Anzeige
Erschienen in:
11.12.2018
A Comparison Between Active Strain and Active Stress in Transversely Isotropic Hyperelastic Materials
Erschienen in: Journal of Elasticity | Ausgabe 1/2019
EinloggenAktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.
Wählen Sie Textabschnitte aus um mit Künstlicher Intelligenz passenden Patente zu finden. powered by
Markieren Sie Textabschnitte, um KI-gestützt weitere passende Inhalte zu finden. powered by
Abstract
Active materials are media for which deformations can occur in absence of loads, given an external stimulus. Two approaches to the modeling of such materials are mainly used in literature, both based on the introduction of a new tensor: an additive stress \(\mathsf{P}_{\text{act}}\) in the active stress case and a multiplicative strain \(\mathsf{F}_{a}\) in the active strain one. Aim of this paper is the comparison between the two approaches on simple shears.
Considering an incompressible and transversely isotropic material, we design constitutive relations for \(\mathsf{P}_{\text{act}}\) and \(\mathsf{F}_{a}\) so that they produce the same results for a uniaxial deformation along the symmetry axis. We then study the two approaches in the case of a simple shear deformation. In a hyperelastic setting, we show that the two approaches produce different stress components along a simple shear, unless some necessary conditions on the strain energy density are fulfilled. However, such conditions are very restrictive and rule out the usual elastic strain energy functionals. Active stress and active strain therefore produce different results in shear, even if they both fit uniaxial data.
Our results show that experimental data on the stress-stretch response on uniaxial deformations are not enough to establish which activation approach can capture better the mechanics of active materials. We conclude that other types of deformations, beyond the uniaxial one, should be taken into consideration in the modeling of such materials.