skip to main content

This content will become publicly available on June 1, 2023

Title: Critical Comparison of Phase-Field, Peridynamics, and Crack Band Model M7 in Light of Gap Test and Classical Fracture Tests
Abstract The recently conceived gap test and its simulation revealed that the fracture energy Gf (or Kc, Jcr) of concrete, plastic-hardening metals, composites, and probably most materials can change by ±100%, depending on the crack-parallel stresses σxx, σzz, and their history. Therefore, one must consider not only a finite length but also a finite width of the fracture process zone, along with its tensorial damage behavior. The data from this test, along with ten other classical tests important for fracture problems (nine on concrete, one on sandstone), are optimally fitted to evaluate the performance of the state-of-art phase-field, peridynamic, and crack band models. Thanks to its realistic boundary and crack-face conditions as well as its tensorial nature, the crack band model, combined with the microplane damage constitutive law in its latest version M7, is found to fit all data well. On the contrary, the phase-field models perform poorly. Peridynamic models (both bond based and state based) perform even worse. The recent correction in the bond-associated deformation gradient helps to improve the predictions in some experiments, but not all. This confirms the previous strictly theoretical critique (JAM 2016), which showed that peridynamics of all kinds suffers from several conceptual faults: (1) more » It implies a lattice microstructure; (2) its particle–skipping interactions are a fiction; (4) it ignores shear-resisted particle rotations (which are what lends the lattice discrete particle model (LDPM) its superior performance); (3) its representation of the boundaries, especially the crack and fracture process zone faces, is physically unrealistic; and (5) it cannot reproduce the transitional size effect—a quintessential characteristic of quasibrittleness. The misleading practice of “verifying” a model with only one or two simple tests matchable by many different models, or showcasing an ad hoc improvement for one type of test while ignoring misfits of others, is pointed out. In closing, the ubiquity of crack-parallel stresses in practical problems of concrete, shale, fiber composites, plastic-hardening metals, and materials on submicrometer scale is emphasized. « less
Authors:
; ;
Award ID(s):
2029641
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10346006
Journal Name:
Journal of Applied Mechanics
Volume:
89
Issue:
6
ISSN:
0021-8936
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. The line crack models, including linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM), cohesive crack model (CCM), and extended finite element method (XFEM), rest on the century-old hypothesis of constancy of materials’ fracture energy. However, the type of fracture test presented here, named the gap test, reveals that, in concrete and probably all quasibrittle materials, including coarse-grained ceramics, rocks, stiff foams, fiber composites, wood, and sea ice, the effective mode I fracture energy depends strongly on the crack-parallel normal stress, in-plane or out-of-plane. This stress can double the fracture energy or reduce it to zero. Why hasn’t this been detected earlier? Because the crack-parallel stress in all standard fracture specimens is negligible, and is, anyway, unaccountable by line crack models. To simulate this phenomenon by finite elements (FE), the fracture process zone must have a finite width, and must be characterized by a realistic tensorial softening damage model whose vectorial constitutive law captures oriented mesoscale frictional slip, microcrack opening, and splitting with microbuckling. This is best accomplished by the FE crack band model which, when coupled with microplane model M7, fits the test results satisfactorily. The lattice discrete particle model also works. However, the scalar stress–displacement softening law of CCM and tensorial modelsmore »with a single-parameter damage law are inadequate. The experiment is proposed as a standard. It represents a simple modification of the three-point-bend test in which both the bending and crack-parallel compression are statically determinate. Finally, a perspective of various far-reaching consequences and limitations of CCM, LEFM, and XFEM is discussed.

    « less
  2. Abstract In the standard fracture test specimens, the crack-parallel normal stress is negligible. However, its effect can be strong, as revealed by a new type of experiment, briefly named the gap test. It consists of a simple modification of the standard three-point-bend test whose main idea is to use plastic pads with a near-perfect yield plateau to generate a constant crack-parallel compression and install the end supports with a gap that closes only when the pads yield. This way, the test beam transits from one statically determinate loading configuration to another, making evaluation unambiguous. For concrete, the gap test showed that moderate crack-parallel compressive stress can increase up to 1.8 times the Mode I (opening) fracture energy of concrete, and reduce it to almost zero on approach to the compressive stress limit. To model it, the fracture process zone must be characterized tensorially. We use computer simulations with crack-band microplane model, considering both in-plane and out-of-plane crack-parallel stresses for plain and fiber-reinforced concretes, and anisotropic shale. The results have broad implications for all quasibrittle materials, including shale, fiber composites, coarse ceramics, sea ice, foams, and fone. Except for negligible crack-parallel stress, the line crack models are shown to be inapplicable.more »Nevertheless, as an approximation ignoring stress tensor history, the crack-parallel stress effect may be introduced parametrically, by a formula. Finally we show that the standard tensorial strength models such as Drucker–Prager cannot reproduce these effects realistically.« less
  3. Toughness of soft materials such as elastomers and gels depends on their ability to dissipate energy and to reduce stress concentration at the crack tip. The primary energy dissipation mechanism is viscoelasticity. Most analyses and models of fracture are based on linear viscoelastic theory (LVT) where strains are assumed to be small and the relaxation mechanisms are independent of stress or strain history. A well-known paradox is that the size of the dissipative zone predicted by LVT is unrealistically small. Here we use a physically based nonlinear viscoelastic model to illustrate why the linear theory breaks down. Using this nonlinear model and analogs of crack problems, we give a plausible resolution to this paradox. In our model, viscoelasticity arises from the breaking and healing of physical cross-links in the polymer network. When the deformation is small, the kinetics of bond breaking and healing are independent of the strain/stress history and the model reduces to the standard linear theory. For large deformations, localized bond breaking damages the material near the crack tip, reducing stress concentration and dissipating energy at the same time. The damage zone size is a new length scale which depends on the strain required to accelerate bond breakingmore »kinetics. These effects are illustrated by considering two cases with stress concentrations: the evolution of spherical damage in a viscoelastic body subjected to internal pressure, and a zero degree peel test.« less
  4. ABSTRACT: Tire failures, such as tread separation and sidewall zipper fracture, occur when internal flaws (cracks) nucleate and grow to a critical size as result of fatigue or cyclic loading. Sudden and catastrophic rupture takes place at this critical crack size because the strain energy release rate exceeds the tear energy of the rubber in the tire. The above-mentioned tire failures can lead to loss of vehicle stability and control, and it is important to develop predictive models and computational tools that address this problem. The objective of this article was to develop a cohesive zone model for rubber to numerically predict crack growth in a rubber component under dynamic tearing. The cohesive zone model for rubber was embedded into the material constitutive equation via a user-defined material subroutine (VUMAT) of ABAQUS. It consisted of three parts: (1) hyperviscoelastic behavior before damage, (2) damage initiation based on the critical strain energy density, and (3) hyperviscoelastic behavior after damage initiation. Crack growth in the tensile strip and pure shear specimens was simulated in ABAQUS Explicit, and good agreement was reported between finite element analysis predictions and test results
  5. While considerable progress has been made in simulating the overall seismic response of steel structures using nonlinear response history (dynamic) analysis, techniques to simulate fracture propagation under large scale inelastic cyclic loading are not as well developed. This is despite the fact that fracture is often a critical limit state that can precipitate structural failure and collapse. To address this, a new ductile damage-based cohesive zone model is presented. The proposed model is an extension of the established continuum-based local or micromechanical ductile fracture models for evaluating ultra-low cycle fatigue in structural steels. This model is implemented in the finite element program WARP3D, and evaluated against tests of notched bars that fail by ductile crack propagation. The preliminary results indicate that the model is an effective tool for predicting ductile fracture initiation and propagation in structural steels subjected to monotonic and cyclic large scale inelastic loading. Implications of this for characterizing the post-fracture response of structural steel components are discussed, along with limitations of the research.