Improved cohesive zone model: integrating strain rate, plastic strain, variable damping, and enhanced constitutive law for fracture propagation
Source abstract
Abstract
Cohesive zone model has been used widely in fracture propagations, but few of them have considered strain rate, plastic strain, and variable damping together. In this paper, artificial compliance and spurious oscillation in bilinear cohesive law are investigated through dynamic simulations. Several constitutive laws and damage criteria used in bilinear cohesive law are presented first, and the properties in these constitutive laws are analyzed about deficiency of plastic strain, inherent discontinuity of constitutive law, and inherent discontinuity of force. Two damage evolution methods (effective separation method and damage factor method) are compared, and the latter one that strictly follows damage criterion and has no healing effect is a better choice for damage evolution. Numerical investigations are conducted to help select proper stiffness and to make sure artificial compliance in an acceptable range. Apart from strain rate and plastic strain, variable damping is considered into bilinear cohesive law, which can remove discontinuous force caused by constant damping at the start and end of bilinear cohesive law. One fixed delamination propagation and two free fracture propagation examples are used to verify the methodology proposed in this paper. From the simulation results, the methodology used in this paper removes spurious oscillation caused by constitutive law itself and enables correct force response, and variable damping reduces spurious oscillation.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Numerical methods in engineering · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Abrate S, Ferrero JF, Navarro P (2015) Cohesive zone models and impact damage predictions for composite structures. Meccanica 50(10):2587–262010.1007/s11012-015-0221-1 ↗
2. Alfano G, Crisfield M (2001) Finite element interface models for the delamination analysis of laminated composites: mechanical and computational issues. Int J Numer Meth Eng 50(7):1701–173610.1002/nme.93 ↗
3. Barenblatt GI (1959) The formation of equilibrium cracks during brittle fracture. General ideas and hypotheses. Axially-symmetric cracks. J Appl Math Mech 23(3):622–63610.1016/0021-8928(59)90157-1 ↗
4. Blal N, Daridon L, Monerie Y, Pagano S (2013) Micromechanical-based criteria for the calibration of cohesive zone parameters. J Comput Appl Math 246:206–21410.1016/j.cam.2012.10.031 ↗
5. Bobaru F, Zhang G (2015) Why do cracks branch? A peridynamic investigation of dynamic brittle fracture. Int J Fract 196:59–9810.1007/s10704-015-0056-8 ↗
6. Bui QV (2011) A modified Benzeggagh-Kenane fracture criterion for mixed-mode delamination. J Compos Mater 45(4):389–41310.1177/0021998310376105 ↗
7. Camanho, Pedro P., and Carlos G. Dávila. "Mixed-mode decohesion finite elements for the simulation of delamination in composite materials." (2002).
8. Cesari F, Dal Re V, Minak G, Zucchelli A (2007) Damage and residual strength of laminated carbon-epoxy composite circular plates load-ed at the centre. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 38(4):1163–117310.1016/j.compositesa.2006.04.013 ↗
9. Chakraborty S, Shaw A (2013) A pseudo-spring based fracture model for SPH simulation of impact dynamics. Int J Impact Eng 58:84–9510.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.03.006 ↗
10. Davenport, J. C., & Smith, D. J. (1995). The influence of plasticity and geometry on the mixed mode fracture of PMMA. In Constraint Effects in Fracture Theory and Applicatons: Second Volume. ASTM International.
11. Davila, Carlos, Pedro Camanho, and Marcelo de Moura. "Mixed-mode decohesion elements for analyses of progressive delamination." In 19th AIAA applied aerodynamics conference, p. 1486. 2001.10.2514/6.2001-1486 ↗
12. De Morais AB, Pereira AB, De Moura MFSF, Silva FGA, Dourado N (2015) Bilinear approximations to the mixed-mode I–II delamination cohesive law using an inverse method. Compos Struct 122:361–36610.1016/j.compstruct.2014.11.058 ↗
13. De Moura MFSF, Gonçalves JPM, Silva FGA (2016) A new energy based mixed-mode cohesive zone model. Int J Solids Struct 102:112–11910.1016/j.ijsolstr.2016.10.012 ↗
14. Dugdale DS (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech Phys Solids 8(2):100–10410.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-2 ↗
15. Fan J, Tadmor EB (2019) Rescaling cohesive element properties for mesh independent fracture simulations. Eng Fract Mech 213:89–9910.1016/j.engfracmech.2019.03.035 ↗
16. Freed Y, Banks-Sills L (2008) A new cohesive zone model for mixed mode interface fracture in bimaterials. Eng Fract Mech 75(15):4583–459310.1016/j.engfracmech.2008.04.013 ↗
17. Giambanco G, Fileccia Scimemi G (2006) Mixed mode failure analysis of bonded joints with rate-dependent interface models. Int J Numer Meth Eng 67(8):1160–119210.1002/nme.1671 ↗
18. Kalthoff JF (2000) Modes of dynamic shear failure in solids. Int J Fract 101(1):1–3110.1023/A:1007647800529 ↗
19. Kazerani T, Zhao G, Zhao J (2010) Dynamic fracturing simulation of brittle material using the distinct lattice spring method with a full rate-dependent cohesive law. Rock Mech Rock Eng 43(6):717–72610.1007/s00603-010-0099-0 ↗
20. Kregting R (2005) Cohesive zone models: towards a robust implementation of irreversible behavior. Philips Appl Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-018-0434-410.1007/s11668-018-0434-4 ↗
21. Liu PF, Islam MM (2013) A nonlinear cohesive model for mixed-mode delamination of composite laminates. Compos Struct 106:47–5610.1016/j.compstruct.2013.05.049 ↗
22. LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual. “Vol. II Material Models.” Livermore Software Technology Corporation (LSTC), CA, USA (2019a)
23. LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual. “Vol. I.” Livermore Software Technology Corporation (LSTC), CA, USA (2019b)
24. Marzi S, Hesebeck O, Brede M, Kleiner F (2009b) A rate-dependent cohesive zone model for adhesively bonded joints loaded in mode I. J Adhes Sci Technol 23(6):881–89810.1163/156856109X411238 ↗
25. Marzi, S., Hesebeck, O., Brede, M., & Kleiner, F. (2009a, May). A rate-dependent, elasto-plastic cohesive zone mixed-mode model for crash analysis of adhesively bonded joints. In 7th European LS-DYNA conference.
26. May M, Hesebeck O, Marzi S, Böhme W, Lienhard J, Kilchert S, Brede M, Hiermaier S (2015) Rate dependent behavior of crash-optimized adhesives–experimental characterization, model development, and simulation. Eng Fract Mech 133:112–13710.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.11.006 ↗
27. Mehrmashhadi, J., Wang, L., & Bobaru, F. (2019). Uncovering the dynamic fracture behavior of PMMA.10.31224/osf.io/46p9q ↗
28. Mehrmashhadi J, Bahadori M, Bobaru F (2020) On validating peridynamic models and a phase-field model for dynamic brittle fracture in glass. Eng Fract Mech 240:10735510.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.107355 ↗
29. Meng L, Tabiei A (2021) An irreversible bilinear cohesive law considering the effects of strain rate and plastic strain and enabling reciprocating load. Eng Fract Mech 252:10785510.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.107855 ↗
30. Menouillard T, Rethore J, Combescure A, Bung H (2006) Efficient explicit time stepping for the eXtended Finite Element Method (X-FEM). Int J Numer Meth Eng 68(9):911–93910.1002/nme.1718 ↗
31. Naik NK, Sekher YC, Meduri S (2000a) Polymer matrix woven fabric composites subjected to low velocity impact: part I-damage initiation studies. J Reinf Plast Compos 19(12):912–95410.1106/X80M-4UEF-CPPK-M15E ↗
32. Naik NK, Sekher YC, Meduri S (2000b) Damage in woven-fabric composites subjected to low-velocity impact. Compos Sci Technol 60(5):731–74410.1016/S0266-3538(99)00183-9 ↗
33. Naik NK, Meduri S, Chandrasekher Y (2001) Polymer matrix woven fabric composites subjected to low velocity impact: part III—effect of incident impact velocity and impactor mass. J Reinf Plast Compos 20(9):720–743
34. Park K, Paulino GH (2011) Cohesive zone models: a critical review of traction-separation relationships across fracture surfaces. Appl Mech Rev. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.402311010.1115/1.4023110 ↗
35. Peng X, Yong H, Zhou Y (2020) Finite element modeling of single-lap joint between GdBa2Cu3O7-x-coated conductors using cohesive elements. Phys C: Supercond Appl 570:135360010.1016/j.physc.2020.1353600 ↗
36. Ruiz G, Pandolfi A, Ortiz M (2001) Three-dimensional cohesive modeling of dynamic mixed-mode fracture. Int J Numer Meth Eng 52(1–2):97–12010.1002/nme.273 ↗
37. Shioya T, Zhou F (1996) Dynamic fracture toughness and crack propagation in brittle material. In: Kawata K, Shioiri J (eds) Constitutive relation in high/very high strain rates. Springer, Tokyo, pp 105–11210.1007/978-4-431-65947-1_12 ↗
38. 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):2829–284810.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.04.030 ↗
39. Sukumar N, Moës N, Moran B, Belytschko T (2000) Extended finite element method for three-dimensional crack modelling. Int J Numer Meth Eng 48(11):1549–157010.1002/1097-0207(20000820)48:11<1549::AID-NME955>3.0.CO;2-A ↗
40. Tabiei A, Zhang W (2017) Cohesive element approach for dynamic crack propagation: artificial compliance and mesh dependency. Engineer-Ing Fracture Mechanics 180:23–4210.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.05.009 ↗
41. Tabiei A, Meng L (2023) A length scale insensitive phase field model based on geometric function for brittle materials. Theoret Appl Fract Mech 125:10390210.1016/j.tafmec.2023.103902 ↗
42. Wang J, Qin QH, Kang YL, Li XQ, Rong QQ (2010) Viscoelastic adhesive interfacial model and experimental characterization for interfacial parameters. Mech Mater 42(5):537–54710.1016/j.mechmat.2010.03.002 ↗
43. Xu C, Siegmund T, Ramani K (2003) Rate-dependent crack growth in adhesives: I. modeling approach. Int J Adhesion Adhesives 23(1):9–1310.1016/S0143-7496(02)00062-3 ↗
44. Xu C, Siegmund T, Ramani K (2003) Rate-dependent crack growth in adhesives II. experiments and analysis. Int J Adhesion Adhesives 23(1):15–2210.1016/S0143-7496(02)00063-5 ↗
45. Zhang W, Tabiei A (2018) Improvement of an exponential cohesive zone model for fatigue analysis. J Fail Anal Prev 18(3):607–61810.1007/s11668-018-0434-4 ↗
46. Zhou F, Molinari JF, Shioya T (2005) A rate-dependent cohesive model for simulating dynamic crack propagation in brittle materials. Eng Fract Mech 72(9):1383–141010.1016/j.engfracmech.2004.10.011 ↗