Abstract
Within this work we investigate the role that the microstructure of a poroelastic material has on the resulting elastic parameters. We are considering the effect that multiple elastic and fluid phases at the same scale (LMRP model (L. Miller and R. Penta, 2020)) have on the estimation of the materials elastic parameters when compared with a standard poroelastic approach. We present a summary of both the LMRP model and the comparable standard poroelastic approach both derived via the asymptotic homogenization approach. We provide the 3D periodic cell problems with associated boundary loads that are required to be solved to obtain the effective elasticity tensor for both model setups. We then perform a 2D reduction of the cell problems, again presenting the 2D boundary loads that are required to solve the problems numerically. The results of our numerical simulations show that whenever investigating a poroelastic composite material with porosity exceeding 5% then the LMRP model should be considered more appropriate in incorporating the structural details in the Young’s moduli E1 and E3 and the shear C44. Whenever the porosity exceeds 20% it should also be used to investigate the shear C66. We find that for materials with less than 5% porosity that the voids are so small that a standard poroelastic approach or the LMRP model produce the same results.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.