4.5 Article

Phase-field modeling of fracture in heterogeneous materials: jump conditions, convergence and crack propagation

期刊

ARCHIVE OF APPLIED MECHANICS
卷 91, 期 2, 页码 579-596

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00419-020-01759-3

关键词

Phase-field modeling; Diffuse modeling framework; Incremental variational formulation; Mechanical jump conditions

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [KA3309/3-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a variational diffuse modeling framework for cracks in heterogeneous media, combining crack kinematics, strain energy split, and relaxation methods to ensure mechanical jump conditions and meaningful crack propagation. The model's effectiveness and reliability are verified through convergence studies and crack branching observations, highlighting the importance of a reasonable homogenization scheme.
In this contribution, a variational diffuse modeling framework for cracks in heterogeneous media is presented. A static order parameter smoothly bridges the discontinuity at material interfaces, while an evolving phase-field captures the regularized crack. The key novelty is the combination of a strain energy split with a partial rank-I relaxation in the vicinity of the diffuse interface. The former is necessary to account for physically meaningful crack kinematics like crack closure, the latter ensures the mechanical jump conditions throughout the diffuse region. The model is verified by a convergence study, where a circular bi-material disc with and without a crack is subjected to radial loads. For the uncracked case, analytical solutions are taken as reference. In a second step, the model is applied to crack propagation, where a meaningful influence on crack branching is observed, that underlines the necessity of a reasonable homogenization scheme. The presented model is particularly relevant for the combination of any variational strain energy split in the fracture phase-field model with a diffuse modeling approach for material heterogeneities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据