XFEM region

In this work, two methods for modelling the damage have been used, namely the cohesive
zone model (CZM) and the extended finite element method (XFEM). All of the data were
modelled using XFEM and some of Belmonte et al.’s (2001, 2004) data was also modelled
using CZM. Both methods use the same traction-separation material model, illustrated
schematically in Figure 3.7, embedded within a mesh of 2D continuum elements having a
linear elastic plane stress response.
This material model behaves in a linear manner until the stress reaches a critical value
(strength parameter) and then unloads with increasing displacement dissipating the fracture
energy (Gc) in the process. Three particular points are highlighted in Figure 3.7. Between
Points 1 and 2, entire cohesive energy is absorbed and no material separation has occurred.
With increasing interface separation, cohesive traction reaches a maximum shown as Point 2
(δmax, σmax) then decreases and eventually vanishes at Point 3 permitting complete material
separation (δsep, σcoh = 0) providing the energy absorption required for decohesion. The area
under traction-separation plot is numerically equal to the toughness, Gc. This traction-
separation relationship is described by two independently measured parameters; the cohesive
strength parameter has been taken as the un-notched tensile strength (σo ) and toughness (Gc)
of the laminate. In the next sub-sections, the CZM and XFEM approaches are discussed in
more detail.
^ = 0) providing the energy absorption required for decohesion. The area under tractionseparation
plot is numerically equal to the toughness, ,
. This traction-separation relationship is described by two independently measured parameters; the
cohesive strength parameter has been taken as the un-notched tensile strength (Z
) and toughness (,
 ) of the laminate. Parameters for the first data set of Afaghi-Khatibi (1996b) are taken by calibration
from available literature, given in Table 3.1. Second and third data set parameters are independently
measured from experimental work (Belmonte et al. (2001, 2004) and are shown in Table 3.2 and
Table 3.3 respectively. In the next sub-sections, the CZM and XFEM approaches are discussed in more
detail.