Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Dec;34(20):2335-2359.
doi: 10.1177/1045389X231185458. Epub 2023 Jun 30.

Mechanical properties and constitutive models of shape memory alloy for structural engineering: A review

Ali Mohammadgholipour  1 , Ahm Muntasir Billah  1
Affiliations
Review

Mechanical properties and constitutive models of shape memory alloy for structural engineering: A review

Ali Mohammadgholipour et al. J Intell Mater Syst Struct. 2023 Dec.

Abstract

Shape Memory Alloys (SMAs) are an innovative material with the unique features of superelasticity and energy dissipation capabilities under extreme loads. Due to their unique features, they have a great potential to be employed in structural engineering applications under different conditions. However, in order to effectively use SMAs in civil engineering structures and model their behaviors accurately in Finite Element (FE) packages, it is crucial for structural engineers to comprehend the mechanical properties and cyclic behavior of different SMA compositions under varying loading conditions. While previous studies have focused mainly on the cyclic behavior of SMAs under tensile loading, it is important to evaluate their fatigue behavior under cyclic tension-compression loading for seismic applications. This literature review aims to discuss the current gaps in the existing literature on the behavior of SMA rebars under low-cycle fatigue (LCF). The review provides a comprehensive overview of the primary characteristics of SMAs, summarizes the mechanical properties of SMAs presented in the literature and the parameters that affect them, and critically evaluates the effects of cyclic loading and LCF on SMAs. The review also provides a summary of the different constitutive models of SMAs and compares their advantages and limitations, which helps structural engineers to employ an appropriate constitutive model for predicting the accurate behavior of SMAs in FE software.

Keywords: Shape memory alloys; buckling; cyclic behavior; finite element; low-cycle fatigue; tension-compression loading.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Cyclic behavior of SMAs: (a) phase transformation between austenite and martensite, (b) shape memory behavior of SMAs, and (c) superelastic behavior of SMAs.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The bibliography mapping of SMAs.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Tensile behavior of superelastic SMA material tested using ASTM F2516-07 (2007).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Tensile-compressive hysteretic behavior of SMAs.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
The mean tensile yield strength for different compositions of SMAs.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
The mean austenite elastic modulus for different compositions of SMAs.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
The mean recovery strain for different compositions of SMAs.
Figure 8.
Figure 8.
Comparison of stress-strain curve of different compositions of SMAs: (a) Ni-Ti SMA (Wang and Zhu, 2018), (b) Cu-Al-Mn SMA (Kato et al., 1999), and (c) Fe-Mn-Si-Cr-Ni-1(V,C) SMA (Fang et al., 2021).
Figure 9.
Figure 9.
Comparison of trained and untrained SMA wire (Wolons et al., 1998).
Figure 10.
Figure 10.
(a) Effects of temperature on the hysteresis loop of a Ni-Ti Wire and (b) effects of temperature and loading frequency on dissipated energy (Wolons et al., 1998).
Figure 11.
Figure 11.
Effects of loading frequency on the stress-strain curve of Ni-Ti SMA rebar (DesRoches et al., 2004).
Figure 12.
Figure 12.
Stress-strain behavior of Ni-Ti SMA rebar with the diameter of 12.7 mm under earthquake and cyclic loading (McCormick et al., 2007).
Figure 13.
Figure 13.
Loading frequency effect on the hysteresis curve of superelastic Ni-Ti SMA rebar with BRD (Wang and Zhu, 2018).
Figure 14.
Figure 14.
Temperature effect on the behavior of Cu SMA: (a) Cu-Al-Be SMA (Zhang et al., 2009) and (b) Cu-Al-Mn SMA (Hong et al., 2022).
Figure 15.
Figure 15.
Effect of cyclic loading with different rates on the maximum stress of Fe SMA (Rosa et al., 2021).
Figure 16.
Figure 16.
The hysteresis curve for the rebars with the diameters of 19.1 mm (12.7 mm reduced) and 12.7 mm (6.35 mm reduced) (McCormick et al., 2007).
Figure 17.
Figure 17.
The LCF behavior of a Ni-Ti SMA strand at strain amplitude of 4%: (a) stress-strain curves, (b) dissipated energy versus the cycle number, (c) residual strain versus the cycle number, and (d) maximum stress versus the cycle number (Yang et al., 2021).
Figure 18.
Figure 18.
Cyclic stress-strain behavior of Cu SMAs (Hong et al., 2022).
Figure 19.
Figure 19.
Comparison between the SMA stress-strain response predicted by Graesser’s model and the experimental result (Graesser and Cozzarelli, 1991).
Figure 20.
Figure 20.
Hysteresis model for SMA developed by Wilde et al. (2000).
Figure 21.
Figure 21.
SMA model presented by Auricchio and Sacco (1997).
Figure 22.
Figure 22.
Comparison of the experimental response and the model developed by Ren et al. (2007).
Figure 23.
Figure 23.
Constitutive models used in FE packages: (a) ABAQUS, (b) LS-DYNA, (c) OpenSees, and (d) SeismoStruct.
Figure 24.
Figure 24.
Cyclic behavior of Ni-Ti SMA rebar with the diameter of 25.4 mm under the tensile loading (DesRoches et al., 2004).
Figure 25.
Figure 25.
Validation of the SMA model developed by Haque and Alam (2017).
Figure 26.
Figure 26.
The stress-strain response of NiTi SMA rebar with different slenderness under compression loading (Pereiro-Barceló and Bonet, 2017).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Abaqus G. (2011) Abaqus 6.11. Providence, RI: Dassault Systemes Simulia Corporation.
    1. Abdulridha A. (2013) Performance of superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced concrete elements subjected to monotonic and cyclic loading. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Ottawa, Ottawa.
    1. Abdulridha A, Palermo D. (2017) Behaviour and modelling of hybrid SMA-steel reinforced concrete slender shear wall. Engineering Structures 147: 77–89.
    1. Abraik E, El-Fitiany SF, Youssef MA. (2020) Seismic performance of concrete core walls reinforced with shape memory alloy bars. Structures 27: 1479–1489.
    1. Alam MS, Nehdi M, Youssef MA. (2007. a) Applications of shape memory alloys in earthquake engineering. In: Proceedings of the 9th Canadian conference on earthquake engineering, Ottawa, ON, 26–29 June, pp.26–29.