Implementation and verification of the Park–Paulino–Roesler cohesive zone model in 3D

Cerrone, Albert; Wawrzynek, Paul A.; Nonn, Aida; Paulino, Gláucio H.; Ingraffea, Anthony R.

doi:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.03.010

Cited by 28 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the above analysis, the cohesive crack is modeled as springs in series. For 2D and 3D cases, the cohesive cracks are usually modeled as continuum interface elements [9,10] or discrete cohesive zone elements [8]. Dividing the extension of the crack element by the element length, a continuum treatment of the cohesive zone model is derived…”

Section: One Dimensional Cohesive Model and The Crack Band Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A disadvantage of this method is computational cost, especially for crack growth analysis, where hundreds of crack increments per computational run are required. Compared to this method, Cohesive zone methods (CZM) based on Barenblatt-Dugdale's pioneering concepts [5,6,7,8,9,10], and the VMCM [11] and XFEM methods, [12], are more efficient. There is always a trade-off between computational efficiency on the one hand and fidelity of solutions on the other.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling damage growth using the crack band model; effect of different strain measures

Waas

2016

Engineering Fracture Mechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: One Dimensional Cohesive Model and The Crack Band Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling damage growth using the crack band model; effect of different strain measures

Waas

2016

Engineering Fracture Mechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The constitutive relationship on the crack is assumed by the linear [91], Xu-Needleman [92], or Park-Paulino-Roesler (PPR) [93,94] cohesive models, with the material strength f N = f M = 3 MPa and the fracture energy G f;N = G f;M = 0.1 N/mm. In the case of PPR, the shape parameters Curves for the computed normal stress 11 versus imposed displacement ı in the (horizontal) loading direction are plotted in the right of Figures 4-7.…”

Section: Patch Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new generalized finite element method for two-scale simulations of propagating cohesive fractures in 3-D

Kim

Duarte

2015

Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a novel numerical framework based on the generalized finite element method with global-local enrichments (GFEM gl ) for two-scale simulations of propagating fractures in three dimensions. A non-linear cohesive law is adopted to capture objectively the dissipated energy during the process of material degradation without the need of adaptive remeshing at the macro scale or artificial regularization parameters. The cohesive crack is capable of propagating through the interior of finite elements in virtue of the partition of unity concept provided by the generalized/extended finite element method, and thus eliminating the need of interfacial surface elements to represent the geometry of discontinuities and the requirement of finite element meshes fitting the cohesive crack surface. The proposed method employs fine-scale solutions of non-linear local boundary-value problems extracted from the original global problem in order to not only construct scale-bridging enrichment functions but also to identify damaged states in the global problem, thus enabling accurate global solutions on coarse meshes. This is in contrast with the available GFEM gl in which the local solution field contributes only to the kinematic description of global solutions. The robustness, efficiency, and accuracy of this approach are demonstrated by results obtained from representative numerical examples. determination of an internal length scale for the correct scaling of the dissipated energy associated with the localization process is one of the main issues in the context of the finite element method (FEM) [11,12].Several strategies can be found in the literature to address those challenges in the FEM. One of the early representative approaches-the so-called cohesive zone model (CZM)-relies on the inclusion of interfacial surface elements (cohesive elements) between adjacent element boundaries [13][14][15][16]. The cohesive elements are then employed to capture the associated dissipated energy through a traction-separation law over a surface rather than stress-strain relationships in the bulk. This approach, however, inherently exhibits solutions that are dependent on the finite element mesh because of restricted paths of the discontinuity, thus potentially requiring adaptive refinement techniques at the macro scale [17][18][19][20].The difficulties with the direct incorporation of a strong discontinuity into the element interior have been tackled more recently by the generalized finite element method/extended finite element method (GFEM/XFEM), which is the method adopted in this study; see e.g., [21][22][23] for detailed reviews. This method relies on the construction of the so-called patch approximation spaces in a node-by-node manner and hierarchically enriches the standard FEM approximation space using the partition of unity (POU) framework [24][25][26][27]. A priori knowledge about solutions is typically employed to select enrichments. These nodal enrichments then allow the discontinuity to propagate independently of the ...

show abstract

“…Combination of the stress and energy criteria has widely received attention and application, for example, finite fracture mechanics, [11,12,16,17] and the cohesive zone model (CZM), [9,10,[18][19][20]22,23]. A characteristic length is introduced in finite fracture mechanics, for example, the point stress criterion and the average stress criterion, [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This criterion was used to predict the strengthes of different sizes of notched three point bend specimens [12] and plates with different sizes of open holes [25], providing good agreement with experimental results. The CZM is another widely used method to predict failure of structures [20][21][22][23]. In fact, the coupled stress and energy criterion given in Eq.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental and numerical study on cross-ply woven textile composite with notches and cracks

Thorsson

Waas

2015

Composite Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementation and verification of the Park–Paulino–Roesler cohesive zone model in 3D

Cited by 28 publications

References 31 publications

Modeling damage growth using the crack band model; effect of different strain measures

Modeling damage growth using the crack band model; effect of different strain measures

A new generalized finite element method for two-scale simulations of propagating cohesive fractures in 3-D

Experimental and numerical study on cross-ply woven textile composite with notches and cracks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About