Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tafmec

Simulation of mixed mode I-II crack propagation in concrete using

toughness-based crack initiation-propagation criterion with modified
fracture energy
Zhuheng Li a, Yujie Gong b, Fengjuan Chen c, *
a
State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
b
China Institute of Building Standard Design and Research Co Ltd, Beijing, 101100, China
c
Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering of Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124 China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The fracture behaviors of quasi-brittle materials such as concrete were evaluated based on the crack propagation
Modified fracture energy criterion, and among all criterions reported in the literature, the toughness-based crack initiation-propagation
Mixed mode I-II crack propagation (TCIP) criterion capable of capturing simultaneously the crack initiation and propagation was widely used.
Toughness-based crack initiation-propagation
Recently, a modified fracture parameter was introduced to ensure the energy balance relationship, however, the
criterion
Spring element
use of the modified parameter-based TCIP criterion was limited only to mode-I fracture of quasi-brittle materials.
In the context of mixed-mode fracture problems, an extra effort was made in this paper to extend the modified
parameter-based TCIP criterion previously developed for the mode-I fracture to the mixed mode I-II fracture.
Application of the extended criterion was performed on three-point bending beams with offset and multi-segment
notches through finite element analysis, in which the cohesive force at the fracture process zone was applied
through nonlinear spring elements. On concrete materials, the full crack trajectories for mixed mode I-II fracture
and nonlinear mechanical responses such as P-δ, P-CMOD, and P-CMSD curves were numerically obtained in the
present paper. With the modified fracture energy parameter, good consistency was found between the numerical
results given by the reported model and experiments. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the use of TCIP
criterion with the modified fracture energy parameter on concretes was bounded, it would be more prominent on
other geomaterials such as rocks, for both static and dynamic analysis.

1. Introduction
In practical engineering, a mixed-mode fracture that exhibits a
combination of the morphologies associated with pure modes I and II
occur frequently in concrete structures, yielding unexpected damages
and material degradation. Compared to pure crack mode I (opening
mode) or mode II (sliding mode) resulting from tensile or shear stress
respectively, the stress state near the crack tip of mixed mode I-II frac­
ture is rather complicated, yielding a tortuous crack propagation path.
Among all classical experimental tests performed for investigating the
effects of the stress field near the crack tip on the fracture mode and the
crack propagation trajectories of concrete materials, single-edge-
notched beam [1] (four-point shear specimen), double-edge-notched
specimen [2,3], centrally cracked Brazilian disk specimen, semi-
circular bending specimen [4,5], and three-point bending beam with
offset notch [6,7] were generally used for mixed mode I-II fracture tests.
Despite the discrepancy in the crack propagation trajectories due to the
different geometries of the above-mentioned specimen, a general trend
shows that the specimens were fractured rapidly after the crack initia­
tion due to the brittleness of the concrete material, only a small part of
the descending part of the stress–strain curve can be obtained from the
experiments. For obtaining the full load–displacement curve, a design
method for a three-point bending beam with a multi-segment notch [8]
was recently proposed for mixed mode I-II fracture. In the analysis of the
fracture mode and the related non-linear behavior of concrete materials,
both the damage criterion and the discussion about the stability of
damage evolution require an estimate of the crack initiation criterion
and the crack propagation laws.
In the field of the mixed-mode I-II crack initiation criterions, most of
the results were proposed in the framework of linear elastic fracture
mechanics (LEFM) by giving crack initiation direction and critical

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: fengjuanchen@bjut.edu.cn (F. Chen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2022.103701
Received 13 September 2022; Received in revised form 26 October 2022; Accepted 21 November 2022
Available online 25 November 2022
0167-8442/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

Nomenclature FPZ
mgδ0 work done by self-weight of the beam
a0 initial crack length P external load
Δa crack propagation length S, D, B span, depth, and width of the beam, respectively
Alig ligament area W0 area under the P-δ curve
CMOD crack mouth opening displacement w crack opening displacement
CMSD crack mouth sliding displacement ws crack opening displacement of turning point in bilinear
E Young’s modulus softening constitutive
ft tensile strength w0 critical crack opening displacement
Gf fracture energy of a material α crack propagation angle
Gf− m modified fracture energy γ xy shear strain
KI mode I stress intensity factor δ displacement at the loading point
KII mode II stress intensity factor εx strain along X axis
Kini
Ic initial fracture toughness of a material εy strain along Y axis
KPI mode I stress intensity factor caused by an external load θ initial angle in TCIP criterion
KPII mode II stress intensity factor caused by an external load σ normal cohesive force
KσI mode I stress intensity factor caused by cohesive force in σs cohesive force of turning point in bilinear softening
FPZ constitutive
KσII mode II stress intensity factor caused by cohesive force in

condition of crack initiation, which have remarkable contributions to

the understanding of the corresponding mechanisms. For instance, the
maximum tangential stress (MTS) criterion suggests that a crack initiates
as long as the tensile stress located at a given distance from the crack tip
reaches a certain value, and it develops along the direction perpendic­
D
ular to the direction of the greatest tension [9]. The maximum tangential
strain (MTSN) criterion considers that a crack propagates along the di­
a rection perpendicular to the maximum tangential strain if the tangential
strain reaches its critical value [10–12]. Later on, MTS and MTSN cri­
S terion were further modified by considering the T-stress and T-strain at
B
S the crack tip, namely the generalized MTS criterion [5] and EMTSN
criterion [13–15]. While the strain energy density (SED) criterion states
Fig. 1. The schematic diagram of the beam specimen for mode I fracture. that the cracks develop in the direction of the minimal strain-ener­
gy–density factor and initiate only in the case where the strain-ener­
gy–density factor reaches a critical value [16]. Based on Griffith’s theory
Table 1 [6,17,18], the maximum energy release rate (MERR) criterion postulates
Material properties. that the crack initiates along the direction in which the energy release
Concrete ft (MPa) E(GPa) Kini
Ic (MPam
1/2
) Gf (N/m) Gf− m (N/m) rate reaches its critical value. Despite different theories employed in the
C30
above-mentioned crack initiation criterions, all critical values in the
3.35 35.38 0.61 124.5 114.0
initiation criterions are in the form of stress intensity factors, for purpose
of considering the singularity at the crack tip as in LEFM. It was proved
by comparing with experimental data that all criterions give relatively
good accuracy in the prediction of mechanical responses of a concrete
undergoing mixed mode I-II fracture. However, one must notice that the
mechanical behavior of a concrete-like material is nonlinear due to the
crack developments, despite the good ability of the LEFM-based method
in estimating the crack path [19–21], the LEFM-based method fails in
predicting the nonlinear mechanical behavior for the concrete materials
containing mixed mode I-II fracture.
Thus, the determination of mixed mode I-II crack propagation cri­
terion to simulate the entire crack propagation process was required. For
mode I fracture, Hillerborg [22] proposed a fictitious crack model (FCM)
in which the stress singularity at the crack tip can be eliminated by
applying cohesive stress to Fracture Process Zone (FPZ). With FCM, the
crack forms if the stress at the crack tip reaches the tensile strength, and
the cohesive stress reduces progressively with the increasing crack open
displacement. Due to the existence of the cohesive stress on FPZ, the
subsequent crack propagation is delayed. The advantage of the FCM is
shown by its capacity of ensuring the energy balance relationship and
Fig. 2. Bilinear softening constitutive relationship.
evaluating the nonlinear behavior of the concrete with mode I fracture.
Extensions of FCM to mixed mode I-II fracture were performed later, and
several crack propagation criterions including stress-based, energy-

2
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

P P
Fig. 3. Comparison between P − δ & P-CMOD curves obtained by numerical simulations with different constitutive relationships and experiments (C30).

Fig. 4. The beam specimen for mixed mode I-II fracture (C30).

a a

S
B
S

Fig. 5. The beam specimen for mixed mode I-II fracture (C25).

based, and stress intensity factor (SIF)-based approaches were proposed

Table 2
for mixed mode I-II fracture. With the stress-based criterion, the tensile
Material properties.
strength of the material is utilized to determine crack propagation
Concrete ft (MPa) E(GPa) Kini
Ic (MPam
1/2
) Gf (N/m) Gf− m (N/m) [21,23–26]. For instance, considering the tension softening and inter­
C25 2.33 25.44 0.475 95.0 86.1 face shear in FPZ, Prasad conducted a mixed-mode I-II crack propaga­
tion simulation of a four-point shear specimen based on the MTS [23].
With the energy-based criterion, it was assumed that a crack propagates
if the strain energy release rate exceeds the dissipated energy in FPZ
[27]. The energy-based criterion was later applied in the numerical

3
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

Table 3 Ooi [33–36] for mixed mode I-II fracture by numerical simulations.
Specimen geometric parameters and KIIini /KIini ratios. It is important to emphasize the fact that the critical conditions for
Specimen number a0 (mm) β(◦ ) Kini ini crack initiation in LEFM and propagation in FCM are different, the
II /KI
LEFM-based models are efficient in predicting the crack initiation but
C25-0.2–22.5 30 22.5 0.23
fail in predicting the crack propagation, while FCM-based models ensure
C25-0.2–45.0 30 45.0 0.47
C25-0.2–67.5 30 67.5 0.76 the energy balance relationship but fail in characterizing the crack
C25-0.2–90.0 30 90.0 1.23 initiation for quasi-brittle materials.
C25-0.3–22.5 45 22.5 0.21 To overcome the drawbacks of the LEFM-based and the FCM-based
C25-0.3–45.0 45 45.0 0.45 models, Wu proposed a toughness-based crack initiation-propagation
C25-0.3–67.5 45 67.5 0.73
C25-0.3–90.0 45 90.0 1.16
(TCIP) criterion in which the crack initiation criterion was assumed
C25-0.4–22.5 60 22.5 0.19 the same as the LEFM approach [37]. For instance, with the TCIP cri­
C25-0.4–45.0 60 45.0 0.41 terion, it was hypothesized that the crack initiates and propagates if the
C25-0.4–67.5 60 67.5 0.68 SIF at the crack tip reaches the initial fracture toughness of the material.
C25-0.5–67.5 75 67.5 0.63
However, instead of vanishing to zero, the value of SIF that resulted from
the external load and the cohesive stress at the crack tip was assumed to
works of [28–31], and a good consistency has been found between the be the same as the initial fracture toughness along with the crack
simulation results and the experimental observations. While the SIF- propagation. Numerical simulations of mode I and mixed mode I-II crack
based criterion that is initially proposed for mode I fracture by propagation processes were performed by Wu et al. [37,38], and the
assuming that the crack propagates when the stress intensity factor at simulated crack trajectories, P-CMOD curves, and P-CMSD curves were
the crack tip on the cohesive zone (i.e. FPZ) vanishes to zero [32]. Later consistent with the experimental results. Later, Dong et al. [39,40]
on, extensions of the SIF-based criterion were made by Moës, Yang, and compared different crack propagation criterions and proved that the

i ai a
E
G K f

i i i

i i

i Pi i
i i

Fig. 6. Flow diagram of the numerical simulation process.

4
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

one must notice that the basic assumptions for crack propagation in TCIP
are different from the FCM. Unlike the FCM in which the crack resistance
is generated by the cohesive force, the crack resistance in the TCIP cri­
terion is provided by both the cohesive force and the initial fracture
toughness. In other words, the TCIP criterion overestimates the energy
consumed in the fracture process with the singularity at the crack tip,
which cannot ensure the energy balance relationship. Thus, modifica­
tion of the fracture energy parameter involved in the TCIP criterion is
required for surmounting this shortcoming. In addition to not satisfying
the energy balance relationship, previous TCIP criterion-based numeri­
cal approaches [8,38,40,46] do not allow for the obtaining of the
complete crack propagation trajectories and the corresponding me­
chanical responses (for instance, the P-CMOD and P-CMSD curves) for
mixed mode I-II fracture.
In this paper, TCIP criterion with modified fracture energy parameter
previously developed for mode-I fracture was extended to mixed mode I-
II fracture. Implementations of the proposed criterion with the modified
fracture energy in the numerical simulations were made on several
concrete beams with different fracture modes, and the complete crack
propagation trajectories and the relevant curves reflecting the me­
chanical behaviors of a fractured concrete were simulated along with the
crack propagation by an improved numerical method. Specifically,
Section 2 elaborates on the algorithm for modifying the fracture energy
in mixed mode I-II crack propagation. Section 3 and Section 4 present
material parameters, softening constitutive relationships used for all
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of the crack opening.

TCIP criterion gave satisfactory predictions for mode I and mixed mode
I-II crack propagation. Except for quasi-brittle materials such as con­
crete, the application of TCIP criterion can also be enlarged to other
heterogeneous materials [41–45] and loading conditions (for instance,
dynamic or sustained loadings [46,47]).
From an energy point of view, it can be considered that the TCIP
criterion is based on the FCM since the dissipated energy on FPZ remains
the same as in FCM (equal to the fracture energy of material). However, Fig. 9. The mesh generation of the used TPB composed of C30.

a y

a a x

y
x
m a y
a y x
a y
a x
y
a x
a y
x
a
x

Fig. 8. Nodal coordinate system of the spring elements as the crack propagation.

5
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

Fig. 10. P − δ curves of TPBs (C30 and C25) undergoing mixed mode I-II fracture calculated by the TCIP criterion with and without the modification of fracture
energy, respectively.

concrete, and the numerical approach introduced in the present paper

Table 4 based on the TCIP criterion. While Section 5 illustrates numerical results
Recalculated fracture energy from..Gf − m with the relevant discussions, and Section 6 gives some concluding
Specimen W0 (N⋅m) mgδ0 (N⋅m) Alig (cm2 ) Gf− rec (N⋅m) % remarks.
number

C30 0.6824 0.0964 62.4 124.8 0.2 % 2. TCIP criterion with the modified fracture energy parameter
C25-0.2–22.5 0.2773 0.0631 36.0 94.5 − 0.5 % for the mixed mode fracture
C25-0.2–45.0 0.3041 0.0631 38.4 95.6 0.7 %
C25-0.2–67.5 0.3441 0.0622 42.4 95.8 0.9 %
C25-0.2–90.0 0.3896 0.0622 47.2 95.7 0.8 %
Starting from the TCIP criterion proposed by Wu et al. [37], this
C25-0.3–22.5 0.1704 0.0589 24.0 95.5 0.6 % section focuses on the derivation of the modified fracture energy
C25-0.3–45.0 0.2102 0.0589 28.0 96.1 1.1 % parameter for mixed mode I-II fracture of quasi-brittle materials. The
C25-0.3–67.5 0.2653 0.0589 34.4 94.2 − 0.8 % original form of the TCIP criterion proposed by Wu et al. [37] was based
C25-0.3–90.0 0.3322 0.0589 41.6 94.0 − 1.0 %
C25-0.4–22.5 0.0633 0.0673 13.6 96.0 1.1 %
on the initial fracture toughness Kini
Ic , and it takes the following form:
C25-0.4–45.0 0.1136 0.0547 17.6 95.6 0.6 %
K P − K σ = KIcini (1)
C25-0.4–67.5 0.1909 0.0547 25.6 95.9 1.0 %
C25-0.5–67.5 0.1129 0.0547 17.6 95.2 0.2 %
with K and K the stress intensity factor caused by external load and
P σ

*Gf − rec means recalculated fracture energy based on the simulated P − δ curves, Ic the initial fracture toughness of con­
cohesive force, respectively; Kini
% means the difference percentage of the Gf − rec from Gf of materials. crete. Without the presence of cohesive (Kσ = 0), Eq. (1) is transformed
to the classical criterion as in LEFM; while without considering the
initial fracture toughness Kini
Ic , Eq. (1) is transformed to the classical
criterion as in FCM.
Table 5 Submitting the MTS criterion [9] that takes the following form
Recalculated fracture energy from..Gf [ ]
θ θ 3
Specimen number W0 (N⋅m) mgδ0 (N⋅m) Alig (cm2 ) Gf− rec (N⋅m) % cos KI cos2 − KII sinθ = KIc (2)
2 2 2
C30 0.7289 0.0964 62.4 132.3 6.2 %
C25-0.2–22.5 0.3017 0.0631 36.0 101.3 6.6 % into Eq. (1) yields expressed the TCIP criterion for mixed mode I-II
C25-0.2–45.0 0.3313 0.0631 38.4 102.7 8.1 % fracture:
C25-0.2–67.5 0.3740 0.0622 42.4 102.9 8.3 % [ ]
C25-0.2–90.0 0.4234 0.0622 47.2 102.9 8.3 % θ ( P ) θ 3( P )
cos KI − KIσ cos2 − KII − KIIσ sinθ = KIcini (3)
C25-0.3–22.5 0.1835 0.0589 24.0 101.0 6.3 % 2 2 2
C25-0.3–45.0 0.2274 0.0589 28.0 102.2 7.6 %
C25-0.3–67.5 0.2883 0.0589 34.4 100.9 6.2 % with the initial angle of the TCIP criterion θ expressed as follows
C25-0.3–90.0 0.3622 0.0589 41.6 101.2 6.5 % [38]:
C25-0.4–22.5 0.0666 0.0673 13.6 98.4 3.6 %
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
C25-0.4–45.0 0.1212 0.0547 17.6 99.9 5.2 % 1 2
C25-0.4–67.5 0.2055 0.0547 25.6 101.6 7.0 % θ = 2arctan [(KIP − KIσ )/(KIIP − KIIσ ) ± ((K PI − K σI )/(K PII − K σII )) + 8]
4
C25-0.5–67.5 0.1215 0.0547 17.6 100.1 5.3 %
(4)
*Gf − rec means recalculated fracture energy based on the simulated P − δ curves,
Here, subscript I and II denote mode I and mode II fracture,
% means the difference percentage of the Gf − rec from Gf of materials.
respectively; and KIc denotes the fracture toughness of concrete.
Once Eq. (3) is fulfilled, the crack initiates in the concrete. The
propagation direction is perpendicular to the direction of the maximum
principal tensile strain at the crack tip [8], whereas the angle of the
maximum principal tensile strain α is expressed as follows:

6
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

Fig. 11. Comparison between the numerically calculated P-CMOD & P-CMSD curves (with and without the modification of fracture energy) and the experiments.

1 be written as follows:
α = arctan(γxy /(εx − εy )) (5)
2 ( ini )2 ∫ w ∫ s0
d ( ) K 0

where γxy is the shear strain at the crack tip, εx and εy are the strains GR = We + Wp = Ic + σ (w)dw + τ(s)ds (6)
da E
along the X-axis and Y-axis.
0 0

Nevertheless, expressing the TCIP criterion in terms of the stress where We , Wp , E, w0 , s0 represent the consumed elastic energy,
intensity factor raises difficulties in understanding the energy trans­ consumed inelastic energy, the elastic module of the material, critical
formation mechanism during crack propagation. From an energy point crack opening displacement, critical crack sliding displacement, and
of view, the energy release rate GR correlated to the TCIP criterion can σ (w) and τ(s) represent the normal and tangential softening constitutive

7
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

(d) C25-0.2-67.5

(e) C25-0.2-90.0

(f) C25-0.3-22.5
Fig. 11. (continued).

respectively. Since the type-II component can be ignored for mixed- material resistance provided by the initial fracture toughness and the
mode I-II crack propagation [40], Eq. (6) can be rewritten as follows: cohesion force in FPZ, respectively.
( ini )2 ∫ w For the FCM, the energy release rate can be further simplified and be
d ( ) K written in the integral form as follows:
0
GR = We + Wp = Ic + σ(w)dw (7)
da E 0 ∫ w0
dWp
revealing that the energy consumption is mainly caused by the GR = = σ(w)dw (8)
da 0

8
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

(g) C25-0.3-45.0

(h) C25-0.3-67.5

(i) C25-0.3-90.0
Fig. 11. (continued).

According to the energy balance relationship, the energy release rate
GR should be identical to the fracture energy Gf , so all the energy is
consumed by cohesion in FPZ, which is the same as the assumption of
FCM. However, if the plastic energy consumed by cohesion in the TCIP
criterion is still considered as fracture energy Gf , the total energy con­
sumption will be overestimated. Li proposed a modified fracture energy
parameter Gf− m for the TCIP criterion [48] and verified the method in
pure mode I crack propagations. By Eq. (7), it is concluded that the
modified fracture energy parameter Gf− m can be further applied for
mixed mode I-II crack propagation. The expression for modified fracture
energy Gf− m is shown in Eq. (9).

9
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

(j) C25-0.4-22.5

(k) C25-0.4-45.0

(l) C25-0.4-67.5
Fig. 11. (continued).

(
KIcini
)2 calculated by Eq. (9) for the consumption of cohesive force in the frac­
Gf − m = Gf − (9) ture process zone. By choosing an appropriate softening constitutive
E
2
relationship for cohesive force, the entire process of mixed mode I-II
(Kini ) crack propagation can be simulated.
where the IcE the term represents the elastic energy consumption
corresponding to the initial fracture toughness Kini This section gives the explicit formulas of TCIP criterion with the
Ic . After eliminating the
effect of the elastic energy consumption, the plastic energy can be modified fracture energy parameter Gf− m being extended to mixed mode

10
Z. Li et al.
(m) C25-0.5-67.5
Fig. 11. (continued).
I-II fracture. Before applying the extended TCIP criterion on quasi-brittle
materials such as concretes for evaluating the crack initialization,
propagation and the corresponding mechanical behaviors, the consti­
tutive relation that described the strain softening behaviors of crack-
induced concrete materials need to be assessed. In the next section,
using experiments of Jia [49] and Sun [8] in which the material pa­
rameters were reported, the softening constitutive relations of concretes
for mixed mode I-II fracture were derived.
3. Softening constitutive relations of concretes for mixed mode
I-II fracture
Starting from mode I fracture, Jia [49] performed three-point
bending beams tests with a mode I fracture on the example of con­
crete C30, and obtained the initial fracture toughness Kini Ic and the frac­
ture energy Gf with values of 0.61 MPa • m1/2 and 124.5 N/m,
respectively. According, the modified fracture energy Gf− m was deter­
mined as 114.0 N/m by Eq. (9). The schematic diagram of the beam
specimen of dimension S × D × B = 640mm × 160mm × 80mm for mode
I fracture was shown in Fig. 1 and the initial crack length a0 was 48mm.
Table 1 gathers the material properties of C30, thereinto, the tensile
strength ft and the elastic modulus E was measured as 3.35 MPa and
35.38 GPa.
Regarding the constitutive behavior [50], both Petersson’s bilinear
softening relationship [51] and a new bilinear softening relationship
based on TCIP criterion were implemented in numerical simulations for
the mode I fracture, the illustration of bilinear softening constitutive
relationship is shown in Fig. 2. The used parameters in Petersson’s
bilinear softening relationship and the new bilinear softening relation­
ship was σs = 13ft , ws = 0.8Gf− m /ft , w0 = 3.6Gf− m /ft and σs = 0.28ft ,
ws = 0.6Gf − m /ft , w0 = 5Gf− m /ft , respectively. By comparing with ex­
periments denoted by TPB-1, TPB-2, and TPB-3 in Jia [49], Fig. 3 shows
that the new bilinear softening constitutive relationship with the
modified fracture energy gives a better fit. Therefore, for C30, the new
bilinear softening constitutive relationship with parameters σ s = 0.28ft ,
ws = 0.6Gf− m /ft , w0 = 5Gf− m /ft was identified as the most suitable
softening constitutive relationship.
Extended to mixed mode I-II fracture, Jia [49] performed addition­
ally experimental tests on the three-point bending beams of the same
dimension S × D × B = 640mm × 160mm × 80mm for mixed mode I-II
fracture with initial crack length a0 of 40 mm and the notch at the
location with a distance of S/4 = 160mm from the left support, as
illustrated in Fig. 4.
With similar experimental procedures, Sun [8] conducted three-
11
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701
point bending tests of S × D × B = 600mm × 150mm × 40mm for con­
crete C25. As shown in Fig. 5, the beam was of dimension S × D × B =
600mm × 150mm × 40mm with a two-segment notch at the bottom of
the beam at mid-span. The notch was different from that in the experi­
ments of Jia [49], each segment had the same length a0 , and the second
segment had an inclined angle β with the vertical direction. During the
tests, a0 and β were changed to obtain different Kini ini
II /KI ratios. Table 2
gathers the material parameters of concrete C25 and Table 3 illustrates
the values of Kini ini
II /KI for a series of tests with different values of a0 and β.
The specimens were named by following the rule “Grade- A-B’’ with A
and B representing the crack length-depth ratio a0 /D and the inclination
angle β, respectively. Moreover, as suggested in the experiments for C30,
the new bilinear constitutive relationship was adopted for describing the
softening behavior of C25 with parameters of σ s = 0.25ft , ws =
0.6Gf− m /ft , w0 = 5.6Gf− m /ft .
In the next section, material parameters and the constitutive re­
lationships identified above for C30 and C25 were used for the numer­
ical simulation of mixed mode I-II fracture.
4. Numerical procedure
ANSYS finite element software was used to simulate the whole pro­
cess of mixed mode I-II crack propagation. To simplify the calculation of
the stress intensity factor based on the displacement extrapolation
method, the singular element is used at the crack tip to represent − 1/2
singularity.
In the previous studies based on the TCIP criterion, the cohesive
force was calculated by the deformation caused by the external load
[8,38,40,46]. No attention has been paid to the effect of cohesive force
on the crack closure, thus, the calculating accuracy is unsatisfactory. In
the present simulation, the nonlinear spring element (Combin 39) in
ANSYS is used to apply cohesive force in the FPZ, the predictive accu­
racy is proved by comparing with experimental results and the complete
crack propagation path can be simulated [49,52], unlike the previously
used numerical approaches by which the crack trajectories and the
descending branches of the relevant curves (i.e. P-CMOD, P-CMSD) were
incomplete [8,38,40,46].
Based on the TCIP criterion with modified fracture energy, the
simulation was carried out by following the flow diagram as illustrated
in Fig. 6, and the numerical procedure is elaborated in the following
steps.
(1) Determine the input material properties, such as E, Kini
Ic , Gf− m , ft
etc. and the constitutive softening equations;
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

G G
G G

G G
G G

G G
G G

G G
G G

G G
G G

Fig. 12. Comparison of the crack trajectories.

(2) Establish the numerical model by finite element method;
(3) Apply displacement δ(1) at the loading point and calculate the
corresponding stress intensity factor KPI and KPII . Once the crack
initiates (Eq. (3) is fully satisfied), calculate α(1) that determines
the crack propagation direction;
(4) Delete the finite element model and re-establish the finite
element model according to α(i − 1), let the crack propagate Δa
along the direction vertical to the α(i − 1). Insert spring element at
the corresponding nodes on the newly generated crack face;
(5) Let δ(i) = δ(i − 1), apply displacement at the loading point.
Calculate KPI , KσI , KPII , KσII and examine whether Eq. (3) gets
satisfied or not. If not, continue increasing displacement and
recalculating the corresponding intensity factors until Eq. (3) is
satisfied;
(6) Output the relevant results, such as P(i), CMOD(i), CMSD(i), α(i);
(7) Repeat (3)-(5) for all subsequent steps. The cycle process termi­
nates when the crack reaches the up boundary of the specimen.
The schematic diagram of the crack opening was shown in Fig. 7. It is
worth noting that the two nodes of the spring element were superposed
when establishing the finite element model. The element provides force
along the nodal X axis when setting its key-option KEYOPT(3) = 0,1. The
nodal coordinate system of the spring element was the same as the
global coordinate system by default, therefore, the element can provide

12
Z. Li et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701

Experimental Experimental
Gf-m Gf-m
Gf Gf

C25-0.4-45.0 C25-0.4-67.5

(k) C25-0.4-45.0 (l) C25-0.4-67.5

Experimental
Gf-m
Gf

C25-0.5-67.5

(m) C25-0.5-67.5
Fig. 12. (continued).

Fig. 13. KII /KI variation with crack propagation length..Δa

cohesive force in FPZ for mode I crack propagates along the Y axis of the
global coordinate system under the condition of this real constant.
However, noticing that the crack propagation direction was constantly
changing along with the crack propagation for mixed mode I-II fracture,
it was necessary to adjust the nodal coordinate system of the spring
element on the crack face to keep the Y axis of the nodal coordinate
system coincident with the crack line, as shown in Fig. 8. Then the
cohesive force vertical to the crack face can be obtained. The previous
TCIP criterion-based study concluded that the effect of the type II
component can be neglected in mixed mode I-II crack propagation
process [40], thus, the type II fracture energy is neglected in the present
simulation. In other words, the spring element doesn’t need to provide
tangential stress along the crack face.
The mesh generation of TPB (C30) was shown in Fig. 9, and it was
found that refined meshes were applied near the crack surfaces inter­
connected by nonlinear spring elements for simulating the cohesive
force. Using the methodologies described above, numerous numerical
results including P-δ, P-CMOD, P-CMSD curves, crack propagation tra­
jectories and KII /KI − Δa can be obtained.Fig. 10..
5. Numerical results
Focusing on the mechanical properties of C30 and C25, mechanical
responses of concrete with mixed mode I-II fracture based on the
modified TCIP criterion integrated with Gf− m were investigated in the
following part.

13
Z. Li et al.
5.1. P − δCurves
It was found that all curves have similar trends, for illustration
purposes, only P − δ curves for C30 and C25-0.2–22.5 calculated by TCIP
criterion integrated with Gf and Gf− m were shown. Roughly speaking,
for mixed mode I-II fracture, the P − δ curves simulated from TCIP cri­
terion with modified fracture energy Gf− m was slightly lower than that
simulated with fracture energy Gf , though the crack initiation loads are
the same. The ratio of elastic energy consumption to the fracture energy
ratio is 8.4 % for C30, and 9.4 % for C25.
Recalling that the TCIP criterion with the modified fracture energy
can well maintain the energy balance, the simulated P − δ curves can be
used to re-calculate fracture energy by Eq. (10) [52].
W0 + mgδ0
Gf = (10)
Alig
where W0 and mgδ0 are work from the external load and self-weight
of the beam, respectively, and Alig is the area of the ligament formed
during the crack propagation. Here, the value of W0 is equal to the in­
tegral area of the P − δ curve.
The recalculated fracture energy can be obtained and compared with
the fracture energy of concrete illustrated in Table 1 and Table 2 to
verify the energy balance relationship. Table 4 and Table 5 list the
comparison results between the recalculated fracture energy and frac­
ture energy of the material.
A comparison between Table 4 to Table 5 shows that the TCIP cri­
terion with the parameter Gf− m ensures the energy balance relationship,
however, using Gf leads to an overestimation of the energy consumed in
the fracture process. Specifically, the percentage of the difference be­
tween the recalculated fracture energy Gf− rec from fracture energy Gf is
no more than 1.1 % for the Gf− m group, while this percentage is about
3.6 %~8.3 % for the Gf group. The results of the quantitative analysis
proved that the modified fracture energy needs to be considered when
using the TCIP criterion. Moreover, it can be inferred that the difference
between the results is more pronounced if the ratio of elastic energy
consumption to fracture energy increases.
5.2. P-CMOD and P-CMSD curves
In the C30 and C25 tests, experimental load P-crack mouth opening
displacement CMOD (resp. load P-crack mouth sliding displacement
CMSD) curves were recorded, which can be used to check the predictive
capacity of the mechanical responses of concrete with mixed mode I-II
fracture based on the TCIP criterion. Fig. 11 gives P-CMOD and P-CMSD
curves from tests and curves simulated with TCIP criterion integrated
with Gf and Gf− m , respectively. The P-CMOD curves are first discussed.
For the C30 specimens, the dispersions of the test curves are small, and
Fig. 11(a) shows that the simulated curves are well-fitted with the test
curves. There were certain dispersions in the test curves and the material
properties of each group C25 specimens with different crack lengths a0
and crack incline angle β [8], but the unified parameters in Table 2 were
adopted in simulation, which makes the fitting effect in P-CMOD curves
relatively general. Besides, the simulated P-CMSD curves have smaller
CMSD values compared to the test results, it is because CMSD measured
by clip sensor at the crack mouth may contain a certain amount of
CMOD value. Overall, the simulated curves are reasonable compared to
the test curves. However, the comparison between two numerical
simulation curves with different parameters can reach the same
conclusion as in the P − δ curves that curve simulated with Gf − m was
slightly lower than that with Gf .
5.3. Crack trajectories
Except for making energy balance in the TCIP criterion with Gf− m ,
another improvement is the utilization of spring elements in numerical
14
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701
simulation, which could give complete crack trajectories. Fig. 12 shows
the complete crack trajectories calculated by the TCIP criterion for
different types of concrete based on the new numerical method, in which
the red solid and the blue dashed lines represent the crack trajectories
simulated by the TCIP criterion with Gf− m and Gf , respectively, and the
shaded envelope area represents the test crack trajectories.
It can be seen from Fig. 12 that the two simulated trajectories are
almost superposed, which can be explained by the modified part in
fracture energy having little effect on the crack trajectories for the
selected concrete types C30 and C25. Compared with previous results
[8], the simulated crack trajectories, and the simulated relevant curves
such as P − δ, P-CMOD, and P-CMSD are complete, regardless of
whichever fracture parameter was used. The conclusions can also be
drawn that the proposed numerical method improves the numerical
simulation calculation process of mixed mode I-II crack propagation
based on the TCIP criterion.
5.4. KII /kI
For the comparison among different criterions for mixed-mode I-II in
previous research [40], the relationship between the ratio KII /KI and the
crack propagation length Δawas explored. However, the energy balance
relationship was not considered, and the numerical calculation process
was inaccurate and incomplete at that time. The method presented in
this paper can solve the above problems and return complete results of
the variation of the ratio (i.e., KII /KI ). The ratio (i.e., KII /KI ) variations of
all specimens have the same trend, so C30 and C25-0.3–67.5 were
selected as examples, and the results are illustrated in Fig. 13. It can be
concluded that the ratio decreases rapidly to approximately zero after
crack initiation. In the beginning, the specimen is considered to be linear
elastic during the crack initiation stage, and the ratio (i.e., KII /KI ) is
controlled by the stress condition at the crack tip. Then, cohesive force
appears on the newly generated crack face with crack propagation. At
this time, the stress field at the crack tip consists of two parts, one is the
stress field caused by external load and constraints, and the other is the
stress field caused by cohesive force. Consequently, the cohesive force in
FPZ changes the stress condition at the crack tip, which leads the frac­
ture mode to transform to mode I from mixed mode I-II. Therefore, the
cohesive force takes a dominant position in the stress field at the crack
tip when crack propagation.
6. Conclusions
Focusing on mixed I-II mode fracture, this paper extended the TCIP
criterion with a modified fracture energy parameter that was initially
developed for mode I fracture to rather complicated mixed mode I-II
fracture problems of concrete materials. For validating the extension,
finite element analysis was conducted on three-point bending beams
with offset and multi-segment notches, in which the cohesive force at
the fracture process zone was applied through nonlinear spring ele­
ments. By numerical calculations, the nonlinear mechanical responses
including the P − δ curve, P-CMOD curve, P-CMSD curve, crack trajec­
tories and KII /KI − Δa, were obtained for TPBs and compared with the
experiments collected from the literature; good consistency between
them was found. By the present paper, the following conclusions can be
drawn:
(a) When using the TCIP criterion, modification in fracture energy
needs to be considered to maintain energy balance. The differences
between the results with and without the modification are affected by
the ratio of the elastic energy consumption to the fracture energy.
(b) The proposed numerical method where the spring element is used
to calculate and apply cohesive force improves the numerical simula­
tions of mixed mode I-II crack propagation based on the TCIP criterion.
The method can reproduce the complete crack trajectories and the
relevant numerical simulation results. The predicted crack trajectories
Z. Li et al.
are well-fitted with the trajectories from experiments. However, modi­
fication in fracture energy has no effect on crack trajectories for the C30
and C25 specimens in this paper.
(c) The simulated curves based on the proposed modified fracture
energy (i.e., P − δ, P-CMOD, P-CMSD) have the same variation trend. The
curves simulated with Gf− m have lower peak loads and lower post-peak
values compared with results simulated with Gf . The criterion-based
numerical simulations can obtain reasonable results (i.e., P-CMOD, P-
CMSD) for the test curves.
(d) The KII /KI ratio decreases rapidly to approximately zero after
crack initiation, which means the fracture mode transforms from mixed
mode I-II to mode I, revealing that the effect of type II components can
be neglected when simulating mixed mode I-II crack propagation.
Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the use of TCIP criterion with
the modified fracture energy parameter on concrete materials was
bounded due to the following reasons: (1) the ratio between the elastic
energy consumed by the initial fracture toughness Kini
Ic and the total
energy consumed and dissipated during the fracture process was rather
small, and (2) the large discrepancy of the mechanical responses of
concrete materials resulted from the material heterogeneity. However,
from a theoretical point of view, it was more rigorous to consider the
modification in fracture energy for the TCIP criterion. Potential appli­
cations of the derived formulas for mixed I-II mode fracture were ex­
pected on other geomaterials such as rocks, for both static and dynamic
analysis.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Zhuheng Li: Writing – original draft, Validation, Methodology,
Investigation, Conceptualization. Yujie Gong: Formal analysis. Feng­
juan Chen: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Methodology,
Formal analysis, Conceptualization.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
The authors are unable or have chosen not to specify which data has
been used.
Acknowledgement
This research work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (No. 52208453), and all support is gratefully
acknowledged.
References
[1] Areea M, Ingraffea A R. Mixed-mode crack propagation in mortar and concrete.
Department of Structural Engineering, 1982, Cornel University, Ithaca, New York,
Report No.81-83.
[2] M.B. Nooru-Mohamed, Mixed-mode fracture of concrete: an experimental
approach, [Ph.D. thesis] Delft University of Technology, Delft, 1992.
[3] M.B. Nooru-Mohamed, E. Schlangen, J.G. van Mier, Experimental and numerical
study on the behavior of concrete subjected to biaxial tension and shear, Adv. Cem.
Bas. Mat. 1 (1) (1993) 22–37.
[4] H.N. Atahan, M.A. Tasdemir, C. Tasdemir, et al., Mode I and mixed mode fracture
studies in brittle materials using the Brazilian disc specimen, Mater. Struct. 38 (3)
(2005) 305–312.
[5] M. Aliha, M. Ayatollahi, D.J. Smith, et al., Mixed mode crack path investigation in
a limestone rock using two circular shaped samples-An experimental and
theoretical study, Dissertations & Theses - Gradworks 4 (9) (2009) 2841–2849.
[6] Y.S. Jenq, S.P. Shah, Mixed-mode fracture of concrete, Int. J. Fract. 38 (2) (1988)
123–142.
15
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701
[7] G.S. Xeidakis, I.S. Samaras, D.A. Zacharopoulos, et al., Trajectories of unstably
growing cracks in mixed mode I-II loading of marble beams, Rock Mech. Rock Eng.
30 (1) (1997) 19–33.
[8] Z.M. Wu, R.C. Yu, C.Y. Sun, et al., A new test method for the complete load-
displacement curve of concrete under mixed mode I-II fracture, Theor. Appl. Fract.
Mech. 108 (2020), 102629.
[9] F. Erdogan, G.C. Sih, On the crack extension in plates under plane loading and
transverse shear, Journal of Basic Engineering, ASME 85 (1963) 519–525.
[10] H.C. Wu, Dual failure criterion for plain concrete, Journal of Engineering
Mechanics, ASCE 100 (1974).
[11] K.J. Chang, On the maximum strain criterion—a new approach to the angled crack
problem, Eng. Fract. Mech. 14 (1) (1981) 107–124.
[12] S.K. Maiti, R.A. Smith, Criteria for brittle fracture in biaxial tension, Engineer
Fracture Mechanics. 19 (1984) 793–804.
[13] M.M. Mirsayar, Mixed mode fracture analysis using extended maximum tangential
strain criterion, Mater. Des. 85(DEC.5):941–947 (2015).
[14] Mirsayar, M. M, Park, et al. Mixed mode brittle fracture analysis of high strength
cement mortar using strain-based criteria. Theoretical & Applied Fracture
Mechanics, 2016.
[15] Mirsayar, M. M, Razmi, et al. Tangential strain-based criteria for mixed-mode I/II
fracture toughness of cement concrete. Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials
and Structures, 2018, 41(1):129-137.
[16] G.C. Sih, Strain energy density factor applied to mixed mode crack problems, Int. J.
Fract. 10 (3) (1974) 305–321.
[17] Z.P. Bažant, P.A. Pfeiffer, Shear fracture tests of concrete, Mater. Struct. 19 (2)
(1986) 111–121.
[18] K. Palaniswamy, W.G. Knauss, Propagation of a crack under general, in-plane
tension [J], Int. J. Fract. Mech. 8 (1) (1972) 114–117.
[19] J. Gálvez, M. Elices, G.V. Guinea, et al., Crack trajectories under mixed mode and
non-proportional loading, Int. J. Fract. 81 (2) (1996) 171–193.
[20] J. Gálvez, M. Elices, G.V. Guinea, et al., Mixed mode fracture of concrete under
proportional and nonproportional loading, Int. J. Fract. 94 (1998) 267–284.
[21] D.A. Cendón, J. Gálvez, M. Elices, et al., Modelling the fracture of concrete under
mixed loading, Int. J. Fract. 103 (3) (2000) 293–310.
[22] A. Hillerborg, M. Modéer, P.E. Petersson, Analysis of crack formation and crack
growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements, Cem.
Concr. Res. 6 (6) (1976) 773–781.
[23] M. Prasad, C.S. Krishnamoorthy, Computational model for discrete crack growth in
plain and reinforced concrete, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 191 (25–26)
(2002) 2699–2725.
[24] Z. Shi, Numerical analysis of mixed-mode fracture in concrete using extended
fictitious crack model, J. Struct. Eng. 130 (11) (2004) 1738–1747.
[25] M. Chafi, A. Boulenouar, A numerical modelling of mixed mode crack initiation
and growth in functionally graded materials, Mater. Res. 22 (3) (2019).
[26] J. Ožbolt, H.W. Reinhardt, Numerical study of mixed-mode fracture in concrete,
Int. J. Fract. 118 (2002) 145–161.
[27] M. Xie, W.H. Gerstle, Energy-based cohesive crack propagation modeling, J. Eng.
Mech. 121 (12) (1995) 1349–1358.
[28] Z.J. Yang, D. Proverbs, A comparative study of numerical solutions to non-linear
discrete crack modelling of concrete beams involving sharp snap-back, Eng. Fract.
Mech. 71 (1) (2004) 81–105.
[29] Z.J. Yang, J. Chen, Finite element modelling of multiple cohesive discrete crack
propagation in reinforced concrete beams, Eng. Fract. Mech. 72 (14) (2005)
2280–2297.
[30] F. Greco, L. Leonetti, R. Luciano, A multiscale model for the numerical simulation
of the anchor bolt pull-out test in lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 95 (2015) 860–874.
[31] F. Suárez, J. Gálvez, D. Cendón, A material model to reproduce mixed-mode
fracture in concrete, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 42 (1) (2019) 223–238.
[32] A. Carpinteri, R. Massabó, Reversal in failure scaling transition of fibrous
composites, J. Eng. Mech. 123 (2) (1997) 107–114.
[33] N. Moës, T. Belytschko, Extended finite element method for cohesive crack growth,
Eng. Fract. Mech. 69 (7) (2002) 813–833.
[34] Z.J. Yang, A. Deeks, Fully-automatic modelling of cohesive crack growth using a
finite element–scaled boundary finite element coupled method, Engineer Fracture
Mechanics 74 (2007) 2547–2573.
[35] E. Ooi, Z. Yang, A hybrid finite element-scaled boundary finite element method for
crack propagation modelling, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 199 (17–20)
(2010) 1178–1192.
[36] E. Ooi, Z. Yang, Modelling multiple cohesive crack propagation using a finite
element–scaled boundary finite element coupled method, Eng. Anal. Bound. Elem.
33 (7) (2009) 915–929.
[37] Z.M. Wu, W. Dong, K. Liu, S.T. Yang, Mode I crack propagation criterion of
concrete and numerical simulation on complete process of cracking, J. Hydraul.
Eng. 38 (12) (2007) 1453–1459.
[38] Z.M. Wu, H. Rong, J.J. Zheng, et al., A numerical method for mixed I-II crack
propagation in concrete, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 139 (11) (2013)
1530–1538.
[39] W. Dong, Z.M. Wu, X.M. Zhou, et al., A comparative study on two stress intensity
factor-based criteria for prediction of mode-I crack propagation in concrete, Eng.
Fract. Mech. 158 (2016) 39–58.
[40] W. Dong, Z.M. Wu, X. Tang, et al., A comparative study on stress intensity factor-
based criteria for the prediction of mixed mode I-II crack propagation in concrete,
Eng. Fract. Mech. 197 (2018) 217–235.
Z. Li et al.
[41] W. Dong, D. Yang, X. Zhou, et al., Experimental and numerical investigations on
fracture process zone of rock–concrete interface, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct.
40 (5) (2016) 820–835.
[42] W. Dong, D. Yang, B. Zhang, et al., Rock-concrete interfacial crack propagation
under mixed mode I-II fracture, J. Eng. Mech. 144 (6) (2018) 04018039.
[43] W. Dong, S. Song, B. Zhang, et al., SIF-based fracture criterion of rock-concrete
interface and its application to the prediction of cracking paths in gravity dam,
Eng. Fract. Mech. 221 (2019), 106686.
[44] W. Yuan, W. Dong, B. Zhang, et al., Investigations on fracture properties and
analytical solutions of fracture parameters at rock-concrete interface, Constr. Build.
Mater. 300 (2021), 124040.
[45] M.H. Zeng, Z.M. Wu, Y.J. Wang, A stochastic model considering heterogeneity and
crack propagation in concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 254 (2020), 119289.
[46] M.H. Ma, Z.M. Wu, J.J. Zheng, et al., Effect of loading rate on mixed mode I-II
crack propagation in concrete, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 112 (2021), 102916.
[47] J. Li, W. Dong, B. Zhang, et al., Prediction on crack propagation of concrete due to
time-dependent creep under high sustained loading, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 34 (2)
(2022) 04021451.
[48] Z. Li, F. Chen, A toughness-based crack initiation-propagation criterion using a
modified fracture energy parameter, Eng. Fract. Mech. 108536 (2022).
16
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 123 (2023) 103701
[49] M.D. Jia, Z.M. Wu, R.C. Yu, X.X. Zhang, Experimental and numerical study on
mixed mode I-II fatigue crack propagation in concrete, J. Eng. Mech. (2022),
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) EM.1943-7889.0002135.
[50] F.H. Wittmann, K. Rokugo, E. Brühwiler, et al., Fracture energy and strain
softening of concrete as determined by means of compact tension specimens,
Mater. Struct. 21 (1) (1988) 21–32.
[51] P.E. Petersson, Crack growth and development of fracture zones in plain concrete
and similar materials. TVBM-1006, Division of Building Materials, Lund Institute of
Technology, Lund, 1981.
[52] T.C. Rilem, Draft recommendation: “Determination of the fracture energy of
mortar and concrete by means of three-point bend tests on notched beams”, Mater.
Struct. 18 (6) (1985) 287–290.
Further reading
[53] Z. Li, A numerical method for applying cohesive stress on fracture process zone in
concrete using nonlinear spring element, Materials 15 (3) (2022) 1251.