journal article·2016-11Open access

On use of the thick level set method in 3D quasi-static crack simulation of quasi-brittle material

Alexis Salzman, Nicolas Moës, Nicolas Chevaugeon

International Journal of Fracture· Volume 202· Issue 1

Abstract

This work demonstrates the 3D capability of the thick level set (TLS) method, first introduced by Moës et al. (Int J Numer Methods Eng 86:358–380, 2011. doi:10.1002/nme.3069) and later in Stolz and Moës (Int J Fract 174(1):49–60, 2012. doi:10.1007/s10704-012-9693-3). The thick level set approach is a non-local damage method embedding fracture mechanics discontinuity. Enhanced numerical implementation for elastic quasi-brittle materials in 2D under quasi-static loading conditions was presented in Bernard et al. (Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 233–236:11–27, 2012. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2012.02.020). The present work focuses on using this enhanced numerical implementation in a 3D context. This work adds a new way to construct the crack faces by use of a “double cut algorithm”. The regularization computation, part of the non-local feature of the model, is also reviewed to improve its accuracy. As 3D models are computationally intensive, CPU aspects are discussed. Five test cases are presented. The first one illustrates the capability of the method to deal with crack coalescence, which is quite unique for this kind of simulation. Three other cases point out a comparison with literature examples (numerical and experimental) and good agreement is observed. One is a more complex example, which deals with an engineering oriented application. This work confirms good performance of the thick level set method in 3D context. The use of the new “double cut” algorithm is giving well discretized crack path and allows for discontinuous displacement.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

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 (27)

Show source-provided references
1. Bažant ZP, Jirasek M (2002) Nonlocal integral formulations of plasticity and damage: survey of progress. J Eng Mech 128:1119–114910.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2002)128:11(1119) ↗
2. Bernard P-E, Moës N, Chevaugeon N (2012) Damage growth modeling using the thick level set (tls) approach: Efficient discretization for quasi-static loadings. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 233–236:11–27. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2012.02.020 (ISSN 0045-7825)10.1016/j.cma.2012.02.020 ↗
3. Bordas S, Rabczuk T, Zi G (2008) Three-dimensional crack initiation, propagation, branching and junction in non-linear materials by an extended meshfree method without asymptotic enrichment. Eng Fract Mech 75(5):943–960. doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.05.010 (ISSN 00137944)10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.05.010 ↗
4. Bourdin B, Francfort GA, Marigo J-J (2008) The variational approach to fracture, vol 91. doi: 10.1007/s10659-007-9107-310.1007/s10659-007-9107-3 ↗
5. Cazes F, Moës N (2015) Comparison of a phase-field model and of a thick level set model for brittle and quasi-brittle fracture. Int J Numer Methods Eng. doi: 10.1002/nme.488610.1002/nme.4886 ↗
6. Chevaugeon N, Salzman A, Moës N (2014) Vector level set contouring algorithm and associated enrichment functions for the extended finite element method. In: 11th World congress on computational mechanics, Barcelona10.1615/IntJMultCompEng.2013006523 ↗
7. Coxeter HSM (1973) Regular polytopes, 3rd edn. Dover Publications, New York
8. Francfort GA, Marigo J-J (1998) Revisiting brittle fracture as an energy minimization problem. J Mech Phys Solids 46:1319–141210.1016/S0022-5096(98)00034-9 ↗
9. Gomes J, Faugeras O (2003) The vector distance functions. Int J Comput Vis 52:161–18710.1023/A:1022956108418 ↗
10. Hachenberger P, Kettner L (2013) 3D Boolean operations on Nef polyhedra. In: CGAL user and reference manual. CGAL Editorial Board, 4.3 edn. http://doc.cgal.org/4.3/Manual/packages.html#PkgNef3Summary
11. Hert S, Schirra S (2013) 3D convex hulls. In: CGAL user and reference manual. CGAL Editorial Board, 4.3 edn. http://doc.cgal.org/4.3/Manual/packages.html#PkgConvexHull3Summary
12. Hoover CG, Bažant ZP (2014) Cohesive crack, size effect, crack band and work-of-fracture models compared to comprehensive concrete fracture tests. Int J Fract 187(1):133–143. doi: 10.1007/s10704-013-9926-010.1007/s10704-013-9926-0 ↗
13. Hoover CG, Bažant ZP, Vorel J, Wendner R, Hubler MH (2013) Comprehensive concrete fracture tests: description and results. Eng Fract Mech 114:92–103. doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2013.08.00710.1016/j.engfracmech.2013.08.007 ↗
14. Karma A, Kessler D, Levine H (2001) Phase-field model of mode III dynamic fracture. Phys Rev Lett 87(4):045501. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.04550110.1103/PhysRevLett.87.045501 ↗
15. Lorentz E, Godard V (2011) Gradient damage models: toward full-scale computations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 200(21–22):1927–1944. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2010.06.02510.1016/j.cma.2010.06.025 ↗
16. Miehe C, Welschinger F, Hofacker M (2010) Thermodynamically consistent phase-field models of fracture: variational principles and multi-field FE implementations. Int J Numer Methods Eng. doi: 10.1002/nm.286110.1002/nm.2861 ↗
17. Moës N, Stolz C, Bernard P, Chevaugeon N (2011) A level set based model for damage growth: the Thick level set approach. Int J Numer Methods Eng 86:358–380. doi: 10.1002/nme.306910.1002/nme.3069 ↗
18. Moës N, Stolz C, Chevaugeon N (2014) Coupling local and non-local damage evolutions with the thick level set model. Adv Model Simul Eng Sci 1(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s40323-014-0016-210.1186/s40323-014-0016-2 ↗
19. Moreau K, Moës N, Cazes F (2015) The thick level set approach, towards simulations coupling local and non-local evolutions. In: CFRAC, fourth international conference on computational modeling of fracture and failure of materials and structures, Ecole Normale Suprieure de Cachan (Paris), France
20. Parrilla Gómez A, Moës N, Stolz C (2015) Comparison between thick level set (TLS) and cohesive zone models. Adv Model Simul Eng Sci. doi: 10.1186/s40323-015-0041-910.1186/s40323-015-0041-9 ↗
21. Pijaudier-Cabot G, Bažant ZP (1987) Nonlocal damage theory. J Eng Mech ASCE 113:1512–153310.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1987)113:10(1512) ↗
22. Spatschek R, Brener E, Karma A (2011) Phase field modeling of crack propagation. Philos Mag 91(1):75–95. doi: 10.1080/14786431003773015 (ISSN 1478-6435)10.1080/14786431003773015 ↗
23. Spievak LE, Wawrzynek PA, Ingraffea AR (2000) Simulating fatique crack growth in spiral bevel gears. Technical Report May 2000, NASA/CR, Glenn Research Center
24. Spievak LE, Wawrzynek PA, Ingraffea AR, Lewicki DG (2001) Simulating fatigue crack growth in spiral bevel gears. Eng Fract Mech 68(1):53–76. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7944(00)00089-8 (ISSN 00137944)10.1016/S0013-7944(00)00089-8 ↗
25. Stolz C, Moës N (2012) A new model of damage: a moving thick layer approach. Int J Fract 174(1):49–60. doi: 10.1007/s10704-012-9693-3 (ISSN 0376-9429)10.1007/s10704-012-9693-3 ↗
26. Ural A, Heber G, Wawrzynek PA, Ingraffea AR, Lewicki DG, Neto JBC (2005) Three-dimensional, parallel, finite element simulation of fatigue crack growth in a spiral bevel pinion gear. Eng Fract Mech 72:1148–1170. doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2004.08.00410.1016/j.engfracmech.2004.08.004 ↗
27. Van Der Meer FP, Sluys LJ (2015) The Thick Level Set method: Sliding deformations and damage initiation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 285(285):64–82. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2014.10.020 . www.elsevier.com/locate/cma10.1016/j.cma.2014.10.020 ↗