Adaptive virtual element method with RCP for mixed-mode fracture analysis of marble rocks using GMTS criterion
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates the application of the Virtual Element Method (VEM) for simulating crack propagation in 2D marble rock under linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) conditions. The inherent mesh flexibility of VEM is leveraged by employing an adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) strategy based on recovery by compatibility in patches (RCP) for triangular, quadrilateral, and even polygonal meshes. The accuracy and efficiency of crack path prediction are enhanced by calculating stress intensity factors (SIFs) and T-stress through the interaction domain integral method coupled with the Generalized Maximum Tangential Stress (GMTS) criterion. The effectiveness of this approach is validated using three distinct marble rock specimens with varying material properties and initial crack configurations: semi-circular bend (SCB) Harsian Marble, center-cracked circular disk (CCCD) limestone, and edge-cracked triangular (ECT) Neyriz Marble. The GMTS criterion, incorporating three parameters (KI, KII, and T), precisely predicts crack initiation and propagation directions, demonstrating its superiority for mixed-mode fractures.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Rock Mechanics and Modeling · Numerical methods in engineering · Drilling and Well Engineering
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. Aliha MRM (2014) Indirect tensile test assessments for rock materials using 3-D disc-type specimens. Arab J Geosci 7:4757–4766. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12517-013-1037-8/FIGURES/910.1007/S12517-013-1037-8/FIGURES/9 ↗
2. Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR (2011) Mixed mode I/II brittle fracture evaluation of marble using SCB specimen. Procedia Eng 10:311–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROENG.2011.04.05410.1016/J.PROENG.2011.04.054 ↗
3. Aliha MRM, Ayatollahi MR (2013) Two-parameter fracture analysis of SCB rock specimen under mixed mode loading. Eng Fract Mech 103:115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.09.02110.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.09.021 ↗
4. Aliha MRM, Ayatollah MR, Smith DJ, Pavier MJ (2010) Geometry and size effects on fracture trajectory in a limestone rock under mixed mode loading. Eng Fract Mech 77:2200–2212. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2010.03.00910.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2010.03.009 ↗
5. Aliha MRM, Hosseinpour GR, Ayatollahi MR (2013) Application of cracked triangular specimen subjected to three-point bending for investigating fracture behavior of rock materials. Rock Mech Rock Eng 46:1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-012-0325-z10.1007/s00603-012-0325-z ↗
6. Alneasan M, Behnia M, Bagherpour R (2019) Analytical and numerical investigations of dynamic crack propagation in brittle rocks under mixed mode loading. Constr Build Mater 222:544–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2019.06.16310.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2019.06.163 ↗
7. Amirdehi HRF, Aliha MRM, Moniri A, Torabi AR (2019) Using the generalized maximum tangential stress criterion to predict mode II fracture of hot mix asphalt in terms of mode I results—a statistical analysis. Constr Build Mater 213:483–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.06710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.067 ↗
8. Artioli E, Veiga LB, Lovadina C, Sacco E (2017a) Arbitrary order 2D virtual elements for polygonal meshes: part I, elastic problem. Comput Mech 60:355–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00466-017-1404-510.1007/S00466-017-1404-5 ↗
9. Artioli E, Miranda S, Lovadina C, Patruno L (2017b) A stress/displacement virtual element method for plane elasticity problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 325:155–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2017.06.03610.1016/j.cma.2017.06.036 ↗
10. Ayatollahi MR, Aliha MRM (2008) On the use of Brazilian disc specimen for calculating mixed mode I–II fracture toughness of rock materials. Eng Fract Mech 75:4631–4641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2008.06.01810.1016/j.engfracmech.2008.06.018 ↗
11. Benedetti A, Miranda S, Ubertini F (2006) A posteriori error estimation based on the superconvergent recovery by compatibility in patches. Int J Numer Methods Eng 67(1):108–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.162910.1002/nme.1629 ↗
12. Benedetto MF, Caggiano A, Etse G (2018) Virtual elements and zero thickness interface-based approach for fracture analysis of heterogeneous materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 338:41–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.04.00110.1016/j.cma.2018.04.001 ↗
13. Bouchard PO, Bay F, Chastel Y, Tovena I (2000) Crack propagation modelling using an advanced remeshing technique. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 189:723–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00324-210.1016/S0045-7825(99)00324-2 ↗
14. Castellazzi G, Miranda S, Ubertini F (2010) Adaptivity based on the recovery by compatibility in patches. Finite Elem Anal Des 46:379–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FINEL.2009.12.00410.1016/J.FINEL.2009.12.004 ↗
15. Chen FHK, Shield RT (1977) Conservation laws in elasticity of the J-integral type. Z Angew Math Phys 28:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0159070410.1007/BF01590704 ↗
16. Chi H, Veiga LB, Paulino GH (2017) Some basic formulations of the virtual element method (VEM) for finite deformations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 318:148–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.12.02010.1016/j.cma.2016.12.020 ↗
17. Chi H, Veiga LB, Paulino GH (2019) A simple and effective gradient recovery scheme and a posteriori error estimator for the virtual element method (VEM). Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 347:21–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CMA.2018.08.01410.1016/J.CMA.2018.08.014 ↗
18. D’Altri AM, Miranda S, Patruno L, Artioli E, Lovadina C (2020) Error estimation and mesh adaptivity for the virtual element method based on recovery by compatibility in patches. Int J Numer Meth Eng 121:4374–4405. https://doi.org/10.1002/NME.643810.1002/NME.6438 ↗
19. Diana V, Labuz JF, Biolzi L (2020) Simulating fracture in rock using a micropolar peridynamic formulation. Eng Fract Mech 230:106985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.10698510.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.106985 ↗
20. Dörfler W (1996) A convergent adaptive algorithm for Poisson’s equation. SIAM J Numer Anal 33(3):1106–1124. https://doi.org/10.1137/073305410.1137/0733054 ↗
21. Duan K, Li Y, Wang L, Zhao G, Wu W (2019) Dynamic responses and failure modes of stratified sedimentary rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 122:104060. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJRMMS.2019.10406010.1016/J.IJRMMS.2019.104060 ↗
22. Duan K, Kwok CY, Zhang Q, Shang J (2020) On the initiation, propagation and reorientation of simultaneously-induced multiple hydraulic fractures. Comput Geotech 117:103226. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPGEO.2019.10322610.1016/J.COMPGEO.2019.103226 ↗
23. El-Tohfa A, Mukhtar F (2023) Fracture and size effect analysis in concrete using 3-D G/XFEM and a CZM-LEFM correlation model: validation with experiments. Comput Struct 282:107043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2023.10704310.1016/j.compstruc.2023.107043 ↗
24. Fu JW, Chen K, Zhu W, Zhang X, Li X (2016) Progressive failure of new modelling material with a single internal crack under biaxial compression and the 3-D numerical simulation. Eng Fract Mech 165:140–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2016.08.00210.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2016.08.002 ↗
25. Gain AL, Talischi C, Paulino GH (2014) On the virtual element method for three-dimensional linear elasticity problems on arbitrary polyhedral meshes. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 282:132–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2014.05.00510.1016/j.cma.2014.05.005 ↗
26. Geuzaine C, Remacle J-F (2009) Gmsh: a 3-D finite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post-processing facilities. Int J Numer Meth Eng 79(11):1309–1331. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.257910.1002/nme.2579 ↗
27. Golos K, Wasiluk B (2000) Role of plastic zone in crack growth direction criterion under mixed mode loading. Int J Fract 102(4):341–353. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100766372892610.1023/A:1007663728926 ↗
28. Ha YD, Lee J, Hong J-W (2015) Fracturing patterns of rock-like materials in compression captured with peridynamics. Eng Fract Mech 144:176–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.06.06410.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.06.064 ↗
29. Ito T (2008) Effect of pore pressure gradient on fracture initiation in fluid saturated porous media: rock. Eng Fract Mech 75:1753–1762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.03.02810.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.03.028 ↗
30. Ju Y, Liu P, Chen J, Yang Y, Ranjith PG (2016) CDEM-based analysis of the 3D initiation and propagation of hydrofracturing cracks in heterogeneous glutenites. J Natl Gas Sci Eng 35:614–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JNGSE.2016.09.01110.1016/J.JNGSE.2016.09.011 ↗
31. Keil M, Snoeyink J (2002) On the time bound for convex decomposition of simple polygons. Int J Comput Geom Appl 12(03):181–192. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021819590200080310.1142/S0218195902000803 ↗
32. Kfouri AP (1986) Some evaluations of the elastic t-term using Eshelby’s method. Int J Fract 30:301–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0001971010.1007/BF00019710 ↗
33. Kuna M (2013) Numerical simulation of crack propagation. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 327–359. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6680-8_810.1007/978-94-007-6680-8_8 ↗
34. Lee H, Jeon S (2011) An experimental and numerical study of fracture coalescence in pre-cracked specimens under uniaxial compression. Int J Solids Struct 48:979–999. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2010.12.00110.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2010.12.001 ↗
35. Li FZ, Shih CF, Needleman A (1985) A comparison of methods for calculating energy release rates. Eng Fract Mech 21:405–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(85)90029-310.1016/0013-7944(85)90029-3 ↗
36. Li LC, Tang CA, Li G, Wang SY, Liang ZZ, Zhang YB (2012) Numerical simulation of 3D hydraulic fracturing based on an improved flow-stress-damage model and a parallel fem technique. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45:801–818. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00603-012-0252-Z/FIGURES/1610.1007/S00603-012-0252-Z/FIGURES/16 ↗
37. Lipnikov K, Manzini G, Shashkov M (2014) Mimetic finite difference method. J Comput Phys 257:1163–1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2013.07.03110.1016/j.jcp.2013.07.031 ↗
38. Lu Y, He M, Wu B, Meng X (2020) Experimental and theoretical analysis of hydraulic fracturing and gas fracturing of rock under true triaxial compressions. Eng Fract Mech 234:107100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.10710010.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.107100 ↗
39. Mengolini M, Benedetto MF, Aragón AM (2019) An engineering perspective to the virtual element method and its interplay with the standard finite element method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 350:995–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2019.02.04310.1016/j.cma.2019.02.043 ↗
40. Mukhtar F (2024) Simulation of fracture behavior in seawater and sea-sand mixed recycled coarse aggregate concrete under three-point bending. Theor Appl Fract Mech 131:104413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2024.10441310.1016/j.tafmec.2024.104413 ↗
41. Mukhtar FM, Duarte CA (2022) Coupled multiphysics 3-D generalized finite element method simulations of hydraulic fracture propagation experiments. Eng Fract Mech 276:108874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.10887410.1016/j.engfracmech.2022.108874 ↗
42. Mukhtar FM, Shauer N, Duarte CA (2022) Propagation mechanisms and parametric influence in multiple interacting hydraulic fractures: a 3-D G/XFEM hydro-mechanical modeling. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 46(11):2033–2059. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.337810.1002/nag.3378 ↗
43. Nguyen-Thanh VM, Zhuang X, Nguyen-Xuan H, Rabczuk T, Wriggers P (2018) A virtual element method for 2D linear elastic fracture analysis. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 340:366–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.05.02110.1016/j.cma.2018.05.021 ↗
44. Rannou J, Limodin N, Réthoré J, Gravouil A, Ludwig W, Baïetto-Dubourg MC, Buffière JY, Combescure A, Hild F, Roux S (2010) Three dimensional experimental and numerical multiscale analysis of a fatigue crack. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 199:1307–1325. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CMA.2009.09.01310.1016/J.CMA.2009.09.013 ↗
45. Rice JR (1968) A path independent integral and the approximate analysis of strain concentration by notches and cracks. J Appl Mech 35:379–386. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.360120610.1115/1.3601206 ↗
46. Sangsefidi M, Akbardoost J, Mesbah M (2020) Experimental and theoretical fracture assessment of rock-type u-notched specimens under mixed mode I/II loading. Eng Fract Mech 230:106990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.10699010.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.106990 ↗
47. Sato A, Hirakawa Y, Sugawara K (2001) Mixed mode crack propagation of homogenized cracks by the two-dimensional ddm analysis. Constr Build Mater 15:247–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-0618(00)00074-X10.1016/S0950-0618(00)00074-X ↗
48. Schmidt RA (1980) A microcrack model and its significance to hydraulic fracturing and fracture toughness testing. In: ARMA US rock mechanics/Geomechanics symposium. ARMA, pp ARMA -80
49. Smith DJ, Ayatollahi MR, Pavier MJ (2001) The role of t-stress in brittle fracture for linear elastic materials under mixed-mode loading. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 24(2):137–150. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1460-2695.2001.00377.x10.1046/j.1460-2695.2001.00377.x ↗
50. Stern M, Becker EB, Dunham RS (1976) A contour integral computation of mixed-mode stress intensity factors. Int J Fract 12(3):359–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0003283110.1007/BF00032831 ↗
51. Tang SB (2015) The effect of t-stress on the fracture of brittle rock under compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 79:86–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJRMMS.2015.06.00910.1016/J.IJRMMS.2015.06.009 ↗
52. Ubertini F (2004) Patch recovery based on complementary energy. Int J Numer Methods Eng 59:1501–1538. https://doi.org/10.1002/NME.92410.1002/NME.924 ↗
53. Veiga LBD, Brezzi F, Cangiani A, Manzini G, Marini LD, Russo A (2013a) Basic principles of virtual element methods. Math Models Methods Appl Sci 23:199–214. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021820251250049210.1142/S0218202512500492 ↗
54. Veiga LB, Brezzi F, Marini LD (2013b) Virtual elements for linear elasticity problems. SIAM J Numer Anal 51:794–812. https://doi.org/10.1137/12087474610.1137/120874746 ↗
55. Veiga LB, Lovadina C, Russo A (2016) stability analysis for the virtual element method
56. Veiga L, Lovadina C, Russo A (2017) Stability analysis for the virtual element method. Math Models Methods Appl Sci 27(13):2557–2594. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021820251750052X10.1142/S021820251750052X ↗
57. Wang C, Wang S (2022) Modified generalized maximum tangential stress criterion for simulation of crack propagation and its application in discontinuous deformation analysis. Eng Fract Mech 259:108159. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2021.10815910.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2021.108159 ↗
58. Wei C, Li Y, Zhu W, Li S, Wang S, Wang H (2020) Experimental observation and numerical investigation on propagation and coalescence process of multiple flaws in rock-like materials subjected to hydraulic pressure and far-field stress. Theor Appl Fract Mech 108:102603. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TAFMEC.2020.10260310.1016/J.TAFMEC.2020.102603 ↗
59. Williams ML (2021) On the stress distribution at the base of a stationary crack. J Appl Mech 24(1):109–114. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.401145410.1115/1.4011454 ↗
60. Wong LNY, Li HQ (2013) Numerical study on coalescence of two pre-existing coplanar flaws in rock. Int J Solids Struct 50:3685–3706. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2013.07.01010.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2013.07.010 ↗
61. Wriggers P, Rust WT, Reddy BD (2016) A virtual element method for contact. Comput Mech 58(6):1039–1050. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00466-016-1331-X10.1007/S00466-016-1331-X ↗
62. Yau JF, Wang SS, Corten HT (1980) A mixed-mode crack analysis of isotropic solids using conservation laws of elasticity. J Appl Mech 47:335–341. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.315366510.1115/1.3153665 ↗