Rubber Fatigue ≠ Metal Fatigue Part 3: Thermal Effects

All materials are temperature dependent, but some more than others: metals tend to be crystalline solids and will melt at sufficiently high temperatures; in contrast, crosslinked elastomers are always solids. They can be glassy or rubbery, crystalline or amorphous. When heated to extreme temperatures, they burn rather than melt, producing new substances, usually low molecular weight hydrocarbons (i.e. tarry substances and smoke).

Of course, you do not have to melt or burn a material to see the effects of temperature. In fatigue analysis, we are concerned with stress-strain and crack growth behaviour. These can be temperature dependent for both metals and rubbers. However, while metals have a very high thermal conductivity, rubbers have almost the lowest. Therefore, fatigue analyses involving large temperature gradients are much more common in rubber than in metal.

As shown in Fig.1, while a 100°C temperature gradient in a metal can affect the fatigue tensile strength or the fatigue limit by 10% [1], the same 100°C temperature gradient in rubber can reduce the fatigue life by four orders of magnitude [2]!

Fig. 1. Left – Effects of temperature on carbon steel showing tensile strength (+), yield stress (●), and fatigue limit (○), [1]; Right – Effects of temperature on natural rubber (Δ) and styrene butadiene rubber (●) [2].
Temperature and Segmental Mobility

The mechanisms underlying the elasticity of metals and rubbers could hardly be more different.  Under stress, atoms in a metal’s crystal lattice are displaced from their equilibrium positions, and potential energy is stored in strained interatomic bonds.  In rubber, however, the strain energy is not predominantly stored in strained atomic bonds.  Rather, elasticity arises because the constituent long-chain molecules are much more likely to be randomly coiled than to be fully extended.

Thus, provided that the molecules are sufficiently agitated by random thermal fluctuations, an entropic spring effect is created, meaning that potential energy can be stored by working to reduce the entropy of the polymer chain network by increasing the end-to-end distance of individual polymer chains [3].

Polymers in general can exhibit both glassy and rubbery behavior, depending on the temperature.  The rubbery state – in which entropic elasticity dominates – exists above the glass transition temperature Tg, if the molecular motion rate is sufficiently high.  In the rubbery state, very large strains are possible and the rubbery elastic storage modulus E’r determines the stress-strain curve.

Below Tg, however, the lack of thermal molecular mobility prevents molecular reconfiguration, resultng in a glassy stiffness E’g that is several orders of magnitude higher than E’r.  Polymers operating below Tg are thus not capable of large elastic strains and instead exhibit inelastic behavior when strains exceed a few percent.  Figure 2 shows how the storage and loss moduli vary through the glass transition (left), and how the rate of molecular motion rate depends on temperature (right).  The relative rate φ(T)/φ(Tg) of molecular motion as a function of temperature T is described by the WLF equation [4], which has material constants A and B.

Since the fracture mechanical properties of rubber depend on the viscoelastic dissipation in the crack tip process zone, with higher dissipation associated with lower crack growth rates, frequency and temperature effects can be inferred accordingly. Viscoelastic master curves, such as those shown in Fig. 2, can be used as part of the material property rate dependence specification in the Endurica solver.

Fig. 2, Left – Rubber’s elastic and viscous responses depend on temperature relative to the glass transition temperature Tg; Right: The rate of molecular motion depends on temperature relative to the glass transition temperature Tg.

Self-Heating and Thermal Runaway

During a charge cycle, work WL is done on the charge stroke, some of which WU is recovered on the discharge stroke, as shown in Fig. 3.  The unrecovered part of the work H remains in the material as heat energy, increasing the temperature.

 

Fig. 3. Work input WL on the loading stroke is partially recovered as WUon the unloading stroke. A portion H of the energy remains in the material as heat.

The rate of viscoelastic heating of rubber depends on strain amplitude, cycle rate (i.e. frequency) and temperature. The strain amplitude dependence of the viscoelastic storage and loss modulii, G’ and G” respectively, can be specified using the Kraus model [5,6]:

 

where εa is the strain amplitude, and where G’∞, G’0, εa,c, m, G”∞, G”max, and ΔG”U are material parameters. The viscoelastic heat rate per unit volume can be calculated from:

Due to the low thermal conductivity of rubber, small amounts of viscoelastic self-heating can produce large temperature gradients.  Accurately accounting for thermal effects on rubber durability generally requires both structural finite element analysis to calculate stress and strain fields, and a thermal finite element analysis to calculate the temperature field. Endurica fatigue solvers can provide heat rate calculations in a coupled finite element simulation for both transient and steady state thermal analyses.

In cases where the temperature in the rubber exceeds a critical value Tx, an additional heat rate contribution q ̇x occurs due to exothermic chemical reactions.  The effect is illustrated in Fig. 4, for a rubber cylinder subjected to a rotating bending load [7]. The thermal runaway starts after about 250 seconds. Both experimental (dashed line) and Endurica-calculated (solid line) simulation results are plotted for the cylinder centreline (blue) and for the cylinder outer surface (green).  The thermal runaway event typically results in rapid decomposition of the rubber into hydrocarbon gases (i.e. smoke/burning rubber) and low-molecular weight substances (tar).

Fig. 4. When temperature exceeds a critical value Tx, exothermic chemical reactions can produce a thermal runaway failure. Plot (right) shows Endurica calculated transient temperature history (solid lines) for a rotating bending cylinder (structural finite element model shown on left). For comparison, experimentally measured temperature histories are also shown (dashed lines).

Reversible Temperature Effects

The crack growth properties of rubber reversibly depend on temperature.  Higher temperatures tend to reduce the tear strength Tof rubber and increase the crack growth rate, as shown in Fig. 5 [8].  At lower temperatures, the tear strength is increased and crack growth is retarded.  Endurica’s crack growth models can be specified with a temperature dependence via the temperature sensitivity coefficient (see Table 1) or via a table look-up function.

Fig. 6 shows the fatigue life as a function of temperature calculated from the parameters in Table 1 [2].  Over a range of 100°C, natural rubber loses approximately a factor of two in fatigue life, and styrene butadiene rubbers loses four orders of magnitude!

Table 1. Crack growth properties and temperature sensitivity for natural rubber (NR) and styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), estimated from measurements reported in [2].
Fig. 5 – Increasing temperature causes the crack growth rate to increase. Results are shown for natural rubber [8].
Fig. 6. Endurica calculated dependence of fatigue life on temperature for natural rubber (Δ) and for styrene butadiene rubber (●) [2]. Compare to Fig. 1.
Some rubbers undergo strain crystallization, which is beneficial when operating under non-relaxing conditions.  The crystallization effect is strongly temperature dependent and decreases with increasing temperature.

Fig. 7 shows the Haigh diagram calculated by Endurica for three different temperatures: 23, 90 and 110°C.  For example, at a mean strain of 100% and a strain amplitude of 20%, the fatigue life at 23°C exceeds 106 cycles, but at 110°C the fatigue life is approximately 103 cycles.  This effect has been confirmed experimentally in recent work by [9].

Fig. 7. Endurica calculated Haigh diagrams for natural rubber at 23, 90 and 110°C . Increasing temperature tends to reduce strain crystallization, with the result that the mean strain benefit associated with strain crystallization is reduced or even eliminated at high temperatures.

Irreversible Temperature Effects / Ageing

Prolonged exposure to high temperatures can cause permanent changes in the cross link density and mechanical properties of rubber, including stiffness and crack growth properties.  The effect depends on the availability of oxygen [10], as shown in Fig. 8.

Fig. 8 – The evolution of rubber’s properties during ageing depends on the availability of oxygen, and on the temperature [10]. Under aerobic conditions, ageing tends to increase stiffness while strain at break decreases. Under anaerobic conditions, ageing tends to decrease stiffness while strain at break decreases.
When aged under Type I aerobic conditions, rubber becomes brittle as its strain at break λb decreases while its stiffness M100 increases.  When aged under Type II anaerobic conditions, rubber tends to soften while its strain at break decreases.

The rate at which thermochemical ageing of rubber progresses can be specified in Endurica using the Arrhenius law [11] and its activation energy parameter Ea. When following a temperature history θ(t), Endurica integrates the Arrhenius law to determine an equivalent exposure time τ at the reference temperature θ0R is the real gas constant.

The equivalent exposure time controls the evolution of the stiffness and crack growth properties with thermal history. As shown in Fig. 9, the evolution of the crack growth rate law is specified by a tabular function that gives the stiffness E(τ), tensile strength Tc(τ) and the fatigue limit T0(τ).  The material properties are then updated iteratively according to the co-simulation workflow shown in Fig. 10.  This allows the effects of thermal history and ageing on fatigue performance to be considered.

Fig. 9. The crack growth rate law evolves as a function of the equivalent exposure time τ. Crack growth property evolution is specified in Endurica by the dependence of the rubber’s tear strength Tc(τ) and its fatigue limit T0(τ) on exposure time.

 

Fig. 10. Endurica DT’s co-simulation workflow updates the crack length c, exposure time τ, and stiffness E so that stress, strain and temperature fields can be updated during solution.

Conclusion

There are many ways in which metals and rubbers differ in their behaviour, and thermal behaviour is one of the most important.

Rubber more often requires careful attention to thermal effects due to its exceptionally low thermal conductivity, its entropy-elasticity, its visco-elastic properties and tendency to self-heat under cyclic loading, the sensitivity of crack growth properties and strain crystallization to temperature, oxidation, and ageing.

Endurica’s fatigue solvers provide material models and workflows that capture these thermal effects, enabling accurate analysis and “right the first time” engineering.

References

[1] P.G. Forrest, Fatigue of Metals, Pergamon Press: Oxford, New York, 1962.

[2] G.J. Lake and P.B. Lindley, “Cut growth and fatigue of rubbers. II. Experiments on a noncrystallizing rubber”, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 8(2), pp. 707-721, 1964.

[3] W. V. Mars and T. G. Ebbott, “A Review of Thermal Effects on Elastomer Durability” in Advances in Understanding Thermal Effects in Rubber: Experiments, Modelling, and Practical Relevance, G. Heinrich, R. Kipscholl, J. B.
Le Cam and R. Stoček (eds.), pp. 251–324, Springer Nature: Switzerland, 2024.

[4] M. L. Williams, R. F. Landel and J. D. Ferry, “The Temperature Dependence of Relaxation Mechanisms in Amorphous Polymers and Other Glass-forming Liquids”, Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 77 (14), pp. 3701–3707,
1955.

[5] G. Kraus, “Mechanical Losses in Carbon Black Filled Rubbers”, in: Journal of Applied Polymer Science: Applied Polymer Symposium, vol. 39, pp. 75–92, 1984.
[6] J. D. Ulmer, “Strain Dependence of Dynamic Mechanical Properties of Carbon Black-Filled Rubber Compounds”, Rubber Chemistry and Technology, vol. 69, pp. 15–47, 1996.

[7] J. Vaněk, O. Peter et al, “2D Transient Thermal Analytical Solution of the Heat Build-Up in Cyclically Loaded Rubber Cylinder” in Advances in Understanding Thermal Effects in Rubber: Experiments, Modelling, and Practical Relevance,
G. Heinrich, R. Kipscholl, J. B. Le Cam and R. Stoček (eds.), pp. 31–52, Springer Nature: Switzerland, 2023.

[8] D. G. Young, “Fatigue Crack Propagation in Elastomer Compounds: Effects of Strain Rate, Temperature, Strain Level, and Oxidation”, Rubber Chemistry and Technology, vol. 59 (5), pp. 809–825, 1986.

[9] B. Ruellan, J. B. Le Cam et al, “Fatigue of natural rubber under different temperatures”, International Journal of Fatigue, vol. 124, pp. 544–557, 2019.isms in amorphous polymers and other glass-forming liquids. Journal of the American Chemical society77(14), 3701-3707.

[10] A. Ahagon, M. Kida and H. Kaidou, “Aging of Tire Parts during Service. I. Types of Aging in Heavy-Duty Tires”, Rubber Chemistry and Technology, vol. 63 (5), pp. 683–697, 1990. [11] S. Arrhenius, “Über die Reaktionsgeschwindigkeit bei der Inversion von Rohrzucker durch Säuren”, Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie, vol. 4 (1), pp. 226–248, 1889.

twitterlinkedinmail

4-in-1

Wow – this year has really been one of many firsts for Endurica.  We had our first ever Community Conference in April, we started our first sister company – in Europe, and from September 9 – 13, 2024, we presented 4 technical papers – a new Endurica record for one week!  The other impressive aspect of this latter feat was that the four presentations were on vastly different topics! I’ll just list the venues and titles and then discuss each one.

International Elastomer Conference 2024, Pittsburgh, PA, USA:

  1. “Heat Build-Up and Thermal Runaway in a Rotating Bending Experiment”

44th Annual Meeting and Conference of The Tire Society, Akron OH, USA:

  1. “Coupled Multiphysics Strategy to Monitor the Health of Rubbery Structures Using Endurica Tools”
  2. “Critical Plane Analysis of Surface-proximal Fields for the Simulation of Mechanochemical Wear”
  3. “Models, Materials and the Move Towards Virtual Product Development”

Let’s start with the first presentation on heat build-up. Will Mars presented this paper at the IEC in Pittsburgh on Tuesday the 10th of September. The presentation highlighted a new machine that has been developed by Coesfeld to evaluate the heat build-up behavior of rubber compounds. It uses a hollow rubber tube that is bent to a 60-90 degree arc and then rotated at about 600 rpm to create a tension-compression cycle throughout the tube due to the pre-bending as shown below.

This test offers many advantages over the historical Goodrich Flexometer self-heating test originally developed in 1937.  The Heat Build-Up Analyzer is instrumented to measure internal temperature as well as forces and deformations while the test is progressing.  The recent advances in the Endurica software and workflows are also equipped to predict the transient behavior in this test.  When the rubber reaches a certain high temperature, the rubber starts to break down, often due to the volatilization of low molecular weight additives creating an exothermic reaction, and also due to the reversion of the cross-links.  The exothermic reaction and thermal “runaway” condition can also be predicted by Endurica software.  The animation below shows the elevated temperatures and the internal pressure rise due to the exothermic reactions. The combination of the HBA test and the Endurica FEA-based analysis will add understanding to the heat-rise behavior of compounds for any company.  As with some other Coesfeld machines, Endurica is the sole distributor in the Americas.

The second presentation listed was presented by Mahmoud Assaad, co-authored by others at Endurica and also by Ed Terrill at ARDL.  This work aims to provide the combination of a full oxygen diffusion and oxidation reaction simulation and experimental characterization capability.   The plot here shows the distribution of reacted oxygen in the crown area of a commercial truck tire.  As the oxygen diffuses into the carcass it also reacts with the rubber compounds creating a phenomenon known as Diffusion Limited Oxidation.  Mahmoud, Ed Terrill and I worked on rubber oxidation with Sandia National Laboratories when the three of us worked together at Goodyear. Now we have developed a characterization and simulation capability that should be ready for customers to try in 2025!

For the third presentation listed, Will Mars quickly travelled from the IEC in Pittsburgh to the Tire Society in Akron to give a talk on an evolving capability for wear prediction. This work was co-authored by Lewis Tunnicliff and James Kollar at Birla Carbon as well as others from Endurica. For many years, researchers have been trying to link rubber fracture and tearing behavior to surface wear. One of the early works on this topic is shown in the drawing below from Southern and Thomas in 1979.

This work attempted to explain observations from blade abrader experiments. The Endurica/Birla work broadens this concept to different asperity shapes and a cumulative fatigue process that depends on the depth into the surface.  Temperature distribution near the surface was also calculated and included in the analysis.  Initial results gave similar trends for wear rates as work done by Gent and Pulford in 1983.  This new approach also makes it easy to also incorporate any aging effects that may occur on the surface of a rubber product. Development work on this new capability will continue well into 2025. In the meantime, Endurica does have a more basic FEA-based offering for wear prediction that has been used for multiple customers.

Lastly, on Friday the 13th of September, I had the honor of giving the Plenary Lecture for the Tire Society conference.  Thanks go to Jim McIntyre and the conference organizers for giving me this unique opportunity to address the society.

In April, we conducted the first ever Endurica Community Conference, and we tied in the Solar Eclipse that passed over Findlay, Ohio on April 8th, to produce a very successful event.  I wanted to include the solar eclipse in my Plenary talk and somehow relate it to topics concerning the development of tires.  The two concepts I used to make the connection were:

  • All models are approximations, but some can be very useful, and
  • Some very good physics theories predict singularities. The singularities reveal our ignorance on the topic and show the area where further work and insights are needed.

The first concept comes from the late George E. P. Box, a statistics professor at the University of Wisconsin. The quote is usually stated as: “All models are wrong, but some are useful”. The second concept makes a tie between fracture mechanics and Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, which was validated by data taken during a solar eclipse in 1919. Both of these theories predict non-physical singularities but remain extremely useful.

The bulk of my talk was on Virtual Tire Development using tire durability as one of the performances to evaluate without building and testing prototypes. It largely followed my experience and contributions to the topic over the 3+ decades I worked on this at Goodyear with many excellent colleagues and partner organizations like Sandia.

All four of these presentations are available on our website at this location: Fatigue Ninja Frontier – Resources from Endurica’s First Annual Meeting.

Please contact us if you have any questions about these presentations or if you would like to chat with us about anything, including possible work together.

One final note: we are working on a revised website. Our Marketing Director, Pauline Glaza, is heading up a project to develop a new website for us that should make navigating our material and interacting with us much easier.  Expect to see our new site in early 2025!

 

twitterlinkedinmail

Combine Multiple Load Cases into a Block Cycle Schedule that Executes as a Single Endurica Job

Our most recent Users Survey garnered two surprising requests:

  • “Very interested in ability to run a single model with increasing load and combine with “Duty cycle” definition to predict/calculate expected lifetime.”
  • “Would like to see more on how to use duty cycles (loads) within one analysis rather than running at one load.”

Endurica already does this! Allow me to break down the process and show how easy it is.

Multiple loading cases for a specific duty cycle is often part of Fatigue analysis. You can piece together a schedule of varying Loads, Displacements, Temperatures, Ozone Exposure, and more with Endurica DT.

I focus on load variability in this example. This duty cycle contains three unique loading conditions for a Simple Tension Strip: (A) 10mm displacement, (B) 20mm displacement, and (C) 35mm displacement.

Each load case is a separate FEA simulation. The strains are all exported separately for use with Endurica DT. Each FEA job is a single cycle of the desired loading.

Figure 1.  Contours of maximum principal engineering strain for each of load cases A, B and C. 

Here is a breakdown of the Duty Cycle for this analysis. One Cycle or “Life” is equivalent to 300 repeats of 10mm, 200 repeats of 20mm, and 100 repeats of 35mm.

Figure 2.  Block cycle schedule consisting of 300 repeats of load case A (displaced of 10mm), followed by 200 repeats of load case B (displaced of 20mm), and by 100 repeats of load case C (displaced of 30mm). 

When setting up the Endurica input file we specify the “schedule” under the “history” header in the input file. The number of “block_repeats” is then specified for each of the loading conditions. Once they are specified you submit the Endurica DT job like you would a single load Endurica CL job. The resulting life you receive will be the total number of cycles till failure.

Figure 3.  Endurica input file json syntax defining the block cycle schedule. 

Once submitted, Endurica provides a minimum life prediction of 2,944 Cycles of the full schedule. That is 883,200 cycles of 10mm, 588,800 cycles of 20mm, and 103,040 cycles of 35mm.

Figure 4.  Contours of fatigue life, reported as repeats of the total block cycle schedule. 

Want more information? Check out more details of Endurica DT’s capabilities.

For tutorials visit Endurica Academy:

twitterlinkedinmail

2023 – a Year of Magnitude and Direction

2023 marked year 15 for Endurica.  If I had to pick one word to describe the past year, that word would be “vector”.  Because magnitude and direction.  😊

We updated our core value statement this year.  The first one I ever wrote as part of Endurica’s original business plan listed 3 values: technical leadership, customer focus, and trustworthiness.  Those values served us well for many years and in many ways shaped who we have become.  But it was important this year to take stock again.  We’ve grown 8-fold since I wrote those down!  So our team spent many hours revisiting our shared values and deliberating over which will best define our culture and steer us right going forward.  In the end, we decided to keep the first 3, and we added 3 more:  embrace the grit, make an impact, and better every day.

We also completed an exercise to articulate what makes Endurica truly unique in the CAE / durability simulation space.  The 3 words we chose are… Accurate, Complete, and Scalable.

  • Accurate refers to the accurate material models that capture rubber’s many “special effects”, the accurate critical plane analysis method for analyzing multiaxial history, the accurate handling of nonlinear relationships between global input load channels and local crack experiences, and the extensive set of validation cases that have demonstrated our accuracy over the years. Nobody offers a more accurate solution for rubber durability.
  • Complete refers to our complete coverage of infinite life, safe life and damage tolerant approaches to testing and simulation. It refers to feature completeness that enables users to account for nearly any material behavior under nearly any service conditions.  Finally, it refers to the documentation, the materials database, and the examples we distribute with the software and with our webinar series.  Nobody offers a more complete solution for rubber durability.
  • Scalable refers to our capacity to apply our solutions efficiently in all circumstances. Scalability is the training we provide so that users can learn our tools quickly.  Scalability is access to powerful, ready-to-use workflows right when you need them.  Scalability is the modular approach we take to material testing and modeling so that simple problems can be solved cheaply and complex problems can be solved accurately in the same framework.  Scalability is our multi-threading that allows job execution time to be accelerated to complete impactful analysis on tough deadlines.  Nobody offers a more scalable solution for rubber durability.

2023 was not all navel-gazing and new marketing.  We also had magnitude and direction in other areas.

Top 10 Code Developments:

  1. New Endurica Architecture: After several years of development and a soft launch under the Katana project name, we finally completed our migration to the new architecture.  The new architecture provides a huge speed advantage for single thread and now for multithread execution. It uses a new input file format (.json). The json format makes it easier than ever for users to build customized and automated workflows via Python scripting.
  2. Sequence Effects: Sometimes the order of events matters to durability, and sometimes it doesn’t. We introduced Steps and Blocks to our input file, giving users complete control over the specification of multi-block, multi-step scheduling of load cases.  There is also a new output request that came out of this work: residual strength.
  3. EIE: 6 channels and support for RPC: Support for 6 channels of load input was one of our most highly requested new features.  Fast growing use of this feature led to further enhancements of the workflow (support for rpc file format, studies of map building techniques), and new recommendations on how to implement boundary conditions for specified rotation histories in explicit and implicit finite element models.
  4. Queuing: Design optimization studies need efficient management and execution of multiple jobs. Endurica’s software license manager now supports queueing for licenses. Queuing allows a submitted job to automatically wait to start until a license is available, instead of the prior behavior of exiting with a license error. Now you can submit many jobs without worrying about license availability.
  5. Haigh Diagram Improvements: We implemented an improved discretization of the Haigh diagram, and parallelized its evaluation. Now you get much nicer looking results in a fraction of the time. For details, check out our blog post on Haigh diagrams and also read about other improvements like axis limit setting and smoother contour plots.
  6. Viewer image copy: There is now a button! Its easier than ever to get your images into reports.
  7. Documentation Updates: We have been focusing on improving documentation this year. There are many new sections in the theory manual and user guide, as well as a getting started guide and more examples.  Stay tuned for many more examples coming in 2024!
  8. User Defined Planes: It is now possible to define your own set of planes for the critical plane search. One example where you might want to do this would be the situation where you would like to refine the critical plane search on a limited domain of the life sphere.
  9. New Database Materials: We added 7 new carbon black and silica filled EPDM compounds to the database. We are now up to 42 unique rubber compounds in the database.
  10. Uhyper Support: The new architecture now supports user-defined hyperelasticity. If you have a Uhyper subroutine for your finite element analysis, you can use it directly with Endurica.

 

Testing Hardware

We completed the acquisition and installation at ACE labs of a Coesfeld Instrumented Cut and Chip Analyser (ICCA).  The ICCA provides unmatched measurement and control of impact conditions, and provides a way to evaluate rubber compounds for their resistance to cutting and chipping.

 

Applications, Case Studies, Webinars

Never underestimate the students! We were blown away by the work of undergraduates at the University of Calgary with our tools and Ansys.  The students designed an airless tire, completing durability simulations using Endurica software within the scope of a senior design project. They were able to Get Durability Right on a short timeline and a student budget. Check out their multi-objective, high-performance design project here.

Analyzing what happens to tires as they take on the most celebrated testing track in the world might have been the funnest project Endurica’s engineers tackled in 2023. We presented the technical details at The Tire Society annual meeting and more in a followup webinar. An extensive Q&A session followed, and I loved the final question: “So, how long before we have a dashboard display of ‘miles to tire failure’ in our cars?”  Bring it.  We are ready!

Our Winning on Durability webinar series hit a nerve with the Metal Fatigue DOES NOT EQUAL Rubber Fatigue episodes on mean strain (the tendency of larger mean strains to significantly INCREASE the fatigue life of some rubbers!) and linear superposition (for converting applied load inputs to corresponding stress/strain responses). The great response has lead to our third installment on the differences between rubber and metal fatigue with an upcoming presentation on temperature effects.

twitterlinkedinmail

The New Endurica Architecture – It’s Time to Migrate

Our transition to a new software architecture is a vital move in navigating the dynamic technological landscape. In a recent webinar, we discussed the aspects of this transition, providing insights into the why and how of adopting a new architectural approach despite having a functional existing one. This post will highlight the motivations behind the shift, the present status of feature migration, alterations in the latest software release, and an overview of projects within this new framework.

The Rationale and Benefits

Why Overhaul?

The complete rewrite of our software’s architecture was not a decision made lightly. The reasoning extends beyond merely wanting a refresh; it was driven by pivotal motivations, primarily surrounding the necessity for speed and efficiency in executing computing processes. Speed is invariably tied to productivity and operational fluency in software and technology. The plot below illustrates a compelling story: the old architecture (represented by the blue line), exhibited a static runtime, regardless of the number of threads engaged, revealing its inability to utilize parallel processing. Contrastingly, the new architecture demonstrates a significant speed-up, even with just a single thread, and scales to allow an increase in speed by many multiples, contingent on thread capacity.

Solving Larger Problems

The pursuit of faster execution isn’t arbitrary; it is intrinsically linked to our objective of solving larger problems. With larger tasks and projects on the horizon, scaling up and utilizing more CPU threads became essential. Exemplified through a job run on a virtual machine with 96 available CPU threads, the linear decrease in runtime with increasing threads (until certain hardware limitations are met) exhibits the new architecture’s adept handling of larger jobs (see plot below). The capability to scale and manage tasks of escalating complexity and size was a crucial driver for our transition.

Enhancing Integrations and Streamlining Workflows

Then, we turned our attention toward improving the user experience in interfacing with our software. Our prior use of the HFI and HFO file formats, while functional, presented numerous challenges regarding modification and integration, particularly when scripted modifications were necessary. The new architecture employs the JSON file format, widely recognized for its robustness and versatility across various industries and applications. With JSON, modifying job inputs and managing data become significantly simplified, as illustrated by a Python script example, wherein the entirety of job modifications, inputs, and submissions can be seamlessly handled with a handful of lines of code.

Improved Usability and Real-Time Error Checking

In an effort to enhance usability and mitigate the common issue of erroneous entries and syntax use, the new architecture, especially when utilized with a text editor like VS Code, offers real-time checking and syntax suggestions. This not only makes job submission more precise but also substantially reduces the trial-and-error cycle, saving valuable time. Additionally, upon job submission, the new architecture performs rigorous error and syntax checks, ensuring smooth execution and user experience.

Comprehensive Feature Migration: A Successful Transition

Reflecting on the past two years, we have accomplished a near-complete feature migration to the new software architecture, with 99% of features now successfully transitioned. This includes all outlined output requests, material models, history types, and various procedures.
Our commitment to supporting multiple interfaces remains, with support for Abaqus, Ansys, and Marc using the new architecture. Furthermore, Endurica Viewer is fully compatible, providing enhanced visualization capabilities under the new system.
The comprehensive migration and the incorporation of new functionalities marks the new architecture as fully operational and ready for use across all undertakings.

Implementation of Directory and Execution Changes in Endurica Software

Refined Directory Structure

In efforts to provide a seamless transition and user experience with the upgraded Endurica software, modifications have been made to the directory structure. The new architecture, once labeled “Katana” during its development phase, has now been ubiquitously integrated into the top-level Endurica directory. With the most recent software installation, users will observe the top-level CL and DT directories contain the new architecture, and the Katana directory has been removed.

Consequently, when we refer to Endurica CL and Endurica DT moving forward, it denotes reference to the new architecture.

Accommodating Transition: The Legacy Folder

Acknowledging that the transition to the new architecture may not be instantaneous for all users, the old architecture will still be available and designated within a “Legacy” folder. Though it requires navigation into subfolders, we ensure its accessibility for users who need more time to transition fully into the new structure.

Executable Naming Conventions

In tandem with the directory adjustments, executable naming conventions have been revised to be more intuitive. Previously, “endurica” was employed to submit fatigue analyses in the old architecture, while “katana” pertained to the new. To streamline, “katana” has been rebranded as “endurica” for submitting the JSON input file, with the legacy version adopting the name “endurica-legacy.” It is crucial to note that users accustomed to utilizing “katana” may continue to do so — “endurica” and “katana” will run the same executable. However, usage of the old architecture requires invoking a new “endurica-legacy” command.

Delivering the Unattainable with Endurica’s New Software Architecture

Embarking upon two recent projects with our new computational architecture, we explored the realms of virtual simulation and data management in tire durability and elastomeric mount durability performance.

Project 1: Tire Durability with Dassault Systems

In collaboration with Dassault Systems, a multi-body dynamic simulation was conducted to compute tire durability at the Nurburgring circuit. Utilizing SIMPACK for generating virtual road load data and employing Endurica EIE and Abaqus to establish a workspace map of driving conditions, the endeavor yielded significant data, processed through 176,000 time steps to evaluate the tire’s fatigue life. After a meticulous analysis, the results spotlighted the fatigue life to be 214 laps, pinpointing the most critical point around the tire bead edge.

Project 2: Durability of an Elastomeric Mount with Ford

Undertaken with Ford, the second project navigated through the durability performance of an elastomeric mount, involving a behemoth of data from 144 load history files, each load file containing tens or hundreds of thousands of time points, accumulating to over 15 million total time points. Utilizing a similar approach as the Nurburgring project, Endurica EIE and Abaqus were used together to generate the strain history data. The analysis focused on membrane elements on the mount’s free surfaces to precisely gauge surface strains. Culminating the analysis, the project succeeded in qualifying the part with a fatigue life of 9.4 repeats of the entire schedule, wherein the requisite was just one repeat.

These projects underscored the capabilities of our new architecture, navigating through large data sets and providing tangible insights in significantly reduced timeframes compared to the old architecture. In essence, the implementation of the new architecture has not only streamlined our processes but also expanded our horizons in handling large data and achieving nuanced analyses in our projects.

Summary

The new Endurica CL and Endurica DT architectures have now fully replaced our old system, maintaining the accuracy our users expect while introducing an easier, more powerful, and scalable solution. Everything has been successfully migrated over to this complete solution. With its enhanced capabilities, it addresses problems that were previously too large or took too long to solve, enabling our customers to tackle challenges they might not have considered before. The ability to solve unprecedented problems is just one more example of our steadfast commitment to providing accurate, complete, and scalable solutions.

twitterlinkedinmail

License Queueing

Design optimization studies are driving a need to support the efficient management and execution of many jobs.  This is why we are announcing that Endurica’s software license manager now supports queueing for licenses. This allows a submitted job to automatically wait to start until enough licenses are available, instead of the prior behavior of exiting with a license error. Now you can submit many jobs without worrying about license availability.

License queueing is only available for network licenses (not node-locked). It is currently supported for Katana CL/DT jobs and EIE jobs submitted from a command prompt.

To enable queueing, set the environment variable RLM_QUEUE to any value. This environment variable must be set on the client machine (not the license server).

To learn more about license queueing, search for “How to Queue for Licenses” in the RLM License Administration documentation here: https://www.reprisesoftware.com/RLM_License_Administration.pdf

 

twitterlinkedinmail

The View on ‘22 – The Top 10 Happenings for Endurica in 2022

  1. Expanded our team! We welcomed 35-year Goodyear veteran Tom Ebbott to our team as Vice President, and at one point we had 3 interns working with us this year.  It wasn’t all hard work – we enjoyed our first company canoe trip / picnic in July.
  2. Solved much bigger problems. We set a record this summer for the largest rubber fatigue analysis ever. Ford Motor Company gave us multi-channel recorded road load histories from the full schedule of 144 distinct test track events that they use to qualify a motor mount for durability. We used Endurica EIE to map the load space and generate 3.2 Terabytes of stress-strain history for fatigue analysis. The new Katana multi-threading architecture of our Endurica CL fatigue solver enabled us to process 152k elements through all 15,693,824 timesteps of the schedule.  Check out our presentation at RubberCon 23 in Edinborough UK.
  3. Made analysis of block cycles easier. The Endurica CL and DT solvers’ Katana architecture now enables multiple blocks of load history to be specified in a single analysis.WoD 6 - Strain Crystallization
  4. Added a Haigh diagram visualization to the Endurica Viewer. Use it to quickly understand your material’s dependence of fatigue life on mean strain and strain amplitude.
  5. Implemented a channel reduction algorithm to Endurica EIE. It will analyze your multi-channel loading history to check for opportunities to reduce the dimensionality of your analysis through a change of coordinate basis.  Often, a 6-channel signal can be reduced to 3, 4 or 5 channels, greatly reducing computational requirements for building the map for EIE’s interpolation process.
  6. Expanded our licensing model to offer local, regional and global options. If your organization uses Endurica at multiple sites around the world, ask us about the advantage of regional or global licenses. These licenses allow any number of users to share a pool of solver threads for maximum flexibility and compute power.
  7. Added an experimental characterization for ozone cracking. Ozone is a trace gas that strongly reacts with some rubbers to produce surface cracking. It limits useful product life, even for loads below the fatigue threshold.Ozone Module. quantify ozone attack critical energy and rate Our testing method gives you the parameters you need to set up the ozone attack model in your Endurica CL / DT analyses. Perfect for analysis of tire sidewall endurance.
  8. Were honored when our founder and president, Will Mars, received the Herzlich Medal – the highest award in the tire industry – at the International Tire Exhibition and Conference. This honor is bestowed every other year to recognize an individual whose career and accomplishments have changed the tire industry for the better and left a lasting impact on tire design, development and manufacturing.
  9. Strengthened our documentation. New and experienced users alike will find it easier than ever to find the theory, procedures and examples that will yield rapid success in applying our software workflows. Check out the new sections on Mullins Effect, Ageing, Safety Factor, and Block Cycle analysis.
  10. Celebrated our client’s success. Technetics Group (Pierrelatte, France Maestral® R&D Sealing Laboratory) and Delkor Rail (New South Wales, Australia) shared their Winning on Durability success in case studies.
twitterlinkedinmail

Use This One Simple Trick to Ensure Rubber Part Durability

We’ve just added a new output to the Endurica fatigue solver: Safety Factor.  This feature makes it simple to focus your analysis on whether cracks have the minimum energy required to grow. Safety Factor is a quick and inexpensive way to identity potential failure locations.  It minimizes the number of assumptions you need to defend, and it is backed by hard science.  You don’t need to measure or explain the many influences that together determine how fast cracks grow.  You don’t need lengthy materials characterization experiments that take days or weeks.  You do need to know your material’s Intrinsic Strength T0 (ie Fatigue Threshold) and its crack precursor size c0. The test takes about an hour using the Coesfeld Intrinsic Strength Analyser.

The Safety Factor S is computed as the ratio of T0 to the driving force T on a potential crack precursor.  If the value of the Safety Factor S = T0/T is greater than 1, it indicates the margin by which crack growth is avoided.  If S is less than 1, it indicates that crack growth is inevitable. The calculation of the Safety Factor includes a search for the most critical plane, as we do for our full fatigue life computations.

Although the Safety Factor can’t tell you how long a part will endure, it nevertheless does offer great utility.  You can make a contour plot showing the locations in your part where the Safety Factor is the lowest.  This is a quick and inexpensive way to identity potential failure locations.  You can make statements about the reserve capacity of your design that are easy to communicate and understand with a wide audience.

 A vibration isolation grommet operating under small displacement  A vibration isolation grommet operating under large displacement

The images above show a vibration isolation grommet operating under small (Safety Factor 2.6) and large displacements (Safety Factor 0.83).  Color contours indicate the Endurica-computed Safety Factor, and use the same scale for both images.  Large Safety Factors are shown in blue.  Safety Factors approaching 1 are shown in red.  Safety Factors smaller than 1 are indicated in black.  These results show that the grommet can be expected to operate indefinitely under the small displacements, but that large displacements will produce cracks at some point, in the regions colored black.

twitterlinkedinmail

Durability by Design on Any Budget

Durability by Design

So, you’ve got a tricky durability problem to solve, a budget, and a deadline.  Let’s look at a helpful framework for sorting which Endurica workflows you need.  In the grid below, each row represents a potential approach you can take.  The approaches are, in order of increasing complexity and cost, the Infinite Life approach, the Safe Life approach, the Damage Tolerant approach, and the Fail Safe approach.

Endurica Durability Workflows

The Infinite Life approach is by far the simplest approach.  Here, we say that damage will not be allowed at all.  All locations in the part must operate, at all times, below the fatigue limit (ie intrinsic strength) of the rubber.  The required material testing is minimal: we need only know the fatigue limit T0 and the crack precursor size c0.  We avoid the question of how long the part may last, and we focus on whether or not we can expect indefinite life.  We report a safety factor S indicating the relative margin (ie S = T0 / T) by which each potential failure location avoids crack development.  When S>1, we predict infinite life.  For S<=1, failure occurs in finite time and we must then go on to the next approach…

In the Safe Life approach, the chief concern is whether or not the part’s estimated finite life is adequate relative to the target life.  The material characterization now becomes more sophisticated.  We must quantify the various “special effects” that govern the crack growth rate law (strain crystallization, temperature, frequency, etc.).  We consider the specific load case(s), then compute and report the number of repeats that the part can endure.  If the estimated worst-case life is greater than the target life then we may say that the design is safe under the assumptions considered.  If not, then we may need to increase the part’s load capacity, or alternatively to decrease the applied loading to a safe level.  In critical situations, we may also consider implementing the next level…

The Damage Tolerant approach acknowledges that, whatever the reasons for damage, the risk of failure always exists and therefore should be actively monitored.  This approach monitors damage development via inspection and via tracking of accrued damage under actual loading history.  A standard nominal load case may be assumed for the purpose of computing a remaining residual life, given the actual loading history to date.  Changes in material properties due to cyclic softening or ageing may also be tracked and considered in computing forecasts of remaining life.

The Fail Safe approach takes for granted that failure is going to occur, and obliges the designer to implement measures that allow for this to happen safely.  This can take the form of a secondary / redundant load path that carries the load once the primary load path has failed.  It can take the form of a sacrificial weak link / “mechanical fuse” that prevents operation beyond safe limits.  It can take the form of a Digital Twin that monitors structural health, senses damage, and requests maintenance when critical damage occurs.

The last three columns of the grid show which Endurica fatigue solver workflows align with each design approach.  The Endurica solvers give you complete coverage of all approaches.  Whether you need a quick Infinite Life analysis of safety factors for a simple part, or deep analysis of Damage Tolerance or Fail Safety, or anything in-between, our solvers have just what you need to get durability right.

twitterlinkedinmail

Road Loads to Block Cycle Schedule

 Road loads being converted into block cycle schedules through Endurica softwareRoad load signals are notoriously difficult to work with. The signals feature so many different time increments that it becomes too much to directly model efficiently in FEA. It is difficult to tell which portions of the loading do the most damage. Experimental fatigue testing would be too time-consuming and costly to run on the full complex road load signal. For these reasons simplifying road loads into block cycle schedules has become the gold standard for working with road load signals. Experimental testing and FEA modeling are more manageable when using a block cycle schedule instead of the full road load signal. Traditional methods of converting a road load signal to block cycle schedule can often fall short. Endurica recently added a built-in method in the Endurica CL software that uses the power of critical plane analysis and rain-flow counting to automate block cycle creation.

Let us dive into the process of block cycle creation using an example of a bushing and a road load history. The road loading history shown below contains results for loadings in 3 axes over a time history.

 Road Load Time History Graph

The first step in creating the block cycle schedule is solving for the strain history over the entire road load history. Fortunately, Endurica EIE comes to the rescue in solving for the long strain history. The road load time history does not need to be modeled directly in FEA. Instead, a map is run in FEA to solve for strain history within the bounds of the road loading. Endurica EIE quickly interpolates the strains from this map to create the full loading strain history. In the animation below the map points solved for in FEA are shown as black dots and the bushing traces out the path of the map.

Endurica EIE quickly interpolating the strains from this map to create the full loading strain history

After the full road load strain history has been solved for in EIE the fatigue life for the road load signal is ready to be analyzed in CL. The fatigue analysis of the entire road load signal gives valuable insight into finding the critical location, developing the block cycle, and allowing the fatigue life of the block schedule to be validated against the fatigue life of the road load. The critical location of the bushing is shown in the image below:

The fatigue analysis of the entire load signal shows the critical location along with an estimated fatigue life

At the bushing critical location, all damaging events on the critical plane are taken into account when creating the block cycle schedule. The events are grouped into different bins categorized by two parameters: the peak CED and R ratio. The analyst remains in control by selecting the number of bins to group into. Each of the bins contains events with similar peak CED and R ratio that falls within the bounds of the bin. Within each bin, a representative cycle is identified that when repeated in the block schedule will contribute at least as much damage as all the various events in the bin. This selection process produces a conservative result that ensures that the block cycle will be at least as damaging as the road load.

 Grouping Damaging events into Bins

The bin results from the original history show the number of times each bin is repeated and the total damage from each bin. At this point, the bins that contribute insignificant damage can be safely eliminated from the block cycle schedule to save testing time and complexity without changing the results.

Comparison of Original history to Block Schedule

 

The simplified block schedule is then modeled to check the fatigue life vs the full road load signal. The results show that the critical location and fatigue life has been accurately maintained in the block schedule.

 Road Load vs. Block Cycle Fatigue + Damage Spheres

This automated block cycle creation procedure succeeded in producing a block cycle with the same critical location and very similar fatigue life. The block cycle selection was able to re-create the full road load signal using only three different loading blocks.

Endurica CL automated block cycle creation lets you take the guesswork out of block cycle creation and harness the proven power of Endurica fatigue analysis technology to get durability right.

twitterlinkedinmail

Our website uses cookies. By agreeing, you accept the use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.  Continued use of our website automatically accepts our terms. Privacy Center