You are on page 1of 55

Universitat de Girona

FRACTURE MECHANICS
Computer lab sessions
D. Trias
October 2012
This document can be found at: ftp://amade.udg.edu/amade/mme/MecFrac/MecFrac.pdf
Contents
1 Singular stresses 1
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Eect of element type, size and shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.2 Finite element discretisation of stresses at a crack tip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 Quarter point / crack tip elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Creating quarter mid-nodes at crack tip with ANSYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3.1 Meshing with usual tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3.2 Meshing with special tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.4 Summary and conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.5 Suggested problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.6 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2 Computational Fracture Mechanics I: Computation of G 17
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2 Finite Crack Extension Method (FCEM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3 Crack Closure Method (CCM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.4 Virtual Crack Closure Technique (VCCT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5 Suggested exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.6 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3 Computational Fracture Mechanics II: Computation of K 27
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.2 The stress intensity factor (K) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.2.1 Numerical estimation of the stresses at the crack tip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.2.2 Computation of K by stress extrapolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.2.3 Computation of K by displacement extrapolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.2.4 Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.3 Displacement extrapolation with quarter node elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.3.1 Formulae for the stress intensity factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.4 ANSYS commands for the computation of K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.4.1 Crack opening displacement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.4.2 KCALC command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
iii
3.5 Proposed exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.6 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4 Computational Fracture Mechanics III: Computation of the J-integral 37
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2 The J integral with ANSYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.3 Proposed exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.4 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5 Computational Fracture Mechanics IV: Cohesive zone modeling 41
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.2 Cohesive laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.2.1 Bilinear law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.2.2 Exponential law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.3 Cohesive elements in ANSYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.3.1 Cohesive zone modeling with interface elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.3.2 Cohesive zone modeling with contact elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.4 Some remarks on element size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.5 Proposed exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.6 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.7 Aknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Chapter 1
Singular stresses
1.1 Introduction
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics deals with cracked solids. This means the stress and strain elds within
this loaded solids are assumed to be inuenced somehow by the presence of cracks. In order to analyze
which is the efect of these cracks let us model a simple cracked plate.
Example 1.1 (Analysis of a cracked plate). Let us assume we consider the analysis of the cracked plate
component of Figure 1.1 by the Finite Element Method.
Figure 1.1: Plate with a central sharp crack.
For the sake of simplicity let us assume the material of the plate is steel and the applied pressure is 1
MPa.
Solution to Example 1.1. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
FINISH
/CLEAR
/TITLE Stress singularity
1
2 Fracture Mechanics
!PRE-PROCESSOR *******************************
/PREP7
!Geometrical parameters
L = 50 ! Half length of component
a = 10 ! Crack half length
b = 0 ! Crack width
th = 30 ! Component thickness
el_len = 5 ! Element length (mesh)
el_shape=0 ! 0: quad, 1: triangle
ET,1,PLANE42 !4 node solid element
!ET,1,PLANE82 !8 node solid element
!Material properties
MP,EX,1,210000 !Young modulus
MP,PRXY,1,0.3 !Poissons coef.
KEYOPT,1,3,3 !Keyoption for thickness activation
R,1,th !Thickness for element type #1
!Geometry definition by keypoints
K,1,a,0
K,2,L,0
K,3,L,L
K,4,0,L
K,5,0,b
!Lines from keypoints
L,1,2,(L-a)/el_len
L,2,3,L/el_len
L,3,4,L/el_len
L,4,5,(L-b)/el_len
L,5,1,a/el_len
!Areas from lines
AL,1,2,3,4,5
!Mesh
LCCAT,5,1
MSHAPE, el_shape, 2D
MSHKEY,2
AMESH,ALL
FINISH
!SOLUTION ***********************************
/SOLU
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 3
DL,1,1,SYMM
DL,4,1,SYMM
SFL,3,PRES,-1 !Pressure on top tip
SOLVE
FINISH
!POST-PROCESSOR ****************************
/POST1
PLDISP,1 !Deformed shape
PLNSOL,S,Y ! Stresses Y direction
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
! Path plot of stress components at theta=0
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!PATH,0DEG,2,10,50
!PPATH,1,,a,0,0
!PPATH,2,,3*a,0,0
!PDEF,SX,S,X,NOAV
!PDEF,SY,S,Y,NOAV
!PDEF,UY,U,Y,NOAV
!PDEF,SY2,S,Y,AVG
!PLPATH,SY2
!PLPATH,SX
!PLPATH,UY
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
! Path plot of stress components at theta=45 deg
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PATH,45DEG,2,10,50
PPATH,1,,a,0,0
PPATH,2,,3*a,3*a-a,0
PDEF,SX,S,X,NOAV
PDEF,SY,S,Y,NOAV
PDEF,UY,U,Y,NOAV
PDEF,SY2,S,Y,AVG
PLPATH,UY
PLPATH,SX
PLPATH,SY
PRPATH,SY
FINISH
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/1_stress_sing.dat
4 Fracture Mechanics
1.1.1 Eect of element type, size and shape
Let us consider now the eect of element size, type and shape in the stress eld of the analyzed plate. To
do so, let us ll in the following table:
Element size Triangle Triangle Quad Quad
(el _l en) PLANE42 PLANE82 PLANE42 PLANE42
1 mm
2 mm
3 mm
4 mm
1.1.2 Finite element discretisation of stresses at a crack tip
Try to explain what happens when regular elements are employed to approximate the stress eld at a crack
tip. You may employ Fig 1.2 by drawing on it the stress eld, dierent discretization sizes and the approxi-
mation obtained by each one. You may start thinking what happens when constant strain elements are used
and then try to gure out which is the solution given by linear elements.
Figure 1.2: Finite element discretization of the stresses near the crack tip
As you may have noticed, traditional engineering maximum stress-based failure analysis become senseless
when stress singularities appear, so other approaches must be used. These are basically stress intensity factor
(K) based approaches and energy release rate (G) based approaches. While G-based and K-based approaches
are the main topic of next chapters, the next section gives an introduction of quarter node tip elements,
which are used to capture eciently the stress singularity in a nite element discretization.
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 5
1.2 Quarter point / crack tip elements
The aim of these elements is to introduce in the element formulation a stress singularity of the 1/

r type.
This is useful for stress related approaches, such as the numerical computation of the stress intensity factor.
To do so we may start by recalling the isoparametric formulation of a 1D quadratic Lagrangian element:
Figure 1.3: 8 node isoparametric quadrilateral element
N
1
=
1
2
(1) (1.1)
N
2
= (1
2
) (1.2)
N
3
=
1
2
(1+) (1.3)
Since for an isoparametric element the same approximation for the geometry and for the displacements
is used, the geometry of the 1-3 edge may be expressed:
x =
n=3

i
N
i
x
i
=
1
2
(1)x
1
+(1
2
)x
2
+
1
2
(1+)x
3
(1.4)
Figure 1.4: 8 node isoparametric element with quarter-side located mid-nodes
6 Fracture Mechanics
Then if we locate the origin of a quad element of side length L at node 1 and locate the mid-node (node
#2) at x
2
=L/4, as shown in Figure 1.4:
x =
1
2
(1+)L +(1
2
)
L
4
(1.5)
And solving for :
=1+2
_
x
L
(1.6)
As you remember, the displacement approximation is given by:
u =
n=3

i
N
i
u
i
=
1
2
(1)u
1
+(1
2
)u
2
+
1
2
(1+)u
3
(1.7)
where u
1
, u
2
and u
3
are the displacements at nodes 1,2 and 3. Using equation 1.6 in the former equation
we obtain the expression of the displacements as a function of the geometry (x):
u =
1
2
_
1+2
_
x
L
__
22
_
x
L
_
u
1
+4
__
x
L

x
L
_
u
2
+
1
2
_
1+2
_
x
L
__
2
_
x
L
_
u
3
(1.8)
If we now compute the strain in the x direction:

x
=
u
x
=

x
u

=
1
2
_
3

xL

4
L
_
u
1
+
_
2

xL

4
L
_
u
1
+
1
2
_

xL
+
4
L
_
u
3
(1.9)
We may easily verify that the former expression is a function of (1/

x) and, consequently, the strain


eld presents a singularity.
However, for a 2D element we might apply the same method for the 8-node serendipity element of Figure
1.4. This way, the singularity would be present only along the edge 1-3, and
r
would not be singular. We
may obtain a radial singular stress eld by collapsing nodes 4, 5 and 6 of the quad of Figure 1.4, ash shown
in Figure 1.5.
Figure 1.5: Quarter tip element from collapsed 8 node quadrilateral
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 7
1.3 Creating quarter mid-nodes at crack tip with ANSYS
As seen in the former sections, if we have to deal with the stresses when stress singularities are present it
is useful to use some kind of special elements. We also showed how, actually, these special elements may
be constructed from regular elements just by placing the mid-side nodes at a quarter of the element side
length of the crack tip. We usually may do this by our means or by using some special commands provided
by the commercial nite element software.
1.3.1 Meshing with usual tools
We may construct this kind of mesh at a crack tip manually, that is, placing the corresponding mid-side
nodes at a distance of a quarter of the side from the crack tip. The following ANSYS log le analyzes the
same problem of Figure 1.1, using N, NGEN and E commands to build the mesh.
Example 1.2. Model the cracked plate of Figure 1.1 using the isoparametric quarter node elements presented
in Section 1.2. Locate the quarter nodes by using ANSYS common node and element generation commands.
Solution to Example 1.2. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
FINISH
/CLEAR
/TITLE Stress singularity - Mesh #2
!===================================
!PRE-PROCESSOR
!-----------------------------------
/PREP7
! Geometrical parameters in mm
L = 5 ! Plate length
a = 1 ! Crack length
b = 0 ! Crack heigth
th = 1 ! Plate thickness
el_len = 0.2 ! Element length
pi= 3.1415926535897932384626433832795
fx = a/10
rdiv = 4 ! radial divisions at crack tip (must be 4)
tdiv = 12 ! angular divisions at crack tip
rdiv2 = 10
ET,1,PLANE42
8 Fracture Mechanics
!Material properties
MP,EX,1,210000 !Young modulus
MP,PRXY,1,0.3 !Poissons ratio
KEYOPT,1,3,3 !Keyoption to introduce thickness in element 42
R,1,th ! Thickness
!Keypoints which define the geometry
K,1,a,0
K,2,L,0
K,3,L,L
K,4,0,L
K,5,0,b
K,6,a,L
K,7,2*a,0
K,8,2*a,a
K,9,a,a
K,10,0,a
K,11,a+2*fx,0
K,12,a,2*fx
K,13,a-2*fx,0
! Lines
L,1,11,100,1000 !1
L,11,7,rdiv2 !2
L,7,2,10 !3
L,2,3,tdiv/4 !4
L,3,6,tdiv/4 !5
L,4,10,10 !6
L,10,5,tdiv/4 !7
L,10,9,tdiv/4 !8
L,9,8,tdiv/4 !9
L,7,8,tdiv/4 !10
L,5,13,rdiv2 !11
L,9,12,rdiv2 !12
!L,1,13,85,20 !13
L,1,13,100,1000 !13
LARC, 11, 12, 1, 2*fx !14
LARC, 12, 13, 1, 2*fx !15
LESIZE,14,,,tdiv/2
LESIZE,15,,,tdiv/2
L,1,12,100,1000 !16
L,6,4,tdiv/4 !17
L,9,6,10 !18
! Nodes
CLOCAL,11,1,a,0,0
CSYS,11
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 9
N,1,0,0,0
N,rdiv,2*fx,0,0
FILL,1,,1,2,1,,,1
NGEN,tdiv*2+1,10,2,rdiv,1,0,90/tdiv,0,0
csys,1
! Generate 1/4 nodes
*DO,I,1,tdiv+1
FILL,1,2+20*(I-1),1,1000+I,,,,3
*ENDDO
*DO,I,1,tdiv+1
FILL,2+20*(I-1),4+20*(I-1),1,2000+20*(I-1),,,,1
*ENDDO
csys,1
ET,2,PLANE82
KEYOPT,2,3,3 !Keyoption to introduce thickness in element 82
R,2,th !thickness
TYPE,2
! Elements
csys,11
*DO,I,1,tdiv
E,2+20*(I-1),2+20*I,1,1,12+(I-1)*20,1001+I,1,1000+I
*ENDDO
E,2,4,24,22,2000,14,2020,12
EGEN,tdiv,20,tdiv+1
AL,2,10,9,12,14 ! Area created from lines
AL,11,15,12,8,7
AL,3,4,5,18,9,10
AL,18,17,6,8
AL,1,14,16
AL,16,15,13
ASBA,1,5,,DELETE,DELETE
ASBA,2,6,,DELETE,DELETE
LCCAT,4,5 !19
LCCAT,9,10 !20
LCCAT,7,8 !21
TYPE,2
!MSHKEY,2
AMESH,1,4 !Mesh
csys,11
10 Fracture Mechanics
NSEL,S,LOC,X,2*fx-fx/50,2*fx+fx/50
NUMMRG,NODE,0.001
theta=pi/(2*tdiv)
!*DO,I,1,tdiv
!NMODIF,12+20*(I-1),fx*cos(theta)
!NMODIF,14+20*(I-1),2*fx*cos(theta)
!*ENDDO
/PSYMB,ESYS,1
csys,0
ALLSEL
FINISH
/SOLU
ANTYPE,0
D,1,UY,0
D,1,ROTZ,0
D,2,UY,0
D,2,ROTZ,0
DL,1,5,SYMM
DL,2,1,SYMM
DL,3,3,SYMM
DL,6,4,SYMM
DL,7,2,SYMM
SFL,5,PRES,-1 !Pressure applied to upper line
SFL,17,PRES,-1
ALLSEL
SOLVE
FINISH
!===================================
!POST-PROCESSOR
!-----------------------------------
/POST1
PLDISP,1 !Deformed shape
PLNSOL,S,Y ! Stresses Y direction
angle=pi/6
PATH,30DEG,2,10,100
PPATH,1,,a,0,0
PPATH,2,,a+cos(angle),sin(angle),0
PDEF,SX,S,X,NOAV
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 11
PDEF,SY,S,Y
PDEF,UY,U,Y,NOAV
PLPATH,SY
PLPATH,SX
PRPATH
FINISH
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/1_quarter_mid_nodes.dat
Figure 1.6 shows the dierent path plots for dierent elements sizes when using ANSYS PLANE42 and
PLANE82 elements compared to the solution obtained with 2 mm Quarter mid-side node elements which
were constructed the way described above. Results show as these elements are able to provide a solution
similar to that obtained by much smaller elements. Since these elements include the 1/

r singularity, they
do not provide a value for r =0, which is the singular point.
0 2 4 6 8 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
r
0
(mm)

y
y

(
M
P
a
)


0.5 mm PLANE42 TRI
2 mm PLANE42 TRI
5 mm PLANE42 TRI
Quarter midside nodes
0 2 4 6 8 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
r
0
(mm)

y
y

(
M
P
a
)


1 mm PLANE82 TRI
2 mm PLANE82 TRI
5 mm PLANE82 TRI
Quarter midside nodes
0 2 4 6 8 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
r
0
(mm)

y
y

(
M
P
a
)


0.5 mm PLANE42 QUAD
2 mm PLANE42 QUAD
5 mm PLANE42 QUAD
Quarter midside nodes
0 2 4 6 8 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
r
0
(mm)

y
y

(
M
P
a
)


1 mm PLANE82 QUAD
2 mm PLANE82 QUAD
5 mm PLANE82 QUAD
Quarter midside nodes
Figure 1.6:
y y
at the crack tip region for the analyzed plate, as obtained with dierent element type/size
and with Quarter mid-side node elements (45
o
path)
1.3.2 Meshing with special tools
Since doing this may be tricky, commercial nite element software usually have special tools for meshing
the crack tip. The next box shows ANSYS command for crack tip meshing.
12 Fracture Mechanics
ANSYS Command: Meshing the crack tip
KSCON, NPT, DELR, KCTIP, NTHET, RRAT
NPT number of the node located at the crack tip
DELR Radius of rst row of elements about crack tip
KCTIP Crack tip singularity key. For our purposes its value should be 1
NTHET Number of elements in circumferential direction. Default is one per 30
o
.
RRAT Ratio of 2nd row element size to DELR. Default is 0.5
The following ANSYS log le performs the same analysis but now the command KSCON is employed
to mesh the crack tip.
Example 1.3. Model the plate of Figure 1.1 using quarter node elements for the crack tip obtained with
the KSCON command.
Solution to Example 1.3. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
FINISH
/CLEAR
/TITLE Stress singularities - KSCON
/PREP7
! Geometrical parameters in mm
L = 50 ! Plate length
a = 10 ! Crack length
b = 0 ! Crack heigth
th = 30 ! Thickness
el_len = 2 ! Element length
ET,1,PLANE82
!Material properties
MP,EX,1,210000 ! Young modulus
MP,PRXY,1,0.3 ! Poissons ratio
KEYOPT,1,3,3 ! Keyoption to introduce thickness
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 13
R,1,th ! Thickness
K,1,a,0
K,2,L,0
K,3,L,L
K,4,0,L
K,5,0,b
K,6,2*a,0
K,7,a,a
K,8,0,a
K,9,a+sqrt(2)*a/2,sqrt(2)*a/2
K,10,a,L
L,1,6,(2*a)/el_len
L,6,2,(L-2*a)/el_len
L,2,3,L/el_len
L,3,10,(L-a)/el_len
L,10,4,a/el_len
L,4,8,(L-a)/el_len
L,8,5,a/el_len
L,5,1,a/el_len
L,9,3,sqrt((L-a)**2+L*L)/el_len
L,1,7,a/el_len
L,7,8,a/el_len
LARC,7,9,1,a,6
LARC,9,6,1,a,6
L,7,10,(L-a)/el_len
KSCON,1,0.15,1,12,0.25
AL,2,3,9,13
AL,12,9,4,14
AL,1,13,12,10
AL,8,10,11,7
AL,11,14,5,6
AMESH,ALL
FINISH
/SOLU
DL,6,5,SYMM
DL,7,4,SYMM
DL,2,1,SYMM
DL,1,3,SYMM
SFL,4,PRES,-1
SFL,5,PRES,-1
SOLVE
FINISH
/POST1
14 Fracture Mechanics
PLDISP,1
PLNSOL,S,Y
FINISH
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/1_stress_sing_KSCON.dat
Figure 1.7 shows pathplots for
y y
as obtained with quarter mid-side node elements. Two of the plots
correspond to elements obtained with the KSCON command. The third one corresponds to the solution
given by the elements obtained in section 1.3.1.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
r
0
(mm)

y
y

(
M
P
a
)


KSCON1
KSCON2
modified mesh
Figure 1.7:
y y
at the crack tip region for the analyzed plate, as obtained with with Quarter mid-side node
elements: several mesh renement with KSCON and by-hand mesh modication (45
o
path)
1.4 Summary and conclusions
When stress singularities are present in some kind of problem, the nite element analysis and specially
the mesh must be carefully considered.
If regular elements are employed, a very ne discretization is needed
Special crack tip elements may be used to estimate adequately the stress singularity with a lower
number of elements.
However the stress solution should still be used carefully, knowing that any solution with a ner mesh
at the crack tip will lead to a higher value of the maximum value of the stress (which analytical value
is )
Energy release rate (G) - based analysis or stress intensity factor (K) - based analysis are a much
better option for linear elastic fracture mechanics regime.
Chapter 1. Singular stresses 15
1.5 Suggested problems
Problem 1.1. Let us assume we want to model the bi-metal shown in Figure 1.1. Consider that the
bi-metal thickness is 30 mm. Apply the displacement on the right side of the steel block. Material data:
E
st eel
=210000 MPa,
st eel
=0.3, E
Al
=70000 MPa,
Al
=0.3.
Solve the problem for three dierent meshes and analyze the stress in the vertical direction.
Identify the zone which reaches higher stresses. What happens with the maximum value (absolute
value) of the stress when remeshing? Why?
Construct an adequate mesh using KSCON command and check that, at least for a range of some
element size at the crack tip, solution is not mesh dependent.
Figure 1.8: Aluminium-Steel Bi-metal for Suggested Problem 1.1
1.6 Further reading
Henshell R.D and Shaw K.G. (1975) Crack tip elements are unnecessary. International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering 9(3): 495-507.
Saouma V.E. and Schwemmer D. (1984) Numerical evaluation of the quarter-point crack tip element. In-
ternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 20(9): 1629-1641.
Gray L.J., Phan AV. et al (2003) Improved quarter point crack tip element.Engineering Fracture Mechanics
70:269-283
Chapter 2
Computational Fracture Mechanics I:
Computation of G
2.1 Introduction
As seen in the former chapter, the traditional-materials strength stress analysis of a cracked component
may be hardly tackled. Although the stress discretisation may be improved by using crack tip elements, the
meaningful analysis is generally that performed using the energy release rate (G).
The energy release rate may be dened as the rate at which energy is dissipated () when a crack grows,
under constant boundary conditions:
G =

A

constant B.C
(2.1)
As seen, the crack opening is measured in terms of the created area (A). This is possible because G is
a state function which means it only depends on the updated geometry and the geometry but not on how
they change in the fracture process. So no matter if the crack grows we can compute G using dierent
crack lengths.
In the following sections, dierents ways for the numerical computation of G, according to its denition
of equation 2.1 will be summarized. We will apply these methods to the classical example of a cracked plate
shown in gure 3.2.1, using an initial crack length a=10mm, L=50mm, unit pressure and a plate thickness
of 30 mm.
Although the crack length should be much more longer to satisfy the main assumptions involved, you
may compare the results we will obtain with the Classical Beam Theory approximation, in order to get a
rough idea of the magnitude:
G
CBT
=
P
2
a
2
BEI
=
12P
2
a
2
B
2
h
3
E
(2.2)
17
18 Fracture Mechanics
Figure 2.1: Plate with a side sharp crack.
G
CBT
= N/mm
Recall that equation 2.2 is an approximation and the analyzed geometry does not satisfy the basic
assumpttions of the Classic Beam Theory, so the result for sure includes large errors. You may use it only
to check the order of magnitude of the computed energy release rate in the following sections.
2.2 Finite Crack Extension Method (FCEM)
In Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LFEM), in quasi-static conditions (which means the kinetic energy
involved in the process may be neglected), the elastic stored energy () equals the dierence between the
strain energy (U) and the external work (W):
=U W (2.3)
where the strain energy U:
U =
1
2

i j

i j
(2.4)
According to the denition of G, it may be computed:
G =
(a +a) (a)
A
(2.5)
where, if B is the thickness of the component, A =a B. By these assumption, G may be computed
using two dierent nite element models with two dierent crack lengths and the same boundary conditions:
Finite Element Model 1. BC and crack length a
Finite Element Model 2. Same BC but crack length a +a
Chapter 2. Computational Fracture Mechanics I: Computation of G 19
ANSYS Command: Computation of Strain Energy
1. Using User GUI:
General Post-processor Element Table Dene Table Add
General Post-processor Element Table Sum of each item
2. Using ANSYS commands:
AVPRIN
ETABLE
SSUM
Example 2.1. Compute the energy release rate (G) for the side-cracked plate of Figure 3.2.1 by means of
the Finite Crack Extension Method. You may use the parametrized ANSYS model given below.
Solution to Example 2.1. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
FINISH
/CLEAR
/TITLE Computation of G - Crack length: a
/PREP7 !PRE-PROCESSOR
L = 50 !Length of component (mm)
a = 10 ! Crack length (mm)
b = 0 ! Crack heigth (mm)
th = 30 !Thickness (mm)
el_len = 2 ! Element length
ET,1,PLANE42
KEYOPT,1,3,3 !Keyoption to activate thickness
R,1,th !Thickness assignment
MP,EX,1,210000 !Young modulus
MP,PRXY,1,0.3 !Poissons ratio
K,1,a,0
K,2,L,0
K,3,L,L
K,4,0,L
K,5,0,b
L,1,2,(L-a)/el_len
L,2,3,L/el_len
L,3,4,L/el_len
20 Fracture Mechanics
L,4,5,(L-b)/el_len
L,5,1,a/el_len
AL,1,2,3,4,5
LCCAT,5,1
ARSYM,Y,1
LCCAT,7,8
MSHKEY,2
AMESH,ALL
ALLSEL
NSEL,S,LOC,X,a,L ! All nodes at y=0, but those of the crack
NSEL,R,LOC,Y,0 ! are selected
CPINTF,ALL
FINISH
/SOLU !SOLUTION
DL,10,2,ALL,0
SFL,3,PRES,-1 !Pressure
nsel,s,loc,y,L
CP,1,UY,ALL
allsel
SOLVE
FINISH
/POST1 !GENERAL POST-PROCESSOR
PLDISP,1
PLNSOL,S,Y
FINISH
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/2_comp_g.dat
You may ll in the following table to compute the energy release rate according to the Finite Crack
Extension Method:
Magnitude FE model 1 (a) FE model 2 (a +a)
Strain energy
Displacement
Force
W

G
FCEM
I
= N/mm
Chapter 2. Computational Fracture Mechanics I: Computation of G 21
2.3 Crack Closure Method (CCM)
The Crack Closure Method assumes that the energy which is dissipated when a crack grows some a is the
same energy needed to open the crack some a. So if, as in the former method, two dierent nite element
models are employed, the forces and displacements needed to close the crack by some a may be computed
as follows.
Finite Element Model 1 (Crack length = a). Used to obtain the force acting at the crack tip. Since
this force is actually a reaction, some rigid link or Multi Point Constraint (MPC) should be employed
at the crack tip to obtain this force value.
Finite Element Model 2 (Crack length = a +a). The longer crack length is achieved by removing
the rigid link at the former crack tip and keeping a rigid link at the new one. This model will be used
to read the displacements needed to close the crack by a.
The Energy Release Rate (G) may be computed:
G =
_
F
(1)
x

(2)
x
+F
(1)
y

(2)
y
_
1
2 a B
(2.6)
where the rst term of the addition corresponds to G
I I
and the second term to G
I
, that is:
G
I
=
1
2
F
(1)
y

(2)
y
a B
(2.7)
G
I I
=
1
2
F
(1)
x

(2)
x
a B
(2.8)
and
(2)
x
=u
(2)
x
u
(2)
x
,
(2)
y
=u
(2)
y
u
(2)
y
and superscripts (1) and (2) denote the model where the variable
is taken.
Figure 2.2: Closure Crack Method
ANSYS Command: Removing CPs
CPINTF
NUMMRG
22 Fracture Mechanics
ANSYS Command: Reading displacement and force results
PRNLD
PRRSOL
You may ll in the following table to compute G by using the nodal values of force and displacement,
according to the CCM:
Magnitude FE model 1 (a) FE model 2 (a +a)
Displacement (top) -
Displacement (bottom) -

y
-
Force (F
y
) -
G
CCM
I
= N/mm
2.4 Virtual Crack Closure Technique (VCCT)
The Virtual Crack Closure Technique makes a further assumption: the crack grows in a self-similar manner.
This means that if we only look at the nearby of the crack tip, from one growth step to the next one, we would
see about the same crack shape -the same displacements- and about the same forces acting at the crack tip.
Consequently, instead of using two dierent models to get the forces at the crack tip and the displacement
needed to close the crack by some a, we may use the same model, so the computational eorts are reduced.
Figure 2.3: Virtual Crack Closure Technique
So, now G may be computed as:
Chapter 2. Computational Fracture Mechanics I: Computation of G 23
G =
_
F
x

x
+F
y

y
_
1
2 a B
(2.9)
where, again, the rst term of the addition corresponds to G
I
and the second term to G
I I
, that is:
G
I
=
1
2
F
x

x
a B
(2.10)
G
I I
=
1
2
F
y

y
a B
(2.11)
where and
x
=u
x
u

x
,
y
=u
y
u

y
.
Finally, you may compute G through the formula derived by the Virtual Crack Closure Technique:
Magnitude FE model (a +a)
Displacement (top)
Displacement (bottom)

y
Force (F
y
)
G
VCCT
I
= N/mm
2.5 Suggested exercises
Problem 2.1. Model the CT specimen of Figure 2.4 using ANSYS with W=5mm, A=25 mm, B (thick-
ness)=10 mm, C=50 mm, D = 62.5 mm, E=5mm and F=60 mm.
Figure 2.4: CT specimen
With this model you are going to analyze G as a function of the crack length (a), using dierent methods
and for two dierent load cases: constant force (P=1000 N) and constant displacement (0.053mm). To
make this you have to use in the ANSYS model Constraint Equations in the line where the crack will grow.
24 Fracture Mechanics
The crack should grow between 2 mm and 16mm, so a element size of 2 mm may be a good choice. You
may use the provided le CT.dat.
In each model you have to keep the following data:
External load or applied displacement
In the constant force loadcase, the displacement of the node where the force is being applied.
In the constant displacement loadcase, the reaction at the node where the displacement is being
applied.
Force at the crack tip, in the vertical direction.
Displacement of the nodes closer to the crack tip, in the vertical direction.
Strain energy
Compute:
1. For both loadcases, get the compliance curve for the specimen as a function of the crack length
(C = f (a)). Derive numerically the obtained curve and use the computed derivative to compute
G =
P
2
2B
dC
da
2. G(a) for both loadcase using the FCEM, CCM, VCCT methods. Plot in the same graph the obtained
curves together with the curve in the former question.
(The four methods should give similar results, for the following, use only the curve obtained with
FCEM.)
3. Assume that the material R-curve is given by:
R =
_
_
_
G
c
_
1(1a/c
f
)
3
_
for a c
f
G
c
for a >c
f
where c
f
=1.25 mm and G
c
=0.3N/mm. Find what load P produces instability.
4. Assume you are performing a laboratory test using a CT speciment, trying to measure the R-curve of
a material. Which loadcase would you use? Why?
5. Analyze the eect of the element size on FCEM, CCM, VCCT methods. Obtain G for three dierent
meshes with dierent element sizes using the three methods.
FINISH
/CLEAR
/TITLE Computation of G - Crack length: a
/PREP7 !PRE-PROCESSOR
a0=8
Chapter 2. Computational Fracture Mechanics I: Computation of G 25
A= 25
W= 5
B=10
C=50
D=62.5
E=5
F=60
el_len = 2 ! Element length
ET,1,PLANE42
KEYOPT,1,3,3 !Keyoption to activate thickness
R,1,B !Thickness assignment
MP,EX,1,210000 !Young modulus
MP,PRXY,1,0.3 !Poissons ratio
K,1,0,0
K,2,C-A,0
K,3,C-A+E,w/2
K,4,D,w/2
K,5,D,F/3
K,6,D,F/2
K,7,C,F/2
K,8,0,F/2
K,9,C,F/3
L,1,2,(D-(D-C)-A)/el_len
L,2,3,sqrt(E*E+W*W/4)/el_len
L,3,4,(D-C+A-E)/el_len
L,4,5,(F/3-W/2)/el_len
L,5,6,(F/2-F/3)/el_len
L,6,7,(D-C)/el_len
L,7,8,C/el_len
L,8,1,(F/2)/el_len
L,5,9,(D-C)/el_len
L,9,7,(F/2-F/3)/el_len
AL,1,2,3,4,9,10,7,8
AL,9,5,6,10
LSYMM,Y,ALL
AL,11,12,13,14,19,20,17,18
AL,19,15,16,20
ACCAT,1,2
ACCAT,3,4
MSHKEY,2
AMESH,5
AMESH,6
ALLSEL
NSEL,S,LOC,X,0,C-A-a0 ! All nodes at y=0, but those of the crack
26 Fracture Mechanics
NSEL,R,LOC,Y,0 ! are selected
CPINTF,ALL
FINISH
/SOLU !SOLUTION
KD,9,UX,0
KF,9,FY,1000 ! Comment for displacement loadcase
!KD,9,UY,10 ! Uncomment for displacement loadcase
KD,18,ALL
ALLSEL
SBCTRAN
SOLVE
FINISH
/POST1 !GENERAL POST-PROCESSOR
PLDISP,1
PLNSOL,S,Y
FINISH
This le can be found at:
ftp: // amade. udg. edu/ mme/ FEmet/ CT. dat
2.6 Further reading
Krger R. (2002) The Virtual Crack Closure Technique: History, Approach and Applications. NASA/CR-
2002-211628. ICASE. Report No. 2002-10.
Chapter 3
Computational Fracture Mechanics II:
Computation of K
3.1 Introduction
Although the use of the energy release rate is normally preferred in advanced analysis and in crack propaga-
tion simulation, the stress intensity factor K is widely used for design and verication of structures. While
G is a energy-based magnitude, K is a stress related value and so, any computational method used to com-
pute it will have to deal somehow with the stress singularity and its related issues we introduced in Chapter 1.
As we saw in the rst chapter, the stress discretisation in a nite element mesh may be improved by
using crack tip elements, to avoid the strong mesh dependence produced by the stress singularity.
In this chapter we will show how to use quarter mid-side node elements to discretize the stress eld and
then, some method to compute K.
3.2 The stress intensity factor (K)
The plane stress eld in the nearby of a crack tip of a crack loaded in mode I can be approximated by the
following expressions:

I
x
=
K
I

2r
cos
_

2
__
1sin
_

2
_
sin
_
3
2
__
(3.1)

I
y
=
K
I

2r
cos
_

2
__
1+sin
_

2
_
sin
_
3
2
__
(3.2)

I
xy
=
K
I

2r
cos
_

2
_
sin
_

2
_
cos
_
3
2
_
(3.3)
were superscript I denotes mode I and and r are the polar coordinates (angle and distance, respectively)
in a polar coordinate system with center at the crack tip.
Analogously, the stress eld ahead the crack tip in a Mode II situation is given by:
27
28 Fracture Mechanics

I I
x
=
K
I I

2r
sin
_

2
__
2+cos
_

2
_
cos
_
3
2
__
(3.4)

I I
y
=
K
I I

2r
sin
_

2
_
cos
_

2
_
cos
_
3
2
_
(3.5)

I I
xy
=
K
I I

2r
cos
_

2
__
1sin
_

2
_
sin
_
3
2
__
(3.6)
The stress at the crack tip might be seen as the limit:
lim
r 0

I
i j
=
K
I

2r
f
I
i j
()

=c
(3.7)
where c denotes a constant. So if we are able to somehow know the stress eld at the nearby of the
crack tip we are able to compute K
I
:
K
I
= lim
r 0

I
i j

2r
f
I
i j
()

=c
(3.8)
since f
I
i j
() are known trigonometrical functions. Analogously for K
I I
:
K
I I
= lim
r 0

I I
i j

2r
f
I I
i j
()

=c
(3.9)
3.2.1 Numerical estimation of the stresses at the crack tip
Let us recall the cracked plate of Figure that we analyzed in the former chapter, using the le 1_quarter_mid_nodes.dat.
Using the ANSYS commands of the next box, you may obtain the stresses at a given path (radius).
ANSYS Command: Path Plots
Command Comments
PATH,NAME,nPTS,nSETS,nDIV Denes geometrically a path by nPTS
PPATH,POINT,NODE,X,Y,Z,CS Denes one of the points of the path.
POINT is the ID of the point. NODE is
a node number if the point is located in a
NODE. X,Y,Z may be used to dene the lo-
cation of the point
PDEF,LABEL,ITEM,COMP,AVGLAB Denes the ITEM (for instance STRESS)
and COMP (for instance X) to plot and give
it a LABEL
PLPATH,NAME Plots the path labelled with NAME
Chapter 3. Computational Fracture Mechanics II: Computation of K 29
Example 3.1. Obtain a plot for
y
for the side-cracked plate, using a path plot.
Solution to Example 3.1. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
FINISH
/POST1
! Path plot of stresses
PATH,0DEG,2,6,100
PPATH,1,,a,0,0
PPATH,2,,a+5,0,0
PDEF,SX,S,X,NOAV
PDEF,SY,S,Y,NOAV
PLPATH,SY
PRPATH,SX,SY !Path results in a text file
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/3_path.dat
A plot similar to that in Figure 3.1 should be obtained.
Figure 3.1:
y
at the nearby of the crack for =0
o
.
30 Fracture Mechanics
3.2.2 Computation of K by stress extrapolation
Since we know how to obtain the stresses in the nearby of the crack tip we are able to obtain K
I
. If the
stresses when r 0 would not tend to we could compute K
I
with the stresses when r =0, but since they
do tend to , we have to somehow compute numerically the limit of Eq. 3.8. To do so we compute K for
each value of the stress
i j
using equations as a function of r and plot the pairs (K,r). Since the values of
the stress for small r are aected by the stress singularity we will neglect them and t the linear variation
of
i j
(r ). The extrapolation for r =0 gives a good approximation of K
I
, as shown in Figure 3.2
0 5 10 15 20 25
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
r (mm)
K
I

(
M
P
a


m
m
1
/
2
)

y = 0.183*x + 6.5
Figure 3.2: Computation of K
I
by stress extrapolation (from
y
3.2.3 Computation of K by displacement extrapolation
The former procedure is strongly aected by the stress singularity. In a nite element procedure, stresses
are obtained from the displacements and so may contain larger errors, specially in cases like this one where
large stress gradients are present. For this reason, a more precise option is to use the displacement solution
for the computation of the stress intensity factor, K. In this case for the region near the crack tip, the
relations between the displacement eld and K
I
and K
I I
are:
K
I
_
_
_
cos

2
(cos)
sin

2
(cos)
_
_
_
=2G
_
2
r
_
_
_
u
I
v
I
_
_
_
(3.10)
K
I I
_
_
_
sin

2
(2++cos)
cos

2
(2cos)
_
_
_
=2G
_
2
r
_
_
_
u
I I
v
I I
_
_
_
(3.11)
where G is the shear modulus:
G =
E
2(1+)
(3.12)
and is a parameter which allows the simultaneous consideration of plane stress and plane strain cases,
with:
Chapter 3. Computational Fracture Mechanics II: Computation of K 31
=
3
1+
for plane stress (3.13)
= 34 for plane strain (3.14)
Since in a nite element solution, the displacement eld is generally a better solution than the stress
eld, the value of K
I
obtained in this manner (see Figure 3.4) should provide a better approximation.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
6
6.5
7
7.5
8
8.5
9
r (mm)
K
I

(
M
P
a


m
m
1
/
2
)



y = 0.449*x + 6.78
Figure 3.3: Displacement extrapolation technique for the computation of K
I
(using u
y
).
You may compare the numerical result with the analytical one, which may be obtained using the hand-
book formula of Figure 3.4.
Figure 3.4: Handbook expression for the analyzed case.
3.2.4 Remarks
The reviewed techniques for the computation of K are rst approximations. Further developments
exist and are still object of current research.
Both stress and displacement extrapolation need of ne meshes to converge to the correct value of
K. Crack tip elements are strongly recommended for the stress extrapolation method.
32 Fracture Mechanics
3.3 Displacement extrapolation with quarter node elements
When the stress singularity is very well discretized, which practically means when quarter-point isoparametric
elements are used, some simple formulae can be applied with surprisingly accurate results. This formuale
are obtained making = in expressions 3.10 and 3.11, since for this angle the error is minimum.
If you recall the quarter node elements shown in Section 1.2, the approximation of the displacement
along edge 1-3 is given by:
u =u
1
+[4u
2
u
3
3u
1
]
_
r
L
+[2u
3
+2u
1
4u
2
]
r
L
(3.15)
and the same expression is valid for the vertical displacement v.
If we substitute this approximation of the displacement eld in expressions 3.10 and 3.11 we obtain:
K
I
_
_
_
cos

2
(cos)
sin

2
(cos)
_
_
_
=4G
_
2
L
_
_
_
4u
2
u
3
3u
1
4v
2
v
3
3v
1
_
_
_
(3.16)
and for mode II:
K
I I
_
_
_
sin

2
(2++cos)
cos

2
(2cos)
_
_
_
=4G
_
2
r
_
_
_
4u
2
u
3
3u
1
4v
2
v
3
3v
1
_
_
_
(3.17)
So we can compute K
I
and K
I I
substituting any value of angle and using the displacements at nodes
1,2 and 3. If we particularize the former expressions for = and since v
1
=0:
K
I
=
2G
+1
_
2
L
(4v
2
v
3
) (3.18)
K
I I
=
2G
+1
_
2
L
(4u
2
u
3
) (3.19)
If we denote node 2 with an A and node 3 with a B and make L= the former expressions may be
written in the form given by Guinea et al. (2000):
K
I
=
E

4
_
2

(4v
A
v
B
) (3.20)
where E

is the eective elastic modulus dened as equal to E for plane stress and E/(1
2
) for plane
strain. v
A
is the vertical displacement of the quarter mid-side node and v
B
the vertical displacement of the
outer vertex node (See Figure 3.5) .
3.3.1 Formulae for the stress intensity factor
With some similar approach the following expressions may also be obtained to compute K
I
(Guinea et al,
2000):
K
I
=
E

2
_
2

v
A
(3.21)
Chapter 3. Computational Fracture Mechanics II: Computation of K 33
Figure 3.5: Quarter-point singular elements and coordinates for near crack-tip eld description. Source:
Guinea et al, 2000
K
I
=
E

12
_
2

(8v
A
v
B
) (3.22)
These methods provide objective ways of computing K. Similar expressions can be obtained for K
I I
,
using 3.11. Again in mixed mode situations the superposition principle may be applied
3.4 ANSYS commands for the computation of K
3.4.1 Crack opening displacement
ANSYS oers a built in method for the computation of the Stress intensity factor (K). Although this method
is related to displacement extrapolation it is actually based on the concept of Crack Opening Displacement
(COD) and uses the formula obtained by Paris and Sih which describes the crack opening near the crack
tip for linear elastic-plastic materials:
V

r
=
K
I
2G
1+

2
(3.23)
This expression can be easily obtained from 3.10 for =.
Since the crack opening displacement V can be obtained from the displacement solution at the nodes
which dene the crack face, the parameters A and B can be obtained by a simple linear t.
V

r
= A+Br (3.24)
Then, since:
lim
r 0
V

r
= A (3.25)
K can be computed from 3.23:
K
I
=

2
2GA
1+
(3.26)
34 Fracture Mechanics
3.4.2 KCALC command
The main steps needed to perform the computation of K in a two-dimensional model are:
1. Dene a path with three nodes. Where NODE1 must be the crack tip and NODE2 and NODE3 two
nodes in the same crack face. If quadratic elements are used, a choice which gives good results is to
use the three nodes of the crack tip element.
2. Dene a cartesian local coordinate system with origin at the crack tip.
3. Execute the KCALC command
ANSYS Command: KCALC, KPLAN, MAT, KCSYM, KLOCPR
KPLAN Key to convert plane stress results into plane strain stress intensity factors:
0 - Plane strain and axisymmetric cases (default)
1 - Plane stress
MAT Material number used in the extrapolation (defaults to 1).
KCSYM Symmetry key:
0 or 1 - Half-crack model with symmetry boundary conditions in the crack-tip coordinate system.
KII = KIII = 0. Three nodes are required on the path.
2 - Like 1 except with antisymmetric boundary conditions (KI = 0).
3 - Full-crack model (both faces). Five nodes are required on the path (one at the tip and two on
each face).
KLOCPR Local displacements print key:
0 - Do not print local crack-tip displacements.
1 - Print local displacements used in the extrapolation technique.
Example 3.2. Compute the Stress Intensity Factor for the plate of Figure 3.2.1 using ANSYS KCALC
command.
Solution to Example 3.2. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
Chapter 3. Computational Fracture Mechanics II: Computation of K 35
SOLVE
FINISH
CS,12,0,1,4,124 !Define local coordinate system at crack tip
CSYS,12 ! Activate local coordinate system
PATH,K1,3,10,50 ! Define 3-node path
PPATH,1,1
PPATH,2,1013
PPATH,3,242
KCALC,0,1,0,1 !Execute KCALC
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/3_kcalc.dat
3.5 Proposed exercises
Problem 3.1. Numerical validation of Irwins hypothesis
Irwins hypothesis may be used when plastic strains appear in the region near the crack tip. It is based on
dening an equivalent case in the elastic regime, with an equivalent crack length. Let us keep working with
the model 1_stress_sing_KSCON.dat we used in Chapter 1.
1. Introduce a perfect plasticity model as the material model. You can do this by adding the following
lines after the material properties denition:
TB,BKIN,1,1
TBDATA,1,270,0
where the value 270 MPa is the yield stress and 0 the hardening modulus.
2. Now increase the applied stress to a value that ensures that plastic strains appear near the crack tip
(representative results are obtained for about 40 MPa).
3. Obtain a curve of S
y
for r between 0 and 0.3 mm, approximately.
4. Compute the equivalent crack length according to the Irwins hypothesis. In the former plot you can
obtain the crack length for S
y
=270 MPa (the yield strength). Compare both values of the equivalent
crack length.
5. Using the analytical expression of the stress eld in the nearby of a singularity, plot the S
y
curve for
the equivalent crack length of the former point. Compare this curve with the one of the question 3
6. Observe the results and comment on about the validity of Irwins hypothesis.
36 Fracture Mechanics
Problem 3.2. Consider again the side-cracked plate of Figure 3.2.1. Compute the mode I stress intensity
factor using equations 3.21, 3.22, 3.20. Compare the results with those obtained with the other methods
seen in this chapter. Comment on the results.
Problem 3.3. Superposition principle
Proof the principle of superposition can be used as schematized in Figure 3.6.
Figure 3.6: Proposed exercise # 2.
Consider a cracked plate submitted to an stress (A). Consider the same plate with the same stress
but also closing stresses which make the crack remain closed (B). Consider the plate submitted only to the
closing stresses but in the oposite direction (C).
1. Considering that the superposition principle is applicable for a single opening mode, discuss how could
you compute K
(C)
I
.
2. Proof that K
(A)
I
=K
(B)
I
+K
(C)
I
3.6 Further reading
Guinea G.V, Planas J. and Elices M. (2000) K
I
evaluation by the displacement extrapolation technique.
Engineering Fracture Mechanics 66:243-255.
Tada H., Paris P.C., and Irwin G.R. (2000) The Stress Analysis of Cracks Handbook. ASME Press. 3rd
Edition
Chapter 4
Computational Fracture Mechanics III:
Computation of the J-integral
4.1 Introduction
To complete the review of computational analysis for Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics we will summarize
the concept of J-integral and we will use ANSYS to compute it.
Let us consider a line integral going around the crack tip and starting in one side of the crack and ending
at the other side of the crack, as shown in gure 4.1.
Figure 4.1: J integral.
It can be shown that the following integral is independent of the path for any curve which satises the
former conditions:
J =
_

_
Udy

t
u
x
ds
_
(4.1)
were U is the strain energy density (U =
1
2
: ),

t is the traction vector dened by the external normal


n, u is the displacement eld and ds is an innitesimal in the direction of the curve.
37
38 Fracture Mechanics
The integral is actually an equilibrium, for any path not including the crack, that is starting and ending
at the same point, J=0, so if the curve starts at one side of the crack and ends at the other side, its value
equals the energy inverted on the crack. The J-integral is also useful in non-linear fracture mechanics but,
since in LEFM its value equals the energy release rate G,
4.2 The J integral with ANSYS
As usual, ANSYS help describes properly the procedure to compute the J-integral. Here we summarize this
procedure for bidimensional cracks:
1. Start the new computation of the J-integral with: CINT,NEW,ID where ID is an integer identifying
the path, for instance 1.
2. Dene the node at the crack tip and the crack plane normal with:
CINT,CTNC,CMNAME
where CMNAME is the name of a node component
1
CINT,NORMAL,par1,par2
where par1 is a coordinate system identier and par2 is an axis of the coordinate system
3. Specify the number of contours n to compute with the command:
CINT,NCONTOUR,n
4. Activate the option for symmetry conditions, if present:
CINT,SYMM,ON
5. Specify the output controls:
OUTRES,ALL
or
OUTRES, CINT
6. Finally, the results for the value of the J integral may be listed or plotted:
PRCINT,ID
PLCINT,PATH,ID
where ID is the crack identier.
Example 4.1. Compute the J-integral for the cracked plate of Figure 3.2.1, by using the ANSYS built-in
method.
1
The command CM,CMNAME,NODE stores the selected nodes under a node component of name CMNAME.
Chapter 4. Computational Fracture Mechanics III: Computation of the J-integral 39
Solution to Example 4.1. The following commands may be used in any of the parametrized models we
used before, with the crack tip located at (a,0) to dene the J-integral computation.
The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either type these commands on the
command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter /input, le, ext or just use
copy and paste.
FINISH
\PREP7
CSYS,1
NSEL,S,LOC,X,a !Select the crack tip node, located at (a,0)
NSEL,R,LOC,Y,0
CM,CRACK,NODE
NSEL,ALL
CINT,NEW,1
CINT,CTNC,CRACK
CINT,NORMAL,0,2
CINT,NCONTOUR,20
CINT,SYMM,ON
OUTRES,CINT
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/4_j_int.dat
After solving the model and in the \POST1 module, results ofr the J integral may be obtained with
the commands PRCINT,1 or PLCINT,PATH,1. It is important to set a sucient number of contours in the
command CINT,NCONTOUR,n, so the integral converges to a value.
4.3 Proposed exercises
Problem 4.1. Compute the J-integral for the model 1_stress_sing_KSCON.dat we used in Chapter 1.
Compare the value of J, with that of G and K, obtained in the corresponding examples.
4.4 Further reading
Rigby R.H. and Aliabadi M.H. Decomposition of the mixed-mode J-integral - Revisited. International
Journal of Solids and Structures 35(1):2073-2099, 1998.
Chapter 5
Computational Fracture Mechanics IV:
Cohesive zone modeling
5.1 Introduction
Whilst Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics assumes the presence of a crack in a perfectly elastic brittle or
quasi-brittle material this is an idealization. Generally, in the nearby of the crack tip there exists a zone
where the material is damaged due the presence of microcracks. When the number of microcracks grow a
larger crack is formed and crack growth takes place. This region of the material is called Failure Process
Zone or, in the case of crack growth modeling, cohesive zone.
Some modeling techniques treat the material in this more realistic manner: before crack growth the
region at the crack tip follows a failure process.
This chapter summarizes the dierent possibilities included in ANSYS for the cohesive zone modeling.
5.2 Cohesive laws
Cohesive laws describe mathematically the separation or debonding of two material surfaces. They are usually
presented as - curves. is the stress acting to separate the surfaces and the relative displacement
between them.
The dierent cohesive laws have some similarities:
Some positive slope region in which, when an increase in implies an increase in .
Some inexion point
m
. Once this point is reached, the cohesive material starts the failure/damage
process.
Some negative slope region. Since the material is damaged the stress to achieve larger decreases.
Some
m
for which =0, which means the total damage of the material
41
42 Fracture Mechanics
The behaviour of the cohesive material is sketched in Figure 5.1. If the material is loaded with <
m
,
the unload follows the same path since the material is not damaged. On the other hand, if the material is
loaded producing some >
m
, the material starts to damage and then the unload follows the secant.
Figure 5.1: Cohesive law
This material behaviour can be modeled with dierent laws. Usually the linear (sometimes called
bilinear), linear-parabolic, exponential and trapezoidal are included in the commercial FE software. They
are sketched in Figure 5.2. ANSYS includes only the bilinear and exponential laws.
Figure 5.2: Usual cohesive laws
5.2.1 Bilinear law
This is the cohesive law used for the contact elements so the names of the variables are slightly dierent
P normal contact stress (tension). Equals
K
n
: normal contact stiness
u
n
: contact gap. Equals
Chapter 5. Computational Fracture Mechanics IV: Cohesive zone modeling 43
Figure 5.3: Bilinear Cohesive law
u
n
: contact gap at the maximum normal contact stress (tension)
u
c
n
: contact gap at the completion of debonding
d
n
: debonding (damage) parameter. d
n
=0 for the virgin material and d
n
=1 for the totally damaged
material
For mode II or mixed mode, additional parameters are required.
5.2.2 Exponential law
This law is the only one available for interface elements.
=exp
max

n
exp

n
exp

2
t
(5.1)
with:

max
: stress for which crack opening starts

n
: maximum normal displacement

t
: maximum tangential displacement
Parameters must be given so:
_
() d =Gc (5.2)
5.3 Cohesive elements in ANSYS
ANSYS oers two dierent possibilities for the cohesive zone modelling. A straight forward manner is the
use of interface elements. A second approach, is the use of ANSYS contact elements together with a
cohesive law.
44 Fracture Mechanics
5.3.1 Cohesive zone modeling with interface elements
Element type
Cohesive elements are referred as interface elements in the literature because of their topology. That is, the
element is located in the interface between two solid structural elements to simulate the debonding process
between them.The dierent interface elements available in ANSYS are shown in the next Table:
Element Characteristics Interface Element Structural Elements
2D, linear INTER202 PLANE42, VISCO106, PLANE182
2D, quadratic INTER203 PLANE2, PLANE82, VISCO88,
PLANE183
3D, quadratic INTER204 SOLID92, SOLID95, SOLID186,
SOLID187
3D, linear INTER205 SOLID45, SOLID46, SOLID64,
SOLID65, SOLID185, SOLIDSH190
Material denition
As mentioned before, when using interface elements, the only material model which can be used is the
exponential. It needs of three parameters:

max
: maximum stress

n
: normal displacement at maximum stress

t
: tangential displacement at maximum stress
ANSYS Command: Material denition for interface elements
TB,CZM,MAT,NTEMP,NPTS,EXPO
TBDATA,1,SMAX,DN,DT
where SMAX is
max
, DN is

n
and DT is

t
.
Example 5.1. DCB test modeling with interface elements
Since the DCB specimen is controlled to always be in crack-opening situation, interface elements may be
successfully employed in the modeling of this test.
Solution to Example 5.1. The following le reproduces an Example of ANSYS verication manual which
aim is to test its cohesive modeling with a DCB test.
Chapter 5. Computational Fracture Mechanics IV: Cohesive zone modeling 45
The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either type these commands on the
command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter /input, le, ext or just use
copy and paste.
FINISH
/CLEAR
/COM,ANSYS MEDIA REL. 11.0 (10/27/2006) REF. VERIF. MANUAL: REL. 11.0
/TITLE, VM248, DELAMINATION OF DOUBLE CANTILEVER BEAM - 2D PLANE STRAIN
/COM, REF: ALFANO, G. AND CRISFIELD, M. A.,
/COM, "FINITE ELEMENT INTERFACE MODELS FOR THE DELAMINATION ANALYSIS
/COM, OF LAMINATED COMPOSITES: MECHANICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL ISSUES"
/COM, INT. J. NUMER. METH. ENGNG 2001, 50:1701-1736.
/PREP7
ET,1,182 !* 2D 4-NODE STRUCTURAL SOLID ELEMENT
KEYOPT,1,1,2 !* ENHANCE STRAIN FORMULATION
KEYOPT,1,3,2 !* PLANE STRAIN
ET,2,182
KEYOPT,2,1,2
KEYOPT,2,3,2
ET,3,202 !* 2D 4-NODE COHESIVE ZONE ELEMENT
KEYOPT,3,3,2 !* PLANE STRAIN
MP,EX,4,1.353E5 !* E11 = 135.3 GPA
MP,EY,4,9.0E3 !* E22 = 9.0 GPA
MP,EZ,4,9.0E3 !* E33 = 9.0 GPA
MP,GXY,4,5.2E3 !* G12 = 5.2 GPA
!MP,GYZ,4,5.2E3
!MP,GXZ,4,3.08E3
MP,PRXY,4,0.24
MP,PRXZ,4,0.24
MP,PRYZ,4,0.46
GMAX = 0.004
TNMAX = 25 !* TENSILE STRENGTH
TB,CZM,5,,,EXPO !* COHESIVE ZONE MATERIAL
TBDATA,1,TNMAX,GMAX,1000.0
RECTNG,0,100,0,1.5 !* DEFINE AREAS
RECTNG,0,100,0,-1.5
LSEL,S,LINE,,2,8,2 !* DEFINE LINE DIVISION
LESIZE,ALL,0.75
LSEL,INVE
LESIZE,ALL, , ,200
ALLSEL,ALL
TYPE,1 !* MESH AREA 2
MAT,4
LOCAL,11,0,0,0,0
ESYS,11
AMESH,2
CSYS,0
TYPE,2 !* MESH AREA 1
ESYS,11
AMESH,1
CSYS,0
NSEL,S,LOC,X,30,100
NUMMRG,NODES
ESLN
TYPE,3
MAT,5
46 Fracture Mechanics
CZMESH,,,1,Y,0, !* GENERATE INTERFACE ELEMENTS
ALLSEL,ALL
NSEL,S,LOC,X,100 !* APPLY CONSTRAINTS
D,ALL,ALL
NSEL,ALL
FINISH
/SOLU
ESEL,S,TYPE,,2
NSLE,S
NSEL,R,LOC,X
NSEL,R,LOC,Y,1.5 !* APPLY DISPLACEMENT LOADING ON TOP
D,ALL,UY,10
NSEL,ALL
ESEL,ALL
ESEL,S,TYPE,,1
NSLE,S
NSEL,R,LOC,X
NSEL,R,LOC,Y,-1.5 !* APPLY DISPLACEMENT LOADING ON BOTTOM
D,ALL,UY,-10
NSEL,ALL
ESEL,ALL
NLGEOM,ON
AUTOTS,ON
TIME,1
NSUBST,40,40,40
OUTRES,ALL,ALL
SOLVE !* PERFORM SOLUTION
FINISH
/POST26
NSEL,S,LOC,Y,1.5
NSEL,R,LOC,X,0
*GET,NTOP,NODE,0,NUM,MAX
NSEL,ALL
NSOL,2,NTOP,U,Y,UY
RFORCE,3,NTOP,F,Y,FY
PROD,4,3, , ,RF, , ,20
/TITLE,VM248, DCB: REACTION AT TOP NODE VERSES PRESCRIBED DISPLACEMENT
/AXLAB,X,DISP U (mm)
/AXLAB,Y,REACTION FORCE R (N)
/YRANGE,0,60
XVAR,2
PLVAR,4
PRVAR,UY,RF
*GET,TMAX,VARI,4,EXTREM,TMAX !* TIME CORRESPONDING TO MAX RFORCE
FINISH
/POST1
SET, , , , ,TMAX !* RETRIEVE RESULTS AT TMAX
NSEL,S,NODE, ,NTOP !* SELECT NODE NTOP
*GET,RF_NTOP,NODE,NTOP,RF,FY !* FY RFORCE AT NODE NTOP
*GET,UY_NTOP,NODE,NTOP,U,Y !* DISP AT NODE NTOP CORRESPONDING TO RFORCE
RF_MAX = RF_NTOP*20 !* PLANE STRAIN OPTION AND WIDTH = 20 mm
SET,LAST !* RETRIEVE RESULTS AT LAST SUBSTEP
*GET,RF_END,NODE,NTOP,RF,FY !* FY RFORCE AT NODE NTOP AT LAST SUBSTEP
*GET,UY_END,NODE,NTOP,U,Y !* DISP AT NODE NTOP CORRESPONDING TO RFORCE
RF_END = RF_END*20 !* PLANE STRAIN OPTION AND WIDTH = 20 mm
*DIM,LABEL,CHAR,2,2
*DIM,VALUE,,2,3
Chapter 5. Computational Fracture Mechanics IV: Cohesive zone modeling 47
*DIM,VALUE2,,2,3
LABEL(1,1) = RFORCE,DISP
LABEL(1,2) = FY (N),UY (mm)
*VFILL,VALUE(1,1),DATA,60.0,1.0
*VFILL,VALUE(1,2),DATA,RF_MAX,UY_NTOP
*VFILL,VALUE(1,3),DATA,ABS(RF_MAX/60.0),ABS(UY_NTOP/1.0)
*VFILL,VALUE2(1,1),DATA,24,10.0
*VFILL,VALUE2(1,2),DATA,RF_END,UY_END
*VFILL,VALUE2(1,3),DATA,ABS(RF_END/24.0),ABS(UY_END/10.0)
/COM
/OUT,vm248,vrt
/COM,------------------- VM248 RESULTS COMPARISON --------------
/COM,
/COM, | TARGET | ANSYS | RATIO
/COM,
/COM,MAX RFORCE AND CORRESPONDING DISP USING INTER202:
/COM,
*VWRITE,LABEL(1,1),LABEL(1,2),VALUE(1,1),VALUE(1,2),VALUE(1,3)
(1X,A8,A8, ,F10.3, ,1F10.3, ,1F5.3)
/COM,
/COM,RFORCE CORRESPONDING TO DISP U = 10.0 USING INTER202:
/COM,
*VWRITE,LABEL(1,1),LABEL(1,2),VALUE2(1,1),VALUE2(1,2),VALUE2(1,3)
(1X,A8,A8, ,F10.3, ,1F10.3, ,1F5.3)
/COM,-----------------------------------------------------------
/OUT
FINISH
*LIST,vm248,vrt
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/5_VM248.dat
Figure 5.4 shows the force-displacement curve for the DCB specimen, as obtained from the model using
cohesive elements.
Figure 5.4: Force-displacement curve
48 Fracture Mechanics
Figure 5.5: Force-displacement curves for dierent parameters of the cohesive law
5.3.2 Cohesive zone modeling with contact elements
Element type
On the other hand, for complex boundary conditions which may not always tend to open the crack, contact
elements may also be employed. In this case
Element Formulation Usage Target element
CONTA171 linear 2-D 2-Node Surface-to-Surface TARGE169
CONTA172 quadratic 2-D 3-Node Surface-to-Surface TARGE169
CONTA173 linear 3-D 4-Node Surface-to-Surface TARGE170
CONTA174 quadratic 3-D 8-Node Surface-to-Surface TARGE170
Material denition
When using contact elements the only material model which can be employed is the bilinear. This can be
dened in ANSYS in two dierent ways: by maximum traction and maximum separation (CBDD) or by
maximum traction and critical energy release rate (CBDE).
ANSYS Command: Material denition for cohesive zone modeling through contact elements
TB,CZM,MAT,NTEMP,NPTS,CBDX (changing X by D or E)
TBDATA,1,C1,C2,C3,C4
Example: DCB test modeling with contact elements
The DCB test may also be modelled with contact elements. This option requires higher computational time.
Chapter 5. Computational Fracture Mechanics IV: Cohesive zone modeling 49
Solution to Example 5.2. The ANSYS
TM
command sequence for this example is listed below. You can either
type these commands on the command window, or you can type them on a le, then, on the command window enter
/input, le, ext or just use copy and paste.
finish
/clear
/prep7
et,1,182 ! solid 4 node element
keyopt,1,3,2 ! plane strain
et,2,182
keyopt,2,3,2
et,3,169 ! target 2d element
et,4,171 ! 2d contact element
keyopt,4,12,5 ! bonded: cohesive law must be defined
et,5, 169 ! target 2d element
et, 6, 171 ! 2d contact element
keyopt,6,4,2 ! Nodal point contact
keyopt,6,2,4 ! Lagrange multiplier method
MP,EX,1,1.353E5 !* E11 = 135.3 GPa
MP,EY,1,9.0E3 !* E22 = 9.0 GPa
MP,EZ,1,9.0E3 !* E33 = 9.0 GPa
MP,GXY,1,5.2E3 !* G12 = 5.2 GPa
MP,GYZ,1,5.2E3
MP,GXZ,1,3.08E3
MP,PRXY,1,0.24
MP,PRXZ,1,0.24
MP,PRYZ,1,0.46
kopen = 1.e6 ! Stiffness contact
smax=25 ! Definition of Cohesive law
gic=0.26
tb,czm,2,1,1,cbde
tbdata,1,smax,gic,smax,gic,1.e-5,1e15
!Geometry
a=35
length=100
h=1.5
l=length/2
rectng,0,length,0,h
rectng,0,length,0,-h
e_size=0.5 ! Element size
esize,e_size
type,1
mat,1
local,11,0,0,0,0
esys,11
amesh,2
csys,0
type,2
esys,11
50 Fracture Mechanics
amesh,1
! Contact between specimen two arms
real,3 ! real set of contact between arms
r,3
rmodif,3,3,-kopen ! Normal contact stiffness
rmodif,3,12,-kopen ! Tangential contact stiffness
asel,s,area,,1
nsla,s,1
nsel,r,loc,y,0
type,3
mat,2
esurf
asel,s,area,,2
nsla,s,1
nsel,r,loc,y,0
nsel,r,loc, x, 0, a+e_size/2
real,3
mat,3
type,6
esurf
allsel,all
nsel,all
finish
/solu
dk,6,all
dk,3,uy,30
nsel,all
esel,all
eqslv,front
neqit,200
nropt, unsymm
nlgeom,on
autots,on
time,1
deltime,0.0005,0.000005,0.1
outres,all,all
solve
finish
This le can be found at:
ftp://amade.udg.edu/mme/FEmet/5_DCB_comp.dat
Chapter 5. Computational Fracture Mechanics IV: Cohesive zone modeling 51
5.4 Some remarks on element size
The use of cohesive elements, in any of the available forms, implies that the cohesive zone (failure process
zone) must be meshed with a sucient number of elements. A rule of the thumb is to use at least three
cohesive elements for the failure process zone. Some estimation for the length of the FPZ should be used
to determine a critical element size. For instance, the length of the fracture process zone for delamination
in a unidirectional test specimen loaded in mode I can be estimated as:

fpz
=
9
32
E
3
G
I c
(
o
3
)
2
(5.3)
where E
3
and
o
3
are respectively the Young modulus and the strength for the direction 3 of the composite
and G
I c
is the critical energy release rate for mode I. Under mixed-mode loading, the length of the failure
process zone is larger than the obtained using the former expression, so the given estimation is conservative.
For typical CFRP the latter expression leads to element size between 0.1 and 0.5 mm. Obviously this is
unsuitable for large structures. Then, some engineering methods may be applied which allow the use of
larger element sizes (Turon et al, 2007).
5.5 Proposed exercises
Perform a mesh-size dependence analysis for the simulation of the DCB test, using interface elements. You
may use the Example given in section 5.3.1. Compare the results with equation 5.3.
5.6 Further reading
Mi, Y., Criseld, M. A., Davies, G. A. O. and Hellweg, H. (1998) Progressive delamination using interface
elements. Journal of Composite Materials 32(14):12461272.
Alfano, G. and Criseld, M. A. (2001) Finite element interface models for the delamination analysis of
laminated composites: mechanical and computational issues. International Journal for Numerical Methods
in Engineering 50(7):17011736.
Turon A., Dvila C.G., Camanho P.P., Costa J. (2007) An engineering solution for mesh size eects in the
simulation of delamination using cohesive zone models. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 74(10):16651682.
5.7 Aknowledgements
The autor is very grateful to Iigo Llanos at IKERLAN for decisive help with the modelling of the cohesive
zone using contact elements.

You might also like