Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 43 references

Slowly decaying strain solitons in nonlinear viscoelastic waveguides

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that longitudinal strain solitons in nonlinear viscoelastic rods decay according to explicit widening and deceleration laws, and that the reduced one-dimensional model reproduces full 3D simulations of the decay.

desk verdict A solid, citable extension of strain-soliton theory to nonlinear viscoelastic rods, but the printed initial-width formula in Eq. (57) inverts the correct relation and makes the central simulation comparison unreproducible as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09415 v1 pith:RNXZUHPR submitted 2025-01-16 nlin.PS cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.soft

F. E. Garbuzov , Y. M. Beltukov This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.PScond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.soft MSC 74J3035Q5335C08
keywords strainsolitonviscoelasticwaveguidenonlinearviscoelasticitydampedBoussinesqequationKorteweg-deVriesretardedoperatorsthird-orderelasticconstantssolitarywavedecay
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is trying to establish that long longitudinal strain solitons in a thin rod made of a nonlinear viscoelastic material can be described by a damped Boussinesq-type equation with memory, and that the slow decay of such solitons---widening, amplitude decrease, and deceleration---follows explicit formulas. The authors derive the equation from the full three-dimensional equations of motion under long-wave, small-strain, small-dissipation scaling, then use perturbation theory for nearly integrable systems to obtain the decaying-soliton solution. They verify the predicted decay against direct numerical simulations of the original 3D equations. If the claim is right, a one-dimensional model with retarded linear and nonlinear dissipation is a valid tool for predicting soliton attenuation in viscoelastic waveguides, and frequency-dependent third-order elastic constants cannot be ignored.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the retarded operator $\hat R_s[f](t)=\int_{-\infty}^{t} e^{-(t-t_1)/\tau_s}\dot f(t_1)\,dt_1$ for $s\ge 1$, with $\hat R_0$ the identity, which encodes each relaxation process as an exponential memory kernel. Inserted into the stress-strain relation, these operators produce both linear dissipation ($\gamma_s\hat R_s[u]$) and bilinear nonlinear dissipation ($\beta_{su}\hat R_s[u]\hat R_u[u]$) in the wave equation. The argument then reduces the Boussinesq equation to a damped Korteweg-de Vries equation by multiple scales and applies adiabatic soliton perturbation theory, which converts the small dissipative terms into quadratures over the soliton shape and yields the ODEs for $L(t)$ and $x_0(t)$.

What would settle it

The theory predicts a specific critical amplitude at which the nonlinear decay rate in Eq. (52) vanishes, so that larger solitons would stop decaying and become unstable. A decisive test is to simulate or measure the phase portrait $dA/dt$ versus $A$ while increasing the nonlinear viscoelastic moduli $\beta_{03}$ and $\beta_{33}$ in small steps; if the zero-crossing does not occur at the predicted amplitude, or if the decay law deviates systematically from the integrated ODEs, the retarded-nonlinear-dissipation model is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the damped Boussinesq-type equation (35) possesses a slowly decaying solitary wave solution of the form $u(x,t)=A(t)\cosh^{-2}((x-x_0(t))/L(t))$, with $A(t)=6\nu_0^2R_*^2/(\beta_{00}L(t)^2)$, where the width $L(t)$ and position $x_0(t)$ obey the ordinary differential equations (39)--(40) for linear dissipation and (52)--(53) when nonlinear dissipative terms are included. The rates are set by universal functions $I_{1,\mathrm{lin}}$, $I_{2,\mathrm{lin}}$, $I_{1,\mathrm{nl}}$, and $I_{2,\mathrm{nl}}$ of the ratios of relaxation times to the instantaneous soliton width; the linear ones involve the digamma function, and the nonlinear ones involve hypergeometric functions. The paper reports that this solution reproduces the decay observed in full 3D simulations, and that including the frequency dependence of the third-order elastic moduli is essential for the agreement.

Load-bearing premise

The whole derivation rests on the ordering $\varepsilon^2\ll\gamma_s\ll\varepsilon$ together with the long-wave limit $L\gg R_*$: dissipation must be much weaker than nonlinearity, and the soliton much wider than the rod's cross-section. Real polymers such as polystyrene violate this ordering by one to two orders of magnitude, so for them the predicted decay rates are approximate at best.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The damped Boussinesq-type equation (35) can serve as a one-dimensional predictive tool for longitudinal strain soliton attenuation in viscoelastic waveguides, replacing full 3D simulations for design and analysis.
  • Soliton decay is not a simple exponential: with retarded dissipation the width grows as $\sqrt{1+D_1t}$ in the long-soliton limit and exponentially in the short-soliton limit, with a smooth crossover encoded in $I_{1,\mathrm{lin}}$.
  • Nonlinear, frequency-dependent dissipation changes the decay rate substantially; for parameters in the range estimated for polystyrene, the decay is several times slower than the linear-dissipation prediction, so linear models overestimate attenuation.
  • The same formulas give the soliton speed correction during decay, relating the deceleration to the same memory functions $I_{2,\mathrm{lin}}$ and $I_{2,\mathrm{nl}}$, which can be checked by tracking the soliton position in experiments.
  • For small enough dissipation, the truncated theory matches full 3D simulations, including the relation between decay rate and amplitude, so it extends existing soliton theory for elastic rods to viscoelastic materials with arbitrary relaxation times.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper does not develop this, but the same retarded-operator machinery could be matched to broadband viscoelastic data by increasing the number of relaxation processes $q$, turning soliton decay measurements into a probe of the relaxation spectrum.
  • The nonzero steady-state amplitude where nonlinear dissipation vanishes, shown in Fig. 7, implies a stability boundary for strain solitons: above a critical amplitude the soliton would grow rather than decay, and measuring that boundary would test the model independently of the small-dissipation ordering.
  • The paper's stress tests suggest that even when real polymer parameters violate the assumed ordering, the nonlinear theory may still capture the qualitative shape of $dA/dt$ versus $A$; a practical consequence is that soliton-based nondestructive evaluation in such materials should treat nonlinear dissipation as a separately calibrated effect rather than compute it directly from measured moduli.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives a damped Boussinesq-type equation for longitudinal strain waves in a thin nonlinear viscoelastic rod, starting from a 3D multiple-integral constitutive model with several relaxation processes. Using asymptotic multiple-scales reduction under the assumptions of long waves, small strains, and small dissipation, the authors obtain a damped KdV equation with retarded dissipation and then apply adiabatic soliton perturbation theory to derive ordinary differential equations for the slow decay of a strain soliton's width and velocity. The predicted decay is compared with direct 3D numerical simulations, both with and without nonlinear viscoelastic dissipation. The paper also tests the model outside its formal validity range by increasing the viscoelastic moduli, and it claims that the nonlinear dissipation theory gives better agreement with the 3D simulations than the linear theory.

Significance. Provided the validation input is corrected, the paper offers a significant methodological advance: it gives a systematic route from a nonlinear viscoelastic constitutive law to a reduced 1D model with explicit soliton decay laws, including nontrivial frequency-dependent third-order elastic constants. The inclusion of nonlinear dissipation in the decay ODEs is new and is motivated by experimental measurements on polymers. The stress tests in Fig. 6 are a strong feature, as they probe the limits of the asymptotic model honestly, and the comparison is not fitted: the soliton decay law is derived analytically and the 3D run serves as an independent benchmark. However, the central quantitative claim of agreement with 3D simulations is currently compromised by an inconsistent initial-condition formula in Eq. (57), which makes the reported comparison non-reproducible as written.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 5, Eq. (57)] The initial-width formula is inconsistent with the soliton relation in Eq. (38). From Eq. (38), A0 = 6 ν0^2 R*^2 / (β00 L0^2), so the correct expression is L0 = R* |ν0| sqrt(6 / (A0 β00)). With the reported values R* = 0.7 mm, ν0 = 0.33, β00 = -5.5, and A0 = -2e-3, this gives L0 ≈ 5.4 mm. Equation (57) instead gives L0 = R* |ν0| sqrt(A0 β00 / 6) ≈ 0.010 mm, which is the reciprocal of the correct ratio inside the square root. A 0.010 mm-wide initial pulse violates the long-wave assumption L >> R* and is smaller than the stated axial grid spacing of 0.1 mm; such an initial condition could not produce the slowly decaying KdV-type soliton shown in Fig. 5. If the simulations actually used the correct 5.4 mm width, then Eq. (57) misreports the initial condition and the comparison is not independently reproducible from the manuscript as written. The authors must correct Eq. (57) and state explicitly which width was used in the 3D runs.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1] There are typos: 'preset study' should be 'present study', and 'ecxept' should be 'except'.
  2. [Section 4.1, Eqs. (45)-(48)] The phrase 'the system (39) and (40) can be solved exactly' overstates the status of the solution; the solution relies on the asymptotic approximations I1(θ) ≈ 8θ/15 and I2(θ) ≈ 0. Please say 'solved asymptotically' or 'solved approximately'.
  3. [Section 5, Table 1] The listed γ_s values (0.33·10^-3) do not exactly equal E_s/E0 = 1.3·10^-3 / 4 = 3.25·10^-4 unless all ν_s equal ν0. Since Eq. (30) allows for frequency-dependent Poisson ratios, the table should state the values of ν_s used, or clarify that the γ_s are the directly prescribed parameters.
  4. [Section 5, Eq. (57)] The notation R*|ν0| sqrt(A0 β00 / 6) is ambiguous because A0 is negative; the product A0 β00 is positive, but the expression should be parenthesized or rewritten with an explicitly positive quantity such as |A0 β00| / 6. The text also refers to 'the amplitude 2·10^-3' while A0 = -2·10^-3; please clarify that this is a compressive amplitude.
  5. [Section 5, Fig. 7] The label 'nonphysical (unstable)' appears as a fragment in the figure; the caption should explain that the negative-dissipation regime corresponds to the steady-state solution of Eq. (52) and is outside the model's range of validity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the soliton-decay derivation is self-contained and benchmarked against 3D numerics as an independent consistency check.

full rationale

The paper's central prediction, the slowly decaying soliton ODEs (39)-(40) and (52)-(53), is derived analytically from the damped Boussinesq equation (35) via a multiple-scales reduction to the damped KdV equation and the external Karpman-Maslov soliton perturbation theory (Ref. [39]). None of the decay-rate functions I1, I2 are fitted to the 3D simulation data; the simulations in Figs. 5-6 use the material parameters from Tables 1-3 as fixed inputs, so the comparison is a genuine numerical benchmark of the reduced model against the full 3D equations of the same constitutive law. Self-citations to Refs. [5] and [26] supply the rod asymptotic reduction and the nonlinear viscoelastic constitutive model; these are prior published derivations, and the present claim is a new application rather than a relabeling of those results. No uniqueness theorem from the authors' own work is invoked to forbid alternatives, and the cosh^-2 ansatz is the standard KdV soliton from the cited external perturbation theory. Two caveats are noted but do not constitute circularity. First, Eq. (57) appears to contain a reciprocal-width error: the printed L0 = R*|nu0| sqrt(A0 beta00/6) gives about 0.010 mm, whereas Eq. (38) requires L0 = R*|nu0| sqrt(6/(A0 beta00)) about 5.4 mm for the stated amplitude; this is a reproducibility and correctness defect in the validation protocol, not an example of simulation output being used as input. Second, the paper itself acknowledges in Section 5 that the higher moduli used in its stress tests violate the small-dissipation ordering (gamma_s much less than epsilon), which limits quantitative accuracy but is an openly stated assumption rather than a circular step. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and the numerical comparison is an independent check of the reduction, so no circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No entity is invented. The result does, however, depend on several input assumptions the reader must accept from prior work: the internal-variable viscoelastic model, the three-moduli restriction for nonlinear isotropy, and a small-dissipation ordering that real polymers may violate. The material parameters used for validation are hand-picked rather than fitted, so the comparison to simulation is a consistency check of the reduced model against the full equations, not an experimental test.

free parameters (3)
  • Linear viscoelastic spectrum {E_s, tau_s, gamma_s} = E_1...E_7 = 1.3e-3 GPa, tau = 0.1, 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 30, 100 micro-s, gamma_s = 0.33e-3
    Chosen by hand in Section 5 (Table 1) to be well inside the model's validity range (gamma_s much smaller than the characteristic strain); not measured for a specific material in this paper.
  • Nonlinear viscoelastic moduli l_su, m_su, n_su = Table 2: l00=-20, l03=l30=1, l33=-1 GPa; m00=-15, m03=m30=1, m33=-1 GPa; n00=-10, n03=n30=1, n33=-1 GPa, giving…
    Hand-picked as representative of frequency-dependent third-order elastic constants, motivated by prior polystyrene measurements; they directly set the nonlinear dissipation coefficients in the soliton decay ODEs.
  • Increased-moduli stress-test parameters = Table 3: l00=-800, l03=780, l33=-780 GPa (similar scaling for m and n), giving beta00=-219, beta03=215, beta33=-215
    Used in Section 5 to probe behavior beyond the formal small-dissipation regime; not intended as a measured material.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The internal-variable power-series constitutive model (Eqs. (4)-(7)) with q relaxation processes is an adequate description of nonlinear viscoelastic solids.
    Invoked in Section 2.1 to construct the retarded linear and bilinear operators; the model was proposed and tested separately in the authors' prior work (Ref. [26]).
  • domain assumption An isotropic nonlinear viscoelastic tensor Nsu can be represented by only three moduli lsu, msu, nsu (Eq. (10)); the possible fourth modulus is neglected.
    Adopted from Ref. [26] because four moduli are hard to measure independently; this directly shapes the nonlinear coefficients beta_su in Eq. (31).
  • domain assumption The long-wave small-strain small-dissipation scaling epsilon, delta << 1 and gamma_s << epsilon is valid, allowing truncation of the asymptotic series and reduction to a damped KdV equation (Eq. (A.2)).
    Stated in Sections 3 and 4.1; the paper's stress tests in Section 5 show that this ordering is violated for realistic polymer parameters.
  • standard math Karpman-Maslov adiabatic perturbation theory (Ref. [39]) applies, so the soliton keeps a sech^2 shape with slowly varying width, amplitude, and velocity, and no significant tail is generated.
    Used in Appendix A to derive ODEs (39)-(40) and (52)-(53); the tail is explicitly left for future work.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Slowly decaying strain solitons in nonlinear viscoelastic waveguides." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RNXZUHPR

@misc{pith2026250109415,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Slowly decaying strain solitons in nonlinear viscoelastic waveguides},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RNXZUHPR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09415}
}
read the original abstract

This paper is devoted to the modeling of longitudinal strain waves in a rod composed of a nonlinear viscoelastic material characterized by frequency-dependent second- and third-order elastic constants. We demonstrate that long waves in such a material can be effectively described by a damped Boussinesq-type equation for the longitudinal strain, incorporating dissipation through retarded operators. Using the existing theory of solitary wave solutions in nearly integrable systems, we derive a slowly-decaying strain soliton solution to this equation. The derived soliton characteristics are shown to be in a good agreement with results from full 3D simulations. We demonstrate the importance of taking into account the frequency dependence of third-order elastic constants for the description of strain solitons.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09415 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic of the generalized standard linear solid. Variables [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematic of the circular cylindrical rod and the cylindrical coordinates. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Plots and asymptotics of the functions I1,lin(θ) and I2,lin(θ). Let us analyze the limiting cases of a long and a short solitary wave (compared to cτ1) in the case of a single relaxation time τ1. Note that in both cases soliton width is still assumed to be larger than the waveguide thickness L ≫ R∗ since the Boussinesq-type model (37) was derived under this assumption. In the first case (L ≫ cτ1) the system (39) and… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Heatmaps of functions I1,nl(θ, η) (panel a) and −I2,nl(θ, η) (panel b). 5. Comparison with 3D simulations In this section we compare the derived theory of solitary wave decay with the results of the direct 3D simulation of the equations of motion (1) with the boundary …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of 3D simulation results with the theoretical models of solitary wave decay. (a) Wave [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Phase portraits of soliton decay in rods with different material properties. (a) Material with parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as in Fig. 5b, but in wider amplitude range. 6. Conclusion In this paper, we systematically developed the model for the longitudinal waves in thin rods and bars made of nonlinear viscoelastic materials (damped Boussinesq-type equation (35)). The linear dissipation…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ostrovsky, E

    L. Ostrovsky, E. Pelinovsky, V. Shrira, Y. Stepanyants, Localized wave structures: Solitons and beyond, Chaos 34 (6) (2024). doi:10.1063/5.0210903

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0210903 2024

  2. [2]

    Khusnutdinova, S

    K. Khusnutdinova, S. Gavrilyuk, L. Ostrovsky, Nonlinear dispersive waves in fluids and solids, Wave Motion 118 (2023) 103123. doi:10.1016/j.wavemoti.2023.103123

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    A. M. Samsonov, Strain solitons in solids and how to construct them, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2001. doi:10.1201/9781420026139

    work page doi:10.1201/9781420026139 2001

  4. [4]

    A. M. Samsonov, G. V. Dreiden, I. V. Semenova, A. G. Shvartz, Bulk solitary waves in elastic solids, AIP Conf. Proc. 1684 (1) (2015) 020002. doi:10.1063/1.4934283

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4934283 2015

  5. [5]

    F. E. Garbuzov, K. R. Khusnutdinova, I. V. Semenova, On boussinesq-type models for long longitudinal waves in elastic rods, Wave Motion 88 (2019) 129–143. doi:10.1016/ j.wavemoti.2019.02.004

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Janno, J

    J. Janno, J. Engelbrecht, Solitary waves in nonlinear microstructured materials, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38 (23) (2005) 5159. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/38/23/006

    work page doi:10.1088/0305-4470/38/23/006 2005

  7. [7]

    Casasso, F

    A. Casasso, F. Pastrone, A. M. Samsonov, Travelling waves in microstructure as the exact solutions to the 6th order nonlinear equation, Acoust. Phys. 56 (2010) 871–876. doi:10. 1134/S1063771010060114. 21

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Berezovski, P

    A. Berezovski, P. V´ an, Internal variables in thermoelasticity, Vol. 243, Springer, 2017

    work page 2017

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    I. A. Gula, A. M. Samsonov, Bulk nonlinear elastic strain waves in a bar with nanosize inclusions, Springer, 2018, pp. 395–416. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-72440-9_21

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    A. V. Porubov, Wave modulation in a nonlinear acoustic metamaterial, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 137 (2021) 103788. doi:10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2021.103788

    2021

  3. [11]

    P. P. Delsanto, Universality of nonclassical nonlinearity, Springer, 2006

    2006

  4. [12]

    K. R. Khusnutdinova, A. M. Samsonov, Fission of a longitudinal strain solitary wave in a delaminated bar, Phys. Rev. E 77 (6) (2008) 1–11. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.77.066603

    2008 doi

  5. [13]

    G. V. Dreiden, K. R. Khusnutdinova, A. M. Samsonov, I. V. Semenova, Bulk strain solitary waves in bonded layered polymeric bars with delamination, J. Appl. Phys. 112 (6) (2012) 063516. doi:10.1063/1.4752713

    2012 doi

  6. [14]

    K. R. Khusnutdinova, M. R. Tranter, On radiating solitary waves in bi-layers with delamina- tion and coupled ostrovsky equations, Chaos 27 (1) (2017) 013112. doi:10.1063/1.4973854

    2017 doi

  7. [15]

    J. S. Tamber, D. J. Chappell, J. C. Poore, M. R. Tranter, Detecting delamination via nonlinear wave scattering in a bonded elastic bar, Nonlinear Dyn. 112 (2023) 23–33. doi:10.1007/ s11071-023-08992-9

    2023

  8. [16]

    C. J. Lissenden, Nonlinear ultrasonic guided waves — principles for nondestructive evaluation, J. Appl. Phys. 129 (2) (2021) 021101. doi:10.1063/5.0038340

    2021 doi

  9. [17]

    R. G. Maev, F. Seviaryn, Applications of non-linear acoustics for quality control and material characterization, J. Appl. Phys. 132 (16) (2022) 161101. doi:10.1063/5.0106143

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    Broda, W

    D. Broda, W. Staszewski, A. Martowicz, T. Uhl, V. Silberschmidt, Modelling of nonlinear crack–wave interactions for damage detection based on ultrasound — a review, J. Sound Vib. 333 (4) (2014) 1097–1118. doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2013.09.033

    2014 doi

  11. [19]

    G. A. Nariboli, A. Sedov, Burgers’s-korteweg-de vries equation for viscoelastic rods and plates, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 32 (1970) 661–677. doi:10.1016/0022-247X(70)90290-8

    1970 doi

  12. [20]

    E. A. Zabolotskaya, M. F. Hamilton, Y. A. Ilinskii, G. D. Meegan, Modeling of nonlinear shear waves in soft solids, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 116 (5) (2004) 2807–2813. doi:10.1121/1.1802533. 22

    2004 doi

  13. [21]

    C. G. Hooper, P. D. Ruiz, J. M. Huntley, K. R. Khusnutdinova, Undular bores generated by fracture, Phys. Rev. E 104 (2021) 044207. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.104.044207

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    Garbuzov, A

    F. Garbuzov, A. Belashov, A. Zhikhoreva, Y. Beltukov, I. Semenova, Shock wave evolution into strain solitary wave in nonlinearly elastic solid bar, Wave Motion 114 (2022) 103022. doi:10.1016/j.wavemoti.2022.103022

    2022

  15. [23]

    B. R. Chintada, R. Rau, O. Goksel, Nonlinear characterization of tissue viscoelasticity with acoustoelastic attenuation of shear waves, IEEE Trans. 69 (1) (2022) 38–53. doi:10.1109/ TUFFC.2021.3105339

    2022

  16. [24]

    A. V. Belashov, A. A. Zhikhoreva, Y. M. Beltukov, O. A. Moskalyuk, I. V. Semenova, Third- order elastic moduli of polystyrene samples fabricated by different technologies, Tech. Phys. 66 (8) (2021) 1186–1192. doi:10.1134/S1063784221080041

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    A. V. Belashov, A. A. Zhikhoreva, Y. M. Beltukov, I. V. Semenova, Frequency dependence of nonlinear elastic moduli of polystyrene, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 167 (2024) 104913. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2024.104913

    2024

  18. [26]

    F. E. Garbuzov, Y. M. Beltukov, Generalization of nonlinear murnaghan elastic model for viscoelastic materials, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 159 (2024) 104598. doi:10.1016/j. ijnonlinmec.2023.104598

    2024

  19. [27]

    De Pascalis, G

    R. De Pascalis, G. Napoli, G. Saccomandi, Kink-type solitary waves within the quasi-linear viscoelastic model, Wave Motion 86 (2019) 195–202. doi:10.1016/j.wavemoti.2018.12. 004

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    Favrie, B

    N. Favrie, B. Lombard, A hyperbolic generalized zener model for nonlinear viscoelastic waves, Wave Motion 116 (2023) 103086. doi:10.1016/j.wavemoti.2022.103086

    2023

  21. [29]

    Martin, L

    R. Martin, L. Bodet, V. Tournat, F. Rejiba, Seismic wave propagation in nonlinear viscoelastic media using the auxiliary differential equation method, Geophys. J. Int. 216 (1) (2019) 453–

    2019

  22. [30]

    A. N. Tutuncu, A. L. Podio, A. R. Gregory, M. M. Sharma, Nonlinear viscoelastic behavior of sedimentary rocks, part i: Effect of frequency and strain amplitude, Geophys. 63 (1) (1998) 184–194. doi:10.1190/1.1444311. 23

    1998 doi

  23. [31]

    K. K. Darvish, J. R. Crandall, Nonlinear viscoelastic effects in oscillatory shear deformation of brain tissue, Med. Eng. Phys. 23 (9) (2001) 633–645. doi:10.1016/S1350-4533(01)00101-1

    2001 doi

  24. [32]

    J. M. Ben ´ ıtez, F. J. Mont´ ans, The mechanical behavior of skin: Structures and models for the finite element analysis, Comput. Struct. 190 (2017) 75–107. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc. 2017.05.003

    2017 doi

  25. [33]

    R. M. Christensen, Theory of viscoelasticity, Academic Press, New York, 1982

    1982

  26. [34]

    W. N. Findley, J. S. Lai, K. Onaran, Creep and relaxation of nonlinear viscoelastic materials: with an introduction to linear viscoelasticity, Dover, 1989

    1989

  27. [35]

    J. M. Carcione, Wave fields in real media: Wave propagation in anisotropic, anelastic, porous and electromagnetic media, Elsevier, 2014

    2014

  28. [36]

    K. R. Khusnutdinova, A. M. Samsonov, A. S. Zakharov, Nonlinear layered lattice model and generalized solitary waves in imperfectly bonded structures, Phys. Rev. E 79 (2009) 056606. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.79.056606

    2009 doi

  29. [37]

    R. S. Johnson, Singular perturbation theory: mathematical and analytical techniques with applications to engineering, Springer, 2005. doi:10.1007/b100957

    2005 doi

  30. [38]

    F. E. Garbuzov, Y. M. Betlukov, K. R. Khusnutdinova, Longitudinal bulk strain solitons in a hyperelastic rod with quadratic and cubic nonlinearities, Theor. Math. Phys. 202 (2020) 319–333. doi:10.1134/S0040577920030046

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    V. I. Karpman, E. M. Maslov, Perturbation theory for solitons, Soviet Physics–JETP 73 (2) (1977) 537–559

    1977

  32. [40]

    Nobili, G

    A. Nobili, G. Saccomandi, Revisiting the love hypothesis for introducing dispersion of longitudinal waves in elastic rods, Eur. J. Mech. A / Solids 105 (2024) 105257. doi: 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2024.105257

    2024

  33. [41]

    F. E. Garbuzov, Y. M. Beltukov, Viscoelastic relaxation of nonlinear strain waves in polymeric bars, AIP Conf. Proc. 2849 (1) (2023) 450024. doi:10.1063/5.0162314

    2023 doi

  34. [42]

    Ostrovsky, Slowly varying oscillations and waves, World Scientific, 2022

    L. Ostrovsky, Slowly varying oscillations and waves, World Scientific, 2022. 24

    2022

  35. [469]

    doi:10.1093/gji/ggy441

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.