4.7 Article

Thermally actuated shape-memory polymers: Experiments, theory, and numerical simulations

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF SOLIDS
卷 58, 期 8, 页码 1100-1124

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmps.2010.04.004

关键词

Polymeric materials; Shape-memory phenomenon; Constitutive behavior; Mechanical testing; Finite elements

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DMI-0517966]
  2. Singapore-MIT Alliance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the aim of developing a thermo-mechanically coupled large-deformation constitutive theory and a numerical-simulation capability for modeling the response of thermally actuated shape-memory polymers, we have (i) conducted large strain compression experiments on a representative shape-memory polymer to strains of approximately unity at strain rates of 10(-3) and 10(-1) s(-1), and at temperatures ranging from room temperature to approximately 30 C above the glass transition temperature of the polymer; (ii) formulated a thermo-mechanically coupled large-deformation constitutive theory; (iii) calibrated the material parameters appearing in the theory using the stress-strain data from the compression experiments; (iv) numerically implemented the theory by writing a user-material subroutine for a widely used finite element program; and (v) conducted representative experiments to validate the predictive capability of our theory and its numerical implementation in complex three-dimensional geometries. By comparing the numerically predicted response in these validation simulations against measurements from corresponding experiments, we show that our theory is capable of reasonably accurately reproducing the experimental results. As a demonstration of the robustness of the three-dimensional numerical capability, we also show results from a simulation of the shape-recovery response of a stent made from the polymer when it is inserted in an artery modeled as a compliant elastomeric tube. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据