journal article·2007-09Open access

Study of the simple extension tear test sample for rubber with Configurational Mechanics

Erwan Verron

International Journal of Fracture· Volume 147· Issue 1-4

Abstract

The simple extension tear test-piece also referred to as the trousers sample is widely used to study crack propagation in rubber. The corresponding energy release rate, called tearing energy for rubber materials, was first established by Rivlin and Thomas (J Polym Sci, 10:291-318, 1953); a second derivation was proposed later by Eshelby (In G.C. Sib, H. C. van Elst, and D. Broek, editors, Prospects of Fracture Mechanics, 69-84, Leyden, 1975). We show here that the derivation of this result can be advantageously revisited through the scope of Configurational Mechanics. Our approach is based on the rigorous definition of the configurations of the body and on the physical significance of the configurational stress tensor. More precisely, it is demonstrated that the change in energy due to crack growth, and then the tearing energy, is directly related to the components of the configurational stress tensor in the body.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Elasticity and Material Modeling · Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design · Fatigue and fracture mechanics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (14)

Show source-provided references
1. Andriyana A and Verron E (2007). Prediction of fatigue life improvement in natural rubber using configurational stress. Int J Solids Struct 44: 2079–209210.1016/j.ijsolstr.2006.06.046 ↗
2. Eshelby JD (1951). The force on an elastic singularity. Phil Trans R Soc Lond A 244: 87–11210.1098/rsta.1951.0016 ↗
3. Eshelby JD (1975a). The elastic energy-momentum tensor. J Elast 5(3-4): 321–33510.1007/BF00126994 ↗
4. Eshelby JD (1975b). The calculation of energy release rates. In: Sih, GC and Broek, D (eds) Prospects of fracture mechanics, pp 69–84. Noordhoff, Leyden
5. Greensmith HW and Thomas AG (1956). Rupture of rubber - III - Determination of tear properties. Rubber Chem Technol 29: 372–38110.5254/1.3542533 ↗
6. Griffith AA (1920). The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Phil Trans R Soc Lond A 221: 163–19810.1098/rsta.1921.0006 ↗
7. Kienzler R and Herrmann G (1997). On the properties of the Eshelby tensor. Acta Mech 125: 73–9110.1007/BF01177300 ↗
8. Knowles JK and Sternberg E (1972). On a class of conservation laws in linearized and finite elastostatics. Arch Rat Mech Anal 44: 187–21110.1007/BF00250778 ↗
9. Maugin GA (1993). Material inhomogeneities in elasticity. Chapman and Hall, London10.1007/978-1-4899-4481-8 ↗
10. Maugin GA (1995). Material forces: concepts and applications. Appl Mech Rev 48: 213–24510.1115/1.3005101 ↗
11. Rivlin RS and Thomas AG (1953). Rupture of rubber. I. Characteristic energy for tearing. J Polym Sci 10: 291–31810.1002/pol.1953.120100303 ↗
12. Thomas AG (1994). The development of fracture mechanics for elastomers. Rubber Chem Technol 67: G50–G6010.5254/1.3538688 ↗
13. Verron E, Andriyana A (In Press) Definition of a new predictor for multiaxial fatigue crack nucleation in rubber. J Mech Phys Solids. doi: 10.1016/j.jmps.2007.05.01910.1016/j.jmps.2007.05.019 ↗
14. Verron E, Le Cam J-B and Gornet L (2006). A multiaxial criterion for crack nucleation in rubber. Mech Res Commun 33: 493–49810.1016/j.mechrescom.2005.06.001 ↗