Dynamic Characterization of Soft Materials

  • Weinong W. Chen
  • Bo Song


Soft materials, such as elastomers, foams, gels, and biological tissues, possess low stiffness, yield strength, and wave speeds. These characteristics pose challenges in experiment design to obtain the dynamic properties of soft materials at high rates of loading. The low wave speeds delay the stress equilibrium in the specimen. Low strength and stiffness require highly sensitive load detection system. Low strength also makes inertia effects significant. This chapter illustrates these challenges as they are encountered in high-rate experiments using Kolsky bars. Experimental solutions designed to overcome these difficulties are then introduced and demonstrated.


Soft materials High strain-rates Split Hopkinson bar Pulse shaping Dynamic equilibrium High-rate responses 



Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy under Contract DE-ACO4–94AL85000.


  1. Bacon C (1998) An experimental method for considering dispersion and attenuation in a viscoelastic Hopkinson bar. Exp Mech 38:242–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bragov AM, Lomunov AK (1995) Methodological aspects of studying dynamic material properties using the Kolsky method. Int J Impact Eng 16:321–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen W, Lu F (2000) A technique for dynamic proportional multiaxial compression on soft materials. Exp Mech 40:226–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen W, Song B (2005) Dynamic compression testing on polymeric foams. In: Experiments in Automotive Engineering – Optical Techniques, 2005 SAE World Congress, April 11–14, 2005, Detroit, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen W, Zhou B (1998) Constitutive behavior of Epon 828/T-403 at various strain rates. Mech Time-Depend Mater 2:103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen W, Zhang B, Forrestal MJ (1999) A split Hopkinson bar technique for low-impedance materials. Exp Mech 39:81–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen W, Lu F, Cheng M (2000a) Tension and compression tests of two polymers under quasi-static and dynamic loading. Polym Test 21:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen W, Lu F, Zhou B (2000b) A quartz-crystal-embedded split Hopkinson pressure bar for soft materials. Exp Mech 40:1–6MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen W, Lu F, Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ (2002) Dynamic compression testing of soft materials. ASME Trans J Appl Mech 69:214–223MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen W, Song B, Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ (2003) Dynamic small strain measurements of a metal specimen with a split Hopkinson pressure bar. Exp Mech 43:20–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen WW, Song B (2006) Temperature dependence of a NiTi shape meomory alloy’s superelastic behavior at high strain rates. J Mech Mater Struct 1:339–356CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen WW, Wu Q, Kang JH, Winfree NA (2001) Compressive superelastic behavior of a NiTi shape memory alloy at strain rates of 0. 001–750 s − 1. Int J Solids Struct 38:8989–8998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clamroth R (1981) Determination of viscoelastic properties by dynamic testing. Polym Test, 2:263–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Casem D, Weerasooriya T, Moy P (2003) Acceleration compensation of quartz transducers embedded in a split Hopkinson pressure bar. In: Proceedings of the 2003 SEM annual conference and exposition on experimental and applied mechanics, June 2–4, 2003, Charlotte, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  15. Casem D, Weerasooriya T, Moy P (2005) Inertial effects of quartz force transducers embedded in a split Hopkinson pressure bar. Exp Mech 45:368–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Casem DT, Fourney WL, Chang P (2003) A polymeric split Hopkinson pressure bar instrumented with velocity gages. Exp Mech 43:420–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Christensen RJ, Swanson SR, Brown WS (1972) Split-Hopkinson-bar tests on rocks under confining pressure. Exp Mech November 508–513Google Scholar
  18. Davis EDH, Hunter SC (1963) The dynamic compression test of solids by the method of the split Hopkinson pressure bar. J Mech Phys Solids 11:155–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dioh NN, Leevers PS, Williams JG (1993) Thickness effects in split Hopkinson pressure bar tests. Polymer 34:4230–4234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Duffy J, Campbell JD, Hawley RH (1971) On the use of a torsional split Hopkinson bar to study rate effects in 1100–0 aluminum. ASME Trans J Appl Mech 37:83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ellwood S, Griffiths LJ, Parry DJ (1982) Materials testing at high constant strain rates. J Phys E: Sci Instrum 15:280–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Forrestal MJ, Wright TW, Chen W (2006) The effect of radial inertia on brittle samples during the split Hopkinson pressure bar test. Int J Impact Eng 34:405–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frantz CE, Follansbee PS, Wright WT (1984) Experimental techniques with the split Hopkinson pressure bar. In: Berman I, Schroeder JW (eds) High energy rate fabrication, Proceedings of the 8th international conference on high energy rate fabrication, pp 229–236, San Antonio, TexasGoogle Scholar
  24. Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ, Chen W (2001) A split Hopkinson pressure bar technique to determine compressive stress-strain data for rock materials. Exp Mech 41:40–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ, Chen W (2002) Pulse shaping techniques for testing brittle materials with a split Hopkinson pressure bar. Exp Mech 42:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ, Chen W (2005) Pulse shaping techniques for testing elastic-plastic materials with a split Hopkinson pressure bar. Exp Mech 45:186–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gorham DA (1989) Specimen inertia in high strain-rate compression. J Phys D: Appl Phys 22:1888–1893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gray GT (2000) Classic split-Hopkinson pressure bar testing. In: Mechanical testing and evaluation, ASM metals handbook, American Society for Metals, OhioGoogle Scholar
  29. Gray GT, Blumenthal WR (2000) Split Hopkinson pressure bar testing of soft materials. In: Mechanical testing and evaluation, ASM metals handbook, 8:488–496, American Society for Metals, OhioGoogle Scholar
  30. Gray GT, Blumenthal WR, Trujillo CP, Carpenter RW (1997) Influence of temperature and strain rate on the mechanical behavior of Adiprene L-100. J Phys IV France Colloque C3 (DYMAT 97) 7:523–528Google Scholar
  31. Harris JA (1987) Dynamic testing under nonsinusoidal conditions and the consequences of nonlinearity for service performance. Rubber Chem Tech 60:870–887Google Scholar
  32. Karnes CH, Ripperger EA (1966) Strain rate effects in cold worked high-purity aluminum. J Mech Phys Solids 14:75–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. King AI (2000) Fundamentals of impact biomechanics: part I – biomechanics of the head, neck, and thorax. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2:55–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kolsky H (1949) An investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very high rates of loading. Proc Phys Soc Lond B62:676–700Google Scholar
  35. Kriven WM, Rosczyk BR, Kremeyer K, Song B, Chen W (2003) Transformation toughening of a calcium zirconate matrix by dicalcium silicate under ballistic impact. In: Kriven WM, Lin HT (eds) 27th international Cocoa Beach conference on advanced ceramics and composites: A, ceramic engineering and science proceedings, 24:383–388Google Scholar
  36. Liu Q, Subhash G (2006) Characterization of viscoelastic properties of polymer bar using iterative deconvolution in the time domain. Mech Mater 38:1105–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marais ST, Tait RB, Cloete TJ, Nurick GN (2004) Material testing at high strain rate using the split Hopkinson pressure bar. Latin Amer J Solids Struct 1:319–339Google Scholar
  38. Meng H, Li QM (2003) An SHPB set-up with reduced time-shift and pressure bar length. Int J Impact Eng 28:677–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Meyers MA (1994) Dynamic behavior of materials. Wiley, New YorkMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moy P, Weerasooriya T, Juliano TF, VanLandingham MR (2006) Dynamic response of an alternative tissue stimulant, physically associating gels (PAG). In: Proceedings of the SEM annual conference and exposition on experimental and applied mechanics, June 4–7, 2006, St. Louis, MissouriGoogle Scholar
  41. Nemat-Nasser S (2000) Introduction to high strain rate testing. In: Mechanical testing and evaluation, ASM metals handbook, 8:427–446, American Society for Metals, OhioGoogle Scholar
  42. Nemat-Nasser S, Isaacs JB, Starrett JE (1991) Hopkinson techniques for dynamic recovery experiments. Proc Royal Soc 435:371–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ninan L, Tsai J, Sun CT (2001) Use of split Hopkinson pressure bar for testing off-axis composites. Int J Impact Eng 25:291–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Oguni K, Ravichandran G (1999) Dynamic behavior of fiber reinforced composites under multiaxial compression. In: Thick composites for loading bearing structures, pp 87–96, ASMEGoogle Scholar
  45. Pan Y, Chen W, Song B (2005) The upper limit of constant strain rates in a split Hopkinson pressure bar experiment with elastic specimens. Exp Mech 45:440–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Park SW, Zhou M (1999) Separation of elastic waves in split Hopkinson bars using one-point strain measurements. Exp Mech 39:287–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Parry DJ, Dixon PR, Hodson S, Al-Maliky N (1994) Stress equilibrium effects within Hopkinson bar experiments. J Phys IV C8:107–112Google Scholar
  48. Parry PJ, Walker AG, Dixon PR (1995) Hopkinson bar pulse smoothing. Meas Sci Tech 6:443–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pervin F, Chen W (2009) Dynamic mechanical response of bovine gray matter and white matter brain tissues under compression. J Biomech 42:731–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Progelhof RC (1986) Impact measurement of low-pressure thermoplastic structural foam. In: Proceedings of instrumented impact testing of plastics and composite materials, Houston TX, ASTM, March 11–12, 1986, 105–116Google Scholar
  51. Ramesh KT, Narasimhan S (1996) Finite deformations and the dynamic measurement of radial strains in compression Kolsky bar experiments. Int J Solids Struct 33: 3723–3738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rao S, Shim VPW, Quah SE (1997) Dynamic mechanical properties of polyurethane elastomers using a nonmetallic Hopkinson bar. J Appl Polym Sci 66:619–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ravichandran G, Subhash G (1994) Critical appraisal of limiting strain rates for compression resting of ceramics in a split Hopkinson pressure bar. J Am Ceram Soc 77:263–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Samanta SK (1971) Dynamic deformation of aluminum and copper at elevated temperatures. J Mech Phys Solids 19:117–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sarva S, Nemat-Nasser S (2001) Dynamic compressive strength of silicon carbide under uniaxial compression. Mater Sci Eng A317:140–144Google Scholar
  56. Sarva SS, Deschanel S, Boyce MC, Chen W (2007) Stress–strain behavior of a polyurea and a polyurethane from low to high strain rates. Polymer 48:2208–2213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sawas O, Brar NS, Brockman RA (1998) Dynamic characterization of compliant materials using an all-polymeric split Hopkinson bar. Exp Mech 38:204–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shergold OA, Fleck NA, Radford D (2006) The uniaxial stress versus strain response of pig skin and silicone rubber at low and high strain rates. Int J Impact Eng 32:1384–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Song B, Chen W (2003) One-dimensional dynamic compressive behavior of EPDM rubber. ASME Trans J Eng Mater Tech 125:294–301CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  60. Song B, Chen W (2004a) Dynamic stress equilibration in split Hopkinson pressure bar tests on soft materials. Exp Mech 44:300–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Song B, Chen W (2004b) Dynamic compressive behavior of EPDM rubber under nearly uniaxial strain conditions. ASME Trans J Eng Mater Tech 126:213–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Song B, Chen W (2004c) A SHPB pulse shaping technique for dynamic stress–strain loops. In: Proceedings of the 2004 SEM X international congress and exposition on experimental and applied mechanics, June 7–10, 2004, Costa Mesa, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  63. Song B, Chen W (2004d) Loading and unloading SHPB pulse shaping techniques for dynamic hysteretic loops. Exp Mech 44:622–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Song B, Chen W (2005) Split Hopkinson bar techniques for characterizing soft materials. Latin Amer J Solids Struct 2: 113–152Google Scholar
  65. Song B, Chen W, Weerasooriya T (2003) Quasi-static and dynamic compressive behaviors of a S-2 Glass/SC15 composite. J Compos Mater 37:1723–1743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Song B, Chen W, Frew DJ (2004) Quasi-static and dynamic compressive and failure behaviors of an epoxy syntactic foam. J Compos Mater 38:915–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Song B, Chen W, Jiang X (2005a) Split Hopkinson pressure bar experiments on polymeric foams. Int J Vehicle Des 37:185–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Song B, Chen W, Yanagita T, Frew DJ (2005b) Confinement effects on dynamic compressive properties of an epoxy syntactic foam. Compos Struct 67:279–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Song B, Chen W, Yanagita T, Frew DJ (2005c) Temperature effects on dynamic compressive behavior of an epoxy syntactic foam. Compos Struct 67:289–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Song B, Chen WW, Dou S, Winfree NA, Kang JH (2005d) Strain-rate effects on elastic and early cell-collapse responses of a polystyrene foam. Int J Impact Eng 31:509–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Song B, Forrestal MJ, Chen W (2006) Dynamic and quasi-static propagation of compaction waves in a low density epoxy foam. Exp Mech 46:127–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Song B, Chen W, Lu W-Y (2007a) Mechanical characterization at intermediate strain rates for rate effects on an epoxy syntactic foam. Int J Mech Sci 49:1336–1343Google Scholar
  73. Song B, Ge Y, Chen W, Weerasooriya T (2007b) Radial inertia effects in Kolsky bar testing of extra-soft specimens. Exp Mech 47:659–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Song B, Ge Y, Chen W, Weerasooriya T (2007c) Dynamic and quasi-static compressive response of a porcine muscle. J Biomech 40:2999–3005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Song B, Syn CJ, Grupido CL, Chen W, Lu W-Y (2008) A long split Hopkinson pressure bar (LSHPB) for intermediate-rate characterization of soft materials. Exp Mech 48:809–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Soong SY, Cohen RE, Boyce MC, Chen W (2008) The effects of thermomechanical history and strain rate on antiplasticization of PVC. Polymer 49:1440–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sounik DF, Gansen P, Clemons JL, Liddle JW (1997) Head-impact testing of polyurethane energy-absorbing (EA) foams. SAE Trans J Mater Manufact 106:211–220Google Scholar
  78. Subhash G, Ravichandran G. (2000) Split-Hopkinson pressure bar testing of ceramics. In: Mechanical testing and evaluation, ASM metals handbook, vol. 8. American Society for Metals, Ohio, pp 497–504Google Scholar
  79. Subhash G, Dowding RJ, Kecskes LJ (2002) Characterization of uniaxial compressive response of bulk amorphous Zr-Ti-Cu-Ni-Be alloy. Mater Sci Eng A334:33–40Google Scholar
  80. Togami TC, Baker WE, Forrestal MJ (1996) A split Hopkinson pressure bar technique to evaluate the performance of accelerometers. ASME Trans J Appl Mech 63:353–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wang L, Labibes K, Azari Z, Pluvinage G (1994) Generalization of split Hopkinson bar technique to use viscoelastic bars. Int J Impact Eng 15:669–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wasley RJ, Hoge KG, Cast JC (1969) Combined strain gauge-quartz crystal instrumented Hopkinson split bar. Rev Sci Instrum 40:889–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Whirley RG, Hallquist JO (1991) DYNA3D: A nonlinear, explict, three-dimensional finite element code for solid and structural mechanics – user manual. UCRL-MA-107254. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  84. Wu XJ, Gorham DA (1997) Stress equilibrium in the split Hopkinson pressure bar test. J Phys IV France C3:91–96Google Scholar
  85. Zencker U, Clos R (1998) Limiting conditions for compression testing of flat specimens in the split Hopkinson pressure bar. Exp Mech 39:343–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Zhang J, Song B, Pintar FA, Yogannandan N, Chen W, Gennarelli TA (2008) A pilot study on high strain rate material properties of brain stimulant. Biomed Sci Instru 44:129–134Google Scholar
  87. Zhao H, Gary G (1995) A three dimensional analytical solution of the longitudinal wave propagation in an infinite linear viscoelastic cylindrical bar: application to experimental techniques. J Mech Phys Solids 43:1335–1348MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  88. Zhao H, Gary G (1997) A new method for separation of waves. application to the SHPB technique for an unlimited measuring duration. J Mech Phys Solids 45:1185–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zhao H, Gary G (2002) Behaviour characterization of polymeric foams over a large range of strain rates. Int J Vehicle Des 30:135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Zhao H, Gary G, Klepaczko JR (1997) On the use of a viscoelastic split Hopkinson pressure bar. Int J Impact Eng 19:319–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Zukas, JA, Nicholas T, Swift HF, Greszczuk LB, Curran DR (1992) Impact Dynamics. Krieger, FLGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Weinong W. Chen
    • 1
  • Bo Song
    • 2
  1. 1.Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Sandia National LaboratoriesLivermoreUSA

Personalised recommendations