An analytical model for DCB/wedge tests based on Timoshenko beam kinematics for accurate determination of cohesive zone lengths
Source abstract
Abstract
In this work, an analytical model consisting of Timoshenko beams coupled with a cohesive zone is used in order to analyze the extent of the cohesive fracture process zone within mechanical systems displaying beam-like features. This is the case, for example, for the double cantilever beam (DCB) specimen or for the wedge test specimen. The predictions of the model are displayed under the form of diagrams and formulas involving non-dimensional parameters, that can be readily used for example in the context of the identification of cohesive parameters from experimental data. The predictions are also compared to those of previous papers using beam models. It appears that in some configurations, for example soft materials with moderate toughness, the kinematic hypothesis of the Timoshenko beam is necessary in order to get accurate estimate of process zone lengths. The influence of the shape of the cohesive law is also discussed.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Bao G, Suo Z (1992) Remarks on crack-bridging concepts. ASME Appl Mech Rev 45:355–36610.1115/1.3119764 ↗
2. Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Adv Appl Mech 7:55–12910.1016/S0065-2156(08)70121-2 ↗
3. Blaysat B, Hoefnagels JPM, Lubineau G, ALfano M, Geers MGD (2015) Interface debonding characteriyation by image correlation integrated with double cantilever beam kinematics. Int J Solids Struct 55:79–9110.1016/j.ijsolstr.2014.06.012 ↗
4. Budzik MK, Jumel J, Imielińska K, Shanahan MER (2009) Accurate and continuous adhesive fracture energy determination using an instrumented wedge test. Int J Adhes Adhes 29:694–70110.1016/j.ijadhadh.2008.11.003 ↗
5. Budzik MK, Jumel J, Imielińska K, Shanahan MER (2011) Effect of adhesive compliance in the assessment of soft adhesives with the wedge test. J Adhes Sci Technol 25:131–14910.1163/016942410X501133 ↗
6. Budzik MK, Jumel J, Salem NB, Shanahan MER (2013) Instrumented en notched flexure–crack propagation and process zone monitoring. Part I: data reduction and experimental. Int J Solids Struct 50:310–31910.1016/j.ijsolstr.2012.08.030 ↗
7. Camacho GT, Ortiz M (1996) Computational modelling of impact damage in brittle materials. Int J Solids Struct 33:2899–293810.1016/0020-7683(95)00255-3 ↗
8. Camanho PP, Dávila CG, de Moura MF (2003) Numerical simulation of mixed-mode progressive delamination in composite materials. J Compos Mater 37:1415–143810.1177/0021998303034505 ↗
9. Carpinteri A (1989a) Cusp catastrophe interpretation of fracture instability. J Mech Phys Solids 37:567–58210.1016/0022-5096(89)90029-X ↗
10. Carpinteri A (1989b) Softening and snap-back instability in cohesive solids. Int J Numer Methods Eng 28:1521–153710.1002/nme.1620280705 ↗
11. Carpinteri A, Paggi M, Zavarise G (2008) The mffect of montact on the decohesion of laminated beams with multiple microcracks. Int J Solids Struct 45:129–14310.1016/j.ijsolstr.2007.07.012 ↗
12. Cotterell B, Hbaieb K, Williams JG, Hadavinia H, Tropsa V (2006) The root rotation in double cantilever beam and peel tests. Mech Mater 38:571–58410.1016/j.mechmat.2005.11.001 ↗
13. de Borst R, Remmers JJC, Verhoosel CV (2014) Evolving discontinuities and cohesive fracture. Proc IUTAM 10:125–13710.1016/j.piutam.2014.01.014 ↗
14. Döll W, Könczöl L (1990) Micro mechanics of fracture: optical interferometry of crack tip craze zone. Adv Polym Sci 91–92:138–214
15. Dugdale DS (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech Phys Solids 8:100–10410.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-2 ↗
16. Gowrishankar S, Mei H, Liechti KM, Huang R (2012) A comparison of direct and iterative methods for determining traction-separation relations. Int J Fract 177:109–12810.1007/s10704-012-9758-3 ↗
17. Harper PW, Hallett SR (2008) Cohesive zone length in numerical simulations of composite delamination. Eng Fract Mech 75:4774–479210.1016/j.engfracmech.2008.06.004 ↗
18. Hillerborg A, Modeer M, Petersson PE (1976) Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem Conc Res 6:773–78210.1016/0008-8846(76)90007-7 ↗
19. Huang D, Shen V, Shen Y, Chui Y (2018) An analytical solution for double cantilever beam based on elastic-plastic bilinear cohesive law: analysis for mode I fracture of fibrous composites. Eng Fract Mech 193:66–7610.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.02.019 ↗
20. Irwin GR (1960) Plastic zone near a crack and fracture toughness. In: Proceedings of the seventh sagamore ordnance materials conference, vol 4, Syracuse University, New York, p 63–78
21. Jumel J, Budzik MK, Shanahan MER (2011) Beam on elastic foundation with anticlastic curvature: application to analysis of model I fracture tests. Eng Fract Mech 78:3253–326910.1016/j.engfracmech.2011.09.014 ↗
22. Jumel J, Budzik MK, Salem NB, Shanahan MER (2013) Instrumented en notched flexure–crack propagation and process zone monitoring. Part I: modelling and analysis. Int J Solids Struct 50:297–30910.1016/j.ijsolstr.2012.08.028 ↗
23. Kanninen MF (1973) An augmented double cantilever beam model for studying crack propagation and arrest. Int J Fract 9:83–9210.1007/BF00035958 ↗
24. Massabò R, Cox BN (1999) Concepts for bridged mode ii delamination cracks. J Mech Phys Solids 47:1265–130010.1016/S0022-5096(98)00107-0 ↗
25. Needleman A (1987) A continuum model for void nucleation by inclusion debonding. J Appl Mech 54:525–53110.1115/1.3173064 ↗
26. Needleman A (1990a) An analysis of decohesion along an imperfect plane. Int J Fract 42:21–4010.1007/BF00018611 ↗
27. Needleman A (1990b) An analysis of tensile decohesion along an interface. J Mech Phys Solids 38:289–32410.1016/0022-5096(90)90001-K ↗
28. Needleman A (2014) Some issues in cohesive zone modeling. Proc IUTAM 10:221–24610.1016/j.piutam.2014.01.020 ↗
29. Ortiz M, Pandolfi A (1999) Finite deformation irreversible cohesive elements for three-dimensional crack propagation analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 44:1267–128210.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19990330)44:9<1267::AID-NME486>3.0.CO;2-7 ↗
30. Palmer AC, Rice JR (1973) The growth of slip surfaces in the progressive failure of over-consolidated clay. Proc R Soc Lond 548:527–548
31. Parmigiania MJP (2007) The effects of cohesive strength and toughness on mixed-mode delamination of beam-like geometries. Eng Fract Mech 74:2675–269910.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.02.005 ↗
32. Peter Feraren HMJ (2004) Cohesive zone modelling of interface fracture near flaws in adhesive joints. Eng Fract Mech 71:2125–214210.1016/j.engfracmech.2003.12.003 ↗
33. Planas J, Elices M (1991) Nonlinear fracture of cohesive materials. Int J Fract 51:139–15710.1007/BF00033975 ↗
34. Réthoré J, Estevez R (2013) Identification of a cohesive zone model from digital images at the micron-scale. J Mech Phys Solids 61:1407–142010.1016/j.jmps.2013.01.011 ↗
35. Rice JR (1968) Mathematical analysis in the mechanics of fracture. Fract Adv Treatise 2:191–311
36. Schellekens JCJ, de Borst R (1993) A nonlinear finite-element approach for the analysis of mode-I free edge delamination in composites. Int J Solids Struct 301:1239–125310.1016/0020-7683(93)90014-X ↗
37. Sih G, Paris P, Irwin G (1965) On cracks in rectilinearly anisotropic bodies. Int J Fract Mech 1:189–20310.1007/BF00186854 ↗
38. Smith E (1989a) The failure of a strain-softening material: I. analytical approach for a double cantilever beam specimen. Thor Appl Fract Mech 11:59–6410.1016/0167-8442(89)90026-8 ↗
39. Smith E (1989b) The size of the fully developed softening zone associated with a crack in a strain—softening material—I. A semi-infinite crack in a remotely loaded infinite solid. Int J Eng Sci 27:301–30710.1016/0020-7225(89)90118-3 ↗
40. Soto A, González EV, Maimí P, de Aja JRS, de la Escalera FM (2016) Cohesive zone length of orthotropic materials undergoing delamination. Eng Fract Mech 159:174–18810.1016/j.engfracmech.2016.03.033 ↗
41. Spearot D, Jacob K, McDowell D (2004) Non-local separation constitutive laws for interfaces and their relation to nanoscale simulations. Mech Mater 36:825–84710.1016/j.mechmat.2003.08.002 ↗
42. Suo Z, Bao G (1992) Delamination R-curve phenomena due to damage. J Mech Phys Solids 40:1–1610.1016/0022-5096(92)90198-B ↗
43. Turon A, Camanho PP, Costa J, Dávila CG (2006) A damage model for the simulation of delamination under variable-mode loading. J Compos Mater 38:1072–1089
44. Turon A, Costa J, Camanho PP, Maimí P (2008) Analytical and numerical investigation of the length of the cohesive zone in delaminated composite materials, chapter 4. In: Netherlands S (ed) Mechanical response of composites. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 77–9710.1007/978-1-4020-8584-0_4 ↗
45. Tvergaard V (1990) Effect of fibre debonding in a whisker reinforced metal. Mater Sci Eng A 125:203–21310.1016/0921-5093(90)90170-8 ↗
46. Tvergaard V, Hutchinson JW (1992) The relation between crack growth resistance and fracture process parameters in elastic-plastic solids. J Mech Phys Solids 40:1377–139710.1016/0022-5096(92)90020-3 ↗
47. Williams JG (1989) End corrections for orthotropic DCB specimens. Compos Sci Technol 35:367–37610.1016/0266-3538(89)90058-4 ↗
48. Williams JG, Hadavinia H (2002) Analytical solutions for cohesive zone models. J Mech Phys Solids 50:809–82510.1016/S0022-5096(01)00095-3 ↗
49. Williams JG, Hadavinia H, Cotterell B (2005) Anisotropic elastic and elastic-plastic bending solutions for edge constrained beams. Int J Solids Struct 42:4927–494610.1016/j.ijsolstr.2005.02.012 ↗
50. Xu XP, Needleman A (1993) Void nucleation by inclusion debonding in a crystal matrix. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 1:111–13210.1088/0965-0393/1/2/001 ↗
51. Xu XP, Needleman A (1994) Numerical simulations of fast crack growth in brittle solids. J Mech Phys Solids 42:1397–143410.1016/0022-5096(94)90003-5 ↗
52. Xu XP, Needleman A (1996) Numerical simulations of dynamic crack growth along an interface. Int J Fract 74:289–32410.1007/BF00035845 ↗
53. Yamakov V, Saether E, Phillips DR, Glaessgen EH (2006) Molecular dynamics simulation based cohesive zone representation of intergranular fracture processes in aluminium. J Mech Phys Solids 54:1899–192810.1016/j.jmps.2006.03.004 ↗
54. Yang QD, Cox BN, Nalla RK, Ritchie RO (2006) Fracture length scales in human cortical bone: The necessity of nonlinear fracture models. Biomaterials 27:2095–211310.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.09.040 ↗
55. Zhou XW, Zimmerman JA, Jr EDR, Moody NR (2008) Molecular dynamics simulation based cohesive surface representation of mixed mode mracture. Mech Mater 40:832–84510.1016/j.mechmat.2008.05.001 ↗