polymers

Article
A Hyper-Elastic Creep Approach and Characterization
Analysis for Rubber Vibration Systems
Dingxin Leng 1 , Kai Xu 1 , Liping Qin 2 , Yong Ma 2 and Guijie Liu 1, *
1 Department of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266024, China;
lengdingxin@126.com (D.L.); user_ xukai@126.com (K.X.)
2 Seventh thirteen Institute of China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation, Zhengzhou 450009, China;
qxjt008@163.com (L.Q.); myourever@sohu.com (Y.M.)
* Correspondence: liuguijie@ouc.edu.cn; Tel./Fax: +86-0532-66781131




Received: 22 March 2019; Accepted: 15 May 2019; Published: 4 June 2019


Abstract: Rubber materials are extensively utilized for vibration mitigation. Creep is one of the most
important physical properties in rubber engineering applications, which may induce failure issues.
The purpose of this paper is to provide an engineering approach to evaluate creep performance of
rubber systems. Using a combination of hyper-elastic strain energy potential and time-dependent
creep damage function, new creep constitutive models were developed. Three different time-decay
creep functions were provided and compared. The developed constitutive model was incorporated
with finite element analysis by user subroutine and its engineering potential for predicting the
creep response of rubber vibration devices was validated. Quasi-static and creep experiments
were conducted to verify numerical solutions. The time-dependent, temperature-related, and
loading-induced creep behaviors (e.g., stress distribution, creep rate, and creep degree) were explored.
Additionally, the time–temperature superposition principle was shown. The present work may
enlighten the understanding of the creep mechanism of rubbers and provide a theoretical basis for
engineering applications.

Keywords: finite element analysis; creep behavior; rubber; vibration system; hyper-elasticity;
creep damage

1. Introduction
Vibration mitigation is an essential design requirement in several industries, such as aerospace,
rocket-engine, and automotive [1]. Passive damping technology often utilizes viscoelastic materials
to decrease the vibratory level transmitted and the vibration field generated. Traditional viscoelastic
materials are rubbers, which are widely utilized for years of service [2]. In practice, when a constant
load is applied to a rubber material, its deformation is not a constant; it gradually increases with
time, which is known as creep. The creep presents a time-dependent characteristic, which induces
the dimensional instability of rubber products over their expected lifetime and may finally lead to
early failure and deteriorate the vibration mitigation performance. Hence, it is important to accurately
predict the creep behaviors of rubbers so that the fracture failure due to the creep effect can be prevented.
Creep is typically classified in three stages, as shown in Figure 1 [3]. The first one is primary
creep or transient creep, which is related to the physical rearrangement of polymer chains (e.g., bond
stretching/bending and crosslinking between chains of rubber materials) [4]. In the primary creep stage,
the strain rate is initially high and reduces with time. When the strain rate diminishes to a minimum
value, the secondary stage begins and an obvious time-dependent behavior is presented, that is, the
stain increases remarkably after an important length of elapsing time. The third stage is termed as

Polymers 2019, 11, 988; doi:10.3390/polym11060988 www.mdpi.com/journal/polymers

Polymers 2019, 11, 988 2 of 19
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 20

that is, the stain increases remarkably after an important length of elapsing time. The third stage is
the creep failure stage, in which the creep resistance is weakened and fracture inside the rubber is
termed as the creep failure stage, in which the creep resistance is weakened and fracture inside the
presented.
rubber In engineering
is presented. In applications, creep analysis
engineering applications, practically
creep considersconsiders
analysis practically the first two creep
the first stages.
two
creep stages.

Figure Strain
1. 1.
Figure Strainasasaafunction of time
function of timefor
forthe
thethree
three creep
creep stages
stages [3]. [3].

The Thereliability of of
reliability creep
creep predictions
predictions isis dependent
dependent on onthetheapplication
application of computational
of computational models.models.
Hyper-elastic
Hyper-elasticmodels
models arearecommonly
commonlyutilized
utilized to describethe
to describe thenonlinear
nonlinear properties
properties of rubber
of rubber materials
materials
and rubber-based
and rubber-based devices.
devices. InInmathematical
mathematical expression,
expression, the thehyper-elasticity
hyper-elasticity of rubber
of rubber is issued
is issued from from
the strain
the strain energy
energy density,
density, whichisisa afunction
which function of principal
principalinvariants
invariants related
relatedto the Cauchy–Green
to the Cauchy–Green
deformation tensors and the Jacobian matrix of the deformation gradient [5].applied
deformation tensors and the Jacobian matrix of the deformation gradient [5]. Widely Widely hyper-
applied
hyper-elastic models include the Mooney–Rivlin model [6,7], the Biderman model [8], the[9],
elastic models include the Mooney–Rivlin model [6,7], the Biderman model [8], the Ogden model Ogden
the Yeoh model [10], the Neo–Hookean model [5], and polynomial series [11]. The parameters in
model [9], the Yeoh model [10], the Neo–Hookean model [5], and polynomial series [11]. The parameters
these phenomenological models are identified according to the experimental data. Additionally,
in these phenomenological models are identified according to the experimental data. Additionally,
some hyper-elastic models are based on microscopic responses of polymer chains in the network of
somerubber
hyper-elastic models are based on microscopic responses of polymer chains in the network
materials, e.g., six or eight constrained-chain models [12,13]. Hyper-elastic models focus on
of rubber materials,
portraying e.g.,force–deflection
nonlinear six or eight constrained-chain
responses of rubbers; models
however,[12,13]. Hyper-elastic
they cannot describe models
the time-focus
on portraying nonlinear force–deflection responses of rubbers; however,
dependent creep responses due to the models without referring to the elapsed loading time [14]. they cannot describe the
time-dependent creep responses
Creep behavior due to
is attributed tothe
themodels without
time-related referring to of
viscoelasticity therubber
elapsed loading time
materials. The [14].
description
Creep behavior of viscoelastic
is attributedbehavior
to thecan be achievedviscoelasticity
time-related by taking into account
of rubber thematerials.
appropriate Theamounts
description
of elastic and
of viscoelastic dampingcan
behavior elements into viscoelastic
be achieved by taking models. Typical computational
into account the appropriate models, such asof
amounts theelastic
Maxwell element and the Kelvin–Voight model, are suitable for
and damping elements into viscoelastic models. Typical computational models, such as the Maxwell depicting linearly viscoelastic
properties; however, long-term nonlinear creep responses are not accurately predicted.
element and the Kelvin–Voight model, are suitable for depicting linearly viscoelastic properties;
Subsequently, some complex viscoelastic models were proposed. Skrzypek [15] proposed a creep
however, long-term nonlinear creep responses are not accurately predicted. Subsequently, some
model by modifying Boltzmann’s superposition principle to describe nonlinear creep laws, in which
complex viscoelastic
time-dependent models
creep strainwere proposed.
was studied. Skrzypek
Lee [16] established[15]aproposed a creep model
modified viscoelastic modelby modifying
in prony
Boltzmann’s
series to study creep characteristics of compressed rubber products and a finite element analysis was creep
superposition principle to describe nonlinear creep laws, in which time-dependent
strainpresented.
was studied. MajdaLee [3][16] established
developed a modified
a modified Burgerviscoelastic
model with model
tunablein prony
damping series
andtostiffness
study creep
characteristics
coefficientsoffor compressed
calculatingrubbercreep products
deformation, and which
a finitewaselement analysis
validated by was presented.
experimental Majda [3]
results.
Although
developed these complex
a modified Burger viscoelastic
model withmodels can forecast
tunable damping creepandnonlinearity,
stiffness their complexity
coefficients for results
calculating
creepindeformation,
time-consuming which calculations
was validatedand substantial
by experimentalcreep experimental
results. Althoughresultsthese
mustcomplex
be inputted to
viscoelastic
determine large numbers of model parameters, which limits the practical
models can forecast creep nonlinearity, their complexity results in time-consuming calculations application.
It is noteworthy that a mechanical model for creep analysis with high efficiency and reasonable
and substantial creep experimental results must be inputted to determine large numbers of model
accuracy is particularly attractive. Recently, Luo proposed an easily implemented creep damage
parameters, which limits the practical application.
model for predicting long-term creep characteristics of polyisoprene rubbers [17]. However, his work
It is noteworthy
focused on the creep thatanalysis
a mechanical
under amodel for creep
fixed loading analysis
level with high and
and temperature efficiency and reasonable
the validation for
accuracy is particularly
various conditions was attractive. Recently,
not considered. In Luo proposed
practice, rubberan easily implemented
materials are commonlycreep used damage
in variousmodel
for predicting
conditionslong-term
(loading level,creep characteristics
temperature, of polyisoprene
humidity, oxygen aging) rubbers [17].studies
and some However, his work
revealed focused
that the
on the creep level
loading analysis
and under
ambient a fixed loading level
temperatures and temperature
are major factors whichand the validation
largely affect the for various
creep
characteristics
conditions was not[3]. It is also emphasized
considered. In practice,that creepmaterials
rubber performances of rubbers under
are commonly used in different
various loading
conditions
conditions and temperatures are significant for engineering designers
(loading level, temperature, humidity, oxygen aging) and some studies revealed that the loading [18]. Some related work has level
and ambient temperatures are major factors which largely affect the creep characteristics [3]. It is also
emphasized that creep performances of rubbers under different loading conditions and temperatures
are significant for engineering designers [18]. Some related work has been conducted, e.g., Rivin [18]
carried out creep tests of compressed rubber components under different levels of static loading and
Polymers
Polymers 2018,
2019, 10,
11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
988 33 of
of 20
19

been conducted, e.g., Rivin [18] carried out creep tests of compressed rubber components under
the correspondence
different characteristics
levels of static loading and werethediscussed. Oman [19]
correspondence observed the
characteristics influence
were of testOman
discussed. programs[19]
and loading conditions on the creep responses of rubbers and different
observed the influence of test programs and loading conditions on the creep responses of rubbers creep performances were
compared.
and different Wang
creep[20] performed awere
performances laboratory
compared.evaluation
Wang [20]on the creep viscosity
performed and stiffness
a laboratory evaluationof tire
on
rubber under
the creep viscositylow and high temperatures and the temperature-related creep stability
stiffness of tire rubber under low and high temperatures and the temperature- was analyzed.
These studies
related are mainly
creep stability wasexperimental
analyzed. These works, in which
studies creep deformation
are mainly experimental is qualitatively
works, in which discussed
creep
from the test results.
deformation Nevertheless,
is qualitatively due tofrom
discussed observation
the testdifficulties, the stress variation,
results. Nevertheless, due to creep rate, and
observation
creep degreethe
difficulties, are stress
not fully addressed,
variation, but rate,
creep such information is beneficial
and creep degree to explore
are not creep mechanism
fully addressed, but such for
the engineering
information design oftorubber
is beneficial explore systems.
creep mechanism for the engineering design of rubber systems.
mentioned above,
As mentioned above, although
although creep creep behaviors
behaviors of rubbers have been theoretically
theoretically studied
studied for
decades, it has been solved by the viscoelastic mechanical models. However, However, the viscoelastic model
notan
is not anoptimal
optimal solution
solution forfor engineering
engineering applications.
applications. Different
Different from
from the the previous
previous work, thework, the
present
study investigates creep performance with a modified hyper-elastic mechanical model with a time-a
present study investigates creep performance with a modified hyper-elastic mechanical model with
time-dependent
dependent creep creep
damage damage
function.function. The integration
The integration of the of the proposed
proposed modelmodelin the in the commercial
commercial finite
finite element
element softwaresoftware
AbaqusAbaqus is provided
is provided by utilizing
by utilizing user
user subroutines.
subroutines. ItsItsvalidation
validationisispresented
presented by by
experimental work. By utilizing the proposed model for predicting creep behaviors
work. By utilizing the proposed model for predicting creep behaviors of rubber of rubber vibration
systems, the
vibration engineering
systems, potential of potential
the engineering the proposed model
of the is validated.
proposed modelThe detailed arrangement
is validated. The detailed of
the present work
arrangement of theis as follows.
present work Theisexperimental
as follows. The testing of rubbertesting
experimental materials is shown
of rubber in Section
materials 2. The
is shown
constitutive
in Section 2.equation and its numerical
The constitutive equationimplementation
and its numerical in the finite element software
implementation are provided
in the finite element
in Sectionare
software 3. provided
The identified parameters
in Section of the proposed
3. The identified model
parameters of are
the determined
proposed model by theareexperimental
determined
data.
by theSection 4 validates
experimental data.theSection
developed approach
4 validates theand discussesapproach
developed the creepand performances
discusses theof rubber
creep
materials underofmulti-level
performances loadings and
rubber materials undertemperatures.
multi-levelFor further evaluating
loadings engineering
and temperatures. Forpotential,
further
the proposedengineering
evaluating approach is utilized
potential, for predicting
the proposed creep approach
performances is of rubber vibration
utilized systems.creep
for predicting The
main conclusions are drawn in Section 5.
performances of rubber vibration systems. The main conclusions are drawn in Section 5.

2. Experimental
2. Experimental Testing
Testing

2.1. Quasi-Static Compression Tests

2.1. Quasi-Static Compression Tests
A quasi-static compression test was performed before the creep experiment to analyze nonlinear
A quasi-static compression test was performed before the creep experiment to analyze nonlinear
hyper-elasticity of the rubber materials. Acrylonitrile-butadiene rubbers (Yi-Ke Rubber Manufacturing
hyper-elasticity of the rubber materials. Acrylonitrile-butadiene rubbers (Yi-Ke Rubber
Corporation, Qingdao, China) were utilized for preparing the rubber samples. The measurements of
Manufacturing Corporation, Qingdao, China) were utilized for preparing the rubber samples. The
the studied cylinder-shaped samples were 29.0 mm in diameter and 12.5 mm in thickness, as shown in
measurements of the studied cylinder-shaped samples were 29.0 mm in diameter and 12.5 mm in
Figure 2. The loading was applied along the axial direction of the sample. All the tests were performed
thickness, as shown in Figure 2. The loading was applied along the axial direction of the sample. All
using a servo-hydraulic testing system (type: WDW-50) in which the load cells with ±1% accuracy and
the tests were performed using a servo-hydraulic testing system (type: WDW-50) in which the load
the displacement sensor with ±0.01 mm accuracy were equipped. The frequency range of this machine
cells with ±1% accuracy and the displacement sensor with ±0.01 mm accuracy were equipped. The
was 0–20 Hz. The rubber sample was constrained between two plates in the experimental system. The
frequency range of this machine was 0–20 Hz. The rubber sample was constrained between two plates
experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.
in the experimental system. The experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.

10mm

Figure
Figure 2.
2. Rubber
Rubber samples
samples for
for quasi-static
quasi-static compression
compression loading.
loading.
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 4 of 19

Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 20

Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 20

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)
Figure 3.
Figure 3. Experimental
Experimentalsetup:
setup:(a)
(a)Quasi-static
Quasi-staticcompression
compressionofofrubber
rubber sample,
sample, (b)(b) creep
creep compression
compression of
Figure 3. Experimental setup: (a) Quasi-static compression of rubber sample, (b) creep compression
of rubber
rubber sample,
sample, andand
(c) (c) creep
creep compression
compression of rubber
of rubber device.
device.
of rubber sample, and (c) creep compression of rubber device.

In
In the
theload-deflection
load-deflectioncompression
compression tests,tests,
the specimens were compressed
the specimens at 25 mm/min
were compressed at 25according
mm/min
In the load-deflection compression tests, the specimens were compressed at 25 mm/min
to the standard test method [21]. The compression was applied without interruption
according to the standard test method [21]. The compression was applied without interruption up to 39% relative
up to
according to the standard test method [21]. The compression was applied without interruption up to
deflection
39% relative for axial compression.
deflection for axialFour loading–unloading
compression. cycles were performed
Four loading–unloading cycles in tested
were specimens.
performed in
39% relative deflection for axial compression. Four loading–unloading ◦ C and 55 ± 1 ◦cycles were performed in
The temperatures for the two tests were maintained at 23 ± 1 C, respectively
tested specimens. The temperatures for the two tests were maintained at 23 ± 1 °C and 55 ± 1 °C, and dry air
tested specimens. The temperatures for the two tests were maintained at 23 ± 1 °C and 55 ± 1 °C,
with relative and
respectively humidity was
dry air lessrelative
with than 30%. The load-deflection
humidity was less than responses of the rubber samples
30%. The load-deflection in the
responses of
respectively and dry air with relative humidity was less than 30%. The load-deflection responses of
multiple
the rubber loading andinunloading
samples the multiplecycles are shown
loading in Figurecycles
and unloading 4. are shown in Figure 4.
the rubber samples in the multiple loading and unloading cycles are shown in Figure 4.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Experimental compression force-deflection history for the rubber sample. (a) 23°C and (b)
Figure4.4. Experimental
Figure Experimental compression 23 ◦ Cand
compression force-deflection history for the rubber sample. (a) 23°C and(b)
(b)
55°C.
◦
55°C.
55 C.

Figure 44 shows
Figure shows a representation of of the Mullins
Mullins effect[22],[22], and aa permanent
permanent set is is presented uponupon
Figure 4 showsaa representation
representation ofthe the Mullinseffect
effect [22],andand a permanentset set is presented
presented upon
unloadingwhich
unloading which denotes viscoelastic effects
suchsuch as hysteresis.
Due toDue to the Mullins
effect, theeffect, the
unloading whichdenotes denotes viscoelastic effects
viscoelastic effects as hysteresis.
such as hysteresis. the Mullins
Due to the Mullins “loading
effect, the
“loading
softening” softening”
of rubber of rubber
samples samples
is clearly is clearly
indicated, indicated,
especially especially
in the in
first the
and first
secondand second
loops, loops,
i.e., the
“loading softening” of rubber samples is clearly indicated, especially in the first and second loops,
i.e., the
force force
value fromvalue from the
the second secondis loading
loading lower than is lower thanthe
that from that from
first the first
loading loading
at a given at a given
deformation,
i.e., the force value from the second loading is lower than that from the first loading at a given
deformation,
approximately approximately
16.7%. The stable16.7%. The stable
force-deformationforce-deformation
loop is presentedloop is presented in the third cycle.
deformation, approximately 16.7%. The stable force-deformation loop isinpresented
the third in cycle. Hence,
the third in
cycle.
Hence,
the in
following the following
creep tests, creep
before tests, before
experimental experimental
data was data
recorded, was
several recorded, several
loading–unloading loading–
cycles
Hence, in the following creep tests, before experimental data was recorded, several loading–
unloading
were cyclesto
conducted were conducted
diminish to diminish
the Mullins theAdditionally,
effect. Mullins effect.compared
Additionally, withcompared
Figure 4a,b, with
withFigure
the
unloading cycles were conducted to diminish the Mullins effect. Additionally, compared with Figure
4a,b, with
temperature the temperature
increasing, increasing,
the slope the
of the the slope
loading of the loading curve of the rubber sample reduces,
4a,b, with the temperature increasing, slopecurve
of theofloading
the rubbercurvesample
of thereduces, which indicates
rubber sample reduces,
which
that theindicates
equivalent that the equivalent
stiffness of rubber stiffness of rubber is weakened.
is weakened.
which indicates that the equivalent stiffness of rubber is weakened.
2.2. Creep Compression Tests
2.2. Creep Compression Tests
Creep tests of rubber materials under multiple levels of loading and temperature were
Creep tests of rubber materials under multiple levels of loading and temperature were
conducted. The sample had a diameter of 12.5 mm and a height of 29.0 mm and three levels of applied
conducted. The sample had a diameter of 12.5 mm and a height of 29.0 mm and three levels of applied
loading (e.g., 1.5 kN, 2.0 kN, and 2.5 kN) and two levels of temperature (e.g., 23 ± 1 °C and 55 ± 1 °C)
loading (e.g., 1.5 kN, 2.0 kN, and 2.5 kN) and two levels of temperature (e.g., 23 ± 1 °C and 55 ± 1 °C)
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 5 of 19

2.2. Creep Compression Tests

Creep tests of rubber materials under multiple levels of loading and temperature were conducted.
The sample had a diameter of 12.5 mm and a height of 29.0 mm and three levels of applied loading
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 20
Polymers 2018,
(e.g., 1.5 kN,10,2.0
x FOR
kN,PEER 2.5 kN) and two levels of temperature (e.g., 23 ± 1 ◦ C and 55 ± 1 ◦ C)5were
andREVIEW of 20
assumed along the vertical direction. All the creep tests lasted 48 h. The measurement of deformation
were assumed
were assumed along the the vertical
vertical direction.
direction. All
All the creep
creep tests
tests lasted
lasted 48
48 h.
h. The
The measurement
measurement of of
was performed along using a non-contact laser extensorthe
displacement sensor operated at the measurement
deformation was
deformation was performed usingusing aa non-contact
non-contact laser
laser extensor
extensor displacement
displacement sensor
sensor operated
operated at
at the
the
accuracy of 0.1%.performed
The creep experimental setup is shown in Figure 3b.
measurement
measurement accuracy of 0.1%.
accuracy of 0.1%. The creep
Theofcreep experimental
experimental setup is shown in Figure 3b.
The time-deformation curves rubbers during thesetup
creepistests
shown in Figure
are shown in 3b.
Figure 5.
The time-deformation curves of rubbers during the creep tests
The time-deformation curves of rubbers during the creep tests are shown in are shown in Figure
Figure 5.
5.

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Experimentalcreep
creephistory (a)23 ◦ C and (b) 55 ◦ C.
23°C
Figure 5.
Figure 5. Experimental
Experimental creep history for
for rubber
rubber materials.
materials. (a)
(a) 23 °C and (b)
and (b) 55
55 °C.
°C.

In Figure
In Figure 5, it
5, it is
it is shown
shown that,
is shown that, ininthe
theinitial
initialcreep
creepstage,
stage,the thedeformation
deformationlargelylargelyincreases,
increases, which
which is
In Figure 5, that, in the initial creep stage, the deformation largely increases, which
assumed
is assumed to to
be be
accelerated
accelerated creep. In the
creep. long-term
In the
the long-term creep stage,
creep the deformation
stage, the deformation
deformation gently increases
gently with
increases
is assumed to be accelerated creep. In long-term creep stage, the gently increases
elapsed
with time,time,
elapsed which whichis termed
is termed as stable
as stablecreep.
creep. Compared
Compared with
with Figure
Figure 5a,b,
5a,b,the
the creep
creep deformation
deformation
with elapsed time, which is termed as stable creep. Compared with Figure 5a,b, the creep deformation
increases with
increases with the
the increase
increase in in temperature
temperature and and at at a fixed
fixed temperature,
temperature, the the slope
slope inin the
thelong-term
long-term creep
creep
increases with the increase in temperature and at aa fixed temperature, the slope in the long-term creep
stage approximately
stage approximately keeps keeps aa constant
constant in in different
different levels
levels ofof applied
applied loadings,
loadings, which
which demonstrates
demonstrates that that
stage approximately keeps a constant in different levels of applied loadings, which demonstrates that
the creep
the creep characterization
creep characterization
characterization is is less
is less sensitive
less sensitive
sensitive to to loading
to loading levels
loading levels than
levels than temperature.
than temperature.
temperature.
the
Additionally, creep
Additionally, creep tests
tests of of the
the rubber
rubber vibration
vibration system were
system were conducted.
conducted. At At room
At room temperature
temperature
Additionally,
◦ creep tests of the rubber vibration system were conducted. room temperature
(e.g., 23 ± 1 °C),
(e.g., 23 C), 2.0
2.0 kNkN loading
loading was was applied
applied along
along thethe normal
normal direction
direction forfor 48
48 h.
h. The
The test
test setup
setup was
was
(e.g., 23 ±± 11 °C), 2.0 kN loading was applied along the normal direction
◦ C is for 48 h. The test setup was
shown
shown in in Figure
in Figure
Figure 3c.3c.
3c. TheThe time-deformation
The time-deformation
time-deformation curve curve
curve in in creep
in creep test
creep test at
test at 23
at 23
23 °C
°C is presented
is presented
presented in in Figure
in Figure
Figure 6. 6.
6.
shown

Figure 6.
Figure6.
Figure Time-deformation curve
Time-deformationcurve
6.Time-deformation of
curveof rubber
ofrubber vibration
rubbervibration system
vibrationsystem in
systemin creep
increep test.
creeptest.

3. Numerical
3. Numerical Simulation
Simulation
3. Numerical Simulation
3.1. Constitutive Model
3.1. Constitutive
3.1. Constitutive Model
Model
In the analysis of experimental data, the rubber materials in creep tests showed nonlinear elasticity
In the
In the analysis
analysis ofof experimental
experimental data,data, the rubber
rubber materials
materials inin creep
creep tests
tests showed
showed nonlinear
nonlinear
in the initial load/deflection characteristicsthe and time-dependent creep behaviors in the long-term
elasticity in the initial load/deflection characteristics and time-dependent creep behaviors
elasticity in the initial load/deflection characteristics and time-dependent creep behaviors in the in the long-
long-
term deformation. Accordingly, the material properties of the rubber showed hyper-elastic
term deformation. Accordingly, the material properties of the rubber showed hyper-elastic behavior behavior
for capturing
for capturing nonlinearity
nonlinearity elasticity
elasticity in
in the
the initial
initial deflection
deflection range
range and
and aa time-related
time-related damage
damage function
function
for representing nonlinear displacement–time relationships in the long-term creep
for representing nonlinear displacement–time relationships in the long-term creep range. Therefore, range. Therefore,
the constitutive
the constitutive equation
equation ofof rubber
rubber materials
materials is is denoted
denoted asas [17]
[17]
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 6 of 19

deformation. Accordingly, the material properties of the rubber showed hyper-elastic behavior for
capturing nonlinearity elasticity in the initial deflection range and a time-related damage function for
representing nonlinear displacement–time relationships in the long-term creep range. Therefore, the
constitutive equation of rubber materials is denoted as [17]

W = W hyper + W creep , (1)

where W hyper and W creep are the hyper-elastic model and the time-decay creep model, respectively.
In general form, W hyper is denoted by,

Whyper = W I + W ( J ), (2)

where W(I) is the deviatoric part of the strain energy density of the primary material response and
W(J) is the volumetric part of the strain energy density. For isotropic rubber, W(I) depends on strain
invariants, I1 , I2 , and I3 . Strain invariants can be expressed in terms of three principle stretch ratios, λ1 ,
λ2 , and λ3 , and it is noted that, for incompressible rubbers, λ3 is 1.

I1 = λ21 + λ22 + λ23 (3)

I2 = λ21 λ22 + λ22 λ23 + λ23 λ21 (4)

I3 = λ21 λ22 λ23 (5)

In W(J), J is Jacobian of the deformation gradient and it is a measure of the volume change caused
by a deformation
q
J = det(B) = det(F), (6)

where F is the deformation gradient tensor.

∂u ∂u1 ∂u1
 

 1+ ∂x1 ∂x2 ∂x3


1
 
 ∂u2 ∂u ∂u2

 

F= 1+ ∂x2 , (7)

 ∂x 1 2 ∂x3 

 ∂u3 ∂u3 ∂u
 
1 + ∂x3

 

∂x1 ∂x2

3

where u1 , u2 , and u3 are three-dimensional deformation and x1 , x2 , and x3 are three-dimensional

coordinate axis. For stress calculation of hyper-elasticity, the strain energy potential in polynomial
series is expressed as

N N
X i  j X 1
( J − 1)2i ,

Whyper = Cij I1 − 3 I2 − 3 + (8)
Dij el
i+ j=1 i=1

where Cij and Di are temperature-dependent material parameters and Jel is elastic volume strain.
Using Equation (8), some typical hyper-elastic models are derived. For example, if N = 0, the
polynomial formulation represents the Neo–Hookean model, which is written as
 
Whyper−NH = C10 I1 − 3 . (9)

If N = 1, the Mooney–Rivlin hyper-elastic model is obtained as

1
( J − 1)2 .
   
Whyper−MN = C10 I1 − 3 + C01 I2 − 3 + (10)
D1 el
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 7 of 19

Also, using the modified Equation (10), the Yeoh hyper-elastic model can be obtained:
   2  3
Whyper−Yeoh = C10 I1 − 3 + C20 I1 − 3 + C30 I2 − 3 . (11)

The hyper-elastic constitutive equation of rubber can be also expressed in high-order polynomial
form. For easy implementation and reasonable accuracy, the strain energy potential in terms of
Mooney–Rivlin was adopted in the present work. Hyper-elastic material parameters (C01 and C10 )
at different temperatures were evaluated by the quasi-static experimental results. The detailed
identification is: Using the experimental force-deformation curve as shown in Figure 4, nominal
strain (change in length per unit of original length) and nominal stress (force per unit of original
cross-sectional area) are derived. Given experimental nominal stress–strain results, the parameters
of the hyper-elastic model are determined by utilizing the least squares fitting algorithm [23]. The
identified objective is to minimize the relative error, Ee .

n  2
X  Tith 
Ee = 1 − test  ,
 (12)
i=1
Ti

where Titest is the stress from the test results and Tith is the nominal stress.
Hyper-elastic models as shown in Equation (2–11) are suitable to depict loading portion in a
mechanical process; however, the unloading process cannot be predicted. Using a rebound energy
approach [24], a modified hyper-elastic model for describing the complete loading–unloading process
is developed: 
Whyper = [1 − (1 − θ0 )β]W I + W ( J ), (13)

where θ0 is rebound resilience parameter of rubbers and β is a state variable. In the loading process, β
is 0. In the unloading process, at the beginning of unloading, β is 0 and at the end of unloading, β is 1.
In the present work, θ0 is 0.55.
As shown in Equation (1), a time-decay function with a damage concept, W creep , is incorporated
into a constitutive equation of rubbers, which describes the nonlinear creep behaviors considering
material constitutive structure change and the elapsed time. The creep damage model should be
assumed as the creep effect from the deviatoric strain invariants during loading, I1 and I2 , and also the
elapsed loading time, t. For characterizing nonlinear creep responses, a phenomenological mathematic
model of W creep is developed. In this work, three kinds of widely nonlinear decay functions are
utilized for developing creep damage constitutive models and compared in terms of accuracy, which is
in the form of power-law functions, logarithmic functions, and exponential functions. As shown in
experimental results, creep parameters should be varied with the temperature.
(1) Power-law creep constitutive model is expressed:

Wcreep = k1 (T )tr1 (T) (I1 + I2 ). (14)

(2) Logarithmic-based creep constitutive model is shown:

h i
Wcreep = k2 (T ) logr2 (T) t (I1 + I2 ). (15)

(3) Exponential-based creep constitutive model is expressed:

Wcreep = k3 (T )er3 (T)t (I1 + I2 ), (16)

where ki and ri (i = 1, 2, 3) are creep parameters. A trial and error procedure was arranged so that the
best adjustment of creep responses could be achieved between numerical and experimental results,
and hence creep parameters were identified.
the UHYPER user subroutine defines the increments of hyper-elastic strain and time-dependent
inelastic strain, which is the function of the solution-dependent variables, e.g., deviatoric stress,
loading, time-step increment, and temperature [25]. Abaqus provides both explicit and implicit time
integration of creep and the choice of the time integration scheme depends on the procedure type,
Polymers 2019, 11, 988
the procedure definition, and a geometric non-linearity [1]. The flow chart of implementation 8 of of
19

constitutive model by UHYPER is illustrated in Figure 7.

The finite element model of rubber with mesh and boundary conditions according to the
3.2. Implementation of Finite Element Method
experimental arrangement was established. Due to the symmetry of the rubber sample’s geometry
and theTheloading
numerical analysisan
condition, was conducted
axial by the
symmetric model finite element
was method
established. using Abaqus
CAX4HT, whichsoftware.
is a 4-nodeIn
material libraries, only standard hyper-elastic models are available, such as Neo–Hooke,
thermally-time coupled plan element with 3 degrees of freedom, was utilized to mesh the rubber Mooney–Rivlin,
Ogden,
isolator.Yeoh,
In the polynomial-term,
finite element model, van derthe
Waals,
totaland Arruda–Boyce.
number of nodes andIn the present were
elements work,1907
the proposed
and 838,
model is not aFor
respectively. standard modelvibration
the rubber and hencesystem,
needs toitsbefinite
incorporated
element via user was
model subroutine.
developedAs the
by UHYPER
C3D8HT
user
elementsubroutine
with thedefines the increments
total number of hyper-elastic
of nodes and element beingstrain 63949and
andtime-dependent
24153. The symmetricinelastic strain,
boundary
which
conditionis the
wasfunction
appliedofin thethe
solution-dependent
symmetric plan and variables, e.g., deviatoric
the bottom of the rubberstress,
wasloading, time-step
constrained. The
increment, and temperature [25]. Abaqus provides both explicit and implicit time
loading force was applied on a rigid body along the vertical direction and the degrees of freedom of integration of creep
and the choice
the rigid body of andthethe
time integration
rubber systemscheme dependsThe
were coupled. on the procedure
numerical type,are
models theshown
procedure definition,
in Figure 8. In
and a geometric
addition, the rigidnon-linearity
body and [1]. rubber
The flowmaterials
chart of implementation
were applied of constitutive
using model by UHYPER
surface-to-surface contact
is illustrated
conditions toin Figure interpenetration
prevent 7. and the friction coefficient value was 0.2.

Figure 7. Flow chart of UHYPER implementation in ABAQUS.

The finite element model of rubber with mesh and boundary conditions according to the
experimental arrangement was established. Due to the symmetry of the rubber sample’s geometry
and the loading condition, an axial symmetric model was established. CAX4HT, which is a 4-node
thermally-time coupled plan element with 3 degrees of freedom, was utilized to mesh the rubber
isolator. In the finite element model, the total number of nodes and elements were 1907 and 838,
respectively. For the rubber vibration system, its finite element model was developed by C3D8HT
element with the total number of nodes and element being 63949 and 24153. The symmetric boundary
condition was applied in the symmetric plan and the bottom of the rubber was constrained. The
loading force was applied on a rigid body along the vertical direction and the degrees of freedom of
the rigid body and the rubber system were coupled. The numerical models are shown in Figure 8. In
addition, the rigid body and rubber materials were applied using surface-to-surface contact conditions
to prevent interpenetration and the friction coefficient value was 0.2.
 Polymers 2019, 11, 988 9 of 19
Polymers
Polymers2018,
2018,10,
10,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 99of
of20
20

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure8. Numerical model of rubber samples. (a) Rubber materials, (b) rubber device.
Figure 8. Numerical
Numerical model
model of
of rubber
rubber samples.
samples. (a)
(a) Rubber
Rubber materials,
materials, (b)
(b) rubber
rubber device.
device.

4.4.
4.Results
Resultsand
Results andDiscussions
and Discussions
Discussions

4.1.Quasi-Static
4.1.
4.1. Quasi-StaticAnalysis
Quasi-Static Analysis
Analysis
Sincethe
Since theproposed
proposedconstitutive
constitutivemodel
modelininthis
thisstudy
studyisisbased
basedon
onstrain
strainenergy
energypotential,
potential,the
the
Since the proposed constitutive model in this study is based on strain energy potential, the
validation
validation
validationof of the
ofthe hyper-elastic
thehyper-elastic model
hyper-elasticmodel is fundamental
modelisisfundamental
fundamentalfor for creep
forcreep analysis.
creepanalysis. Load-deflection
analysis.Load-deflection histories
Load-deflectionhistories
historiesofof
of
thesimulation
the
the simulationand
simulation andexperiment
and experimentresulting
experiment resultingin
resulting inquasi-static
in quasi-staticcompression
quasi-static compressionare
compression are compared
arecompared
comparedin in Figure
inFigure 9.
Figure9.9.

(a)
(a)TT==23
23°C.
°C. (b)
(b)TT==55
55°C.
°C.
Figure
Figure9.9.
Figure 9.Comparison
Comparisonof
Comparison ofload-deflection
of load-deflectioncurves
load-deflection curvesbetween
curves betweenthe
between thesimulation
the simulationand
simulation andthe
and theexperiment.
the experiment.
experiment.

Asshown
As
As shownin
shown inin Figure
Figure
Figure 9, curves
9,9,the
the the curves
curves of
ofthe of the numerical
thenumerical
numerical and
andthe and the experimental
theexperimental
experimental results
resultsare results
areconsistent,
consistent,are
consistent,
which
which which
implies
implies the implies
the model the model
model could
could could predict
accurately
accurately accuratelythepredict
predict the the deformation
deformation
deformation process in process
process in the
the static in loading–
static the static
loading–
loading–unloading
unloading compression.
unloading compression. compression.
Figure10
Figure
Figure 10shows
10 showsthe
shows thestress
the stress
stress profile
profile
profile ofof
of thethe
the rubber
rubber
rubber in in
thethe
in the identical
identical
identical deformation
deformation
deformation (ɛ(ɛ ==(ε = 0.16)
0.16)
0.16) at
at twoat
two
two temperatures.
temperatures.
temperatures.
In Figure 10, it is shown that the stress distribution presents symmetrically, which is due to the
loading and boundary conditions. In the loading process, as shown in Figure 10a,c, rubber showed
swelling in the radial boundary under compression and in the unloading process in Figure 10b,d, the
rubber was elongated under rebound deformation. The maximum Mises stress points at different
temperatures were mainly located on the contact edges. Such stress concentration was induced by
the non-flat surface of the rubber in the contact area, which was the result of uncontrolled slippage at
the rubber–rigid interface [18]. Additionally, at the strain of 16%, the maximum stress values in the
loading process are 1.44 MPa and 1.19 MPa at 23 ◦ C and 55 ◦ C, respectively, which can be explained by
the stiffness analysis as compared in Figure 4. Compared (b) with Figure 10a,b at 23 ◦ C under the same
(a)
(a)Loading
Loadingprocess,
process,TT==23 23°C.
°C. (b)Unloading
Unloadingprocess,
process,TT==23 23°C.°C.
strain, the maximum stress in loading (1.44 MPa) is larger than that (1.00 MPa) in unloading; similar
behaviors are also shown at 55 ◦ C, hence the numerical model could evaluate the Mullins effect.
 As shown in Figure 9, the curves of the numerical and the experimental results are consistent,
which implies the model could accurately predict the deformation process in the static loading–
unloading compression.
Figure
Polymers 10988
2019, 11, shows the stress profile of the rubber in the identical deformation (ɛ = 0.16) at two
10 of 19
temperatures.
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 20

Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR

(c) PEER REVIEW
Loading process, T = 55 °C. (d) Unloading process, T = 55 °C. 10 of 20
(a) Loading process, T = 23 °C. (b) Unloading process, T = 23 °C.
Figure 10. Stress distribution profile at strain of 16%.

In Figure 10, it is shown that the stress distribution presents symmetrically, which is due to the
loading and boundary conditions. In the loading process, as shown in Figure 10a,c, rubber showed
swelling in the radial boundary under compression and in the unloading process in Figure 10b,d, the
rubber was elongated under rebound deformation. The maximum Mises stress points at different
temperatures were mainly located on the contact edges. Such stress concentration was induced by
the non-flat surface of the rubber in the contact area, which was the result of uncontrolled slippage
at the rubber–rigid interface [18]. Additionally, at the strain of 16%, the maximum stress values in the
loading process are 1.44 MPa and 1.19 MPa at 23 °C and 55 °C, respectively, which can be explained
by (c)
theLoading
stiffness process,
analysis asT =compared
55 °C. in Figure 4. Compared (d)with
Unloading process,
Figure 10a,b at 23T°C
= 55 °C. the
under
same strain, the maximum
Figurestress
Figure 10. in loading
10. Stress
Stress (1.44 MPa)
distribution
distribution is larger
profile
profile at than of
at strain
strain that (1.00 MPa) in unloading;
of 16%.
similar behaviors are also shown at 55 °C, hence the numerical model could evaluate the Mullins
4.2. Creepeffect.
Analysis
In Figure 10, it is shown that the stress distribution presents symmetrically, which is due to the
loading
Theand
creep
4.2. boundary
Analysisconditions.
numerical
Creep simulationInwas theperformed
loading process, as shown
in accordance inthe
with Figure 10a,c, rubber
experimental showed
test, in which
swelling in the
three levels of radial
loading boundary
of 1.5 kN, under
2.0 kN,compression
and 2.5 kN and
at in
two the unloading
temperatures (23 ◦
process
C in
and 55 ◦
Figure C) 10b,d,
were the
held
The creep numerical simulation was performed in accordance with the experimental test, in
rubber
for 48 h,was elongated
respectively.
which under
three levels rebound
of loading deformation.
of 1.5 kN, 2.0 kN, and The
2.5 kNmaximum Mises stress
at two temperatures (23 °Cpoints
and 55 at °C)different
temperatures were
were held
To validate formainly
the located
of theon
48 h, respectively.
reliability the contact
numerical edges. and
simulation Suchcompare
stress concentration
the accuracy of wastheinduced by
three creep
the non-flat To validate
surfacethe the
of creep reliability
the rubber of the numerical
in the contact simulation
area, which and compare the accuracy of the three
damage functions, deformations obtained from the was the result
simulation are of uncontrolled
presented slippage
and compared
creep damage functions, the creep deformations obtained from the simulation are presented and
at theexperimental
with rubber–rigid results
interface in [18].
FigureAdditionally,
11. at the strain of 16%, the maximum stress values in the
compared with experimental results in Figure 11.
loading process are 1.44 MPa and 1.19 MPa at 23 °C and 55 °C, respectively, which can be explained
by the stiffness analysis as compared in Figure 4. Compared with Figure 10a,b at 23 °C under the
same strain, the maximum stress in loading (1.44 MPa) is larger than that (1.00 MPa) in unloading;
similar behaviors are also shown at 55 °C, hence the numerical model could evaluate the Mullins
effect.

4.2. Creep Analysis

The creep numerical simulation was performed in accordance with the experimental test, in
which three levels of loading of 1.5 kN, 2.0 kN, and 2.5 kN at two temperatures (23 °C and 55 °C)
were held for 48 h, respectively.
To validate the reliability of the numerical simulation and compare the accuracy of the three
Polymers 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 20
creep damage (a) Power-lawthe
functions, creep constitutive
creep model. obtained
deformations (b) Logarithmic-based
from thecreep
simulation
constitutive are presented and
model.

compared with experimental results in Figure 11.

(c) Exponential-based creep constitutive model.

Figure
Figure 11. 11. Comparison
Comparison of creep
of creep deformationbetween
deformation between numerical
numericalandand
experiment resultsresults
experiment (T = 23 ◦ C).
(T = 23 °C).

In Figure 11, it is seen that the proposed creep damage functions generally could predict the
time-dependent increasing deformation in creep tests under different levels of loadings and
(a)temperatures.
Power-lawCompared
creep constitutive model.
with power-law and the(b) Logarithmic-based
logarithmic-based creepcreep constitutive
constitutive model,model.
the
exponential-based creep constitutive model showed steep deformation in the initial creep
deformation, which indicates that this model is not suitable for predicting the primary creep stage.
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 11 of 19

In Figure 11, it is seen that the proposed creep damage functions generally could predict
the time-dependent increasing deformation in creep tests under different levels of loadings and
temperatures. Compared with power-law and the logarithmic-based creep constitutive model, the
exponential-based creep constitutive model showed steep deformation in the initial creep deformation,
which indicates that this model is not suitable for predicting the primary creep stage. As for the
logarithmic-based model, the long-term behavior is reasonably evaluated but it shows a relatively
large error in the amplitude of initial creep deformation.
For clarification, the error analysis of these creep constitutive models is presented in Table 1.
Several error indexes are selected, such as the squared correlation coefficient (SCC), the mean absolute
percentage error (MAPE) and the mean square error (MSE). The expressions of error indexes are
provided in Table 2.

Table 1. Error analysis of different creep damage functions (T = 23 ◦ C).

Error Indexes
Creep Models Loading
SCC MAPE MSE
1.5 kN 0.9991 2.9821 0.0113
Power-low function 2.0 kN 0.9996 1.7582 0.0093
2.5 kN 0.9998 1.6917 0.0087
1.5 kN 0.9995 4.9595 0.0303
Logarithmic function
2.0 kN 0.9990 3.4315 0.0224
2.5 kN 0.9988 3.7001 0.0337
1.5 kN 0.9959 5.3389 0.0497
Exponential function
2.0 kN 0.9976 4.7459 0.0661
2.5 kN 0.9986 4.3447 0.0633

Table 2. Expression of error evaluation indexes.

Error Index Formula Analysis

 n
2
[ Fsim (i)·Fexp (i)]

 P 


 

SCC  r i=1
 n
r
n

 Larger is better
2 2
 P P 
Fsim (i) · Fexp (i) 


 
i=1 i=1
  P n  F (i)−F (i) 

100  sim exp
MAPE n · Fexp (i)
 Smaller is better
i=1
n  2
MSE 1 P
Smaller is better
· Fsim (i) − Fexp (i)

n
i=1

As shown in Table 1, the SCC of these three models were all larger than 0.99, which verifies
the validation of these adopted time-dependent nonlinear creep models. For the other two indexes,
compared with logarithmic-based and exponential-based models, the average value of MAPE of the
power-law creep model decreased by 46.8% and 55.4%, respectively. In the case of 2.0 kN applied
loading, the MSE of the power-law creep model decreased by 58.5% and 85.9% respectively than that of
logarithmic-based and exponential-based models. Therefore, the power-law creep constitutive model
was chosen for the subsequent creep analysis because of the high accuracy.
To further study the effect of creep parameters on responses in the power-law creep model,
sensitivity analysis was conducted. The detailed process of parameter sensitivity analysis is as follows:
(1) A set of creep parameters as the reference values was selected. In the present work, the reference
parameters were adopted in testing conditions of 2.0 kN loading at 23 ◦ C, denoted as k0 and r0 . (2)
 n i 1

To further study the effect of creep parameters on responses in the power-law creep model,
sensitivity analysis was conducted. The detailed process of parameter sensitivity analysis is as
follows: (1) A set of creep parameters as the reference values was selected. In the present work, the
Polymers 2019,
reference 11, 988
parameters were adopted in testing conditions of 2.0 kN loading at 23 °C, denoted as k120 and
of 19

r0. (2) One parameter’s value was varied and another was unchanged; the changed proportion range
of
One each parametervalue
parameter’s was approximately
was varied and –20% to +20%.
another The effectsthe
was unchanged; of varying
changedparameters are shown
proportion range of each in
Figure 12.
parameter was approximately –20% to +20%. The effects of varying parameters are shown in Figure 12.

(a) Change in k. (b) Change in r.

Figure
Figure 12. Effects
Effects of
of varying
varying parameters in creep deformation responses.

shownin
As shown inFigure
Figure12, 12,when
when k was
k was equal
equal to 0.8
to 0.8 k0 and
k0 and 1.2 k1.2 k0 ,maximum
0, the the maximum deformations
deformations in creepin
creep 0.93
were 0 andδ0
wereδ0.93 andδ1.07
1.07 δ0 , respectively,
0, respectively, in which
in which δ0 was δ0 the
wasmaximum
the maximum deformation
deformation of k0 of
andk0 and r0 .
r0. For
For varying
varying r, the
r, the difference
difference in maximum
in maximum deformations
deformations was was 0.96δ
0.96δ 0 and
0 and 1.04δ
1.04δ 0 for
0 for +20%
+20% r0 and
r0 and −20%
−20% r0,
r0 , respectively.
respectively. In Inthethe phenomenal
phenomenal aspect,
aspect, k kcontrolled
controlledthe theamplitude
amplitudeof of creep
creep deformation,
deformation, which
describes the thestrength
strength of the
of creep damage,
the creep and r determines
damage, the inclination
and r determines degree of creep
the inclination deformation.
degree of creep
Creep
deformation. compliance, J(t), is a representative index for evaluating creep performances. Using the
power-law2018,creep
Creep
Polymers compliance,
10, x FOR PEERJ(t)
model, J(t),under different levelsindex
is a representative
REVIEW of loading and temperature
for evaluating is presented inUsing
creep performances. Figure 13.
the
13 of 20
power-law creep model, J(t) under different levels of loading and temperature is presented in Figure
13.

(a) T = 23 °C. (b) T = 55 °C.

Figure 13. Comparison of numerical and experimental creep compliance.

As shown in Figure 13, it was concluded

concluded that when the loading levels increased, the creep
compliance reduced. This
This phenomenon
phenomenon is is presented
presented at
at different temperatures; additionally, at the
same loading level, the increment
increment ofof temperature
temperature leads
leads to
to the
the enhancement
enhancement of
of creep
creepcompliance.
compliance.
During creep, the stress distribution
distribution of rubber changes with time. However, these results cannot
be observed by experimental testing. In the present work, the maximum principle stress profiles of
rubbers are studied
studied by
by finite
finite element
element simulation,
simulation, as
as shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 14.
14.
 As shown in Figure 13, it was concluded that when the loading levels increased, the creep
compliance reduced. This phenomenon is presented at different temperatures; additionally, at the
compliance reduced. This phenomenon is presented at different temperatures; additionally, at the
same loading level, the increment of temperature leads to the enhancement of creep compliance.
same loading level, the increment of temperature leads to the enhancement of creep compliance.
During creep, the stress distribution of rubber changes with time. However, these results cannot
During creep, the stress distribution of rubber changes with time. However, these results cannot
be observed by experimental testing. In the present work, the maximum principle stress profiles of
be observed
Polymers by988
2019, 11, experimental testing. In the present work, the maximum principle stress profiles
13 of of
19
rubbers are studied by finite element simulation, as shown in Figure 14.
rubbers are studied by finite element simulation, as shown in Figure 14.

(a) In the initial creep time. (b) In the final creep time.
(a) In the initial creep time. (b) In the final creep time.
Figure 14. Maximum principle stress profiles (T = 23 °C; F = 2.5 kN).
Figure 14.
Figure 14. Maximum principle stress profiles (T =
profiles (T = 23 °C; =2.5
◦ C; F = 2.5kN).
kN).
In Figure 14, it is shown that the tensile stress distributes around the free surfaces and the
In Figure 14, it is shown that the tensile stress distributes around the free surfaces and the
maximum tensile principle stress is observed at the center of the free surface, while the maximum
maximum tensile
maximum tensile principle
principle stress
stress is
is observed
observed at at the
the center
center of the free surface, while the maximum
compressive stress occurs at the contact edge. Compared with Figure 14a,b, the maximum tensile
compressive stress
stressoccurs
occursatatthe contact
the edge.
contact Compared
edge. Compared withwith
Figure 14a,b,
Figure the maximum
14a,b, the maximumtensiletensile
stress
stress was 0.99 MPa in the initial creep and 1.48 MPa in the final creep, which indicates that the
was 0.99 MPa in the initial creep and 1.48 MPa in the final creep, which indicates that
stress was 0.99 MPa in the initial creep and 1.48 MPa in the final creep, which indicates that the the maximum
maximum principle stress was enhanced during creep process. For detailed comparison, the time-
principle stress
maximum was enhanced
principle stress wasduring
enhancedcreep process.
during creepFor detailed
process. comparison,
For the time-dependent
detailed comparison, the time-
dependent maximum principle stress of a reference point where the maximum tensile principle stress
maximum principle
dependent maximum stress of a reference
principle stress of point wherepoint
a reference the maximum
where thetensile
maximum principle stress
tensile was located
principle stress
was located is plotted in Figure 15.
is plotted in Figure 15.
was located is plotted in Figure 15.

Figure 15. Time variation of maximum principle stress of reference point (T = 23 ◦ C).

In Figure 15, it is clearly seen that, at a fixed loading level, the maximum principle stress of the
reference point increased over time. This phenomenon is called “stress hardening”, which can be
explained by the engineering principle, in that the extra geometric deformation during creep adds
to the mechanical deformation [17]. It is also shown that, with the increase in loading levels, the
maximum principle stress and its hardening degree (the slope of the time varied maximum principle
stress) increased.
To study the effect of temperature and loading levels on the stress hardening effect, the maximum
tensile principle stresses under different conditions are compared in Table 3. The hardening degree, λ,
is calculated as
σmax− f − σmax−i
!
λ(%) = × 100%, (17)
σmax−i
where σmax− f and σmax−i are the maximum tensile principle stresses in the final and initial creep times,
respectively.
As shown in Table 3, at room and high temperatures, σmax−i and σmax− f increased with increasing
loading level. It was also seen that λ at room temperature was in the range of 40–50%, while at high
temperatures, λ was less than 10%. Hence, a slower development of maximum principle stress increase
occurs at high temperature.
where  max  f and  max i are the maximum tensile principle stresses in the final and initial creep
times, respectively.

Table 3. Maximum tensile principle stress under different conditions.

 max  f
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 14 of 19
Temperature Loading  max i (MPa) (MPa) λ (%)
1.5 kN 0.0413 0.0598 44.95%
Table 3. Maximum tensile principle stress under different conditions.
23°C 2.0 kN 0.0669 1.0025 53.21%
Temperature 2.5 kNLoading 0.0997
σmax−i (MPa) 1.0485
σmax−f (MPa) 48.95%
λ (%)
1.5 kN 1.5 kN 0.0403 0.0413 0.0439
0.0598 8.93%
44.95%
55°C 23 C
◦ 2.0 kN 0.0645 0.0691 7.13%
2.0 kN 0.0669 1.0025 53.21%
2.5 kN 0.0913 0.0923 1.10%
2.5 kN 0.0997 1.0485 48.95%

 max i and  max  f increased

1.5 kN 0.0403 0.0439 8.93%
As shown in ◦Table 4, at room and high temperatures, with
55 C 2.0 kN 0.0645 0.0691 7.13%
increasing loading level. It was also seen that  at room temperature was in the range of 40%–50%,
while at high temperatures,  was less than 10%. Hence, a slower development of maximum
2.5 kN 0.0913 0.0923 1.10%

principle stress increase occurs at high temperature.

Additionally,
Additionally, thethe axial
axial creep
creep deformation
deformation profiles
profiles atat differenttimes
different timesare
areshown
shownininFigure
Figure16.
16.

(a) Time = 1 min. (b) Time = 48 h.

Figure 16.16.
Figure Axial creep
Axial deformation
creep profiles
deformation at at
profiles different times
different (T(T
times = 23
= 23 °C;◦ C; = 1.5
F =F1.5 kN).
kN).

AsAs shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 16,16,
thethe axial
axial deformation
deformation profiles
profiles presented
presented a layer
a layer phenomenon:
phenomenon: AtAtthethe
bottom,
bottom, it was
it was the the minimum
minimum (approximately
(approximately zero)zero) due
due to thetoboundary
the boundary condition,
condition, at the at the
top, top, it
it was
thewas the maximum
maximum becausebecause of the loading
of the loading condition,
condition, and inareas
and in other otheritareas it gradually
gradually varied. varied. This
This layer
layer characteristic
characteristic stayed stayed
unchanged unchanged over different
over different creepcreep
times.times. Additionally,
Additionally, the the maximum
maximum creep
creep
deformation
deformation increased
increased over
over time
time andand bulging
bulging of of
thethe free
free surfaces
surfaces enhanced
enhanced with
with increasing
increasing time.
time.
ToTo evaluatethe
evaluate thecreep
creep degree,
degree, thethecreep
creepdeformation
deformation percentage,
percentage,Creep (%), (%),
Creep under different
under loading
different
levels levels
loading and temperatures, is compared
and temperatures, in Table
is compared in 4.
Table 5.
!
Dt − D0
Creep(%) = × 100%, (18)
De − D0

where Dt is the creep deformation after t, De is the final creep deformation, and D0 is the creep
deformation at the end of applied loading.

Table 4. Creep (%) of rubber materials during the creep test at different times.

Loading 1.5 kN 2.0 kN 2.5 kN

Temperature 23 ◦C 55 ◦C 23 ◦C 55 ◦C 23 ◦C 55 ◦ C
1 min 27.17% 26.78% 31.90% 29.50% 30.71% 25.81%
30 min 72.50% 58.88% 74.31% 60.50% 74.28% 57.00%
Time 1h 77.50% 66.70% 78.62% 68.14% 78.50% 61.55%
6h 89.33% 83.27% 88.97% 80.65% 88.48% 81.86%
12 h 92.67% 89.07% 93.97% 89.23% 92.32% 85.94%
24 h 96.00% 95.42% 97.24% 94.69% 96.16% 91.37%
48 h 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
 Time 6h 89.33% 83.27% 88.97% 80.65% 88.48% 81.86%
12 h 92.67% 89.07% 93.97% 89.23% 92.32% 85.94%
24 h 96.00% 95.42% 97.24% 94.69% 96.16% 91.37%
48 h 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 15 of 19
As shown in Table 5, at a fixed loading level, the creep deformation percentage in room
temperature was higher than that in high temperature; this temperature-related phenomenon is
As shown in Table 4, at a fixed loading level, the creep deformation percentage in room temperature
increasingly obvious with increasing loading. For example, at the time interval of 1 min, the
was higher than that in high temperature; this temperature-related phenomenon is increasingly obvious
difference in creep deformation percentage between 23 °C and 55 °C, δ, is 0.39% at a loading of 1.5
with increasing loading. For example, at the time interval of 1 min, the difference in creep deformation
kN and 4.9 % at a loading of 2.5 kN, a 12.6 times increase. In addition, δ changes in different creep
percentage between 23 ◦ C and 55 ◦ C, δ, is 0.39% at a loading of 1.5 kN and 4.9 % at a loading of 2.5 kN,
stages. For instance, when the applied loading was 2.5 kN, δ was 17.28% at 30 min and 4.79% at 24 h.
a 12.6 times increase. In addition, δ changes in different creep stages. For instance, when the applied
Hence, at a fixed applied loading, δ in initial creep was greater than that in stable creep, which
loading was 2.5 kN, δ was 17.28% at 30 min and 4.79% at 24 h. Hence, at a fixed applied loading, δ in
indicates that high temperature leads to a faster development of creep deformation in stable creep.
initial creep was greater than that in stable creep, which indicates that high temperature leads to a
Relative creep rate (RC) is another significant index for depicting creep behaviors, which is
faster development of creep deformation in stable creep.
defined as [16]
Relative creep rate (RC) is another significant index for depicting creep behaviors, which is defined
as [16] D D 
RC   Dtt − D00 , (19)
RC =  H , (19)
H
where Dtt is the creep deformation after t and H is the original thickness.
Figure 17 shows the relative creep rate versus time plot.

(a) F = 1.5 kN. (b) F = 2.0 kN. (c) F = 2.5 kN.

Figure
Figure 17. Creep
Creep rate
rate for
for rubbers
rubbers under
under different
different conditions.

As shown in Figure
Figure 17,
17, under
underdifferent
differentloading
loadinglevels
levelsand
andtemperatures
temperaturesthetherelative creep
relative creeprate
rateis
approximately
is approximately proportional
proportional to to
thethe
logarithm
logarithm of of
time in in
time thethe
stable creep
stable stage,
creep which
stage, whichcharacteristic of
characteristic
physical
of creep
physical [26].
creep Physical
[26]. creep
Physical is due
creep to to
is due thethe
viscoelasticity of of
viscoelasticity rubber
rubbermaterials and
materials thethe
and slippages
slippagesin
cross links of rubbers molecules under loading. In general, physical creep is primarily dominated in
short-time creep tests (less than 103 min). It was also seen that, at room temperature, RC at loading levels
of 1.5 kN, 2.0 kN, and 2.5 kN were 4.37%, 3.95%, and 3.61%, respectively, while in high temperatures,
RC at the final creep time at loading levels of 1.5 kN, 2.0 kN, and 2.5 kN were 2.90%, 2.71%, and 2.69%,
respectively. These results demonstrate that the high temperature mode shows more creep resistance
than room temperature at a fixed loading. This can be explained by a slower increase of maximum
principle stress due to “stress hardening” and a more uniform stress distribution in the case of high
temperature, as shown in Table 3.
To further evaluate the engineering potential of the proposed constitutive model, the creep
behavior of the rubber vibration system was predicted and compared with experimental results,
as shown in Figure 18. It is seen that the proposed model in which the materials’ parameters are
identified by rubber-material testing could depict the different creep stages of the rubber system and
the numerical solutions match the experimental results.
 To further evaluate the engineering potential of the proposed constitutive model, the creep
To of
behavior further evaluate
the rubber the engineering
vibration system waspotential
predictedofand
thecompared
proposed with
constitutive model,
experimental the creep
results, as
shown in Figure 18. It is seen that the proposed model in which the materials’ parameters areas
behavior of the rubber vibration system was predicted and compared with experimental results,
shown inbyFigure
identified 18. It is seen
rubber-material that
testing the depict
could proposed model increep
the different which the of
stages materials’ parameters
the rubber system and are
identified
the numerical bysolutions
rubber-material testing
match the could depict
experimental the different creep stages of the rubber system and
results.
Polymers 2019, 11, 988
the numerical solutions match the experimental results. 16 of 19

.
.
Figure
Figure18.
18. Comparison
Comparisonofofnumerical
numericaland
andexperimental
experimentalcreep
creepdeformation
deformationofofthe
therubber
rubbersystem
systematat
Figure
room 18. Comparison
temperature.
room temperature. of numerical and experimental creep deformation of the rubber system at
room temperature.
Theaxial
The axialcreep
creepdeformation
deformationprofiles
profiles at
at different
different times
times are
are shown in Figure 19.
The axial creep deformation profiles at different times are shown in Figure 19.

(a) Time = 20 s. (b) Time = 48 h.

(a) Time = 20 s. (b) Time = 48 h.
Figure
Figure19.
19.Creep
Creepprofiles
profilesof
ofthe
therubber
rubber system
system at
at different times (T ==23
different times ◦ C;FF==2.0
23°C; 2.0kN).
kN).
Figure 19. Creep profiles of the rubber system at different times (T = 23 °C; F = 2.0 kN).
InFigure
In Figure19, 19,ititisisseen
seenthat
thatthethedeformation
deformationdistribution
distributionatatdifferent
differentcreep
creeptimes
timeswas wassimilar;
similar;
In
however,the
however, Figure 19,
themaximum it is
maximum creep seen that the
creep deformation deformation
deformation increased distribution
increased with
with time at
time elapsing.different creep
elapsing. ItItisisnoticed times
noticedthat
thatatwasthesimilar;
atthe initial
initial
however,
creeptime
creep the
time (20 maximum
(20 s), self-contactcreep
self-contact had deformation
had occurred increased
occurredinside
insidethe
thetopwith time
topofofthe elapsing.
therubber
rubber It
system, is
system, noticed
which
which that
lasted at the
during
lasted initial
duringthe
creep
creep time (20
deformation. s), self-contact
Different fromhad occurred
rubber inside
materials, the
the top
axial of the
creep rubber system,
deformation
the creep deformation. Different from rubber materials, the axial creep deformation presented an which
presented lasted
an during
irregular
the creep
layer
irregular deformation.
phenomenon
layer due toDifferent
phenomenon the
due to from
structural rubber materials,
geometry
the structural effect. the
geometry axial creep deformation presented an
effect.
irregular
During
During layer phenomenon
creep,
creep, theMises
the due to
Misesstress
stress the structural
distribution
distribution geometry
ofthe
of the effect. atatdifferent
rubbersystem
rubber system differentcreep
creeptimes
timesisisshown
shown
in During
Figure
in Figure
Polymers 20. creep, the Mises
20.10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
2018, stress distribution of the rubber system at different creep times is
17shown
of 20
in Figure 20.

(a) Time = 20 s (b) Time = 48 h

Figure20.
Figure Misesstress
20.Mises stress distribution of
of the
therubber
rubbersystem
systematat
different creep
different times
creep (T =(T23= ◦23
times F=F
C; °C; 2.0= kN).
2.0
kN).
As seen in Figure 20, the patterns of the two stress profiles look similar; the maximum Mises stress
wasAslocated
seen in
in the region
Figure 20,where the stiffness
the patterns of theistwo
weakest
stress(e.g., the central
profiles region).the
look similar; Using the analysis
maximum Misesof
the rubber
stress system in
was located mentioned above,
the region thethe
where proposed model
stiffness and its(e.g.,
is weakest numerical approach
the central couldUsing
region). provide
thea
good prediction for creep evaluation of rubber-based engineering cases.
analysis of the rubber system mentioned above, the proposed model and its numerical approach
could provide a good prediction for creep evaluation of rubber-based engineering cases.

5. Time–Temperature Equivalent Analysis

It is evident that creep responses measured by long-term loading creep tests are expensive and
time-consuming. To reduce the experimental cost, time–temperature equivalent analysis should be
conducted. Some accelerated methods have been developed to predict long-term creep performances
of rubber materials based on short-time experiments [27,28]. The principle of these accelerated
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 17 of 19

5. Time–Temperature Equivalent Analysis

It is evident that creep responses measured by long-term loading creep tests are expensive and
time-consuming. To reduce the experimental cost, time–temperature equivalent analysis should be
conducted. Some accelerated methods have been developed to predict long-term creep performances
of rubber materials based on short-time experiments [27,28]. The principle of these accelerated
methods lies in the fact that, in the creep test, the effect of longer time is similar to the effect of
higher temperature [29]. Among them, the well-known equation for describing the temperature–time
equivalent principle is Williams–Landel–Ferry (WLF) equation [30]; its time-dependent shift factor, αT ,
is expressed as
−C1 (T − Tr )
Log(αT ) = , (20)
C2 + (T − Tr )
where C1 and C2 are two constants which are related to the reference temperature Tr and the type of
rubber materials. According to ISO4664-1, when the glass transition temperature (Tg ) is regarded as
the reference temperature (Tr ), then C1 and C2 are 17.44 K and 51.6 K, respectively [31]. Then, the
time–temperature equivalent shift factor calculated in the term of glass transformation temperature is
 
−17.44 T − Tg
Log(αT ) = . (21)
51.6 + (T − T g )

One of the key issues of applying the WLF equation is the determination of the glass transition
temperature of rubber materials. In the present work, the glass transformation temperature was
tested utilizing the dynamic differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) method [31]. Measurements were
conducted on a Mettler–Toledo DSC instrument (Type: QJ-X03) in a fluid nitrogen atmosphere. Rubber
samples were prepared weighing 5.80 mg of the compound in aluminum crucibles. The weight was
measured by the Mettler–Toledo scale (type: XP105) with a resolution of 0.01 mg. Before testing,
the rubbers were heated from −100 ◦ C to 100 ◦ C for erasing in-balance thermal effects, then this was
repeated using constant heating and cooling rates of 10 ◦ C/min. During DSC measurement, liquid
nitrogen was released at 10 mL/min.
The thermal flow curve of rubber samples is shown in Figure 21. The inflection point of this figure
represents the glass transition temperature of rubber samples, hence the glass transition temperature
was –25.70 ◦ C as shown by data processing. Additionally, according to GB/T 29611-2013, titled as
“Determination of the rubber’s glass transition temperature by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC)
method”,
Polymers the
2018, 10,labels of exo
x FOR PEER and endo are added in Figure 21.
REVIEW 18 of 20
Exo

Tg
Endo

Figure 21.
Figure 21. Determination of TTggby
Determination of bydifferential
differential scanning
scanning calorimetry
calorimetry (DCS)
(DCS) method.
method.

By integrating glass transition temperature into Equation (21), the master curve of the equivalent
By integrating glass transition temperature into Equation (21), the master curve of the equivalent
shift factor, α , is illustrated in Figure 22.
shift factor, TT , is illustrated in Figure 22.
 Figure 21. Determination of Tg by differential scanning calorimetry (DCS) method.

By integrating glass transition temperature into Equation (21), the master curve of the equivalent
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 18 of 19
shift factor,  T , is illustrated in Figure 22.

Figure 22. Temperature dependence of instantaneous modulus of rubber materials.

Figure 22. Temperature dependence of instantaneous modulus of rubber materials.
Based on the equivalent shift factor master curve, the creep compliance, J(T1 ) at temperature T1 ,
Based on the equivalent shift factor master curve, the creep compliance, J(T1) at temperature T1,
can be converted to the creep compliance, J(T2 ) at temperature T2 [31], which is expressed as
can be converted to the creep compliance, J(T2) at temperature T2 [31], which is expressed as
αT1
" ! #
J (T1 ) = Jlog  T ·T2 .  (22)
J T1   J log αT2 1   T2  . (22)
  T  
6. Conclusions
 2

This paper provides a hyper-elastic creep constitutive model to evaluate creep characteristics
6. Conclusions
of rubber materials under different conditions. The numerical implementation of the proposed
phenomenological modela hyper-elastic
This paper provides is presented and creepvalidated.
constitutiveThe time-dependent,
model loading-related,
to evaluate creep characteristicsand
of
temperature-induced creep behaviors of rubber materials are studied. The proposed
rubber materials under different conditions. The numerical implementation of the proposed method is further
utilized to predict creep
phenomenological modelperformances
is presented of anda rubber vibration
validated. system for validating
The time-dependent, its engineering
loading-related, and
potential. A time-temperature
temperature-induced equivalent
creep behaviors ofanalysis
rubber by WLF equation
materials in glass
are studied. transition
The proposed temperature
method is is
also introduced.
further utilized By
to comparing
predict creep numerical and experimental
performances of a rubber results, the proposed
vibration system creep models could
for validating its
depict nonlinear
engineering creep behaviors
potential. of rubber materials
A time-temperature equivalentandanalysis
rubber byvibration systems, in
WLF equation which
glassprovides an
transition
option for rubber
temperature system
is also design and
introduced. its creep prediction.
By comparing numerical and experimental results, the proposed
creep models could depict nonlinear creep behaviors of rubber materials and rubber vibration
Author Contributions: conceptualization, D.L. and G.L.; methodology, D.L. and K.X.; software, K.X.; validation,
systems, which provides an option for rubber system design and its creep prediction.
Y.M. and L.Q.; formal analysis, Y.M.; investigation, G.L.; resources, L.Q.; data curation, L.Q.; writing—original draft
preparation,
Author D.L.; writing—review
Contributions: and editing,
conceptualization, G.L.;G.L.;
D. L. and visualization, L.Q.; D.L.
methodology, supervision,
and K.X.;G.L.; projectK.X.;
software, administration,
validation,
D.L.; funding acquisition, D.L. and Y.M.
Y.M. and L.Q.; formal analysis, Y.M.; investigation, G.L.; resources, L.Q.; data curation, L.Q.; writing—original
Funding:
draft This work
preparation, waswriting—review
D.L.; funded by National
and Natural
editing, Science Foundation of
G.L.; visualization, China
L.Q.; (No. 51709248),
supervision, Open
G.L.; project
Foundation of Henan Key Laboratory of Underwater Intelligent
administration, D.L.; funding acquisition, D. L. and Y.M. Equipment (KL03B1803) and National Natural
Science Foundation of Shandong Province (No. 201503014).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Daver, F.; Kajtaz, M.; Brandt, M.; Shanks, R. Creep and recovery behavior of polyolefin-rubber nanocomposites
developed for additive manufacturing. Polymers 2016, 8, 437. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Francesca, C.; Ettore, B.; Roly, W. Limitations of Viscoelastic Constitutive Models for Carbon-Black Reinforced
Rubber in Medium Dynamic Strains and Medium Strain Rates. Polymers 2018, 10, 988.
3. Pawel, M.; Skrodzewicz, J. A modified creep model of epoxy adhesive at ambient temperature. Int. J. Adhes.
Adhes. 2009, 29, 396–404.
4. Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, C.; Shi, S.; Chen, X. Mechanical properties of cerium oxide-modified
vulcanised natural rubber at elevated temperature. Plast. Rubber Compos. 2017, 46, 306–313. [CrossRef]
5. Boyce, M.C.; Arruda, E.M. Constitutive Models of Rubber Elasticity: A Review. Rubber Chem. Technol. 2000,
73, 504–523. [CrossRef]
6. Rivlin, R.S. Large Elastic Deformations of Isotropic Materials; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1997.
7. Mooney, M.A. Theory of Large Elastic Deformation. J. Appl. Phys. 1940, 11, 582. [CrossRef]
Polymers 2019, 11, 988 19 of 19

8. Mansouri, M.R.; Darijani, H. Constitutive modeling of isotropic hyperelastic materials in an exponential

framework using a self-contained approach. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2014, 51, 4316–4326. [CrossRef]
9. Ogden, R.W. Large Deformation Isotropic Elasticity—On the Correlation of Theory and Experiment for
Incompressible Rubberlike Solids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 1972, 326, 565–584. [CrossRef]
10. Yeoh, O.H. Some Forms of the Strain Energy Function for Rubber. Rubber Chem. Technol. 1993, 66, 754–771.
[CrossRef]
11. Li, X.; Wei, Y. Classic strain energy functions and constitutive tests of rubber-like materials. Rubber Chem.
Technol. 2015, 88, 604–627. [CrossRef]
12. Arruda, E.M.; Boyce, M.C. A three-dimensional constitutive model for the large stretch behavior of rubber
elastic materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 1993, 41, 389–412. [CrossRef]
13. Erman, B.; Flory, P.J. Relationships between stress, strain, and molecular constitution of polymer networks.
Comparison of theory with experiments. Macromolecules 1982, 15, 806–811. [CrossRef]
14. Luo, R.K.; Zhou, X.L.; Tang, J.F. Numerical prediction and experiment on rubber creep and stress relaxation
using time-dependent hyper elastic approach. Polym. Test. 2016, 52, 246–253. [CrossRef]
15. Skrzypek, J.J.; Hetnarski, R.B.; Mróz, Z. Plasticity and creep. Encycl. Tribol. 1994, 61, 749–750. [CrossRef]
16. Lee, B.S.; Rivin, E.I. Finite element analysis of load-deflection and creep characteristics of compressed rubber
components for vibration control devices. J. Mech. Des. 1996, 118, 328–336. [CrossRef]
17. Luo, R.K.; Wu, X.; Peng, L. Creep loading response and complete loading–unloading investigation of
industrial anti-vibration systems. Polym. Test. 2015, 46, 134–143. [CrossRef]
18. Rivin, E.I.; Lee, B.S. Experimental study of load-deflection and creep characteristics of compressed rubber
components for vibration control devices. J. Mech. Des. 1994, 116, 539–549. [CrossRef]
19. Oman, S.; Nagode, M. Observation of the relation between uniaxial creep and stress relaxation of filled
rubber. Mater. Des. 2014, 60, 451–457. [CrossRef]
20. Wang, H.; You, Z.; Mills-Beale, J.; Hao, P. Laboratory evaluation on high temperature viscosity and low
temperature stiffness of asphalt binder with high percent scrap tire rubber. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 26,
583–590. [CrossRef]
21. ASTM D575-91(2018) Standard Test Method for Rubber Properties in Compression, American Society for Testing
Materials Standard; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2018.
22. Mullins, L.; Harwood, J.A.C.; Payne, A.R. Stress Softening in Natural Rubber Vulcanizates. J. Appl. Polym.
Sci. 1965, 9, 3011–3021.
23. ABAQUS User’s Manual; Version 5.6; Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc.: Pawtucket, RI, USA, 1996.
24. Luo, R.K. Creep modelling and unloading evaluation of the rubber suspensions of rail vehicles. Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit 2015. [CrossRef]
25. Suchocki, C. Finite element implementation of slightly compressible and incompressible first invariant-based
hyperelasticity: Theory, coding, exemplary problems. J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 2017, 55, 787–800. [CrossRef]
26. Derham, C.J. Creep and stress relaxation of rubbers—The effects of stress history and temperature changes.
J. Mater. Sci. 1973, 8, 1023–1029. [CrossRef]
27. Luo, W.; Wang, C.; Hu, X.; Yang, T. Long-term creep assessment of viscoelastic polymer by
time-temperature-stress superposition. Acta Mech. Solida Sin. 2012, 25, 571–578. [CrossRef]
28. Jazouli, S.; Luo, W.; Bremand, F.; Vu-Khanh, T. Application of time–stress equivalence to nonlinear creep of
polycarbonate. Polym. Test. 2005, 24, 463–467. [CrossRef]
29. Williams, M.L.; Landel, R.F.; Ferry, J.D. The Temperature Dependence of Relaxation Mechanisms in
Amorphous Polymers and Other Glass-forming Liquids. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1955, 77, 3701–3707. [CrossRef]
30. Shivakumar, E.; Das, C.K.; Segal, E.; Narkis, M. Viscoelastic properties of ternary in situ elastomer composites
based on fluorocarbon, acrylic elastomers and thermotropic liquid crystalline polymer blends. Polymer 2005,
46, 3363–3371. [CrossRef]
31. Wei, K.; Wang, F.; Wang, P.; Liu, Z.X.; Zhang, P. Effect of temperature- and frequency-dependent dynamic
properties of rail pads on high-speed vehicle–track coupled vibrations. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2017, 55, 351–370.
[CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).