Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
57
58
a
b
= q0 + q1 + pb b
a
t
t
(2.1)
(a)
(b)
59
+
E
or
=
E
(2.2)
or
= 1 J M (t),
J M (t) =
t
1
+
E
(2.4)
The time function J M (t) is the creep compliance function of the Maxwell model.
E
(2.5)
+ =
(a)
E
1
=
(2.6)
(b)
60
(2.7)
(2.8)
When variation of integration constant C(t) with initial condition (0) = 0 is done
we arrive at the solution of (2.6)
1
E
=
1 exp t
E
E
1
1 exp t
E
or
= 1 J VK (t),
J VK (t) =
(2.9)
(2.10)
Function J VK (t) is the creep compliance function of the VK model. Note that VK
model does not account for instantaneous elasticity, hence J VK (0) = 0, see Fig. 2.2b.
When the more general case of a time function (t) is applied and variation of
constant C(t) is done in (2.8) we arrive at the differential equation for C(t)
1
C(t)
= exp
E
t (t)
(2.11)
t
exp
0
E
()d
(2.12)
Substitution of (2.12) to (2.8) with the initial condition (0) = 0 yields C1 = 0, such
that the following general solution for (t) holds
E t
E
1
exp t
()d
exp
0
t
E
= 1 exp (t ) ()d
(t) =
(2.13)
61
(t) =
E
E
E
exp (t ) ()d
t
0
(2.14)
in which it is clearly seen that the creep function J VK (t) has two terms:
independent
of time J0 = 1/E and dependent on time (t) = E1 exp E (t ) .
Analogous solution may be reached by use of the Laplace transform method
(2.48). In order to do this the nonhomogeneous VK equation (2.5) is multiplied
both-side by est and integrated with respect to variable t in range from 0 to
(t)e
st
E
dt +
(t)e
st
dt =
(t) st
e dt
(2.15)
E
(s)
(s) =
(2.16)
When the initial condition (0) = 0 is used, the solution of (2.16) with respect of
transformed variable
(s) is given as the following
(s) =
1
s+
(s)
(2.17)
Applying next the inverse Laplace transform and taking advantage of property that
multiplication of two transforms in fictitious domain of variable s corresponds to the
convolution of two functions in real time space t, we arrive at the solution of linear
viscoelastic problem
1
(t) =
identical to (2.13).
t
0
E
exp (t ) ()d
(2.18)
62
E
+
=+
E1 + E
E1 + E
E1 + E
(2.19)
The simple creep function, when the standard model is subjected to a step function
= 1 = const ( = 0) and integrated with the initial condition (0) = 1 /E
used, takes one of two equivalent forms
1
=
E
E
E
E1
1+
exp t
E1
E1
or
= 1 J s (t),
J s (t) =
1
E
E
E
E1
1+
exp t
E1
E1
(2.20)
(2.21)
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2.3 The standard model: a mechanical scheme, b creep at constant stress input with
instantaneous elastic strain built-in
63
1
1
2
+
+
E1
E2
E2
+
(2.22)
Note that the above equation is the second-order linear differential equation with
respect to strain and stress but of constant coefficients being functions of four parameters E 1 , E 2 , 1 and 2 . It means that all strain and stress functions and their time
derivatives are the linear functions, whereas the coefficients in Eq. (2.22) are constants: two Youngs modules E 1 , E 2 and two viscosity parameters 1 , 2 .
When the Burgers model is loaded by a step stress input applied at t = 0 the
= 1 /1 +
integration of Eq. (2.22), with two initial conditions (0) = 1 /E, (0)
1 /2 used, leads to one of equivalent relationships
=
E1
E2
E1
1
1+
1 exp t
t+
E1
1
E2
2
(2.23)
or
= 1 J (t),
B
E1
E2
1
E1
1+
1 exp t
J (t) =
t+
E1
1
E2
2
B
(2.24)
where the creep compliance function characterizing the Burgers model compliance
function J B (t) is applied.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2.4 The Burgers model: a the mechanical scheme, b the simple creep curve at constant stress
input applied at t = 0
64
Note that the creep curve described by the Burgers model exhibits a skewed
asymptote which corresponds to the unlimited strain increase with decreasing strain
rate, which better fits the experimental findings, see Fig. 2.4b.
Note that the rate of stress decrease changes from the initial (0)
= 1 E/ to zero,
()
(2.26)
where the term containing the Heaviside unit function H(t) describing the constant
stress in the spring, followed by the infinite stress input in dashpot described by the
-Dirac function, appears.
The standard model is free from the above singularity and if it is subject to a
constant strain at t = 0, the stress continuously decreases from the initial level
E1 (t = 0) to the asymptotically approached value H 1 (t ) such that stress
relaxation function of the standard model is written as
H
H
t
+ 1
exp
(2.27)
(t) = E1
E
E
n
where the definitions hold:
1
1
1
=
+
and n =
.
H
E
E1
E + E1
65
Table 2.1 Properties of Maxwell, VoigtKelvin, standard and Burgers viscoelastic units, after
Skrzypek [13]
Model
Creep compliance function J (t)
1
E
1+ t
Maxwell
E
1
Et
1e
VK
E
1
E
E E1 t
1+
Standard
e
E
E1
E1
E
E1
E1
1
2t
1+
1 e 2
Burgers
t+
E1
1
E2
Model
Maxwell
Ee
E 1 + E (t)
E +E
E1
E
1 t
E
+
e
E1 + E
E1 + E
Et
VK
Standard
Burgers
If the Burgers model is subject to a constant strain = 1 at t = 0, a continuous stress relaxation is described by the combination of two exponential functions
exp(r1 t) and exp(r2 t) (cf. Table 2.1), where after Findley et al. [4] the new definitions are used
1
1
2
+
+
E1
E2
E2
1 2
q2 =
E2
p1 =
1 2
E1 E2
p1 A
=
2 p2
p2 =
r1,2
q1 = 1
A = p12 4 p2
(2.28)
(2.29)
66
In other words, strain at the arbitrary material point, being a function of the space
x and time t variables, can be presented as a product of the instantaneous elastic
strain e (x) depending on x only and the creep compliance function J (t) specifically
chosen for given material model dependent on time t only. In the light of comments
presented in Sect. 2.1.5, Eq. (2.29) does not apply to the VoigtKelvin model in a
straightforward manner. The VK model does not comprise the initial elastic strain.
In particular, a deflection of beam made of the linear viscoelastic material
wve (x, t) at constant loading can be presented as the product of the elastic deflection
w e (x) and the dimensionless creep compliance function EJ(t) as follows
w ve (x, t) = w e (x) EJ (t)
(2.30)
exp t
w (x, t) = w (x) 1 +
E1
E1
E
E2
E
1
1
1 exp t
w B (x, t) = w e (x) 1 +
t+
1
E2
2
(2.31)
The aforementioned relationships hold for all linear viscoelastic models discussed
even though VK model does not exhibit instantaneous response. This comment
holds for all linear viscoelastic models that do not have free elastic spring.
f ()
N (x) t
d
J (t )
A 0
f ()
M (x) t
ve (x, t) =
d
J (t )
I 0
67
ve (x, t) =
(2.32)
t
J (t )()d =
J ()(t )d = J (t)
(2.33)
(2.34)
Hence, the axial elongation of the linear viscoelastic beam ve is a product of instantaneous (elastic) elongation and the creep compliance function. Analogously, the
curvature of the linear viscoelastic beam ve is a product of instantaneous curvature
and creep compliance function J (t). For simplicity, the conventional beam theory is
adopted here.
(2.36)
68
where P and Q stand for linear differential operators with respect to time acting on
stress (t) and strain (t), respectively
2
+ p2 2 +
t
t
2
Q = q0 + q1 + q2 2 +
t
t
P = p0 + p1
(2.37)
It is clear that the linear elastic (Hookes) material is a particular case of linear
viscoelastic material in equation of which all time derivatives disappear, whereas
q0 / p0 = E.
Note that differential operators P and Q are linear with respect to all derivatives,
hence the operator format of Eq. (2.36) can formally be treated as an algebraic equation as follows
(t)
Q(t)
(2.38)
= Eve (t)
Eve (t) =
(t)
P(t)
The rational operator Eve (t) used in Eq. (2.38) plays a role of the time-dependent
stiffness operator. As a consequence by contrast to elasticity a fraction (t)/(t) is
not constant but depends on time. Hence, Eq. (2.38) should be read in a symbolic
way as follows
(t)
Q(t)
(2.39)
P(t)
(t)
Class of the linear viscoelastic materials is a subclass of the nonlinear
viscoelastic materials; however, the Boltzmann superposition principle holds for
the linear viscoelastic materials only. The superposition principle states that resultant response of the system (t) under the sum of causes is equal to the sum
of responses corresponding to causes acting separately. In particular if stress 1 is
applied at time 1 and, then, stress 2 is applied at time 2 , the resultant strain (t) at
any time t > 2 is represented as the sum of the strains resulting from both stresses
considered as though each were acting separately
[1 (t 1 ) + 2 (t 2 )] = [1 (t 1 )] + [2 (t 2 )]
(2.40)
n
i=1
i (t i ) =
n
i=1
J (t i )i
(2.41)
69
If the time step tends to zero, we arrive at the integral form of uniaxial creep strain
for the linear viscoelastic material
t
(t) =
0
()
d =
J (t )
t
J (t )()d
(2.42)
()
d =
E(t )
t
E(t )()d
(2.43)
In above integral equations, J (t ) and E(t ) denote the creep function and the
relaxation function of the material considered, respectively. In practical applications,
the alternative forms to (2.42) or (2.43) are more convenient
t
(t) = J0 (t) +
(t )()d
(2.44)
or
t
(t) = E 0 (t)
(t )()d
(2.45)
70
(2.46)
where P1 , Q1 , P2 , and Q2 are the linear differential operators applicable to the separable shape change and the volume change effects. In the explicit format, equations
(2.46) can be rewritten as
2
a
+ p2 2 + + pa a si j (t) =
+
t
t
t
2
b
q0 + q1
+ q2 2 + + qb b ei j (t)
t
t
t
2
a
b
q0 + q1
+ q2 2 + + qb b kk (t)
t
t
t
p0
p1
(2.47)
0
est f (t) dt
(2.48)
71
The use of above transformation allows to replace the real initial differential problem of the linear viscoelastic material (differential equation and appropriate initial
conditions) by the equivalent elastic algebraic equation of a fictitious elastic material.
In the next step, when the fictitious algebraic problem is solved in elementary way,
application of the inverse Laplace transform allows to return to the original viscoelastic problem. Described procedure leads to the solution faster than the straightforward
integration of a differential equation due to the Laplace transform pairs known from
literature.
Basic properties of the Laplace transform commonly used in theory of viscoelasticity can be found among others in, e.g., Nowacki [8], Pipkin [9], Findley et al. [4].
Exemplary Laplace transforms for selected elementary functions f (t) are shown in
Table 2.2.
By use of the Laplace transformation equations of transformed isotropic linear
viscoelasticity (2.46) can be expressed in terms of the transformed variable s as
follows
si j (s) =
ei j (s)
Q1
P1
(2.49)
kk (s) =
kk (s)
P2
Q2
f (s)
f(t)
s
f (s) f (0)
f (t)
t
f ()d
1
H(t)
(t) = H(t)
t
eat
eat ebt
1 eat
1
s
1
s
a
H(t a)
1
1
s2
(t a)
1
s+a
ba
(s + a)(s + b)
a
s(s + a)
t n eat
tn
aeat bebt
t
1
2 (1 eat )
a
a
f (s)
f (s)
s
a
s
eas
s
eas
n!
s n+1
n!
(s + a)n+1
(a b)s
(s + a)(s + b)
1
s 2 (s + a)
72
or
p0 + p1 s + p2 s 2 + + pa s a
si j (s) =
2
ei j (s)
q0 + q1 s + q2 s + + qb s b
2
a
p0 + p1 s + p2 s + + pa s
kk (s) =
2
kk (s)
q0 + q1 s + q2 s + + qb s b
(2.50)
Based on the analogy between Eq. (2.49) that describe transformed viscoelastic problem and linear isotropic elastic equations
si j = 2Gei j ,
kk = 3K kk
(2.51)
it is possible to find out the generalized modules of viscoelasticity Gve (t) and Kve (t) as
Gve (t) =
Q1
2P1
Kve (t) =
Q2
3P2
(2.52)
9KG
,
3K + G
3K 2G
6K + 2G
(2.53)
substitution of (2.52) to (2.53) furnishes the generalized Youngs modulus Eve (t)
commonly called relaxation modulus and generalized Poissons ratio ve (t) of
isotropic linear viscoelasticity that can be expressed in terms of time-dependent
operators (2.46)
3 QP 1 QP 2
3Q1 Q2
Eve (t) = Q 1 2Q =
1
2
P2 Q1 + 2P1 Q2
P1 + 2 P2
(2.54)
Q2
Q1
P1 Q2 P2 Q1
P2 P1
ve (t) = Q
=
P2 Q1 + 2P1 Q2
2 2 + Q1
P2
P1
Different equation
2G
Q1
s
s
Q2
3K
1+
2G
Q1
t
1+
3K
Q2
1+
t
1+
E s
E s
E t
E + s
E + s
E + t
E + t
= E +
E t
VoigtKelvin
Maxwell
+
P2
Volumetric operators
P1
Deviatoric operators
Hooke
= E
Model
Table 2.3 Differential operators for seclected simple linear viscoelastic models (after Findley et al. [4])
E
E 1 +E t
E
s
E +E
E
s
E +E
s
E +E
E 1 E
E 1 +E
1+
s
E +E
E 1 E
E 1 +E
1+
E
E 1 +E t
E 1 +E t
E 1 E
E 1 +E
1+
E 1 +E t
E 1 E
E 1 +E
1+
+ p1 = q0 + q1
Standard
2
t 2
2
t 2
q1 s + q2 s 2
2
t 2
1 + p1 s + p2 s 2
q1 s + q2 s 2
2
t 2
1 + p1 s + p2 s 2
q1 t
+ q2
1 + p1 t
+ p2
q1 t
+ q2
1 + p1 t
+ p2
+ p1 + p2 =
q1 + q2
Burgers
74
0
t
kk ()
d
kk (t) = 3 Kve (t )
(2.55)
In a particular case, if the volume change is pure elastic, Eq. (2.55) take the simplified
form
t
ei j ()
d
si j (t) = 2 Gve (t )
(2.56)
0
kk = 3K kk
(2.57)
75
P1 si j (x, t) = Q1 ei j (x, t)
P2 kk (x, t) = Q2 kk (x, t)
(2.58)
t
kk (x, t) = 3 Kev (t ) kk (x, ) d
(2.59)
(2.60)
(2.61)
For simplicity independence of the viscoelastic modules, Gve , Kve from the spatial
coordinates holds. In other words, material homogeneity is assumed. In a particular
case of composite materials although that material is inhomogeneous at microlevel
a homogenization technique allows to reduce such problem to homogeneous at the
RUC level of the representative unit cell, see Chap. 3.
When the Laplace transformation of the above set of Eqs. (2.57)(2.61) is done
we arrive at the fictitious coupled elastic problem
i j (x, s)
+
b j (x, s) = 0
xi
Q1
ei j (x, s)
P1
Q
kk (s) = 2
kk (x, s) = 3s K
kk (x, s)
P2
u j (x, s)
u i (x, s)
1
i j (x, s) =
+
2
x j
xi
ji (x, s) n j at P
Pi (x, s) =
G
ei j (x, s) =
si j (x, s) = 2s
i (x, s) =
u i (x, s)
U
(2.62)
at U
76
Finally, the analogy between viscoelastic and coupled elastic problems can be
formulated. Namely if a solution of coupled fictitious elastic problem is known (2.62)
u i (x, s), the solution of corresponding linear viscoelastic problem
i j (x, s) and
(2.57)(2.61) can be obtained on the way of the inverse Laplace transformations
i j (x, t) and u i (x, t). Simultaneously, following relations must hold
Gve =
Q1 (s)
2s
P1 (s)
ve =
K
Q2 (s)
3s
P2 (s)
(2.63)
The correspondence principle can be applied only to the boundary problems where
the interface between the boundary P (where the external forces are prescribed) and
the boundary U (where the surface displacements are given) is independent of time,
see Findley et al. [4]. The above limitation does not hold in case of some material
forming processes, for instance rolling, where the interface between boundaries P
and U varies with time.
An example of elastic-viscoelastic correspondence principle applied to multiaxial
stress and strain states the thick walled tube made of the isotropic standard material
subject to internal pressure p(t) = pH(t) applied instantaneously at t = 0 is
considered after Findley et al. [4]. Taking advantage of the correspondence principle
and recalling Lams solution for coupled elastic problem
pa 2 1 +
u = 2
b a2 E
b2
1
+
r
r
1+
(2.64)
E
Q1
Q1 +
Q2
2
P2
1+
P1
1
3P1 Q2
(2.65)
P1
p (s)a 2
2
2
b a Q1
Q1 +
Q2
2
P2
b2
P1
+
r
r
3P1 Q2
(2.66)
pa 2 A
B
u (s) = 2
+
b a 2 E 1
s
(2.67)
77
b2
r
+
,
r
3
E + E
B= 1
E1 E
b2
r
+
r
3
+
2r
9K
(2.68)
Finally, the solution of the real linear viscoelastic problem is achieved by use of the
inverse Laplace transform of (2.67) in the following format
2
pa 2
1 b
r
1 b2
r
2r
u(t) = 2
+
+
+
+
2
9K
E1 r
3
b a E r 3
E1
1 exp t
(2.69)
Ji jkl (t ) kl () d
(2.70)
(2.71)
ve
0
or
t
i j (t) =
ve
0
veE
veJ
i jkl (t
i jkl (t
78
or
t
{(t)} =
[ve E(t )]
0
{()} d
(2.73)
When nonabbreviated notation is used introducing matrix of creep compliance functions ve Ji j (t ), we arrive at the following constitutive integral equations of
anisotropic linear material
x x (t)
yy (t)
t
zz (t)
=
yz (t)
zx (t)
x y (t)
ve
J11
veJ21
ve
J31
veJ41
veJ51
veJ
61
veJ
12
veJ
22
veJ
32
veJ
42
veJ
52
veJ
62
veJ
13
veJ
23
veJ
33
veJ
43
veJ
53
veJ
63
veJ
14
veJ
24
veJ
34
veJ
44
veJ
54
veJ
64
veJ
15
veJ
25
veJ
35
veJ
45
veJ
55
veJ
65
veJ
16
x x ()
veJ
yy ()
26
veJ
zz ()
36
d
veJ ()
46
yz
veJ
zx ()
56
veJ
x y ()
66
(2.74)
where [ve J ]i j = [J (t )]i j is the creep compliance matrix. For Eq. (2.73) the
inverse relation holds
ve
ve
ve
ve
ve
ve
yy ()
yy (t)
ve
t E 21 E 22 E 23 E 24 E 25 E 26
= ve
ve
ve
ve
ve
ve
yz () d (2.75)
yz (t)
E 41 E 42 E 43 E 44 E 45 E 46
ve
ve
ve
ve
ve
ve
0 E
zx ()
zx (t)
51 E 52 E 53 E 54 E 55 E 56
veE
veE
veE
veE
veE
veE
()
x y (t)
xy
61
62
63
64
66
65
In particular case of orthotropic linear viscoelastic material, Eqs. (2.74) and (2.75)
reduce to narrower forms
ve
()
22 (t)
22
t
ve
veJ veJ
J
33 (t)
33 ()
31
32
33
=
(2.76)
veJ
23 () d
23 (t)
44
veJ
31 (t)
31 ()
0
55
veJ
12 (t)
12 ()
66
or
11 (t)
22 (t)
t
33 (t)
=
23 (t)
0
31 (t)
12 (t)
ve
E 11
veE 21
ve
E 31
veE
veE
veE
12
22
32
veE
veE
veE
11 ()
22 ()
33 ()
23 () d
31 ()
veE
12 ()
66
13
23
33
veE
44
veE
55
79
(2.77)
being extension of equations of orthotropic linear elasticity (1.103). Note that both
stresses and strains are functions of time ve i j =ve i j (t), ve i j =ve i j (t), in
similar fashion as elements of creep compliance veJi j =ve Ji j (t ) and relaxation
veE =ve E (t ) matrices.
ij
ij
Applying the Laplace transform to Eqs. (2.74) and (2.75), we arrive at the associated fictitious elastic constitutive equations in the transformed domain
(s)
J
x
x
11
(s)
yy
21
zz (s)
J
= s 31
(s)
J41
yz
(s)
J51
zx
x y (s)
J61
or
x x (s)
E
11
(s)
yy
21
zz (s)
E
= s 31
(s)
yz
41
(s)
E
51
zx
x y (s)
61
E
12
E
22
E
32
E
42
E
52
E
62
E
J12
J22
J32
J42
J52
J62
J13
J23
J33
J43
J53
J63
13
E
23
E
33
E
43
E
53
E
63
E
J14
J24
J34
J44
J54
J64
14
E
24
E
34
E
44
E
54
E
64
E
J15
J25
J35
J45
J55
J65
15
E
25
E
35
E
45
E
55
E
65
E
x x (s)
J16
yy (s)
J26
zz (s)
J36
yz (s)
J46
zx (s)
J56
x y (s)
J66
16
x x (s)
E
26
yy (s)
E
(s)
E 36
zz
yz (s)
46
E
56 zx (s)
E
(s)
66
xy
E
(2.78)
(2.79)
80
or
{
(s)} = s[
E(s)] {
(s)}
(2.80)
{
(s)} = s[
J(s)] {
(s)}
(2.81)
When the vector-matrix notation is applied the corresponding formulas can be written
in an expanded fashion
E
(s)
11
11
21
22 (s)
E
33 (s)
E
= s 31
(s)
23
(s)
0
31
12 (s)
0
or
12
E
22
E
32
E
13 0
E
23 0
E
33 0
E
0 0 E
44
0 0 0
0 0 0
J
(s)
11
J11
22 (s)
21
33 (s)
J
= s 31
(s)
23
(s)
0
31
12 (s)
0
J12
J22
J32
11 (s)
22 (s)
33 (s)
23 (s)
0 0
31 (s)
55 0
12 (s)
66
0 E
0
0
0
J13 0
J23 0
J33 0
0 0 J44
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
J55
0
0
0
J66
11 (s)
22 (s)
33 (s)
23 (s)
31 (s)
12 (s)
(2.82)
(2.83)
81
t
=
ve ()
J i jkl (t
()
)ve kl ()d
(2.84)
or
ve ()
i j (t)
t
=
ve
()
()
(2.85)
where the local variables, microstress, and microstrain are combined by local constitutive time-dependent fourth-rank tensors (the creep compliance tensor or the
relaxation tensor) for the homogeneous constituent material. In a formal fashion
when a homogenization inside the RUC is used, we arrive at
t
ve
i j (t) =
ve
(2.86)
ve
(2.87)
or
t
ve
i j (t) =
0
ve E
ve J ()
i jkl
()
82
or
e
i j (s)
1
= s
E i jkl (s)e
kl (s)
(2.88)
e
i j (s)
= s
E i jkl (s)e
kl (s)
(2.89)
Finally, solution of the anisotropic linear viscoelastic problem can be obtained by the
i j (s),e
i j (s)
use of inverse Laplace transformation from the transformed domain e
ve
ve
to the physical domain i j (t), i j (t). When absolute notation is used we get (see
Haasemann and Ulbricht [5])
ve (t)
= ve E(t) : ve(t = 0) +
ve E(t)
ve (t
t
ve E(t
0
0) + [ve E
) : ve ()d
(2.90)
ve ](t)
Recall definition of the Laplace transform of the function f (t) (t > 0) into the
function of transformed variable
f (s)
def
L { f (t)} =
f (s) =
f (t)est dt
(2.91)
t
f (t) =
(2.92)
Applying the Laplace transform (2.91) to the convolution integral (2.92), we arrive
at the convolution theorem (see Findley et al. [4])
L
t
f 1 (t ) f 2 ()d
f 1 (s)
f 2 (s)
= L { f 1 (t) f 2 (t)} =
(2.93)
Taking next the Laplace transform of the integral form of constitutive equation of
the anisotropic linear viscoelasticity (2.90), we arrive at the equivalent transformed
algebraic equation of anisotropic linear elasticity according to scheme
ve
L
(t) =ve E(t) :ve (t = 0) +ve E(t) :ve (t)
(s) = s
E(s) :
(s)
(2.94)
83
and relaxation ve E i jkl (t) tensors (e.g., Haasemann and Ulbricht [5]). Hence to overcome this deficiency, the suggested scheme is as follows: first apply the Laplace transform at the level of subcell in order to eliminate physical time (left path in Table 2.4),
second use a homogenization method in order to reach the RUC level for fictitious
elastic RUC of composite material and finally apply the inverse Laplace transform
to arrive at the physical viscoelastic RUC level (right back path in Table 2.4).
Usually for sake of simplicity of further applications, the transversely isotropic
E(s) at the level of RUC is sufficient, whereas at the
effective relaxation matrix s
microlevel (subcell) the isotropic matrices for the constituents (f) fiber and (m)
(f)
(m)
composite matrix s
E (s) and s
E (s) are usually accepted (see also (2.82)).
Elastic-viscoelastic correspondence principle as applied to orthotropic viscoelastic
Table 2.4 Elastic-viscoelastic homogenization method based on the representative unit cell (RUC)
applied to the associated elastic material by correspondence principle
()
ve ()
() d
linear viscoelastic
{} =
ve
=============
()
()
=
0
ve
E()
() d
homogenization ? {} =
= s J()
()
associated elastic
t
0
ve
L1
=s J
=============
()
= s E()
()
homogenization
=s E
84
e3
e2
e1
81 s t
u1 (t)
Em , m
Ef , f
Fig. 2.5 Beam model and RUC of unidirectional composite according to Haasemann and
Ulbricht [5]
Table 2.5 Viscoelastic
properties of fiber and matrix
material following
Haasemann and
Ulbricht [5]
Relaxation
function
Poissons ratio
Fiber
Matrix
70 + 200 e0.1t/s
3 + 15 et/s
0.2
0.35
and viscoplastic materials is applied by Haasemann and Ulbricht [5]. In case of unidirectionally reinforced composite considered by Haasemann and Ulbricht [5] (see
Fig. 2.5), both fiber and matrix materials were described as isotropic linear viscoelastic (see Table 2.5); whereas at macroscale, the sane composite material obeyed the
transverse isotropy symmetry. The LaplaceCarson transform
f C (s) = s
LC { f (t)} =
est f (t) dt
(2.95)
References
1. Altenbach, H.: Classical and non-classical creep models. In: Altenbach, H., Skrzypek, J.J.
(eds.) Creep and Damage in Materials and Structures. CISM Courses and Lectures No. 399,
pp. 4596. Springer, Wien (1999)
2. Betten, J.: Creep Mechanics, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (2008)
3. Byron, F.W., Fuller, M.D.: Mathematics of elliptic integrals for engineers and physicists.
Springer, Berlin (1975)
4. Findley, W.N., Lai, J.S., Onaran, K.: Creep and Relaxation of Nonlinear Viscoplastic Materials.
North-Holland, New York (1976)
85
5. Haasemann, G., Ulbricht, V.: Numerical evaluation of the viscoelastic and viscoplastic behavior
of composites. Technische Mechanik 30(13), 122135 (2010)
6. Krempl, E.: Creep-plastic interaction. In: Altenbach, H., Skrzypek, J.J. (eds.) Creep and Damage in Materials and Structures. CISM Courses and Lectures No. 399, pp. 285348. Springer,
Wien (1999)
7. Murakami, S.: Continuum Damage Mechanics. Springer, Berlin (2012)
8. Nowacki, W.: Teoria pezania. Arkady, Warszawa (1963)
9. Pipkin, A.C.: Lectures on Viscoelasticity Theory. Springer, Berlin (1972)
10. Pobedrya, B.E.: Mehanika kompozicionnyh materialov. Izd. Mosk. Univ. (1984)
11. Rabotnov, Ju.N.: Creep Problems of the Theory of Creep. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1969)
12. Shu, L.S., Onat, E.T.: On anisotropic linear viscoelastic solids. In: Proceedings of the Fourth
Symposium on Naval Structures Mechanics, p. 203. Pergamon Press, London (1967)
13. Skrzypek, J.J.: In Hetnarski, R.B., (ed.) Plasticity and Creep, Theory, Examples, and Problems.
Begell House/CRC Press, Boca Raton (1993)
14. Skrzypek, J.: Material models for creep failure analysis and design of structures. In: Altenbach,
H., Skrzypek, J.J. (eds.) Creep and Damage in Materials and Structures. CISM Courses and
Lectures No. 399, pp. 97166. Springer, Wien (1999)
15. Skrzypek, J., Ganczarski, A.: Modeling of Material Damage and Failure of Structures. Springer,
Berlin (1999)
http://www.springer.com/978-3-319-17159-3