Constitutive modelling of the mechanical response of a polycaprolactone based polyurethane elastomer: Finite element analysis and experimental validation through a bulge test
Source abstract
Abstract
The mechanical behaviour of a high performance polycaprolactone based polyurethane elastomer (PCL) up to large strain levels, cyclic loading and equibiaxial stress has been assessed. The PCL can be categorised as a rubber-like material, thus, showing nonlinear stress-strain behaviour. The materials elastic network is based on a high molecular weight PCL polyol which gives the material its elastomeric behaviour similar to polyurethanes. In this work, mechanical testing capturing the major features of the stress-strain curve under different loading conditions is performed. Both, uni-axial loading-unloading curves and bulge test are thoroughly studied through the addition of digital image correlation (DIC) to measure the strain field. Results show the presence of hysteresis and loading configuration dependence. Then, two well-known hyperelastic constitutive models, the Arruda-Boyce eight-chain and Bergström-Boyce, were fitted to the uni-axial monotonic and cyclic test data and compared to the bulge test experimental results through finite element analysis (FEA) in Abaqus.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Elasticity and Material Modeling · Polymer composites and self-healing · Polymer Nanocomposites and Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Instituto de Investigación en Ciencia y Tecnología de Materiales INTEMA, CONICET, UNMdP, Mar del Plata, Argentina
The University of Queensland, School of Mechanical and Mining Engineering, Centre for Advanced Materials Processing and Manufacturing, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1080/03602559.2015.102149010.1080/03602559.2015.1021490 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.05.00310.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.05.003 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2009.08.00410.1016/j.engfailanal.2009.08.004 ↗
4. 10.5254/1.354691410.5254/1.3546914 ↗
5. 10.5254/1.353921010.5254/1.3539210 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2009.05.00210.1016/j.mechmat.2009.05.002 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2004.08.00110.1016/j.mechmat.2004.08.001 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.matdes.2014.08.05410.1016/j.matdes.2014.08.054 ↗
9. 10.1039/c3sm27125k10.1039/c3sm27125k ↗
10. 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2014.03.00110.1016/j.ijengsci.2014.03.001 ↗
11. 10.3390/app612038610.3390/app6120386 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.11.01410.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.11.014 ↗
13. 10.1002/app.2002910.1002/app.20029 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2011.04.00110.1016/j.mechmat.2011.04.001 ↗
15. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.928.2010.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.928.20 ↗
16. 10.1007/s10118-018-2125-810.1007/s10118-018-2125-8 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2008.09.00110.1016/j.polymertesting.2008.09.001 ↗
18. 10.1007/s11340-018-0374-710.1007/s11340-018-0374-7 ↗
19. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.551-552.310.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.551-552.3 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2006.06.00510.1016/j.polymertesting.2006.06.005 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.mechrescom.2014.05.00610.1016/j.mechrescom.2014.05.006 ↗
22. 10.1007/s11340-011-9571-310.1007/s11340-011-9571-3 ↗
23. 10.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_12210.1007/978-3-319-45781-9_122 ↗
24. 10.1039/C8RA01256C10.1039/C8RA01256C ↗
25. 10.1002/pen.1074910.1002/pen.10749 ↗
26. 10.1098/rsta.1951.000410.1098/rsta.1951.0004 ↗
27. 10.1016/0022-5096(93)90013-610.1016/0022-5096(93)90013-6 ↗
28. 10.1016/S0022-5096(97)00075-610.1016/S0022-5096(97)00075-6 ↗
29. 10.5254/1.354760210.5254/1.3547602 ↗
30. ASTM D412 · 2006
31. 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2004.05.00710.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2004.05.007 ↗
32. 10.1016/B978-0-323-31150-2.00005-410.1016/B978-0-323-31150-2.00005-4 ↗
33. Bergström JS. · 2013
34. 10.1093/comjnl/7.4.30810.1093/comjnl/7.4.308 ↗
35. Bergström JS. · 2003