ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Numerical Simulation of Elastic Plastic Fatigue Crack Growth in Functionally Graded Material

Using XFEM

Dr. Somnath Bhattacharya Ph.D. *, Mr. kamal Sharma1, Mr. Vaibhav Sonkar2

1
Email: kamals@barc.gov.in, Bhabha Atomic Research Center, Mumbai, 400085 India

2
Email: sonkar.vaibhav@gmail.com, National Institute of Technology Raipur, Mechanical

Engineering, Raipur, 492010 India

*
Corresponding Author Email: somnabhatt.me@nitrr.ac.in, National Institute of Technology

Raipur, Mechanical Engineering Department, NIT Raipur, GE Road,, Raipur, 492010 India

Abstract

In the present work, extended finite element method (XFEM) has been used to simulate the

fatigue crack growth problems in functionally graded material (FGM) in the presence of hole,

inclusion and minor crack under plastic and plane stress conditions for both edge and centre

crack. Both soft and hard inclusions have been implemented in the problems. The validity of

linear elastic fracture mechanics theory is limited to the brittle materials. Therefore, the elastic

plastic fracture mechanics theory needs to be utilized to characterize the plastic behaviour of the

material. A generalized Ramberg-Osgood material model has been used for modeling purpose.

Key words

FGM, fatigue crack growth, XFEM, elastic plastic conditions, discontinuities.

1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Introduction

A composite material is a structural material made from two or more than two constituent

materials with significantly different chemical or physical properties which when combined at

macroscopic level are not soluble in each other and produce a material with characteristics

different from the individual components.In general, any material consisting of two or more

components with different properties and distinct boundaries among the components can be

referred as a composite material.Functionally Graded Materials (FGMs) are referred as the

composite materials.The composition and microstructure of FGM varies in space following a

predetermined law. This gradual change in composition and microstructure of material is suitable

to get gradient of properties and performances. FGMs are synthesized in such a way that they

possess continuous spatial variations in volume fractions of their constituents to yield a

predetermined composition. These variations lead to the formation of a non-homogeneous

macrostructure with continuously varying mechanical and/or thermal properties in one or more

than one direction. FGMs are commonly manufactured by sintering process which leads to

contain discontinuities and inhomogeneities.These discontinuities and inhomogeneity affect the

Stress Intensity Factor (SIF) at the tip of major crack. In past some studies have been carried out

in XFEM, FGM and fatigue crack growth.Belytschko & Black (1999)studies and simulated

elastic crack growth with minimal remeshing.Discontinuous enrichment functions are added to

the finite element approximation to account for the presence of the crack.Moes et al. (1999) has

done elastic crack growth without remeshing.Daux et al. (2000) used XFEM for arbitrary

branched and intersecting cracks as well as crack emanating from the holes.Belytschko et al.

(2001) has used XFEM for crack growth, non-bonded inclusions and jointed rock

2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

mass.Sukumaret al.(2001) proposed a methodology to model arbitrary holes and inclusions

(material interface) without remeshing the domain. The location of holes and material interface is

represented by level set method. Chessa et al. (2002) analysed XFEM for solidification

problems. Rao & Rahman (2003)developed interaction integrals for calculating stress-intensity

factors for a stationary crack in 2D orthotropic functionally graded materials of arbitrary

geometry.Nagashima et al. (2003) analysed interfacial crack in bi-material using XFEM.

Sukumar et al. (2004)extended the use of XFEM to the analysis of the cracks present at the

interface of the two elastic homogeneous isotropic materials.Liu et al.(2004) evaluate the mixed

mode SIF for homogeneous and bi-materials. Fries & Belytschko (2006) used XFEM for

arbitrary discontinuities without additional unknowns.Prabel et al.(2007) used XFEM in

dynamics crack propagation in elastic plastic media. Huynh & Belytschko (2008) analysed

XFEM for fracture in composite materials. Kumar et al. (2009) has done elastic plastic analysis

of edge crack by EFGM.Incremental theory of plasticity is used to determine the plastic stress

and strain. Material behaviour has been modelled using Ramberg Osgood model. Yazid et al.

(2009) studied XFEM for complex material fracture mechanics like presence of holes, inclusions

in the cracked domain.Sohn et al. (2011) used three level finite element for propagation of crack

in domain in the presence of randomly distributed voids and inclusions. Region far from crack is

coarse meshed, region near crack is intermediately meshed while very near crack tip region is

refined into the fine level mesh. Singh et al. (2011) simulated crack, holes and inclusions in

FGM. They found that the increase in SIF is more severe for the FGMs containing major center

crack as compared to a major edge crack.Singh et al. (2012)studied and simulated fatigue crack

growth in homogeneous material in the presence of holes, inclusions and micro crack and

3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

calculated the fatigue life. Shedbale et al. (2013) studied crack in the Presence of holes and

inclusions and found negligible difference in linear and nonlinear analysis.Kumar et al. (2013)

solve numerical problems of stable crack growth in ductile material to show the capability of

XFEM. Bhattacharya et al. (2013)studied fatigue crack growth in FGM under mixed mode

loading conditions. They found that minor cracks have the least effect on the fatigue lives of the

materials whereas effect of holes is quite significant.Bhattacharya et al. (2013) calculated fatigue

life of FGM plate in the presence of minor crack, holes and inclusion. They found that the

presence of holes/voids in the domain has a more significant effect on the fatigue life of the

material as compared to the presence of minor cracks and inclusions. The effect of minor cracks

in the domain on the fatigue life of the material is found minimum. Bhattacharya et al. (2013)

worked on Fatigue crack growth simulations of interfacial cracks in bi-layered FGMs using

XFEM. The fatigue life of the interfacial central crack plate is found more as compared to the

interfacial edge crack plate.Singh et al. (2014)found that the plastic region near the crack tip

improves the fatigue life.Bhattacharya & Sharma (2014) simulated fatigue crack growth in FGM

plate under thermal cyclic load by XFEM.Jameel&Harmain (2015) used element free galerkin

method (EFGM) to model and simulate fatigue crack growth in cracked domain containing holes

and bi-material interfaces. It is observed that the effect of holes on the fatigue life is more severe

than the bi-material interfaces.Jameel&Harmain (2016) used XFEM to evaluate the fatigue life

of cracked specimens in presence of bi-material interfaces. The presence of weak bi-material

discontinuity reduces the fatigue life and the critical crack length of the specimen. On the basis

of these literatures it is to be found that analysis of the FGM is carried out under elastic

conditions. There is not any work available in fatigue crack growth of FGM under plastic

4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

conditions by XFEM. Therefore in the present work elastic plastic conditions are considered and

problems of fatigue crack growth in FGM are solved by XFEM.

XFEM formulation for FGM

XFEM stands for extended finite element method.XFEM is technique which allows crack

modelling independent of mesh, and avoids remeshing while crack growth. XFEM models a

crack by enriching the standard Finite Element approximation with some functions, which are

obtained from the theoretical background of the problem. Moving discontinuities are tracked by

the level set method. XFEM is a numerical method, based on the Finite Element Method (FEM)

that is especially designed for treating discontinuities.

Governing Equations

A given domain ( Ω ) boundary is partitioned into displacement ( Γ u ), traction ( Γ t ) and traction

free ( Γ c ) boundaries as shown in Fig. 1. The equilibrium conditions and boundary conditions

are given as(Belytschko & Black 1999, Moes et al. 1999, Daux et al. 2000, Belytschko et al.

2001, Chessa et al. 2002)

.ζ  b  0in  (1)

ζ.nˆ  t on Γ t (2)

ζ.nˆ  0 on Γ c (3)

u  u on Γ u (4)

5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Where ζ is the Cauchy stress tensor, u is the displacement field, b is the body force per unit

volume and n̂ is the unit outward normal.

The constitutive relation for the Elastic-plastic material is given as

ζ  u   Dep  x  ε  u  (5)

Where, x is the vector of x and y-coordinates, Dep  x  is Elastic-plastic constitutive matrix

varying in x-direction.The elastic constitutive matrix can be written for plane stress condition as

 
 
1 ν 0
E x  
De  x   ν 1 0 D (6)

1 ν2   1  ν  / 2

0 0 
 
 

The elastic-plastic constitutive relation for a material can be modelled using incremental theory

of plasticity(Kumar et al. 2009). The material behaviour is modelled in the form of an

incremental stressvector dζ and incremental strain vector dε such that dζ  Dep .dε . In this

relation, Dep is called elastic-plastic stiffness matrix which is determined as follows

 Total strain increment is the sum of elastic and plastic strains

dε  dεe  dε p (7)

 Elastic incremental strain and stress is determined

dζ  De dεe (8)

 Failure criteria is given as

6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

F ζ   f ζ  (9)

In which F and f are two different forms of failure functions, ζ is the stress tensor and

ζ is the equivalent stress.

 Flow rule that relates strain increment to other quantities, is the gradient of a function

called plastic Potential. If one assumes that the plastic potential function is the same as

the failure function, then one can get the following relation known as normality rule as

the flow rule,

dε p F .d λ (10)

 Plastic modulus Η is given as

dζ
Η (11)
dε p

 For a given strain energy δw , and according to the definitionof dε p we must have,

δw  ζ .dε p (12)

 According to the Von Mises criteria, F  J 2 , where J 2 is the second invariant of

ζ2
deviatoric stress tensor. So, we must have F  ζ   , ThusEqs. (7) and (8) result in
3

dζ  De dε  dε p  (13)

 After taking the derivatives from both sides of failure criteria equation

 F   f ζ  ε p w 
 dζ    . . . .ε p  (14)
 ζ   ζ  ε p w  ε p 


7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

F f
a a
 For simplicity we take ζ , ζ

1
a.dζ  a .Η .   ζ.dε p (15)
ζ

 dλ is calculated by omitting dζ between Eq. (13) and (14) and substituting dε p from Eq.

(10). By substituting dλ in Eq. (10),The final form of material matrix is obtained as,

Dep  De  Dp (16)

DaaT D
where, D p  (17)
a
Ηζ T  a T Da
ζ

Weak formulation

ζ  u : ε  v  dΩ  b.vdΩ   t .vdΓ
Ω Ω Γt
(18)

After substituting the trial and test functions and using the arbitrariness of nodal variations, the

following discrete system of equations are obtained

 K d    f  (19)

Where, K is the global stiffness matrix, d is the vector of nodal unknowns and f is the external

force vector.

XFEM approximation for cracks

By taking advantage of the property of partition of unity it is possible to enrich the finite element

approximation. XFEM approximation is given by(Belytschko & Black 1999):

8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

4
uh  N i ui  N j H  x  a j  N k Fl  x  bk (20)
iI jJ kS l 1

Where I is the set of all nodes, J is the set of split nodes and S the set of tip nodes.

ui is a nodal displacement vector associated with the continuous part of the finite element

solution.

N i , N j and N k are the element shape function associated with set of nodes i , j and k .

a j is the nodal enriched degree of freedom associated with Heaviside function H  x  .

Where H  x  is referred to here as a discontinuous or ‘jump’ function. This is defined as

(Shedbaleet al. 2013)

1, if   x   0
H  x   (21)
1, otherwise

Where φ  x  is the level set function.

bk are the nodal enriched degree of freedom associated with crack tip enrichment Fl  x  .

Tip enrichment function (Shedbale et al. 2013)

 11n  θ  1 n
1
 θ  1 n
1
θ
1
θ 
Fl  x   r cos   , r sin   , r sin   sin  θ  , r cos   sin  θ 
1 n
(22)
 2 2 2  2 

9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Where  r , θ  are the local polar co-ordinates at the crack tip where the local axes are taken to be

aligned with the crack tip, n is the strain hardening exponent.

XFEM approximation for holes(Bhattacharya et al. 2013)

uh  N i ui   N hV  x  ch (23)
iI hH

The Heaviside jump function, V  x  takes a value of +1 on one side and 0 on the other side i.e.

inside the hole.

Where H is the set of nodes cut by holes, ch is the nodal enriched degree of freedom associated

with Heaviside function V  x  and N h is the element shape function associated with set of nodes

h.

XFEM approximation for inclusions(Bhattacharya et al. 2013)

uh  N i ui  N Ψ φ  x  dm
m (24)
iI mM

Where Ψ  φ  x   is a local enrichment function, defined as Ψ  φ  x   = | φ  x  | and φ  x  is

the level set function. M is the set of nodes cut by inclusions, d m is the nodal enriched degree of

freedom associated with enrichment function Ψ  φ  x   and N m is the element shape function

associated with set of nodes m .

10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

XFEM formulation for cracks in FGM(Singh et al. 2014)

Using the approximation functions of the crack elemental stiffness and force matrix can be

determined as

 K ijuu K ijua K ijub K ijuc K ijud 

 au 
 K ij K ijaa K ijab K ijac K ijad 
K ij =  K ijbu
e
K ijba K ijbb K ijbc K ijbd  (25)
 cu 
 K ij K ijca K ijcb K ijcc K ijcd 
 K du K ijda K ijdb K ijdc K ijdd 
 ij 

  B
T
K rs ij  i
r
 C  B j s  h dΩ (26)
Ωe

Where r , s  u, a, b, c, d

 
T
f h  fi u fi a f i b1 fi b2 f i b3 fi b4 fi c fi d (27)

fi u   N b dΩ   N t dΓ
e
i
Γt
i (28)
Ω

f i a   N i  H  x   b dΩ   N i  H  x   t dΓ (29)
Ω e Γt

f i bl   N i  Fl  x   b dΩ   N i  Fl  x   t dΓ (30)
Ωe Γt

Where l  1,2,3,4

f i c   N i V  x   b dΩ   N i V  x   t dΓ (31)
Ωe Γt

11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

f i d   N i Ψ  x   b dΩ   N i Ψ  x   t dΓ (32)
Ω e Γt

Where N i are finite element shape functions, Biu , Bia , Bib , Bic , Bid the matrices of shape function

derivatives given by:

 N i,x 0 
 
B  0
u
i Ni, y  (33)
 Ni, y N i , x 
 318

 N  H  x  0 
 i ,x 
Bi 
a  0 N i  H  x  , y  (34)
 
 N i  H  x  N i  H  x  , x 
 ,y 

Bib   Bib1 Bib 2 Bib3 Bib 4  (35)

 N  F  x  0 
 i l ,x 
Bi 
bl  0 N i  Fl  x  , y  (36)
 
 N i  Fl  x   N i  Fl  x  , x 
 ,y 

Where l  1,2,3,4

 N V  x   0 
 i ,x 
Bi 
c  0 N i V  x  , y  (37)
 
 N i V  x   N i V  x  , x 
 ,y 

 N Ψ  x   0 
 i ,x 
Bi  
d
0 N i Ψ  x  , y  (38)
 
 N i Ψ  x   N i Ψ  x  , x 
 ,y 

12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

After obtaining the numerical formulations, Eq. (19) is solved to obtain the nodal displacements,

and then strains and stresses are evaluated through post processing. The difference between the

solution for a homogenous material and FGM lies in the fact that the material properties are a

function of the space variable. After obtaining the values of stress and strain components, the

values of stress intensity factor are evaluated using domain based interaction integral approach.

Variation in the properties of FGM

A FGM plate is shown in Fig.2 the plate is made by reinforcing an alloy with ceramic. The

volume fraction of ceramic is varied to obtain a material property gradation in the x-direction. It

is also assumed that the FGM has the properties of the alloy at x  0 and ceramic at the other end

i.e. x  Lt . The major crack is taken at the center of the edge of 100% alloy of FGM plate in the

x-direction. The variation of the elastic modulus for FGM is modelled as (Bhattacharya et al.

2013)

E  x   Ealloy e αx (39)

1  Eceramic 
Where α  ln  
L  Ealloy 

Calculation of stress intensity factors for FGM(Rao&Rahman 2003)

Interaction integral approach is widely used to calculate the stress intensity factor at the crack

 
tip.Two states of a cracked body are considered. State 1, ζij1 , εij1 , ui1 , corresponds to the


present state and state 2, ζij 2 , εij 2 , ui 2  is an auxiliary state which will be chosen as the

asymptotic fields for Modes I or II. The J -integral for the sum of the two states is

13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

J 12  J 1  J  2  I 1,2 , where J 1 and J  2 are the J-integrals for state 1 and state 2, I 1,2 is

called the interaction integral for states 1 and 2.

 2 1
1,2  1 ui 2  2 ui
1
1,2   q 1  1 εij  2 εij ζij1  2 ζ ij 2 1 
I   ζij  ζij  W δij  dA   ζ ij  ζ ij  εij  εij  qdA
A x1 x1  x j A
2  x1 x1 x1 x1 
(40)

Where q stands for a weight function chosen such that it has a value of unity at the crack tip,

zero along the boundary of the domain and arbitrary elsewhere, W 

1,2 
is the interaction strain

energy.

W 1,2  ζij1 εij 2  ζij 2 εij1 (41)

The SIF at the crack tip can be computed for plane stress or plane strain conditions using the

interaction integral Eq. 39.

I 1,2 Etip
*

K I , II  (42)
2

 Etip for Plane Stress


*
Where Etip   Etip
1  ν 2 for Plane Strain
 tip

Fatigue crack growth analysis for FGM

The direction of crack growth has been obtained by the maximum principal stress

criterion(Bhattacharya et al. 2013). Therefore the local direction of crack growth ( θc ) is

 K  K 2  8K 2 
θc  2 tan 1  I I II
 (43)
 4 K II 
 

The equivalent SIF for mode-I is obtained by

14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

θ  2  θc   θc 
K Ieq  K I cos3  c   3K II cos  2  sin  2  (44)
 2     

Plastic behaviour of the material is modelled using Ramberg Osgood equation (Shedbale et al.

2013)

1/ n
ζ ζ 
ε   (45)
E H

Where H is the strength coefficient and n is the strain hardening exponent.The value of

n  0.0946 is used for all simulation problems.For stable crack propagation, the generalized

Paris’s law is given as:

 C  ΔK Ieq 
da m
(46)
dN

Where, a is the crack length and N is the number of loading cycles. C and m are material

properties, the values for which are taken as C  3 1011 and m  3 . In actual case the path of

crack growth is curved but in this study the linear crack growth path is taken. Linear crack

extension length Δa for an edge crack is kept constant. For a center crack maximum crack

extension length Δamax is kept on principal crack tip. The principle crack tip is the crack tip

where ΔK Ieq maximum.Crack increment at the other crack tip is given by:

m
 ΔK Ieq 
Δa  Δamax   (47)
 ΔK Ieq max
 

The crack tip extension at the principal crack tip is Δamax and at the other crack tip extension is

smaller. The crack extension takes place K Ieq max  K IC . Crack becomes unstable when

15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

K Ieq max  K IC . Simulation continues until this condition is met. Here K Ieq max is the equivalent

SIF for mode-I at principal crack tip and K IC is the material property called fracture toughness

or critical SIF. K IC for FGM is given by (Bhattacharya et al. 2013)

1/2
 E  x 
 1  νalloy
2
 K IC
alloy

2
1  νceramic
2


K IC  x   K IC   m   ceramic     m  
ceramic
V x 1 V x  (48)
1  νFGM Ealloy K E ceramic  
2
 
  IC  

Where, K IC  x  is the fracture toughness of the FGM at point x. K IC

alloy ceramic
and K IC are the

fracture toughness of the alloy and ceramic, while 𝜈alloy and 𝜈ceramic are Poisson’s ratios for

the alloy and ceramic respectively. Vm  x  denotes the volume fraction for the alloy at point x .

After the crack increment level set functions are used to update the tip and split nodes.

Bench Mark Problem

A rectangular domain of length 100 mm. and height 200 mm. with a center crack is solved by

XFEM under the elastic plastic conditions. In this problem keep α  0 in the Eq. 39 So that the

FGM becomes isotropic material and problem is solved for aluminium alloy of Elastic modulus

71.7 GPa, poisson’s ratio 0.33 and yield strength 520 MPa at 80Mpa load. The results obtained

from present study and the literature results (Singh et al. 2014) are plotted in Fig. 4(a) with

maximum percentage error of 2.94%.

Problem Description

A rectangular plate of functionally graded material of length ( Lt ) 100 mm. and height ( Ht ) 200

mm. with 100% copper nickel alloy on left side and 100% ceramic (alumina) on right side is

considered in the problem. Gradation in property is taken in x-direction, where x varies from x =

16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

0 to x = 100 mm. A uniform traction of 100 Mpa is applied on the top edge of the rectangular

domain along y direction. In some problems domain contains major crack along with minor

cracks or/and holes or/and inclusions. Major crack is located the centre of the left edge or the

centre of the domain. A convergence study for an edge crack of length 20mm is carried out using

different number of nodes in the domain. The results almost converge for different mesh sizes.

This study is depicted in Fig. 4(b). The discontinuities, such as minor cracks, holes and

inclusions are added either singly or in combination with each other. The minor cracks are of

length 3.5--4.5 mm, and are oriented at angles randomly ranging from 0 to 60 0. The holes and

inclusions are of circular nature with their radii varying between 3.0 and 4.5 mm. Problems of

inclusions are simulated for soft inclusions as well as for hard inclusions. All minor

discontinuities are located randomly in the domain such that they do not intersect with each

other. Cyclic loading is applied at top edge of the plate with a maximum value of

 max  100 MPa and minimum value of  min  0 MPa . A uniform mesh of size 117 × 235 nodes

is used for the analysis in each case. The values of SIFs are computed at the tip of the major

crack. MATLAB code is compiled five times for each case and the average values of SIF have

been used for plotting. The variation of SIF with crack length is plotted in each case. The

material properties are taken from the Table 1.

Results & discussions

Case 1.A major crack in FGM plate

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size centre crack is also taken as shown in Fig. 5(a) and Fig. 6(a) respectively.

17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Cyclic loading is applied at the top edge of the FGM plate, and a crack propagates due to this

loading. The plots of SIF with crack length for an edge and centre crack configuration are shown

in Fig. 5(b) and Fig. 6(b), respectively. The crack propagation paths for edge and centre cracks

are shown in Fig. 5(c) and Fig. 6(c), respectively. The failure crack length obtained for edge

crack is 0.0402 m. and maximum crack extension for a centre crack is 0.0401 m.

Case 2.A major crack in FGM plate with holes

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown in Figs. 7(a) and 8(a). 30 holes are

randomly distributed in the domain above and below the major crack. The sizes of the holes vary

randomly from 3 to 4.5 mm. The crack starts propagating due to the cyclic loading applied at the

top edge of the FGM plate. The plots for SIF variation with crack length is shown in Fig. 7(b)

and 8(b). The crack propagation path for edge crack and center crack is shown in Fig. 7(c) and

8(c). The failure crack length for edge crack is obtained 0.0385 m and maximum crack extension

for center crack is 0.0389 m.

Case 3.A major crack in FGM plate with inclusion

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown in Fig. 9(a) and Fig. 10(a). 30

inclusions are randomly distributed in the domain above and below the major crack. The sizes of

the inclusions vary randomly from 3 to 4.5 mm. The crack starts propagating due to the cyclic

loading applied at the top edge of the FGM plate. The plots for SIF variation with crack length of

edge crack is shown in Fig. 9(b) and Fig. 9(d) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The

18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

crack propagation path for edge crack is shown in Fig. 9(c) and Fig. 9(e) for soft and hard

inclusions respectively. The failure crack length for edge crack is obtained 0.0397 m. and 0.0410

m. for soft and hard inclusions respectively.

The plots for SIF variation with crack extension of center crack is shown in Fig. 10(b) and Fig.

10(d) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The crack propagation path for edge crack is

shown in Fig. 10(c) and Fig. 10(e) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The maximum crack

extension before failure for center crack is obtained 0.0391 m. and 0.0411 m. for soft and hard

inclusions respectively.

Case 4.A major crack in FGM plate with minor cracks

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown in Fig. 11(a) and Fig. 12(a).54 minor

cracks are randomly added in the domain above and below the major crack. The sizes of the

minor cracks randomly vary from 3.5 to 4.5 mm, and orientations of cracks vary from 0 to 60 0. A

cyclic load is applied at the top edge of the FGM plate which results in the propagation of cracks.

The plots for SIF variation with crack length is shown in Fig. 11(b) and Fig. 12(b). The crack

propagation path for edge crack and center crack is shown in Fig. 11(c) and Fig. 12(c). The

failure crack length for edge crack is obtained 0.0401 m. and maximum crack extension for a

center crack is 0.0399 m.

Case 5.A major crack in a FGM plate with minor cracks and holes

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown in Fig. 13(a) and Fig. 14(a). 42

19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

minor cracks and 23 holes are randomly distributed in the domain above and below the major

crack. The sizes of the minor cracks vary from 3.5 to 4.5 mm, and their orientation varies from 0

to 600. The radii of the holes also vary randomly from 3 to 4.5 mm. The major crack propagates

due to cyclic load applied at the top edge of the FGM plate. The plots for SIF variation with

crack length is shown in Fig. 13(b) and Fig. 14(b). The crack propagation path for the edge is

shown in Fig.13(c) and Fig. 14(c). The failure crack length for edge crack is obtained as 0.0390

m. and maximum crack extension for center crack is 0.0372 m.

Case 6.A major crack in a FGM plate with minor cracks and inclusions

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown in Fig. 15(a) and Fig. 16(a). 42

minor cracks and 23 inclusions are randomly distributed in the domain above and below the

major crack. The sizes of the minor cracks vary from 3.5 to 4.5 mm, and their orientation varies

from 0 to 600. The radii of the inclusions also vary randomly from 3 to 4.5 mm. The major crack

propagates due to cyclic load applied at the top edge of the FGM plate. The plots for SIF

variation with crack length of edge crack is shown in Figs. 15(b) and Fig. 15(d) for soft and hard

inclusions respectively. The crack propagation path for edge crack is shown in Fig. 15(c) and

Fig. 15(e) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The failure crack length for edge crack is

obtained 0.0397 m. and 0.0408 m. for soft and hard inclusions respectively.

The plots for SIF variation with crack extension of center crack is shown in Fig. 16(b) and Fig.

16(d) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The crack propagation path for edge crack is

shown in Fig. 16(c) and Fig. 16(e) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The maximum crack

20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

extension before failure for center crack is obtained 0.0374 m. and 0.0403 m. for soft and hard

inclusions respectively.

Case 7.A major crack in a FGM plate with holesand inclusions

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm) and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown on Fig. 17(a) and Fig. 18(a). 20

holes and 20 inclusions are randomly added in the domain above and below the major crack. The

radii of holes as well as inclusions vary randomly from 3 to 4.5 mm. The crack starts propagating

due to cyclic loading applied at the top edge of the FGM plate. The plots for SIF variation with

crack length of edge crack is shown in Fig. 17(b) and Fig. 17(d) for soft and hard inclusions

respectively. The crack propagation path for edge crack is shown in Fig. 17(c) and Fig. 17(e) for

soft and hard inclusions respectively. The failure crack length for edge crack is obtained 0.0379

m. and 0.0382 m. for soft and hard inclusions respectively.

The plots for SIF variation with crack extension of center crack is shown in Fig. 18(b) and Fig.

18(d) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The crack propagation path for edge crack is

shown in Fig. 18(c) and Fig. 18(e) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The maximum crack

extension before failure for center crack is obtained 0.0367 m. and 0.0386 m. for soft and hard

inclusions respectively.

Case 8.A major crack in FGM plate with holes, inclusionsand minor cracks

In this case, a major crack of length a  20 mm is taken at the edge of the domain (100 mm × 200

mm)and a same size of center crack is also taken as shown in Fig. 19(a) and Fig. 20(a).Minor

cracks, holes and inclusions are randomly added in the domain above and below the major crack.

21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The sizes of all 36 minor cracks vary randomly from 3.5 to 4.5 mm, and their orientation is

varying from 0 to 600. In addition to 36 minor cracks, 15 holes and 15 inclusions are also added

in the domain. The locations of holes and inclusions are also taken randomly in the domain. The

radii of these holes and inclusions vary from 3 to 4.5 mm. The crack propagates due to applied

cyclic loading at the top edge of the FGM plate. The plots for SIF variation with crack length of

edge crack is shown in Fig. 19(b) and Fig. 19(d) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The

crack propagation path for edge crack is shown in Fig. 19(c) and Fig. 19(e) for soft and hard

inclusions respectively. The failure crack length for edge crack is obtained 0.0384 m. and 0.0392

m. for soft and hard inclusions respectively.

The plots for SIF variation with crack extension of center crack is shown in Fig. 20(b) and Fig.

20(d) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The crack propagation path for edge crack is

shown in Fig. 20(c) and Fig. 20(e) for soft and hard inclusions respectively. The maximum crack

extension before failure for center crack is obtained 0.0351 m. and 0.0363 m. for soft and hard

inclusions respectively.

Conclusions

In the present study the simulation of cracks in a FGM plate has been carried out in the presence

of multiple inhomogeneities by XFEM using elastic-plastic formulation. SIF has been calculated

at the tip of the major crack using interaction integral approach. The variation in the SIF at the

tip of the major crack has been studied when multiple inhomogeneities are present in the domain.

On the basis of this study it is found that effect of minor crack in the domain’s failure crack

length is minimum, whereas soft inclusions have moderate effect and the effect of holes have

22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

maximum effect. It is observed that the crack growth is more before the failure in each case

when hard inclusions are present in place of soft inclusions. Hence the presence of the hard

inclusions in the plate increases the failure crack length of the plate i.e. plate survives more. The

failure crack length of the material depends on the number, locations, orientations and sizes of

inhomogeneities.This work can be further extended for fatigue life, thermal loads and thermo-

mechanical loads.

23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

References

Belytschko, T., Moes, N., Usui, S., Parimi, C.: Arbitrary discontinuities in finite elements. Int. J.

Numer. Meth. Engng. 50, 993-1013 (2001)

Belytschko, T. & Black, T.:Elastic crack growth in finite elements with minimal remeshing. Int.

J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 45, 601-620 (1999)

Bhattacharya, S., Singh, I.V., Mishra, B.K.: XFEM simulation of cracks, holes and inclusions in

functionally graded materials.Int. J. Mech. Mater. Des. 7, 199–218 (2011)

Bhattacharya, S., Singh, I.V. & Mishra, B.K.: Fatigue-life estimation of functionally graded

materials using XFEM. Engineering with Computers 29, 427–448 (2013)

Bhattacharya,S., Singh, I.V. & Mishra, B.K.: Mixed-mode fatigue crack growth analysis of

functionally graded materials by XFEM. Int. J. Fract. 183, 81–97 (2013)

Bhattacharya, S., Singh, I.V., Mishra, B.K. & Bui, T.Q.: Fatigue crack growth simulations of

interfacial cracks in bi-layered FGMs using XFEM.Comput. Mech. 52, 799–814 (2013)

Bhattacharya, S. & Sharma, K.: Fatigue crack growth simulations of FGM plate under cyclic

thermal load by XFEM. Procedia Engineering 86, 727 – 731(2014)

Chessa, J., Smolinski, P. & Belytschko, T.: The extended finite element method ( XFEM ) for

solidification problems. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 53, 1959–1977 (2002)

Daux, C., Moes, N. & Dolbow, J.: Arbitrary branched and intersecting cracks with the extended

finite element method. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 48, 1741-1760 (2000)

24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fries, T. & Belytschko, T.: The intrinsic XFEM : a method for arbitrary discontinuities without

additional unknowns. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng.68, 1358–1385 (2006)

Huynh, D.B.P. & Belytschko, T.: The extended finite element method for fracture in composite

materials.Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng.(2008)

Jameel, A. & Harmain, G.A.: Fatigue crack growth in presence of material discontinuities by

EFGM. International Journal of Fatigue 81, 105–116 (2015)

Jameel, A. & Harmain, G.A.: Modeling and numerical simulation of fatigue crack growth in

cracked specimens containing material discontinuities. Strength of Materials, Vol. 48, No.

2, (2016)

Kumar, B.A., Singh, I. V.& Saran, V.H.: Elasto-plastic EFGM analysis of an edge

crack.Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering Vol. II (2009)

Kumar, S., Singh, I. V.& Mishra, B.K.: Numerical investigation of stable crack growth in ductile

materials using XFEM. Procedia Engineering 64, 652 – 660 (2013)

Liu, X.Y., Xiao, Q.Z. & Karihaloo, B.L.: XFEM for direct evaluation of mixed mode SIFs in

homogeneous and bi-materials.Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng.59, 1103–1118 (2004)

Moes, N., Dolbow, J. & Belytschko, T.: A finite element method for crack growth without

remeshing. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 46,131-150 (1999)

Nagashima, T., Omoto, Y. & Tani, S.: Stress intensity factor analysis of interface cracks using

X-FEM. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 56, 1151–1173 (2003)

25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Prabel, B.,Combescure, A., Gravouil, A.& Marie, S.: Level set X-FEM non-matching meshes :

Application to dynamic crack propagation in elastic – plastic media. Int. J. Numer. Meth.

Engng.69, 1553–1569 (2007)

Rao, B.N. & Rahman, S.: An interaction integral method for analysis of cracks in orthotropic

functionally graded materials. Computational Mechanics. 32, 40–51 (2003)

Shedbale, A.S., Singh, I. V.& Mishra, B.K.: Nonlinear simulation of an embedded crack in the

presence of holes and inclusions by XFEM. Procedia Engineering. 64, 642 – 651 (2013)

Singh, I.V., Mishra, B.K., Kumar, S. & Shedbale, A. S.: Nonlinear fatigue crack growth analysis

of a center crack plate by XFEM. Advanced Material Manufacturing & Characterization

Vol. 4 Issue 1 (2014)

Singh, I.V., Mishra, B.K., Bhattacharya, S. & Patil, R.U.: The numerical simulation of fatigue

crack growth using extended finite element method.International Journal of Fatigue 36,

109–119 (2012)

Sohn, D., Lim, J.H., Cho, Y.S., Kim, J.H. & Im, S.: Finite element analysis of quasistatic crack

propagation in brittle media with voids or inclusions. Journal of Computational Physics

Volume 230, Issue 17, 6866–6899 (2011)

Sukumar, N., Chopp, D.L., Moes, N. & Belytschko, T.: Modeling holes and inclusions by level

sets in the extended finite-element method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 190

(2001) 6183-6200 (2001)

Sukumar, N.,Huang, Z.Y., Prévost, J.H., Suo, Z.: Partition of unity enrichment for bimaterial

26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

interface cracks. , Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng.59, 1075–1102 (2004)

Yazid, A., Abdelkader, N. & Abdelmadjid, H.: A state-of-the-art review of the X-FEM for

computational fracture mechanics.Applied Mathematical Modelling 33, 4269–4282 (2009)

27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1 Material property table (Bhattacharya et al. 2013)

Material properties Values

Elastic modulus of Copper Nickel alloy (Gpa) 160

Elastic modulus of Alumina (ceramic) (Gpa) 386

Elastic modulus of Soft Inclusion (Gpa) 100

Elastic modulus of Hard Inclusion (Gpa) 400

Poisson’s Ratio of Copper Nickel alloy 0.35

Poisson’s Ratio of Alumina (ceramic) 0.21

Poisson’s Ratio of soft inclusion 0.3

Poisson’s Ratio of hard inclusion 0.3

Poisson’s Ratio of inclusion 0.23

Fracture Toughness of Copper Nickel alloy (MPa√ ) 79

Fracture Toughness of Alumina (ceramic) (MPa√ ) 5

Paris constant 3×10-11

Paris exponent 3

28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig.1 Domain with discontinuities

29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 2 FGM plate geometry

30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig.3 Path independent closed contour around crack tip

31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 4(a) Comparison of literature result and present study

32
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 4(b): Convergence study for the grid for an edge crack

33
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 5 (a) FGM plate with an Edge crack (b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack length (c) Path

of edge crack propagation

34
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 6 (a) FGM plate with a center crack (b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack extension(c)

Path of center crack propagation

35
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 7 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 30 holes(b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack

length (c) Path of edge crack propagation

36
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 8 (a) FGM plate with a center crack 30 holes(b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack

extension(c) Path of center crack propagation

37
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

38
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 9 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 30 inclusions(b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack

length for soft inclusions(c) Path of edge crackpropagation for soft inclusions(d) Plot for

variation of SIF with crack length for hard inclusions(e) Path of edge crackpropagation for hard

inclusions

39
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

40
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 10 (a) FGM plate with a center crack 30 inclusions(b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack

extension for soft inclusions(c) Path of center crackpropagation for soft inclusions(d) Plot for

variation of SIF with crack extension for hard inclusions(e) Path of center crackpropagation for

hard inclusions

41
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 11 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 54 minor cracks(b) Plot for variation of SIF with

crack length (c) Path of edge crack propagation

42
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 12 (a) FGM plate with a center crack 54 minor cracks(b) Plot for variation of SIF with crack

extension(c) Path of center crack propagation

43
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 13 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 23 holes and 42 minor cracks(b) Plot for variation

of SIF with crack length (c) Path of edge crack propagation

44
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 14 (a) FGM plate with a center 23 holes and crack 42 minor cracks(b) Plot for variation of

SIF with crack extension(c) Path of center crack propagation

45
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

46
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 15 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 23 inclusions and 42 minor cracks(b) Plot for

variation of SIF with crack length for soft inclusions(c) Path of edge crackpropagation for soft

inclusions(d) Plot for variation of SIF with crack length for hard inclusions(e) Path of edge

crackpropagation for hard inclusions

47
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

48
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 16 (a) FGM plate with a center 23 inclusions and crack 42 minor cracks(b) Plot for variation

of SIF with crack extension for soft inclusions(c) Path of center crackpropagation for soft

inclusions(d) Plot for variation of SIF with crack extension for hard inclusions(e) Path of center

crackpropagation for hard inclusions

49
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

50
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 17 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 20 inclusions and 20 holes(b) Plot for variation of

SIF with crack length for soft inclusions(c) Path of edge crackpropagation for soft inclusions(d)

Plot for variation of SIF with crack length for hard inclusions(e) Path of edge crackpropagation

for hard inclusions

51
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

52
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 18 (a) FGM plate with a center 20 inclusions and 20 holes(b) Plot for variation of SIF with

crack extension for soft inclusions(c) Path of center crackpropagation for soft inclusions(d) Plot

for variation of SIF with crack extension for hard inclusions(e) Path of center crackpropagation

for hard inclusions

53
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

54
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 19 (a) FGM plate with an edge crack and 15 inclusions, 15 holes and 36 minor cracks (b)

Plot for variation of SIF with crack length for soft inclusions(c) Path of edge crackpropagation

for soft inclusions(d) Plot for variation of SIF with crack length for hard inclusions(e) Path of

edge crackpropagation for hard inclusions

55
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

56
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig. 20 (a) FGM plate with a center crack and 15 inclusions, 15 holes and 36 minor cracks (b)

Plot for variation of SIF with crack extension for soft inclusions(c) Path of center

crackpropagation for soft inclusions(d) Plot for variation of SIF with crack extension for hard

inclusions(e) Path of center crackpropagation for hard inclusions

57
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT