The 4 major mechanical model concepts of rheology
The word viscoelastic is derived from the words "viscous" + "elastic"; a viscoelastic material
exhibits both viscous and elastic behaviour – a bit like a fluid and a bit like a solid. One can
build up a model of linear viscoelasticity by considering combinations of the linear elastic
spring and the linear viscous dash-pot. These are known as rheological models or mechanical
models.
I. Hooke’s Model
According to Britannica “Hooke’s law, law of elasticity discovered by the English
scientist Robert Hooke in 1660, which states that, for relatively small deformations of an object,
the displacement or size of the deformation is directly proportional to the deforming force or
load. Under these conditions the object returns to its original shape and size upon removal of the
load. Elastic behaviour of solids according to Hooke’s law can be explained by the fact that
small displacements of their constituent molecules, atoms, or ions from normal positions is also
proportional to the force that causes the displacement.”
Sometimes Hooke’s law is formulated as F = −kx. In this expression F no longer means the
applied force but rather means the equal and oppositely directed restoring force that causes
elastic materials to return to their original dimensions.
The spring is the elastic (or storage) element, as for it the force is proportional to the extension; it
represents a perfect elastic body obeying the Hooke law (ideal solid). This model is thus referred
to as the Hooke model. If we denote by m the pertinent elastic modulus we have
In this case we have no creep and no relaxation so the creep compliance and the relaxation
modulus are constant functions:
The relationship between the stress and strain during the creep-test may be expressed in the
form:
J here is called the creep (compliance) function ( J 1/ E for the elastic spring)
II. The Maxwell Model
Consider next a spring and dash-pot in series. This is the Maxwell model. One can divide the
total strain into one for the spring ( 1 ) and one for the dash-pot ( 2 ).
Equilibrium requires that the stress be the same in both elements. One thus has the following
three equations in four unknowns1:
To eliminate 1 and 2, differentiate the first and third equations, and put the first and second into
the third:
This constitutive equation has been put in what is known as standard form – stress on left, strain
on right, increasing order of derivatives from left to right, and coefficient of is 1.
A branch constituted by a spring in series with a dashpot is known as the Maxwell model . We
have
where τσ is referred to as the relaxation time.
The Maxwell model exhibits an exponential (reversible) stress relaxation and a linear (non-
reversible) strain creep; it is also referred to as the relaxation element.
III. The Kelvin–Voigt Model
Consider next the other two-element model, the Kelvin (or Voigt) model, which consists of a
spring and dash-pot in parallel. It is assumed there is no bending in this type of parallel
arrangement, so that the strain experienced by the spring is the same as that experienced by the
dash-pot. This time,
where 1 is the stress in the spring and 2 is the dash-pot stress. Eliminating 1 , 2 leaves the
constitutive law.
If a load 0 is applied suddenly to the Kelvin model, the spring will want to stretch, but is held
back by the dash-pot, which cannot react immediately. Since the spring does not change length,
the stress is initially taken up by the dash-pot. The creep curve thus starts with an initial slope
o / .
Some strain then occurs and so some of the stress is transferred from the dash-pot to the spring.
The slope of the creep curve is now 2 / , where 2 is the stress in the dashpot, with 2 ever-
decreasing. In the limit when 0 2 , the spring takes all the stress and thus the maximum strain
is o / E .
A branch constituted by a spring in parallel with a dashpot is known as the Kelvin–Voigt model
(Fig. 1c). We have
where τǫ is referred to as the retardation time.
IV. Newton Model
The dashpot is the viscous (or dissipative) element, the force being proportional to rate of
extension; it represents a perfectly viscous body obeying the Newton law (perfect liquid). This
model is thus referred to as the Newton model. If we denote by b1 the pertinent viscosity
coefficient, we have
In this case we have a linear creep J(t) = J+ t and instantaneous relaxation G(t) = G_ δ(t) with G_
= 1/J+ = b1.
We note that the Hooke and Newton models represent the limiting cases of viscoelastic bodies of
type I and IV, respectively.
Referrence:
http://www.brittanica.com/science/Hookes-law
1. Barnes HA; Handbook of Elementary Rheology, Institute of Non-Newtonian Fluid
Mechanics, University of Wales (2000)
2. Shaw MT, Macknight WJ; Introduction to Polymer Viscoelasticity, Wiley (2005)
3. Larson RG; The Structure and Rheology of Complex Fluids, Oxford University Press,
New York (1999)
4. Rohn CL; Analytical Polymer Rheology – Structure-Processing-Property
Relationships Hanser-Gardner Publishers (1995)
5. Malvern Panalytical White Paper- Understanding Yield Stress
Measurements – https://www.malvernpanalytical.com/en/learn/knowledge-
center/Whitepapers/WP120416UnderstandYieldStressMeas.html
6. Larsson M, Duffy J; An Overview of Measurement Techniques for Determination of Yield
Stress, Annual Transactions of the Nordic Rheology Society Vol 21 (2013)
7. Malvern Panalytical Application Note - Suspension stability; Why particle size, zeta
potential andrheology are important
8. Malvern Panalytical White Paper - An Introduction to DLS
Microrheology – https://www.malvernpanalytical.com/en/learn/knowledge-
center/Whitepapers/WP120917IntroDLSMicro.html
9. Duffy JJ, Rega CA, Jack R, Amin S; An algebraic approach for determining viscoelastic
moduli from creep compliance through application of the Generalised Stokes-Einstein
relation and Burgers model, Appl. Rheol. 26:1 (2016)
10. R.L. Bagley, On the equivalence of the Riemann-Liouville and the Caputo fractional
order derivatives in modeling of linear viscoelastic materials, Fractional Calculus and
Applied Analysis 10 No 2, 123–126 (2007).
11. R.B. Bird, J.M. Wiest, Constitutive Equations for Polymeric Liquids Annual Review of
Fluid Mechanics 27, 169–193 (1995)
12. D.R. Bland, The Theory of Linear Viscoelasticity (Pergamon, Oxford, 1960) [4] V.
Cannelli, D. Melini and A. Piersanti, Post-seismic stress relaxation with a linear transient
rheology, Ann. Geophys. 53 No 2, 89–99 (2010) 37
13. M. Caputo, Linear models of dissipation whose Q is almost frequency independent, Part
II, Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc. 13, 529–539 (1967) [Reprinted in Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal.
11, 4–14 (2008)]
14. M. Caputo, Elasticit`a e Dissipazione (Zanichelli, Bologna, 1969) [in Italian]
15. M. Caputo, F. Mainardi, A new dissipation model based on memory mechanism, Pure
and Appl. Geophys. (PAGEOPH) 91, 134–147 (1971a) [Reprinted in Fractional Calculus
and Applied Analysis 10 No 3, 309–324 (2007)]
16. M. Caputo, F. Mainardi, Linear models of dissipation in anelastic solids, Riv. Nuovo
Cimento (Ser. II) 1, 161–198 (1971b)
17. J.M. Carcione, Wave Fields in Real Media. Theory and Numerical Simulation of Wave
Propagation in Anisotropic, Anelastic and Porous Media, 2-nd Ed. (Elsevier, Amsterdam,
2007)
18. G. Doetsch, Introduction to the Theory and Application of the Laplace Transformation
(Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1974)
19. W.N. Findley, J.S. Lai, K. Onaran, Creep and Relaxation of Nonlinear Viscoelastic
Materials with an Introduction to Linear Viscoelasticity (North-Holland, Amsterdam,
1976)
20. I.M. Gel’fand, G.E. Shilov, Generalized Functions, Vol. 1 (Academic Press, New York,
1964)
21. C. Giunchi and G. Spada, Postglacial rebound in a non-Newtonian spherical Earth,
Geophys. Res. Lett. 27 No 14. 2065–2068 (2000)
22. R. Gorenflo, J. Loutchko, Yu. Luchko, Computation of the MittagLeffler function
Eα,β(z) and its derivatives, Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal. 5 No.4, 491–518 (2002); Corrections
in Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal. 6 No.1, 111–112 (2003)
23. R. Gorenflo, F. Mainardi, Fractional calculus: integral and differential equations of
fractional order, in: A. Carpinteri and F. Mainardi (Editors), Fractals and Fractional
Calculus in Continuum Mechanics, (Springer Verlag, Wien,1997), pp. 223–276. [E-print:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.3823] 38
24. N. Heymans, I. Podlubny, Physical interpretation of initial conditions for fractional
differential equations with Riemann-Liouville fractional derivatives, Rheol. Acta 45 No
5, 765–771 (2006)
25. H. Jeffreys, The Earth, 1-st Ed. §14.423, pp. 224-225 (Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1924)
26. H. Jeffreys The Earth, 5-th Ed., §8.13, pp. 321-322 (Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1970)
27. H. Jeffreys, A modification of Lomnitz’s law of creep in rocks, Geophys. J. Roy. Astr.
Soc. 1, 92–95 (1958)
28. A.A. Kilbas, H.M. Srivastava, J.J. Trujillo, Theory and Applications of Fractional
Differential Equations (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006)
29. Y. Klausner, Fundamentals of Continuum Mechanics of Soils (Springer Verlag, Berlin,
1991)
30. M. K¨ornig, G. M¨uller, Rheological models and interpretation of postglacial uplift,
Geophys. J. Int. 98, 243–253 (1989)
31. C.P. Li, Z.G. Zhao, Introduction to fractional integrability and differentiability, The
European Physical Journal-Special Topics 193, 5– 26 (2011)
32. J.G. Liu, M.Y. Xu, Higher-order fractional constitutive equations of viscoelastic
materials involving three different parameters and their relaxation and creep functions,
Mech. Time-Depend. Mater. 10, 263– 279 (2006)
33. F. Mainardi, R. Gorenflo, Time-fractional derivatives in relaxation processes: a tutorial
survey, Fractional Calculus and Applied Analysis 10, 269–308 (2007) [E-print:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.4914]
34. F. Mainardi, Physical and mathematical aspects of fractional calculus in linear
viscoelasticity, In: A. Le M´ehaut´e, J.A. Tenreiro Machado, J.C. Trigeassou, J. Sabatier
(Editors), Proceedings the 1-st IFAC Workshop on Fractional Differentiation and its
applications (FDA’04), pp. 62–67 [ENSEIRB, Bordeaux (France), July 19-21, 2004] 39
35. F. Mainardi, Fractional Calculus and Waves in Linear Viscoelasticity, (Imperial College
Press–World Scientific, London, 2010)
36. F. Mainardi, An historical perspective on fractional calculus in linear viscoelasticity, E-
print http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.2959
37. D. Melini, V. Cannelli, A. Piersanti and G. Spada, Post-seismic rebound of a spherical
Earth: new insights from the application of the PostWidder inversion formula, Geophys.
J. Int. 174 672–695 (2008)
38. D. Melini, G. Spada and A. Piersanti, A sea level equation for seismic perturbations,
Geophys. J. Int. 180 No 1, 88-100 (2010)
39. G. M¨uller, Generalized Maxwell bodies and estimates of mantle viscosity, Geophys. J.
R. Astr. Soc. 87, 1113–1145 (1986) Erratum, Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc. 91, 1135 (1987)
40. K.D. Papoulia, V.P. Panoskaltsis, N.V. Kurup, I. Korovajchuk, Rheological
representation of fractional order viscoelastic material models, Rheol. Acta 49, 381–400
(2010)
41. A.C. Pipkin, Lectures on Viscoelastic Theory, 2-nd Ed. (Springer Verlag, New York,
1986)
42. I. Podlubny, Fractional Differential Equations (Academic Press, San Diego, 1999)
43. G.M. Scott-Blair, Survey of General and Applied Rheology (Pitman, London, 1949)
44. G. Spada, ALMA, a Fortran program for computing the viscoelastic Love numbers of a
spherically symmetric planet, Computers & Geosciences 34 No 6, 667–687 (2008)
45. G. Spada and L. Boschi, Using the Post-Widder formula to compute the Earth’s
viscoelastic Love numbers, Geophys. J. Int. 166 No 1, 309–321 (2006)
46. G. Spada, F. Colleoni and G. Ruggieri, Shallow upper mantle rheology and secular ice
sheet fluctuation, Tectonophysics, in press (2010), doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2009.12.020. 40
47. D. Verotta, Fractional compartmental models and multi-term MittagLeffler response
functions, J Phamacokinet. Pharmacodyn. 37 No 2, 209- 215 (2010)
48. D. Verotta, Fractional dynamics pharmacokinetics - pharmacodynamic models, J.
Pharmacokinet. Pharmacodyn 37 No 3, 257–276 (2010)
49. P. Wessel, W.H.F. Smith, New, improved version of the Generic Mapping Tools
released, Eos Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union 79, 579 (1998)
50. C. Zener, Elasticity and Anelasticity of Metals (University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
1948)
