Skip to main content
Log in

The third Sandia Fracture Challenge: from theory to practice in a classroom setting

  • Sandia Fracture Challenge 2017
  • Published:
International Journal of Fracture Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three computational methods for modeling fracture are compared in the context of a class’ participation in the Third Sandia Fracture Challenge (SFC3). The SFC3 was issued to assess blind predictions of ductile fracture in a complex specimen geometry produced via additive manufacturing of stainless steel 316L powder. In this work, three finite-element-based methods are investigated: (1) adaptive remeshing, with or without material-state mapping; (2) element deletion; and (3) the extended finite element method. Each student team was tasked with learning about its respective method, calibrating model parameters, and performing blind prediction(s) of fracture/failure in the challenge-geometry specimen. Out of 21 teams who participated in the SFC3, three of the seven student teams from this class project ranked among the top five based on either global force-displacement or local strain predictions. Advantages and disadvantages of the three modeling approaches are identified in terms of mesh dependency, user-friendliness, and accuracy compared to experimental results. Recommendations regarding project management and organization are offered to facilitate future classroom participation in the Sandia Fracture Challenge or similar blind round-robin exercises.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. One of the teams (Team E) had four members to share the load of modifying and running external scripts for material-state mapping.

  2. The predictions from Teams E* and E** were not submitted to the SFC3 because the teams neglected to write out logarithmic strain, which was a required quantity of interest for participation (see Sect. 2.2). Consequently, any results involving logarithmic strain described in this manuscript do not include predictions from Teams E* and E**. The team names are assigned “E*” and “E**” to associate them with “Team E”, originally named in the lead SFC3 article (Kramer et al. 2019), since all three teams used the adaptive-remeshing technique.

  3. Despite violation of the small-scale yielding assumption, \(K_{I}\) is used as a surrogate to represent the relevant crack-front fields.

  4. Analysis paralysis is a feeling of being overwhelmed (often caused by information overload) that leads to complete inaction.

References

  • Abaqus V (2014) 6.14 Documentation. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corporation, 651

  • Boyce BL, Kramer SLB, Fang HE et al (2014) The Sandia Fracture Challenge: blind round robin predictions of ductile tearing. Int J Fract 186(1–2):5–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce BL, Kramer SLB, Bosiljevac TR et al (2016) The second Sandia Fracture Challenge: predictions of ductile failure under quasi-static and moderate-rate dynamic loading. Int J Fract 198(1–2):5–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdogan F, Sih G (1963) On the crack extension of plates under plane loading and transverse shear. J Basic Eng 85(4):519–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingraffea AR (2007) Computational fracture mechanics. In: Stein E, Borst R, Hughes TJR (eds) Encyclopedia of computational mechanics, vol 2. Wiley, Chichester, pp 375–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer SLB et al (2019) The third Sandia Fracture Challenge: predictions of ductile fracture in additively manufactured metal. Int J Fract. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-019-00361-1

    Google Scholar 

  • Lan W, Deng X, Sutton M (2007) Three-dimensional finite element simulations of mixed-mode stable tearing crack growth experiments. Eng Fract Mech 74(16):2498–2517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee HC, Choi JS, Jung KH, Im YT (2009) Application of element deletion method for numerical analyses of cracking. J Ach Mater Manuf Eng 35(2):154–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi S (2008) Extended finite element method for fracture analysis of structures. Blackwell Publishing, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Moës N, Dolbow J, Belytschko T (1999) A finite element method for crack growth without remeshing. Int J Numer Methods Eng 46(1):131–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pommier S (2011) Extended finite element method for crack propagation. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Song JH, Kim DJ, Lee SH, Belytschko T (2008) A comparative study on dynamic fracture with finite element methods. In: 8th world congress on computational mechanics. Venice, Italy

  • Spear AD, Priest AR, Veilleux MG, Hochhalter JD, Ingraffea AR (2011) Surrogate modeling of high-fidelity fracture simulations for real-time residual strength predictions. AIAA J 49(12):2770–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sukumar N, Moës N, Moran B, Belytschko T (2000) Extended finite element method for three-dimensional crack modelling. Int J Numer Meth Eng 48:1549–1570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton M, Yan J, Deng X, Cheng C, Zavattieri P (2007) Three-dimensional digital image correlation to quantify deformation and crack-opening displacement in ductile aluminum under mixed-mode I/III loading. Opt Eng 46(5):051003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wawrzynek PA, Carter BJ, Ingraffea AR (2009) Advances in simulation of arbitrary 3D crack growth using FRANC3D/NG. In: 12th international conference on fracture. Ottawa, Canada

Download references

Acknowledgements

A.D. Spear would like to acknowledge Professors Anthony Ingraffea and Alan Zehnder from Cornell University for inspiring the content and structure of the Fatigue and Fracture course. A.D. Spear’s time on this project spent outside of the regular course obligations was supported by the National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career Award under Grant No. CMMI-1752400.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashley D. Spear.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Fig. 17.

Fig. 17
figure 17

Lecture-by-lecture schedule of the Fatigue and Fracture course offered at the University of Utah in the spring semester of 2017

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Spear, A.D., Czabaj, M.W., Newell, P. et al. The third Sandia Fracture Challenge: from theory to practice in a classroom setting. Int J Fract 218, 171–194 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-019-00366-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-019-00366-w

Keywords

Navigation