Proceedings of the ASME 2017 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition
IMECE2017
November 3-9, 2017, Tampa, Florida, USA
POST-FATIGUE CREEP AND STRESS RELAXATION RESPONSE OF A HYBRID
POLYMER COMPOSITE
Raghu V. Prakash
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Chennai, Tamilnadu, India
ABSTRACT
Polymer composites have a characteristic, composition
specific visco-elastic property which influences the damage
progression during fatigue cycling. While some researchers
have studied the time dependent constitutive response of
polymer composites during the first cycle of fatigue loading,
very few have experimentally investigated the dependence of
visco-elastic response of built-up polymer composite materials
at various stages of fatigue cycling [1]. Our earlier studies on
fatigue response of polymer composites focused primarily on
the stiffness degradation as a function of applied cycles of
loading, which represents the gross response of the material [2].
While doing such an experiment, complimentary experimental
techniques to measure the temperature evolution was attempted
through the use of infrared thermal imaging technique, which
gave some insight into the change in temperature response as a
function of fatigue cycling. However, there was no systematic
measurement of creep and stress relaxation response of the
composite material as a function of induced fatigue damage.
The present paper describes the results of creep and stress-
relaxation obtained during uni-axial fatigue loading of a hybrid
polymer composite material. For this purpose, a woven carbon
fiber mat was chosen as the synthetic fiber and Flax fiber in the
unidirectional form was chosen as the natural fiber that is laid
between the two layers of woven carbon fiber mat. Epoxy LY
556 and hardener Araldite® was used for building up of
composite laminate by hand-lay-up technique. Dog-bone shaped
tensile specimens with a gage width of 13 mm and gage length
of 57 mm were extracted from the 250 x 250 mm sq. plate
laminate of 2.1 mm thickness using a numerical controlled
milling machine. The specimens were tested at 35% of their
median tensile strengths under fatigue at a positive stress ratio
(Pmin/Pmax) of 0.1 in tension-tension loading. Prior to start of
fatigue loading, the specimens were held in load control and the
strain in the gage length was measured for understanding the
creep response over 2500 seconds. For stress-relaxation
1 Copyright © 2017 ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
IMECE2017-71177
Monalisha Maharana
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Chennai, Tamilnadu, India
characterization, the specimens were held in extensometer
control over a period of 2500 sec. The creep and stress
relaxation tests were carried out after periodic intervals of
fatigue cycling.
It was observed that in the case of un-impacted specimens,
the creep rate is consistent with the stiffness variation, which in
turn, is dependent on the number of fatigue cycles - till it
showed signs of de-lamination. Thereafter it was governed by
the woven synthetic fiber response. Similarly, the stress
relaxation response was found to decrease with increasing
fatigue cycles. In case of impacted specimens, the local
deformation had a prominent role in terms of creep and stress
relaxation response.
INTRODUCTION
Polymer composites are used in many safety-critical
applications in view of their tailor suiting of mechanical
properties which is a function of fiber and resin properties.
Since the composite involves polymer matrix which behaves
like a viscous material and brittle fibers are used for
reinforcement, the resultant composite has a combination of
viscous and elastic properties. Several researchers have worked
on the constitutive modeling of the visco-elastic behavior of
composites through classical models such as Maxwell, Kelvin-
Voigt or a combination of models [3]. Most of these studies are
focused on the tensile response of the polymer composites.
Built-up composite structures experience loads that are
dynamic in nature; understanding the mechanical behavior of
polymer composites subjected to cyclic loading is an important
element to design safety-critical polymer composite structures.
During cyclic mechanical loading, the mechanical response of
polymer composites is quite different from that of monotonic
tension, compression response of the materials. This is due to
the phase-lag between the stress and strain response as well as
the internal heating that takes place due to cyclic loading. Many
factors such as test frequency, strain rate, waveform shape and
 the test temperature play a role in the fatigue performance of
polymer composites. The failure mechanism during fatigue
cycling of composites includes events such as: fiber breakage,
dis-bond, de-lamination and final fracture. Amongst these, de-
lamination happens to be the most commonly encountered
failure mechanism in polymer composites. This is due to the
mis-match in strains between the adjacent lay-ups of the
composite.
Characterization of mechanical performance of polymer
composites is often done through stiffness studies and residual
strength studies. Of these two, stiffness is one of the prime
parameters that can be monitored during cyclic loading. While
there are numerous literatures that focus the fatigue
performance of composites through stiffness studies, including
our previous work [2] on stiffness degradation due to
programmed FALSTAFF spectrum loading (a European fatigue
load sequence - Fighter Aircraft Loading STandard for Fatigue
and Fracture), very little effort has been put in to understand the
reasons for degradation in stiffness.
In parallel, there are numerous researchers who have
focused on the constitutive modeling of visco-elastic properties
of composites under monotonic and cyclic loading. Xia et al.
[5], Hizoum et al. [6], Yakimets et al. [7], Sullivan [8], Bles et
al. [9], Cantournet et al. [10], Mizuno and Sanomura [11],
Spieckermann et al. [12], Zrida et al. [13], Ayoub et al. [14],
Bouchart et al. [15], Buckley et al. [16], Ramkumar et al. [17],
Silberstein and Boyce [18] and Vandenbroucke et al. [19], to
name a few, have focused on the time-dependent response of
polymers and their composites subjected to cyclic loading. Most
of the studies focused on the first cycle loading-unloading
response of a cyclic deformation.
Ayoub et al. [20] and Drozdov [1] have focused on fatigue
response in low-cycle fatigue type of conditions which are
primarily strain-controlled loading programs. Tao and Xia [21],
Liu et al. [22] and Kang et al. [23], have considered cyclic tests
with stress-controlled programs which included the ratcheting
response on polymers and polymer composites. When one
considers the stress-strain behavior of polymer composites, it
would be important to know the creep response and the stress-
relaxation response which forms the basis for constitutive
modeling of composite materials.
In the present work, a systematic characterization of creep
and stress-relaxation response of polymer composites after
fatigue cycling has been undertaken and the results discussed in
the light of the change in stiffness response of these materials.
In the recent times, there is a growing consciousness
towards environment and use of bio-degradable fibers. Natural
fibers have reduced density and can be used for components
that operate under moderately severe loading conditions.
However, the disadvantage of natural fiber composites is their
susceptibility to environment, esp. moisture as they are
hydrophilic by nature. Abdullah and Low have reported a
substantial reduction in elastic modulus, strength and toughness
[24]. This reduction becomes more evident with the increasing
volume fraction of the natural fiber in the composite.
2 Copyright © 2017 ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
As recourse, a hybrid composite which is a combination of
both natural fiber and synthetic fiber is proposed as an
alternative cost-effective solution for designers. In this hybrid
construction, natural fibers can be used at regions subjected to
lower stresses. In this study, a hybrid composite, comprising of
a synthetic fiber (Woven Carbon mat – 480 GSM) and a natural
fiber (Flax Fiber in stitched UD format), was subjected to uni-
axial tension-tension fatigue load. Typical fiber diameter for
Flax fibers varies between 60 – 110 microns.
As some of these composites are subjected to accidental,
barely visible impact damages (BVID) during their service, it is
essential to understand the loss of strength and stiffness due to
mild impacts, more so, under fatigue loading. In the present
study, an impacted condition involving a low velocity impact
(typically 1.4 m/s and 5 J input impact energy) was considered
for fatigue, creep, stress-relaxation response understanding.
Natural fiber hybrid laminates show hydrophilic response
which results in a loss of strength due to moisture ingression. A
few specimens of Carbon-Flax fiber in an Epoxy matrix were
allowed for moisture ingression over a period of one week to
gain the weight and thereafter it was conditioned in a controlled
humidity environment to allow for the loss of gained moisture.
The specimen was then subjected to fatigue test and its creep
and stress relaxation response was monitored at periodic
intervals. It is noted that there are very few studies that report
the fatigue behavior of the hybrid composites in post-impacted
conditions.
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
2.1 Laminate Preparation and Specimen Extraction
Carbon-Flax hybrid composite with one layer of woven
carbon fiber mat at the top and bottom along with an
intermediate layer of Flax fiber oriented along the 0 degree (i.e.
longitudinal direction) was prepared by hand lay-up technique
in a mold that had a typical dimension of 300 mm x 300 mm
with a thickness of 2.1 mm. The laminates were molded on top
of a Mylar ® sheet that was coated with a thin layer of Wax and
the fiber mats were placed on the mold. The weight of the fibers
was measured prior to start of molding. Controlled quantity of
resin (by weight) was poured and steel rollers were used to
spread out and squeeze the excess resin. Epoxy LY 556 and
hardener Araldite® was used as resin for the laminate.
The laminates were cured at room temperature, lab air
conditions for 24 hours and thereafter cured in a compression
molding machine at a pressure of 10 bar (1 MPa) for 24 hours
duration. The resultant laminate was used for specimen
extraction on a CNC router. Owing to the thinness of the
specimen, the tensile specimens were made as per ASTM D 638
standard [25] to avoid failure of the specimen at the grip region.
Figure 1 presents the details of fatigue specimen used in this
study. End-tabs were adhesively bonded to the specimen grip
area. Prior to fatigue testing, tensile tests were carried out on a
100 kN MTS 810 servo-hydraulic testing machine with a
 computer control under displacement control at a displacement
rate of 5 mm/min. Details of the tensile test are available in Ref.
26. The load level for fatigue cycling was set at ~ 35% of the
ultimate tensile strength of the hybrid laminate. An
extensometer having a gage length of 25 mm and a travel of +/-
5 mm was attached at the gage length to monitor the strain at
the gage length.
Figure 1: Fatigue test specimen. All dimensions in mm
The 13 mm wide tensile specimens were impacted to ~ 5 J
impact energy (~ 1.4 m/s) to cause barely visible damage using
an in-house developed drop-impact tester; The specimen was
placed on a 80 mm wide, 4 mm thick back-up GFRP laminate
and this configuration was further clamped between the steel
plates having a window for the hemispherical impact head to
impact the specimen. The impactor had a mass of 5.2 kg and a
hemispherical tip of nominally 16 mm diameter (Figure 2). A
special feature was incorporated in the drop impact tester to
avoid multiple impacts.
Figure 2: Drop impact test set-up
Water Soaking and drying the specimen
Since natural fibers are prone to water absorption, 2 cm X
2 cm square shaped specimens were soaked in water for seven
days and the percentage gain in moisture was measured using a
Citizen CX 165 weighing machine having a resolution of 0.01
mg. The laminate gained a weight of 1.5% after 7 days of
soaking. The specimen was allowed to dry in a lab air
environment having a 25 °C and 50% RH. The net weight gain
3 Copyright © 2017 ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
was negligible compared to the pre-soaked condition. This
specimen (i.e. water-soak followed by drying) was subjected to
fatigue loading to understand the stiffness, creep and stress
relaxation response.
Fatigue tests were conducted on specimens with the
following configuration: a) Un-impacted, b) 5 J impacted, c)
Un-impacted, water soaked and dried, and d) water-soaked
followed by 5 J impact. Prior to start of fatigue test, the
specimens were subjected to Creep test by holding the load at
values indicated in Table 1 and the strain response was
monitored using an MTS axial extensometer over a period of
2500 seconds.
Stress relaxation tests were carried out with a fixed
extensometer displacement (in strain control) for a period of
2500 seconds and the load response monitored. The test
specimens were fatigue cycled as per the loading parameters
indicated in Table 1 on a MTS 810 servo-hydraulic testing
system at a frequency of 3 Hz up to a predefined number of
cycles interval (50, 100 cycles). A block of 3 cycles of loading
at a frequency of 0.5 Hz was applied and the load-extensometer
data was acquired during these cycles. This was intended to
acquire the data for stiffness measurements at periodic intervals.
After the first block of 3000 cycles of fatigue loading, creep and
stress relaxation tests were carried out. This exercise was
repeated after 6000 cycles, 10000 cycles, 20000 cycles, 40000
cycles, 80000 cycles, 160000 cycles, 260000 cycles (subject to
specimen failure as the cut-off criteria).
Table 1 - Test Parameters chosen for Fatigue Studies on
Carbon-Flax hybrid composites.
Sl.No. Specimen Test parameters (load, Stress
Condition ratio, frequency)
Load (kN) Stress Frequency
Ratio (Hz)
1 Un-impacted 3.0 0.1 3
2 5 J impacted 1.0 0.1 3
3 Un-impacted,
Water soaked 3.0 0.1 3
and dried.
4 Water-soaked, 5
1.0 0.1 3
J impacted.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 3 presents the creep and stress relaxation response
of an un-impacted specimen in pristine state. The initial elastic
strain corresponding to the start of the test is annulled to present
the creep strain response. Similar methodology was adopted for
stress relaxation tests. It can be seen that even within a short
time of 2000 seconds, one could visualize the creep strain
increase and probably a stable response at about 1500 seconds.
Similar observation can be made from the stress relaxation
response of the specimen. In respect of creep response, there is
a logarithmic increase in strain as a function of time. The stress
relaxation response showed a logarithmic decrease in stress
 with time. The data presented in the graphs are raw data that
were acquired at 200 Hz test data sampling for the purpose of
understanding the trend. During the course of the stress
relaxation experimentation, it was noticed that there are some
minor fluctuations in strain (as the extensometer was attached to
the specimen gage length using springs/rubber bands), which
resulted in minor variations in stress response. Data
averaging/filtering was attempted in some cases to eliminate
such spikes, without loss of data fidelity.

a)

a)

b)
Fig. 4 – a) Creep and b) stress relaxation response of Un-
impacted Carbon+Flax hybrid composite specimen subjected to
fatigue cycling.

Table 2 – Creep and Stress relaxation response data fit.

Creep Response Function: Y = Aln(X)+B
Fatigue A B R2 value
Cycles
b) 0 6x10-5 -2x10-4 0.937
Figure 3: (a) Creep response and (b) Stress relaxation 20000 3x10-5 -1x10-4 0.874
response of an unimpacted Carbon+Flax hybrid composite 40000 3x10-5 -9x10-5 0.883
specimen at the start of fatigue test (zeroth cycle response). 80000 5x10-5 -1x10-4 0.944
160000 7x10-5 -2x10-4 0.945
Figure 4 presents the creep and stress relaxation response 260000 6x10-5 -1x10-4 0.959
of the un-impacted specimen after periodic intervals of fatigue Stress Relaxation Response Function: Y = Aln(X)+B
cycling. Table 2 presents the constants of fit used for creep Fatigue A B R2 value
response after the application of cumulative fatigue cycles. It Cycles
can be seen that the creep constants change as a function of 0 -6x10-4 8x10-4 0.925
-4
fatigue cycles applied to the specimen. From Table 2, it can be 20000 -6x10 1.3x10-3 0.884
noticed that when the creep response is showing signs of 40000 -7x10-4 3x10-3 0.923
change, the stress relaxation response does not seem to alter 80000 -6x10-4 5x10-4 0.951
significantly. Table 3 presents the constants of fit used for stress 160000 -8x10-4 1.4x10-3 0.983
relaxation response after the application of cumulative fatigue 260000 -4x10-4 5x10-4 0.978
cycles to the Carbon+Flax fiber hybrid laminate.

4 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 The unloading stiffness response of the laminate estimated the creep and stress relaxation coefficients for the 5 J impacted
over a compliance window of 50-90% of the maximum stress specimen that was subjected to fatigue loading after impact.
(from the stress-extensometer data) showed a change in stiffness
with applied cycles of loading. Loading stiffness was estimated
by taking data in the 10-50% of the loading segment. It may be
noted that one of the objectives of this study is to understand
the stiffness variation due to fatigue cycling and check if the
creep and stress relaxation response change with stiffness
degradation. Table 3 presents the stiffness of the hybrid
composite as estimated from the loading, unloading segments of
the specimen during a single cycle of monotonic loading. It was
noted that during fatigue cycling, the specimen had developed
de-lamination after some fatigue cycles and this was reflected in
the loss of stiffness of the specimen.

Table 3 – Stiffness of Hybrid composite after fatigue cycling

Fatigue Cycle Loading Stiffness, Unloading
Figure 5 – Normalized creep (CR) response coefficient, stress
kN/mm Stiffness, kN/mm
relaxation (SR) response coefficient and stiffness with fatigue
0 40.11 41.26
cycling for Carbon-Flax Hybrid composite.
20000 41.30 43.71
40000 29.28 32.92
80000 29.15 30.98
160000 37.17 38.36
260000 35.59 26.51

Data presented in Table 2 and 3 was non-dimensionalized

keeping the data at zeroth cycle as reference and the resultant
data with respect to creep coefficient, stress relaxation
coefficient and stiffness was plotted as a function of fatigue
cycles. Figure 5 presents the normalized plot of creep response
(CR) coefficient, stress relaxation (SR) response coefficient and
stiffness (both loading and unloading) with fatigue cycles. It can
be seen that there is a correspondence between the stiffness
response and creep coefficient for the hybrid laminate tested as
part of this study – i.e., when the stiffness decreases, the creep
coefficient also decreases and when the stiffness shows an a)
increase, the creep coefficient increases. However, the stiffness
of un-impacted specimen does not show an increase beyond the
original stiffness that was measured at zeroth cycle, whereas,
the creep coefficient increases in some cases beyond the zeroth
cycle response. Interestingly, when the creep coefficient is
stable, the stress-relaxation coefficient shows the change and for
every change in creep coefficient with fatigue cycling, the stress
relaxation coefficient shows a negative response.
From a fundamental view point, loss of stiffness with
fatigue cycle can be attributed to presence of de-lamination, dis-
bond or similar events. If there is de-lamination or dis-bond,
one could expect that it would affect the viscous response of the
epoxy laminate and this is seen in the experiments that were
conducted as part of this study.
b)
Figure 6 presents the Creep and Stress relaxation response
Figure 6 – Creep and Stress relaxation response of 5 J input
of a Carbon+Flax hybrid laminate subjected to 5 J input impact
impact energy laminate after fatigue cycling.
energy. The creep and stress relaxation response was monitored
after some periodic intervals of fatigue cycling. Table 4 presents

5 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 4 – Creep and Stress Relaxation data fit for 5 J water soaked for 1 week and thereafter dried in lab air, 50% RH
impacted hybrid composite laminate after fatigue cycling. conditions). Table 5 presents the creep and stress relaxation
Creep Response Function: Y = Aln(X)+B response coefficients for the laminate. It may be noted that the
Fatigue A B R2 value initial stress at the start of the stress relaxation test was annulled
Cycles and the drop in stress values as a function of time is plotted
0 4x10-5 -1x10-4 0.958 here.
-5
3000 3x10 -6x10-5 0.900
20000 4x10-5 -1x10-4 0.868
40000 3x10-5 -1x10-4 0.879
Stress Relaxation Response Function: Y = Aln(X)+B
Fatigue A B R2 value
Cycles
0 -2x10-4 -2x10-4 0.862
-4
3000 -4x10 9x10-4 0.903
20000 -1x10-4 1x10-4 0.759
40000 -1x10-4 -4x10-4 0.748

Figure 7 presents the normalized creep response

coefficient, stress relaxation response coefficient and stiffness
as a function of number of fatigue cycles for the impacted
hybrid laminate. It can be noted that the creep coefficient
decreases initially with fatigue cycles, but one could not infer
that there is a systematic trend between the creep or stress a)
relaxation response with applied fatigue cycles. This could
possibly be because, the damage is localized and it was more
predominant compared to the general creep and stress
relaxation response of the laminate. Further, the absolute load
level chosen for creep test was much less compared to un-
impacted specimen as the ultimate strength of the impacted
laminate is much lower than the un-impacted laminate. Further,
one could notice a drop in initial stiffness (at zeroth cycle) for
impacted specimen as ~ 25-27 kN/mm which is approx. 60-70%
of un-impacted laminate.

b)
Figure 8 - Creep and Stress relaxation response of an
environmentally treated laminate after fatigue cycling.

Table 5 – Creep and Stress Relaxation data fit for an

environmentally treated hybrid composite laminate after
fatigue cycling.
Creep Response Function: Y = Aln(X)+B
Fatigue A B R2 value
Cycles
Figure 7 – Normalized creep (CR) response coefficient, stress 0 9x10-5 -3x10-4 0.940
relaxation (SR) response coefficient and stiffness with fatigue 6000 4x10 -5
-1x10-4 0.889
cycling for Carbon-Flax Hybrid composite after 5 J impact.
10000 7x10-5 -3x10-4 0.924
40000 8x10-5 -3x10-4 0.920
Figure 8 presents the creep and stress relaxation response
80000 8x10-5 -3x10-4 0.922
of a hybrid laminate that was environmentally conditioned (i.e.

6 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Stress Relaxation Response Function: Y = Aln(X)+B fatigue cycles, where normalization is done with reference to
Fatigue A B R2 value zeroth cycle values of stiffness and creep coefficient
Cycles respectively. During the course of this experiment, the weight of
0 -9x10-4 1.8x10-3 0.965 the specimen was measured prior to start of fatigue cycling and
-4
6000 -4x10 4x10-5 0.942 at the end of fatigue cycling to understand if there is any weight
10000 -8x10-4 1.6x10-3 0.970 loss/gain due to fatigue cycling. This is pertinent as fatigue
40000 -7x10-4 9x10-4 0.975 cycling results in heating of the specimen as has been confirmed
80000 -4x10-4 1x10-5 0.959 through our earlier studies where the temperature of the
specimen was monitored using an Infrared thermal imaging
Table 6 presents the stiffness of the specimen as a function camera [27]. Further, in an attempt to ensure that the weight of
of fatigue cycles where the stiffness was estimated from the the sample is maintained more or less constant at the end of
loading segment and unloading segment of the load- every block of fatigue cycles, the specimen was soaked in water
extensometer data. Figure 9 presents the normalized plot of to allow for moisture gain before the start of the next block of
creep response coefficients and stress relaxation response fatigue cycling. Table 7 presents the weight data for the water
coefficients along with normalized stiffness data which is soaked, impacted specimen at specific intervals. It is noted that
plotted as a function of number of fatigue cycles applied during the weight loss during fatigue is approximately in proportion to
the test. the number of fatigue cycles applied.

Table 6 – Stiffness of environmentally conditioned Hybrid

composite after fatigue cycling
Fatigue Cycle Loading Stiffness, Unloading
kN/mm Stiffness, kN/mm
0 35.48 37.17
6000 37.13 37.51
10000 41.82 41.48
40000 32.24 32.70
80000 30.30 32.54

Figure 10- Creep response of an impacted, water-soaked hybrid

composite after fatigue cycling.

Figure – 9 Normalized creep (CR) response coefficient, stress

relaxation (SR) response coefficient and stiffness with fatigue
cycling for Carbon-Flax Hybrid composite after environmental
conditioning.

Figure 10 presents the creep response of water soaked and

5 J impacted hybrid laminate subjected to fatigue testing. It can
be seen that the creep response decreases with the application of Figure 11 – Normalized stiffness and creep coefficient as a
fatigue cycles to the specimen. Figure 11 presents the function of fatigue cycles for a water-soaked, impacted
normalized stiffness, creep coefficient of the specimen with specimen.

7 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 7 – Weight loss of water-soaked, impacted hybrid It can be noted that the creep response is the highest for the
composite specimen after fatigue cycling environmentally conditioned specimen compared to pristine
No. of Fatigue Weight of the % weight loss condition. Similarly the stress relaxation response suggests that
Cycle specimen (in the extent of stress relaxation was the highest in case of
grams) environmental conditioned specimen. It may be because of the
Zero cycle 8.284 0 hydrophilic nature of the polymer that has resulted in increased
After 3000 cycles 8.277 0.087 viscous flow of the epoxy system for the environmental
After 40000 cycles 8.197 at the end of 1.107 conditioned specimen. Further study is required to understand
(i.e. between 80000 cycles. the effect of moisture ingression on molecular structure of
40000 cycles and Weight at 40001th epoxy and associated mechanical behavior.
80000 cycles of cycle is 8.289
loading) SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Figure 12 presents the plot of creep and stress relaxation
response at the zeroth cycle of fatigue loading for the three
laminate conditions of pristine (un-impacted), Impacted and
water soaked and dried (i.e. environment conditioned).
This paper presented the results of creep and stress
relaxation tests carried out on Carbon+Flax fiber hybrid
composite laminate after fatigue loading under the following
conditions: a) Un-impacted, b) 5 J impacted, c) Unimpacted,
environmentally conditioned and d) water-soaked and impacted
conditions. The stiffness change due to fatigue cycling could be
mapped to the creep response of the material. The stress
relaxation effect was found to be opposite of creep response –
i.e., where the creep response was significant, the stress
relaxation response was not noticed to be significant. However,
many of these observations relate to un-impacted test
conditions. In case of impacted specimens, the local effects
dominate the stiffness response compared to creep and stress
relaxation response. Water soaking increases the creep and
stress relaxation response. A weight loss in proportion to the
number of cycles of fatigue loading was observed in this study.
The results of this study would help in modeling the visco-
elastic response of polymer composite materials subjected to
cyclic loading.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the support received from
a) colleagues of Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai
as well as sponsorship received by the second author from TVS
Motor Company Ltd., Hosur to pursue the M.Tech (Automotive
Technology) program at IIT Madras.

REFERENCES

1. Drozdov, A. D., “Cyclic visco-elasto-plasticity and low-

b)
Figure 12 – a) Creep response and b) stress relaxation response
at zeroth cycle of hybrid laminate in three conditions – Pristine
(unimpacted), Impacted with 5 J and Environment conditioned.
cycle fatigue of polymer composites”, International Journal
of Solids and Structures, Volume 48, Issue 13, 2011, 2026-
2040.
2. Prakash, R. V., John, M., Sudevan, D., Gianneo, A., and
Carboni, M., “Fatigue Studies on Impacted and Un-
impacted CFRP Laminates,” Fatigue and Fracture Test
Planning, Test Data Acquisitions, and Analysis, ASTM
STP1598, ASTM International, PA, 2017, pp. 94–118,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/STP159820160094
3. Crawford, R. J., ‘Plastics Engineering’, Third Edition,
Butterworth Heinemann Publications,1987

8 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 4. Drozdov, A. D., Christansen, J., “Thermo-visco-plasticity
of carbon black-reinforced thermoplastic elastomers”,
International Journal of Solids and Structures, Elsevier.
June-2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2009.01.015
5. Xia, Z., Shen, X., Ellyin, F., 2005. “An assessment of
nonlinearly visco-elastic constitutive models for cyclic
loading: the effect of a general loading/unloading rule”
Mech. Time-Dependent Mater. 9, 281–300.
6. Hizoum, K., Remond, Y., Bahlouli, N., Oshmyan, V.,
Patlazhan, S., Ahzi, S., 2006. “Nonlinear strain rate
dependency and unloading behavior of semi-crystalline
polymers” Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 61, 743–749.
7. Yakimets, I., Lai, D., Guigon, M., 2007. “Model to predict
the viscoelastic response of a semi-crystalline polymer
under complex cyclic mechanical loading and unloading
conditions.” Mech. Time-Dependent Mater. 11, 47–60.
8. Sullivan, R.W., 2008. “Development of a visco-elastic
continuum damage model for cyclic loading.” Mech. Time-
Dependent Mater. 12, 329–342
9. Bles, G., Nowacki, W.K., Tourabi, A., 2009. “Experimental
study of the cyclic visco-elasto-plastic behaviour of a
polyamide fibre strap.” Int. J. Solids Struct. 46, 2693–
2705.
10. Cantournet, S., Desmorat, R., Besson, J., 2009. “Mullins
effect and cyclic stress softening of filled elastomers by
internal sliding and friction thermodynamics model.” Int. J.
Solids Struct. 46, 2255–2264.
11. Mizuno, M., Sanomura, Y., 2009. “Phenomenological
formulation of viscoplastic constitutive equation for
polyethylene by taking into account strain recovery during
unloading.” Acta Mech. 207, 83–93.
12. Spieckermann, F.C., Wilhelm, H.R., Schafler, E., Alfantis,
E.C., Zehetbauer, M.J., 2009. “Determination of critical
strains in isotactic polypropylene by cyclic
loading/unloading.” Trans. ASME. J. Eng. Mater. Technol.
131, 0111091–0111095.
13. Zrida, M., Laurent, H., Rio, G., Pimbert, S., Grolleau, V.,
Masmoudi, N., Bradai, C., 2009. “Experimental and
numerical study of polypropylene behavior using an hyper-
visco-hysteresis constitutive law”. Comput. Mater. Sci. 45,
516–527.
14. Ayoub, G., Zairi, F., Nait-Abdelaziz, M., Gloaguen, J.M.,
2010. “Modelling large deformation behaviour under
loading–unloading of semicrystalline polymers: application
to a high density polyethylene”. Int. J. Plasticity 26, 329–
347.
9 Copyright © 2017 ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/16/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
15. Bouchart, V., Bineu, M., Bhatnagar, N., Kondo, D., 2010.
“A multiscale approach of nonlinear composites under
finite deformation: experimental characterization and
numerical modeling”. Int. J. Solids Struct. 47, 1737–1750.
16. Buckley, C.P., Prisacariu, C., Martin, C., 2010. “Elasticity
and inelasticity of thermoplastic polyurethane elastomers:
sensitivity to chemical and physical structure”. Polymer 51,
3213–3224.
17. Ramkumar, A., Kannan, K., Gnanamoorthy, R., 2010.
“Experimental and theoretical investigation of a polymer
subjected to cyclic loading conditions”. Int. J. Eng. Sci. 48,
101–110
18. Silberstein, M.N., Boyce, M.C., 2010. Constitutive
modeling of the rate, temperature, and hydration dependent
deformation response of Nafion to monotonic and cyclic
loading. J. Power Sources 195, 5692–5706.
19. Vandenbroucke, A., Laurent, H., Ait Hocine, N., Rio, G.,
2010. A hyperelasto-viscohysteresis model for an
elastomeric behaviour: experimental and numerical
investigations. Comput. Mater. Sci. 48, 495–503.
20. Ayoub, G., Zairi, F., Nait-Abdelaziz, M., Gloaguen, J.M.,
2011. Modeling the low-cycle fatigue behavior of visco-
hyperelastic elastomeric materials using a new network
alteration theory: application to styrene-butadiene rubber. J.
Mech. Phys. Solids 59, 473–495.
21. Tao, G., Xia, Z., 2007. Ratcheting behavior of an epoxy
polymer and its effect on fatigue life. Polym. Testing 26,
451–460.
22. Liu, W., Gao, Z., Yue, Z., 2008. Steady ratcheting strains
accumulation in varying temperature fatigue tests of
PMMA. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 492, 102–109.
23. Kang, G., Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Chen, Z., Xu, W., 2009.
Uniaxial ratchetting of polymer and polymer matrix
composites: Time-dependent experimental observations.
Mater. Sci. Eng. A 523, 13–20
24. Abdullah M. Alhuthali and It-Meng Low, “Effect of
Prolonged Water Absorption on Mechanical Properties in
Cellulose Fiber Reinforced Vinyl-Ester Composites”,
Wiley Online Library, Polymer Engineering and Science –
2015.
25. ASTM Annual Book of Standards, Volume 15.03, 2015.
26. Prakash, R. V., and Maharana, M., “Thermo-mechanical
response of hybrid polymer composites during tensile
loading”, IMECE 2017-71335, accepted manuscript,
ASME IMECE 2017, 2017.
27. Kathirvel, T., Ph.D. Thesis, IIT Madras, May 2010.