Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683

www.elsevier.nl/locate/polytest

Property Modelling
Modelling the behaviour of plastics for design under impact
G. Dean, B. Read
Centre for Materials Measurement and Technology, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex TW11 0LW, UK

Received 9 October 2000; accepted 19 December 2000

Abstract

Computer methods based on finite element analysis are able to predict the performance of plastics under impact
loading. Although the accuracy of results depends on the model used to describe the deformation behaviour of the
polymer, whichever model is used, the analysis requires stress/strain data over a wide range of strain rate. These data
are most conveniently measured in tension, but procedures are currently not available for determining results at high
strain rates. ISO standards for tensile property measurement are applicable for strain rates up to around 0.1 s⫺1. To
simulate behaviour under impact, data are required at rates that are 3 or 4 orders of magnitude higher than this. For
accurate data acquisition at these higher rates, attention needs to be paid to apparatus design in order to minimise
contributions from transient forces arising from resonances and the propagation of shock waves in the apparatus. In
addition, procedures and extensometers are not routinely available for determining strains at the higher rates of defor-
mation. This paper illustrates the acquisition of data over a wide range of strain rates through a combination of measure-
ments at low and moderate strain rates with extrapolation of these data to higher rates. In order to maximise accuracy
at moderate strain rates, suitable designs need to be selected for the transducers, the test specimen geometry and the
test assembly. Extrapolation is achieved by the use of mathematical functions to model the stress/strain curves and
their rate dependence. Reference is also made to the development of a new materials model for describing the defor-
mation behaviour of toughened plastics at large strains.  2001 NPL. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights
reserved.

Keywords: Measurement; Plastics; Modelling; Impact; Materials; FEA

1. Computer aided design
Most modern grades of plastics are very tough
materials that are capable of sustaining large strain levels
prior to failure, making them an attractive option for
many applications. Such applications include housings
for domestic and electronic appliances, which may have
to sustain accidental impact without showing signs of
damage, and interior components of motor vehicles,
which may be impacted by occupants in a crash and must
minimise damage to the human body part involved. In
these applications and others, it is important that the per-
formance and the safe operating limits of the component
under impact are known. Substantial savings can be
made in both time and cost if this can be done through
competent design rather than the moulding and testing
of prototypes. Computer methods are available based on
finite element analysis that enable predictions to be made
of performance under realistic loading situations.
There are two factors that limit the wider use of these
computer methods. Firstly, a lack of recognised and rou-
tine test methods for measuring some of the data required
by the analysis, and secondly, limited knowledge of the
validity for plastics of the materials models employed by
the computer analysis, and thus uncertainty in the accu-
racy of derived results.
This paper discusses the experimental issues associa-
ted with data measurement, and a procedure for
determining properties by modelling and extrapolation
is proposed. The limitations of elastic–plastic materials

0142-9418/01/$ - see front matter  2001 NPL. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 2 - 9 4 1 8 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 0 3 - 4
678 G. Dean, B. Read / Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683
models for describing non-linear deformation in plastics
are also discussed and the basis for a new model is
explained.
2. Determination of data required for impact
analysis
2.1. Materials models and data
Non-linear stress/strain behaviour of plastics is gener-
ally associated with an enhanced stress–relaxation, or
creep arising from an increase in molecular mobility
induced by elevated stresses. Much of the strain is recov-
erable at levels below the yield strain. Satisfactory mod-
els of non-linear viscoelasticity have yet to be developed,
and most FE packages consider material non-linearity in
terms of elastic–plastic models that were developed for
metals and adapted for use with plastics and other
materials.
With elastic–plastic models, calculations of stress and
strain distributions at low strains (ⱕ0.01) are based on
the theory of linear elasticity using, for isotropic
materials, values of the Young’s modulus E and elastic
Poisson’s ratio ne. The onset of non-linearity in a stress–
strain curve is then ascribed to plastic deformation and
occurs at a stress level regarded as the first yield stress.
The subsequent increase in yield stress with strain is
associated with the effects of strain hardening. The hard-
ening behaviour is required by the computer analysis and
is most commonly defined by a plot of tensile yield stress
against the tensile plastic strain. This is derived from a
measured tensile stress/strain curve by subtracting the
elastic component of strain at each stress level. Since
plastics are viscoelastic materials, the hardening curves
are dependent upon the strain rate associated with the
applied load.
2.2. Experimental methods
Much of the material property data required by a finite
element analysis of the performance of a component
under impact loading can be derived from a series of
tensile stress/strain curves measured over a range of
strain rates. For many applications, the strain rate should
reach or exceed 100 s⫺1. Standard test methods for meas-
uring tensile behaviour are confined to strain rates below
0.1 s⫺1. Using servo-hydraulic test machines, smaller
specimens and light weight extensometers, reliable
results can generally be obtained to strain rates around
1 s⫺1. Above this value experimental difficulties,
especially with strain measurement, can significantly
reduce the accuracy of results.
The development of high-speed extensometers that
operate at higher strain rates has been reported, although
these devices are not used routinely for data acquisition.
A simpler approach to determining strain in such tests is
to derive values from cross-head movement or the
change in grip separation. An apparent or average strain
is obtained from the ratio of the change in grip separation
to the length of the specimen between the grips prior to
load application. [Note, if the measurement of cross-head
movement is used then a correction will, in general, be
necessary arising from the compliance of the test
assembly.] Since the test specimen is usually waisted in
the gauge region, this average strain will differ from
actual strain in the gauge region of the specimen, where
the corresponding stress is calculated. It is possible to
estimate the actual strain values from the average strain
using a correlation of these quantities determined from
lower speed tests, where actual strain can be measured
with extensometers. The correlation obtained will be spe-
cific to a particular test machine, the specimen size and
geometry and the strain level in the specimen when this
is above the limit for linear behaviour. There will also
be a small dependence upon material properties and
hence test speed.
There remains some concern over the use of this
approach for determining strain in materials where the
strain is not uniform in the gauge section of the specimen
beyond the peak in the stress/strain curve. Materials that
show a visible neck region are an extreme example of
this.
In this way, it is generally possible to obtain valid
tensile data up to test speeds of around 1 m/s which will
correspond to strain rates of typically 10 s⫺1. At test
speeds above this, additional problems arise. Owing to
the finite time for the hydraulic ram to accelerate to the
set speed, the test will not be performed under constant
strain rate. In general, this is not a major problem since
in the initial part of the test where the behaviour is linear,
the strain rate is less than in the latter part where plastic
deformation is dominant. Hence, elastic and plastic
behaviour should be analysed using different values of
strain rate. A more serious problem arises with the rapid
accelerations associated with load application that give
rise to transient forces. Such forces are recorded by the
force transducer and superimposed onto the measured
force on the specimen. These transient forces arise from
excitation of a resonance of the force transducer and
from multiple reflections of the acoustic pulse generated
at one end of the specimen by the sudden load appli-
cation. The influence of these forces on the accuracy of
measurements can be minimised by using components
of low mass in the test assembly and a high stiffness
force transducer and by filtering or smoothing the
force signal.
2.3. Data acquisition by materials modelling
The measurement of data characterising rate-depen-
dent behaviour suitable for impact analyses is laborious
 G. Dean, B. Read / Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683
and prone to errors unless suitable precautions are taken.
An alternative approach to obtaining plastic strain hard-
ening behaviour at high strain rates is to use mathemat-
ical models of stress/strain curves measured at low and
intermediate strain rates to extrapolate behaviour to
higher rates where experimental difficulties arise. The
advantages of this approach are:
1. Data acquisition is achieved with the use of minimal
testing effort and expensive apparatus. The testing
procedures required for data extrapolation are rela-
tively straightforward.
2. Extensive materials property data can be readily cal-
culated from a mathematical function together with
values for the material parameters in this function that
have been derived from selected tests. This is a con-
venient and efficient way of accessing materials
properties in a package that allows a user to define
the expression for rate-dependent hardening.
3. If valid functions are available for modelling rate-
dependent behaviour, then materials properties at
high strain rates derived by extrapolation will be more
accurate than measured values. This may be parti-
cularly relevant for those materials in which the strain
distribution in the gauge length of the specimen is not
uniform after the peak load has been reached. Meas-
ured stresses and strains are then average values
which can depart significantly from true stress and
strain in regions of strain localisation.
To address this latter problem, true stress and strain
measurements can be made using a video extensometer
and multiple, short gauge regions along the specimen.
By measuring lateral strain as well as longitudinal strain,
in these discrete regions in the tensile specimen, values
for Poisson’s ratio and thus true stresses can be calcu-
lated. Video extensometers can only be used at low or
moderate strain rates but by extrapolating precise
measurements at these rates to higher rates, it should be
possible to achieve higher accuracy in true stress and
strain values than is possible by measurement of aver-
age values.
The realisation of these objectives depends critically
on the validity of the model functions used to describe
strain and strain-rate dependence. Some suitable func-
tions are proposed below and their application illustrated
using extensive property data measured on a propylene–
ethylene copolymer containing 8% ethylene.
2.4. Modelling plastic strain hardening
Fig. 1 shows true stress/true strain curves for the pro-
pylene copolymer measured in tension at strain rates
ranging from 3×10−4 s⫺1 to 90 s⫺1. These strain rates
refer to strain levels of 0.03 and above where plastic
679
Fig. 1. Tensile stress–strain curves for a propylene–ethylene
copolymer measured at different test speeds. The values for the
plastic strain rate for each test are shown with each curve.
deformation is dominant. At strain rates between 0.0003
s⫺1 and 0.03 s⫺1 measurements were obtained using the
ISO multipurpose test specimen and cross-head speeds
of 1, 10 and 100 mm/min. Strain measurements at low
values (ⱕ0.01) were made using contacting exten-
someters to measure both the longitudinal and transverse
strains. At higher strains, a contacting lateral exten-
someter was used for transverse strain measurements,
and a video extensometer was used to obtain longitudinal
strains. From these measurements, Poisson’s ratio was
derived over the strain range and used to calculate values
for the true tensile stress. No significant variation of
Poisson’s ratio with strain rate was discernible from
these tests.
Data at strain rates between 0.2 and 30 were obtained
using tensile specimens having the same geometry as the
standard multipurpose specimen but scaled to half the
size. A servohydraulic test machine was used to achieve
cross-head speeds in the range 10 to 1000 mm/s. Con-
tacting extensometers were used to measure longitudinal
strain up to a strain of about 0.1 in tests carried out at
speeds of 10 and 100 mm/s. At higher strains, and in
tests at the higher speed of 1 m/s, longitudinal strains
were derived from measurements of cross-head move-
ment. Data at the highest strain rate were obtained from
falling weight impact tests at a speed at contact of 4 m/s.
Lateral strain measurements were not made in tests at
strain rates above 0.03 s⫺1. Since tests at lower rates
showed that any variation of Poisson’s ratio with strain
rate was small, true stresses in the higher rate tests were
calculated using Poisson’s ratio data obtained at the
lower rates.
Values for tensile modulus E were obtained at each
strain rate from measurements below a strain level of
0.005. These were used to derive curves of stress s
against plastic strain ep based on the assumption that the
680 G. Dean, B. Read / Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683

parameters b and q are essentially rate independent for

this material and can be assumed to take average values
of 0.69 and 0.6 respectively without any loss of predic-
tive accuracy.
The parameter eps decreases with strain rate and
reflects a shift in the strain at which the peak in stress
occurs with increasing strain rate as observed in Fig. 2.
This dependence can be either modelled as shown below
or assumed constant for convenience, if the associated
loss of precision is acceptable.

2.5. Modelling rate-dependent behaviour

The variation of the yield stress of polymers with

strain rate is generally described using the Eyring equ-
Fig. 2. True tensile stress/true tensile plastic strain curves ation [1]. In its most simple form, this can be written
derived from the data in the figure.
sy⫽A⫹B log ėp (3)
where sy is usually the peak stress in a tensile test carried
total strain e is the sum of elastic and plastic compo-
out at the strain rate ėp and A and B are temperature-
nents. Thus
dependent materials parameters. The rate-dependence of
s the parameters so and sf in Table 1 have accordingly
ep⫽e⫺ (1)
E been modelled using the expressions
The resulting curves are shown in Fig. 2 and are the rate- sf⫽sfo⫹b log ėp (4a)
dependent hardening data required by a finite element and
analysis.
Each of these curves can be accurately modelled by a so⫽soo⫹c log ėp (4b)
function of the form
Plots of sf and so taken from Table 1 against log ėp
s⫽[so⫹(sf⫺so)(1⫺exp⫺(ep/eps)b)](1⫺qep) (2)
are shown in Fig. 3. Eq. (4) gives a satisfactory fit to

With this curve, stress values range between so (the first

yield stress) corresponding to zero plastic strain and a
value of around sf (the initial flow stress) corresponding
approximately to the plateau stress. The parameter eps
represents some mean strain within the strain range over
which the stress rises rapidly between so and sf, and the
parameter b influences the width of that range. The term
containing the parameter q describes a small decrease of
stress with plastic strain beyond the strain at which the
peak in stress occurs. Values for these parameters giving
the best fit of Eq. (2) to each of the curves in Fig. 2 are
shown in Table 1.
It is evident from Table 1 that the main strain rate Fig. 3. Plots of the parameters sf, so and eps shown in Table
dependence occurs in the parameters so and sf. The 1 against log plastic strain rate.

Table 1
Values for the parameters in Eq. (2) giving the fits shown to the data in Fig. 2

ėp (s⫺1) 0.00035 0.004 0.027 0.20 2.1 29 91

so (MPa) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
sf (MPa) 27 29.3 31.7 35.4 39.5 42.5 46.5
eps 0.013 0.010 0.009 0.008 0.0075 0.006 0.005
b 0.63 0.63 0.70 0.68 0.70 0.75 0.75
q 0.56 0.51 0.47 0.70 0.76 0.59 0.54
 G. Dean, B. Read / Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683
Fig. 4. Comparisons of tensile data with calculated values
using Eq. (7) and the parameters in Table 2.
the data and yield values for sfo and soo of 38 MPa and
10.6 MPa respectively. The parameters b and c are 3.6
MPa and 1.1 MPa respectively. The variation of the para-
meter eps can also be adequately described by a linear
dependence on log ėp as also shown in Fig. 3. Thus tak-
ing
eps⫽eso⫺d log ėp
values for eso of 0.0077 and for d of 0.0013 have been
derived.
In general it will be possible to simplify Eq. (4) with
negligible loss of accuracy. It can be seen from the para-
meters derived from Fig. 3 that Eq. (4) can be written
sf⫽sfo(1⫹a log ėp)
so⫽soo(1⫹a log ėp)
where a is approximately 0.090. Eq. (2) then takes the
form
s⫽(sfo⫺(sfo⫺soo)exp⫺(ep/eps)b)(1⫺qep)(1⫹a log ėp)
It is worth noting that if eps is assumed constant, inde-
pendent of strain rate, then the strain and strain-rate
dependencies of s in Eq. (7) are separable. This can
make implementation of materials properties as a user-
defined hardening function easier in certain FE packages.
Fig. 4 shows comparisons of Eq. (7) with the experi-
mental data using values for the parameters given in
Table 2.
Table 2
Values for the parameters in Eqs. (7) and (5) used to model strain and strain-rate dependent yield in the propylene copolymer
sfo (MPa) soo (MPa) a q
38 10.6 0.090
681
It can be seen that the comparison between the func-
tion and experimental data is very satisfactory except at
the highest rate of 91 s⫺1. The departure here may arise
from experimental error in the data which were determ-
ined using the falling weight impact method. Alterna-
tively, it may indicate the onset of a breakdown of Eq.
(4a) at this rate. With any predictive method, it is neces-
sary to establish the limitations in the functions
especially when used for extrapolation. The validity of
Eq. (4a) over a wider range of strain rate can be explored
through the use of measurements at lower temperatures
as discussed below.
Evidence that Eqs. (3) and (4) represent an over sim-
plification of yielding kinetics has been reported for
some polymers [2,3] and attributed to a contribution to
the yield stress from a secondary (lower temperature)
relaxation process. Assuming that this process gives an
additive contribution to the yield stress, it follows that
the sf vs log ėp plot (Fig. 3) will show a change to a
steeper gradient at a strain rate dependent on the kinetics
of the secondary relaxation. This change of gradient
occurs at lower strain rates if the temperature is lowered,
as shown in Fig. 5. In this figure, the maximum stress
sy at each strain rate is identified from tensile tests at
(5) different absolute temperatures T and is plotted as the
ratio sy/T against log strain rate. By normalising with
respect to the absolute temperature T, the analysis shows
that the gradients of both regions (with and without con-
tributions from the secondary relaxation respectively) are
(6)
(7)
Fig. 5. Plots of sy/T against log strain rate for the propylene–
ethylene copolymer at different temperatures. Here, sv refers to
the peak value of stress on a stress/strain curve.
b eso d
0.6 0.69 0.007 0.0013
682 G. Dean, B. Read / Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683

the same at each temperature. The transition to a steeper

gradient is then easier to identify, and it is possible to
estimate where this will occur at temperatures around
and above ambient.

3. The application of materials models

3.1. Limitations of elastic–plastic models

For an elastic–plastic model which assumes that plas-

tic deformation is described by a von Mises yield cri-
terion, the only data requirements are elastic properties
and a hardening curve represented by a plot of yield
stress against plastic strain. If rate dependent behaviour Fig. 6. Experimental stress/strain curves for an acrylonitrile–
butadiene–styrene (ABS) polymer obtained from tests under
is to be modelled then curves spanning a range of strain
uniaxial compression, uniaxial tension and shear.
rate are needed, as shown in Fig. 2. However, in order
to establish how valid the von Mises criterion is for a
particular material, it is necessary to compare hardening
functions obtained under different stress states. In this the tensile curve. Clearly plastic deformation under a ten-
way, the sensitivity of yielding to the hydrostatic compo- sile stress is different from that under compression or
nent of stress can be investigated. Tensile data are gener- shear. The plastic deformation mechanism that deter-
ally used for this purpose as data acquisition is relatively mines behaviour under tension is associated with the
straightforward, together with results from shear or uni- nucleation of multiple crazes or cavities in the polymer.
axial compression tests. Results are analysed using a Since this requires a dilatational component of stress or
yield criterion with sensitivity to the hydrostatic compo- strain, the process is not observed in compression or
nent of stress [4,5]. The simplest of these is shear. In the case of ABS, the rubber phase acts as
centres for nucleation of cavities which serve to produce
冑3(l+1) (l−1) enhanced yielding around the rubber particles leading to
sT ⫽ 2D ⫹
J1/2 J (8) a reduction in the tensile yield stresses relative to equiv-
2l 2l 1
alent stresses in shear and compression. This behaviour
where J1/2
2D is the 2nd invariant of the deviatoric stress is revealed by measurements of Poisson’s ratio with
tensor and is a measure of the effective shear stress in strain as shown in Fig. 7. Initially, Poisson’s ratio is
the material. J1 is another stress invariant and is the observed to rise slightly with strain consistent with a
hydrostatic stress component. The parameter sT is a ten- plastic deformation mechanism that is predominantly
sile yield stress and will depend upon plastic strain ep. shear in character. At a strain of around 0.02, the Pois-
The function sT(ep) is the plastic strain hardening func- son’s ratio decreases as cavities start to nucleate, and a
tion and is shown at different strain rates by the data in deformation mechanism is initiated that involves sig-
Fig. 2. The parameter l is a measure of the sensitivity nificant dilatational strain. This cavity nucleation process
of yielding to the hydrostatic stress. Its magnitude can
be determined by analysis of the tests under different
stress states and lies typically in the range 1.1–1.2.
The yield behaviour of many materials cannot be read-
ily modelled using Eq. (8). Such materials are character-
istically multiphase polymers that have been specially
formulated by blending or copolymerisation to improve
toughness. A common example of such a material is
acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS). Results of tests
carried out on a typical grade of this material under uni-
axial tension, uniaxial compression and shear are shown
in Fig. 6. If the results of the shear and compression tests
are analysed using Eq. (8), then a value for l=1.2 is
obtained. However, if tension and compression data or
tension and shear data are compared, then the derived Fig. 7. Comparison of tensile and shear test data for the ABS
values for l are significantly higher and must vary with polymer showing the onset of dilatational plastic deformation
plastic strain as a consequence of the different shape of in the tensile test at a strain of about 0.02.
 G. Dean, B. Read / Polymer Testing 20 (2001) 677–683
Fig. 8. Comparison of tensile stress/strain data for the ABS
polymer with the curve predicted usng the new model with
hardening data from a shear test.
is responsible for the observed reduction in tensile
yield stresses.
3.2. A new model for toughened plastics
An alternative elastic–plastic model is currently being
developed based on the Gurson model [6] for porous
plasticity in metals. The Gurson model describes
enhanced yielding caused by the nucleation of cavities
around rigid inclusions in the material. These are
nucleated by the debonding of the inclusions and the
matrix at a critical level of plastic strain. This model is
being modified to take into consideration three important
features of toughened plastics.
1. A modification of the yield criterion to include a sen-
sitivity to the hydrostatic component of stress in the
absence of cavities.
2. A modification of the hardening function of the
material so that it changes progressively from the
function for a toughened polymer (without cavities)
to the function appropriate to the matrix polymer as
cavities are nucleated and the toughening phase
becomes ineffective.
3. A change in the criterion for cavity nucleation so that
the critical factor is the volumetric strain. In this way,
cavities will not be formed under compressive or
shear stress states.
The new model is being developed and evaluated
through an analysis of results from tests under different
states of stress. Fig. 8 shows some early predictions
using the model to analyse data from the ABS polymer
shown in Fig. 6. The hardening function used in the
model calculations is obtained from the stress/strain
curve measured in a shear test. Fig. 8 then shows com-
683
parisons of the measured tensile behaviour with calcu-
lations based on the new model.
4. Conclusions
Computer methods based on finite element analysis
are able to calculate the performance of plastics compo-
nents under impact. For these calculations, tensile
stress/strain data are needed that have been determined
over a wide range of strain rate up to, and ideally,
beyond 100 s⫺1.
There are problems with the measurement of
stress/strain curves at strain rates above around 1 s⫺1. At
rates above this, errors in measurement occur associated
with the generation of transient forces and with difficult-
ies in the measurement of strain.
The data required by a finite element analysis are ten-
sile stress as a function of plastic strain and are derived
from measured stress/strain curves. Mathematical func-
tions have been proposed here that accurately model
stress/plastic strain curves for a propylene–ethylene
copolymer and the dependence of these curves on
strain rate.
Using this model, stress/strain curves at high strain
rates can be calculated by extrapolation of measurements
made at low and moderate strain rates where measure-
ment accuracy is adequate. The validity of the extrapol-
ation can be verified by selected measurements at a
lower temperature.
A new materials model has been developed for plas-
tics that acquire high toughness through the nucleation
of cavities under dilatational stress. The model is able to
predict tensile behaviour from a knowledge of behaviour
under shear. Further work is needed to make additional
refinements to the model and assess its applicability to
a wider range of types of polymer.
Acknowledgements
This work was carried out with funding from the DTI
as part of their programme on the Characterisation of the
Performance of Materials.
References
[1] H. Eyring, J. Chem. Phys. 4 (1936) 283.
[2] J.A. Roetling, Polymer 6 (1965) 311.
[3] C. Bauwens-Crowet, J.-C. Bauwens, G. Homes, J. Polym.
Sci. A2 7 (1969) 735.
[4] S.S. Sternstein, L. Ongchin, Am. Chem. Soc. Polym. Prepr.
10 (1969) 117.
[5] R. Raghava, R.M. Caddell, G.S. Yeh, J. Mater. Sci. 8
(1973) 225.
[6] A.L. Gurson, J. Eng. Mater. Technol., Trans ASME 99
(1977) 2.