journal article·2022-07

Effect of strain rate and load orientation on cyclic response of anisotropic polyurethane foam

Dorra Ben Abdeljelil, Sami Chatti, Raja O Ahmed Ben Ali

Cellular Polymers· Volume 41· Issue 4
Publisher page

Abstract

Anisotropic cellular materials, such as polymeric foams, play an important role in structures subjected to cyclic loadings. The present paper provides an experimental investigation of the mechanical behavior of an anisotropic polyurethane foam subjected to cyclic compressive loadings under two perpendicular orientations: the rising and perpendicular directions. The foam samples are loaded under three different strain rates and various deformations. The experimental results are presented in terms of elasticity modulus, maximal compressive stress, effective energy absorption capacity, and residual strain. It is proved that the investigated polyurethane foam presents a macroscopic mechanical anisotropy caused by microscopic cell elongation in the foaming direction. Moreover, it is demonstrated that the mechanical behavior of the foam is fully influenced by both deformation rates and imposed strains. The experimental stress–strain curves are modelized using an empirical model considering an adjustable modulus of elasticity. The analytical results show a good agreement with the experiments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Polymer composites and self-healing · Mechanical Behavior of Composites

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

Affiliations

Mechanical Laboratory of Sousse, National Engineering School of Sousse, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia

Mechanical Laboratory of Sousse, Higher Institute of Sciences and Techniques of Sousse, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.10567910.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.105679 ↗
2. 10.1007/s10934-005-1652-110.1007/s10934-005-1652-1 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.10.00610.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.10.006 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.05.02410.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.05.024 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.10616410.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.106164 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2019.06.03210.1016/j.jmrt.2019.06.032 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.04810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.048 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.01.03510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.01.035 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.10618810.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.106188 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.proeng.2013.12.03910.1016/j.proeng.2013.12.039 ↗
11. 10.1177/109963621665738810.1177/1099636216657388 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.03.01910.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.03.019 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.10565710.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.105657 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.acme.2016.12.00910.1016/j.acme.2016.12.009 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.11.04510.1016/j.compositesb.2018.11.045 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.ast.2015.11.01310.1016/j.ast.2015.11.013 ↗
17. 10.1007/s11340-019-00521-310.1007/s11340-019-00521-3 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.12.16010.1016/j.proeng.2016.12.160 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.12.00910.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.12.009 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2014.08.00410.1016/j.ijmecsci.2014.08.004 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.10503010.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.105030 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.07.04410.1016/j.compstruct.2013.07.044 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2018.06.00610.1016/j.mechmat.2018.06.006 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.12.02610.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.12.026 ↗
25. 10.1007/BF0054748610.1007/BF00547486 ↗
26. 10.1016/S0749-6419(01)00049-310.1016/S0749-6419(01)00049-3 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.compstruc.2011.03.01010.1016/j.compstruc.2011.03.010 ↗
28. 10.1016/S0020-7683(01)00213-X10.1016/S0020-7683(01)00213-X ↗