NPL Report CMMT(B)130)

Project: PAJ1;Failure Criteria and their Application to Visco-

Elastic/Visco-Plastic Materials
Report 3


The Constitutive Models Suitable for Adhesives in some
Finite Element Codes and Suggested Methods of
Generating the Appropriate Materials Data


M. N. Charalambides
A Olusanya









April 1997
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
2












The Constitutive Models Suitable for Adhesives in some
Finite Element Codes and Suggested Methods of
Generating the Appropriate Materials Data

M. N. Charalambides
A Olusanya



Centre for Materials Measurement and Technology
National Physical Laboratory
Teddington
Middlesex, UK, TW11 0LW




This report represents the deliverable for
Task 4. Milestone 15
Task 5. Milestone 19












NPL Report CMMT(B)130
3






Crown copyright 1997
Reproduced by permission of the Controller of HMSO

ISSN 1361-4061



National Physical Laboratory
Teddington, Middlesex, UK, TW11 0LW















No extracts from this report may be reproduced without
the prior written consent of the Managing Director
National Physical Laboratory; the source must be acknowledged










Approved on behalf of Managing Director, NPL, by Dr C Lea,
Head, Centre for Materials Measurement and Technology
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
4














The Constitutive Models Suitable for Adhesives in some
Finite Element Codes and Suggested Methods of
Generating the Appropriate Materials Data









ABSTRACT

Commercial Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software packages are widely used for stress analysis of
adhesive joints. This report is a survey of constitutive models implemented in various FEA packages
which are suitable for adhesives. Elastic plastic models that take into account the pressure
dependence of the plastic deformation are discussed. These models will be suitable for simulating
behaviour of most structural adhesives, or adhesives whose operating temperatures are lower than
their glass transition temperature. In addition, the stress/strain distributions in a bonded joint are such
that the strain rate in the adhesive is not uniform. Therefore, material models where the strain rate
dependence is taken into account are required. Various visco-plastic models, originally developed
for metals are discussed. Materials data that is required to define the elastic - plastic models are
identified and experimental methods for their determination are outlined. Finally, large strain
constitutive models that are suitable for simulating the behaviour of rubbery adhesives or for
adhesives tested at temperatures above their glass transition temperatures are discussed. These are
the linear viscoelastic, the hyperelastic and hyperfoam models. The hyperelastic and hyperfoam
models are based on large strain constitutive theories developed for rubber. In ABAQUS a
*VISCOELASTIC option exists which in combination with either the *HYPERELASTIC or the
*HYPERFOAM materials option results in a non-linear, elastic, strain rate dependent material
model.
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
5
GLOSSARY


c cohesion (ANSYS and LUSAS)
C
ij
material parameters for hyperelastic model
d cohesion (ABAQUS)
D
i
material parameters for hyperelastic model
E elastic modulus
E
h
hardening modulus from a yield stress vs. effective plastic strain plot
E
t
hardening modulus from a yield stress vs. total strain plot
g
i
P
relative shear modulus of term i in Prony series
G limiting shear modulus at t
G
0
instantaneous shear modulus
G
R
(t) shear relaxation modulus
I
1
first invariant of the stress tensor
I
1
'
first invariant of the plastic strain tensor
I
_
1 first invariant of deviatoric strain tensor for hyperelastic model
I
_
2 second invariant of deviatoric strain tensor for hyperelastic model
J volume ratio
J
2
second invariant of the deviatoric stress tensor
J
2
'
second invariant of the deviatoric plastic strain tensor
p pressure
q von Mises equivalent stress
W strain energy density function of hyperelastic material
friction angle (ABAQUS)

y
shear plastic strain

.
e elastic strain rate

p
equivalent plastic strain

cr
equivalent creep strain

.
p equivalent plastic strain rate

.
p plastic strain rate

.
strain rate

.
p0 static equivalent plastic strain rate

.
cr
equivalent creep strain rate

1
axial strain in uniaxial tension

1e
elastic component of
1

1p
plastic component of
1

2
lateral strain in uniaxial tension

2e
elastic component of
2

2p
plastic component of
2

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
6

i
engineering principal strains

ij
component of the strain tensor

yc
compressive plastic strain

yt
tensile plastic strain (same as
1p
)
ratio of the yield stress in compression to the yield stress in tension corresponding to the
same equivalent plastic strain

_
i deviatoric principal extension ratios

i
principal extension ratios

e
elastic Poissons ratio

p
plastic Poissons ratio

t
Poissons ratio calculated from total strains

t
'
Poissons ratio calculated from total engineering strains

i
effective Poissons ratio, large strain case

i
principal stresses

ij
component of the stress tensor

in
stress at first yield

n
hydrostatic stress (=I
1
/3)

y
yield stress at arbitrary value of equivalent plastic strain rate

y0
static yield stress

yc
yield stress in compression

yt
yield stress in tension

i
relaxation time of term i in Prony series

y
yield stress in shear
angle of internal friction (ANSYS and LUSAS)

f
dilation angle (ANSYS)
dilation angle (ABAQUS)
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
7
CONTENTS

1. Introduction 8
2. Elastic - Plastic Models 8
3. Viscoplastic Models 14
4. Determination Of Material Parameters 16
4.1. Elastic Properties 16
4.2. Hardening Curves 16
4.3. Calculation Of The Dilation Angle 18
4.4. Determination Of Strain Rate Dependence Of Yield 19
5. Constitutive Models For Large Strain Materials 20
5.1. Linear Viscoelasticity 20
5.2. Hyperelasticity 21
5.3. Combination Of Hyperelastic And Viscoelastic Material Models In Abaqus 24
5.4. Elastomeric Foam Behaviour 25
6. Conclusions 27
7. References 27
Appendix 1:The Creep Power Law 28
Appendix 2 Evaluation Of The Parameter From Tensile And Shear Tests 29
Appendix 3 Evaluation Of
P
When The Latter Varies With Strain 31
Appendix 4 Evaluation Of Plastic Strain Rate For A Constant Strain Rate Test 32

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
8
1. INTRODUCTION

Finite Element Modelling (FEM) or Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is used extensively in stress
analyses of adhesive joints. This is due to the complex stress/strain distributions that exist in such
joints and the inability of analytical methods to cope with such complexities.

When using commercial FEA software packages, an important step in the analysis is to define the
materials constitutive behaviour. The basis of this report is to identify constitutive models which are
suitable to model adhesive behaviour.

Adhesives are viscoelastic materials. As a result, a differences in the stress - strain curve will be
noted for changes in the applied strain rate. This effect is most pronounced when the adhesive is
operating at temperatures close to its glass transition temperature; where changes in the stress - strain
curve are observed for small changes in the strain rate. For glassy, structural adhesives, this effect is
less noticeable due to the fact that their glass transition temperature is above the usual operating
temperatures. In addition, the stress - strain curves of adhesives are usually highly non-linear with
plastic flow possibly occurring at high strains.

Research on conventional, i.e. metallic materials, has been performed for a considerably longer time
compared to polymeric materials. From this research, extensive constitutive theories exist for metals
that take into account plasticity and the strain rate dependence of yield. Another material that has
been studied extensively is soil, for which plasticity theories have been developed that account for a
pressure dependence for plastic deformation. These models have been implemented in FEA
software packages. This report summarises the constitutive models which could be utilised to model
adhesives, in addition to those that have been developed specifically for polymeric materials.

In this report, sections 2 and 3 discuss the plastic and viscoplastic constitutive models and section 4
describes the experiments required to determine the various material parameters that appear in the
models. Section 5 describes the constitutive theories developed for rubbers and similar materials
which can be used to model the flexible polyurethane, polybutadiene types of adhesive. Section 6 is
a brief summary of the main conclusions and recommendations.

2 ELASTIC - PLASTIC MODELS


In this section, it is assumed that the material is elastic - plastic. In the initial, linear region, the theory
of elasticity using Hookes law is valid. In the non-linear region, plastic deformation is assumed to
take place. The stress analysis when plastic deformation is occurring is described below.

Rate independent plasticity is based on three fundamental concepts:

i) the yield criterion; determines the stress state necessary for plastic deformation

ii) the hardening rule; describes how the materials resistance to further yield changes with
increasing strain

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
9
iii) the flow rule; defines the incremental plastic strains as a function of the stresses.
For metals, the classic von Mises yield criterion is usually assumed. This produces a yield criterion
independent of the hydrostatic component of stress, Equation 1:

( ) ( ) ( )
[ ]

1 2 2 1 yt 3 3 2
J + +
1
2
3
2 2 2
(1)

where

i
are the principal stresses

yt
is the tensile yield stress
and
J
2
is the second invariant of the deviatoric stress tensor.

In general, the tensile yield stress need not be constant, e.g. the material could strain harden. Plastic
deformation is assumed to take place under constant volume conditions, e.g. the plastic Poissons
ratio,
p
, is equal to 0.5.

The independence of yield on hydrostatic stress implies that the tensile and compressive yield
stresses are the same. However, studies on polymers reveal that, the chain structure generally leads
to higher yield stress in compression than in tension. Hence, a deviation from the classical von Mises
yield criterion is observed.

Two main forms of pressure dependent criteria appear in the literature related to the yield of
adhesives
1,2
. They are usually referred to as the Drucker-Prager and Raghavas criteria and are
given by Equations 2 and 3 respectively:

( ) ( )

yt 2 1
+1
2
J
- 1
2
I +
3
(2)

( ) 1
yt
2
2 yt 1
J I + 3 (3)

where:

I
1
is the first invariant of the stress tensor
and
is the ratio of the yield stress in compression to the yield stress in tension corresponding to the
same equivalent plastic strain,
p
.

The equivalent plastic strain and the equivalent stress are scalar quantities that allow the analysis of
situations where multi-axial loading is present. For uniaxial tension they reduce to the tensile plastic
strain and tensile stress, respectively. Equation (2) has originated from deformation theories of soils
3

and it has been subsequently used for polymers
4
. Equation (3) was proposed specifically for
polymers
5
. Both equations revert to equation (1), for =1. Experimental methods for determining
are discussed in section 4.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
10
Equations 2 and 3 can be found in various FEA packages. For example, ABAQUS
6
has a general
form of the Drucker-Prager criterion, called the linear extended Drucker-Prager model, Equation
4:
d = t - ptan (4)

where p is the pressure and is defined as -I
1
/3

is the friction angle of the material

d is the cohesion of the material

and
t is defined as, Equation 5:

t =
1
2
q 1+
1
K K
r
q

_
,

_
,

1
]
1
1
1
1
3
(5)

where
r is the third invariant of the deviatoric stress tensor

q is the von Mises equivalent stress which from equation 1, is equal to 3J
2
.

For K=1, t is equal to q and yielding is independent of the third deviatoric stress invariant.

Therefore Equation 4 can be rewritten as:

d = 3J
I
2
+ tan
1
3
(6)

Multiplying Equation 6 by the factor

_
,

1
2
and comparing with Equation 2, the following identities
are derived:

tan

_
,

3
1
1
(7)

d =
2
yt

_
,

1
(8)

The data that is required to be defined for this linear model are , K and the yield stress in tension,
compression or shear. The options of perfect plasticity, constant yield stress, or isotropic hardening,
yield stress is a function of von Mises equivalent plastic strain, are available.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
11
The von Mises equivalent plastic strain,
p
, is equal to, Equation 9:

p
2
'
J
2
3
(9)

where

J
2
'
is the second invariant of the deviatoric plastic strain tensor.

Note: in deriving Equation 9, it is assumed that the plastic Poissons ratio is 0.5.

Tensile, compressive or shear data can be used to define isotropic hardening. In all three cases, the
data have to be converted to corresponding data of von Mises equivalent stress, Equation 1 and
strain, Equation 9.

A further parameter that is required to be defined is the dilation angle, . This parameter appears in
the flow rule and determines whether the flow rule is associated or non-associated. Associated flow
implies that the plastic strain increments are normal to the yield surface and under such conditions
. The tangent of is defined as the ratio of the volumetric plastic strain to the von Mises
equivalent plastic strain, Equation 10:

tan =
I
2
3
J
1
'
2
'
(10)

where

I
1
'
is the first invariant of the plastic strain tensor

and

J
2
'
is the second invariant of the deviatoric plastic strain tensor.

Under uniaxial tensile loading conditions, the invariants I
1
'
and J
2
'
are given by:

( )
I
1
'
p yt
1 2 and
( )
J
2
'
p yt
2
+
1
3
1
2
(11)

where

yt
is the plastic strain in the loading direction
and

p
is the plastic Poissons ratio, e.g. the ratio of the transverse to the axial plastic strains.

Substitution of Equation 11 into Equation 10 results in the following relationship between and
p,
Equation 12:
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
12
( )
( )
tan =
p
p

3 1 2
2 1

+
(12)

For
p
=0.5, e.g. yield at constant volume, =0.

When is greater than zero, the material expands during plastic deformation and
p
is smaller than
0.5.

Section 4 describes an experimental method for determining
p
and hence, .

The Drucker-Prager yield criterion (Equation 2) is also implemented in LUSAS
7
and ANSYS
8
, in
the form shown in Equation 13:

( ) ( )
6
3 3
6ccos(
3 3
0
sin(
sin( sin(
)
)
)
)
n
2
J

(13)

where

is the angle of internal friction

c is the cohesion

and

n
is the hydrostatic stress (=I
1
/3).

By rearranging and comparing Equations 2 and 13, the following relationships between c, ,
yt
and
are obtained:

( )
( )
sin

+
3 1
3 1

(14)

c =
6
yt

2
(15)

The parameters that need to be defined for this model are the initial values of c
0
and
0
, when the
equivalent plastic strain is zero.

The option of isotropic hardening is available in LUSAS and it is defined by giving the gradients of
the cohesion and the friction angle as a function of the equivalent plastic strain. The ANSYS FEA
package allows the definition of the dilation angle,
f
, as an option.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
13
Raghavas yield criterion is implemented in LUSAS, in exactly the same form as Equation 3. The
parameters that are required to be defined are the elastic properties and the initial values of the
tensile and compressive yield stresses. Isotropic hardening is optional and an assumption of
associated flow is made.

Raghavas criterion also exists as an option in ABAQUS under the terminology the exponent
Drucker-Prager model, Equation 16:

aq - p = p
b
t
(16)

where a and b are material parameters and p
t
is a hardening parameter.

Assuming the special case of b=2, rearranging and comparing with Equation 3, the relationships for a
and the hardening parameter p
t
, can be derived, Equations 17 and 18:

( )
a =
1
3
y
1
(17)

( )
p
t
y

3 1
(18)

The data that is required to be defined for the exponent model are a, b, and the yield stress in
tension, compression or shear. The options of perfect plasticity, or isotropic hardening are once
again available. The flow for this model is assumed to be non-associated.

A less commonly used pressure dependent yield criterion is the Mohr-Coulomb criterion. This has
also been developed from constitutive theories developed for soils
3
. It is available in LUSAS,
Equation 19:

( ) ( )
1 3 1 3
2ccos 0 + + sin (19)

where
1
and
3
are the maximum and minimum principal stresses.

In order to define c and in terms of and
yt
, the loading conditions corresponding to tension (
1

=
yt
,
2
=
3
=0) and compression (
1
=
2
=0,
3
= -
yt
) are substituted into Equation 19 yielding
simultaneous equations that can be solved for c and , Equation 20:

sin =

+
1
1
and c =
yt

2
(20)

This model has similar data requirements to the Drucker-Prager model, Equation 13.


NPL Report CMMT(B)130
14
3. VISCOPLASTIC MODELS

For some adhesives, strain rate dependence can not be ignored. The deformations in a typical joint
are such that the strain rate is not uniform throughout the adhesive. Hence, if any of the constitutive
theories described in section 2 are to be used, options have be available in the FEA software which
will account for the extra variable, i.e. strain rate.

There are two ways of introducing a strain rate dependent yield. One is to separate the strain and
strain rate effects and the other is to combine both dependencies into the materials parameters.
Here, the material parameter that is assumed to vary with strain rate is
yt
.

The Cowper and Symonds model is a commonly used strain rate dependent yield model that
separates the strain rate from the strain effects. This model assumes that the hardening curves
corresponding to the various strain rates are similar and hence can be defined by a single static
hardening curve and a scaling factor.

For example, in LS-DYNA 3D
9
, material model 24, assumes von Mises yield with the following
relationship for the static yield stress,
yt0
:

yt0 in
p f +

_
,

_
(21)
where,
in
is the stress at first yield and f p
_

_
,

is a hardening function that can be defined either in

tabular form or in terms of linear hardening (bilinear model). The strain rate dependence is taken into
account by the Cowper and Symonds model that modifies the static yield stress,
yt0
, with the
scaling factor:

yt
yt0
p
P
C
+

_
,

1
1
.
(22)

where
.
p is the equivalent plastic strain rate and C and P are material parameters that need to be
defined.

A very similar model also exists in ABAQUS. Here the scaling factor is defined in terms of the
power law:

.
p
yt
yt0
m
F

_
,
1 for
yt
/
yt0
> 1.0 (23)

where F and m are material properties that need to be defined. Equation (23) can be used in
conjunction with the linear(equation 4) and exponent (equation 16) models.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
15
An alternative option which is available in ABAQUS and LS-DYNA 3D is the capability to define
the scaling factor directly as a function of the equivalent plastic strain rate,
.
p . This requires
numerical data in the form of (
yt
/
yt0
) vs.
.
p .

Another example of separable strain and strain rate dependent yield model is material model 15 of
LS-DYNA 3D. This assumes von Mises yield (equation 1) and strain rate dependence is defined
by:

yt
yt0
p
p
bln +

_
,

1
0
.
.
(24)

where b is a material constant that needs to be defined and
.
p0 is the equivalent plastic strain rate of
the static test, that is when
yt
is equal to
yt0
. Equation (24) is known as the Eyring model.

A yield model where the strain and strain rate effects are not separable is given by material 19 in LS-
DYNA 3D. The von Mises yield criterion is assumed and hardening is defined as:


yt in
p
h
p p E

_
,
+

_
,

. .
_
(25)

where E
h
is the hardening modulus from a yield stress vs. effective plastic strain plot and
in
is the
initial yield stress. Both E
h
and
in
are functions of the effective plastic strain rate,
.
p . Therefore,
there is no separation of the strain and strain rate effects. LS-DYNA 3D calculates E
h
from E (elastic
modulus) and E
t
(hardening modulus from a yield stress vs. total strain plot) using E
h
=E
t
/(1-E
t
/E).

Definition of E and E
t
as functions of effective plastic strain rate is required to lead to a strain rate
dependent E
h
. Defining E as a function of
.
p is a very useful option when modelling ductile
adhesives, especially where changes in strain rate lead to changes in the whole of the stress - strain
curve and not just in the plastic part of the curve. However, the disadvantage of this specific model
of LS DYNA 3D, is that it does not take into account the pressure dependence of yield.

Another option for defining a non separable, strain and strain rate dependent yield, is to give
complete hardening curves as numerical stress - strain data for various strain rates. This may lead to
a large amount number of data having to be entered. It can be used in both ABAQUS and LS-
DYNA 3D, with the Drucker-Prager and von Mises models respectively.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
16
In addition to all the models that were described above, most FEA packages also include classical
metal creep models. These are also viscoplastic models where the inelastic strains are the product of
two independent processes: plastic strains that are time independent and creep strains that are time
dependent. The usual von Mises yield criterion is used to define the onset of plastic deformation
whereas creep occurs when the body is stressed. The use of such models involves the definition of a
creep law, e.g. a function that defines the equivalent creep strain rate in terms of the von Mises
equivalent stress, temperature and time (or strain). These are derived from uniaxial experiments.
Some of the most widely used models (for example the power creep law) are implemented in FEA
packages. In addition, in some packages an option exists which enables the definition of a users
own creep law. The main difference between the creep constitutive models and the models
described above, is in the time frame over which the deformation occurs; in creep, the deformation
takes place over a much larger time frame. Appendix 1 give an example of a creep law and the
experimental determination of its parameters is given in.


4. DETERMINATION OF MATERIAL PARAMETERS


This section describes experimental methods for determining the material parameters required in the
constitutive models described in sections 2 and 3.


4.1 ELASTIC PROPERTIES


The elastic parameters that are required are Youngs modulus, E and the elastic Poissons ratio,
e
.
Youngs modulus may be determined from a uniaxial tensile test and Poissons ratio may be
determined during the same test, by taking simultaneous measurements of the lateral contraction of
the specimen. An extensometer or any other device for measuring the displacement accurately is
required for both measurements. Note that if the shear modulus, G, is known or measured,
e
can
be calculated from (E-2G)/2G.


4.2 HARDENING CURVES


The tensile stress at first yield and the complete tensile hardening curve are obtained from a tensile
test. The hardening data are represented according to the limitations of the specific FEA software.
For example, some packages allow only bi-linear representation, others allow for multi-point
definitions. For many adhesives, the hardening curve will extend to strain values in excess of 10%
and the cross sectional area of the sample will significantly reduce with increasing strain.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
17
In such cases the engineering stress,
'
, should be converted to true stress, , and the engineering
strain,
'
, should be converted to true or logarithmic strain, , using:

( )

'
' '
1
2
t
(26)

and

( )
= ln 1+
'
(27)

where
t
'
is the ratio of the lateral to tensile total engineering strains obtained from a uniaxial tensile
test.

The parameter appears in all forms of pressure dependent criteria. It is defined as the ratio of the
yield stress in compression,
yc
, to the yield stress in tension,
yt
, corresponding to the same
equivalent plastic strain,
p
. In the discussion that follows it is assumed that the stress - strain curves
in tension and compression, engineering stress and strain are converted to true stress - true strain
plots.

In cases where tensile and compressive data are available, can be determined as follows. The
yield point in both tensile and compressive stress - strain curves is determined and plots of
yc
vs.
yc

(compressive plastic strain) and
yt
vs.
yt
(tensile plastic strain), are constructed. Note that the
plastic strains are calculated by subtracting the elastic strains (equal to current stress divided by the
elastic modulus) from the total strains. The parameter is then calculated by dividing values of
yc

and
yt
that correspond to the same slope, that is
yc
/
yc
=
yt
/
yt
. This will ensure that the
p

corresponding to
yc
and
yt
are the same
2
. This procedure results in values of that are generally
functions of
p
. If the dependence of on
p
is not very strong, an average value, valid for the
range of plastic strains of interest, can be used.

Compression tests can lead to inhomogeneous stress - strain states due to frictional effects between
the sample and the loading platens. Evidence of such an occurrence is the barrelling of cylindrical
samples in compression, with the diameter half way through the length of the compressed sample
being larger than the diameter at the top and bottom surfaces. This effect may be reduced by the use
of suitable lubricants but it is usually extremely difficult to eliminate it completely. The use of longer
specimens will also reduce the frictional effects, however these might lead to buckling. For this
reason, instead of performing tensile and compressive tests, a more reliable method is to perform
tensile and shear tests.

With plots of
yt
vs.
yt
and
y
(shear yield stress) vs.
y
(shear plastic strain) now available, the
shear plastic strains are calculated by subtracting the elastic strain components (equal to current
stress divided by the shear modulus) from the total strains.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
18
Using equations (2) and (3), the relationships between
y
and
yt
corresponding to the same
p
are
(see Appendix 2):

( )

+1
2
yt
y

3

(28)

yt
y
3

(29)

Equations (28) and (29) are for the Drucker-Prager and Raghava criteria, respectively. The
procedure for calculating is described below. The proof of the method is given in Appendix 2.

i) From corresponding
yt
and
yt
values calculate the tensile slope, S
t
=
yt
/
yt
.
ii) Calculate the corresponding shear slope, S
s
, from S
s
=S
t
/2(1+
p
), where
p
is the plastic
Poissons ratio (see Section 4.3).
iii) Determine the values of
y
and
y
such that
y
/
y
=S
s
. This ensures that the shear and tensile data
correspond to the same
p
(see Appendix 2).
iv) Calculate by substituting the corresponding
yt
and
y
in equation (28) or (29).

This procedure should be repeated for various points on the
yt
vs.
yt
curves. It is important to
realise that depending on the type of adhesive tested, may remain constant or vary with strain. If
is constant and the tensile and shear stress - strain data show plateau stress values at large strains,
the determination of is greatly simplified. The shear and tensile plateau values are substituted in
equations (28) or (29) to calculate .


4.3 CALCULATION OF THE DILATION ANGLE


The last parameter that needs to be defined in the rate independent elastic - plastic models, is the
dilation angle, . This can be calculated using equation (12), if the Poissons ratio,
p
, in the plastic
region, i.e. the ratio of the lateral to tensile plastic strains, is known. In the following discussion, it is
assumed that the stresses and strains are converted to true stresses and true strains.

A procedure for the determination of
p
is given below.

A uniaxial tensile test is performed during which the tensile extension and lateral contraction are
measured. A plot of
t
vs. tensile strain is constructed, where
t
is the total Poissons ratio, i.e. the
ratio of the lateral to tensile total strains. The initial portion of such a plot, corresponds to the elastic
region and will be a horizontal line, i.e.
t
will be constant and equal to the elastic Poissons ratio,

e
. Thereafter, depending on whether the
p
is higher, equal or lower than the
e
, the total
Poissons ratio,
t
, will increase, remain constant or decrease, with strain.
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
19
For all these cases, the value of
t
corresponding to large strain values, will be equal to
p
, as the
deformation will essentially be plastic, i.e. the total Poissons ratio will tend to a value
corresponding to the plastic Poissons ratio, for large strains.

The above is summarised by the these relationships:

t
=
e
for
t0
where
t0
is the total strain at first yield

t
<
e
for >
t0
and
p
<
e

t
=
e
for >
t0
and
p
=
e

t
>
e
for >
t0
and
p
>
e

t

p
for large values of .

This procedure is not suitable for the case where
p
varies with strain. Most FEA packages do not
allow a definition of varying or
p
, however, the procedure for calculating the plastic
p
in such
cases, as a function of strain, is described in Appendix 3.

Finally, the total Poissons ratio calculated from engineering strains,
t
'
, is also required to convert
engineering stresses to true stresses. The plastic Poissons ratio,
p
, is required for the calculation
of (Section 4.2).


4.4 DETERMINATION OF STRAIN RATE DEPENDENCE OF YIELD


To determine the effect of the strain rate on the materials behaviour, additional tests, usually uniaxial
tensile tests, are required for a number of strain rates. For the case of uniaxial tension, the equivalent
plastic strain p and equivalent plastic strain rate
.
p are equal to the tensile plastic strain,
yt
, and
tensile plastic strain rate,
.
yt .

As already discussed in section 3, there are three popular methods for defining the strain rate
dependence of yield in FEA packages. These are:
i)direct entry of numerical data of
yt
vs.
yt
for various
.
yt ,
ii)entry of the corresponding data of scaling factor (
yt
/
yt0
) vs.
.
yt ,
iii)approximation of the data with one of the models described in section 3. For example, if the
power law of equation (23) is to be used, plots of log
.
yt vs. log (
yt
/
yt0
-1) should be
constructed. The material parameters F and m can then be calculated from the intercept and the
gradient of the line that best fits the experimental data.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
20
All of the above methods require the experimental data to be defined in terms of various constant
values of
.
yt . However, the tests are usually performed under constant strain rate,
.
. Appendix 4
describes a method for determining
.
yt for a constant strain rate (
.
) test.


5. CONSTITUTIVE MODELS FOR LARGE STRAIN MATERIALS


The plasticity models described in sections 2 and 3 are believed to be the most suitable for modelling
impact of glassy, structural adhesives that are operating at temperatures below their glass transition
temperature. For adhesives operating close to or above their transition temperature, the non-linear
appearance of the stress - strain curve might not be predominantly due to plastic flow but due to
dissipative losses caused by viscous effects or to non-linear elastic effects. In such cases, it might be
more precise to use a viscoelastic constitutive model.


5.1. LINEAR VISCOELASTICITY


Small strain, linear, viscoelastic models have been developed and are implemented in ABAQUS and
ANSYS. These can be used to model adhesives whose stress - strain curves are essentially linear
and depend on rate of deformation as well as temperature. However, linear viscoelasticity will
generally lead to non-linear stress - strain curves, due to relaxation effects occurring during the
loading phase of the test.

Using the terminology of ABAQUS, the time dependent material behaviour is approximated with the
Prony series for the shear relaxation modulus, G
R
(t):

( )
( )
G t
G
g e
R
0
i
P
-t/
i=1
N
i

1 1

(30)

where N (number of terms in Prony series), g
i
P
(relative modulus of term i) and
i
(relaxation time of
term i) are material parameters that need to be defined. The maximum allowable value of N in this
model is 13. G
0
is the instantaneous shear modulus and it is related to g
i
P
through:

G G + G g
0 0
i=1
N
i
P

(31)

where G is the limiting shear modulus at t. The instantaneous shear modulus G
0
has to
correspond to the Youngs modulus and the Poissons ratio entered in the elastic definition of the
material, i.e. E and should be obtained from a high rate test. An independent relaxation function
for the bulk modulus, similar in form to equation (30), is an option.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
21
Establishing G
R
(t) from equation (31), enables (t) as a function of strain history or the stress - strain
curves at specified strain rates to be calculated. For example for a shear test, in which a time varying
strain (t) is applied, the response (t) is given by:

( )
( )

G t - s
d s
ds
ds
R
0
t
(32)
Equation (32) is based on the Boltzmann superposition principle for evaluating the response for a
number of simple loading programmes.

The constants g
i
P
and
i
in equation (30), may be entered directly or calculated by ABAQUS from
experimental shear relaxation or creep curves. In the latter case, the experimental data has to be
entered as normalised shear modulus (G
R
(t)/G
0
) or compliance (J
R
(t)/J
0
) vs. time data, G
0
and J
0

being the instantaneous shear modulus and compliance respectively. This option is not available in
ANSYS, where material constants have to be entered directly.

In ABAQUS and ANSYS, the shift function describing the effects of temperature on the viscoelastic
material behaviour by the reduced or pseudo time concept can be defined. In most cases linear
relaxation effects alone are not enough to explain the amount of non-linearity present in the stress -
strain curve and non - linear viscoelastic models should ideally be used. However, these are
complex models where the Boltzmann superposition principle used in linear viscoelasticity is no
longer valid in its original, unmodified form. This means that the assumption that, each increment in
stress makes an independent contribution to the overall strain, is not correct. Because of their
complexity, non-linear viscoelastic models have not yet been implemented in the widely available
FEA packages. However, some rubbery adhesives could be modelled in ABAQUS which allows
the combination of the linear viscoelastic model with a non-linear elastic or a hyperelastic model


5.2. HYPERELASTICITY


Hyperelastic models exist in both ABAQUS and ANSYS packages. These are large strain, non-
linear, elastic models based on constitutive theories of rubbers. They can be used to model non-
linear materials that extend to large, recoverable strains and are almost incompressible, i.e. the
Poissons ratio is in the range of 0.45 to 0.5. When this model is used on its own, the assumption is
made that the material is strain rate independent.

Hyperelastic materials are described in terms of an elastic potential scalar function W (or strain
energy density function) whose derivative with respect to a strain component,
ij
, determines the
corresponding stress component,
ij
. This can be expressed by:

ij
ij
W
(33)

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
22
The strain energy density in ABAQUS is given by:
( ) W= C I I
1
D
J
ij
i+ j=1
N
_
1
i
_
2
j
i
el
i=1
N
2i

_
,

_
,
+ 3 3 1 (34)

where N is a material parameter that defines the number of terms in the strain energy function and C
ij

and D
i
are temperature dependent material parameters. The maximum value of N is 6.

I
_
1 and I
_
2 are the deviatoric strain invariants and they are equal to:

I
_
1 + + 1
2
2
2
3
2
(35)

I
_
2 + +

1
2
2
2
3
2
(36)

where
_
i are the deviatoric principal extension ratios (
i
J
-1/3
i
), J is the volume ratio (equal to

3
) and
i
are the principal extension ratios, i.e. the ratio of the deformed length to the original
length.

The relationship between the extension ratio,
i
and the engineering strain,
i
, is:

i
+ 1
i
(37)

The last term of equation (34) represents the hydrostatic (volumetric) work. J
el
is defined as:

( )
J
J
J
el
th
th



1 2 3
1 2 3
(38)

where ( )
1 2 3
th
is the volume change due to temperature changes.

For incompressible behaviour,
1 2 3
=1, D
i
are set to zero and equations (35) and (36) can be
written as:

I
_
1 + +
1
2
2
2
3
2
(39)

I
_
2 + +
1
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
2
2
3
2
(40)

Assuming incompressible behaviour and N=1, W becomes:

( ) ( )
W= C I C I
10
1
01
+ 3 3 2 (41)

Equation (41) is the classical Mooney-Rivlin law.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
23
For a uniaxial tension test,
1
= ,
2
=
3
=
1/2
, substitution into equation (41) and differentiating
with respect to yields the following relationship for the uniaxial engineering stress:



= 2 C C
10 01

_
,
+

_
,

1 1
2
(42)

For N=2, there are five terms in W, for N=3, nine terms etc.

ANSYS also supports hyperelastic materials with a model similar to the polynomial form of
ABAQUS, however the maximum value of N is limited to 3.

The material parameters for up to N=2 can be determined by ABAQUS and ANSYS from a linear
regression fit of experimental data. For good characterisation of the test material it is recommended
that three experiments are performed, these are uniaxial, equibiaxial and planar (pure shear) tests.

A uniaxial tension test is usually preferred over a uniaxial compression test as the latter usually suffers
from an inhomogeneous stress - strain state due to frictional effects between the sample and the
loading platens. The tension test is performed by pulling a dumbbell shaped sample. Note that if
both compression and tension test data are used, difficulties might arise in the least squares fit,
leading to inaccurate calculations of the models parameters.

Tension tests are also usually preferred in equibiaxial experiments over the compression tests due to
practical difficulties with the experimental set-up. In addition, it can be shown that for a fully
incompressible material, the compressive equibiaxial test is equivalent to the tensile uniaxial test. The
equibiaxial tension test is performed on square sheets with gripping tabs in the shape of a cruciform,
in a biaxial testing machine.

Planar (or pure shear) tests are performed on thin, short and wide rectangular samples. Wide
loading grips are used to grip the sample along its wide edges and they are moved apart either in
tension or compression. The planar tension and compression tests can be shown to be equivalent for
an incompressible material.

When it is necessary to allow some compressibility in the material model, the coefficients D
i
must
also be given. For a general case, these can be calculated by the FEA package if volumetric test
data as pressure vs. volume ratio are defined.



NPL Report CMMT(B)130
24
Where volumetric test data are not available but the Poissons ratio, , is known from uniaxial test
data, the following procedure is suggested:

i) Choose N=1. This should be a sufficiently accurate model for strains less than 100%.
ii) Enter the uniaxial, equibiaxial and planar test data in a preliminary run and allow the FEA
package to calculate the constants C
10
and C
01
, i.e. assume incompressibility.
iii) Calculate the initial Youngs modulus from:

( ) E C + C
0 10 01
6 (43)

This should agree with the slope at the origin of the uniaxial nominal stress - strain curve.

iv) From E
0
and calculate the initial bulk modulus, K
0
:

( )
K =
E
31- 2
0
0

(44)

v) Calculate D
1
from:
D
K
1
0

2
(45)

vi) Define the materials hyperelastic behaviour by entering directly C
10
, C
01
and D
1
and
continue with the analysis.

Non zero values of D
i
affect the uniaxial, equibiaxial and planar stress results. However, since the
material is assumed to be only slightly compressible ( = 0.45 to 0.5), the techniques described for
obtaining the C
ij
should give sufficiently accurate values even though they assume that the material is
fully incompressible.


5.3. COMBINATION OF HYPERELASTIC AND VISCOELASTIC MATERIAL
MODELS IN ABAQUS


In ABAQUS, it is possible to combine the hyperelastic and the linear viscoelastic models. This
results in non-linear, strain rate dependent model that may be applicable for some rubbery adhesives
(or adhesives tested above their glass - transition temperature). As mentioned earlier, no plasticity
exists in this model. The deformation is elastic and is recovered upon unloading with time.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
25
This is not a non-linear viscoelastic model, the viscoelasticity is still linear and its governing equations
are similar to the ones described in section 5.1, i.e. the time dependent part of the materials
response, is not affected by strain. The difference is that the relaxation coefficients of equation (34),
are applied to the constants that define the hyperelastic behaviour, i.e., G
R
(t)/G
0
is replaced by
( ) C t C
ij
R
ij
0
/ (polynomial form) or ( )
i
R
i
0
t / (Ogden form). When this combined model is used, it is
only the behaviour at long times that is dependent on strain, i.e. hyperelastic, a separation of strain
and time effects is made.

The proposed procedure for use of this model is described below. This procedure is only valid for
the case where the hyperelastic behaviour is the classical Mooney-Rivlin formulation with =0.5.
Similar procedures can be followed for more general cases.

i)Define C
10
and C
01
. This can be done directly or by providing the appropriate experimental data,
(section 5.2). The strain rate for these tests should be sufficiently high to ensure that no relaxation
effects are allowed to take place as the instantaneous response of the material will be calculated from
these parameters.

ii)From the above definitions the instantaneous response i.e. the initial shear modulus is calculated
from:

G C C
0 10 01
+ + 2
1 2
( ) (46)

iii)The time dependent behaviour is defined through g
i
P
and
i
. The shear moduli g
i
P
are normalised
with respect to the instantaneous modulus calculated from equation (46). The alternative is to
provide experimental data, e.g. shear normalised moduli vs. time (section 5.3). The value of the
normalised shear modulus at t, should also be defined. ABAQUS will then use a linear
regression procedure to calculate the viscoelastic parameters.

5.4. ELASTOMERIC FOAM BEHAVIOUR


Elastomeric foams are cellular materials that have the following mechanical characteristics:

1) They can deform elastically up to 90% compression and

2) Their porosity allows very large volumetric deformations i.e. the effective Poissons ratio is
less than 0.45-0.5.

Elastomeric foam materials are modelled in ABAQUS using the *HYPERFOAM option, Section
8.9.26 of the User's manual, which is a non-linear elastic model.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
26
The elastic behaviour of the foams is based on a modified Hill strain energy function.
where
and
i
are the principal stretches. The elastic and thermal volume ratios J
el
and J
th
are
where J is the total volume ratio (current volume divided by original volume), and the thermal strain

th
follows from the temperature and the isotropic thermal expansion coefficient defined in the
ABAQUS *EXPANSION material option

The coefficients
i
are related to the initial shear modulus
o
,
the initial bulk modulus K
0
follows from
and
i
is related to the effective Poissons ratio
i
,

52




In ABAQUS the test data are specified as nominal stress-nominal strain pairs using combinations of
uniaxial, equibiaxial, planar, simple shear and volumetric test data. Time or frequency dependent
elastic behaviour can be modelled by using the *VISCOELASTIC option in conjunction with the
*HYPERFOAM material option.


U =
2

$
+
$
+
$
- 3 +
1
(
J
- 1)
i =1
N
i
i
2
1 2 3
i
el
-
i i i
i i

1
]
1

47
i
th
-
i
1 2 3
el
$
=
J

$ $ $
=
J

_
48
el
th
th t h
3
J =
J
J
and J = (1 + ) 49
o
i+1
N
i
= 50
0
i =1
N
i i
K
= 2
1
3
+

_
,
51
i
i
i

1 2

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
27
6. CONCLUSIONS


This report has described a number of constitutive models that can be used to model adhesives. The
suitability of each of these models, depends on the type of adhesive, loading regime and operating
conditions.

Elastic - plastic, pressure dependent, models can be used for structural adhesives when the operating
temperatures are low in comparison to their glass transition temperature. If these are to be used in
situations where a varying strain rate will be present, viscoplastic i.e. strain rate dependent plasticity
models can be used.

In order to define the material parameters appearing in the above constitutive models, stress-strain
curves under two different states of stress are required. It is recommended that these should be
uniaxial tension and shear tests. The tensile tests need to be performed for a range of strain rates.
Procedures for determining the various material parameters from the experimental data have been
suggested.

For more rubbery adhesives the hyperelastic model or hyperfoam model if the effective Poissons
ratio is less than 0.45 may prove to be more suitable. If viscoelastic behaviour needs to be taken into
account the hyperfoam model can be combined with a linear viscoelastic model within the ABAQUS
FEA programme. All of these models have been described and some of the experiments that are
required to define the relevant material parameters have been outlined.


7. REFERENCES


1 C.K. Lim, M.A. Acitelli and W.C. Hamm, Failure criterion of a typical polyamide cured
epoxy adhesive, J. Adhesion, Vol. 6, pp. 281-288, 1974.
2) S. Gali, G. Dolev and O. Ishai, An effective stress/strain concept in the mechanical
characterisation of structural adhesive bonding, Int. J. Adhesion and Adhesives, Vol. 1,
pp. 135-140, 1981.
3) D.C. Drucker and W. Prager, Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design, Quarterly
of Applied Mathematics, Vol. 10, pp. 157-165, 1952.
4) S.S. Sternstein and L. Ongchin, American Chemical Society Polymer Preprints, Vol. 10, pp.
1117-., 1969.
5) R. Raghava, R. Caddell and G.S.Y. Yeh, The macroscopic yield behaviour of polymers, J.
Materials Science, Volume 8, pp. 225-232, 1973.
6) ABAQUS Users and Theory Manuals, Version 5.5, Hibbit, Karlsson & Sorensen Inc.,
USA, 1995.
7) LUSAS Users and Theory Manuals, Version 11, FEA Ltd., UK.
8) ANSYS Theory Manual, Version 5.2, Swanson Analysis Systems Inc., USA.
9) LS-DYNA 3D Users and Theory Manuals, Version 936, Ove Arup & Partners, UK.
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
28
APPENDIX 1: THE CREEP POWER LAW


An experimental procedure is described which allows the determination of the material constants that
appear in the creep power law. The terminology of ABAQUS
6
will be used:

.
cr
n k
Aq t (1.1)

where
.
cr
is the equivalent creep strain rate, q is the von Mises equivalent stress, t is time and A, n
and k are material constants to be determined.

Integrating equation (1) leads to:

cr
n k+1
A
k +1
q t (1.2)

where
cr
is the equivalent creep strain. Equation (1.2) can be converted to a logarithmic form:

( )
( ) ( ) log log
A
k +1
nlogq k +1 logt logB nlogq k +1 logt
cr

_
,
+ + + + (1.3)

where B=A/(k+1). Equation (1.3) can be used in conjunction with uniaxial creep experimental data
to determine A, n and k. The proposed procedure is as follows:

i) Perform a uniaxial creep test where the applied load is constant and record the creep strain as a
function of time, i.e. keep q constant and vary t. For a uniaxial tensile test,
cr
is equal to the creep
strain and q is equal to the applied stress. From this test, a plot of log
cr
vs. logt should be
constructed. The gradient of the line that best fits the experimental data, will be equal to (k+1),
hence k can be evaluated. The intercept of the line will be equal to (logB+nlogq).

ii) Perform several creep tests at various constant loads and measure the resulting creep strain after a
constant time period, i.e. keep t constant and vary q. From this, a plot of log
cr
vs. logq should be
constructed, whose gradient will be equal to n. Its intercept will be equal to {logB+(k+1)logt)}.
Since k is determined, B and hence A can be assessed. A cross check on accuracy should be
performed by calculating B via the intercept obtained in step i), as well.

Note that in all of the above, it was assumed that a constant applied load leads to a constant stress,
q, therefore, the above procedure is valid only if the reduction in the specimens cross section during
creep, is negligible.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
29
APPENDIX 2 EVALUATION OF THE PARAMETER FROM TENSILE AND SHEAR
TESTS

For pure shear loading conditions where a shear stress
y
is applied, the stress invariants are equal
to:

I
1
= 0, J
2
=
y
2
(2.1)

Substituting equation (1.1) in equations (2) and (3), expressions relating the tensile yield stress to the
shear yield stress corresponding to the same equivalent plastic strain, are obtained:

( )

+1
2
yt
y

3

(2.2)

yt
y
3

(2.3)

Equations (2.2) and (2.3) are for the Drucker-Prager and Raghava criteria respectively. In order to
proceed further, the equivalent plastic strain relationships are required, i.e. the yield criteria need to
be re-written in terms of strain invariants. Equations (2.4) and (2.5) correspond to the Drucker-
Prager and Raghava criteria respectively:

( )
( )
( )
( )

p
p
2
'
p
1
'
=
3
J I
+1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1 2 +
+

(2.4)

( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )

p
p
1
'
2
p
1
'
p
2
'
= I
1- 2
I J
1
2
1

1+
1
1 2
1
2
12
2
2
2

+ + (2.5)

The expressions (2.4) and (2.5) are such that, for uniaxial tensile loading,
p
is equal to the tensile
plastic strain,
yt
. For pure shear loading conditions, the strain invariants I
1
'
and J
2
'
are equal to:

I
1
'
= 0, J
2
'
=

4
y
2
(2.6)

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
30
Substitution of (2.6) into equations (2.4) and (2.5), yields the equivalent plastic strains in a shear test
for Drucker-Prager and Raghava, equations (2.6) and (2.7) respectively:

( )
( )

p
y
p
yt
=
3 +1
4 1+


(2.7)

( )

p
y
p
yt
=
3
2 1+
(2.8)

Equations (2.7) and (2.8) relate the tensile plastic strain to the shear plastic strain corresponding to
the same equivalent stress.

Using equations (2.2) and (2.7) the following relationship is derived:

( )
[ ]

yt
yt
y
y
p
+ 2 1 (2.9)

or

( )
[ ]
S S
t s p
+ 2 1 (2.10)

Equation (2.10) was used in Section 4.2 in order to determine the parameter .
NPL Report CMMT(B)130
31
APPENDIX 3 EVALUATION OF
P
WHEN THE LATTER VARIES WITH STRAIN


Section 4 described a method that can be used to determine
p
when the latter is constant. In cases
where
p
varies with strain or when it is desirable to examine the validity of the assumption that
p
is
constant, the following procedure can be used. Uniaxial tensile experimental data are required which
should be converted to true stress - true strain for large strains.

i) For any value of axial strain,
1
, calculate the elastic,
1e
, and plastic,
1p
, components, using:

1e

(3.1)


1p 1e

1
(3.2)

where E is the elastic modulus and is the stress corresponding to the stain
1
.

ii) Calculate the elastic,
2e
, and plastic,
2p
components of the lateral strain,
2
, which corresponds
to
1
, from:


2e e e

1
(3.3)


2p 2e
-
2
(3.4)

where
e
is the elastic Poissons ratio.

iii) Calculate the plastic Poissons ratio,
p
, from:

p
2p
1p
(3.5)

The above procedure should be repeated for a range of
1
values in order to determine the variation
of
p
with
1
. In many cases an average value might have to be defined as most widely available
FEA packages do not allow for a varying
p
.

NPL Report CMMT(B)130
32
APPENDIX 4 EVALUATION OF PLASTIC STRAIN RATE FOR A CONSTANT
STRAIN RATE TEST


The tensile yield stress,
yt
, is a function of the plastic strain,
yt
:

( )

yt yt
f (4.1)

where f is determined experimentally from a tensile test at constant strain rate,
.
.

From the usual assumption regarding the additive decomposition of the total strain, the following is
obtained:


. . .
+ e yt (4.2)

where
.
e and
.
yt are the elastic and plastic strain rates respectively.

The elastic strain rate can be written as:

.
.
e
yt
E
(4.3)

where E is the elastic modulus. Combining equations (4.1), (4.2) and (4.3):

( )

. . .
+
1 1

f
.
+
.
E
df
d
yt
yt
yt
yt yt (4.4)

or, solving for
.
yt :

.
.
yt
h
E
E

+ 1
(4.5)

where E
h
is df/d
yt
, i.e. the slope of the tensile yield stress against tensile plastic strain curve.



NPL Report CMMT(B)130
33
For a linear elastic - perfectly plastic material, E
h
is zero and from equation (4.5),
.
yt is constant and
equal to
.
. For linear hardening (bi-linear stress - strain curve), E
h
is constant and
.
yt is again
constant but smaller than
.
. For the general case where the function f in equation (4.1) is neither a
constant nor linear,
.
yt will vary throughout the test. Since the ratio E
h
/E will generally decrease with
increasing strain,
.
yt will increase during the test and will approach a value equal to
.
at large
strains.

The above observations need to be considered when defining the strain rate dependence of yield.
The representation of the hardening curve will have consequences on the validity of constant
.
yt tests
that most FEA packages assume.