Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

A single Lode-weighted energy potential captures tension–compression-asymmetric softening and failure in soft materials, with uniaxial-calibrated parameters predicting pure shear without refitting.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 16:34 UTC pith:SJFNUGCD

load-bearing objection Useful new construction with a credible pure-shear out-of-sample test, but the linear Lode interpolation and thermodynamic consistency claims are softer than the abstract implies. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2512.12614 v2 pith:SJFNUGCD submitted 2025-12-14 cond-mat.soft

A constitutive framework for distortional-mode-dependent failure in soft materials: Tension-compression asymmetry and beyond

Yogesh C. Chandrashekar , Kshitiz Upadhyay This is my paper
classification cond-mat.soft MSC 74B2074R20 PACS 62.20.F-62.20.mm
keywords hyperelasticityenergy limiterstension–compression asymmetryLode invariantssoftening and failureagarose hydrogelsconstitutive modelingsoft materials
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper sets out to show that tension–compression-asymmetric softening and failure in soft materials can be captured by one strain-energy potential that never invokes internal damage variables: it gives tensile and compressive distortion their own energy ceilings and blends them with the Lode angle, the coordinate that labels the deformation mode. Fitted only to combined uniaxial tension and compression data for agarose hydrogels (1, 2, and 3% w/v), the model is claimed to predict the pure-shear response—stiffness, softening, and rupture—with no additional fitting, a cross-mode transfer most existing continuum damage laws do not offer. If the claim holds, complete failure characterization reduces to one tension test and one compression test per material, expressed through eight physically interpretable parameters: four elastic, four failure-related. The framework also yields power-law concentration scaling, letting an untested gel composition (2.5% w/v) be predicted rather than measured. A sympathetic reader would care because mode-aware failure is exactly the missing piece for predicting rupture in gels, tissues, and elastomers under multiaxial loading.

Core claim

The central claim is that soft-material failure can be made an explicit function of the distortion mode through a bi-failure construction: the strain-energy density splits into a mode-dependent failure energy and a mode-dependent recoverable elastic energy, each a Lode-angle-weighted blend of separate tensile and compressive branches. The Lode angle K3 of the logarithmic strain labels the mode (−π/6 compression, 0 pure shear, +π/6 tension); a linear weight β(K3) interpolates between branches. Each branch caps the intact energy W at a pseudo-failure energy Φ± with softening sharpness m±, yielding the stress-reduction factor exp[−(W/Φ±)^m±]; at pure shear the prediction is the arithmetic mean

What carries the argument

Key machinery: the Lode angle K3 of the logarithmic strain, which uniquely labels the distortion mode (−π/6 uniaxial compression, 0 pure shear, +π/6 uniaxial tension). On it rests a bi-failure potential: two energy-limiting branches, each capping the intact energy W at a pseudo-failure energy Φ± with softening sharpness m±, are blended by a linear weight β(K3) = (K3 + π/6)/(π/3), so pure shear (β = 1/2) inherits the arithmetic mean of tensile and compressive stress-reduction factors. The intact response comes from a Lode-invariant hyperelastic potential with a mode-dependent modulus G(K3), giving eight total parameters fitted from combined uniaxial data; no internal damage variables appear.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that softening and failure vary linearly with the Lode angle between the compression and tension extremes: the weighting function β(K3) is assumed, not derived, and is checked only at the pure-shear midpoint and only for agarose hydrogels.

What would settle it

Measure failure under a distortion mode away from pure shear — unequal biaxial tension, or combined compression–shear — and compare the predicted failure stress and stretch, computed from uniaxial-calibrated parameters through β(K3), against experiment. A discrepancy that grows as the loading moves off the pure-shear midpoint would falsify the linear interpolation; repeating the comparison on a non-hydrogel soft material would test whether the construction generalizes beyond agarose.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • One tension test plus one compression test per material may suffice to fix failure behavior across the distortion-mode range, with pure shear following automatically from the Lode-angle midpoint.
  • The pure-shear prediction is explicit and testable: the stress-reduction factor there equals the arithmetic mean of the tensile and compressive reduction factors.
  • Failure energies in agarose are roughly an order of magnitude larger in compression than in tension; the model encodes that ratio as a continuous function of the Lode angle rather than as two disconnected fits.
  • Because fitted parameters scale as power laws in gel concentration, response at intermediate compositions can be interpolated — demonstrated at 2.5% w/v for both uniaxial and pure-shear loading.
  • The framework yields a single free-energy surface over the (K2, K3) invariant space, which the paper identifies as the foundation for constructing full three-dimensional failure maps of soft materials.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The linear Lode-angle weight β(K3) is the link that is assumed rather than measured: the paper checks it only at the pure-shear midpoint (K3 = 0) and only for agarose. A test under a second intermediate mode — unequal biaxial stretch or combined compression–shear — would reveal whether linear mode interpolation survives or needs a nonlinear form.
  • The intact potential used as the elastic baseline was originally built for brain tissue, so the same bi-failure construction is transferable to other soft materials; the open question is whether the linear mode rule is generic or specific to agarose-like networks.
  • The formulation is presented for monotonic loading with reversibility (failure energy can elastically recover on unloading); extending to tearing, cyclic, or post-failure protocols would require activating the irreversible switch the paper introduces but sets to zero.
  • If the interpolation rule is later fitted to true multiaxial data instead of assumed, the same structure becomes a practical tool for mapping full three-dimensional failure envelopes in (K2, K3) space — the paper's own stated next step.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Lode-invariant-based hyperelastic softening model for soft materials that couples Volokh's energy-limiting framework with separate tensile and compressive energy limiters. Mode dependence is introduced through a linear Lode-angle weighting function β(K3), and the intact response is described by the Prasad–Kannan hyperelastic potential. The model is calibrated to combined uniaxial tension and compression data for agarose hydrogels at 1, 2, and 3% w/v, then used to predict pure shear response and, via power-law concentration scaling, the response at an intermediate 2.5% w/v concentration. The free-energy landscape over the (K2,K3) invariant space is presented as evidence of thermodynamic stability.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the contribution is significant: an eight-parameter, physically interpretable constitutive framework that maps failure energetics across distortion modes using only uniaxial tension and compression calibration. The pure-shear prediction is a genuine out-of-sample test, and the reported agreement with experiments is the strongest part of the paper. The use of Hencky-Lode invariants is well motivated, and the absence of internal damage variables is a practical advantage. The power-law interpolation across concentrations is also a useful practical tool. However, the broader claim that the framework provides a foundation for three-dimensional failure mapping rests on an assumed linear interpolation in K3 that is only validated at a single intermediate point, and the thermodynamic-consistency claim is supported by visual inspection rather than formal analysis. These issues are load-bearing for the paper's most general claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [§7, Eq. (35)] The linear Lode-weighting function β(K3)=(K3+π/6)/(π/3) is assumed, not derived or independently tested. The pure-shear prediction fixes β only at K3=0, where β=1/2; any continuous function with β(−π/6)=0, β(π/6)=1, and β(0)=1/2 gives exactly the same pure-shear prediction as Eq. (49). The manuscript's own Section 7 recognizes this: the Lode-weighting function 'was assumed to vary linearly based on validation across the three primary distortional modes.' Since every intermediate-mode prediction in the paper, including the stated 3D failure-mapping foundation, passes through this β, the cross-mode predictive claim is currently limited to pure shear. Additional multiaxial experiments at other K3 values, or a physics-based derivation for β, are needed before the 3D failure-mapping claim can be considered established.
  2. [§4.2.2, Eq. (49a)] The printed pure-shear stress formula contains a factor-of-two error. Equation (48) gives T(ps)=√2 (∂W/∂K2)(∂ψprop/∂W). Since P=T/λ, Eq. (49a) should read P(ps)=√2/λ (∂W/∂K2)(∂ψprop/∂W), not 1/(√2 λ) times that quantity. As written, Eq. (49a) cannot reproduce the pure-shear curves in Fig. 8 unless the implementation used a different factor. This needs correction and verification against the code used for Fig. 8. Separately, the statement that γ2=1/K2 ∂W/∂K3 vanishes at K3=0 is not generally true for the Prasad–Kannan potential, since G'(0) is generally nonzero. For pure shear, T1 happens to be independent of γ2 because the 11 and 33 components of N2 coincide, but the derivation as written is not correct.
  3. [§6.4, Eq. (36)] Thermodynamic admissibility is asserted from visual inspection of the free-energy surfaces. The text states that 'no regions of singularity or discontinuous curvature are observed' and that 'continuous and convex topology' validates internal consistency. For a softening elastic model, convexity of the energy is not the relevant criterion near failure; loss of strong ellipticity is expected in the softening regime. The paper does not provide formal conditions for boundedness of ∂ψ/∂K2 and ∂ψ/∂K3, positivity of the dissipation, or the range of stretches over which the model remains well posed. A formal analysis, or at least a delineation of the conditions under which the energy remains rank-one convex in the intact regime, is required to support the thermodynamic-consistency claim.
  4. [§6.5, Table 3 and Table 5] The power-law concentration scaling is applied to all eight parameters, including m+. However, Table 3 shows no systematic concentration trend for m+: the averages are 139.22, 96.54, and 210.20 for 1, 2, and 3% w/v, with within-concentration replicate scatter as large as m+=5.99 vs. 287.34 at the same concentration. Fitting a power law to three averages, with no reported R² or confidence intervals, and then interpolating m+=154.47 at 2.5% w/v is not a reliable procedure. The 2.5% w/v validation is a legitimate independent test, but for m+ it is a model-selection artifact rather than a meaningful power-law prediction. The power-law claims should be restricted to parameters with clear monotone concentration dependence, and goodness-of-fit/uncertainty should be reported.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§5.3, Eq. (51)] The relative-error metric uses max{0.1max(P), |P_i|} in the denominator, which mixes a data-dependent scale with the pointwise value. This makes the reported 'average residual error' in Table 3 nonstandard and difficult to compare across datasets. Consider also reporting normalized RMSE or R² values.
  2. [§6.1, Table 3] The paper repeatedly states that 'thermodynamic admissibility' is enforced during calibration and that the model is 'thermodynamically consistent,' but no formal admissibility constraint is visible in the optimization, except parameter positivity. Please clarify what admissibility condition is enforced in the fitting procedure.
  3. [§5.2.3 and Fig. 8] Uniaxial tests are reported with n=4 per concentration, while pure shear experiments appear to use n=3. State explicitly why the replicate counts differ, and whether the pure-shear prediction uses average parameters from all four uniaxial replicates or a subset.
  4. [Data accessibility] The data availability statement says 'Data will be made available on request.' For a constitutive-validation paper of this type, deposition of the reduced stress–stretch datasets and fitting/prediction scripts would substantially increase reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the pure-shear and 2.5% predictions are genuinely out-of-sample, and the linear Lode-weighting assumption is an acknowledged limitation rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central predictive claims are not circular. Model parameters are calibrated using combined uniaxial tension and compression data (Section 5.3, Figs. 6), and the pure-shear response is then computed from Eqs. (43)-(49) with no pure-shear data entering the fit. The pure-shear stress-reduction factor (Eq. 49b) is an arithmetic mean of the tensile and compressive reduction factors only because the Lode-weighting function is set to β(0)=1/2 by Eq. (35); this is an explicit modeling assumption, not a parameter fitted to pure-shear measurements. The paper candidly states in Section 7 that β(K3) 'was assumed to vary linearly based on validation across the three primary distortional modes,' acknowledging that the linear interpolation is not independently established. That limitation affects the breadth of the 3D failure-mapping claim, but it is not a self-definitional reduction of the prediction to its inputs. Similarly, the 2.5% w/v prediction is obtained by power-law interpolation of parameters fitted at 1, 2, and 3% w/v, without fitting to the 2.5% data, so it is a genuine interpolation test. The uniaxial 'reproduction' is the calibration itself, and the energy landscape (Fig. 9) is a visualization of the fitted model, but neither is presented as an independent prediction. Self-citations (e.g., Upadhyay et al. for specimen preparation, DIC protocols, and earlier hydrogel characterization) support experimental methodology and do not carry the load-bearing constitutive derivation, which rests on Volokh's energy-limiters framework and the external Prasad-Kannan hyperelastic potential. No step in the derivation chain reduces by construction to a fitted quantity or to a self-citation chain. The main caveat — that only pure shear (K3=0, β=1/2) tests the interpolation — is a limitation in external validity, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

9 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model relies on eight fitted constitutive parameters, a linear Lode-angle interpolation function, and standard continuum assumptions (incompressibility, isotropy, Volokh energy-limiters). No new physical entity such as a particle or force is introduced; beta(K3) is a mathematical weighting function, not a material object.

free parameters (9)
  • mu (shear modulus) = 49.79 / 174.37 / 301.10 kPa (1/2/3% w/v averages)
    Fitted to combined uniaxial tension-compression data; controls small-strain stiffness.
  • a (strain-stiffening coefficient) = 3.22 / 6.95 / 17.04 kPa
    Fitted; governs exponential stiffening of the intact Prasad-Kannan potential.
  • b0 (mode-modulus coefficient) = 9.47 / 7.73 / 6.42
    Fitted; modulates Lode-angle dependence of the intact modulus.
  • b1 (mode-modulus exponent) = 1613.88 / 3245.63 / 3585.66
    Fitted; lower bound b1>100 set from cited work [125].
  • Phi+ (tensile pseudo-failure energy) = 0.47 / 1.78 / 5.02 kPa
    Fitted; tensile energy limiter controlling failure onset.
  • m+ (tensile softening sharpness) = 139.22 / 96.54 / 210.20
    Fitted; large values produce abrupt tensile rupture; no systematic concentration trend observed.
  • Phi- (compressive pseudo-failure energy) = 0.23 / 4.03 / 11.38 kPa
    Fitted; compressive energy limiter controlling gradual compressive softening.
  • m- (compressive softening sharpness) = 0.22 / 0.33 / 0.38
    Fitted; values below 1 produce gradual compressive softening.
  • Power-law scaling constants (K, n) for concentration = exponents: mu 1.66, a 1.47, b0 -0.35, b1 0.76, Phi+ 2.13, Phi- 3.54, m- ~0.3; m+ no trend, interpolated 154.47 at 2.5%
    Fitted to three concentration points (1,2,3% w/v) via log-log regression; used to predict 2.5% behavior.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Incompressibility (J=1) for soft materials
    Adopted in Section 2.1; used to construct uniaxial and pure shear deformation gradients.
  • domain assumption Material isotropy and frame indifference
    Strain energy is expressed in terms of invariants of Hencky strain; no preferred direction is modeled.
  • domain assumption Prasad-Kannan potential is the intact hyperelastic response
    Adopted from [125], originally fitted to brain tissue and satisfying Baker-Ericksen inequalities; applied to agarose without re-derivation.
  • domain assumption Volokh energy-limiter form with stress reduction exp[-(W/Phi)^m]
    Basis of the softening formulation, Eq. (17) and Eq. (43b,d); the entire failure framework inherits this postulate.
  • ad hoc to paper Linear Lode-angle weighting beta(K3)
    Eq. (35) sets beta by linear interpolation between uniaxial compression and tension; explicitly acknowledged as an assumption in Section 7.
  • domain assumption Reversible damage, no unloading (zeta=0)
    Appendix B sets H(zeta)=1, so the model is elastic along the monotonic loading path; path dependence and unloading are not tested.
  • domain assumption Pure-shear stress-stretch reconstruction procedure
    Appendix C pairs global engineering stress with average strain, then appends the local failure stretch; this assumes the global stress remains meaningful during localization.
  • ad hoc to paper Power-law concentration scaling of all model parameters
    Eq. (52) assumes Y=Kc^n across only three concentrations; m+ shows no systematic trend, so this scaling is partly an interpolation of noise.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 40491 in / 14907 out tokens · 133807 ms · 2026-08-03T16:34:29.469941+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Soft materials exhibit pronounced tension-compression asymmetry (TCA) in their softening and failure, a feature that conventional hyperelastic and continuum-damage formulations fail to capture in a unified framework. We present a Lode-invariant-based hyperelastic softening model for distortional-mode-dependent failure in soft materials, where mode dependence is introduced through a bi-failure construction with distinct tensile and compressive energy limiters. The proposed model extends Volokh's classical energy-limiting approach by embedding a Lode-angle-dependent weighting function, ensuring a smooth and physically consistent transition in failure across distortion modes within the constitutive description of the bulk response, without introducing internal damage variables. Agarose hydrogels (1, 2, and 3 % w/v) serve as the validation system. The framework reproduces experimental stress-stretch responses in uniaxial tension and compression, capturing concentration-dependent stiffness and failure energetics. Using parameters calibrated solely from combined uniaxial data, the model predicts pure shear behavior, including softening and failure, thereby demonstrating strong cross-mode predictive capability. To further assess thermodynamic consistency and distortion-mode sensitivity, the model's free-energy landscape is analyzed across the full Lode-invariant space, confirming a smooth and physically consistent response under diverse loading conditions. Parameter evolution with concentration follows power-law scaling, enabling interpolation and predictive validation at intermediate concentrations (evaluated at 2.5 % w/v). Overall, the proposed formulation provides a physically interpretable constitutive framework for tension-compression-asymmetric softening and distortional-mode-dependent failure, and establishes a foundation for three-dimensional failure mapping in soft materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.12614 by Kshitiz Upadhyay, Yogesh C. Chandrashekar.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Unit cube in the (a) reference configuration and (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic illustration of a pure shear loading set [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Typical uniaxial engineering stress–stretch res [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A schematic of the proposed Lode-invariants-base [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Experimental setup for mechanical testing of agar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Combined experimental uniaxial engineering stre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of experimental (black) and model-pre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Engineering stress–stretch response for agarose [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Free-energy landscapes of ψprop for agarose gels at (a) 1% w/v, (b) 2% w/v, and (c) 3% w/v. Left col￾umn: ψprop(K2, K3) surfaces over the K2 − K3 invariant space. Right column: corresponding ψprop(K2) slices at K3 = {−π/6, 0, π/6}, representing uniaxial compression (magenta), pure shear (black), and uniaxial tension (red). 24 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Evolution of the proposed model’s parameters wit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Experimental (n=4) and predicted engineering st [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Engineering stress–stretch response of 2.5% w/v [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_12.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. A physics-informed data-driven framework for modeling hyperelastic materials with progressive damage and failure

    cs.CE 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0

    A two-stage GPR constitutive model learns intact elasticity and a monotonic damage factor from tension data and extrapolates to compression and shear failure.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

199 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Goriely, M

    A. Goriely, M. G. Geers, G. A. Holzapfel, J. Jayamohan, A. J´ erusalem, S . Sivaloganathan, W. Squier, J. A. van Dommelen, S. Waters, E. Kuhl, Mechanics of the br ain: perspectives, chal- lenges, and opportunities, Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology 14 (5) (2015) 931–965

    2015

  2. [2]

    B¨ ohringer, J

    D. B¨ ohringer, J. Hinrichsen, R. Gataulin, S. Wiedenmann, M. Sp ¨ orrer, S. Sherifova, P. Steinmann, G. A. Holzapfel, B. Fabry, S. Budday, Compression-tension-asymmetry and stiffness nonlinearity of collagen-matrigel composite hydrogels, Advanced Healthcare Materials (2025) e03052

    2025

  3. [3]

    Anssari-Benam, M

    A. Anssari-Benam, M. Destrade, G. Saccomandi, Modelling brain tiss ue elasticity with the ogden model and an alternative family of constitutive models, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 380 (2234) (2022) 20210325

    2022

  4. [4]

    Martonov´ a, A

    D. Martonov´ a, A. Goriely, E. Kuhl, Generalized invariants meet con stitutive neural networks: A novel framework for hyperelastic materials, Journal of the Mechanics an d Physics of Solids (2025) 106352

    2025

  5. [5]

    J.-M. Y. Carrillo, F. C. MacKintosh, A. V. Dobrynin, Nonlinear elastici ty: from single chain to networks and gels, Macromolecules 46 (9) (2013) 3679–3692

    2013

  6. [6]

    G. A. Holzapfel, J. D. Humphrey, R. W. Ogden, Biomechanics of soft biologi cal tissues and organs, mechanobiology, homeostasis and modelling, Journal of the Royal Society In terface 22 (222) (2025) 20240361

    2025

  7. [7]

    K. M. Moerman, C. K. Simms, T. Nagel, Control of tension-compression as ymmetry in ogden hyperelasticity with application to soft tissue modelling, Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials 56 (2016) 218–228. doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.11.027

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.11.027 2016

  8. [8]

    K. M. Myers, C. P. Hendon, Y. Gan, W. Yao, K. Yoshida, M. Fernandez, J. Vi nk, R. J. Wapner, A continuous fiber distribution material model for human cervical tis sue, Journal of biomechanics 48 (9) (2015) 1533–1540

    2015

  9. [9]

    A. D. Drozdov, J. d. Christiansen, Tension–compression asymmetry in the mechanical response of hydrogels, Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials 110 (2020) 103851

    2020

  10. [10]

    D. H. Cortes, D. M. Elliott, Extra-fibrillar matrix mechanics of annu lus fibrosus in tension and compression, Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology 11 (6) (2012) 781–790. 31

    2012

  11. [11]

    Sun, H.-q

    J.-y. Sun, H.-q. Zhu, S.-h. Qin, D.-l. Yang, X.-t. He, A review on t he research of mechanical problems with different moduli in tension and compression, Journal of mechanical science and technology 24 (9) (2010) 1845–1854

    2010

  12. [12]

    Reddipaga, K

    M. Reddipaga, K. Kannan, On the construction of a viscoelastic consti tutive model for brain tissue maximizing tension–compression asymmetry, International Jou rnal of Engineering Science 218 (2026) 104415

    2026

  13. [13]

    Huang, B

    X. Huang, B. Li, W. Hong, Y.-P. Cao, X.-Q. Feng, Effects of tension–compression as ymmetry on the surface wrinkling of film–substrate systems, Journal of the Mech anics and Physics of Solids 94 (2016) 88–104

    2016

  14. [14]

    Z. Du, X. Guo, Variational principles and the related bounding theore ms for bi-modulus materials, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 73 (2014) 183–211

    2014

  15. [15]

    Z. Du, G. Zhang, T. Guo, S. Tang, X. Guo, Tension-compression asymmetry at finite strains: A theoretical model and exact solutions, Journal of the Mechanics and Phys ics of Solids 143 (2020) 104084

    2020

  16. [16]

    S. Tang, G. Zhang, T. F. Guo, X. Guo, W. K. Liu, Phase field modeling of frac ture in nonlinearly elastic solids via energy decomposition, Computer Methods in Applie d Mechanics and Engineering 347 (2019) 477–494

    2019

  17. [17]

    P. S. Stewart, S. L. Waters, T. El Sayed, D. Vella, A. Goriely, Wrin kling, creasing, and folding in fiber-reinforced soft tissues, Extreme Mechanics Letters 8 (2016) 22–29

    2016

  18. [18]

    Konale, V

    A. Konale, V. Srivastava, On modeling fracture of soft polymers, Mech anics of Materials 206 (2025) 105346

    2025

  19. [19]

    Volokh, Fracture as a material sink, Materials Theory 1 (1) (2017) 3

    K. Volokh, Fracture as a material sink, Materials Theory 1 (1) (2017) 3

    2017

  20. [20]

    Notbohm, A

    J. Notbohm, A. Lesman, P. Rosakis, D. A. Tirrell, G. Ravichandran, Micr obuckling of fibrin provides a mechanism for cell mechanosensing, Journal of The Royal Soc iety Interface 12 (108) (2015) 20150320

    2015

  21. [21]

    Linka, M

    K. Linka, M. Hillg¨ artner, M. Itskov, Fatigue of soft fibrous tissues: multi-scale mechanics and constitutive modeling, Acta biomaterialia 71 (2018) 398–410

    2018

  22. [22]

    Anssari-Benam, M

    A. Anssari-Benam, M. Hossain, A unified pseudo-elastic model of contin uous and discontinuous softening in the finite deformation of isotropic soft solids, Internati onal Journal of Solids and Structures 290 (2024) 112670

    2024

  23. [23]

    J. A. Pe˜ na, M. A. Mart ´ ınez, E. Pe˜ na, Failure damage mechanical properties of thoracic and abdom- inal porcine aorta layers and related constitutive modeling: phenome nological and microstructural approach, Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology 18 (6) (2019) 1709–1730

    2019

  24. [24]

    W. Liu, Z. Yu, K. I. Elkhodary, H. Xiao, S. Tang, T. Guo, X. Guo, A tube-base d constitutive model of brain tissue with inner pressure, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 196 (2025) 105993

    2025

  25. [25]

    Rausch, G

    M. Rausch, G. Karniadakis, J. Humphrey, Modeling soft tissue damage and failure using a combined particle/continuum approach, Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiol ogy 16 (1) (2017) 249– 261

    2017

  26. [26]

    Z. Zhu, C. Jiang, H. Jiang, A visco-hyperelastic model of brain tissu e incorporating both ten- sion/compression asymmetry and volume compressibility, Acta Mechani ca 230 (6) (2019) 2125– 2135

    2019

  27. [27]

    Upadhyay, A

    K. Upadhyay, A. Alshareef, A. K. Knutsen, C. L. Johnson, A. Carass, P. V. Ba yly, D. L. Pham, J. L. Prince, K. T. Ramesh, Development and validation of subject-specifi c 3D human head models based on a nonlinear visco-hyperelastic constitutive framework, Journal of T he Royal Society Interface 19 (195) (2022) 1–27. doi:10.1098/rsif.2022.0561. 32

    arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    P. V. Bayly, A. Alshareef, A. K. Knutsen, K. Upadhyay, R. J. Okamoto, A. C arass, J. A. Butman, D. L. Pham, J. L. Prince, K. T. Ramesh, C. L. Johnson, MR Imaging of Human Brain Mechanics In Vivo: New Measurements to Facilitate the Development of Computational Mo dels of Brain Injury, Annals of Biomedical Engineering 49 (10) (2021) 2677–2692. doi:10.1007/s...

    work page doi:10.1007/s10439-021-02820-0 2021

  29. [29]

    Franceschini, D

    G. Franceschini, D. Bigoni, P. Regitnig, G. A. Holzapfel, Brain tissu e deforms similarly to filled elastomers and follows consolidation theory, Journal of the Mechanics and P hysics of Solids 54 (12) (2006) 2592–2620

    2006

  30. [30]

    Mendis, R

    K. Mendis, R. Stalnaker, S. Advani, A constitutive relationship f or large deformation finite element modeling of brain tissue, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering (1995)

    1995

  31. [31]

    M. J. Lohr, G. P. Sugerman, S. Kakaletsis, E. Lejeune, M. K. Rausch, An introduction to the ogden model in biomechanics: Benefits, implementation tools and limitati ons, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Scien ces 380 (10 2022). doi: 10.1098/rsta.2021.0365

    arXiv 2022

  32. [32]

    Z. Wang, S. Das, A. Joshi, A. J. Shaikeea, V. S. Deshpande, 3d observations p rovide striking findings in rubber elasticity, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci ences 121 (24) (2024) e2404205121

    2024

  33. [33]

    Mooney, A theory of large elastic deformation, Journal of applied phys ics 11 (9) (1940) 582–592

    M. Mooney, A theory of large elastic deformation, Journal of applied phys ics 11 (9) (1940) 582–592

    1940

  34. [34]

    R. S. Rivlin, Large elastic deformations of isotropic materials iv. fur ther developments of the general theory, Philosophical transactions of the royal society of London. S eries A, Mathematical and physical sciences 241 (835) (1948) 379–397

    1948

  35. [35]

    R. S. Rivlin, Large elastic deformations of isotropic materials vi. fur ther results in the theory of torsion, shear and flexure, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Socie ty of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 242 (845) (1949) 173–195

    1949

  36. [36]

    R. S. Rivlin, D. Saunders, Large elastic deformations of isotropic mate rials vii. experiments on the deformation of rubber, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Socie ty of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 243 (865) (1951) 251–288

    1951

  37. [37]

    R. W. Ogden, Large deformation isotropic elasticity–on the correlation of t heory and experiment for incompressible rubberlike solids, Proceedings of the Royal So ciety of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 326 (1567) (1972) 565–584

    1972

  38. [38]

    Anssari-Benam, A generalisation of the pucci–saccomandi model of rubb er elasticity, Interna- tional Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics 158 (2024) 104578

    A. Anssari-Benam, A generalisation of the pucci–saccomandi model of rubb er elasticity, Interna- tional Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics 158 (2024) 104578

    2024

  39. [39]

    Martins, E

    J. Martins, E. Pires, R. Salvado, P. Dinis, A numerical model of pas sive and active behavior of skeletal muscles, Computer methods in applied mechanics and engin eering 151 (3-4) (1998) 419– 433

    1998

  40. [40]

    Pe˜ na, J

    E. Pe˜ na, J. A. Pe˜ na, M. Doblar´ e, On the mullins effect and hysteresis of fibered biological materials: A comparison between continuous and discontinuous damage models, Inte rnational Journal of Solids and Structures 46 (7-8) (2009) 1727–1735

    2009

  41. [41]

    Volokh, Hyperelasticity with softening for modeling materials failure, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 55 (10) (2007) 2237–2264

    K. Volokh, Hyperelasticity with softening for modeling materials failure, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 55 (10) (2007) 2237–2264

    2007

  42. [42]

    A. Anssari-Benam, Continuous softening up to the onset of failure: A h yperelastic modelling ap- proach with intrinsic softening for isotropic incompressible soft s olids, Mechanics Research Com- munications 132 (2023) 104183

    2023

  43. [43]

    Volokh, On modeling failure of rubber-like materials, Mechani cs Research Communications 37 (8) (2010) 684–689

    K. Volokh, On modeling failure of rubber-like materials, Mechani cs Research Communications 37 (8) (2010) 684–689

    2010

  44. [44]

    Pe˜ na, Computational aspects of the numerical modelling of soften ing, damage and permanent set in soft biological tissues, Computers & Structures 130 (2014) 57–72

    E. Pe˜ na, Computational aspects of the numerical modelling of soften ing, damage and permanent set in soft biological tissues, Computers & Structures 130 (2014) 57–72

    2014

  45. [45]

    Pe˜ na, Prediction of the softening and damage effects with permane nt set in fibrous biological materials, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 59 (9) (2011) 1808–1822

    E. Pe˜ na, Prediction of the softening and damage effects with permane nt set in fibrous biological materials, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 59 (9) (2011) 1808–1822. 33

    2011

  46. [46]

    Volokh, Prediction of arterial failure based on a microstructural b i-layer fiber–matrix model with softening, Journal of Biomechanics 41 (2) (2008) 447–453

    K. Volokh, Prediction of arterial failure based on a microstructural b i-layer fiber–matrix model with softening, Journal of Biomechanics 41 (2) (2008) 447–453

    2008

  47. [47]

    Pe˜ na, V

    E. Pe˜ na, V. Alastru´ e, A. Laborda, M. Mart ´ ınez, M. Doblar´ e, A constitutive formulation of vascular tissue mechanics including viscoelasticity and softening beha viour, Journal of biomechanics 43 (5) (2010) 984–989

    2010

  48. [48]

    Calvo, E

    B. Calvo, E. Pena, P. Martins, T. Mascarenhas, M. Doblare, R. N. Jorge, A. F erreira, On modelling damage process in vaginal tissue, Journal of Biomechanics 42 (5) (2009) 642–651

    2009

  49. [49]

    Mullins, Softening of rubber by deformation, Rubber chemistr y and technology 42 (1) (1969) 339–362

    L. Mullins, Softening of rubber by deformation, Rubber chemistr y and technology 42 (1) (1969) 339–362

    1969

  50. [50]

    Harwood, L

    J. Harwood, L. Mullins, A. R. Payne, Stress softening in natural ru bber vulcanizates. part ii. stress softening effects in pure gum and filler loaded rubbers, Journal of Appli ed Polymer Science 9 (9) (1965) 3011–3021

    1965

  51. [51]

    Pe˜ na, P

    E. Pe˜ na, P. Martins, T. Mascarenhas, R. N. Jorge, A. Ferreira, M. Doblar ´ e, B. Calvo, Mechanical characterization of the softening behavior of human vaginal tissue, Journ al of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials 4 (3) (2011) 275–283

    2011

  52. [52]

    Anssari-Benam, G

    A. Anssari-Benam, G. Saccomandi, Continuous softening as a state of hype relasticity: Examples of application to the softening behavior of the brain tissue, Journal of B iomechanical Engineering 146 (9) (2024)

    2024

  53. [53]

    Munoz, J

    M. Munoz, J. Bea, J. Rodr ´ ıguez, I. Ochoa, J. Grasa, A. P. del Palomar, P. Zaragoza, R. Osta, M. Doblar´ e, An experimental study of the mouse skin behaviour: damage an d inelastic aspects, Journal of biomechanics 41 (1) (2008) 93–99

    2008

  54. [54]

    Alastru´ e, E

    V. Alastru´ e, E. Pe˜ na, M. Mart ´ ınez, M. Doblar´ e, Experimental study and constitutive modelling of the passive mechanical properties of the ovine infrarenal vena cava tissue, Journal of biomechanics 41 (14) (2008) 3038–3045

    2008

  55. [55]

    R. W. Ogden, D. G. Roxburgh, A pseudo–elastic model for the mullin s effect in filled rubber, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Phys ical and Engineering Sciences 455 (1988) (1999) 2861–2877

    1988

  56. [56]

    Chagnon, E

    G. Chagnon, E. Verron, L. Gornet, G. Marckmann, P. Charrier, On the re levance of continuum damage mechanics as applied to the mullins effect in elastomers, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 52 (7) (2004) 1627–1650

    2004

  57. [57]

    G. A. Holzapfel, B. Fereidoonnezhad, Modeling of damage in soft biological tissues, in: Biome- chanics of living organs, Elsevier, 2017, pp. 101–123

    2017

  58. [58]

    Kachanov, Time of rupture process under deep conditions, Izv

    L. Kachanov, Time of rupture process under deep conditions, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR 8 (1958) 26

    1958

  59. [59]

    Rabotnov, Elements of hereditary solid mechanics, (No Title) ( 1980)

    I. Rabotnov, Elements of hereditary solid mechanics, (No Title) ( 1980)

    1980

  60. [60]

    Lemaitre, How to use damage mechanics, Nuclear engineering and desi gn 80 (2) (1984) 233–245

    J. Lemaitre, How to use damage mechanics, Nuclear engineering and desi gn 80 (2) (1984) 233–245

    1984

  61. [61]

    J. C. Simo, On a fully three-dimensional finite-strain viscoel astic damage model: formulation and computational aspects, Computer methods in applied mechanics and engi neering 60 (2) (1987) 153–173

    1987

  62. [62]

    M. E. Gurtin, E. C. Francis, Simple rate-independent model f or damage, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 18 (3) (1981) 285–286

    1981

  63. [63]

    G. Z. Voyiadjis, P. I. Kattan, Investigation of the damage variable basic issues in continuum damage and healing mechanics, Mechanics Research Communications 68 (2015) 89–94

    2015

  64. [64]

    Keller, K

    A. Keller, K. Hutter, On the thermodynamic consistency of the eq uivalence principle in continuum damage mechanics, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 59 (5) (2011) 1115–1120

    2011

  65. [65]

    Weisbecker, D

    H. Weisbecker, D. M. Pierce, P. Regitnig, G. A. Holzapfel, Layer-sp ecific damage experiments and modeling of human thoracic and abdominal aortas with non-atherosclerotic in timal thickening, Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials 12 (2012) 93–106. 34

    2012

  66. [66]

    Schmidt, D

    T. Schmidt, D. Balzani, G. A. Holzapfel, Statistical approach for a conti nuum description of damage evolution in soft collagenous tissues, Computer Methods in Applied Me chanics and Engineering 278 (2014) 41–61

    2014

  67. [67]

    T. C. Gasser, An irreversible constitutive model for fibrous soft biological tissue: a 3-d microfiber approach with demonstrative application to abdominal aortic aneurysms, Ac ta Biomaterialia 7 (6) (2011) 2457–2466

    2011

  68. [68]

    Miller, T

    C. Miller, T. C. Gasser, A microstructurally motivated constit utive description of collagenous soft biological tissue towards the description of their non-linear and time -dependent properties, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 154 (2021) 104500

    2021

  69. [69]

    J. F. Rodr ´ ıguez, F. Cacho, J. A. Bea, M. Doblar´ e, A stochastic-structurally based three dimensional finite-strain damage model for fibrous soft tissue, Journal of the Mechani cs and Physics of Solids 54 (4) (2006) 864–886

    2006

  70. [70]

    J. F. Rodriguez, V. Alastrue, M. Doblare, Finite element impleme ntation of a stochastic three dimensional finite-strain damage model for fibrous soft tissue, Compute r methods in applied me- chanics and engineering 197 (9-12) (2008) 946–958

    2008

  71. [71]

    Hamedzadeh, T

    A. Hamedzadeh, T. C. Gasser, S. Federico, On the constitutive mode lling of recruitment and damage of collagen fibres in soft biological tissues, European Journal of Mechani cs-A/Solids 72 (2018) 483–496

    2018

  72. [72]

    G. A. Holzapfel, R. W. Ogden, A damage model for collagen fibres with an appli cation to collage- nous soft tissues, Proceedings of the Royal Society A 476 (2236) (2020) 20190821

    2020

  73. [73]

    J. Lu, X. He, F. Auricchio, A waviness-centered damage model for collage nous soft tissues, Acta Biomaterialia 195 (2025) 134–143

    2025

  74. [74]

    Xiao, T.-T

    R. Xiao, T.-T. Mai, K. Urayama, J. P. Gong, S. Qu, Micromechanical modeli ng of the multi-axial deformation behavior in double network hydrogels, International Journal of Plasticity 137 (2021) 102901

    2021

  75. [75]

    T.-T. Mai, T. Matsuda, T. Nakajima, J. P. Gong, K. Urayama, Damage cross-effe ct and anisotropy in tough double network hydrogels revealed by biaxial stretching, Soft m atter 15 (18) (2019) 3719– 3732

    2019

  76. [76]

    Miller, T

    C. Miller, T. C. Gasser, A bottom-up approach to model collagen fiber d amage and failure in soft biological tissues, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 169 (2022) 105086

    2022

  77. [77]

    Dargazany, M

    R. Dargazany, M. Itskov, A network evolution model for the anisotropic mullins effect in carbon black filled rubbers, International Journal of Solids and Structures 46 (16) (2009) 2967–2977

    2009

  78. [78]

    H. Gao, P. Klein, Numerical simulation of crack growth in an isotropic soli d with randomized internal cohesive bonds, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 46 (2) (1998) 187–218

    1998

  79. [79]

    Gao, Elastic waves in a hyperelastic solid near its plane-strain e quibiaxial cohesive limit, Philo- sophical magazine letters 76 (5) (1997) 307–314

    H. Gao, Elastic waves in a hyperelastic solid near its plane-strain e quibiaxial cohesive limit, Philo- sophical magazine letters 76 (5) (1997) 307–314

    1997

  80. [80]

    Born, On the stability of crystal lattices

    M. Born, On the stability of crystal lattices. i, in: Mathematical P roceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, Vol. 36, Cambridge University Press, 1940, pp. 160–172

    1940

Showing first 80 references.