Ductile Crack Growth Modelling Using Cohesive Zone Approach
The paper studies the prediction of the crack growth of the ductile fracture of forged steel 42CrMo4. Crack extension is simulated by means of element extinction algorithms and two approaches have been compared. The first one is based on the damage model Gurson-Tvergard-Needleman (GTN) (see ), the second on the cohesive zone model with the exponential traction separation law. The bulk of the paper is concentrated on the cohesive zone modelling. Determination of micro-mechanical parameters is based on the combination of static tests, microscopic observation and numerical calibration procedures. The attention is paid on the influence of initial value of J-integral and the slope of R-curve (J-Δa) which is modelled by 3D FEM. Based on tensile test the static elastic-plastic characterization of metals consist of the determination of the curve expressing the equivalent von Mises stress as a function of equivalent plastic strain. For ductile materials capable of undergoing large post-necking deformations, the exact material curve determination requires exact approach. The approximation suggested by Mirone  has appeared to be promising and valid for the structural steels.
KeywordsCohesive Zone Cohesive Zone Model Cohesive Element Void Volume Fraction Stable Crack Growth
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.ABAQUS 6.5.4 (2005) User’s manual, ABAQUS Inc.Google Scholar
- 3.Brocks W, Cornec A, Schneider I (2003) Computational Aspects of Nonlinear Fracture Mechanics, GKSS 2003/30: 129–203Google Scholar
- 10.Gullerud A, Koppenhoefer K, Roy A, RoyChowdhury R, Walter M, Bichon B, Cochran K, Carlyle A, Dodds RH Jr. (2005) WARP3D – Release 15.4 – 3D Dynamic Nonlinear Fracture Analysis of Solids Using Parallel Computers and Workstation, University of Illinois, 1–433Google Scholar
- 12.Gurson AL (1997) Continuum Theory of Ductile Rapture by Void Nucleation and Growth: Part 1-Yield Criteria and Flow Rules for Porous Ductile Media, J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 99: 2–15Google Scholar
- 23.Siegele D, Schmidt W (1983), Comput. Struct. 17: 697Google Scholar
- 25.Vlček L (2004) Numerical 3D analysis of cracked specimen: Constraint parameter computation and stable crack growth modelling, Ph. D. thesis, Brno University of Technology, Brno, Czech RepublicGoogle Scholar