A Finite Element Method of Light-activated Polymeric Materials
A Finite Element Method of Light-activated Polymeric Materials
Shape-memory polymers (SMPs) belong to a class of smart materials that have shown promise for a widerange of applications. They are characterized by their ability to maintain a temporary deformed shapeand return to an original parent permanent shape. In this paper, we consider the coupled photomechani-cal behavior of light activated shape-memory polymers (LASMPs), focusing on the numerical aspects forfinite element simulations at the engineering scale. The photomechanical continuum framework is summa-rized, and some specific constitutive equations for LASMPs are described. Numerical implementation ofthe multiphysics governing partial differential equations takes the form of a user defined element subroutinewithin the commercial software package ABAQUS. We verify our two-dimensional and three-dimensionalfinite element procedure for multiple analytically tractable cases. To show the robustness of the numericalimplementation, simulations are performed under various geometries and complex photomechanical loading.
Published papers for details:
Craig, M.H., Cui, F., Chester, S.A., 2017. A finite element method for light activated shape‐memory polymers. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 111 (5), 447-473
Figure 1. Schematic of the polymer network and shape-memory effect in a simple cycle based on combined mechanical loading and irradiation. In all figures, the filled circles indicate chemical crosslinks in the original network, the open squares indicate unbonded chromophores, and lastly the filled squares indicate bonded chromophores. The thick blue line indicates the temporary shape, and the dashed line theoriginal reference body for this simple shape-memory cycle.
Figure 2. Verification for the radiative transfer problem on an unstructured mesh for (a) two-dimensions, and (b) three-dimensions. The top shows the computed finite element solution, the middle the analytical, and thebottom is the absolute value of the difference error.
Figure 3. Comparison of numerical solutions against analytical solution (given by the solid line) for a simple shape-memory cycle under uniaxial compression. (a) Uniaxial stretch versusnormalized stress response, (b) extent of bond reaction over time, (c) evolution of the normalized stress over time, and (d) evolution of the stretch over time.
Figure 4. Contours of the reaction extent on the deformed body at: (a) the end of the initial loading; after (b) 333 s, (c) 666 s, and (d) 1000 s of irradiation at wavelength of 300 nm during the crosslinking reacation; (e) the unloaded temporary shape; (f) after 400 s, g) 2000 s, (h) and 8000 s of irradiation at a wavelength of 200 nm during the cleavage reaction. In all cases, the thick black lines indicate the initial body, and note the change in scale foreach figure. We note that the values shown in the legend outside the range are an artifact of the interpolation for visualization only.
Figure 5. Contours of the reaction extent on the deformed body at: (a) the end of the initial loading; after (b) 333 s, (c) 666 s,and (d) 1000 s of irradiation at a wavelength of 300 nm during the crosslinking reacation; (e) the unloaded temporary shape; (f) after 666 s, g) 1333 s, h) and 4000 s of irradiation at a wavelength of 200 nm during the cleavage reaction. In all cases, the thick black lines indicate the initial body and note the change in scale foreach figure. We note that the values shown in the legend outside the range are an artifact of the interpolation for visualization only.