ARTICLE IN PRESS

POLYMER TESTING
Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 www.elsevier.com/locate/polytest

Test Method

Dynamic tensile testing of plastic materials

Xinran Xiao
General Motors Corporation, MC 480-106-710, 30500 Mound Road, Warren, MI 48090-9055, USA Received 1 August 2007; accepted 15 September 2007

Abstract Dynamic tensile tests were carried out using a servo-hydraulic machine on four representative plastic materials following a practice guideline by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). The experimental results generated this way were ranked as good using the qualitative measure provided in the guideline. To advance our understanding of dynamic tensile tests, the validity of the dynamic tensile tests was investigated by examining the condition of dynamic stress equilibrium; a criterion used in split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) tests. The results show that the quantitative criterion for a valid SHPB test is also applicable to dynamic tensile tests and it is an unbiased method as compared to the qualitative method used in the current practice. Another issue in dynamic material testing using a tensile testing machine is system ringing. The testing system was analyzed using a basic vibration model. The analytical solutions were obtained for the onedegree freedom spring-mass model with and without a damper. The mathematical model provided descriptions about the inuence of the loading rate and the natural frequency of the testing system on the magnitude of system ringing and its decay rate. It illustrated that the maximum strain rate at which a testing system can be used to generate acceptable data are limited by the natural frequency of the testing system. The analysis results agreed well with the empirical relationships established based on experimental evidence. For the rst time, this work advances the dynamic tensile testing technique from its current empirical stage to an analysis-based level. r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keyword: Dynamic tensile tests; Dynamic stress equilibrium; Strain rate; System ringing; Natural frequency; High rate servo-hydraulic system

1. Introduction Engineering plastics are used in instrument panels, knee bolsters, interior trim, fuel tanks and other vehicle applications. Due to their viscoelastic nature, plastics exhibit signicant rate dependence in their stressstrain responses. The strain rate dependent stressstrain curves of these materials are required input in dynamic nite element (FE) analysis for crashworthiness prediction [13]. The common strain rates recorded in vehicle crashE-mail address: xinran.xiao@gm.com 0142-9418/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.polymertesting.2007.09.010

worthiness simulations on plastic parts cover a wide range from 0.01 to 500 s1. The experimental technique to generate data at these strain rates is a research topic of practical importance. Five types of testing systems are commonly used in generating the rate dependent material data: the conventional screw drive load frame, servo-hydraulic system, high rate servo-hydraulic system, impact tester and Hopkinson bar system. Fig. 1 presents a schematic representation of the coverage range of each testing system. The conventional tensile test can provide strain rate dependent data up to 1 s1. Split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) [46], a

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 165

200 PE (tensile) 180 160 PMMMA (compression) PMMA (tensile) PM Impact tester Hopkinson Bar

Peak Stress (MPa)

140 High rate servo-hydraulic system 120 servo-hydraulic system 100 80 60 40 20 0 1E-05 0.0001 0.001 Conventional load frame

0.01

0.1 1 Strain Rate (1/s)

10

100

1000

10000

Fig. 1. Rate dependence of the peak stress of PE [12] and PMMA [7] and the typical strain rates covered by conventional load frame, servo-hydraulic system and Hopkinson bar system.

widely used high strain rate testing technique, may be used to generate data at the high end [7]. However, the experimental techniques to generate tensile stressstrain data at the medium strain rates in the range of 1100 s1 are not well established. Two types of equipment have been used to generate data in this strain range: the high rate servohydraulic testing machine [811] and the drop weight impact machine [12,13]. These two dynamic tensile test techniques use dumbbell-shaped specimens, which appear to be similar to those used in the well established quasi-static tensile test. Nevertheless, these tests are dynamic tests and the test methods and standards established for quasi-static test conditions are not automatically valid in dynamic material testing. To obtain valid stressstrain data in a material test, the specimen should be in a state of stress equilibrium, and undergo homogeneous deformation in the gage section. Under slow loading rates, the time for a stress wave to travel back and forth inside the specimen is small as compared to the loading time and the specimen is in a quasiequilibrium state. The standard specimen geometry has been optimized to provide utmost deformation homogeneity. In comparison, these basic requirements are much more difcult to achieve in dynamic material tests. The dynamic loading has to be introduced in a much shorter duration. The loading

time can be comparable to the time needed for stress waves to travel a round trip over the length of the load train. If the stresses build up in the specimen by relatively fewer stress waves, the condition of dynamic stress equilibrium may be violated. If it is not properly damped, the impulse during load introduction can excite the test system to oscillate, a phenomenon called system ringing. System ringing results in high amplitude stress pulse and nonhomogeneous deformation in the specimen. In extreme cases, the stress at one end of the specimen can exceed the strength of the material that actually causes fracture while the rest of the specimen experiences little deformation. To ensure validity of a dynamic material test, the number of stress waves during load introduction and their amplitude should be controlled so that the specimen is in a condition of dynamic stress equilibrium and undergoes homogeneous deformation at a nearly constant strain rate. To develop an industrial standard for dynamic tensile test at medium strain rates, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) coordinated a co-operative research project on Standardization of High Strain Rate Tensile Test Techniques For Automotive Plastics. The project resulted in a practice guideline [14] and a draft SAE J standard [15]. European researchers have been working on an ISO standard [16]. The International Iron and Steel

ARTICLE IN PRESS
166 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178

Institute (IISI) formed a consortium to develop a high rate tensile test standard for sheet steel [17]. All these projects recognized the importance of the specimen geometry and size in dynamic material testing. SAE [14,15] and IISI [17] projects provided in-depth, detailed discussions about many issues in dynamic testing. These include the relations between the specimen size and wave propagation, the inertia effect, the strain measurement technique, the loading devices, the load measurement, system ringing, and the gripping device and clamping mechanism. To assure dynamic stress equilibrium, the SAE draft standard [15] requires that at least 10 elastic reected waves propagate through the specimen gage length from the time of loading to the time of yield. The guideline also provided graphic examples of system ringing on the quality of the test results, as shown in Fig. 2. The IISI document [17] mentions the load rising time and damping but does not provide detailed information or examples. The use of servo-hydraulic machines in medium strain rate tensile testing was reported for steel [8,9], plastics [10] and composite materials [11]. Bruce et al. [9] investigated dynamic tensile testing of sheet steel. Three different specimen sizes were used in testing at strain rates lower than 10, 10400 s1 and above 400 s1. The specimens had a dumbbell shape like the common tensile specimens but with a longer

Unacceptable response Marginal/ acceptable response Acceptable response

TIME
Fig. 2. Examples of system ringing in dynamic tensile experiments [14].

grip section at one end where a strain gage was attached to measure the load directly on the specimen. The work demonstrated that the load signal measured from the strain gage at the grip section of the specimen did not have the oscillations as in the signal obtained from a piezoelectric load washer. It was also noted that the signal from the load washer lagged behind the signal from the strain gage by about 50 ms in a test conducted at a velocity of 6 m s1. Hill and Sjoblom [10] used the ASTM D 1822 Type L specimens and were successful in generating stressstrain data at strain rates up to 300 s1 with polycarbonate and polypropylene. Fitoussi et al. [11] conducted dynamic tensile tests on two composite materials. The authors introduced the concept of damping joint, a damping layer at the contact surface of the slack adaptor to the hydraulic jack. From experiments, they selected a 1.5 mm rubber nitride element as the damping joint. They also performed FE simulations to obtain optimized specimen geometry, and reported that the developed experiment method was applicable to strain rates up to 200 s1. The methods for dynamic tensile tests are still under development. The understanding of the dynamic phenomena associated with this experimental technique, and the relationships between various phenomena and their inuence on the overall measurements are far from complete. In fact, reports of work on experimental techniques for dynamic tensile tests are relatively scarce. The lack of access to high rate servo-hydraulic testing machines is one of the reasons. On the other hand, there is a wealth of literature on SHPB. A recent review on experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies by Field et al. [18] cited over 300 publications. The knowledge and experiences acquired in SHPB research are applicable to dynamic tensile testing at medium strain rates. It is of value to examine the methods developed in SHPB and use them to guide the development of dynamic tensile testing techniques. It is well recognized that SHPB, though simple in its principle and experimental setup, is not a standard material characterization technique that can be mastered without sufcient training in the theories of dynamics, wave propagation in deformable solids and experimental mechanics. The SHPB technique, developed over a half century ago [4], is still a research subject. SHPB is continuously subjected to vigorous investigations and modications so that the technique can generate reliable

STRESS

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 167

dynamic experimental data for a specic material, such as metals [5,6], polymers [7,1924], polymer composites [25] and rocks [26]. It has been established in SHPB research that, to reach dynamic stress equilibrium, the loading pulse should travel back and forth inside the specimens more than three times [5]. It was observed that the loading rate (rising time) [1921], the specimen thickness [4,1922] and the impedance mismatch between the bar and the specimen [19,20] affect the dynamic stress equilibrium. A slow loading rate, small thickness and high impedance mismatch were found to facilitate quicker dynamic stress equilibrium [19]. Naturally, there is a limit in reducing the specimen size. Therefore, various techniques have been developed to manipulate the loading rate and the impedance mismatch. The loading rate may be controlled by the pulse-shaping technique [26]. The impedance mismatch can be regulated by varying bar materials or using hollow tubes [7,23,24]. All these factors are the subjects of investigations in SHPB tests when a new class of materials is tested. Similar approaches may also be applicable to dynamic tensile tests. System ringing is an important issue in dynamic material testing using a tensile testing machine. This topic has been discussed in SAE [14,15] and IISI [17] projects. IISI guides recommended the following: To reduce the stress oscillation, in addition to a careful design of the testing machine, clamping system and specimen, the proper selection of the load measurement device is critical. The draft SAE standard [15] relates the system ringing to the resonant frequency of the test system and provides the required resonant frequency for the targeted strain rates in a tabulated format. These recommendations are based on experimental evidence. The SAE guideline has been subjected to a round robin test on ve representative plastic materials [27] before being submitted for an SAE J standard. The General Motors Corporation R&D center was one of the 12 participants in the round robin test. The experimental results have been presented previously [28]. The objective of the current research is to improve our understanding of dynamic tensile tests. To develop a quantitative measure for the validity of the dynamic tensile test, the experimental results generated in previous work were re-evaluated by examining the condition of the dynamic stress equilibrium, following a criterion developed in SHPB research. To understand the phenomenon of system ringing, the vibration response of the

typical tensile testing system was analyzed using a single degree of freedom spring-mass model. 2. Experimental 2.1. Materials Five materials were selected for the SAE round robin tensile test. They were high-density polyethylene (HDPE); polycarbonate/acrylonitrilebutadiene styrene terpolymer (PC/ABS); thermoplastic elastomerolenic (TPO); long (11 mm) glass ber 40% lled polypropylene (PP/glass); and short (23 mm) glass ber 30% lled polyamide (glass/ PA66). Most of the PP/glass specimens failed near the end of the gage section and, therefore, PP/glass will not be included in the discussion thereafter. The ASTM D683 Type-V specimen (Fig. 3) was recommended by the SAE practice guideline [14]. The specimen has a dumbbell shape. The straight gage section has a length of 9.5 mm and a width of 3.2 mm. The test coupons were injection molded by the participating material suppliers. The nominal thickness of the specimens was 3.2 mm. The specimens were stored in desiccators until the testing day. The round robin test required the participants to test the above materials at two nominal strain rates: 40 and 400 s1. Using the ASTM D638 type-V specimen, these strain rates correspond to crosshead velocities of 0.4 and 4 m s1. 2.2. The range of dynamic tests The deformation behavior of a material is governed by different mechanisms at different strain rates [2932]. According to Achenbach [29], the effects of wave motion are important if the time interval of application of an external disturbance to a solid body is of the same order of magnitude as a characteristic time of transmission of the disturbance
60.33 3.18 12.70

9.53

Dimensions in mm

Fig. 3. The ASTM D638 Type V specimen used in SAE round robin.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
168 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 Table 1 One-dimensional longitudinal elastic wave velocity of materials Material Elastic modulus (GPa) 207 70 1.27 1.00 1.88 9.8 Density (kg m3) Elastic wave velocity (m s1) 5151 5092 1188 1054 1371 2165 Time to travel round-trip in a 9.5 mm long bar (s) 3.688E-06 3.732E-06 1.559E-05 1.803E-05 1.386E-05 8.776E-06

Steel Aluminum TPO HDPE PC/ABS PA/glass

7800 2700 900 900 1000 2091

across the body. For metals, the range of dynamic testing has been summarized by Lindholm [30]. A test is considered as dynamic at strain rates above 1 s1, when the inertia force becomes important. The dynamic testing is further divided into the medium rate testing that covers the range 1100 s1 and the high rate testing which begins at strain rates above 100 s1. In high rate testing, not only the inertia effect but also the stress wave propagation should be considered. At strain rates above 104 s1, the shock wave becomes a concern. The range of dynamic testing for other materials can be established based on Achenbachs denition. For simplicity, elastic wave propagation in a rod subjected to uniaxial stress state is considered. The one-dimensional longitudinal elastic stress wave of an isotropic material is given in Ref. [29] s E c , (1) r where c is the stress wave velocity, E is the Youngs modulus, and r is the density. Table 1 lists the elastic moduli, the densities and the elastic stress wave velocities of steel, aluminum and the four plastic materials tested in this study. It also provides the time interval required for elastic wave to travel a round trip over a distance between the grips for the ASTM D683 type-V specimen. Since a pair of shoulder grips was employed in this study (Fig. 4), the distance between the grips was assumed to be equal to the gage length of the specimen. As seen, the elastic wave velocity in unlled plastics is about one-fth, and the time interval for a round trip wave is about ve times of the values of steel and aluminum. This indicates that the effects of wave motion in unlled plastics start at a strain rate about a half order lower than the steel or aluminum specimen of the same dimensions.

Fig. 4. The INSTRON servo-hydraulic high rate testing machine and the shoulder grips used in dynamic tensile testing.

2.3. Dynamic loading devices and techniques The dynamic tensile tests were conducted using an INSTRON servo-hydraulic testing machine. According to the manufactures specications, the machine can reach a maximum speed of 20 m s1 with a load capacity of 100 kN. The machine operates with closed-loop at rates lower than 0.1 m s1 and with open loop at rates higher than 0.1 m s1. The use of servo-hydraulic machine with open loop for compression testing at medium strain rates was documented by Chou et al. [33]. Fig. 4 shows the testing machine and the shoulder grips used in dynamic tensile testing. Fig. 5 presents the schematic of the load train. It consists of a load washer, shoulder grips, a test specimen and a slack-loading device (slack adaptor). As shown in Fig. 5, a tensile specimen is placed into the shoulder grips. The dynamic load is introduced to the lower shoulder grip through the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 169

Load cell Shoulder grip Specimen

Sliding bar

Hydraulic jack

Damping layer

Fig. 5. Schematics of load train for dynamic tensile test.

slack adaptor. The slack adaptor consists of a hollow tube and a sliding bar. In dynamic tensile tests, when the machine is actuated, the hollow tube travels freely with the hydraulic head over a distance to reach a predened speed before coming into contact with the cone-shaped surface of the sliding bar. A layer of damping tape is placed at the coneshaped surface of the sliding bar to create a damper, similar to the damping joint in Ref. [11]. The slackloading device eliminates the inertia effect of the lower portion of the load train in its acceleration stage. However, the sudden engagement with the upper portion of the load train can generate a high amplitude stress wave, causing oscillations at the systems natural frequency, i.e. system ringing. The damper can effectively reduce system ringing. The effect of a damper in dynamic testing will be discussed later on. To reduce the inertia effect, lightweight grips are recommended in dynamic tensile tests [10,1417]. In this work, the shoulder grips were made of titanium. The upper grip alone weighed about 0.36 kg. In high rate testing, the response of the load cell is another concern. Piezoelectric load washers are recommended for dynamic tests [10,1417]. The load can also be measured by a strain gage attached

at the griping portion of the specimen [9]. In this work, the load signal was measured by a Kistler 9071A piezoelectric load washer. The response frequency of the load washer was 30 kHz. The response frequency together with the upper grip was estimated to be 20 kHz [34]. The load signal was amplied through a Kistler 5011 charge amplier with a specied response frequency of 200 kHz. The natural frequency of the tensile testing system was determined from the load history plots after brittle specimens were fractured, a method described in Ref. [35]. Fig. 6 presents a load history plot measured with the current tensile test setup. The natural frequency estimated from Fig. 6 was about 6700 Hz. A testing system with a high natural frequency is preferred for dynamic testing. The initial position of the lower hydraulic head together with the tube in respect to the specimen is also an experimental variable. In open loop, a servohydraulic machine maintains nearly constant speed over a given distance. The lower hydraulic head needs to be placed at a position such that the dynamic tensile test is performed within the constant speed window, as shown in Fig. 7. If the initial position of the hydraulic head is too low, the loading of specimen may start before a constant speed has been reached. On the other hand, if the initial position of the hydraulic head is too high, the machine may run out of actuation (travel at the desired velocity) before the specimen fractures. This concern is particularly true for polymers capable of large elongation. 3. Discussions In a dynamic material test, it is impossible to reach the state of stress equilibrium as in a quasistatic test. Instead, a dynamic stress equilibrium condition is sought. In SHPB, the criterion for the condition of dynamic stress equilibrium is rather simple. To reach dynamic stress equilibrium in the specimen, the loading pulse should travel back and forth inside the specimen more than three times [5]. The current high rate tensile testing draft standards and guidelines [1417] provide detailed recommendations on all aspects of the testing, from test apparatus to strain measurement techniques. The draft SAE standard [15] discusses the specimen dimension and load train length. These recommendations are very helpful to users to improve their high strain rate testing techniques. Nevertheless, besides a qualitative denition (Fig. 2) given by the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
170 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178

4 3 2 1

load (kN)

0 5.00E-03 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5

5.50E-03

6.00E-03

6.50E-03

7.00E-03

7.50E-03

8.00E-03

time (s)
Fig. 6. Ringing at the natural frequency after a brittle specimen has fractured. The natural frequency of the testing system can be determined from this type of plots [35].

4500 4000
Velocity (mm/s)

3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 Time (s) 0.01 0.012 Optimal Range

section are desired for approximate equilibrium. It also provides the following equations to estimate the time of travel for one reected stress wave in the specimen twave 2Lg , (2) c where Lg is the distance between the grips; and c is the elastic stress wave velocity of the specimen material. The number of stress waves to the time of yield is estimated as y c , (3) N V where ey is the yield strain of the material, and V is the displacement velocity of the crosshead. Considering the contribution of the reected waves in the load train gives a lower estimation of the number of waves up to the time of yield [15]: N% y Lg cfixt c , V Lfixt c Lg cfixt (4)

Fig. 7. A typical velocity history curve at 4 m s1 nominal velocity, generated by the servo-hydraulic high rate testing setup.

draft SAE standard [15], there is no quantitative denition or criterion about what constitutes a valid dynamic material test. Furthermore, SAE round robin test results have shown that, with the same specimens, the quality of the high rate testing data varied greatly among participating labs [36]. Obviously, additional factors have to be considered. In the following section, we examine the condition for dynamic stress equilibrium rst using the SAE criterion and then using the SHPB criterion. 3.1. Specimen and load train The draft SAE standard [15] recommends that at least 10 elastic reected waves in the specimen gage

where Lxt is the length of the xture; cxt is the elastic stress wave velocity of the xture material respectively. Eq. (4) extends the analysis to the dimensions of the testing system. It demonstrates that a short load train is preferred in dynamic testing because the number of the reected waves increases with reduction in xture length. In principle, the criterion of at least 10 elastic reected waves in the specimen gage section for approximate equilibrium is in accordance with the denition of Achenbach [29]. However, Eqs. 3 and 4

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 171

in Ref. [15] were derived based on the assumptions of (1) the load rising ramp is linear, and (2) the elastic strain rate is a half of the plastic strain rate. These assumptions are valid when ringing is negligible. In high rate testing, ringing is inevitable. Without proper damping, a sudden applied impulse will excite the system to oscillate at its natural frequency. The magnitude of the stress oscillation can be comparable to the yield strength of the material. In these cases, the in-situ elastic strain rate is much higher than the assumption in the derivation. On the other hand, if the test system is damped, the actual elastic strain rate will depend on the modied load rising curve and the assumptions in the derivation are again invalid. Eqs. 3 and 4 provide the same output for both cases. Therefore, these equations are the necessary conditions. They provide estimations of the maximum nominal strain rate that might possibly be achieved for a given material and specimen size. Whether dynamic stress equilibrium can be achieved or not is determined by additional conditions. One of them is the load rising time. 3.2. Load rising time Research on SHPB has shown that, to achieve dynamic stress equilibrium, the load rising time should be sufcient to allow a certain number of round trips of the stress waves inside the specimen. The time T needed for a specimen to reach dynamic stress equilibrium is given by T n 2L , (5) c where L is the length of the specimen, c is the elastic stress wave velocity of the material, and n is the number of round-trips of the stress wave. Experimental results in SHPB tests yield a criterion that n X 3 [5]. Eq. 5 shows that for the same rising time, a large specimen size results in a smaller n value. n is also found to be affected by the loading rate and the impedance mismatch between the specimen and the bars [26]. Chen and co-workers [19,20,23,24] developed a pulse shaping technique that can ne-tune the load rising response so that a variety of materials can be tested. In a dynamic tensile test, the loading of the specimen starts when the sliding bar comes into contact with the hollow tube in the slack adaptor. At high rates, a direct metal-to-metal surface contact between the sliding bar and the tube may create a

shock wave in the testing system, and cause excessive ringing [11]. Therefore, a damping joint [11] is needed at this contact face. The importance of the rate of load introduction in dynamic tensile testing was also recognized by Hill and Sjoblom [10]. In this work, damping was provided by placing a layer of 3 M double coated vinyl foam tape (3 M 4416) at the cone-shaped surface of the sliding bar and it was found to be sufcient to reduce the system ringing for the material testing conducted in this work. The vinyl foam in 3 M 4416 tape has a closed cell structure and a thickness of 1/16 in (1.56 mm). To examine the effect of damping on loading, tensile tests were conducted with and without damping. Figs. 8 and 9 present the load-history plots of two tensile tests of TPO material performed at 4 m s1. Without damping, the load rose quickly to a peak value of 0.8 kN and then oscillated between 0.2 and 0.6 kN. The average amplitude of the oscillation was about 0.15 kN. With damping, the load increased gradually to 0.1 kN in the initial 0.8 m s1 and then rose to a peak value of 0.4 kN. An inspection of Fig. 9 indicates that a small oscillation was still distinguishable in the load history trace but its amplitude was reduced to about 0.05 kN. The initial gradual loading can be attributed to the compression of the damping layer [11]. The load rising time was about 0.5 103 s between 0 and 0.1 kN and 0.2 m s1 between 0.1 and 0.4 kN. The total load rising time was 0.7 103 s. The average loading rate up to the peak load for the specimen tested with the damping tape was about 0.57 103 kN s1. For the case without damping, the load rising time to the peak load was about

0.7 0.6 0.5

Load (kN)

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 3 -0.1 Time (ms) 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7

Fig. 8. The load history trace of a TPO specimen tested at 4 m s1 before damping the slack adaptor.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
172 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178

0.09 103 s and the loading rate was about 7.22 103 kN s1. The n values of the two tests were calculated using Eq. 5. The tensile test performed without damping had a value of nE 0.95. The test performed with the damping tape had n 7.4. In comparison with the criterion n X 3, the test without damping tape did not satisfy the condition of dynamic stress equilibrium and therefore was invalid. The test performed with the damping tape met the condition of dynamic stress equilibrium. The same conclusion can be reached by visual inspection using the qualitative criterion of an acceptable or unacceptable test. Compared to the visual inspection method, the quantitative criterion (nX3) provides a more objective measure, which is particularly advantageous when the test curve is in a marginal acceptance range. The example on TPO illustrates the necessity of sufcient conditions for dynamic stress equilibrium. For a given material, the specimen size and load train arrangement determines the maximum nominal strain rate that might possibly be achieved. However, whether that dynamic stress equilibrium can be achieved or not is determined by the load
0.7 0.6 0.5
Load (kN)

rising rate. The damper is a necessary link in the dynamic testing system. It not only provides a way to regulate the load rising time, but also reduces system ringing. Nevertheless, not all testing systems could be effectively damped to be used in high rate testing. 3.3. System ringing and damping Reducing system ringing by damping is known in dynamic tensile testing and has been discussed previously in a qualitative way [14,15,17]. The draft SAE standard [15] recommended that damping is needed for strain rates greater than 10 s1 and the damping-related effect should be nished by the time the applied load is at 25% of the yield. The load rising history in Fig. 9 satises this condition. The draft SAE standard [15] also provided a table (Table 2) that relates the resonant frequency range of the testing system to the maximum nominal strain rate for a given specimen. It shows that dynamic testing at higher rates requires a testing system with higher resonant frequency. This requirement appears to be critical for high rate testing. SAE round robin test results have shown that the testing systems with low resonant frequencies failed to generate acceptable results [36]. It should be noted that the terminology of resonant frequency is not an accurate one. According to Thomson [37], resonance is a condition when the external excitation is oscillatory and its frequency coincides with one of the natural frequencies of the system. The system ringing in a dynamic tensile test is a transient problem. The external excitation is impulsive rather than oscillatory. Therefore, the term natural frequency is more appropriate and by default it means the one with the lowest frequency among the natural frequencies of the system.

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Time (ms) 5.5 6.0 6.5

Fig. 9. The load history trace of a TPO specimen tested at 4 m s1 with damping.

Table 2 Guideline for specimen selection provided by the draft SAE standard [15] Commonly used specimen congurations ASTM D638 Type I ISO 527 Types 1A and 1B ASTM D638 Type V ISO 527 1BB ISO 8256 Type 2 or 3 Distance between grip ends on specimen mm (in) X115 (4.5) X104120 (4.14.7) 25.4 (1) 2330 (0.91.18) System resonant frequency (Hz) o1000 1000o2000 2000+ o1000 1000o4000 4000+ Maximum suggested nominal strain rate (s1) p1 p110 p1020 p5 p5100 p1001000

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 173

To understand the effect of the natural frequency of the testing system in dynamic tensile testing, the vibration response of a typical tensile testing system was analyzed using a single degree of freedom spring-mass model. The objective of this part of the study was to investigate the relationships between system ringing, damping, the maximum strain rate and the natural frequency of the testing system. A tensile testing system that introduces load through the use of a slack adaptor is comparable to a dynamic system excited by a suddenly applied impulse. Consider a one-degree freedom undamped spring-mass system, as shown in Fig. 10a. Under free vibration, the response of suchRa system initially at rest and excited by an impulse f dt is [37] R f dt x sin on t, (6) mon where m is the mass, and on is the natural frequency of the system in circular frequency with a unit of radian per second. on 2pfn, where fn is the natural frequency with a unit of cycle per second. A mass subjected to such an impulse will change its velocity. According to the basic law of particle dynamics, the impulse is equal to the change in particle momentum [38]. For a mass that initially is at rest and reach a velocity V at the end of impulse, it gives Z Z f dt m dv mV . (7) Introducing Eq. (7) into Eq. (6), we obtain x V sin on t. on (8)

Eq. (8) dictates that when excited by an impulse loading, a dynamic system will oscillate at its natural frequency and its amplitude is determined by the sudden change in velocity and the natural frequency of the system. Since the amplitude of the oscillation is reciprocal to the natural frequency of the dynamic system, a testing system with a higher natural frequency will produce system ringing with lower amplitude. Eq. (8) is derived for rigid bodies. Strictly speaking, this is not the exact description of a system consisting of deformable bodies. An inspection of Fig. 8 indicates that the oscillation frequency in the response of TPO tested at 4 m s1 without damping was close to the natural frequency of the system. This provided the justication to continue the analysis for a rst order approximation. Using Eq. (8), a natural frequency value of 6700 Hz and a loading rate of 4 m s1, the calculated amplitude of oscillation was 0.095 mm. Assuming the displacement resulted from this oscillation occurred predominantly over the gage length of the specimen (9.5 mm), the corresponding elastic strain in the specimen gage section can be estimated. The strain estimated by this method was about 0.01. From the strain and the elastic modulus of the TPO (1270 MPa), the amplitude of the oscillation was obtained in terms of stress. The value was 12.7 MPa. This in turn gave the amplitude of oscillation in terms of load. The value was 130 N. This value agreed fairly well with the average value of 150 N observed in Fig. 8. According to Eq. (8), the amplitude of oscillation of system ringing would increase linearly with increasing loading rate and hence the amplitude of oscillation corresponding to a loading rate at 0.4 m s1 would be about one-tenth of that at 4 m s1. Fig. 11 is the load-history plot of a tensile test of TPO material performed at 0.4 m s1 without damping. As shown, the amplitude of oscillation is in the order estimated by Eq. (8). When damping is considered, the response of the spring-mass system is modied. The solution for the damped system shown in Fig. 10b varies depending on the damping ratio z. z is the ratio of critical damping cc (cc 2mon) to the proportional constant for viscous damping c x c . cc (9)

Fig. 10. One-degree freedom vibration models: (a) a system consisting of a mass and a massless spring, (b) a system consisting of a mass, a massless spring, and a damper.

If z o1, the response is damped oscillation. The solution for the spring-mass system under

ARTICLE IN PRESS
174 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178

consideration was derived following the general solution provided in Ref. [37] as q DV x p exon t sin 1 x2 on t. (10) o n 1 x2 If z 1, the response is critically damped motion. The solution is x DVteon t . (11)

If z 41, the response is non-oscillatory motion. The solution is q DV fexpx x2 1on t x 2 2on x 1 q expx x2 1on tg. 12 These solutions are summarized in Table 3. In an extreme case, the damper may be considered as an isolator. The natural frequency of a system consisting of an isolator with a compressible thickness d is given by [39] r 9807 fn ; d in mm: (13) d

Once again, for a rst-order approximation, the effects of the natural frequency of the testing system may be evaluated using these equations. For simplicity, the evaluation was conducted for the case of critically damped condition using Eq. 11. Fig. 12 plots the responses corresponding to the critically damped condition for testing systems with three different natural frequencies, 6700, 4000 and 2000 Hz. The loading rate of the tensile test was assumed to be 4 m s1 which corresponds to a nominal strain rate roughly 400 s1 in a specimen with a gage length of 9.5 mm. The response was given in terms of stress by assuming the test specimen was TPO material. The conversion of amplitude from displacement to stress was the same as presented for the undamped case. As shown in Fig. 12, for the system with a natural frequency of 6700 Hz, the response rst increased with time, peaked at about 0.03 103 s, and then decreased. The maximum stress was about 5 MPa. The ringing effect became negligible after
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0.0 0.1 Time (ms)
Fig. 12. The responses of systems with natural frequency f 6700, 4000, 2000 Hz at their critically damped condition. The system was disturbed by a sudden change of velocity of 4 m s1. The response is calculated in terms of stress in a TPO specimen.

Amplitude of Oscillation (MPa)

6700 Hz 4000 Hz 2000 Hz

0.40 0.30
Load (kN)

0.20 0.10 0.00 0.030 -0.10 Time (s)

0.2

0.3

0.040

0.050

0.060

0.070

Fig. 11. The load history trace of a TPO specimen tested at 0.4 m s1 before damping the slack adaptor.

Table 3 Solutions for a single degree freedom spring-mass system excited by an impulse Category x0 xo1 x1 x41 Undamped Under damped Critically damped Over damped Solution
V x on sin on t

on

DV p exon t sin 1x2 on t

p 1 x2 on t p p x2 1on t expx x2 1on tg

x DVte
n

x 2o DV 1 fexpx x2

(the system is assumed under free vibration with an initial condition at rest).

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 175

0.1 103 s. For the system with a natural frequency of 4000 Hz, the maximum stress was about 8 MPa at 0.04 103 s and the ringing effect became negligible after 0.2 103 s. For the system with a natural frequency of 2000 Hz, the maximum stress was almost 16 MPa, which is about 50% of the yield stress of the material. The amplitude decay also slowed accordingly. Evidently, this system cannot generate acceptable data for TPO material at this strain rate. In principle, the analysis result agrees with the recommendation in the draft SAE standard [15] that for strain rates higher than 100 s1, the natural frequency of the testing system should be higher than 4000 Hz. This simple analysis reveals that the natural frequency of the testing system is a determinant in high rate testing. The natural frequency determines the magnitude of the system ringing. When damping is present, the natural frequency also determines the rate of decay of the system ringing. A system with higher natural frequencies would result in oscillations of lower amplitudes and respond to damping in a time interval the same order as its natural period t (t 1/fn) and, therefore, its ringing can be suppressed effectively by damping. Theoretically, the system ringing can be damped out regardless of the natural frequency of a testing system. In the extreme case, an isolator may be used as indicated in Eq. (13). However, the rate of decay in such cases would be unrealistically slow for high rate testing. Therefore, the maximum strain rate at which a testing system can generate acceptable data is limited by its natural frequency. The above analysis is performed for TPO with a nominal strain rate of 400 s1. For a material with a different value of elastic modulus and/or tested at a different strain rate, the maximum stress will vary. The analysis can be carried out for other materials the same way demonstrated in the above discussions. It should be noted that the exact solution for a spring-mass system with a damper depends on the damping ratio. The damping ratio in a real system is difcult to measure and a dynamic tensile testing system is much more complicated than the simple spring-mass-damper model. Nevertheless, the result from this simple model agrees well with the recommendation based on experimental evidence. Furthermore, the model provides quantitative information about the inuences of different parameters. This is the rst time that a mathematical model is used to describe the system ringing in

dynamic tensile tests. It has helped to shed light onto this complicated subject. 4. Other materials The experimental setup discussed in the above analysis has been proven to be valid for TPO. When different materials are tested, the same experiment setup may not be automatically valid. According to Eq. (5), the load rising time varies with the stress wave velocity of the material. Therefore, the condition of dynamic stress equilibrium needs to be examined for each material. Figs. 1316 present the typical stress history plots for TPO, HDPE, PC/ABS and PA/glass obtained in tensile test at 4 m s1 respectively. By visual inspection of the stress history plots, all tests meet the acceptable criterion in Fig. 2. The dynamic equilibrium condition was examined using the quantitative method described earlier. The load rising time was dened as the time between the onset of loading to the peak stress. Table 4 records
40 30 20 10 0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 Time (ms) 6.0 6.5

Fig. 13. The stress history trace of a TPO specimen tested at 4 m s1 with damping.

Stress (MPa)
Stress (MPa)

80 60 40 20 0 2.4

2.6

2.8

3.0 Time (ms)

3.2

3.4

3.6

Fig. 14. The stress history trace of a HDPE specimen tested at 4 m s1 with damping.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
176 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178

the load rising time and the peak stress measured from the stress history plots. The average load rising rate was calculated through dividing the peak stress by the load rising time, and the n value was obtained using Eq. 5. These values are also presented in Table 4. It is interesting to note that although the values for the average load rising rate varied signicantly,

100 80

Stress (MPa)

60 40 20 0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Time (ms) 5.5 6.0

the n values for the four materials were very close, ranging from 6.2 to 7.7. The value of load rising rate of PA/glass actually was at the same level as that of TPO without damping. However, due to its higher wave velocity and higher peak stress, there was enough time for 7.7 round-trip waves during the load rising time. In summary, examining the number of stress waves during the load rising time appears to be a suitable approach to ensure the validity of a dynamic material test. The method provides a quantitative measure that is a useful addition to the visual inspection method used in the current practice. 5. Summary and conclusions Dynamic tensile tests were performed at two nominal strain rates of 40 and 400 s1 using a servohydraulic testing machine on four representative plastic materials: HDPE, PC-ABS, TPO and 30% short glass ber lled PA (nylon), following the SAE practice guideline for high strain rate tensile testing of plastic materials. The experimental results were ranked as good based on the qualitative measure by the SAE guideline. Our experimental work conrmed that the draft SAE standard on high rate tensile testing of plastic materials is a valuable document that can help the user to generate reliable data in their dynamic tensile testing. The condition of dynamic stress equilibrium in these tensile tests was evaluated by examining the number of stress waves during the load rising time, a method used in SHPB. The results showed that n X 3, a criterion for a valid SHPB test, are also applicable to dynamic tensile tests. It is an unbiased method as compared to the qualitative method used in current practice. The dynamic tensile tests were conducted at the conditions with and without damping. Without

Fig. 15. The stress history trace of a PC/ABS specimen tested at 4 m s1 with damping.

300 250
Stress (MPa)

200 150 100 50 0 3.8

3.9

4.0

4.1 Time (ms)

4.2

4.3

4.4

Fig. 16. The stress history trace of a PA/glass specimen tested at 4 m s1 with damping.

Table 4 Number of round-trip waves during load rising Material Damping Load rising time (s) 9.0 105 7.0 104 8.0 104 5.1 104 4.0 104 Peak stress (MPa) Average load rising rate (MPa s1) 5.96 105 4.71 104 8.69 104 1.53 105 5.75 105 Number of round-trip wave 0.9 7.4 7.5 6.2 7.7

TPO TPO HDPE PC/ABS PA/glass

No Yes Yes Yes Yes

56 33 70 78 230

ARTICLE IN PRESS
X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 177

damping, the impulse resulted from loading at 4 m s1 excited the testing system to oscillate at its natural frequency. A simple mathematical model of a spring-mass-damper system at critically damped condition was developed to evaluate the effect of the natural frequency of the testing system and system ringing. With approximation, the model provides descriptions about the inuences of loading rate and the natural frequency of the testing system on the magnitude of system ringing and the decay rate. It illustrated that the maximum strain rate at which a testing system can be used to generate acceptable data is limited by the natural frequency of the testing system. The analysis resulted from this model agreed well with the empirical relations gained through experiments. This is the rst time that a mathematical model is used to describe the system ringing in dynamic tensile tests. Acknowledgments The author would like to acknowledge S. Hill of University of Dayton Research Institute for sharing her experience regarding high rate testing; C. Mentzer and M. Leach (2004 summer intern) for the use of a high rate-testing machine and for performing dynamic tensile testing; and J. Owens for valuable comments on the manuscript.

References
[1] G.V. Gandhe, L. Lorenzo, Y. Noritake, Design development of energy absorbing ribs for meeting FMVSS201 extended head impact, SAE Technical Paper, SAE-970161, 1997. [2] J.M. Lorenzo, FMVSS201 A: pillar impact simulation and verication study, SAE Technical Paper, SAE-1999-01-0433, 1999. [3] X. Xiao, Plastic material modeling for FMVSS201 simulation, SAE Technical Paper, SAE-2002-01-0385, 2002. [4] H. Kolsky, An Investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very high rates of loading, Proc. Phys. Soc. B 62 (1949) 676700. [5] G.T. Gray, Classic Split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar Testing, Mechanical Testing and Evaluation Handbook, vol.8, American Society For metals, Materials Park, OH, 2000, pp. 488496. [6] U.S. Lindholm, Some experiments with the split Hopkinson pressure bar, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 12 (1964) 317335. [7] W. Chen, F. Lu, M. Cheng, Tension and compression tests of two polymers under quasi-static and dynamic loading, Polym. Test. 21 (2002) 113121. [8] P.C. Bastias, S.M. Kulkarni, K.Y. Kim, J. Gargas, Noncontacting strain measurements during tensile tests, Exp. Mech. 78 (1996) 7883.

[9] D.M. Bruce, D.K. Matlock, J.G. Speer, A.K. De, Assessment of the strain-rate dependent tensile properties of automotive sheet steels, SAE 2004-10-0507. [10] S. Hill, P. Sjoblom, Practical considerations in determining high strain rate, Mater. Prop., SAE 981136. [11] J. Fitoussi, F. Meraghni, Z. Jendli, G. Hug, D. Baptiste, Experimental methodology for high strain rates tensile behavior analysis of polymer matrix composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 65 (2005) 21742188. [12] G. Dean, B. Read, Modeling the behavior of plastics for design under impact, Polym. Test. 20 (2001) 677683. [13] C.M. Roland, J.N. Twigg, Y. Vu, P.H. Mott, High strain rate mechanical behavior of polyurea, Polymer 48 (2007) 574578. [14] S.I. Hill, Standardization of high strain rate test techniques for automotive plastics project, UDRI: Structural Test Group, UDR-TR-2004-00016, February 2004. [15] High strain rate testing of polymers, SAE J2749, a draft, 2006-01. [16] Plasticsdetermination of tensile properties at high strain rates, a draft of ISO/CD 18872, 2003. [17] M. Borsutzki, Cornette, D., Kuriyama, Y., Uenishi, A., Yan, B., Opbroek, E. Recommended practice for dynamic tensile testing for sheet steels, International Iron and Steel Institute: High Strain Rate Experts Group, September 2003. [18] J.E. Field, S.M. Walley, W.G. Proud, H.T. Goldrein, C.R. Siviour, Review of experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies, Int. J. Impact Eng. 30 (7) (2004) 725775. [19] B. Song, W. Chen, Dynamic stress equilibration in split Hopkinson pressure bar tests on soft materials, Exp. Mech. 44 (3) (2004) 300312. [20] W. Chen, F. Lu, D.J. Frew, M.J. Forestal, Dynamic compression testing of soft materials, Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech. 69 (2002) 214223. [21] X.J. Wu, D.A. Gorham, Stress equilibrium in the split Hopkinson pressure bar tests, J Phys. IV France Colloq. C3 (DYMAT97) 7 (1997) 9196. [22] N.N. Dioh, P.S. Leevers, J.G. Williams, Thickness effects in split Hopkinson pressure bar tests, Polymer 34 (1993) 42304234. [23] W. Chen, B. Zhang, M.J. Forestal, A split Hopkinson pressure bar technique for low-impedance materials, Exp. Mech. 39 (1999) 8185. [24] H. Zhao, G. Gary, J.R. Klepaczko, On the use of a viscoelastic split Hopkinson pressure bar, Int. J. Impact Eng. 19 (1997) 319330. [25] L. Ninan, J. Tsai, C.T. Sun, Use of split Hopkinson pressure bar for testing off-axis composites, Int. J. Impact Eng. 25 (2001) 291313. [26] D.J. Frew, M.J. Forrestal, W. Chen, A split Hopkinson bar technique to determine compressive stressstrain data for rock materials, Exp. Mech. 41 (2001) 4046. [27] S. Hill, M.F. Pinnell, A.J. Minch, Standardization of high strain rate tensile testing of polymers, in: Proceedings of ANTEC 2005. [28] X. Xiao, M. Leach, Intermediate and high strain rate tensile testing of plastic materials, in: Proceedings of the 2005 Society of Experimental Mechanics (SEM) Annual meeting. [29] J.D. Achenbach, Wave Propagation In Elastic Solids, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1973.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
178 X. Xiao / Polymer Testing 27 (2008) 164178 D.R. Ireland (Eds.), Instrumented Impact Testing of Plastics and Composite Materials, ASTM STP 936, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1987, pp. 923. M.F. Pinnell, S. Hill, A.J. Minch, Special concerns in high strain rate tensile testing of polymers, SAE Technical Paper, SAE2006-01-0121. W.T. Thomson, Theory of Vibration With Application, third edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1988. D. Holliday, R. Resnick, Physics, third edition, Wiley, New York, 1978. J.E.K. Foreman, Sound Analysis and Noise Control, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1990. [30] U.S. Lindholm, in Bunshan RF (Ed.), Techniques in Metal Research, vol.5, part 1, Interscience, New York, 1971. [31] J.A. Zukas, T. Nicholas, H.F. Swift, L.B. Greszczuk, D.R. Curran, Impact Dynamics, Wiley, 1982. [32] H. Kolsky, Stress Waves In Solids, Dover Publications Inc, New York, 1963. [33] C.S. Chou, K.D. Robertson, J.H. Rainey, The effect of strain rate and heat developed during deformation on the stressstrain curve of plastics, Exp. Mech. 13 (1973) 422432. [34] Kistlers technical support, Private communication. [35] M.C. Cheresh, S. McMichael, Instrumented impact test data interpretation, in: S.L. Kessler, G.C. Adams, S.B. Driscoll,

[36]

[37]

[38] [39]