Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DOI 10.1007/s10704-009-9391-y
ORIGINAL PAPER
Received: 13 August 2008 / Accepted: 4 August 2009 / Published online: 30 August 2009
Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009
Y. Xu H. Yuan (B)
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Wuppertal, 42097 Wuppertal, Germany
e-mail: h.yuan@uni-wuppertal.de
1 Introduction
Since damage mechanics models confront difficulties
in computational convergence as well as in strain localizations, the cohesive zone model (CZM) has been
popular in simulating material failure (Scheider et al.
2006; Tan et al. 2005; Yuan and Cornec 1990; Yuan
et al. 1996), which provides an alternative way to
describe crack propagation. In these works the crack
propagations are only modeled for simple loading history, i.e. fracture under monotonic loading conditions.
The idea in monotonic fracture is that the material fails
as soon as the critical fracture energy is exceeded, while
fatigue cracks follow accumulative damage. The cohesive zone model has been extended to model fatigue
in recent years (Nguyen et al. 2001; Siegmund 2004;
Yang et al. 2001). Compared to the crack simulation
under simple loading history, the development of the
cyclic cohesive zone model (CCZM) is still in the early
stages. Both cyclic damage accumulation and mixedmode failure are involved in controversial discussions.
A cyclic cohesive model for engineering applications
needs substantial further understanding and validation
with experiments.
An additional limitation for the cohesive zone model
is related to the finite element method. In most of
the published works the crack path was pre-assumed
(Scheider et al. 2006; Tan et al. 2005; Yuan and Cornec
1990; Yuan et al. 1996). The conventional finite element method does not allow new crack surfaces into
an element. Therefore, investigations of cohesive zone
123
152
models are mainly limited to the cohesive tractionseparation law with zero threshold under mode I loading. However, in engineering applications a fatigue
crack initiates under the shear loading condition (Stage
I) and propagate further under the mode I condition
(Stage II) (Socie and Marquis 2000). In this sense
fatigue crack propagation is generally mixed-mode.
Especially in nonproportional multi-axial fatigue, the
crack direction can vary with crack growth, and in these
cases the crack path cannot be pre-assumed. Additionally, the cohesive traction-separation law calculated
from atomistic simulations implies a finite threshold
value for the cohesive zone (Krull and Yuan 2009). As
discussed in Zhai et al. (2004), it is difficult to simulate the curve crack propagation, even impracticable
for 3D mixed-mode crack problems using FEM (Chen
et al. 2005).
Recently several promising computational methods
for considering discontinuity (Oden et al. 1998; Zi
et al. 2005), generally referred as extended finite element methods (XFEM), have been developed based on
Melenk and Babuskas work on the approach of partition of unity (Melenk and Babska 1996). In these
type of methods, the discontinuity is introduced by
means of additional degrees of freedom (DOFs) on
those elements where the discontinuity crosses. The
most appealing feature is that the XFEM inherits the
finite element framework and its advantageous properties, such as sparsity and symmetry. Combining with
the XFEM, the cohesive zone model can be naturally incorporated to simulate mixed-mode crack propagation and has found wide application (Jirasek and
Zimmermann 2001; Mergheim et al. 2005; Meschke
and Dumstorff 2007; Wells and Sluys 2001; Simone
et al. 2003; Zi and Belytschko 2003). Using the XFEM,
one can consider crack initiation at an arbitrary material
point and crack propagation in an arbitrary direction,
without adding extra nodes and elements. Additionally,
it allows multi-cracks nucleation, growth and coalescence without remeshing.
Under mixed-mode loading conditions crack propagation depends on loading mode mixity and intensity.
The loading mode mixity affects crack direction, while
the intensity determines the crack growth rate. In the
past decades many different fatigue criteria were suggested based on experimental observations and fracture mechanics considerations (Qian and Fatemi 1996;
Richard 1984, 1985; Socie and Marquis 2000). A popular criterion was developed based on maximal principal
123
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
153
n
m
u=
(1)
i a i +
j bi j ,
i=1
j=1
Na + Hd Nb,
standard
(2)
u
Fig. 1 An FEM domain crossed by the discontinuity d and
restrained by the applied boundary conditions. d does not exist
before the material failure starts
in ,
(5)
enriched
[u] = Nb |d .
n = t on t ,
(6)
(7)
123
154
Kaa Kab
Kba Kbb
a
f
f
= a,ext a,int
fb,ext
fb,int
b
(8)
Monotonic Loading
with
0.8
fa,int =
BT d,
fb,int =
BT d +
+
fa,ext =
NT td,
fb,ext =
NT td,
-0.2
0.0
BT DBd,
+
T
Kba = Kab
=
BT DBd,
+
BT DBd +
+
NT TNd.
d
123
1.0
2.0
3.0
n
4.0
5.0
6.0
Fig. 2 The cyclic cohesive zone model under pure normal separation. Under the simple loading condition the cohesive law
is identical with the model of Xu and Needleman (1994), as
0 = 0 in (11). Under unloading and reloading the traction
decreases/increases linearly with separation. The material damage is characterized by diminishing tensile strength Tn together
with decreasing material stiffness
BT DBd,
Kbb =
0.4
Kab =
Degradation
0.2
NT td,
t+
Kaa =
0.6
d
t
and
T n / max,0
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
(11)
denotes the effective normal separation. n is the normal separation from the FEM computation. 0 stands
for a model parameter to consider the threshold value
of the cohesive traction. For 0 = 0 the model recurs
to the original version of the model of Xu and Needleman (1994). G t is the shear stiffness and t is the tangential separation. The characteristic cohesive length is
denoted by 0 . The fracture energy, n , resulting from
normal separation for failure is calculated as
n = emax 0 ,
(12)
(13)
D c =
max
max,0
| n | dt. In the above
with D c 0 and =
expression H represents the Heaviside function which
prescribes that the damage accumulation starts once
the accumulated material separation is greater than
the characteristic length 0 . The cohesive strength is
affected by Dc , which can be written as
max = (1 Dc )max,0
with max,0 as the initial cohesive strength. Obviously,
this consideration is a direct extension of continuum
damage mechanics (Lemaitre 1996). Additionally, f
is the cohesive zone endurance limit, and is the accumulated cohesive length which scales the increment of
material separation n .
In this investigation, the unloading and reloading
are assumed to proceed along a current stiffness, kn =
max,0 (1 dc )e/0 , which is equal to the slope of the
current cohesive curve at zero separation. This assumption will lead to the presence of a residual separation.
The material damage is presumed to be accumulating
during the whole process of unloading and reloading,
except for the case of compression, i.e. n < 0. As for
the potential compressing case, from a viewpoint of
numerical treatment, the material penetration at the discontinuity is reduced by enhancing the material compression stiffness.
155
123
156
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
(a)
(b)
Fig. 3 Two types of intersected elements implemented in ABAQUS. The middle line with two dots denotes the discontinuity in
the XFEM-element. a The discontinuity divides a quadrilateral
into two sub-quadrilaterals. b The discontinuity separates an element into one triangle and another pentagon. In both cases the
enhanced elements are divided into 8 sub-triangles for integration. Each sub-triangle possesses three integration points (open
circles). The discontinuity curve is integrated using two integration points (solid circles)
5 Computational models
123
r
KI
cos
G(1 + ) 2
2
,
1 + (1 + ) sin2
2
r
KI
sin
=
G(1 + ) 2
2
2
2 (1 + ) cos
;
2
uIx =
uIy
r
KI I
=
sin
G(1 + ) 2
2
,
2 + (1 + ) cos2
2
(14)
uI Iy
r
cos
1 +
2
2
.
+(1 + ) sin2
2
KI I
=
G(1 + )
157
(15)
(16)
at
the remote boundary with the radius of r0 =
x02 + y02 and the polar angle = tan1 (y0 /x0 ). The
initial crack tip is located at the origin of the geometry (r = 0). The cyclic loading is imposed by varying
the stress intensity factors, K I and K I I . For simplicity we only consider pulsating load with the loading
ratio R = K min /K max = 0 so that K = K max . The
range of stress intensity factor K is correlated with
the incremental energy release rate G as
G =
(1 2 )K 2
.
E
(17)
The global finite element mesh and the boundary conditions are plotted in Fig. 4. To reduce the artificial
effect of K fields on the crack, crack propagation is
confined to a small region, and its area is negligible in
comparison to the whole specimen (less than 1%). The
radius of the crack extension region, l, is smaller than
5%r0 , where r0 represents the radius of the boundary
layer model. As shown in Fig. 4b, the mesh is highly
refined in the crack extension region.
Computations were performed under the plane strain
condition in ABAQUS, in which the CPE4-type element was employed, together with the user-defined
elements discussed in the previous sections. To save
computational time, only those elements near the crack
path were defined as the user-defined elements.
The material properties of the specimen are normalized by yield stress 0 which is not needed in elastic
materials. Accordingly, elastic modulus E = 3000 ,
and Poissons ratio = 0.3. For the cohesive model,
the cohesive strength and length are taken as max,0 =
6.70 and 0 = 0.0153 mm, respectively. In this investigation, in accordance with a suggestion from Roe and
Siegmund (2004), the parameters f and are set to
0.25max,0 and 40 , respectively.
3
( )|=0 = K I 3 cos + cos
2
2
3
3K I I sin + sin
(18)
2
2
max
for the angular function of the circumferential stress
component . According to this criterion, the crack
123
158
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
=
+ 8.
(19)
tan
2
4 KI I
4
KI I
In this criterion, K I and K I I are loading parameters and
are directly used to determine the cracking orientation.
This criterion has been verified by many experimental
results.
123
i wi Ai .
(21)
i=1
In the above equations r is the distance of the Gaussian point to the cohesive zone tip and denotes the
radius of the nonlocal zone. The nonlocal stress tensor
results from the sum of the local stresses at the Gaussian points i, the weight function wi and the associated
area Ai . In the 2-dimensional case the orientation of
maximum principal stress can be calculated from the
nonlocal stresses as
2x y
tan(20 ) =
.
(22)
x y
In the XFEM computations the maximum principal
stress criterion includes two aspects: propagation of
the cohesive zone, and direction of the cohesive zone
propagation. During computations the maximum principal stress ahead of the cohesive zone tip is calculated
and checked against the fatigue limit of the material.
Once it exceeds the fatigue limit, the enhanced degrees
of freedom in this element are activated. That is, the
159
123
160
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
(a)
(b)
O
O
70
60
60
50
50
()
70
()
(b) 80
40
30
40
30
Experimental value
MPS steady comp. solu.
MTS analy. solu.
MERR analy. solu.
20
10
0
(a) 80
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Experimental Value
MPS initial comp. solu.
MPS steady comp. solu.
MPS analy. solu.
20
10
0
0
0.2
0.4
KII/ (KI+KII)
0.6
0.8
KII/ (KI+KII)
123
f = (an + b ) max .
(24)
161
80
Criteria: (a n +b )max= f
60
40
()
20
0
Experiment
a=0.0,b=1.0
a=0.3,b=0.7
a=0.5,b=0.5
a=0.7,b=0.3
a=1.0,b=0.0
-20
-40
-60
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
KII/ (KI+KII)
Fig. 7 Crack angle as a function of the loading mixity predicted
by the modified Findleys model (24)
Firstly, the pure mode I loading is considered, illustrating the detailed procedure of fatigue life prediction
and investigating the validity in terms of applying the
XFEM combined with CCZM in fatigue life assessment. In Fig. 8a, the approximately linear relationship between the crack extension and loading cycle
number in the double-logarithmic coordinate system
is depicted. The slopes of these curves (i.e. crack propagation rates) depend on K I . As K I increases the
crack growth rate rises. On the basis of these data, the
crack propagation rates can be expressed as a function
of G/n according to Expression (17). As shown in
Fig. 8b, it can be seen that d(a/0 )/d N is linearly
dependent on G/n in double-logarithmic coordinates, which can be curve-fitted in Paris law
G m
d(a/0 )
=C
(25)
dN
n
with C = 67.35 and m = 2.16. Paris law only
describes stationary fatigue crack growth, whereas the
CCZM also can predict fatigue crack growth in low and
high loading amplitudes. By introducing the threshold,
f in the damage evolution Eq. (13), one may shift
the fatigue limit in the life curve. That is, the fatigue
damage predicted in the XFEM approaches a threshold
below which the material degradation will not occur.
On the other hand, the normalized energy release rate
range possesses an upper limit which is characterized
by the general cohesive law without cyclic damage.
The traction degradation processes on three material
points ahead of the initial crack tip under K I loading
conditions are recorded in Fig. 9, which shows different damage processes in a cracked specimen. All
three points are located on the crack path along the
initial crack direction, as shown in Fig. 4. Point A is
at the initial crack tip. Point C is 10 elements away
from Point A, i.e. approximately, 0.3 l (l denotes the
length of the refined region). B is located in the middle
of A and C. Since A is located at the initial crack tip
where the stress concentration occurs initially and the
stress level is highest, the cohesive zone goes through
A earlier than the other points. Once the criterion of
cohesive zone growth has been satisfied, the discontinuity will immediately be introduced into these elements ahead of the crack tip. Thereafter, with the cyclic
damage accumulation and the cohesive zone propagation, the loading capacity of the material point begins
to sink and the material degrades gradually. As shown
in Fig. 9, Point A experiences the highest peak traction,
123
162
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
(b) -0.5
(a) 35
K I=2.00
KI=2
25
KI=2.5
K I=2.50
20
KI=2.75
K I=2.75
d (a / 0 )
G
= 67.35
dN
n
-0.7
log(d(a/ d 0 )/dN)
a/ d 0
-0.6
KI=2.25
K I=2.25
15
30
2.16
-0.8
-0.9
-1
KII=0
KII =0
10
-1.1
5
0
-1.2
0
50
100
150
N (cycles)
-1.3
-1.5
250
200
-1.4
-1.3
-1.2
log(G/f n)
-1.1
-1
Fig. 8 Correlation between crack growth and mode I loading: a variation of crack growth with loading amplitude K I ; b dependence
of crack growth rate on G
(a) 0.8
(b) 1
0.7
point A
point B
0.6
0.8
Dc at B
Dc at C
0.8
Tn at A
point C
Tn / max,0
0.4
0.3
0.2
Tn at B
0.6
Tn at C
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
Dc
0.6
0.5
Tn / max,0
Dc at A
0.1
0
0
-0.1
0.17
-0.2
0.27
0.37
0.47
0.57
n / 0
20
40
60
80
100
-0.2
Cycles (N)
Fig. 9 Evolution of material damage predicted by XFEM: a the predicted traction-separation responses for three points A, B, C along
the crack path; b the relationships between traction and damage evolution of the three points
123
163
(a) -0.2
(b) 1.2
-0.4
1.2
KI /KII =2
KI /KII =1
KI /KII =0.5
1
-0.8
-1
-1.2
-1.6
-1.8
-1.6
-1.5
-1.4
-1.3
-1.2
-1.1
0.8
KII =0
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
KII=0
KI=0
KI/KII=1
KI/KII=2
KI/KII=0.5
-1.4
KI =0
0.8
|max
MTS
Analy. Solu.
Crack growth rate
0.2
-1
-0.9
0.2
log (G/fn)
0.4
0.6
KII/ (KI+KII)
Scaled s |max
log(d(a/d0)/dN)
-0.6
0.2
0.8
crack tip field according to the MTS criterion versus the scaled
crack growth rates at log(G/n ) = 1.25
described in Eq. (13). Furthermore, comparing the variations of Dc over Points A and C, it can be found that
when the material point A is just completely damaged,
i.e. Dc = 1, Dc on C is just setting out, meaning that
the cohesive zone is just now embedded in this element.
This result signifies that the length of the cohesive zone
in this investigation is the distance between A and C.
Based on experimental observations (Richard 1984,
1989; Sander and Richard 2006), the mixed-mode
fatigue crack in brittle materials or high cycle fatigue
is searching in the direction of mode I and the crack
propagation is dominated by the mode I stress field.
In this sense, understanding of the mode I crack is
essential for understanding of mixed-mode cracks. To
examine the validity of the proposed method for mixedmode fatigue, various combinations of K I and K I I
have been considered. In Fig. 10a, fatigue crack growth
rate, d(a/0 )/d N , is plotted with respect to the normalized energy release rate range (G/n ), under various mixed-mode loadings. For the mixed-mode case,
G = G I + G I I is introduced.
We find a linear correlation between log[d(a/0 )/
d N ] and log(G/n ) for all cases analyzed with a
unique exponent m of Paris law (25), regardless of
mode-mixity. That is, even for the mixed-mode fatigue
cracking there exists a Paris law as, d(a/0 )/d N =
C(G/n )m , in which m is independent of mode-mixity, but the parameter C varies with K I I /(K I + K I I ).
7 Conclusions
In the present paper the formulation of the XFEM
and the CCZM have been discussed and applied for
the analysis of mixed-mode fatigue cracking. Both
123
164
implementation and verification of CCZM in combination with XFEM in the frame of ABAQUS have been
reported. Application of XFEM allows displacement
discontinuities within finite elements so that the curved
crack propagation can be simulated with less effort.
The combination of XFEM and CCZM possesses an
appealing ability to predict the fatigue crack curvilinear extension under mixed-mode loading.
Based on the modified boundary layer formulation, a
detailed investigation has been conducted regarding the
crack propagation direction under mixed mode loading. Compared with known experimental results, the
nonlocal stress based maximum principal stress criterion of the XFEM accurately predicts crack propagation behavior in brittle materials. Moreover, the
computation shows that the initial crack kinking angle
differs from the stabilized crack direction. The transient region, however, is very small. These computations agree with known experimental data.
Additional computations based on a modified Findleys multi-axial fatigue criterion reveal that Findleys
model approaches experimental observations only with
very small shear stress contribution. This implies that
this kind of criterion is only suitable for considering
shear stress contribution, for fatigue crack propagation
in ductile materials.
In fatigue analysis the crack propagation rate is
another important issue. In this context the fatigue crack
rate prediction under mixed mode loading in the framework of XFEM combined with CCZM has been investigated as well. The numerical simulation shows that
the computational results match the known form of
Paris law under mixed mode condition. Additionally,
simulations verify the proposed method is able to simulate the crack initiation and steady propagation process for very low cycle problems. The computational
results in fatigue simulation coincide with the experimental records in higher loading levels. For finite cycle
fatigue the evolution of damage accumulation predicts over-proportional increment of damage indicator.
This implies that the damage evolution equation needs
further modifications.
Although the results obtained so far are important and many experimental phenomena can be
simulated properly, the main difficulties for the
application of the CCZM are in the formulation of
the cyclic damage evolution equation as well as in the
description of the shear stress failure. Especially in ductile materials the shear stress becomes significant in
123
Y. Xu, H. Yuan
References
ABAQUS (2006) Theory manual. Version 6.6. ABAQUS Inc.
Providence, R. I.
Anderson TL (1995) Fracture mechanicsfundamentals and
applications, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Belytschko T, Fish J, Engelmann BE (1988) A finite element
with embedded localization zones. Comp Meth Appl Mech
Eng 70:5989
Chen CR, Kolednik O, Heerens J, Fischer FD (2005) Threedimensional modelling of ductile crack growth: cohesive
zone parameters and crack tip triaxiality. Eng Fract Mech
72:20722094
De Borst R (2006) Modern domain-based discretization methods for damage and fracture. Int J Fract 138:241262
Erdogen F, Sih GC (1963) On the crack extension in plates under
plane loading and transverse shear. J Bas Eng ASME Trans
85:519525
Findley WN (1956) Modified theories of fatigue failure under
combined stress. Proc Soc Exp Stress Anal 14:3546
Jirasek M, Zimmermann T (2001) Embedded crack model. Part
I: basic formulation. Int J Num Meth Eng 50:12691290
Karolczuk A, Macha E (2005) A review of critical plane orientations in multiaxial fatigue failure criteria of metallic
materials. Int J Fract 134:267304
Krull H, Yuan H (2009) Suggestions to cohesive models based
on atomistic simulations. Eng Fract Mech. Submitted for
publication
Larsson SG, Carlsson AJ (1973) Influence of non-singular stress
terms and specimen geometry on small-scale yielding at
crack tips in elastic-plastic materials. J Mech Phy Solids
21:263277
Lemaitre J (1996) A course on damage mechanics. Springer,
Berlin
McDiarmid DL (1994) A shear stress based critical-plane criterion of multiaxial fatigue failure for design and life prediction. Fat Fract Eng Mat Struct. 14751485
Melenk JM, Babska I (1996) The partition of unity finite element method: basic theory and applications. Comp Meth
Appl Mech Eng 139:289314
Meschke G, Dumstorff P (2007) Energy-based modeling of
cohesive and cohesionless cracks via X-FEM. Comp Meth
Appl Mech Eng 196:23382357
Mergheim J, Kuhl E, Steinmann P (2005) A finite element
method for the computational modelling of cohesive cracks.
Int J Num Meth Eng 63:276289
Nguyen O, Repetto EA, Ortiz M, Radovitzky RA (2001) A cohesive model of fatigue crack growth. Int J Fract 110:351369
165
Wells GN, Sluys LJ (2001) A new method for modelling cohesive cracks using finite elements. Int J Num Meth Eng
50:26672682
Xu XP, Needleman A (1994) Numerical simulations of fast
crack growth in brittle solids. J Mech Phy Solids 42:1397
1434
Xu YJ, Yuan H (2009a) Computational analysis of mixedmode fatigue crack growth in quasi-brittle materials using
extended finite element methods. Eng Fract Mech 76:
165181
Xu YJ, Yuan H (2009b) On damage accumulations in the cyclic
cohesive zone model for XFEM analysis of mixed-mode
fatigue crack growth. Comp Mat Sci. (in print)
Yuan H (2002) Numerical assessments of cracks in elastic-plastic materials. Springer, Berlin
Yuan H, Cornec A (1990) Application of cohesive zone model
in investigation of elastic-plastic crack growth. In: Zarka
J et al., (ed) STRUCENG & FEMCAD: structural engineering and optimization. IITT International, Gournay pp
317323
Yuan H, Lin G, Cornec A (1996) Applications of cohesive zone
model for assessment of ductile fracture processes. Trans
ASME: J Eng Mat Tech 118:192200
Yang B, Mall S, Ravi-Chandar K (2001) A cohesive zone model
for fatigue crack growth in quasibrittle materials. Int J Solids Struct 38:39273944
Zhai J, Tomar V, Zhou M (2004) Micromechanical simulation of
dynamic fracture using the cohesive finite element method.
J Eng Mater Tech 126:179191
Zi G, Belytschko T (2003) New crack-tip elements for XFEM
and applications to cohesive cracks. Int J Numer Methods
Eng 57:22212240
Zi G, Chen H, Xu J, Belytschko T (2005) The extended finite
element method for dynamic fractures. Shock Vibr 12:
923
123