann–Liouville derivative and the Caputo derivative
coincide in the closed interval [a, T], if the function f(t) defined in
the closed interval [a, T] satisfies the conditions that f(t) ¼ 0 at
t ¼ a, f(t) is continuous in t  a, and that the first derivative f(1)(t)
is integrable in [a, T] [8]. In the physical point of view, the lower
terminal a is the time of birth of the material in consideration.
Nonlinear models for viscoelastic materials have long been
investigated by many authors. Lodge [11] proposed a model
known as the elastic liquid, in which the memory effect was taken
into account in the deformation of polymeric liquids. His model
can be transformed to a fractional derivative model under certain
conditions [12,13], because it is expressed by the Boltzmann
superposition principle (see Eq. (4) and the explanation followed
by). A review of liquid-type viscoelastic models can be seen in
the texts written by Bird et al. [14,15].
Attempts to express finite deformation of viscoelastic materials
by fractional derivatives have been made [16–21]. Drozdov [16]
(1) considered a fractional derivative model based on the Oldroid
rate of the Cauchy stress and the rate of deformation tensor
d ¼ ð1=2Þ½FF _ 1 þ ðFF
_ 1 ÞT , where F is the deformation gradient
tensor and F_ is the time derivative of F. (He used the term “rate of
strain tensor” for d in his paper. See Ref. [22] for the terminology
of d.) Haupt and Lion [17] proposed two constitutive fractional
derivative models. Their models are constructed using the lower
(2)
convected rate and the Oldroid rate of the Cauchy stress, and the
rate of deformation tensor.
A model based on the Green–Naghdi rate of Kirchhoff stress is
proposed by Freed and Diethelm [20]. Adolfsson and Enelund
[18] introduced fractional derivatives of internal variables and
considered a fractional Maxwell model. Adolfsson [19] gave an
equation relating the Mandel stress tensor and the fractional deriv-
ative of the deformation gradient tensor. Nasuno [21] proposed a
(3) fractional derivative constitutive model for finite deformation
between the time derivative of the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress
tensor and the time derivative of the right Cauchy–Green tensor.
It will be useful in the derivation of models for finite deforma-
tion to consider the underlying mechanism of the viscoelasticity
of the materials. Models that give fractional derivative constitu-
tive equations are proposed by several authors [23–25]. In these

Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics NOVEMBER 2015, Vol. 10 / 061002-1

C 2015 by ASME
Copyright V

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 models, fractal structures of springs and dashpots are the origin of
the fractional order stress–strain relation. Rouse [26] and Zimm
[27] derived the dynamic shear modulus of a rarefied polymer so-
lution. Rouse assumed that the deformation of polymer coils
causes elastic force due to entropic change. The action of entropic
elasticity and the frictional force between the polymer coils and
the solvent results in the frequency dependence of the dynamic
shear modulus that is interpreted by the fractional derivative con-
stitutive equation given by Eq. (1) with q ¼ 1/2 for a certain fre-
quency range [4].
One of the basic descriptions of dynamical behaviors of visco-
elastic materials is the Boltzmann’s superposition principle [28],
which gives the stress as a sum of delayed response to the strain 9
[28–31]
ðt
rv ¼ Gðt  sÞeðsÞds
_ (4)
a model is given. Then, fractional derivative models for finite defor-
where G(t) is the time-dependent dynamic shear modulus. In
Rouse’s model [26], the dynamical behavior of a polymer solution
is described as a sum of decay modes with a wide range of the
decay times ti
X
n
GðtÞ ¼ G0 et=ti (5)
i¼1
where G0 is a positive constant. The distribution of ti leads Eq. (4)
to a fractional constitutive model given by Eq. (1) of order q ¼ 1/2
[4]. In general, if the distribution of ti is proportional to tq1,
Eq. (4) is reduced to a fractional derivative of e of order q.
A key to the three-dimensional (3D) generalization of Eq. (4) is
in the interpretation of e_ and e. The time derivative has to be
the objective rate. However, there are a number of objective
rates, which is one of the reasons why there are many fractional
derivative models. One of the simple but powerful tools that help
studying viscoelastic materials through Eq. (4) is the generalized
Maxwell model (see Fig. 1). The generalized Maxwell model is
developed to construct the model of viscoelastic properties of rub-
bers [32–40].
Polymers in the solid type viscoelastic materials such as gels
are connected to each other [30,41] like the polymers in rubbers
[42], while the dynamic shear moduli of some gels show a power-
law frequency dependence in a wide frequency range like rarefied
polymer solutions. Being lead by this fact, Fukunaga and Shimizu
[43] proposed a nonlinear fractional derivative model under the
assumption that the entropic elasticity of polymers and the friction
between polymers and the solvent are the origin of the dynamical
Fig. 1 The Generalized Maxwell Model
061002-2 / Vol. 10, NOVEMBER 2015
Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
behavior of the gels. Fukunaga and Shimizu [43] obtained the fol-
lowing relationship between the nominal stress rn for the uni-
axial deformation with the use of the generalized Maxwell model
 
1
rn ¼ lv Dqa k  2 (6)
k
where k is the stretch ratio of the current height of the specimen to
the initial height. This relation was named “type IIa” (the type
classification is given in the Appendix). Fukunaga and co-workers
[13,44] showed that Eq. (6) reproduces well the experimental data
on impulse response with a small correction for k.
In this paper, the idea proposed in Ref. [43] for the uni-axial
deformation is developed to the 3D deformation through the con-
tinuum mechanics treatment with the use of the generalized Max-
well model. In sec. 2, an explanation of the generalized Maxwell
mations are derived based on the generalized Maxwell model in
secs. 3 and 4. In sec. 3, the general procedure of derivation of frac-
tional derivative constitutive equation is obtained. The fractional
derivative model is given as a generalization of an objective
time rate of strain to fractional order. Then, the method is applied
to derive a fractional derivative model in terms of the second
Piola–Kirchhoff stress, which is based on the Truesdell rate (or
the Oldroid rate for the incompressible case) of the Cauchy stress.
This model is an explicit realization of fractional model suggested
by Simo [34]. In Sec. 4, another fractional derivative model is
derived in terms of the Biot stress tensor. This model is a general-
ization to the three dimension of the type IIa model given by
Eq. (6). In Sec. 5, a discussion is given on the properties and
applicability of the models.
2 Generalized Maxwell Model
As was explained earlier, the generalized Maxwell model is an
effective tool in constructing a 3D fractional constitutive model
for viscoelastic material. The linear, one-dimensional (1D) gener-
alized Maxwell model defined by Fig. 1 is briefly reviewed for
later convenience. A series of an internal spring and an internal
dashpot is referred to as the Maxwell element. It is noted that the
terminology in this paper is somewhat different from those in
other literatures in which a spring is added in parallel to the Max-
well elements. The term “internal” is added to the components in
the Maxwell elements in order not to confuse with purely elastic
components or dashpot components that may be added in parallel
to the generalized Maxwell model. The term internal components
is borrowed from the term “internal variables” introduced in the
physics of viscoelasticity as not being necessarily observable vari-
ables [33,45,46].
The generalized Maxwell model satisfies the Boltzmann’s
superposition principle as is given below. The equation for the
generalized Maxwell model is given by
X
n
rv ¼ ri (7)
i¼1
where rv and ri are the total stress and the stress of the i-th Max-
well element, respectively, with
dei
ri ¼ ki ðe  ei Þ ¼ gi (8)
dt
where e, ei, and gi are the total strain of the Maxwell element, the
strain and the coefficient of viscosity of the ith internal dashpot
component, respectively. Elimination of ei from Eq. (8) gives
dri 1 dðki eÞ
þ ri ¼ ; i ¼ 1; :…; n (9)
dt ti dt
Transactions of the ASME
 where ti ¼ gi/ki. The set of Eqs. (7) and (9) with the initial condi- full treatment of the continuum mechanics). One coordinate sys-
tion, e ¼ 0 at t ¼ a, gives the set of Eqs. (4) and (5), if G0 is tem is for physical space, which is represented by a 3D space R3
replaced by ki. called the spatial description. The other coordinate system moves
A fractional derivative model is derived, if the time constant ti with the body and is called the material coordinates (or the
in Eqs. (5) and (9) has a power-law type distribution, / tq1dt, material description). It is assumed that the body is in the
over i ¼ 1,…,n, as [17,43] unstressed and unstrained state in t  0. This means that the lower
terminal a of the fractional derivatives can be replaced by a ¼ 0.
rv ðtÞ ¼ lA Dqa ½keðtÞ (10) Each point P fixed to the body is assigned
P to the two coordinate
systems. The material coordinates X ¼ 3i¼1 Xi Ei label the point
in the continuous limit, where lA is a positive constant, and P at the initial time t ¼ 0 with respect to the Cartesian
P basis Ei,
i ¼ 1, 2, 3. The spatial coordinates x ¼ xðX; tÞ ¼ 3i¼1 xi ei assign
X
n X
n the current position of P with respect to the Cartesian basis ei,
rv ¼ lim ri and k ¼ lim ki (11) where i ¼ 1, 2, 3. The bases of the two coordinates systems are
n!1 n!1
i¼1 i¼1 taken to coincide: Ei ¼ ei, where i ¼ 1, 2, 3. Let dX and dx be in-
finitesimal vectors directed from a point P to a point Q fixed to
The generalized Maxwell model given by Eq. (8) can be repre- the material at infinitesimal distances at t ¼ 0 and the current time,
sented by the energy principle. The potential energy of the inter- respectively (Fig. 3). The deformation gradient tensor F is defined
nal elastic components is given by (see e.g., [37,39]) as
X
n
@xi
w¼ wi ðe; ei Þ (12) dx ¼ FdX; or F¼ ei  Ej (16)
i¼1 @Xj
1
wi ðe; ei Þ ¼ ki ðe  ei Þ2 (13) where the symbol  indicates the tensor product. The deformation
2 gradient tensor is decomposed to a rotation tensor R and a sym-
metric right stretch tensor U as
Thus, Eq. (8) is written as
F ¼ RU (17)
@wi ðe; ei Þ @w ðe; ei Þ
ri ¼ ¼ i (14)
@e @ei The right Cauchy–Green tensor C is defined by C ¼ FTF ¼ U2,
where FT is the transpose of F. The inverse and the transposed
The elastic stress kie on the right-hand side (RHS) of Eq. (9) is inverse of F are denoted by F1 and FT, respectively.
given by
 
@wi ðe; ei Þ 3.1 Fractional Derivative Model Based on the 3D
ki e ¼ (15)
@e ei ¼0 Generalized Maxwell Model. The fractional time derivatives
express memory effects. The memory of a material is carried in
In what follows the fractional model given by Eq. (10) with each volume element not being fixed to the space but to the mate-
Eq. (15) is generalized to the 3D finite deformation. rial. Therefore, the material description is essential to construct
the fractional derivative models (see the discussion given in
Refs. [3] and [48]). A 3D generalization of the Maxwell elements,
3 Fractional Derivative Model for Finite Deformation P may be written in terms of the 3D Cauchy stress r as
Eq. (9),
rv ¼ ni¼1 ri and
In this section, fractional derivative models for solid-type iso-
tropic viscoelastic materials are derived for finite deformations 1
through the continuum mechanics treatment. For simplicity of r i þ ri ¼ r i;0 ðeÞ i ¼ 1; 2; …; n (18)
ti
description, the material is homogeneous and isothermal, i.e., the
physical values such as mass density are constant in space and the where the symbol (8) represents an appropriate time rate that satis-
temperature is constant during deformation processes. A visco- fies the objectivity condition, and ri;0 ðeÞ is the 3D generalization
elastic material is represented by a continuum body embedded in of kie in Eq. (15).
the 3D physical space. The body is described by a subset X of the In order to express the memory effect properly, we impose the
3D space, which changes as the body moves; At t ¼ 0, it is following condition to the objective rate. Let / be a
X ¼ X0  R3 (Fig. 2). In describing the physical state of the body,
two coordinate systems are adopted (see Refs. [39] and [47] for

Fig. 3 Infinitesimal vectors directed from the point P to the

Fig. 2 The initial and current configurations of a continuum point Q fixed to the body at the initial time dX and the current
body time dx

Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics NOVEMBER 2015, Vol. 10 / 061002-3

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 transformation of the Cauchy stress r to an objective material It is assumed that the internal elastic components of the Maxwell
stress tensor, and /1 its inverse. An objective rate of r is written elements have the property of hyperelasticity. The hyperelasticity
as of a continuum body is defined as follows: the work done by the
stress during the deformation process is dependent only on the ini-
_
r ¼ /1 ð/ðrÞÞ (19) tial strain at time t ¼ 0 and the final strain at the current time
[39,49]. Thus, the Helmholtz free energy W describing the ther-
where the symbol ð
Þ denotes the material time derivative. The modynamic process is a scalar function of the deformation gradi-
material description of the generalized Maxwell model is derived ent tensor F. The free energy does not change under the rigid
by operating / on both side of Eq. (18) as body rotation, whereas F changes by rotation. Therefore, the free
energy is a function, W ¼ W(U) ¼ W(C), of the strain tensor U or
C, since U and C are eliminated the rotation tensor from F.
_ i Þ þ 1 /ðri Þ ¼ /ðr
/ðr _ i;0 Þ i ¼ 1; 2; …; n (20)
ti The second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor is defined as the work
conjugate of the rate of Green tensor ð1=2ÞðC  IÞ_, where I the
and identity tensor. Thus, the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor is
given by
X
n
/ðrv Þ ¼ /ðri Þ (21) @W
S¼2 (26)
i¼1 @C

The fractional derivative constitutive equation for the material It is assumed that the viscoelastic response is due to the devia-
stress is give by comparing Eqs. (20) and (21) with Eqs. (7), (9), toric part of deformation. Thus, the deformation gradient tensor
and (10) as decomposes to the volumetric change J1=3I and isochoric defor-
mation F as (e.g., Ref. [39])
/ðrv Þ ¼ lA  Dqa /ðr0 Þ (22)
 ¼ J 1=3 F
F ¼ ðJ 1=3 IÞF  (27)
for the distribution of ti proportional to tq1 under the condition
that the sum for P i and the transformation is interchanged, where where det F ¼ 1. The right Cauchy-Green tensor also decomposes
/ðr0 Þ ¼ limn!1 ni¼1 /ðri;0 Þ. The spatial description is derived to the volumetric change and the isochoric deformation as
by the inverse transformation of Eq. (22) as  and @ C=@C
C ¼ J 2=3 C  ¼ J 2=3 P T , where the projection tensor P
is the fourth order tensor defined by P ¼ I  ð1=3ÞC1  C, and
rv ¼ /1 ½lA  Dqa /ðr0 Þ (23) I is a fourth order unit tensor defined by ðI Þijkl Ei  Ej  Ek 
El ¼ ð1=2Þðdik djl þ dil djk ÞEi  Ej  Ek  El . The deviatoric part
of any second order tensor A is defined by
The derivative /1 ½Dqa /ðrÞ is a generalization of the objective
rate of r to the fractional order q; it tends to Eq. (19) for q ! 1. 1
The Caputo time derivative in Eqs. (22) and (23) can be replaced DevA ¼ A  ðA : CÞC1 (28)
3
with the Riemann–Liouville derivative in many cases of applica-
tions under the adopted initial condition (see the explantions
The operation of the projection tensor P to any second order ten-
below Eq. (3)). We have so far constructed a general procedure of
sor A is equivalent to the deviatoric part of A, P : A ¼ DevA.
constructing a fractional derivative constitutive model for finite
The free energy of strain is assumed to be separated into the
deformation of viscoelastic materials based on the 3D generaliza-
energy of volumetric change Wvol (J) and that of the isochoric
tion of the 1D generalized Maxwell model.
deformation. The latter is further decomposed to the purely elastic
component Wel 
iso ðCÞ and the viscoelastic component represented
3.2 Generalized Maxwell Model in Terms of the Second by a 3D generalization of the generalized Maxwell model
Piola–Kirchhoff Stress Tensor. There are several types of objec-  CÞ. Thus, the following expression results [33,36,39]:
Wviso ðC;
tive rates that satisfy Eq. (19) (see Refs. [39] and [49]). One of the
objective rates applicable to compressible materials is the Trues-
dell rate defined by r Trues ¼ ð1=JÞF½ðJF1 rFT Þ
FT , where the WðC; CÞ ¼ Wvol ðJÞ þ Wel  v 
iso ðCÞ þ Wiso ðC; CÞ (29)
symbol ð
Þ indicates the material time derivative. This expression
is rewritten in terms of the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor S where C ¼ fC1 ; …; Cn g is the set of strain tensors of the internal
defined by dashpot components. The last term on the RHS of Eq. (29) is the
 Ci Þ of the Maxwell elements
sum of the energy function !i ðC;
S ¼ JF1 rFT (24)
X
n
as r Trues
¼ ð1=JÞFSF _ T . The transformation of r defined by  CÞ ¼
Wviso ðC;  Ci Þ
!i ðC; (30)
Eq. (24) is known as the Piola transformation. The second i¼1
Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor is a material stress tensor. If the
Truesdell rate is applied to Eq. (18), and tensors JF1 and FT are It is natural to assume that Wvol ð1Þ ¼ 0; Wel iso ðIÞ ¼ 0, and !i
operated on the both sides, the material time derivatives of the ith (I, I) ¼ 0. Differentiation of Eq. (30) with respect to the strain
Maxwell element is given for Si as [48] gives the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor as
X
n
1 Sv ¼ Si (31)
_i
S_ i þ Si ¼ G i ¼ 1; 2; …; n (25) i¼1
ti

The stress of the internal elastic components is given by

The tensor Gi on the RHS of Eq. (25) is defined by
Gi ¼ JF1 ri;0 ðeÞFT .
The equation for the Maxwell elements is given by Eqs. (18)
 Ci Þ=@C;
Si ¼ 2@!i ðC; i ¼ 1; 2; …; n (32)
or (25), where the form of Gi is given later in the next subsection.

061002-4 / Vol. 10, NOVEMBER 2015 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 and is calculated to be [39] or in the explicit form

 Ci Þ  ðt 
Si ¼ J 2=3 P : 2rC !i ðC; (33) 1 ðt  sÞq dGðCðsÞÞ

type III : rv ¼ FðtÞ lA ds FT ðtÞ
J a Cð1  qÞ ds
 Ci Þ ¼ @!i ðC;
where rC !i ðC;  Ci Þ=@ C.
 The right equality of Eq.
(41)
(14) is generalized as the partial derivative of Ci as
 Ci Þ
@!ðC; 3.4 Fractional Derivative Models for Incompressible
Si ¼ 2 ; i ¼ 1; 2; …; n (34) Media. So far a fractional derivative model for finite deformation
@Ci
of compressible viscoelastic materials has been derived based on
The dissipation function Wdiss is defined as the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor. In some materials,
incompressible models give a good approximation. In incompres-
Xn
1 sible bodies, the determinant of C is unity and hence J ¼ 1. Thus,
Wdiss ¼ Si : C_ i ; (35)  may be replaced with C. The free energy for volume change is
C
i¼1
2 the constant Wvol ¼ 0. The pressure is treated as an undetermined
value.
which is non-negative [39]. In this section, for demonstration, a stress–strain relationship
will be derived for the case in which the free energy is given by
3.3 Fractional Constitutive Equation Based on the Second the neo-Hookean elasticity. The elasticity of polymeric materials
Piola–Kirchhoff Stress Tensor. The expression of Gi in Eq. (25) comes from the entropy change of the polymer chains due to
is derived as follows. The term ri;0 ðeÞ on the RHS of Eq. (18) is a deformation [26,42]. Further, the free energy of entropic elasticity
generalization of Eq. (15) under the objectivity condition. Thus, of Gaussian chains in the isothermal process is identified with that
Gi should also be a generalization of Eq. (15). Since the 3D form of neo-Hookean elasticity [30,39,42]. The free energy of the neo-
of the internal elastic components of the generalized Maxwell Hookean elasticity is given as a function of the first invariant I1 of
model is given by Eq. (33), the form of Gi is thus derived from  (see Ref. [39]). Thus
C
Eq. (33) by setting Ci ¼ I
 IÞ ¼ ðG=2ÞðI1  3Þ
Wviso ðC; (42)
 ¼J
Gi ¼ Gi ðCÞ 2=3  Ci ¼ IÞ
P : 2rC !i ðC; (36)
This is a special case of isotropic material in which the free
 The sum of
In Eq. (36), the scalar functions !i depend only on C. energy is given in terms of the principal values of strain tensor C.
 is denoted by  IÞ is calculated to be GI by the chain
The value of 2rC Wviso ðC;
Gi ðCÞ
rule. Thus, Eq. (38) is reduced to
X
n
 ¼
GðCÞ 
Gi ðCÞ (37)  ¼ J 2=3 P : GI
GðCÞ
i¼1  
1 (43)
¼ G I  trðCÞC1
Thus, with the use of Eqs. (36) and (30), the last expression is 3
reduced to
where J ¼ 1 is used in the last expression. Substituting Eq. (43)
into Eq. (39), we have a fractional derivative model in which
 ¼J
GðCÞ 2=3
P:  IÞ
2rC Wviso ðC; (38) the internal elastic components are given by the neo-Hookean
elasticity
Equations (31) and (25) lead to a fractional derivative expres-  
sion for a special distribution / tq1dt of decay time in the con- 1
type IIIc Sv ¼ lv  Dqa I  trðCÞC1 (44)
tinuous limit using the relationship between Eqs. (20), (21), and 3
(22) as [48]
where lv ¼ GlA.
type III : 
Sv ¼ lA  Dqa GðCÞ (39)
4 The Fractional Derivative Model Based on the Biot
This expression is one of the explicit realizations of the fractional
Stress Tensor
derivative model suggested by Simo [34] in his work of visco-
elastic model. The constant lA in Eq. (39) is basically different In Sec. 3, a fractional derivative model for viscoelastic
from lA in Eq. (10). However, if e in Eq. (10) is a component of materials was constructed as a generalization of the Truesdell rate
strain, the value of lAk is derived from a linear approximation of of the Cauchy stress. It was written in terms of the second
 in Eq. (39),
Eq. (39). It should be noted that, in calculating GðCÞ Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor. However, there are several types of
concrete forms of individual !i ðC;  Ci Þ or !i ðC;
 Ci ¼ IÞ in objective rates. In this section, the fractional derivative model is
Eq. (36) are not necessary. Only needed is the sum Wviso ðC;  IÞ of constructed in terms of the Biot stress. The push forward of the
!i at Ci ¼ I given in Eq. (38). This is a direct consequence of the time derivative of the Biot stress is also an objective rate of the
special distribution of decay time. Indeed GðCÞ  is a function of Cauchy stress.
time, and the symbol of Caputo derivative  Dqa means differentia- The Biot stress tensor is defined as (see Refs. [49] and [50])
tion with respect to time. The time derivative is the material time
derivative. The time integration is also the material time integra- TB ¼ JRT rFT ¼ US (45)
tion, in which the time integration is performed for the fixed mate-
rial point.
The expression given by Eq. (45) is not symmetric. The symmet-
The Cauchy stress rv of the fractional component is the push
ric form of the Biot stress T is given by
forward of the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress Sv

1  T 1
type III : rv ¼ F½lA  Dqa GðCÞF (40) T ¼ ðUS þ SUÞ (46)
J 2

Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics NOVEMBER 2015, Vol. 10 / 061002-5

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 and if TB is symmetric, i.e., if US ¼ SU derivative model given by Eq. (40) based on the second
Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor.
1 When the neo-Hookean elasticity, Eq. (42), is applied to the
r¼ ðRTFT þ FTRT Þ (47)  is given by
2J internal elastic components, the stress GT ðCÞ

The Biot stress tensor is the work conjugate to the time derivative  ¼ G½U  ð1=3ÞtrðCÞU1 
GT ðCÞ (57)
_ It is easy to show that the rate defined
of the right stretch tensor U.
by with the use of Eqs. (43), (54), and (55), where J ¼ 1 for
the incompressible case is used in the last expression. Thus, a
1 _ T Þ ¼ 1 ½RðTU
_ T þ FTR _ þ UTÞR
_ T fractional constitutive equation based on the Biot stress is
ðRTF (48)
2J 2 expressed as
 
is one of the rates of r that satisfies the objectivity condition. 1
With the use of Eq. (46), the expressions in Eq. (32) for the type IVc Tv ¼ lv  Dqa U  trðCÞU1 (58)
3
second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor may be replaced with those
of the Biot stress tensor. The component constitutive equation for
Ti, i ¼ 1, 2,…, n, is given by
5 Discussion
 Ci Þ @!i ðC;
@!i ðC;  Ci Þ @C In the previous sections, two types of fractional constitutive
Ti ¼ ¼ : (49)
@U @C @U equations for finite deformations were derived for viscoelastic
materials under the assumption that the fractional derivative
which is reduced to stress–strain relations are the result of a complex combination of
elastic components and viscous components. The method is based
1 on the 3D generalized Maxwell model. Fractional derivative mod-
Ti ¼ ðUSi þ Si UÞ (50)
2 els are derived as a superposition of decaying modes of strains of
the Maxwell elements, see Eq. (22). The form of the stress–strain
using the symmetry property of U. When Ci ¼ I, the potential relationship depends on the objective rate of the Cauchy stress
 Ci ¼ IÞ is a function only of C
!i ðC;  and hence of U
 ¼ J 1=3 U tensor and the form of the strain energy function of the elastic
[see Eq. (27)]. Defining components. One fractional derivative model is derived in terms
of the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor as Eq. (39), which is
 ¼ 1 UGi ðCÞ
GT;i ðCÞ  þ 1 Gi ðCÞU
 (51)
equivalent to a model in terms of the Truesdell rate of the Cauchy
2 2 stress tensor to the fractional order. Another type of fractional
derivative model is also developed in terms of the Biot stress as
a 3D extension of the generalized Maxwell model based on the Eq. (55) in order to show that independent fractional derivative
Biot stress is postulated as (see also Ref. [48]) models can be constructed, if the objectivity condition is satisfied
for the time derivative.
1 _ T;i ðCÞ;
 In order to see the difference between the type III model and
T_ i þ Ti ¼ G i ¼ 1; …; n (52)
ti the type IV model, the response of a volume element is examined
from the view point of the response of the polymers (see Fig. 2).
and The volume element is so small that its shape is approximated by
the parallelepiped shape, if it is initially rectangular. Physically,
X
n the continuum body consists of the polymers that are connected to
TV ¼ Ti (53) each other. The responses of individual polymers are described by
i¼1 the generalized Maxwell model. The response of the volume ele-
ment is described by the fractional derivative model, only if the
instead of Eq. (25) based on the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress. response of every polymer is coherent in the sense that the defor-
Here we define mation of each polymer is similar to the volume element. If the
orientations of the polymers move randomly, or if the polymers
X
n
 ¼
GT ðCÞ  ¼ 1 ½UGðCÞ
GT;i ðCÞ  þ GðCÞU
 (54)
move out or move into the volume element, the memory pos-
2 sessed by individual polymers will not be fixed to the volume ele-
i¼1
ment. Therefore, the junctions that connect polymers must move
with the material points and the individual polymers change their
Equations (52) and (53) lead to a fractional constitutive equation
shape similar to the volume element in which the polymers are
given by
contained. This deformation is known as the affine deformation
 (see e.g., [42], see also Ref. [43] for the discussion relevant to the
type IV : Tv ¼ lA  Dqa GT ðCÞ (55)
fractional model). For simplicity of explanation, the polymers are
assumed to have the same molecular weights and hence the same
in the continuous limit with the decay time distribution / t1qdt. volume size in the natural unstressed state. Thus, the volume ele-
A similar expression to Eq. (55) is obtained by Fukunaga and Shi- ment can be minimized to the smallest possible volume that can
mizu [48] using the Biot stress TB instead of the symmetric Biot barely contain one polymer.
stress tensor. The equivalent equation to Eq. (55) for the Cauchy The relationship given by Eq. (55) of type IV is interpreted as
stress is obtained with the use of Eq. (47) as follows. Let dA and N be the area of one of the sides of the vol-
ume element and its unit normal at time t ¼ 0, respectively. Let da
1 and n be the area and the unit normal of the same surface area at
type IV : r¼ l fR½Dqa GT ðCÞF
 T þ F½Dq GT ðCÞR
 Tg
the current time, respectively. The current surface area is related
2J A a

(56) to the initial surface area by the Nanson’s formula as nda ¼ J FT
NdA [39]. Thus, the relationship
The RHS of Eq. (56) is an objective fractional time rate [see
Eq. (48)]. This expression is clearly independent of the fractional TB NdA ¼ RT rnda (59)

061002-6 / Vol. 10, NOVEMBER 2015 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Fig. 4 The response of the fictitious specimen to the uni-axial
compression with constant rate
follows, where TB is used instead of the symmetric T for the sim-
plicity of explanation. Considering this expression, the type IV
relation gives the relationship between the total force on an indi-
vidual polymer and the strain. The coherency of the responses
assures the same fractional derivative response for larger volume
elements that move with the body. Thus, the response to the total
force (not the force per current unit area) of the volume element is
stored as the memory. The relation is written in terms of the force
per unit area at t ¼ 0 after the correction RT is made to the orienta-
tion of the surface.
The type III relation given in terms of the second Piola Kirchh-
off stress describes the relationship between the total force on the
surface and the strain, since it includes the Biot stress
SNdA ¼ U1 TB NdA ¼ F1 rnda (60)
The difference among the two type relations is in the presence of
factor U in the type III relation in which the response to the total
force multiplied by U1 is stored as the memory. The type III and
type IV models are generalizations of type IIa model in the sense
that the force per unit area on the initial volume element is respon-
sible to the fractional model. However, the type IV model is more
closer to the type IIa model, because the type IIa model does not
include the contribution from the stretch tensor U1 seen in the
type III model.
Objective rates may lead to unphysical solutions [51–53]. In
this paper, the constitutive equations are written by the material
description, which will enable to minimize the risk of deriving
physically unacceptable model. Applicability of the models given
in this paper or other models should be examined through the
physical considerations and the comparison of experimental data.
Here, numerical examples will be given for the description of
the models. Figure 4 shows the responses of models given in
Eqs. (6), (44), and (58) to the uni-axial compression with the
constant deformation rate. The response of the type IIIb model is
given by
S ¼ lv Dqa ðI  C1 Þ (61)
which is proposed by Haupt and Lion [17] is also plotted. The
specimen is made of a fictitious material with the material con-
stants, lv ¼ 50,000 Nsq/m2, q ¼ 0.5, and a height H ¼ 0.01 m. The
rate of deformation is 0.001 m/s. The difference in the response
appears when the deformation is larger than about 5 mm. The type
IIa, type IIIc, and the type IVc model show similar response. The
smallest nominal stress is observed in type IIIb model. The simi-
larity of the response among the type IIa, type IIIc, and type IVc
is also observed in the impulse response [54]. The three models
reproduced well the experimental data of impulse response of a
polymer gel. Among them the type IVc model gave the best fit.
Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics
Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
The properties of purely elastic component Sel were not dis-
cussed in the previous sections. A simple model may be that the
free energy Wel 
iso ðCÞ of the purely elastic component has the same
form as the free energy of the internal elastic components. How-
ever, as has been discussed in Refs. [13] and [54], there may be
the possibility in some viscoelastic materials, that the purely elas-
tic component does not have the same law of elasticity as the in-
ternal elastic components. In these materials, the origins of the
purely elastic components may be different from those of the in-
ternal elastic components.
Finally, it is noted that the material constant lv is common to
all the models, Eqs. (6), (44), and (58), and that it can be derived
through the shear modulus for infinitesimally small deformations
(see Refs. [13] and [54]). The relationship between the physical
constants of the entropic elasticity and the coefficient lv was
derived in Ref. [43].
Appendix: Type Classification
The type classification adopted in this paper is as follows:
type I—The 1D incompressible model based on the Cauchy
stress [43].
type II—The 1D incompressible model based on the force per
initial area (the nominal stress) [43].
type III—The 3D model based on the second Piola–Kirchhoff
stress.
type IV—The 3D model based on the Biot stress.
The subtypes denoted by “a,” “b,” and “c” are labeled for the
incompressible models.
“a”—The models with (1/3)tr C in Eq. (43) is artificially
replaced with the undetermined pressure p.
“b”—The models with (1/3)tr C in Eq. (43) is artificially
replaced by unity.
“c”—The models without artificial replacement.
The type IIIb model is identified with the Haupt and Lion
model [17], while the type IVa model reduces to the type II model
in the uni-axial deformation. Thus, the symbol “a” is attached to
the type II model.
References
[1] Gemant, A., 1936, “A Method of Analyzing Experimental Results Obtained
From Elasto-Viscous Bodies,” J. Appl. Phys., 7(8), pp. 311–317.
[2] Blair, S. G. W., 1944, “Analytical and Integrative Aspects of the Stress–
Strain–Time Problems,” J. Sci. Instrum., 21(5), pp. 80–84.
[3] Rabotnov, Y. N., 1980, Elements of Hereditary Solid Mechanics, Mir Publish-
ers, Moscow, Russia.
[4] Bagley, R. L., and Torvik, P. J., 1983, “A Theoretical Basis for the Application
of Fractional Calculus to Viscoelasticity,” J. Rheol., 27(3), pp. 201–210.
[5] Bagley, R. L., and Torvik, P. J., 1983, “Fractional Calculus—A Different
Approach to the Analysis of Viscoelasticity Damped Structures,” AIAA J.,
21(5), pp. 741–748.
[6] Koeller, R. C., 1984, “Application of Fractional Calculus to the Theory of
Viscoelasticity,” ASME J. Appl. Math., 51(2), pp. 299–307.
[7] Oldham, K. H., and Spanier, J., 1974, The Fractional Calculus, Mineola, NY.
[8] Podlubny, I., 1999, Fractional Differential Equations, Academic Press,
NY.
[9] Kilbas, A. A., Srivastava, H. M., and Trujillo, J. J., 2006, Theory and Applica-
tions of Fractional Differential Equations, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
[10] Caputo, M., 1967, “Linear Model of Dissipation Whose q is Almost Frequency
Independent—II,” Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 13(5), pp. 529–539.
[11] Lodge, A. S., 1964, Elastic Liquids, Academic Press, London.
[12] Freed, A. D., and Diethelm, K., 2006, “Fractional Calculus in Biomechanics: A
3D Viscoelastic Model Using Regularlized Fractional Derivative Kernels With
Application to the Human Calcaneal Fat Pad,” Biomech. Modell. Mechanobiol.,
5(4), pp. 203–215.
[13] Fukunaga, M., and Shimizu, N., 2009, “Analysis of Impulse Response of a Gel
by Nonlinear Fractional Derivative Model,” ASME DETC 2009, San Diego,
CA, Aug. 30–Sept. 2, ASME Paper No. DETC2009/86803.
[14] Bird, R. B., Armstrong, R. C., and Hassager, O., 1987, Dynamics Elastic
Liquids, Vol. 1, Wiley, NY.
[15] Bird, R. B., Curtiss, C. F., Armstrong, R. C., and Hassager, O., 1987, Dynamics
Elastic Liquids, Vol. 2, Wiley, NY.
[16] Drozdov, A. D., 1997, “Fractional Differential Models in Finite
Viscoelasticity,” Acta Mech., 124(1–4), pp. 155–180.
[17] Haupt, P., and Lion, A., 2002, “On Finite Linear Viscoelasticity of Incompressi-
ble Isotropic Materials,” Acta Mech., 159(1–4), pp. 87–124.
NOVEMBER 2015, Vol. 10 / 061002-7
 [18] Adolfsson, K., and Enelund, M., 2003, “Fractional Derivative Viscoelasticity at
Large Deformations,” Nonlinear Dyn., 33(3), pp. 301–321.
[19] Adolfsson, K., 2004, “Nonlinear Fractional Order Viscoelasticity at Large
Deformations,” Nonlinear Dyn., 38(1–4), pp. 233–246.
[20] Freed, A. D., and Diethelm, K., 2007, “Caputo Derivatives in Viscoelasticity: A
Non-Linear Finite-Deformation Theory for Tissue,” Fractional Calculus Appl.
Anal., 10(3), pp. 219–248.
[21] Nasuno, H., 2009, “Nonlinear Viscoelastic Finite Element Analysis by Means
of Fractional Calculus,” Ph.D. dissertation, Graduate Course of Science and
Engineering, Iwaki Meisei University, Iwaki, Japan.
[22] Xiao, H., Bruhns, O. T., and Meyers, A., 1997, “Hypo-Elasticity Model Based
Upon the Logarithmic Stress Rate,” J. Elasticity, 47(1), pp. 51–68.
[23] Schiessel, H., and Blumen, A., 1993, “Hierarchical Analogues to Fractional
Relaxation Equations,” J. Phys. A, 26(19), pp. 5057–5069.
[24] Heymans, N., and Bauwens, J. C., 1994, “Fractional Rheological Models and
Fractional Differential Equations for Viscoelastic Behavior,” Rheol. Acta,
33(3), pp. 210–210.
[25] Heymans, N., 1996, “Hierarchical Models for Viscoelasticity: Dynamic behav-
ior in the Linear Range,” Rheol. Acta, 35(5), pp. 508–519.
[26] Rouse, P. E., Jr., 1953, “A Theory of the Linear Viscoelastic
Properties of Dilute Solutions of Coiling Polymers,” J. Chem. Phys., 21(7), pp.
1272–1280.
[27] Zimm, B. H., 1956, “Dynamics of Polymer Molecules in Dilute Solution: Vis-
coelasticity, Flow Birefringence and Dielectric Loss,” J. Chem. Phys., 24(2),
pp. 269–278.
[28] Coleman, B. D., and Noll, W., 1961, “Foundation of Linear Viscoelasticity,”
Rev. Mod. Phys., 33(2), pp. 239–249.
[29] Caputo, M., and Mainardi, F., 1971, “Linear Models of Dissipation in Anelastic
Solids,” Riv. del Nuovo Cimento, 1(2), pp. 161–198.
[30] Strobl, G. R., 1996, The Physics of Polymers, Springer, Berlin, Germany.
[31] Mainardi, F., 2010, Fractional Calculus and Waves in Linear Viscoelasticity,
Imperial College Press, London, UK.
[32] Lu, S. C. H., and Pister, K. S., 1975, “Decomposition of Deformation and Rep-
resentation of the Free Energy Function for Isotropic Thermoelastic Solids,”
Int. J. Solids Struct., 11(7,8), pp. 927–934.
[33] Lubliner, J., 1985, “A Model of Rubber Viscoelasticity,” Mech. Res. Commun.,
12(2), pp. 93–99.
[34] Simo, J. C., 1987, “On a Fully Three-Dimensional Finite-Strain Viscoelastic
Damage Model: Formulation and Computational Aspects,” Comput. Method
Appl. Mech. Eng., 60(2), pp. 153–173.
[35] Govindjee, S., and Simo, C., 1992, “Mullins’ Effect and the Strain Amplitude
Dependence of the Storage Modus,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 29(14,15), pp.
1737–1751.
061002-8 / Vol. 10, NOVEMBER 2015
Downloaded From: http://computationalnonlinear.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/30/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
[36] Holzapfel, G. A., and Simo, J. C., 1996, “A New Viscoelastic Constitutive
Model for Continuous Media at Finite Thermomechanical Changes,” Int. J. Sol-
ids Struct., 33(20–22), pp. 3019–3034.
[37] Simo, J. C., and Hughes, T. J. R., 1998, Computational Inelasticity. Springer,
NY.
[38] Lion, A., 1998, “Thixotropic Behavior of Rubber Under Dynamic Loading His-
tories: Experimental Results and Theory,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 46(5), pp.
895–930.
[39] Holzapfel, G. A., 2000, Nonlinear Solid Mechanics, Wiley, Chichester, NY.
[40] Haupt, P., and Seldan, K., 2002, “Viscoelasticity of Elastic Materials: Experi-
mental Facts and Constitutive Modelling,” Acta Mech., 159(1–4), pp. 87–124.
[41] de Gennes, P., 1979, Scaling Concepts in Polymer Physics, Cornell University
Press, Ithaca, NY.
[42] Treloar, L. R. G., 1975, The Physics of Rubber Elasticity, Third Edition, Oxford
Classic Texts in the Physical Sciences, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
[43] Fukunaga, M., and Shimizu, N., 2011, “Nonlinear Fractional Derivative Models
of Viscoelastic Impact Dynamics Based on Viscoelasticity And Generalized
Maxwell Law,” ASME J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn., 6(2), p. 021005.
[44] Fukunaga, M., Shimizu, N., and Nasuno, H., 2009, “A Nonlinear Fractional
Derivative Models of Impulse Motion for Viscoelastic Materials,” Phys. Scr.,
T136, p. 014010.
[45] Lubliner, J., 1969, “On Fading Memory in Materials of Evolutionary Type,”
Acta Mech., 8(1,2), pp. 75–81.
[46] Valanis, K. C., 1971, “A Theory of Viscoelasticity With a Yield Surface Part
I—General Theory,” Arch. Mech., 23(4), pp. 517–533.
[47] Truesdell, C., and Noll, W., 2004, The Non-Linear Field Theories of Mechan-
ics, 3rd ed., Springer, Heidelberg, Germany.
[48] Fukunaga, M., and Shimizu, N., 2011, “Three-Dimensional Fractional Deriva-
tive Models for Finite Deformation,” ASME 2011 IDETC/CIE 2011, Washing-
ton, DC, Aug. 28–31, ASME Paper No. IDETC2011/47552.
[49] Bonet, J., and Wood, R. D., 1997, Nonlinear Continuum Mechanics for Finite
Element Analysis, Cambridge University Press, NY.
[50] Biot, M. A., 1965, Mechanics of Incremental Deformations, Wiley, NY.
[51] Dienes, J. K., 1979, “On the Analysis of Rotation and Stress Rate in Deforming
Bodies,” Acta Mech., 32(4), pp. 217–232.
[52] Kleiber, M., 1986, “On Errors Inherent in Commonly Accepted Rate Forms of
Elastic Constitutive Laws,” Arch. Mech., 38(3), pp. 271–277.
[53] Meyers, A., Xiao, H., and Bruhns, O. T., 2006, “Choice of Objective Rate in
Single Parameter Hypoelastic Deformation Cycles,” Comput. Struct.,
84(17,18), pp. 1134–1140.
[54] Fukunaga, M., and Shimizu, N., 2014, “Comparison of Fractional Derivative
Models for Finite Deformation With Experiments of Impulse Response,”
J. Vib. Control, 20(7), pp. 1033–1041.
Transactions of the ASME