When invariants matter: The role of I1 and I2 in neural network models of incompressible hyperelasticity

Abstract

For the formulation of machine learning-based material models, the usage of invariants of deformation tensors is attractive, since this can a priori guarantee objectivity and material symmetry. In this work, we consider incompressible, isotropic hyperelasticity, where two invariants I1 and I2 are required for depicting a deformation state. First, we aim at enhancing the understanding of the invariants. We provide an explicit representation of the set of invariants that are admissible, i.e. for which (I1, I2) a deformation state does indeed exist. Furthermore, we prove that uniaxial and equi-biaxial deformation correspond to the boundary of the set of admissible invariants. Second, we study how the experimentally-observed behaviour of different materials can be captured by means of neural network models of incompressible hyperelasticity, depending on whether both I1 and I2 or solely one of the invariants, i.e. either only I1 or only I2, are taken into account. To this end, we investigate three different experimental data sets from the literature. In particular, we demonstrate that considering only one invariant, either I1 or I2, can allow for good agreement with experiments in case of small deformations. In contrast, it is necessary to consider both invariants for precise models at large strains, for instance when rubbery polymers are deformed. Moreover, we show that multiaxial experiments are strictly required for the parameterisation of models considering I2. Otherwise, if only data from uniaxial deformation is available, significantly overly stiff responses could be predicted for general deformation states. On the contrary, I1-only models can make qualitatively correct predictions for multiaxial loadings even if parameterised only from uniaxial data, whereas I2-only models are completely incapable in even qualitatively capturing experimental stress data at large deformations.

References in corpus (12)

• A new family of Constitutive Artificial Neural Networks towards automated model discovery
• NN-EUCLID: deep-learning hyperelasticity without stress data
• Neural networks meet hyperelasticity: A guide to enforcing physics
• FE${}^{\text{ANN}}$ $-$ An efficient data-driven multiscale approach based on physics-constrained neural networks and automated data mining
• Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Shell Structures
• Mixed formulation of physics-informed neural networks for thermo-mechanically coupled systems and heterogeneous domains
• Theory and implementation of inelastic Constitutive Artificial Neural Networks
• Finite electro-elasticity with physics-augmented neural networks
• Consistent machine learning for topology optimization with microstructure-dependent neural network material models
• Symmetry-enforcing neural networks with applications to constitutive modeling
• Experimental Learning of a Hyperelastic Behavior with a Physics-Augmented Neural Network
• Neural networks meet hyperelasticity: A monotonic approach

Cited by in corpus (6)

• Biaxial characterization of soft elastomers: experiments and data-adaptive configurational forces for fracture
• Precise, efficient and flexible modeling of crystallizing elastomers based on physics-augmented neural networks
• Data-adaptive spline surfaces for non-separable hyperelastic energy functions
• Construction of minimal integrity basis for anisotropic hyperelasticity via structural tensors
• A physics-augmented neural network framework for finite strain incompressible viscoelasticity
• Learning ultra-compressible hyperelasticity with splines: Constitutive asymmetries and non-unique representations