Research Papers

Mesomechanical Modeling of Polymer/Clay Nanocomposites Using a Viscoelastic-Viscoplastic-Viscodamage Constitutive Model

[+] Author and Article Information
Ardeshir H. Tehrani

Zachry Department of Civil Engineering,  Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843

Rashid K. Abu Al-Rub1

Zachry Department of Civil Engineering,  Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843rabualrub@civil.tamu.edu


Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 133(4), 041011 (Oct 20, 2011) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004696 History: Received March 17, 2011; Revised July 09, 2011; Published October 20, 2011; Online October 20, 2011

In this study, damage evolution in a nanocomposite containing the polymethyl methacrylate polymer (PMMA) embedded with silicate nanoclay particles is simulated by using a nonlinear viscoelastic, viscoplastic, and viscodamage constitutive model. Mesomechanical two-dimensional representative volume elements (RVEs) of fully intercalated and fully exfoliated nanoclay polymer composites have been arbitrarily generated assuming a uniform dispersion of nanoclay particles with random length, aspect ratio, and orientation. Proper size of the RVE has been determined by studying the effect of the RVE size on the stress-strain response and toughness. Several simulations including different intercalated and exfoliated nanoclay weight fractions under different strain rates at room temperature have been conducted. It is concluded that the strength of exfoliated nanoclay composite is higher than intercalated one due to more distributed damage within many narrow localized zones for the case of exfoliated nanoclay polymer composite.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

RVEs with 3 wt. % of nanoclay particles: (a) fully intercalated and (b) fully exfoliated

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

RVE size convergence study: (a) toughness; (b) maximum stress

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Stress-strain behavior of nanoclay PMMA composite at three different strain rates and for three different weight fractions: (a), (c), and (e) are for fully intercalated composite; (b), (d), and (f) are for fully exfoliated composite

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Comparison of toughness between pure PMMA and nanoclay composites at three strain rates with three different weight fractions: (a) Intercalated; and (b) exfoliated

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

The distribution of damage evolution in intercalated nanoclay composite at 1.0/s strain rate, weight fraction is 3%, and (a) 5%, (b) 10%, (c) 15%, and (d) 20% strains

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Damage distribution in nanoclay composites at 1.0/s strain rate for 1 wt. %: (a) intercalated, (b) exfoliated; 3 wt. %: (c) intercalated, (d) exfoliated, and 8 wt. %: (e) intercalated, (f) exfoliated




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In