4.7 Article

Phase field study on fracture behavior of crushable polymer foam

Journal

ENGINEERING FRACTURE MECHANICS
Volume 295, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2023.109738

Keywords

Phase -field model; Crushable foam; Modified Drucker-Prager criterion; Polymer foam

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper introduces a phase-field model for polymer foam materials by combining the phase-field method with the crushable foam model. The model is calibrated using experimental data and successfully simulates the fracture processes of polyurethane under different loading conditions. The study is important for the engineering applications of polymer foam materials.
Polymer foam is a widely used material across various industries for its lightweight and exceptional energy absorption capability. Nevertheless, its porous structure and compaction properties present challenges in simulating crack initiation and propagation. The phase field method has attracted much attention for its advantages in predicting cracks. In this paper, we combine the phase field method with the crushable foam model and introduce the modified Drucker-Prager failure criterion to establish the phase field model of polymer foam materials. Material parameters are calibrated using experimental data from uniaxial compression, uniaxial tensile and shear punching experiments. The typical tensile, shear and compression instability fracture processes of polyurethane are then simulated using the proposed model, and the numerical results agree well with the experimental results. This indicates that the coupled phase-field crushable foam model not only exhibits the compaction properties of polymer foam materials but also accurately predicts its crack propagation under complex loading. Studying the fracture behavior of polymer foams under complex loads can enhance their engineering applications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available