A dialogue between Finite Fracture Mechanics and Phase Field approaches to fracture for predicting crack nucleation at the microscale
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Unraveling the material behavior at the microscale is one of the challenges of this century, demanding progress in experimental and computational strategies. Among the latter, two approaches are commonly applied for predicting crack nucleation. The Coupled Criterion (CC) and the Phase Field (PF) model, both depending on a material length parameter. In brittle materials at the macroscale, this parameter is significantly smaller than the specimen size. However, when the scale decreases, this material length might approach the structural dimensions. In this context, a comprehensive comparison between the two models is conducted, changing the ratio between the material length parameter and the dimensions of the specimen. Results indicate that when this ratio is sufficiently small predictions from both models coincide, otherwise both the CC and the PF model predict different results. Despite their differences, an agreement with experiments reported in the literature have been observed.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Numerical methods in engineering · Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Rock Mechanics and Modeling
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (51)
Show source-provided references
1. Heimann RB (2010) Classic and advanced ceramics: from fundamentals to applications. John Wiley, Hoboken. https://doi.org/10.1002/978352763017210.1002/9783527630172 ↗
2. Schuh C (2006) Nanoindentation studies of materials. Mater Today 9(5):32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-7021(06)71495-X10.1016/S1369-7021(06)71495-X ↗
3. Dehm G, Jaya B, Raghavan R, Kirchlechner C (2018) Overview on micro- and nanomechanical testing: new insights in interface plasticity and fracture at small length scales. Acta Materialia 142:248–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2017.06.01910.1016/j.actamat.2017.06.019 ↗
4. Leguillon D (2002) Strength or toughness? A criterion for crack onset at a notch. European J Mech 21(1):61–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0997-7538(01)01184-610.1016/S0997-7538(01)01184-6 ↗
5. Weißgraeber P, Hell S, Becker W (2016) Crack nucleation in negative geometries. Eng Fracture Mech 168:93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2016.02.04510.1016/j.engfracmech.2016.02.045 ↗
6. Pham K, Marigo J-J (2010) Approche variationnelle de l’endommagement: I. les concepts fondamentaux. Comptes Rendus Mécanique 338(4):191–19810.1016/j.crme.2010.03.009 ↗
7. Pham K, Amor H, Marigo J-J, Maurini C (2011) Gradient damage models and their use to approximate brittle fracture. Int J Damage Mech 20(4):618–65210.1177/1056789510386852 ↗
8. Ambati M, Gerasimov T, De Lorenzis L (2015) Phase-field modeling of ductile fracture. Comput Mech 55:1017–104010.1007/s00466-015-1151-4 ↗
9. Cornetti P, Pugno N, Carpinteri A, Taylor D (2006) Finite fracture mechanics: a coupled stress and energy failure criterion. Eng Fracture Mech 73(14):2021–2033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.03.01010.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.03.010 ↗
10. Mantič V (2009) Interface crack onset at a circular cylindrical inclusion under a remote transverse tension. Application of a coupled stress and energy criterion. Int J Solids Struct 46(6):1287–130410.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.10.036 ↗
11. Cornetti P, Sapora A, Carpinteri A (2013) Mode mixity and size effect in v-notched structures. Int J Solids Struct 50(10):1562–158210.1016/j.ijsolstr.2013.01.026 ↗
12. García I, Mantič V, Blázquez A, París F (2014) Transverse crack onset and growth in cross-ply [0/90] s laminates under tension. Application of a coupled stress and energy criterion. Int J Solids Struct 51(23–24):3844–3856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2014.06.01510.1016/j.ijsolstr.2014.06.015 ↗
13. Parvizi A, Garrett K, Bailey J (1978) Constrained cracking in glass fibre-reinforced epoxy cross-ply laminates. J Mater Sci 13(1):195–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-4361(87)90006-110.1016/0010-4361(87)90006-1 ↗
14. Doitrand A, Henry R, Meille S (2021) Brittle material strength and fracture toughness estimation from four-point bending test. J Theor Comput Appl Mech. https://doi.org/10.46298/jtcam.675310.46298/jtcam.6753 ↗
15. Gallo P, Sapora A (2020) Brittle failure of nanoscale notched silicon cantilevers: a finite fracture mechanics approach. Appl Sci 10(5):1640. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1005164010.3390/app10051640 ↗
16. Jiménez-Alfaro S, Leguillon D (2021) Finite fracture mechanics at the micro-scale. Application to bending tests of micro cantilever beams. Eng Fracture Mech 258:108012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.10801210.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.108012 ↗
17. Baldassari M, Monaco A, Sapora A, Cornetti P (2023) Size effect on flexural strength of notched and un-notched concrete and rock specimens by finite fracture mechanics. Theor Appl Fracture Mech 125:103787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2023.10378710.1016/j.tafmec.2023.103787 ↗
18. Martin E, Carrère N (2023) A fast procedure to predict the notch strength with the coupled criterion. Eng Fracture Mech 284:10925710.1016/j.engfracmech.2023.109257 ↗
19. Tanné E, Li T, Bourdin B, Marigo J-J, Maurini C (2018) Crack nucleation in variational phase-field models of brittle fracture. J Mech Phys Solids 110:80–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2017.09.00610.1016/j.jmps.2017.09.006 ↗
20. Guillén-Hernández T, García I, Reinoso J, Paggi M (2019) A micromechanical analysis of inter-fiber failure in long reinforced composites based on the phase field approach of fracture combined with the cohesive zone model. Int J Fracture 220:181–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-019-00384-810.1007/s10704-019-00384-8 ↗
21. Fantoni F, Bacigalupo A, Paggi M, Reinoso J (2020) A phase field approach for damage propagation in periodic microstructured materials. Int J Fracture 223:53–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-019-00400-x10.1007/s10704-019-00400-x ↗
22. Guillén-Hernández T, Quintana-Corominas A, García I, Reinoso J, Paggi M, Turón A (2020) In-situ strength effects in long fibre reinforced composites: a micro-mechanical analysis using the phase field approach of fracture. Theor Appl Fracture Mech 108:102621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.10262110.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102621 ↗
23. Macías J, Arteiro A, Otero F, Camanho PP, Reinoso J (2023) Micro-mechanical analysis of composite materials using phase-field models of brittle fracture. European J Mech -A/Solids 102:105069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechsol.2023.10506910.1016/j.euromechsol.2023.105069 ↗
24. Awaji H, Nishimura Y, Choi S-M, Takahashi Y, Goto T, Hashimoto S (2009) Toughening mechanism and frontal process zone size of ceramics. J Ceramic Soc Japan 117(1365):623–62910.2109/jcersj2.117.623 ↗
25. Bažant ZP, Kazemi MT (1990) Size effect in fracture of ceramics and its use to determine fracture energy and effective process zone length. J Am Ceram Soc 73(7):1841–185310.1111/j.1151-2916.1990.tb05233.x ↗
26. Molnár G, Doitrand A, Estevez R, Gravouil A (2020) Toughness or strength? Regularization in phase-field fracture explained by the coupled criterion. Theor Appl Fracture Mech 109:102736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.10273610.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102736 ↗
27. Doitrand A, Molnár G, Estevez R, Gravouil A (2023) Strength-based regularization length in phase field fracture. Theor Appl Fracture Mech 124:10372810.1016/j.tafmec.2022.103728 ↗
28. Molnár G, Doitrand A, Lazarus V (2024) Phase-field simulation and coupled criterion link echelon cracks to internal length in Antiplane shear. J Mech Phys Solids. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2024.10567510.1016/j.jmps.2024.105675 ↗
29. Griffith AA (1921) VI. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids philosophical transactions of the royal society of London. Series A, Contain Papers Math Phys Charact 221(582–593):163–198. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1921.000610.1098/rsta.1921.0006 ↗
30. Marigo J-J, Maurini C, Pham K (2016) An overview of the modelling of fracture by gradient damage models. Meccanica 51:3107–3128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-016-0538-410.1007/s11012-016-0538-4 ↗
31. Miehe C, Welschinger F, Hofacker M (2010) Thermodynamically consistent phase-field models of fracture: variational principles and multi-field fe implementations. Int J Numerical Methods Eng 83(10):1273–131110.1002/nme.2861 ↗
32. Amor H, Marigo J-J, Maurini C (2009) Regularized formulation of the variational brittle fracture with unilateral contact: numerical experiments. J Mech Phys Solids 57(8):1209–1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2009.04.01110.1016/j.jmps.2009.04.011 ↗
33. Bourdin B, Marigo J-J, Maurini C, Sicsic P (2014) Morphogenesis and propagation of complex cracks induced by thermal shocks. Phys Rev Lett 112(1):01430110.1103/PhysRevLett.112.014301 ↗
34. Francfort GA, Marigo J-J (1998) Revisiting brittle fracture as an energy minimization problem. J Mech Phys Solids 46(8):1319–1342. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5096(98)00034-910.1016/S0022-5096(98)00034-9 ↗
35. Ambrosio L, Tortorelli VM (1990) Approximation of functional depending on jumps by elliptic functional via t-convergence. Commun Pure Appl Math 43(8):999–1036. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.316043080510.1002/cpa.3160430805 ↗
36. Bourdin B, Francfort GA, Marigo J-J (2000) Numerical experiments in revisited brittle fracture. J Mech Phys Solids 48(4):797–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5096(99)00028-910.1016/S0022-5096(99)00028-9 ↗
37. Barrata IA, Dean JP, Dokken JS, HABERA M, HALE J, Richardson C, Rognes ME, Scroggs MW, Sime N, Wells GN (2023) Dolfinx: The next generation fenics problem solving environment
38. Doitrand A, Henry R, Zacharie-Aubrun I, Gatt J, Meille S (2020) $$\text{ UO}_2$$ micron scale specimen fracture: parameter identification and influence of porosities. Theor Appl Fracture Mech 108:102665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.10266510.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102665 ↗
39. Jaya BN, Kirchlechner C, Dehm G (2015) Can microscale fracture tests provide reliable fracture toughness values? A case study in silicon. J Mater Res 30(5):686–69810.1557/jmr.2015.2 ↗
40. Henry R, Blay T, Douillard T, Descamps-Mandine A, Zacharie-Aubrun I, Gatt J, Langlois C, Meille S (2019) Local fracture toughness measurements in polycrystalline cubic zirconia using micro-cantilever bending tests. Mech Mater 136:103086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2019.10308610.1016/j.mechmat.2019.103086 ↗
41. Hofer A-K, Walton R, Ševeček O, Messing GL, Bermejo R (2020) Design of damage tolerant and crack-free layered ceramics with textured microstructure. J European Ceram Soc 40(2):427–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2019.09.00410.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2019.09.004 ↗
42. Zolesi C, Maurini C (2024) Stability and crack nucleation in variational phase-field models of fracture: effects of length-scales and stress multi-axiality10.1016/j.jmps.2024.105802 ↗
43. Henry R, Zacharie-Aubrun I, Blay T, Chalal S, Gatt J, Langlois C, Meille S (2020) Fracture properties of an irradiated PWR $$\text{ UO}_2$$ fuel evaluated by micro-cantilever bending tests. J Nuclear Mater 538:152209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2020.15220910.1016/j.jnucmat.2020.152209 ↗
44. Klinsmann M, Rosato D, Kamlah M, McMeeking RM (2015) An assessment of the phase field formulation for crack growth. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 294:313–33010.1016/j.cma.2015.06.009 ↗
45. Navidtehrani Y, Betegón C, Martínez-Pañeda E (2021) A simple and robust abaqus implementation of the phase field fracture method. Appl Eng Sci 6:100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apples.2021.10005010.1016/j.apples.2021.100050 ↗
46. Camanho PP, Dávila CG, Pinho ST, Iannucci L, Robinson P (2006) Prediction of in situ strengths and matrix cracking in composites under transverse tension and in-plane shear. Composites Part A: Appl Sci Manuf 37(2):165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.04.02310.1016/j.compositesa.2005.04.023 ↗
47. García I, Mantič V, Graciani E (2015) Debonding at the fibre-matrix interface under remote transverse tension. one debond or two symmetric debonds? European J Mech -A/Solids 53:75–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechsol.2015.02.00710.1016/j.euromechsol.2015.02.007 ↗
48. Jalalvand M, Hosseini-Toudeshky H, Mohammadi B (2013) Numerical modeling of diffuse transverse cracks and induced delamination using cohesive elements. Proc Institut Mech Eng 227(7):1392–140510.1177/0954406212460974 ↗
49. Karoui Z, Berthe J, Maurini C (2023) Non-uniform spacing of transverse cracks in symmetric composite laminates. Int J Fracture 242(2):191–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-023-00715-w10.1007/s10704-023-00715-w ↗
50. Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Adv Appl Mech 7:55–12910.1016/S0065-2156(08)70121-2 ↗
51. Wu J-Y, Nguyen VP (2018) A length scale insensitive phase-field damage model for brittle fracture. J Mech Phys Solids 119:20–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2018.06.00610.1016/j.jmps.2018.06.006 ↗