Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative study of the r-adaptive material force approach and the phase-field method in dynamic fracture

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Fracture Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This contribution presents a comparison between a discrete and a smeared approach to approximate a crack in finite element simulations including the contribution of inertia to the behavior of brittle material under transient loading in the case of fracture. The discrete approximation of a crack is based in this case on a node duplication technique triggered by the evaluation of the so-called “material force” at the crack tip. The smeared approximation of a crack bases on the diffuse description of the crack by a phase-field approach. The governing equations under consideration of transient contributions are shown and the procedure for the finite element implementation is outlined. Numerical simulations investigate the capabilities and limitations of both methods. Firstly, the procedure to introduce initial cracks in a structure and the setup necessary to make them interact with stress waves properly, are under investigation. Moreover, this study deals with the evaluation of the velocity of the crack propagation and its comparison to experimental data. Finally, the phenomenon of crack branching is studied. The presentation and discussion of the results of the simulations provide an overview on the potential of both approaches with respect to an efficient and a realistic simulation of fracture processes in dynamic problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26
Fig. 27
Fig. 28
Fig. 29
Fig. 30
Fig. 31

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ambati M, Gerasimov T, Lorenzis LD (2015) A review on phase-field models of brittle fracture and a new fast hybrid formulation. Comput Mech 55:383–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amor H, Marigo JJ, Maurini C (2009) Regularized formulation of the variational brittle fracture with unilateral contact: numerical experiments. J Mech Phys Solids 57:1209–1229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arakawa K, Takahashi K (1991) Relationship between fracture parameters and surface roughness of brittle polymers. Int J Fract 48:103–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkvist H (1974) Some experiments on crack motion and arrest in polymethylmethacrylate. Eng Fract Mech 6:621–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borden M (2012) Isogeometric analysis of phase-field model for dynamic brittle and ductile fracture. PhD thesis, The University of Texas at Austin

  • Borden MJ, Verhoosel CV, Scott MA, Hughes TJR, Landis CM (2012) A phase-field description of dynamic brittle fracture. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 217–220:77–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdin B (2007) The variational formulation of brittle fracture: numerical implementation and extensions. IUTAM Symp Discret Methods Evol Discontin 5:381–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdin B (2008) The variational approach to fracture. J Elast 91:5–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braides A (2002) Gamma-convergence for beginners. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braun M (1997) Configurational forces induced by finite-element discretization. Proc Estonian Acad Sci Phys Math 35:379–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Brouzoulis J, Larsson F, Runesson K (2010) Strategies for planar crack propagation based on the concept of material forces. Comput Mech 3:295–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Dally J (1979) Dynamic photoelastic studies of fracture. Exp Mech 19:349–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fineberg J, Gross SP, Marder M, Swinney H (1992) Instability in the propagation of fast cracks. Am Phys Soc 45:5146–5154

    Google Scholar 

  • Francfort GA, Marigo JJ (1998) Revisiting brittle fracture as an energy minimization problem. J Mech Phys Solids 46:1319–1342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith AA (1921) The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Philos Trans R Soc London Ser A 221:163–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gürses E, Miehe C (2009) A computational framework of three-dimensional configurational-force-driven brittle crack propagation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198:1413–1428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurtin ME (2000) Configurational forces as basic concepts of continuum physics. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilber H, Hughes T, Taylor R (1977) Improved numerical dissipation for the time intergration algorithms in structural dynamics. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 5:283–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofacker M (2013) A thermodynamically consistent phase field approach to fracture. PhD. thesis, Universität Stuttgart

  • Hofacker M, Miehe C (2013) A phase field model of dynamic fracture: robust field updates for the analysis of complex crack patterns. Int J Numer Methods Eng 93:276–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofacker M, Welschinger F, Miehe C (2009) A variational-based formulation of regularized brittle fracture. Proc Appl Math Mech 9:207–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karma A, Kessler DA, Levine H (2001) Phase-field model of mode III dynamic fracture. Phys Rev Lett 87(4):045501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kienzler R, Herrmann G (2000) Mechanics in material space: with applications to defect and fracture mechanics. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi AS, Mall S (1978) Dynamic fracture toughness of homalite-100. Exp Mech 18:11–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobayashi AS, Wade BG, Bradley WB, Chiu ST (1972) Crack branching in homalite-100 sheets. Off Nav Res 13:1–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn C, Müller R (2010) A continuum phase field model for fracture. Eng Fract Mech 77:3625–3634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn C, Müller R (2011) A new finite element technique for a phase field model of brittle fracture. J Theor Appl Mech 49:1115–1133

    Google Scholar 

  • Maugin GA (2010) Configurational forces: thermomechanics, physics, mathematics, and numerics. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maugin GA, Trimarco C (1992) Pseudomomentum and material forces in nonlinear elasticity: variational formulations and application to brittle fracture. Acta Mech 94:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menzel A, Denzer R, Steinmann P (2004) On the comparison of two approaches to compute material forces for inelastic materials. Application to single-slip crystal-plasticity. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng 193:5411–5428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers MA (1994) Dynamic behavior of materials. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miehe C, Gürses E (2007) A robust algorithm for configurational-force-driven brittle crack propagation with r-adaptive mesh alignment. Int J Numer Methods Eng 72:127–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miehe C, Hofacker M, Welschinger F (2010) A phase field model for rate-independent crack propagation: robust algorithmic implementation based on operator splits. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 199:2765–2778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miehe C, Welschinger F, Hofacker M (2010) Thermodynamically consistent phase-field models of fracture: variational principles and multi-field fe implementations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 83:1273–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller R, Maugin GA (2002) On material forces and finite element discretizations. Comput Mech 29:52–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Näser B, Kaliske M, Dal H, Netzker C (2009) Fracture mechanical behaviour of visco-elastic materials: application to the so-called dwell-effect. Z Angew Math Mech 89:677–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz M, Pandolfi A (1999) Finite-deformation irreversible cohesive elements for three-dimensional crack-propagation analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 44:1267–1282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özenç K, Kaliske M (2014) An implicit adaptive node-splitting algorithm to assess the failure mechanism of inelastic elastomeric continua. Int J Numer Meth Eng 100:669–688

  • Özenç K, Kaliske M, Lin G, Bashyam G (2014) Evaluation of energy contributions in elasto-plastic fracture: a review of the configurational force approach. Eng Fract Mech 115:137–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özenç K, Chinaryan G, Kaliske M (2016) A configurational force approach to model the branching phenomenon in dynamic brittle fracture. Eng Fract Mech 157:26–42

  • Pandolfi A, Ortiz M (2002) An efficient adaptive procedure for three-dimensional fragmentation simulations. Eng Comput 18:148–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramulu M, Kobayashi AS (1985) Mechanics of crack curving and branching—a dynamic fracture analysis. Int J Fract 27:187–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravi-Chandar K, Knauss W (1984) An experimental investigation into dynamic fracture: III. On steady-state crack propagation and branching. Int J Fract 26:141–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice JR (1968) Mathematical analysis in the mechanics of fracture, vol 2. Academic Press, New York

  • Schlüter A, Willenbücher A, Kuhn C, Müller R (2014) Phase field approximation of dynamic brittle fracture. Comput Mech 54:1141–1161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schütte H (2009) Curved crack-propagation based on configurational forces. Comput Mater Sci 46:642–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharon E, Gross SP, Fineberg J (1996) Energy dissipation in dynamic fracture. Phys Rev Lett 76:2117–2120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simha N, Fischer F, Shan G, Chene C, Kolednikf O (2008) J-integral and crack driving force in elastic-plastic materials. J Mech Phys Solids 56:2876–2895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann P (2000) Application of material forces to hyperelastostatic fracture mechanics. I. Continuum mechanical setting. Int J Solids Struct 37:7371–7391

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of “Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft” under grant KA 1163/19-1 and as well the technical support of the center for information services and high performance computing of the TU Dresden for providing access to the Bull HPC-Cluster. Moreover, we would like to thank ANSYS, Inc. for supporting Kaan Özenç.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Structural Analysis, Technische Universität, Dresden, Germany

    Christian Steinke, Kaan Özenç, Gor Chinaryan & Michael Kaliske

Authors
  1. Christian Steinke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaan Özenç
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gor Chinaryan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Kaliske
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Kaliske.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Steinke, C., Özenç, K., Chinaryan, G. et al. A comparative study of the r-adaptive material force approach and the phase-field method in dynamic fracture. Int J Fract 201, 97–118 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-016-0125-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-016-0125-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation