Element-wise algorithm for modeling ductile fracture with the Rousselier yield function
- 434 Downloads
Within the theme of ductile fracture in metals, we propose an algorithm for FEM-based computational fracture based on edge rotations and smoothing of complementarity conditions. Rotation axes are the crack front nodes in surface discretizations and each rotated edge affects the position of only one or two nodes. Modified edge positions correspond to the predicted crack path. To represent softening, porous plasticity in the form of the Rousselier yield function is used. The finite strain integration algorithm makes use of a consistent updated Lagrangian formulation which makes use of polar decomposition between each increment. Constitutive updating is based on the implicit integration of a regularized non-smooth problem. The proposed alternative is advantageous when compared with enriched elements that can be significantly different than classical FEM elements and still pose challenges for ductile fracture or large amplitude sliding. For history-dependent materials, there are still some transfer of relevant quantities between meshes. However, diffusion of results is more limited than with tip or full remeshing. To illustrate the advantages of our approach, fracture examples making use of the Rousselier yield function are presented. The Ma-Sutton crack path criterion is employed. Traditional fracture benchmarks and newly proposed verification tests are solved. These were found to be very good in terms of crack path and load/displacement accuracy.
KeywordsFracture Plasticity Porous Ductile
Pedro Areias gratefully acknowledges the financing from the “Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia” under the Project PTDC/EME-PME/108751 and the Program COMPETE FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-010267. Michael Sargado and Timon Rabczuk would like to acknowledge the partial financial support of the Framework Programme 7 Initial Training Network Funding under Grant No. 289361 “Integrating Numerical Simulation and Geometric Design Technology”.
- 2.Aravas N (1987) On the numerical integration of a class of pressure-dependent plasticity models. Int J Numer Meth Eng 24:1395– 1416Google Scholar
- 3.Areias P (2011) Simplas. https://ssm7.ae.uiuc.edu:80/simplas. Accessed 13 Dec 2012
- 9.Areias P, Rabczuk T (2012) Finite strain fracture of plates and shells with configurational forces and edge rotation. Int J Numer Methods Eng (Accepted)Google Scholar
- 15.Broberg KB (1999) Cracks and fracture. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 21.Holzapfel GA (2000) Nonlinear solid mechanics: a continuum approach for engineers. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 22.Hughes TJR (2000) The finite element method. Reprint of Prentice-Hall edition, 1987. Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 26.Ma F, Deng X, Sutton MA, Newman JC Jr (1999) CTOD-based mixed-mode fracture criterion, chapter mixed-mode crack behavior. Number STP 1359. ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, pp 86–110Google Scholar
- 28.Ogden RW (1997) Non-linear elastic deformations. Dover Publications, MineolaGoogle Scholar
- 32.Seabra MRR, Sustari P, Cesar de Sa JMA, Rodic T (2013) Damage driven crack initiation and propagation in ductile metals using XFEM. Comput Mech 52(1):161–179Google Scholar
- 33.Simo JC, Hughes TJR (2000) Computational inelasticity. Corrected Second Printing edition. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 38.Van Goethem N, Areias P (2012) A damage-based temperature-dependent model for ductile fracture with finite strains and configurational forces. Int J Fract 178:215–232Google Scholar