Variational approach to viscoelastic fracture: comparison of a phase-field and a lip-field approach
Source abstract
Abstract
Fracture of viscoelastic materials is considered to be a complex phenomenon due to their highly rate sensitive behavior. In this context, we are interested in the quasi-static response of a viscoelastic solid subjected to damage. This paper outlines a new incremental variational based approach and its computational implementation to model damage in viscoelastic solids. The variational formalism allows us to embed the local constitutive equations into a global incremental potential, the minimization of which provides the solution to the mechanical problem. Softening damage models in their local form are known to result in spurious mesh-sensitive results, and hence non-locality (or regularization) has to be introduced to preserve the mathematical relevance of the problem. In the present paper, we consider two different regularization techniques for the viscoelastic damage model : a particular phase-field and a lip-field approach. The model parameters are calibrated to obtain some equivalence between both these approaches. Numerical results are then presented for the bidimensional case and both these approaches compare well. Numerical results also demonstrate the ability of the model to qualitatively represent the typical rate-dependent behaviour of the viscoelastic materials. Besides, the novelty of the present work lies in the use of lip-field approach for the first time in a viscoelastic context.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Numerical methods in engineering · Elasticity and Material Modeling · Rock Mechanics and Modeling
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (57)
Show source-provided references
1. Ambati M, Gerasimov T, Lorenzis LD (2015) Phase-field modeling of ductile fracture. Comput Mech 55(5):1017–104010.1007/s00466-015-1151-4 ↗
2. Amor H, Marigo JJ, Maurini C (2009) Regularized formulation of the variational brittle fracture with unilateral contact: numerical experiments. J Mech Phys Solids 57(8):1209–122910.1016/j.jmps.2009.04.011 ↗
3. Andersen M, Vandenberghe L The cvxopt linear and quadratic cone program solvers. https://cvxopt.org/
4. Anderson TL (2005) Fracture mechanics: fundamentals and applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton10.1201/9781420058215 ↗
5. Azinpour E, Ferreira JPS, Parente MPL et al (2018) A simple and unified implementation of phase field and gradient damage models. Adv Model Simul Eng Sci 5:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40323-018-0106-710.1186/s40323-018-0106-7 ↗
6. Barenblatt G (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Adv Appl Mech 7:55–12910.1016/S0065-2156(08)70121-2 ↗
7. Belytschko T, Black T (1999) Elastic crack growth in finite elements with minimal remeshing. Int J Numer Method Eng 45:601–62010.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19990620)45:5<601::AID-NME598>3.0.CO;2-S ↗
8. Benson SJ, Munson TS (2006) Flexible complementarity solvers for large-scale applications. Optim Methods Softw 21:155–16810.1080/10556780500065382 ↗
9. Bourdin B, Francfort GA, Marigo JJ (2008) The variational approach to fracture. J Elast 91:5–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-007-9107-310.1007/s10659-007-9107-3 ↗
10. Brinson HF, Brinson LC (2015) Polymer engineering science and viscoelasticity: an introduction10.1007/978-1-4899-7485-3 ↗
11. Cabot GP, Bazant Z (1987) Non-local damage theory. J Eng Mech 113:1512–153310.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1987)113:10(1512) ↗
12. 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 103:114–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.488610.1002/nme.4886 ↗
13. Chevaugeon N, Moës N (2022) Lipschitz regularization for fracture: the lip-field approach. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2022.11564410.1016/j.cma.2022.115644 ↗
14. D’Amico F, Carbone G, Foglia MM, Galietti U (2013) Moving cracks in viscoelastic materials: temperature and energy-release-rate measurements. Eng Fract Mech 98:315–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.10.02610.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.10.026 ↗
15. Damma F, Ambati M, Kästner M (2021) A unified phase-field model of fracture in viscoelastic materials. Continuum Mech Thermodyn 33:1907–1929. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00161-021-01013-310.1007/s00161-021-01013-3 ↗
16. Dubois F, Petit C (2005) Modelling of the crack growth initiation in viscoelastic media by the $$G \theta v$$-integral. Eng Fract Mech 72:2821–2836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.04.00310.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.04.003 ↗
17. Dugdale D (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech Phys Sol 8:100–10410.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-2 ↗
18. Fancello E, Ponthot JP, Stainier L (2006) A variational formulation of constitutive models and updates in non-linear finite viscoelasticity. Int J Numer Methods Eng 65:1831–1864. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.152510.1002/nme.1525 ↗
19. Germain P, Suquet P, Nguyen QS (1983) Continuum thermodynamics. ASME J Appl Mech 50:1010–102010.1115/1.3167184 ↗
20. Geuzaine C, Remacle JF (2009) Gmsh: a 3-d finite element mesh generator with built-in pre-and post-processing facilities. Int J Numer Methods Eng 79(11):1309–133110.1002/nme.2579 ↗
21. Halphen B, Nguyen QS (1975) Sur les materiaux standards généralisés. Journal de Mécanique 14(1):39–63
22. Griffith AA (1921) The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A 221:163–19810.1098/rsta.1921.0006 ↗
23. Hughes TJR (2000) The finite element method: linear static and dynamic finite element analysis. Dover Publications, Mineola
24. Irwin GR (1956) Onset of fast crack propagation in high strength steel and aluminum alloys. Sagamore Res Conf Proc 2:289–305
25. Kachanov LM, Nijhoff M, Dordrecht (1986) Introduction to continuum damage mechanics10.1007/978-94-017-1957-5 ↗
26. Knauss WG (2015) A review of fracture in viscoelastic materials. Int J Fract 196:99–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-015-0058-610.1007/s10704-015-0058-6 ↗
27. Kuhn C, Schlüter A, Müller R (2015) On degradation functions in phase field fracture models. Comput Mater Sci 108:374–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2015.05.03410.1016/j.commatsci.2015.05.034 ↗
28. Lahellec N, Suquet P (2007) On the effective behavior of nonlinear inelastic composites: I. Incremental variational principles. J Mech Phys Solids 55:1932–1963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2007.02.00310.1016/j.jmps.2007.02.003 ↗
29. Lakes RS, Wineman A (2006) On Poisson’s ratio in linearly viscoelastic solids. J Elast 85:45–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-006-9070-410.1007/s10659-006-9070-4 ↗
30. Lemaitre J (1984) How to use damage mechanics. Nucl Eng Des 80(2):233–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-5493(84)90169-910.1016/0029-5493(84)90169-9 ↗
31. Lorentz E, Andrieux S (2003) Analysis of non-local models through energetic formulations. Int J Sol Struct 40:2905–293610.1016/S0020-7683(03)00110-0 ↗
32. Miehe C, Welschinger F, Hofacker M (2010a) Thermodynamically consistent phase-field models of fracture: variational principles and multi-field FE implementations. Int J For Numer Methods Eng 83(10):1273–131110.1002/nme.2861 ↗
33. Miehe C, Hofacker M, Welschinger F (2010b) A phase-field model for rate-independent crack propagation: robust algorithmic implementation based on operator splits. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 199(45–48):2765–2778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2010.04.01110.1016/j.cma.2010.04.011 ↗
34. Milan J (2007) Mathematical analysis of strain localization. Revue Européenne de Génie Civil. https://doi.org/10.3166/regc.11.977-99110.3166/regc.11.977-991 ↗
35. Moës N, Chevaugeon N (2021) Lipschitz regularization for softening material models: the Lip-field approach. Comptes Rendus. Mécanique 349:415–434. https://doi.org/10.5802/crmeca.9110.5802/crmeca.91 ↗
36. Moës N, Dolbow J, Belytschko T (1999) A finite element method for crack growth without remeshing. Int J Numer Method Eng 46:131–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19990910)46:1<131::AID-NME726>3.0.CO;2-J10.1002/(SICI)1097-0207(19990910)46:1<131::AID-NME726>3.0.CO;2-J ↗
37. Moës N, Stolz C, Bernard PE, Chevaugeon N (2011) A level set based model for damage growth: the thick level set approach. Int J For Numer Methods Eng 86:358–38010.1002/nme.3069 ↗
38. Nguyen QS, Andrieux S (2005) The non-local generalized standard approach: a consistent gradient theory. Comptes Rendus Mécanique 333:139–14510.1016/j.crme.2004.09.010 ↗
39. Ortiz M, Stainier L (1999) The variational formulation of viscoplastic constitutive updates. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 171:419–44410.1016/S0045-7825(98)00219-9 ↗
40. Peerlings R, Geers M, Borst RD, Brekelmans W (2001) A critical comparison of nonlocal and gradient enhanced softening continua. Int J Sol Struct 38(44–45):7723–774610.1016/S0020-7683(01)00087-7 ↗
41. Pham KH, Ravi-Chandar K, Landis CM (2017) Experimental validation of a phase-field model for fracture. Int J Fract 205:83–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-017-0185-310.1007/s10704-017-0185-3 ↗
42. Pirmohammad S, Ayatollahi MR (2020) Fracture behavior of asphalt materials. Springer, New York10.1007/978-3-030-39974-0 ↗
43. Radovitzky R, Ortiz M (1999) Error estimation and adaptive meshing in strongly nonlinear dynamic problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 172(1–4):203–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(98)00230-810.1016/S0045-7825(98)00230-8 ↗
44. Rahulkumar P, Jagota A, Bennison SJ, Saigal S (2000) Cohesive element modeling of viscoelastic fracture: application to peel testing of polymers. Int J Solids Struct 37(13):1873–189710.1016/S0020-7683(98)00339-4 ↗
45. Rice JR (1968) A path independent integral and the approximate analysis of strain conservations by notches and cracks. J Appl Mech 35:379–38510.1115/1.3601206 ↗
46. Schapery RA (1984) Correspondence principles and a generalized J integral for large deformation and fracture analysis of viscoelastic media. Int J Fract 25:195–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0114083710.1007/BF01140837 ↗
47. Schapery RA (1990) On some path independent integrals and their use in fracture of nonlinear viscoelastic media. Int J Fract 42:189–20710.1007/BF00018386 ↗
48. Schreyer HL, Chen Z (1986) One-dimensional softening with localization. J Appl Mech 53:891–97910.1115/1.3171860 ↗
49. Shen R, Waisman H, Guo L (2019) Fracture of viscoelastic solids modeled with a modified phase-field method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 346:862–890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.09.01810.1016/j.cma.2018.09.018 ↗
50. Shewchuk JR (1996) Applied computational geometry towards geometric engineering. Triangle 1148:203–222
51. Shiferaw B, Chupin O, Piau JM, Moës N (2021) Development of a damage viscoelastic model using the thick level set approach to fracture: 1D modeling and comparison to uniaxial tension stress tests on bituminous specimens. Eng Fract Mech 2:57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.10802610.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.108026 ↗
52. Song SH, Paulino GH, Buttlar WG (2006) A bilinear cohesive zone model tailored for fracture of asphalt concrete considering viscoelastic bulk material. Eng Fract Mech 73(18):2829–2848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.04.03010.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.04.030 ↗
53. Virtanen P et al (2020) SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat Methods 17:261–27210.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 ↗
54. Yin B, Storm J, Kaliske M (2021) Viscoelastic phase-field fracture using the framework of representative crack elements. Int J Fract. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-021-00522-110.1007/s10704-021-00522-1 ↗
55. Yoon C, Allen DH (1999) Damage dependent constitutive behavior and energy release rate for a cohesive zone in a thermoviscoelastic solid. Int J Fract 96(1):55–7410.1023/A:1018601004565 ↗
56. Zhang HH, Li LX (2009) Modeling inclusion problems in viscoelastic materials with the extended finite element method. Finite Elem Anal Des 45(10):721–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2009.06.00610.1016/j.finel.2009.06.006 ↗
57. Zhang HH, Rong G, Li LX (2010) Numerical study on deformations in a cracked viscoelastic body with the extended finite element method. Eng Anal Bound Elem 34(6):619–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2010.02.00110.1016/j.enganabound.2010.02.001 ↗