Advertisement

International Journal of Fracture

, Volume 216, Issue 1, pp 1–29 | Cite as

Fractional calculus derivation of a rate-dependent PPR-based cohesive fracture model: theory, implementation, and numerical results

  • Oliver Giraldo-Londoño
  • Glaucio H. PaulinoEmail author
  • William G. Buttlar
Original Paper
  • 115 Downloads

Abstract

Rate-dependent fracture has been extensively studied using cohesive zone models (CZMs). Some of them use classical viscoelastic material models based on springs and dashpots. However, such viscoelastic models, characterized by relaxation functions with exponential decay, are inadequate to simulate fracture for a wide range of loading rates. To improve the accuracy of existing models, this work presents a mixed-mode rate-dependent CZM that combines the features of the Park–Paulino–Roesler (PPR) cohesive model and a fractional viscoelastic model. This type of viscoelastic model uses differential operators of non-integer order, leading to power-law-type relaxation functions with algebraic decay. We derive the model in the context of damage mechanics, such that undamaged viscoelastic tractions obtained from a fractional viscoelastic model are scaled using two damage parameters. We obtain these parameters from the PPR cohesive model and enforce them to increase monotonically during the entire loading history, which avoids artificial self-healing. We present three examples, two used for validation purposes and one to elucidate the physical meaning of the fractional differential operators. We show that the model is able to predict rate-dependent fracture process of rubber-like materials for a wide range of loading rates and that it can capture rate-dependent mixed-mode fracture processes accurately. Results from the last example indicate that the order of the fractional differential operators acts as a memory-like parameter that allows for the fracture modeling of long- and short-term memory processes. The ability of fractional viscoelastic models to model this type of process suggests that relaxation functions with algebraic decay lead to accurate fracture modeling of materials for a wide range of loading rates.

Keywords

PPR cohesive zone model Fractional viscoelasticity Fractional calculus Fractional differential equations Rate-dependent fracture Damage mechanics Fracture mechanics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge support by the Raymond Allen Jones Chair at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The interpretation of the results of this work is solely that by the authors, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors or sponsoring agencies.

References

  1. ABAQUS (2011) Version 6.11 Documentation. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp. ProvidenceGoogle Scholar
  2. Adolfsson K, Enelund M, Olsson P (2005) On the fractional order model of viscoelasticity. Mech Time Depend Mater 9(1):15–34Google Scholar
  3. Alfano G (2006) On the influence of the shape of the interface law on the application of cohesive-zone models. Compos Sci Technol 66(6):723–730Google Scholar
  4. Alfano G, Musto M (2017) Thermodynamic derivation and damage evolution for a fractional cohesive zone model. J Eng Mech 143(7):D4017001Google Scholar
  5. Allen DH, Searcy CR (2001) A micromechanical model for a viscoelastic cohesive zone. Int J Fract 107:159–176Google Scholar
  6. Bažant ZP, Li YN (1997) Cohesive crack with rate-dependent opening and viscoelasticity: I. Mathematical model and scaling. Int J Fract 86:247–265Google Scholar
  7. Corigliano A, Mariani S, Pandolfi A (2003) Numerical modeling of rate-dependent debonding processes in composites. Compos Struct 61:39–50Google Scholar
  8. Craiem D, Rojo F, Atienza J, Armentano R, Guinea G (2008) Fractional-order viscoelasticity applied to describe uniaxial stress relaxation of human arteries. Phys Med Biol 53(17):4543–4554Google Scholar
  9. Dai Z, Peng Y, Mansy H, Sandler R, Royston T (2015) A model of lung parenchyma stress relaxation using fractional viscoelasticity. Med Eng Phys 37(8):752–758Google Scholar
  10. Davis GB, Kohandel M, Sivaloganathan S, Tenti G (2006) The constitutive properties of the brain paraenchyma: part 2. Fractional derivative approach. Med Eng Phys 28(5):455–459Google Scholar
  11. de Gennes PG (1996) Soft adhesives. Langmuir 12(19):4497–4500Google Scholar
  12. Diethelm K, Ford NJ, Freed AD (2002) A predictor–corrector approach for the numerical solution of fractional differential equations. Nonlinear Dyn 29(1):3–22Google Scholar
  13. Diethelm K, Ford NJ, Freed AD, Luchko Y (2005) Algorithms for the fractional calculus: a selection of numerical methods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194(6):743–773Google Scholar
  14. Freed Y, Banks-Sills L (2008) A new cohesive zone model for mixed mode interface fracture in bimaterials. Eng Fract Mech 75:4583–4593Google Scholar
  15. Giraldo-Londoño O, Spring DW, Paulino GH, Buttlar WG (2018) An efficient mixed-mode rate-dependent cohesive fracture model using sigmoidal functions. Eng Fract Mech 192:307–327Google Scholar
  16. Gourdon E, Sauzéat C, Di Benedetto H, Bilodeau K (2015) Seven-parameter linear viscoelastic model applied to acoustical damping materials. J Vib Acoust 137(6):061003–061003–9Google Scholar
  17. Grünwald AK (1867) Über “begrenzte” derivationen und deren anwendung. Zeitschrift für angewandte Mathematik und Physik 12:441–480Google Scholar
  18. Johnson FA, Radon JC (1972) Molecular kinetics and the fracture of PMMA. Eng Fract Mech 4:555–576Google Scholar
  19. Kang J, Bolander JE (2016) Multiscale modeling of strain-hardening cementitious composites. Mech Res Commun 78:47–54Google Scholar
  20. Kapnistos M, Lang M, Vlassopoulos D, Pyckhout-Hintzen W, Richter D, Cho D, Chang T, Rubinstein M (2008) Unexpected power-law stress relaxation of entangled ring polymers. Nat Mater 7(12):997–1002Google Scholar
  21. Kim H, Wagoner MP, Buttlar WG (2009) Rate-dependent fracture modeling of asphalt concrete using the discrete element method. Can J Civ Eng 36(2):320–330Google Scholar
  22. Knauss WG (1970) Delayed failure—the Griffith problem for linearly viscoelastic materials. Int J Fract Mech 6(1):7–20Google Scholar
  23. Knauss WG, Emri I, Lu H (2008) Springer handbook of experimental solid mechanics, Chapter 3. Springer, Berlin, pp 49–96Google Scholar
  24. Kontou E, Katsourinis S (2016) Application of a fractional model for simulation of the viscoelastic functions of polymers. J Appl Polym Sci 133(23):43505Google Scholar
  25. Krishnasamy VS, Mashayekhi S, Razzaghi M (2017) Numerical solutions of fractional differential equations by using fractional Taylor basis. IEEE/CAA J Autom Sin 4(1):98–106Google Scholar
  26. Liechti KM, Wu J-D (2001) Mixed-mode, time-dependent rubber/metal debonding. J Mech Phys Solids 49(5):1039–1072Google Scholar
  27. Mainardi F (2010) Fractional calculus and waves in linear viscoelasticity. Imperial College Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Makhecha DP, Kapania RK, Johnson ER, Dillard DA, Jacob GC, Starbuck M (2009) Rate-dependent cohesive zone modeling of unstable crack growth in an epoxy adhesive. Mech Adv Mater Struct 16(1):12–19Google Scholar
  29. Marzi S, Hesebeck O, Brede M, Kleiner F (2009a) A rate-dependent cohesive zone model for adhesively bonded joints loaded in mode I. J Adhes Sci Technol 23:881–898Google Scholar
  30. Marzi S, Hesebeck O, Brede M, Kleiner F (2009b) A rate-dependent, elasto-plastic cohesive zone mixed-mode model for crash analysis of adhesively bonded joints. In: 7th European LS-DYNA conference, Salzburg, vol 7Google Scholar
  31. Maugis D (1985) Review: subcritical crack growth, surface energy, fracture toughness, stick-slip and embrittlement. J Mater Sci 20(9):3041–3073Google Scholar
  32. Maugis D, Barquins M (1978) Fracture mechanics and the adherence of viscoelastic bodies. J Phys D Appl Phys 11:1989–2023Google Scholar
  33. May M, Hesebeck O, Marzi S, Böhme W, Lienhard J, Kilchert S, Brede M, Hiermaier S (2015) Rate dependent behavior of crash-optimized adhesives—experimental characterization, model development, and simulation. Eng Fract Mech 133:112–137Google Scholar
  34. Miller KS, Ross B (1993) An introduction to the fractional calculus and fractional differential equations, 1st edn. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  35. Milner ST, Newhall JD (2010) Stress relaxation in entangled melts of unlinked ring polymers. Phys Rev Lett 105(20):208–302Google Scholar
  36. Mueller HK, Knauss WG (1971) Crack propagation in a linearly viscoelastic strip. J Appl Mech 38(2):483–488Google Scholar
  37. Murio DA (2006) On the stable numerical evaluation of Caputo fractional derivatives. Comput Math Appl 51:1539–1550Google Scholar
  38. Musto M, Alfano G (2013) A novel rate-dependent cohesive-zone model combining damage and visco-elasticity. Comput Struct 118:126–133Google Scholar
  39. Musto M, Alfano G (2015) A fractional rate-dependent cohesive-zone model. Int J Numer Methods Eng 103(5):313–341Google Scholar
  40. Needleman A (1987) A continuum model for void nucleation by inclusion debonding. J Appl Mech 54(3):525–531Google Scholar
  41. Needleman A (1990a) An analysis of decohesion along an imperfect interface. Int J Fract 42(1):21–40Google Scholar
  42. Needleman A (1990b) An analysis of tensile decohesion along an interface. J Mech Phys Solids 38(3):289–324Google Scholar
  43. Ngo D, Park K, Paulino GH, Huang Y (2010) On the constitutive relation of materials with microstructure using a potential-based cohesive model for interface interaction. Eng Fract Mech 77:1153–1174Google Scholar
  44. Ogden RW (1972) Large deformation isotropic elasticity—on the correlation of theory and experiment for incompressible rubberlike solids. Proc R Soc A 326(1567):565–584Google Scholar
  45. Olard F, Di Benedetto H (2003) General “2S2P1D” model and relation between the linear viscoelastic behaviours of bituminous binders and mixes. Road Mater Pavement Des 4(2):185–224Google Scholar
  46. Oldham KB, Spanier J (1974) The fractional calculus: theory and aapplication of differentiation and integration to arbitrary order, vol 111. Mathematics in science and engineering. Academic Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. Padovan J (1987) Computational algorithms for FE formulations involving fractional operators. Comput Mech 2(4):271–287Google Scholar
  48. Park K, Paulino GH (2011) Cohesive zone models: a critical review of traction–separation relationships across fracture surfaces. Appl Mech Rev 64(6):061002Google Scholar
  49. Park K, Paulino GH (2012) Computational implementation of the PPR potential-based cohesive model in Abaqus: educational perspective. Eng Fract Mech 93:239–262Google Scholar
  50. Park K, Paulino GH, Roesler JR (2009) A unified potential-based cohesive model for mixed-mode fracture. J Mech Phys Solids 57:891–908Google Scholar
  51. Podlubny I (1998) Fractional differential equations: an introduction to fractional derivatives, fractional differential equations, to methods of their solution and some of their applications. Academic press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  52. Rahul-Kumar P, Jagota A, Bennison SJ, Saigal S, Muralidhar S (1999) Polymer interfacial fracture simulations using cohesive elements. Acta Materialia 47(15–16):4161–4169Google Scholar
  53. Reeder JR, Crews JR (1990) Mixed-mode bending method for delamination testing. AIAA J 28:1270–1276Google Scholar
  54. Rubinstein M, Obukhov SP (1993) Power-law-like stress relaxation of block copolymers: disentanglement regimes. Macromolecules 26(7):1740–1750Google Scholar
  55. Schiessel H, Blumen A (1993) Hierarchical analogues to fractional relaxation equations. J Phys A Math Gen 26(19):5057–5069Google Scholar
  56. Schiessel H, Blumen A (1995) Mesoscopic pictures of the sol–gel transition: ladder models and fractal networks. Macromolecules 28(11):4013–4019Google Scholar
  57. Schiessel H, Blumen A, Alemany P (1994) Dynamics in disordered systems. Progr Colloid Polym Sci 96:16–21Google Scholar
  58. Schiessel H, Metzler R, Blumen A, Nonnenmacher TF (1995) Generalized viscoelastic models: their fractional equations with solutions. J Phys A Math Gen 28(23):6567–6584Google Scholar
  59. Schmidt A, Gaul L (2002) Finite element formulation of viscoelastic constitutive equations using fractional time derivatives. Nonlinear Dyn 29(1):37–55Google Scholar
  60. Scott-Blair GW (1947) The role of psychophysics in rheology. J Colloid Sci 2(1):21–32Google Scholar
  61. Shen B, Paulino GH (2011a) Direct extraction of cohesive fracture properties from digital image correlation: a hybrid inverse technique. Exp Mech 51:143–163Google Scholar
  62. Shen B, Paulino GH (2011b) Identification of cohesive zone model and elastic parameters of fiber-reinforced cementitious composites using digital image correlation and a hybrid inverse technique. Cem Concr Compos 33:572–585Google Scholar
  63. Spring DW, Giraldo-Londoño O, Paulino GH (2016) A study on the thermodynamic consistency of the Park–Paulino–Roesler (PPR) cohesive fracture model. Mech Res Commun 78:100–109Google Scholar
  64. Tosun-Felekoğlu K, Felekoğlu B, Ranade R, Lee BY, Li V (2014) The role of flaw size and fiber distribution on tensile ductility of PVA-ECC. Compos Part B Eng 56:536–545Google Scholar
  65. Uchaikin VV (2013) Fractional derivatives for physicists and engineers, vol 1. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  66. Valoroso N, Debruyne G, Laverne J (2014) A cohesive zone model with rate-sensitivity for fast crack propagation. Mech Res Commun 58:82–87Google Scholar
  67. Volokh KY (2004) Comparison between cohesive zone models. Commun Numer Methods Eng 20(11):845–856Google Scholar
  68. Webb TW, Aifantis EC (1995) Oscillatory fracture in polymeric materials. Int J Solids Struct 32(17–18):2725–2743Google Scholar
  69. Welch S, Rorrer R, Duren R (1999) Application of time-based fractional calculus methods to viscoelastic creep and stress relaxation of materials. Mech Time Depend Mater 3(3):279–303Google Scholar
  70. Williams JG (1972) Visco-elastic and thermal effect on crack growth in PMAA. Int J Fract Mech 8(4):393–401Google Scholar
  71. Williams ML (1963) The fracture of viscoelastic material. In: Drucker DC, Gilman JJ (eds) Fracture of solids. Interscience Publishers, New York, London, pp 157–188Google Scholar
  72. Williams ML (1965) Initiation and growth of viscoelastic fracture. Int J Fract Mech 1:292–310Google Scholar
  73. Wu J-D (1999) Time-dependent, mixed-mode fracture of solid rocket motor bondline systems. Ph. D. thesis, University of Texas at AustinGoogle Scholar
  74. Xu XP, Needleman A (1993) Void nucleation by inclusion debonding in a crystal matrix. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 1(2):111–132Google Scholar
  75. Xu C, Siegmund T, Ramani K (2003a) Rate-dependent crack growth in adhesives I. Modeling approach. Int J Adhes Adhes 23:9–13Google Scholar
  76. Xu C, Siegmund T, Ramani K (2003b) Rate-dependent crack growth in adhesives II. Experiments and analysis. Int J Adhes Adhes 23:15–22Google Scholar
  77. Zhou F, Molinari JF, Shioya T (2005) A rate-dependent cohesive model for simulating dynamic crack propagation in brittle materials. Eng Fract Mech 72:1383–1410Google Scholar
  78. Zhu Y, Liechti KM, Ravi-Chandar K (2009) Direct extraction of rate-dependent traction–separation laws for polyurea/steel interfaces. Int J Solids Struct 46(1):31–51Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Media B.V., onderdeel van Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oliver Giraldo-Londoño
    • 1
  • Glaucio H. Paulino
    • 1
    Email author
  • William G. Buttlar
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations