Chapter 6

Crack Growth Simulations

There is a great deal of literature available concerning the simulation of quasi-static
and fatigue crack growth with the nite element method. See for example the early
review article by Rice and Tracey (1973), and the more recent work of Bittencourt,
Wawrzynek, Sousa, and Ingraea (1996). In this chapter, emphasis is placed on
the advantages of implementing discontinuous enrichment to simulate crack growth.
The ability to model crack growth without remeshing, as well as to consider several
dierent crack paths with a single mesh is examined. We adopt a relatively `crude'
crack growth law in this chapter and utilize the numerical techniques developed in
Chapters 3-5. When possible the resulting crack paths are compared to experimental
results, either quantitatively or qualitatively.
In the next section, we provide a review of some of the criteria available for
modeling crack growth. Sections 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 examine the eects of the state of
stress in the domain of interest and the geometry of the initial crack(s) on the resulting
crack paths. The subsequent section examines the eect of contact in the vicinity of
the crack on the crack evolution. Finally, Section 6.6 provides some conclusions.
139

6.1. REVIEW OF CRACK GROWTH LAWS

yn

140

n+1

n+1

c
xn

Figure 6.1: Discrete representation of crack segments.

All of the structured and unstructured meshes used for the examples in this chapter
were constructed with the program gmsh, developed by Jean-Francois Remacle and
Christophe Geuzaine. The program is available on the web at
http://www.monteore.ulg.ac.be/ geuzaine/gmsh.html

6.1 Review of crack growth laws

We consider the evolution of a crack geometry in a nite body on the interval [0; T ],
partitioned into steps
ti with i = 1 : : : n. Given an admissable state (n; un) at
step n for crack geometry Dn, the problem is to determine the crack geometry Dn+1
at the subsequent step . This process is governed by the discrete representation of D
as well as the choice of crack growth law.
In the present formulation, the crack is represented as a connected set of straight
line segments as shown in Fig. 6.1. In the local crack coordinate system (^xn; y^n), we
then wish to determine the propagation angle cn+1 and length
an+1 for the new
segment. In the following, we rst describe the available methods for calculating the

6.1. REVIEW OF CRACK GROWTH LAWS

141

angle c, and then discuss how
a is determined.

Some of the criteria which have been proposed for the crack growth direction are:
1. normal to the direction of maximum hoop stress (Erdogan and Sih, 1963),
2. normal to the direction of minimum strain energy (Sih, 1974),
3. along the direction for which KII vanishes on the crack extension (Goldstein
and Salganik, 1974),
4. along the direction which gives the maximum energy release rate (Nuismer,
1975).
The rst two criteria can be implemented using the information at step n. The
last two require an iterative procedure, or the application of a perturbation analysis
(Sumi, 1985).
In this chapter, we use the maximum hoop stress criterion, which states that the
crack will propagate from its tip in the direction c where the circumferential (hoop)
stress  is maximum. Under general mixed-mode loadings, the asymptotic near tip
circumferential and shear stresses take the form
8
>
< 
>
: r

9
>
=

8
9
>
< 3 cos(=2) + cos(3=2) >
=
K
1
I
p
=
>
2r 4 >
;
: sin(=2) + sin(3=2) >
;
8
9
>
>
<
K 1 ;3 sin(=2) ; 3 sin(3=2) =

(6.1)

+ p II 4 >
2r : cos(=2) + 3 cos(3=2) >
;

The circumferential stress in the direction of crack propagation is a principal stress.

Therefore, the critical angle c dening the radial direction of propagation can be

6.1. REVIEW OF CRACK GROWTH LAWS

142

determined by setting the shear stress r in (6.1) to zero. After a few manipulations,
the following expression is obtained:


p 1 cos( 2 ) 21 KI sin() + 12 KII (3cos() ; 1) = 0

2r

(6.2)

This leads to the equation dening the angle of crack propagation c in the tip coordinate system.

KI sin(c ) + KII (3cos(c) ; 1) = 0:

(6.3)

Solving this equation gives



p
c = 2arctan 41 KI =KII  (KI =KII )2 + 8

(6.4)

The root which corresponds to a positive hoop stress in (6.1) is taken to be the
direction of crack growth.
The step size
an can be set in several ways, depending on the assumptions made
with regards to the applied load on the structure. For example, if the structure is
assumed to be subjected to cyclic loading, a linearized Paris Law (Paris and Erdogan,
1963) is typically applied by writing

a = C (
K )m
N

(6.5)

where the parameters C and m are obtained from experimental data. In the above,

K is the dierence between the maximum and minimum stress intensity factors
(K max ; K min ) during the number of cycles
N . Under general mixed-mode loadings,

6.1. REVIEW OF CRACK GROWTH LAWS

143

this is replaced by an equivalent mode I stress intensity factor K1eq .

The equivalent mode I stress intensity factor is calculated using the growth angle
c in the expression for the circumferential stress  in (6.1). We write
eq
 (r; c) = pKI
2r

(6.6)

which after a few manipulations yields

K1eq = KI cos3 ( 2c ) ; KII 32 cos( 2c ) sin(c)

(6.7)

In the studies presented in this chapter, the cracks are grown quasi-statically. The
crack increment
a is set, and at each stage the equivalent stress intensity factor KIeq
is calculated. This can then be compared to the critical value for the material (if
available), and crack growth is said to occur if

KIeq  Kc

(6.8)

where Kc is the critical stress intensity factor, or fracture toughness of the material.
Stable fracture is characterized by a decreasing KIeq with increasing crack length,
in which eventual crack arrest is expected. In the present investigation, we study
unstable fracture, in which either the equivalent stress intensity factor remains above
the critical value with increasing crack length or increasing applied load.
It is emphasized that while remeshing is not necessary to model crack growth
with discontinous enrichment, a certain level of discretization is necessary to obtain
an accurate crack trajectory. In the examples which follow, we adopt the approach of
initially using a relatively coarse mesh to obtain a rough estimate of the overall crack

6.2. INSTABILITIES IN CRACK GROWTH

144

path. We then rene the mesh in the vicinity of the crack path, and use a smaller
increment
a to obtain a `converged' solution.

6.2 Instabilities in crack growth

The double cantilever beam (DCB) specimen shown in Fig. 6.2 has been used to study
the stability of the crack growth process by several researchers. While the loading is
purely Mode I , small perturbations in either the loading or crack geometry trigger
curvillinear crack growth. Experimental results using PMMA were obtained by Sumi
and Kagohashi (1983), who also simulated the experiment with nite elements and
continuous remeshing (Sumi, 1985). In the latter work, the crack growth direction was
determined using a perturbation analysis to nd the angle along which KII vanished
(criteria 3).
P

x
L

Figure 6.2: Geometry of the DCB specimen. The dashed lines indicate the portion
of the domain considered.

6.3. CRACK GROWTH FROM A FILLET

145

In the present investigation, we model only the portion of the domain indicated by
the dotted lines in Fig. 6.2. The relevant dimensions are L = 11:8in., b = 1:97in. and
a = 5:45in. The material properties are taken to be that of PMMA with E = 0:45x106
psi and  = 0:35, and the load P is taken to be 197 lbs. To examine the instabilities
in the fracture process, the end of the crack is perturbed by
x and
 as shown in
the gure.
Fig. 6.3 compares the experimental results to the simulated paths for various step
sizes and discretizations. The axes are taken to be aligned with the left end of the
specimen, along the centerline as shown in Fig. 6.2. Results were rst obtained using
a relatively coarse mesh of 32x80 quadrilateral elements with step sizes
a = 0:30 in.
and
a = 0:15 in. With an initial indication for the region of crack growth, a mesh of
4250 elements was constructed which was rened in this zone. The remaining results
correspond to this mesh, and they show excellent agreement with the experimental
results.

6.3 Crack growth from a llet

This example shows the growth of a crack from a llet in a structural member, and
serves to illustrate how the present method can be used as an aid to design against
failure. The conguration to be studied is shown in Fig. 6.4, with the actual domain
modeled as indicated. The setup is taken from experimental work found in (Sumi,
Yang, and Wang, 1995). In this example, we investigate the eect of the thickness
of the lower I-beam on crack growth. Only the limiting cases for the bottom I-beam
of a rigid constraint (very thick beam) and exible constraint (very thin beam) are
considered. In addition, the welding residual stresses between the member and the

6.3. CRACK GROWTH FROM A FILLET

Experiment
a = 0.30 in,
a = 0.15 in,
a = 0.10 in,
a = 0.05 in,

146

2560
2560
4250
4250

elements
elements
elements
elements

3.5

2.5

2
6

Figure 6.3: Experimental and calculated crack paths for the DCB specimen. The
background lines are elements in the coarse mesh.

6.3. CRACK GROWTH FROM A FILLET

147

I-beam are neglected.

P

Initial
Crack

75

= 20

Simulated
Region

75
375
800

Figure 6.4: Experimental conguration for crack growth problem.

The structure is loaded with a traction of P = 20:0kN , and the initial crack length
is taken to be ao = 5mm. The geometry is discretized with 8243 three-node triangular
elements. To model a rigid constraint, the displacement in the vertical direction is
xed along the entire bottom of the domain. A exible constraint is idealized by
xing the vertical displacement at both ends of the bottom of the domain. For both
sets of boundary conditions, an additional degree of freedom is xed to prevent a
rigid body translation.
We simulate crack growth with a step size of
a = 5mm for a total of 14 steps.
Fig. 6.5 shows the mesh in the vicinity of the llet and compares the crack paths
for the cases of a thick I-beam (upper crack) and a thin I-beam (lower crack). It
is emphasized that the same mesh is used throughout the simulation, and that no
remeshing is required. As new crack segments are added, additional enriched degrees
of freedom are generated for each new segment. The results shown are consistent

6.3. CRACK GROWTH FROM A FILLET

148

Figure 6.5: Zoom of the crack paths (shown in black) for the cases of a thick (top
crack) and thin (bottom crack) I-beam.

6.4. CRACK GROWTH FROM RIVET HOLES

149

with both the experimental (Sumi, Yang, and Wang, 1995) and previous numerical
results using the EFG method (Fleming, 1997).

6.4 Crack growth from rivet holes

In this section, we consider the modeling of crack growth in a plate with cracks
emanating from two holes subjected to a far-eld tension yyo . Fig. 6.6 shows the
geometry and loads under consideration. In the initial conguration, both cracks
have a length of 0.2 in. and are oriented at angles  = 45 and  = ;45 for the left
and right holes, respectively.
The initial geometry is discretized with a mesh of 2650 scatterred nodes as shown
in Fig. 6.7. The mesh is rened towards the center of the plate, where the cracks are
expected to propagate. It is emphasized that the mesh does not conform to the crack
geometries, and that the same mesh is used throughout the simulation.
In the initial study, the change in crack length for each iteration is taken to
be a constant
a = 0:1 in., and the cracks are grown for nine steps. The two
cracks grow in a nearly symmetrical pattern, despite the fact that the mesh is not
symmetric. Fig. 6.8 shows the stress contours and crack geometries for the next to
last conguration. Table 6.1 gives the position and stress intensity factors of the top
crack tip at each stage of the simulation. The values are normalized by yyo pao. In
this example, the cracks eventually grow into the holes.
We next rene the mesh in the vicinity of the crack paths, and halve the change
in crack length to
a = 0:05 in. The ne mesh is quasi-uniform with a blend of
quadrilateral and triangular elements for a total of 5117 nodes. The cracks are grown
for a total of sixteen steps, and once again grow towards the holes. The crack tip

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

150

position and stress intensity factors for the top crack tip are provided in Table 6.2.
Fig. 6.9 compares the nal crack paths for both the coarse and ne mesh, and shows
good correlation.
o

yy

2.5 in.

2 in.

1 in.

r = 5/64 in.

2 in.

2.5 in.

Figure 6.6: Geometry and loadcase of the crack growth problem.The initial crack
lengths are 0.2 in.

6.5 Crack growth in a compressive eld

The study of crack growth in a compressive eld has a long history. See for example
the early work by Hoek and Bieniawski (1965) and Cotterell (1972), or the more re-

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

Figure 6.7: Quasi-uniform mesh for crack growth.

151

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

152

3.5
3.25

yy
13
11.9286
10.8571
9.78571
8.71429
7.64286
6.57143
5.5
4.42857
3.35714
2.28571
1.21429
0.142857
-0.928571
-2

2.75
2.5
2.25
2
1.75
1.5
1.5

2.5

3.5

Figure 6.8: Zoom of the yy stress contours and geometries near the holes. The
element boundaries are shown in black.

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

153

tip position
SIF's
p
o
step
xc
yc KI =yy ao KII =yyo pao
initial 2.1488 2.5707
0.78
0.65
1
2.2484 2.5616
1.55
-0.02
2
2.3482 2.5550
1.84
-0.10
3
2.4481 2.5592
2.53
0.00
4
2.5480 2.5634
2.31
0.95
5
2.6312 2.5080
0.92
-0.19
6
2.7289 2.4866
0.48
-0.27
7
2.8153 2.5370
0.56
0.28
8
2.9139 2.5204
0.11
-0.10
Table 6.1: Position and stress intensity factors for left crack tip. Coarse mesh results
with
a = 0:1 in.
tip position
SIF's
p
o
step
xc
yc KI yy ao KII yyo pao
initial 2.1488 2.5707
0.79
0.65
1
2.1986 2.5663
1.45
0.03
2
2.2481 2.5595
1.57
-0.07
3
2.2981 2.5575
1.68
-0.01
4
2.3481 2.5581
1.86
0.01
5
2.3981 2.5562
2.09
-0.12
6
2.4480 2.5600
2.56
0.08
7
2.4980 2.5608
3.03
0.41
8
2.5465 2.5488
2.64
0.46
9
2.5886 2.5219
2.63
-0.04
10
2.6321 2.4972
2.68
-0.28
11
2.6820 2.4998
2.73
0.01
12
2.7320 2.5013
0.57
0.02
13
2.7819 2.5037
0.55
-0.05
14
2.8306 2.5151
0.68
0.03
15
2.8802 2.5217
0.64
-0.03
Table 6.2: Position and stress intensity factors for left crack tip. Fine mesh results
with
a = 0:05 in.

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

154

Figure 6.9: Crack paths for the coarse (black)

and ne (red) meshes.
cent papers of Ingraea and Heuze (1980) and Nemat-Nasser and Horii (1982). Crack
growth in a compressive eld is observed in the fracture of geomaterials such as rocks
under large geotectonic states of stress. A condition known as axial splitting often
occurs in which the initial crack in an overall compressive eld will turn and propagate in the direction of the applied load. Nemat-Nasser and Horii (1982) presented
experimental results in which thin slits were cut in glass and resin plates. They found
that cracks oriented at an angle to the principle compressive load almost invariably
propagated in the direction of the load. If no lateral loads were applied, the fracture
tended to be stable and the propagating cracks arrest if the magnitude of the applied
load is not suciently increased.
The numerical simulation of fracture in a compressive eld was presented by Ingraea and Heuze (1980). In that study, the contact between the crack faces was not
considered, and nite elements with remeshing were used to model the crack propagation. For traditional formulations, the modeling of contact on the crack faces is

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

155

burdened by the need to remesh at each step of crack growth. In contrast, the combination of discontinuous enrichment and the iterative technique developed in Chapter
5 provides a straightforward means to address this problem.
The geometry under consideration is shown in Fig. 6.10, a square plate subjected
to a compressive load with an initial crack located at an angle . The dimensions of
the plate and initial crack are taken from Ingraea and Heuze (1980), with W =4 in.,
and a = 0.4 in. The domain is partitioned with a uniform mesh of 80x80 quadrilateral
elements, and the material properties are taken to be that of PMMA with E =
0:45x106 psi and  = 0:35.
yy

x
a
W

yy

Figure 6.10: Plate with crack at angle , loaded in compression.

We begin by considering a single crack with orientation = 0:2. Nemat-Nasser

6.5. CRACK GROWTH IN A COMPRESSIVE FIELD

156

and Horii (1982) provides both analytical and experimental results for this situation.
We consider the case of frictionless contact on the crack faces, and simulate crack
growth with
a = 0:15in. An important consideration in determining the stress
intensity factors is to account for the tractions on the crack faces (see Appendix A).
The trajectory of the top crack tip is compared to the results of Nemat-Nasser and
Horii (1982) in Fig. 6.11. The crack is observed to grow in the direction of the applied
load, and shows a good correlation with the experimental solution.
Numerical
Experimental
0.9

0.8

y (in)

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

-0.5

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0.1

0.2

x (in)

Figure 6.11: Experimental and numerical trajectories of top crack tip.

As a last example, we simulate crack growth for a collinear array of four cracks
oriented at = ;=4 for a total of six steps. The nal conguration and displacement
contours are shown in Fig. 6.12. The cracks grow in the direction of the applied load,
and do not intersect one another. These results are consistent with the experimental

6.6. CLOSING REMARKS

157

observations for the same conguration presented by Nemat-Nasser and Horii (1982).

uy
2.28E-06
1.56E-06
8.41E-07
1.19E-07
-6.02E-07
-1.32E-06
-2.05E-06
-2.77E-06
-3.49E-06
-4.21E-06
-4.93E-06
-5.65E-06
-6.38E-06
-7.10E-06
-7.82E-06

1.5
1

0.5
0

-0.5
-1
-1.5

-1

Figure 6.12: Displacement contours at the last stage of crack growth.

6.6 Closing remarks

Several numerical examples of crack growth were presented in the context of twodimensional linear elastic fracture mechanics. While a relatively simple crack growth
law was implemented, the resulting crack trajectories often showed good correlation
with experimental results. With discontinuous enrichment the crack geometry is

6.6. CLOSING REMARKS

158

described independently of the mesh, and so there is no need to remesh the domain
at each stage of crack advance. The consideration of dierent crack paths arising
from changes in boundary conditions or applied loads is also straightforward.
The work presented in this chapter suggests several areas for future research. In
several cases the mesh was rened locally about the crack path region to obtain better
accuracy. This is essentially an adaptive process, which can be made much more ecient. In the same spirit of obtaining greater accuracy, the present formulation oers
a straightforward means to test/validate new crack growth laws. As the simulations
are not burdened by the need to remesh as the crack propagates, growth laws which
are a function of the stress state at a subsequent stage can be more readily examined.
In addition to unilateral contact, the formulation developed in Chapter 5 could also
be used for cohesive crack models.