ProductsAbaqus/StandardAbaqus/Explicit
Linear orthotropic elastic materials
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Engineering constants
|
Stiffness coefficients
|
|
1000.
|
|
1000.
|
|
1000.
|
|
0.
|
|
1000.
|
|
1010.1
|
|
0.
|
|
0.
|
|
0.
|
|
101.01
|
|
0.1
|
|
1010.1
|
|
100.
|
|
100.
|
|
100.
|
|
100.
|
|
100.
|
|
100.
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Linear anisotropic elastic material
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Stiffness coefficients
|
|
2.24e11
|
|
4.79e5
|
|
1.23e11
|
|
4.21e5
|
|
4.74e5
|
|
1.21e11
|
|
1.e6
|
|
2.e6
|
|
3.e6
|
|
7.69e10
|
|
4.e6
|
|
5.e6
|
|
6.e6
|
|
7.e6
|
|
7.69e10
|
|
8.e6
|
|
9.e6
|
|
10.e6
|
|
11.e6
|
|
12.e6
|
|
9.e9
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Logarithmic porous elasticity
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Logarithmic bulk modulus,
= 1.0
|
Poisson's ratio,
= 0.3
|
(The units are not important.)
Initial conditions
Initial void ratio,
= 1.08
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Power law–based porous elasticity
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
= 5000.0
|
= 3.0
|
= 1.0
|
= 0.5
|
= 0.3
|
= 0.3
|
= 1.0
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hypoelasticity
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
The following dependence of E on the second strain
invariant
is used:
E
|
|
|
637.5
|
0.499
|
4.5420e−3
|
700.3
|
0.499
|
1.6621e−2
|
765.7
|
0.499
|
3.4418e−2
|
840.7
|
0.499
|
5.6607e−2
|
917.4
|
0.499
|
8.2201e−2
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with polynomial strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Polynomial coefficients (N=1):
= 80.,
= 20.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data (N=2): Treloar's
experimental data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with reduced polynomial strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Polynomial coefficients (N=1):
= 100.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data (N=6): Treloar's
experimental data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with neo-Hookean strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Neo-Hookean coefficient:
= 100.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data: Treloar's experimental
data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with Mooney-Rivlin strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Mooney-Rivlin coefficients:
= 80.,
= 20.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data: Treloar's experimental
data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with Yeoh strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Yeoh coefficients:
= 100.,
= −1.,
= 0.01.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data: Treloar's experimental
data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with Ogden strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Ogden coefficients (N=2):
= 160.,
= 2.,
= 40.,
= −2.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data (N=2): Treloar's
experimental data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with Arruda-Boyce strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Arruda-Boyce coefficients:
= 200.,
= 5.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data: Treloar's experimental
data.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with Van der Waals strain energy function
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Van der Waals coefficients:
= 200.,
= 10., a = 0.1,
= 0.
|
Compressible case:
= 0.001.
|
Test data: Treloar's experimental
data.
|
Test data (parameter
held constant): Treloar's experimental data,
= 0.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Hyperelasticity with Marlow strain energy function
Elements tested
- C3D8H
- C3D8R
- CPE4RH
- CPE4R
- CPS4R
- S4R
- SC8R
- M3D4R
- T2D2
- T3D2
- B21
- B22
- B31
- B32
- B31OS
- B32OS
Problem description
The tests in this section verify that the results generated using the Marlow
hyperelastic model with different elements agree with the test data specified
in the model.
Results and discussion
The results agree well with the test data specified for the Marlow model.
Hyperfoam
Elements tested
Problem description
Material:
Hyperfoam coefficients (N=3, from fit
of test data):
|
= −48.3291,
= 3.58961,
= 26.3505,
= 3.84360,
= 22.1809,
= 3.34171.
|
Test data (N=3): Uniaxial compression,
simple shear test data.
|
An effective Poisson's ratio of
= 0 is used, except for
= 0.10 for the biaxial test cases and varying
in the temperature-dependent case.
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Low-density foam
Elements tested
Problem description
The tests in this section verify that the results generated using the
low-density foam model with different elements agree with the test data
specified in the model.
Results and discussion
The results agree well with the rate-dependent test data specified for the
low-density foam model.
Anisotropic hyperelasticity with generalized Fung strain energy
function
Elements tested
- C3D8
- C3D8R
- CPE4R
- CPS4R
- S4R
- M3D4R
Problem description
Material:
Fung
coefficients
|
|
26.95e3
|
|
0.9925
|
|
0.0749
|
|
0.4180
|
|
0.0295
|
|
0.0193
|
|
0.0089
|
|
5.0
|
|
5.0
|
|
5.0
|
Compressible case
|
=1.5e-7
or =1.0e-8
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Anisotropic hyperelasticity with Holzapfel strain energy
function
Elements tested
- C3D8R
- CPE4R
- CPS4R
- S4R
- M3D4R
- C3D10
- C3D10HS
Problem description
Material:
Holzapfel coefficients:
|
= 7.64.,
= 996.6,
= 524.6,
= 0.226.
|
Fiber directions (N=2):
|
|
|
|
|
with
=49.98°.
|
Compressible case:
= 1.e-6.
|
(The units are not important.)
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
No compression
Elements tested
Problem description
This option is used to modify the elasticity definition so that no
compressive stress is allowed.
Material:
Young's modulus, E = 3.0e6
|
Poisson's ratio,
= 0.3
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
No tension
Elements tested
Problem description
This option is used to modify the elasticity definition so that no tensile
stress is allowed.
Material:
Young's modulus, E = 3.0e6
|
Poisson's ratio,
= 0.3
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical or approximate solutions.
Compression factor with traction elastic behavior
Elements tested
Problem description
This option is used to modify the elasticity definition for uncoupled
traction-separation elastic behavior such that the stiffness in compression is
a user-specified factor times the stiffness in tension. Two cohesive elements
are tested in each model. One element is subjected to a tensile strain
(separation), while the other element is subjected to a compressive strain
(separation).
Material:
Stiffness in normal direction,
= 2.0e5
|
Compression factor = 2.0
|
Results and discussion
The results agree well with exact analytical solutions.
|