Current ANSYS Fracture Mechanics Capabilities R160

Current ANSYS Fracture
Mechanics Capabilities R160
ANSYS Technical Support
1 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016
Documentation:
Fracture Analysis Guide
Fracture Analysis Guide
Fracture Theory Basics
Introduction
Structural integrity is critical for all structures.
Fracture occurs when cracks form and propagate, which can cause
catastrophic failures.
Loss of structural integrity can occur for many reasons: Improper choice of
materials, Improper design, Improper manufacturing/casting techniques,
Exceeding duration of life, Environmental conditions…
Fracture mechanics uses concepts from applied mechanics and material
science to directly consider the combined effect of stress and flaws:
• Flaw characteristics (shape, length, etc.)
• Stresses
• Fracture toughness of material
Fracture Mechanics Capabilities in ANSYS
ANSYS Mechanical and Mechanical APDL offer several different

methodologies to evaluate fracture
Traditional fracture mechanics parameters
• Energy Release Rate (G)
• J‐Integral
• Stress Intensity Factors (SIFs)
• T‐Stress
• C* Integral
• Material Forces
Fracture Mechanics Modes
Three primary modes of fracture:
• Mode I: tensile or opening mode
– generally most critical
• Mode II: sliding or shear mode
• Mode III: tearing mode
• Mixed‐mode fracture is also possible
Fracture Mechanics Parameters
Stress intensity factors, J‐Integral, and energy release rates are
common fracture mechanics parameters
For linear elastic materials; G, J, and K are related
K2
J G  : for plane stress conditions near crack tip
E
K 2 (1  2 )
J G  : for plane strain conditions near crack tip
E
Energy Release Rate
Energy release rate (G) quantifies the energy required to create
newly formed crack surfaces

G
a
G is a function of the far‐field stresses, crack dimensions, and
material properties
 a 2
G
E
J‐Integral
J‐Integral is a contour‐integral around the crack tip that is equal to the
change in potential energy due to incremental crack advance
 u j  q 
J     ij  w1i  dA    ii q1dA   t j u ji q1dS
A
 x1  xi x1 C
• σ is the stress tensor
• u is the displacement vector
• w is the strain energy density
• δ is the Kronecker delta
• x is the coordinate axis
• q is the crack extension vector
• α is the thermal expansion coefficient
• t is the crack face traction
J‐Integral
J‐Integral is path independent
J A  JB
• applicable to linear and nonlinear behavior
• path‐independency allows easy computation
– not necessary to account for “singularity” effects at crack tip
– small scale yielding problems can be treated as “elastic”
• easy to incorporate in numerical schemes
– particularly in finite element methods
Stress Intensity Factors
Stress Intensity Factors characterize the stress state near crack tips
Near‐field crack tip stresses can be expressed as:
K I , K II , K III = SIF for each fracture mode
SIFs are only applicable for linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM)
The Interaction Integral method is used to extract the individual stress
intensity factors
Fracture Toughness Testing
A standard specimen is tested in the laboratory.
– An initial crack is introduced into the specimen.
– The specimen is loaded until the crack extends.
Fracture toughness, Kc or Gc, can be calculated from the results.
For a certain material, we have a measured Kc (or Gc).
– We can calculate K (or G).
– The crack extents if K (or G) exceeds Kc (or Gc).
CINT Approach for J‐Integral
CINT uses the domain integration approach to calculate J‐integral
• area integration for 2D; volume integration for 3D
1  u j  q k
J   ij
A c V  x k
 w ki  dV
 x i
Ac
virtual crack extension area
CINT Approach for SIFs
For linear elastic materials: G, J, and K are related, but for mixed‐
mode conditions, SIFs cannot be extracted directly from the J‐
Integral results
CINT uses the Interaction Integral method to extract the individual
SIFs for mixed‐mode fracture
I
2
E'
 1

K1 K1  K 2 K 2  K 3 K 3aux
aux aux
CINT Approach
CINT performs independent calculations at multiple contour locations
• contours are numbered outward from crack front
– contour 1 located at crack front
– contour 2 next closest to crack front, etc.
• J‐integral is path independent
– results should converge after first few contours
• no limit on the number of contours, but all contours must be located entirely
within the FE domain
• calculations on contours that touch the outer boundaries will not be accurate due
to boundary effects
CINT Approach
Meshing requirements:
• Radial/ring patterned mesh is not required
– may provide a better results for the first few contours.
• Singular elements are not required
– only applicable with linear elastic material
• for 3D models, hexahedral elements are desirable
– avoid tet elements near crack tip
Path independence should be observed after the first few contours
irrespective of mesh patterns
CINT Approach for VCCT
A common failure mode for composite structures is delamination,
which can be characterized using the energy release rate calculated
by the virtual crack‐closure technique (VCCT).
VCCT is based on the assumption that the energy needed to
separate a surface is the same as the energy needed to close the
same surface and that stress states around the crack tip do not
change significantly when the crack grows by a small amount.
For 3‐D models with a low‐order elements, G is defined as
1 1 1
GI  RY v GII  RX u GIII  RZ w
2a 2a 2a
• GI, GII, GIII = mode I, II, and III energy‐release rate
• Δu, Δv, Δw = relative displacement between top and bottom of crack face
• Rx, Ry, Rz = reaction forces at the crack‐tip node
• Δa = crack extension
2D geometry 3D geometry
Unstructured Mesh Method
(UMM)
UMM – Unstructured Mesh Method
While structured hexahedral meshes are commonly used
to accurately evaluate fracture mechanics parameters,
some analyses may require unstructured hexahedral
meshes or tetrahedral meshes. In such cases, the
conventional method used for parameter evaluation
results in either approximate values or values that tend
to oscillate around some mean value.
The unstructured mesh method (UMM) is a numerical tool used to
improve the accuracy of fracture mechanics parameter calculations for
unstructured hexahedral meshes and tetrahedral meshes.
The accuracy of the resulting parameters is generally comparable to that
of the parameters evaluated using structured hexahedral meshes.
Elements and Fracture Mechanics Support
by UMM
Element types
 SOLID185
 SOLID186
 SOLID187
 SOLID285
Fracture Mechanics Parameters
 Stress Intensity Factors
 J‐integral
UMM User Interface
 Activation/Deactivation
CINT, UMM, par1
where par1 = 1 or YES or ON : Activate UMM
= 0 or NO or OFF : Deactivate UMM
 UMM Defaults
[1] For meshes with SOLID185 or SOLID186, if degenerated elements (tetrahedral or
pyramid shapes) exist in the region around the crack front where the contour
integration is performed, UMM is enabled (CINT,UMM,ON) by default.
 CINT,UMM command overrides default UMM setting
Application Example
UMM,ON & UMM,OFF Structured HEX: UMM,OFF
Application Example
K1
30000
29000
28000
27000
26000
K1
25000 UMM OFF
24000 UMM ON
23000 Hex
22000
21000
20000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 JINT
Crack Front Abscissa 3800
3600
3400
3200
3000
JINT
UMM OFF
2800
UMM ON
2600
Hex
2400
2200
2000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Crack Front Abscissa
T‐stress calculation
AFT Fracture R150
T‐stress definition
The asymptotic expansion of the stress field in the vicinity of the crack tip, expressed in the
local polar coordinate system described on Figure 11.2, writes as follow [Williams 54]:
2 2 2
The first singular term of this eigen‐expansion is the well‐known stress intensity factor, and the
first non‐singular term, denoted here , is the so‐called elastic T‐stress.
The T‐stress itself is extracted from the interaction integral by:
1
Where:
is the obtained T‐stress value,
the Young’s modulus,
the Poisson ratio,
the interaction integral,
and the extensional strain at the crack front in the direction tangential to the front.
T‐stress definition
The T‐stress represents the stress acting parallel to the crack faces. It is
tightly linked to the level of crack‐tip stress triaxiality, thus its sign and
magnitude can substantially change the size and shape of the crack‐tip
plastic zone [Larsson and Carlson 1973, Zhao 2001]. Negative T‐stress
values decrease the level of crack‐tip triaxiality leading to bigger plastic
zones; while positive values increase the level of triaxiality, leading to
smaller plastic zones. A higher crack‐tip triaxiality promotes fracture
because the input of external work will be less dissipated by the global
plastic deformation and hence be available to augment local material
degradation and damage [Hackett 1993].
The T‐stress also plays an important role for the stability of straight crack
paths submitted to mode I loading conditions. For small amount of crack
growth, cracks with 0 have been shown to be stable whereas cracks
with 0 tend to deviate from their initial propagation plane [Coterell
and Rice 80].
Elastic T‐stress for corner cracks
• T‐stress calculation on a corner crack
including symmetry.
• Tensile load applied on the top face.
• T‐stress calculation defined using
CINT,TYPE,TSTRESS
Ref: Stress intensity factor K and the elastic T‐stress for corner cracks
L.G. ZHAO, J. TONG and J. BYRNE
Parametric analysis is performed with a/W varying from 0.1 to 05.
→ Results match well with the reference.
T/σ vs Angle
‐0.3
0 20 40 60 80 100
‐0.35
‐0.4
‐0.45 a/W = 0.1
a/W = 0.3
T/σ
‐0.5
a/W = 0.4
‐0.55 a/W = 0.45
a/W = 0.5
‐0.6
‐0.65
‐0.7
Angle
Another parametric analysis is performed with a/W varying from 0.1 to 05
and Nu varying from 0 to 0.45.
→ Results at ϕ=45° match well with the reference.
T/σ vs a/W at ϕ=45°

‐0.1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
‐0.15
‐0.2
‐0.25 Nu = 0
T/σ
‐0.3 Nu = 0.15
‐0.35 Nu = 0.3
‐0.4 Nu = 0.45
‐0.45
‐0.5
a/W
C* Integral Calculation
Background
Fracture analysis of structural components operating at high
temperatures.
A time‐dependent loading parameter Ct controls the stress and strain
singularities at the crack tip
For long‐time loading (as secondary creep strains dominate the elastic
strains) the C → C ∗ , a path and time independent parameter.
C*‐integral is used to evaluate the crack tip fields in a homogenous
material undergoing a secondary (steady‐state) creeping deformation.
C* is obtained by replacing the displacements with velocities, and the
strain energy density with the strain energy rate density in the J‐integral
expansion.
To obtain path‐independent C*‐integral values, the creep deformation
must be fully developed (that is, the creep strains should dominate the
elastic strains in a region near the crack tip).
Formulations
Definition of C(t)
n ui
C (t )  lim
 0 

n 1
 ij ij dx2   ij n j

x1
ds
The contour Γ is a vanishing small loop enclosing the crack tip; the
unit normal is directed away from the crack tip; and is the
power law creep material constant.
Formulations (contd.)
• Estimation of C(t) for short time loading application
J
Ct 
( n  1)t
is the far field J‐integral, is the time
• For a long‐time loading, C → C ∗
ui
C   W (ij )dx2   ij n j
*
ds

x1
where is the strain energy rate density
• To represent the interpolation between short and long time behavior
J
Ct   C*
( n  1)t
MAPDL Commands
Define a C*‐integral calculation
!INITIATE A NEW CONTOUR INTEGRAL, AND DEFINE TYPE AS CSTAR
CINT, NEW, 1
CINT, TYPE, CSTAR
Print C*‐integral result
/POST1
SET,LAST,LAST
PRCINT,1,,CSTAR
Plot C*‐integral result
/POST1
SET,LAST,LAST
PLCINT,FRONT,1,,,CSTAR
Verification model: Compact Tension
Compact tension specimen Ansys model
Comparison of Ansys on reference results
Reference Ansys Relative Error
Value(MPa*mm/h) Value(Mpa*mm/h)
0.0157 0.0156 0.9%
von Mises creep strain
Verification model: Compact Tension
Path‐dependency of Ct
0.1
0.09
0.08
0.07
Ct (Mpa*mm/h)
0.06
t = 5 hours
0.05
t = 10 hours
0.04
0.03 t = 35 hours
0.02 t = 100 hours
0.01
0
0.2 0.7 1.2 1.7
Verification on Ct calculation
Ring Radius (mm) 0.14
0.12
0.1
Ct (MPa*mm/h)
0.08
ANSYS
0.06 Riedel[3]
0.04 Ref. C*
0.02
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
39 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016 Time (hour)
Material Force Method
For Fracture Applications
Material Force for Fracture
• Material Force Parameter may now be
evaluated
• Also known as “Configuration Force” is a
useful tool to investigate to investigate an
energy change of an inhomogeneous
continuum.
• May be used for integrity assessment, crack
growth simulation 5.00
4.00
• Equivalent to J‐Integral in linear elasticity 3.00
Series
• Applicable to nonlinear materials such as 2.00 3
Series
1
kinematic hardening plasticity 1.00
Series
4
• More nonlinear materials will be supported 0.00 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19
-1.00
in future
-2.00
Material force value as function of contours
Eshelby Dissipative
Material Force for Fracture Applications
Cyclic Loading
25.00
160 20.00
140
120
15.00
100
10.00
80
60 5.00
40
20 0.00
0 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 ‐5.00
42
Material Force for Fracture
• Use CINT,TYPE,MFOR to calculates material forces
• Material force evaluation supports the following material
behavior:
– Linear isotropic elasticity
– Nonlinear isotropic elasticity
– Isotropic hardening plasticity
– Kinematic hardening plasticity
– hyperelasticity
Material Force:
A novel approach to fracture mechanics
Material force - A new way to evaluate driving

forces on defects (like the J-Integral in fracture
mechanics, and energy release) with generality
Applications and benefits of development

• Fracture mechanics
• Use a fracture mechanics parameter for
structure integrity assessment
• Fracture mechanics based design
• Crack growth simulation
• Fatigue crack growth simulation
• Unique parameter may overcome limitations
of traditional fracture mechanics parameter
• Introduced in R150, extended to hyperelastic

models in R160.
44
Introduction to Material Force
The force exerted by the matrix on the
inclusion is the material force. When an
inclusion is incorporated into a stress‐free
elastic body, the entire body undergoes a
deformation, resulting in a configurational
change of the body (or matrix) from its
original state.
The change in the total energy due to the
deformation is characterized by the material
force. The material force is typically
calculated by evaluating the energy‐
momentum tensor (or Eshelby stress
tensor).
45
Computation of Material Forces
• integration of physical nodal forces
• integration of material nodal forces
46
Fracture Mechanics
Computation of Material Forces
• local spatial momentum balance
• local material momentum balance
47
Material Forces to Fracture
• The material force is energy-conjugated to the crack propagation rate
• Material force can be understood as a force to close an equivalent, friction

free zipper
material force at force to close an

crack tip equivalent zipper
48
Material Force: Arruda-Boyce Model
Arruda-Boyce Model
49
Material Force: Conclusion
• in small strain elasticity, material force gives total energy release rate
• contains additional information due to its vectorial nature
• not restricted to proportional loading and isotropic hardening
(kinematic supported)
• large strain elasticity & hyperelasticity
50
Fracture Exposure in Mechanical
Fracture exposure in Mechanical
The version 14.5 brings a lot of improvements in fracture mechanics
exposure in Mechanical application:
• Flat semi‐elliptical Crack Meshing in 3D analyses
• CINT definition for cracks and imported meshes
• Output quantities postprocessing: Stress Intensity Factors, J
Integral & VCCT Energy Release Rates
• Coordinate System Alignment based on principal stresses
We can then identify the three following use cases:
• Crack insertion and mesh at a know location
• Crack insertion and mesh at maximum principal stress
• Use a 2D cracked geometry and mesh it with mesh connections
• Import a 2D or 3D crack mesh with FE Modeler
New Properties on the Crack Object
Align with face normal:
• Specifies whether the Crack
Coordinate System’s X‐Axis will be
aligned with the face normal of the
nearest surface. Defaults to Yes.
Project to nearest surface:
• Specifies whether the Crack
Coordinate System’s origin will be
projected to a point on the nearest
surface. Defaults to Yes.
Crack annotations for
inclined crack
Crack mesh for inclined
crack in X‐Z plane
Use Case 1: Crack insertion and mesh at a
know location
1. Insert Static Structural analysis
2. Input geometry
3. Locate a coordinate system with graphic pick point or coordinates or some
topology
4. Align the axes for the crack face and direction
5. Insert “Fracture” folder
6. Insert Crack Object
7. Specify all the crack object details
8. Generate the mesh
9. Apply “typical” BC
10. Insert a contact region between crack faces using a command object if
necessary
11. Solve
12. Postprocess JINT, K1, K2, K3
13. Export to excel or copy/paste from chart if necessary
Use Case 1
1. Insert a Static Structural analysis in the Project Page Schematic
2. Import an external geometry or create your geometry in Design
Modeler
3. Create a coordinate system used to locate the center of the
elliptical shape of the crack. The coordinate system can be defined
using global coordinate or a geometric scoping.
4. You can then chose to orient X axis normal to a surface at a hit
point:
• Select the Hit Point Normal option
(Hit point mode will turn on)
• Pick a point on screen, then click Apply to
see the primary axis change
Use Case 1
6. Insert Crack Object
Use Case 1
7. Specify all the crack object details:
The body to which the crack is scoped must be
meshed with quadratic tetrahedron elements.
The crack shape is semi‐elliptical and the crack
plane is perpendicular to Y axis.
The minor and the major radii define
respectively the crack size along X and Z axes.
Use Case 1
8. Generate the mesh :
Fracture meshing is a post mesh process in that it occurs in a separate step
after the base mesh is generated. If you do not generate a base mesh
before you invoke Generate All Crack Meshes, the base mesh is generated
first and the crack meshing occurs in a separate step after base meshing is
complete.
The buffer zone size used to insert the fracture template in the base mesh
can be modified using the Buffer Zone Scale Factors in order to ensure a
good element size transition.
Use Case 1
9. Apply “typical” Boundary Conditions
In many cases it can be interesting to use the submodeling capability by
linking the coarse mesh analysis and the submodel in which the crack is
inserted:
Use Case 1
10. Apply any pressure on crack face if necessary (has to happen after
meshing):
Crack faces nodes named selections can generated if you activate the
option in the crack detail view.
Then these named selections can be used to apply a nodal pressure on the
crack faces.
Use Case 1
11. Solve
12. Postprocess JINT, K1, K2, K3:
Insert a Fracture Tool at the solution level and a crack result: Stress
intensity factors (K1, K2 & K3) or J Integral can then be post processed.
Use Case 1
The contours results are plot in the graph window and the selected
contour result is displayed graphically on the crack front.
13. The contours results can also be exported in a text file using RMB and
Export Option.
Use Case 2: 2D cracked geometry
2. Input geometry
3. Draw the crack in DM
4. Use Mesh connections to create the crack mesh
5. Locate a coordinate system with graphic pick point or coordinates or
some topology
8. Insert Premeshed Crack Object
11. Apply any pressure on crack face if necessary (has to happen after
meshing)
12. Solve
13. Postprocess JINT, K1, K2, G1, G2 & GT
Use Case 2
2. Import an external geometry or create your geometry in Design Modeler
3. Draw the crack in DM:
The crack is created at the geometry level.
The bodies corresponding to the 2 different
sides of the crack must be grouped in 2 Part 1
different parts.
The nodes connection will be generated at
the meshing level.
Some additional slices can be added to
ensure the quality of the mesh (radial
element layers) Part 2
Use Case 2
4. Use Mesh connections to create the crack mesh by connecting the
edges corresponding to the closed side of the crack
5. Locate a coordinate system with graphic pick point or coordinates
or some topology
6. Modify the axes of the coordinate system
to align Y axis with the normal direction to
the crack plane
Use Case 2
Use Case 2
A node named selection containing the crack
front node is selected.
The number of solution contours is entered.
The previously created coordinate system is
selected.
Use Case 2
If the model include a symmetry plane at the crack face it’s possible to mesh
only one side of the crack and to activate the symmetry for fracture
calculations.
To activate the symmetry for the calculations a Mechanical variable called
“all cracks symmetric” has to be added. Then the symmetry will be activated
for all cracks defined in the model.
Use Case 2
11. Apply any pressure on crack face if necessary
Use Case 2
12. Solve
13. Postprocess JINT, K1, K2, K3, G1, G2 & GT:
If the mesh is made of linear elements VCCT output energy release rates
(G1, G2 & GT) can also be post processed.
Use Case 2
Export Option.
Use Case 3: Import 2D or 3D crack mesh
2. Input the cdb mesh through FE Modeler
3. Locate a coordinate system with graphic pick point or
coordinates or some topology
9. Apply any pressure on crack face if necessary (has to happen
after meshing)
10. Solve
11. Postprocess JINT, K1, K2, K3, G1, G2, G3 & GT
Use Case 3
2. Input the cdb mesh (or any other supported mesh) through FE Modeler
Use Case 3
3. Locate a coordinate system with graphic pick point or coordinates
or some topology
4. Modify the axes of the coordinate system to align Y axis with the
normal direction to the crack plane
Use Case 3
Use Case 3
A node named selection containing the crack
front nodes is selected.
The number of solution contours is entered.
The previously created coordinate system is
selected.
Use Case 3
If the model include a symmetry plane at the crack face it’s possible
to mesh only one side of the crack and to activate the symmetry for
fracture calculations.
To activate the symmetry for the calculations a Mechanical variable
called “all cracks symmetric” has to be added. Then the symmetry
will be activated for all cracks defined in the model.
Use Case 3
9. Apply any pressure on crack face if necessary
Use Case 3
10. Solve
11. Postprocess JINT, K1, K2, K3, G1, G2, G3 & GT:
If the mesh is made of linear elements VCCT output energy release rates
(G1, G2, G3 & GT) can also be post processed.
Use Case 3
Export Option.
eXtended Finite Element
Method (XFEM)
16.0 Release
81
eXtended Finite Element Method (XFEM)
The eXtended Finite Element Method (XFEM) is used to model cracks and
other discontinuities by enriching the degrees of freedom in the model
with additional displacement functions that account for the jump in
displacements across the discontinuity. The method is a good
engineering approach to crack‐growth simulation and eliminates the
necessity of (re)meshing crack tip regions.
• Offers a way to model the cracks without explicitly meshing the
crack surfaces
• Allows for arbitrary crack growth within the existing mesh. No
morphing or remeshing is needed.
• Initial crack(s) must be present in the model and can be modeled as
traction free or with cohesive zone behavior.
82
How XFEM works?
How to introduce a discontinuity inside an element?
 Heaviside step functions
83
Level Set
Describe the discontinuity surface by the iso‐zero of a
level set (crack not defined explicitly in the mesh):
• Φ refers to the crack face side
• Ψ locates the crack front position
• Intersection of Φ and Ψ is the crack front Ψ = 0
Φ = 0
84
XFEM Overview
The techniques used in XFEM can be broadly classified into the following:
• Singularity‐Based Approach: Accounts for crack tip singularities as well
as the jumps in displacements across the crack surfaces. Cracks may
terminate inside a finite element.
• Phantom Node Method: Accounts for jumps in displacements across
the crack surfaces. Crack tip singularity is not taken into account. The crack
terminates at the edge (or face) of a finite element.
85
Phantom Node Method
The phantom node method considers only the displacement jump
across the crack faces and ignores the crack tip singularity
contributions. By introducing phantom nodes superposed on the
parent element nodes, the displacement function can be rewritten in
terms of the displacements of the real nodes and the phantom nodes
as:
86
XFEM in ANSYS
An XFEM‐based crack‐growth simulation uses:
• PLANE182 and SOLID185 elements.
• The CINT command to calculate the maximum
circumferential stress criterion as the crack
propagation criterion.
• The CGROW command to define the crack‐growth
set, fracture criterion, and solution control
parameters.
87
XFEM Crack‐Growth Simulation Process
An XFEM crack‐growth simulation is assumed to be linear quasi‐static
(fatigue not yet supported). Following is the general process for
performing the simulation:
1. Create a Finite Element Model with an Initial Crack (enrichment)
2. Define the Crack‐Growth Criterion
3. Define the Decay of Stresses on the Newly Created Crack Segments
4. Specify Cohesive Zone Behavior on Initial Crack
5. Perform the Crack‐Growth Criterion Evaluation
6. Perform the Crack‐Growth Calculation
88
Enrichment
Define an enrichment region in the model associated with possible crack
propagation. The enrichment region will be enhanced with the additional
internal nodes necessary to carry the enriching displacement functions as
required. Multiple initial cracks can be defined in the region.
The enrichment region should be limited, as the addition of extra internal
nodes in the model requires extra computational time.
The enriched region can be associated with a name for identification:
XFENRICH,EnrichmentID
Define an element component in which the initial cracks are defined and will
possibly propagate:
XFENRICH,EnrichmentID,CompName
89
Enrichment
The initial cracks specified in the enrichment region can be traction‐free or
can have an associated cohesive zone behavior if necessary. Specify a
material ID that describes the cohesive zone behavior of the initial crack:
XFENRICH,EnrichmentID,CompName,MAT_ID
where MAT_ID is the material ID number describing the cohesive zone
behavior. If the material ID is not specified, the crack faces are assumed to be
traction‐free.
90
Level Set
The level set method is used to define the location of the crack in
the finite element model. The crack geometry in an element is
defined by specifying two signed distance functions at the nodes of
the element. The two signed distance functions at the nodes
represent the position of the nodes from the crack surface and
from the crack front.
XFDATA,LSM,ELEMNUM,NODENUM,PHI
91
Crack‐Growth Criterion
A crack‐growth criterion must be specified for newly cracked
cohesive segments to initiate ahead of the existing cracks. When
the critical value of the crack‐growth criterion is reached ahead
of the crack, new cohesive segments are introduced in the
elements ahead of the current crack front. The crack segments
are such that they fully cut the elements ahead of the crack. The
crack propagates at the rate of only one element at a time.
92
The available crack‐growth criteria are (CINT definition):
• STTMAX ‐ Maximum circumferential stress criterion:
The maximum circumferential stress criterion is based on evaluating the
maximum value of the circumferential stress σθθ when sweeping around the
crack tip.
• PSMAX ‐ Circumferential stress criterion based on σrθ=0
An alternative to the maximum circumferential stress criterion is to evaluate
the circumferential stress at a point where σrθ=0.
Ideally, the maximum circumferential stress criterion and the circumferential
stress criterion based on yield the same result. Due to finite element
discretization, however, they may yield slightly different results.
93
94
Direction of Crack Propagation
By default, the crack propagation direction for the STTMAX and
PSMAX crack‐growth criteria is always orthogonal to the direction
of the circumferential stress whenever the fracture criterion is
satisfied.
In principle, both should give the exact same results. However,
they won't. As the documentation indicates, since this is a point‐
wise evaluation of the stresses (going around the crack tip at a
particular radius), there is bound to be numerical issues.
Clearly, being inside the 1st element is not a good choice as it does
not capture the singularity very well.
The mesh should be sufficiently refined such that the asymptotic
behavior is captured over a few elements ahead of the crack tip at
least.
Coarse meshes may not give proper results at all.
95
Decay of Stresses on the Newly Created
Crack Segments
When the cohesive segments are initiated, the cohesive stresses in the
crack segments gradually decrease to zero as the deformation
progresses.
To define the rigid linear law, issue the TB,CGCR,,,,RLIN command.
96
Cohesive Zone Behavior on Initial Crack
Initial cracks in the model may or may not have cohesive behavior.
• Issue the TB,CZM,,,,BILI command, then specify the material constants
via the TBDATA command.
• Specify the material ID (MatID on the XFENRICH command) to invoke
the cohesive behavior on the initial crack.
By default, the interaction between the crack surfaces is taken into
account using a simple penalty contact formulation in the normal
direction. The contact behavior is activated only when the crack surfaces
are assumed to be closed or penetrating. The crack faces are assumed to
be in frictionless contact.
97
Crack Growth Behavior
• Definition of the initial crack
• Crack front cohesive zone
• Crack propagates
• …
98
Application Example
99
Application Example
100
Delamination Theory Basics

Cohesive Zone Models

Cohesive Zone Model
The Cohesive Zone Model can be used to simulate debonding or a
crack growth along an interface
Typical uses may be delamination of composite structures,
separation of adhesive joints, or fracture processes.
Overview of CZM
In ANSYS, there are two methods of modeling an interface:
• 20x interface elements with CZM
• 17x contact elements with bonded behavior and CZM
The options for both are distinct, so they will be discussed
separately

INTER20x Elements
Interface elements (INTER202‐205) are generated at the interface of the
crack growth.
• This can be done manually with E or EGEN commands, or via the
CZMESH (and related CZDEL) command.
• The INTER20x is one element thick through the interface, where the
thickness of the element is initially zero.
• Integration points exist at the midplane where calculations occur
• For higher‐order elements, no midside
nodes exist along edges of separation
direction since this element initially
has zero thickness

INTER20x Elements
There are four INTER20x elements:
• INTER202 and INTER203
• 2D (plane stress, plane stress with thickness, axisymmetry, plane strain) analyses
• 4‐node lower‐order element and 6‐node higher‐order element
• INTER204 and INTER205
• 3D analyses
• 16‐node higher‐order element and 8‐node lower‐order element
Generation of INTER20x Elements
The CZMESH command can be used to facilitate proper
generation of INTER20x elements:
• CZMESH is used on a mesh with shared nodes at the interface
• The user can either specify two element components adjacent to the
interface or an x/y/z location of the interface
• The CZMESH command then “splits” the nodes at the interface and
generates the interface elements based on the active element type
– The element type is defined by the ET command
– The constitutive model is defined by TB,CZM,,,,EXPO (see next slide)
• The CZMESH and CZDEL commands are not accessible in the GUI
Split

Exponential CZM Law
An exponential traction‐separation law provides the material behavior
with TB,CZM,,,,EXPO
• Based on the work of Needleman & Xu
• Three material constants required
• Area under curve represents critical fracture energy to separate surfaces

Exponential CZM Law
The traction‐separation law relates the normal  and shear  traction to the
normal n and shear t separation distances. The normal and shear
separation distances are calculated based on the Gauss point at the
midplane of the element, as shown below:
The user inputs three constants for TB,CZM (TBOPT= EXPO):
• C1: Maximum normal traction at the interface 
n max
• C2: Normal separation across interface at max when there is no shear
separation
•  t  2 t across interface at max when there is no normal
C3: Shear separation
separation
Exponential CZM Law
The normal n and shear t work of separation are as follows:

e
n  e max n t   max t
2
• It is assumed that the total work does not change, whether the separation is
normal, shear, or a combination of both. Hence, the value of max is not
needed as a material parameter.
• For the case of shear separation only (no normal separation),
n
 max  2e max
t

Exponential CZM Law – Normal Behavior
On the bottom, a plot of traction vs. separation for behavior only in
the normal direction shows the complex exponential behavior.
• In tension, when max is reached, softening occurs gradually
• In compression, the stiffness is very high to minimize penetration,
similar to penalty‐based contact elements. However, the stiffness
may not be large enough for some applications, such as adhesives,
so too much penetration may result. In these situations, the user
can overlay contact elements at the interface to enforce the contact
impenetrability condition.

Exponential CZM Law – Tangential
Behavior
The case of tangential‐only behavior is shown on the bottom,
where shear traction and shear separation are shown:
• Shear traction vs. separation law is same in either direction

Exponential CZM Law – Combined
Behavior
When both normal and shear separation occur, there is a
combination of both normal and shear traction.
• The area under the curves represent the work of separation, which is
always constant
• An example is shown below (blue=normal, red=shear)

Exponential CZM Law
The normal and shear tractions are determined by the following
equations:
2
  
n  n
n
  t
 t

  e  max e e 
n
2
  
t  n   n
n
  t
 t


  2 e  max  n 2  1   e e 
t  n 
• One can see that as  becomes very large, the exponential terms go
to 1 and the stresses go to 0
• n  n
When and  t=0, the normal traction is max

• t  t
When and  n=0, the shear traction is 2  max
n
n
• However, this is not the maximum shear traction value. The max
 
shear traction value occurs at with a value of 2e 
t n
t
2  max
n

Exponential CZM Law – Unloading
Note that unloading follows the same traction‐separation path (same
true for normal direction). Consequently, this model is not suitable
for cyclic loading, as the traction‐separation path will be followed
during closure (this would imply that more force is required to close
the crack, which is not realistic).

Bilinear CZM Law
A bilinear traction‐separation law provides the material behavior
with TB,CZM,,,,BILI
• Based on the work of Alfano and Crisfield
• Five or six material constants required
• Damage is included

Bilinear CZM Law: Mode I dominated
The Mode I dominated bilinear CZM model assumes that the separation
of the material interfaces is dominated by the displacement jump
normal to the interface.
The relation between normal cohesive traction Tn and normal
displacement jump δn can be expressed as:
Tn  K n n (1  Dn )
where:
Tnmax
Kn  normal cohesive stiffness
 n*
Tnmax  maximum normal cohesive traction (C1)
 n*  normal displacement jump at Tnmax

where:  nc  normal displacement jump at debonding (C2)
  n*  nc
ratio of to (C5)
 nmax  maximum normal displacement attained
Dn  damage parameter associated with Mode I law
0  nmax   n*
 max
  n   n   n 
* c
Dn    c 
*   n*   nmax   nc
  n   n   n 
max
1  nc   nmax


For Mode I dominated cohesive law, the tangential cohesive traction and
tangential displacement jump behavior is assumed to follow the normal
cohesive traction and normal displacement jump behavior and is
expressed as:
Tt  K t t (1  Dn )
where:
Kt  Tt max
tangential cohesive stiffness
 t*
Tt max
 maximum tangential cohesive traction
 t*  Tt max
tangential displacement jump at (C3)
 tc  tangential displacement jump at debonding (C4)

Bilinear CZM Law: Mode II dominated
The Mode II dominated bilinear CZM model assumes that the separation of the
material interfaces is dominated by the displacement jump that is tangent
to the interface.
The relation between tangential cohesive traction Tt and tangential
displacement jump δt can be expressed as :
Tt  K t t (1  Dt )
where:
Tt max
Kt  normal cohesive stiffness
 t*
Tt max  maximum tangential cohesive traction (C3)
 t*  tangential displacement jump at Tt max

where:
 tc  tangential displacement jump at debonding (C4)
 t t
* c
ratio of to (C5)
 tmax  maximum normal displacement attained
Dt  damage parameter associated with Mode II law
0  tmax   t*
 max
  t   t   t 
* c
Dt    c 
*   t*   tmax   tc
  t   t   t 
max
1  tc   tmax


For Mode II dominated cohesive law, the normal cohesive traction and
normal displacement jump behavior is assumed to follow the tangential
cohesive traction and tangential displacement jump behavior and is
expressed as :
Tn  K n n (1  Dt )
where:
Tnmax
Kn  tangential cohesive stiffness
 n*
Tnmax  maximum tangential cohesive traction
 n* 
max
Tn
tangential displacement jump at (C1)
 nc  tangential displacement jump at debonding (C2)

Bilinear CZM Law: Mixed Mode dominated
For bilinear cohesive law under the mixed‐mode fracture, the
separation of material interfaces depends on both the normal
and tangential components of displacement jumps. To take into
account the difference in their contributions to the separation
of material interfaces, a non‐dimensional effective
displacement jump λ for mixed‐mode fracture is defined as :
2 2
   
   cn    t
2 
n    tc 
   
where the non‐dimensional parameter β (C6) assigns different
weights to the tangential and normal displacement jumps.

Bilinear CZM Law: Mixed Mode dominated
The normal and tangential components of the cohesive tractions are
expressed as:
Tn  K n d n (1  Dm )
Tt  K t dt (1  Dm )
The damage parameter Dm associated with mixed mode bilinear cohesive
law is defined as:
0 max  cr
Dt  
min1, Dm  max  cr
where:
 n*  t*  max  cr   c
 c
cr  c   c Dm  n  n  n
 t
n t  
max
  nc   n*  tc   t*
Bilinear CZM Law
Determining the fracture mode of a CZM model is based on the input data, as
follows:
Case Input on the TBDATA command as follows:
Mode I Dominated C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 (where C3 = ‐τmax)

Mode II/III Dominated C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 (where C1 = ‐σmax)
Mixed‐Mode C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6 (where C1 = σmax and C3 = τmax)

Postprocessing INTER20x
Output of INTER20x elements is straightforward:
• The normal and shear tractions can be output in /POST1 or /POST26
using the SS,X and SS,XY (SS,XZ) values
• The normal and shear separations can be output in /POST1 or /POST26
using SD,X and SD,XY (SD, XZ) values
Output is evaluated with
PLxSOL, PRxSOL, and ESOL
commands.
Note example on left, showing
normal stress of INTER20x
elements. Failed elements
show zero stress. Elements in
compression (‐13.3) are also
present.

Postprocessing INTER20x
Calculation of work of separation:
• To calculate the amount of work  (units of energy/length2) used
in opening the crack, integration (INT1) of traction (SS) with
respect to separation (SD) can be performed in the Time‐History
Postprocessor (/POST26).
– Use ESOL to define variables for traction (SS,X/XY/XZ) and
separation (SD,X/XY/XZ), then integrate traction with respect
to separation via INT1
– Substeps should be large enough in quantity to capture the
traction‐separation path accurately

CONTA17x Elements
Contact elements can also be used with CZM:
• In this situation, “debonding” of an interface can be modeled
• Elements supported:
• Surface‐to‐surface (CONTA171 through CONTA174)
• Node‐to‐surface (CONTA175)
• Line‐to‐line (CONTA176)
• Line‐to‐surface (CONTA177)
• The contact behavior needs to be either bonded (KEYOPT(12) = 4, 5 or 6) or no‐
separation contact (KEYOPT(12)=2, 3)
• No‐separation is used for Mode I debonding only
• The contact algorithm requires the pure penalty method or augmented
Lagrangian method (KEYOPT(2) = 0 or 1).
• When a CZM material is associated with 17x contact elements, debonding can be
simulated. After debonding occurs, standard contact ensues. This means that if
friction is also defined, friction effects act after debonding is complete.

Bilinear CZM Law
With 17x contact elements, the bilinear traction‐separation law is
utilized:
The normal traction and separation
are modeled with a bilinear law.
Loading occurs along red line.
Area under curve OAC represents
critical fracture energy.
Damage is included, so if unloading
occurs, it follows path OB.

Bilinear CZM Law
The traction‐separation/slip laws are as follows:
  K nun 1  d m 
  K t ut 1  d m 
Note that for tangential behavior in 3D, the slip is assumed to be
“isotropic” and calculated as u  u 2  u 2
t y z
Although these two equations are uncoupled, a damage parameter dm
(discussed next) is used to keep track of the coupled effects
• In Mode I debonding, for example, dm is zero until the maximum normal
stress is reached

Bilinear CZM Law – Damage
In order to couple the normal and tangential effects, dm uses an SRSS of the
separation/slip ratios:
2 2
 u n   ut 
      1
 u n   ut   unc 
dm   c 
 u n   ut   u n  u n 
2 2
    
 u n   ut 
un
where is maximum separation at max normal stress (for Mode I debonding)
and is maximum slip at max shear stress (for Mode II debonding)
ut
The following constraint is automatically  unc   utc 

satisfied by scaling the normal/tangential  c    c 
contact stiffnesses  u n  u n   u t  ut 

Bilinear CZM Law – Energy
 Gn   Gt 
The critical fracture energy is       1
 Gcn   Gct 
1
For Mode I: Gcn   max unc
2
1
For Mode II: Gcn   max utc
2

Bilinear CZM Law
There are also some special features:
• If convergence difficulties are encountered during softening, artificial
damping  can be included to modify the contact stress:
t
 
Tn  Tnfinal  Tninitial  Tnfinal .e
• By default, for Mode II and Mixed‐Mode debonding, no tangential slip is
allowed under compressive normal stresses but can be changed by
setting b=1
• After separation, standard contact behavior ensues (with friction, if
defined).

Bilinear CZM Law – Defined Input
Specification of the bilinear cohesive zone model is done with
TB,CZM:
• For bilinear traction‐separation law, use TB,CZM,,,,CBDD
• For bilinear traction‐critical fracture energy specification, use
TB,CZM,,,CBDE
The table below lists the constants required:
c c c c

Separation-Based u G
max n u n G 
max t t 
Mode I C1 C2 C5 C6
Mode II C3 C4 C5 C6
Mixed Mode C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
Energy Specification
Mode I C1 C2 C5 C6
Mode II C3 C4 C5 C6
Mixed Mode C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
• C1‐C6 are input via TBDATA
CONTA17x Considerations
As noted earlier, supported CONTA17x elements with TB,CZM must use penalty‐
based methods:
• Contact formulation must be pure penalty (KEYOPT(2)=1) or augmented
Lagrange (KEYOPT(2)=0)
• Contact behavior must be bonded (KEYOPT(12)=4, 5, or 6)
• The normal contact stiffness FKN (real constant #3) controls stiffness in both
separation and in compression for Mode I
• The tangential contact stiffness FKT (real constant #12) controls stiffness for
sticking and tangential separation for Mode II
• The pinball region PINB (real constant #6) should be adjusted to encompass the
max separation
• At ANSYS 11.0, the elastic portion is assumed to be small (i.e., FKN is assumed to
be high), so the elastic portion is not part of calculated energies. At ANSYS 12.0,
the elastic contribution will be included in fracture energy calculations, which is
suitable when FKN is low.

Postprocessing CONTA17x
Contact normal and tangential stresses are output using CONT,PRES
and CONT,SFRIC
• Components of tangential stress are in TAUR/TAUS element tables
Separation and sliding distances are output with CONT,GAP and
CONT,SLIDE
Debonding‐specific output are also available:
• Debonding time history
• Damage parameter dm
• Fracture Energies
• (These are accessed with corresponding NMISC records)

Contact debonding
• Cohesive Zone Material (CZM) models previously available for use only with
Interface elements (INTER20x) can now be used with CONTA17x elements
─ Exponential (EXPO)
(TB,CZM,,,,EXPO)
─ Bilinear (BILI)
(TB,CZM,,,,BILI)
• Contact based debonding is easier to use/model and allows dissimilar mesh
at the interface
• Only available via MAPDL
January 11, 2016 137 Release 16.0
... Contact debonding
Bilinear (TB,CZM,,,,BILI) law differs from the Bilinear
Behavior‐contact Models exposed in WB‐Mechanical
• Response under the compressive traction is also
governed by the traction separation law. This differs
from bilinear behavior (contact) where, under
compressive traction, the response is governed by
standard contact constraints in the normal direction,
thus preventing penetration.
• The separation at which maximum traction is achieved is an input quantity in this
law. In the bilinear behavior (contact) model, this quantity is calculated based on
contact stiffness and maximum traction.
• The mixed mode behavior is also different for this law, with user control over the
contribution of normal and tangential separations to the equivalent slip
• The viscous regularization is also different, with this model requiring use
of TB,VREG

... Contact debonding (VM248)
At node with max force
Contact Pressure ahead of the crack front
Contact
Force, N
Interface Element
Displacement, mm
At a gauss point
Crack Opening Traction, MPa

Contact
Interface Element
January 11, 2016 139 Separation, mm Release 16.0

When using contact elements to model debonding, you can now specify the
contact normal stiffness for opening contact (gap condition) to be different from
closing(penetration) contact.
• Activated by manually specifying real constant FKOP
• If FKOP is not specified, the normal contact stiffness determined by real
constant FKN is used for both opening (gap) and closing (penetration)
contact during debonding.
• Only applies to Bilinear CZM (TBOPT = CBDD, CBDE)

LS#1: Bonded Contact LS#2: Debonding

High Contact Stiffness Material dictated Contact
prevents penetration Stiffness models debonding
At a gauss point
Contact Pressure, MPa
LS#1: Bonded Contact

High Contact Stiffness (1e6MPa) prevents
penetration
LS#2: Debonding
Low Contact Stiffness (10 MPa) is dictated by
material property.
Gap, mm
Post Debonding Healing
When the cohesive zone material defined at a contact interface is completely
debonded, the contact behavior at that interface is changed to standard contact
(KEYOPT(12) = 0) by default.
User can now specify that the cohesive zone interface be “healed” if the
surfaces come into contact again after debonding, and you can specify the
material properties for multiple healing cycles
• Applies to TBOPT = CBDD, CBDE or BILI on the TB command
TB,CZM,1,,,CBDE ! Activate the CBDE bilinear material behavior
TBFIELD,CYCLE,0 ! Initial CZM definition (before healing)
TBDATA,1,σmax,Gcn,τmax,Gct,η,β ! CZM properties
TBFIELD,CYCLE,1 ! CZM definition for first healing cycle
TBDATA,1, ... ! CZM properties to be used after first healing

… Post Debonding Healing
! Activate the CBDE bilinear material behavior
TB,CZM,1,,,CBDE
! Initial CZM definition (before healing)
TBFIELD,CYCLE,0
TBDATA,1,σmax,Gcn,τmax,Gct,η,β
! CZM definition for first healing cycle
TBFIELD,CYCLE,1
TBDATA,1, ...
1st Debonding
cycle
Damage
1st
Traction
2nd 2nd
Debonding
Debonding Debonding
cycle
cycle cycle
Healing
Separation Time
Viscous regularization for
Cohesive Zone Model & User
Option for CZM

Viscous regularization for Cohesive Zone
Model Crack
Purpose
Viscous regularization for CZM is
introduced to resolve convergences
difficulties caused by material
softening in damage simulations.
Algorithm
Viscous regularization is
implemented by adding artificial
damping forces onto CZM tractions
directly
APDL commands
TB,CZM,1,,,VREG !enable viscous
regularization feature
TBDATA,1,0.0001 !set the
damping coefficient to 0.0001

User option for Cohesive Zone Model
Purpose
Provide a user interface for users to link their own cohesive zone models into
Ansys.
Implementation
• The general code interface is available in USERCZM.
• Customers develop their own subroutine as userCZM.F, and build Ansys
executable with Ansys provided customization procedure.
• Use state variable table (TB,STATE) to store solution dependent variables
APDL command syntax
TB,CZM,,,,USER ! *ENABLE USER CZM option
User Interface
subroutine userCZM (matId, elemId, kMatIntPt, ldstep,isubst,
& keycut, ncomp,nProp, nstatev,
& Time, dTime, Temp, dTemp,
& coords, prop, Strain, dStrain,
& stress, dsdePl, sedEl, sedPl, statev,
& var1, var2, var3, var4, var5)
VCCT‐Based Crack
Growth

VCCT‐Based Crack Growth Simulation
The virtual crack closure technique (VCCT) was initially developed to
calculate the energy‐release rate of a cracked body. It has since
been widely used in the interfacial crack growth simulation of
laminate composites, with the assumption that crack growth is
always along a predefined path, namely the interfaces.
VCCT‐based crack growth simulation is available with current‐
technology linear elements such as PLANE182 and SOLID185.

A VCCT‐based crack growth simulation involves the
following assumptions:
• Crack growth occurs along a predefined crack path.
• The path is defined via interface elements.
• The analysis is quasi‐static and does not account for transient
effects.
• The material is linear elastic and can be isotropic, orthotropic or
anisotropic.

The crack can be located in a material or along the interface of the two
materials. The fracture criteria are based on energy‐release rates
calculated using VCCT. Several fracture criteria are available,
including a user‐defined option. Multiple cracks can be defined in
an analysis.
A VCCT‐based crack growth simulation uses:
• Interface elements INTER202 (2‐D) and INTER205 (3‐D).
• The CINT command to calculate the energy‐release rate.
• The CGROW command to define the crack growth set, fracture
criterion, crack growth path, and solution control parameters.

A VCCT‐based crack growth simulation is assumed to be quasi‐static. Following
is the general process for performing the simulation:
• Step 1. Create a Finite Element Model with a Predefined Crack Path
• Step 2. Perform the Energy‐Release Rate Calculation
• Step 3. Initiate the Crack Growth Set
• Step 4. Specify the Crack Path
• Step 5. Specify the Energy‐Release Rate and Fracture Criterion
• Step 6: Specify Solution Controls
Crack growth simulation is a nonlinear structural analysis. The analysis details
presented here emphasize features specific to crack growth.

The predefined crack path is discretized with interface elements and grouped as
an element component, as shown in the following figure:
The interface elements can be program‐meshed (CZMESH) or meshed by a
third‐party tool that generates interface elements.

To calculate the energy‐release rates, issue the CINT,TYPE,VCCT
command to specify the crack tip node component and crack
plane/edge normal.
The VCCT calculation assumes that the strain energy released when a
crack advances by a small amount is the same as the energy
required to close the crack by the same amount. This assumption
does not apply when crack growth approaches the boundary;
therefore, use the VCCT calculation with care and examine the
analysis results.

To define a crack growth set, issue the CGROW,NEW,n command,
where n is the crack growth set number.
To define the crack path, issue the CGROW,CPATH,cmname
command, where cmname is the component name for the
interface elements.

Specify the VCCT calculation by issuing the CGROW,CID,n command,
where n is the contour‐integral calculation (CINT) ID for energy‐
release rate calculation with VCCT. (The CINT command defines
parameters associated with fracture parameter calculations.)
Specify the critical energy‐release rate by issuing the
CGROW,FCOPTION,GC,value command, where value is the critical
energy‐release rate.

For a more complex fracture criterion, you can specify the fracture
criteria via a material data table. Issue the
CGROW,FCOPTION,MTAB,matid command, where matid is the
material ID for the material table. Several fracture criterion
options are available (such as linear, bilinear, B‐K, modified B‐
K, Power Law, and user‐defined).
For more information, see the TB,CGCR command and Fracture
Criteria.

For each crack growth set, you can specify only one fracture criterion,
and one element component for crack growth. You can define
multicrack growth sets with different cracks and fracture criteria.
Multiple cracks can grow simultaneously and independently from
each other. Cracks can merge to a single crack when they are on the
same interface, as shown in the following figure:

You can also define the same crack with different fracture criteria
in a separate crack growth set. The cracks can grow based on
different criteria (according to which criterion is met), and are
independent from each other. This technique is useful for
comparing facture mechanisms.
To specify the fracture criterion ratio (fc), issue the
CGROW,FCRAT,value command, where value is the ratio.

Issue the CGROW command to specify solution controls, as follows:
To specify this solution
Issue this CGROW command:
control...
CGROW,DTIME,value,
Initial time step when crack
where value is initial time step To avoid over‐predicting the
growth initiates
load‐carrying capacity, specify a small initial time step.
Minimum time step for CGROW,DTMIN,value,
subsequent crack growth where value is the minimum time step size
Maximum time step for CGROW,DTMAX,value,
subsequent crack growth where value is the maximum time step size
CGROW,STOP,value,
Maximum crack extension where value is the maximum crack extension Because crack
allowed at any crack front growth simulation can be time‐consuming, use this command
nodes to stop the analysis when the specified crack extension of
interest has been reached.
When a crack extends rapidly (for example, in cases of unstable crack
growth), use smaller DTMAX and DTMIN values to allow time for
load rebalancing. When a crack is not growing, the specified
time‐stepping controls are ignored and the solution adheres to
standard time‐stepping control.

The following input example defines a crack growth set:
CGROW,NEW,1
CGROW,CPATH,cpath1
CGROW,FCOPTION,MTAB,5
CGROW,DTIME,1.0e‐4
CGROW,DTMIN,1.0e‐5
CGROW,DTMAX,2.0e‐3

In a crack growth simulation, a quantity of interest is the amount of crack
extension. VCCT measures the crack extension based on the length of the
interface elements that have opened, as expressed by the following
equation and in the subsequent figure:
a   i

Crack extension Δa is available as CEXT as part of the crack solution variable
associated with the crack‐calculation ID, and can be postprocessed similar
to energy release rates via POST1 and POST26 postprocessing commands
(such PRCINT, PLCINT, and CISOL).

To model the crack growth, it is necessary to define a fracture criterion for crack
onset and the subsequent crack growth. For linear elastic fracture mechanics
(LEFM) applications, the fracture criterion is generally assumed to be a
function of Mode I (GI), Mode II (GII), and Mode III ((GIII) critical energy‐
release rates, expressed as:

f  f G , G , G , GI , GII , GIII ...
c
I
c
II
c
III 
Other parameters may be necessary for some models.

Fracture occurs when the fracture criterion index is met, expressed as:
f  fc
where fc is the fracture criterion ratio. The recommended ratio is 0.95 to
1.0. The default is 1.0.
To initiate a fracture criterion table without the critical energy‐release
rate criterion, issue the TB,CGCR command.

The following fracture criteria are available:
• Critical Energy‐Release Rate Criterion
• Linear Fracture Criterion
• Bilinear Fracture Criterion
• B‐K Fracture Criterion
• Modified B‐K Fracture Criterion
• Power Law Fracture Criterion
• User‐Defined Fracture Criterion

Critical Energy‐Release Rate Criterion
The critical energy‐release rate criterion uses total energy‐release rate (GT) as
fracture criterion. The total energy‐release rate is summation of the Mode I
(GI), Mode II (GII), and Mode III ((GIII) energy‐release rates, expressed as:
GT
f  c GT  GI  GII  GIII
GT
where
GTc is the critical energy‐release rate.
The critical energy‐release rate option is the simplest fracture criterion and is
suitable for general 2‐D and 3‐D crack growth simulation.

Linear Fracture Criterion
The linear option assumes that the fracture criterion is a linear function of the
Mode I (GI), Mode II (GII), and Mode III ((GIII) energy‐release rates,
expressed as:
GI GII GIIII
f  c c  c
GI GII GIII
c c c
GII and GIII are the Mode I, Mode II, and Mode III critical energy‐
Where GI ,
release rates, respectively.
The linear fracture criterion is suitable for 3‐D mixed‐mode fracture simulation
where distinct Mode I, Mode II, and Mode III critical energy‐release rates
exist.

Bilinear Fracture Criterion
The bilinear fracture option assumes that the fracture criterion is a linear function
of the Mode I (GI) and Mode II (GII) energy‐release rates, expressed as:
 1 c
 G  G G  G c
G  I II
 I c II for II 
 GI GI GI  GII
f 
 1 c
GI  GIIc
GII  GI GII 
 G c for 
 II GI GI  GII
c c
G G
where I and II are the Mode I and Mode II critical energy‐release rates,
respectively, and ξ and ζ are the two material constants. The bilinear fracture
criterion is suitable for 2‐D mixed‐mode fracture simulation.

B‐K Fracture Criterion
The B‐K option is expressed as:
GT
f  
 GII  GIII 
G  G  G 
c
I  c
II
c
I  
 GT 
c c
GI and GII are the Mode I and Mode II critical energy‐release rates,
Where
respectively, and η is the material constant.
The B‐K criterion is intended for composite interfacial fracture and is suitable
for 3‐D mixed‐mode fracture simulation.

Modified B‐K Fracture Criterion
The modified B‐K (or Reeder) option, is expressed as:
GT
f   1
 c c GIII  GII  GIII 
c
I c GII
G   GII  GI  GIII  GI
c
 
  
 GT GT  GT 
c c c
where GI , GII , and
GIII are Mode I, Mode II, and Mode III critical energy‐
release rates, respectively, and η is the material constant.
The modified B‐K criterion is intended for composite interfacial fracture to
account for distinct Mode II and Mode III critical energy‐release rates, and
is suitable for 3‐D mixed‐mode fracture simulation.

Power Law Fracture Criterion
The power law option assumes that the fracture criterion is a power function of
the Mode I (GI), Mode II (GII), and Mode III ((GIII) energy‐release rates,
expressed as:
1 2 3
 GI   GII   GIIII 
f   c    c    c 
 GI   GII   GIII 
c c c
GI , GII and GIII are Mode I, Mode II, and Mode III critical energy‐
Where
release rates, respectively, and n1, n2, and n3 are power exponents and are
also constants.
The power law fracture criterion is suitable for 3‐D mixed‐mode fracture
simulation where distinct Mode I, Mode II, and Mode III critical energy‐
release rates exist.

User‐Defined Fracture Criterion
A custom fracture criterion that you define is expressed as:

f  f GI , GII , GIII , GT ... 
where the fracture criterion is a function of the Mode I (GI), Mode II (GII), and
Mode III (GIII) energy‐release rates, and the material constant(s). All values
are input via the TBDATA command.
A subroutine that you provide is necessary. For more information, see the
Programmer's Manual.

Delamination Exposure
in Mechanical
Mechanical Products

Material Exposure in EDA
Material models for cohesive zone models with contact &
interface elements (TB,CZM) and VCCT based crack growth criteria
(TB,CGCR) are exposed in Engineering Data.

Material Exposure in EDA
CZM & VCCT Materials:
• CZM with INTER Elements
• CZM with CONTACT Elements
• VCCT

CZM Contact Exposure
CZM based debonding using contact elements is exposed in
Mechanical at the Fracture folder level. The object defines
the CZM properties in regards to the selected contact region:

CZM & VCCT Inter Elements
The generation of interface elements can be done using “Interface
Delamination” object. Two solutions are exposed:
• Node Matching
• Matched Meshing (Shared Topology: None or Imprint)

CZM Inter Elements
To use CZM law with INTER elements, select a CZM method
and choose a material containing a CZM law supported
by INTER elements. The object defines the CZM
properties in regards to the selected interface region:

VCCT Inter Elements
VCCT based crack growth can be defined choosing VCCT Method
(scoped on a predefined “Pre‐Meshed Crack”).

VCCT Inter Elements
The time step used after the beginning of the debonding
can be input in the Step Controls section:

Interface Definition in ACP
Interface Layers can now be
created in ACP
Workflow
1. Create Element Set for
defining the Interface
2. Create Oriented Element Set
corresponding to Interface
3. Create Interface layer using
the oriented element set
4. Create Solid Model

Interface Definition Import
• Interfaces defined in ACP can be imported
and scoped to an Interface Delamination
Object.
• Both CZM and VCCT methods are
supported.
Ability to use VCCT or CZM for delamination
Ability to use Pre‐Generated Interface from ACP for scoping

Contact definition
• Using Pre‐generated Interfaces from ACP contact
regions can be defined on the closed and opened
sides of the crack interface:

Riveted Bolt Model

Objective
The goal of this model is to test the cohesive zone modeling of spot
welded joints using CZM with 3D interface elements in Mechanical
(replication of the riveted bolt MAPDL model created by Sheldon).
For that the following features have been used:
‐ Face connection in Design Modeler
‐ Exponential CZM law definition in Engineering Data
‐ 3D Interface elements

Model
The following 1/8 symmetry model was used for this example
• Geometry, loads, and material properties based on but modified from
“Cohesive‐Zone Modeling of the Deformation and Fracture of Spot‐Welded
Joints,” M.N. Cavalli, M.D. Thouless, and Q.D. Yang

Face Connection in DM
The geometry is made of 4 bodies. All the bodies must be in a
multi‐bodies part because Match Controls objects are needed
in Mechanical by the Interface Delamination object. However
a connected mesh is needed at some bodies interfaces:
Coincident but
unshared nodes at
interface
Shared nodes at
interface
Shared nodes at
interface

Face connections allow in R150 to chose whether the node are share or
not at a specific interface between bodies.
• First the bodies must be grouped in a part using Shared Topology
method = None
• Then Share Topology object must be inserted in the tree.

• Finally man can insert Connects from Tools menu to
connect faces and thus obtain shared nodes in
Mechanical:

CZM material properties
Exponential CZM law for interface elements is inserted in
Engineering data and parameters are defined as follows:

Mechanical Model
• NLISO plastic law is used and defined using the following
command in a command object:
• Three symmetry planes are defined:

Mechanical Model
• Match Control object is inserted and scoped on the
interface where the interface elements are going to be
generated:

Mechanical Model
• Interface Delamination object inserted in Fracture
folder:
– CZM law chosen
– Material containing the ED law selected
– Match control object selected

Mechanical Model
Fracture begins in a region dominated by mode‐I loading. The mode‐II
and ‐III components increase (and the mode‐I component decreases) as
the crack progresses around the weld nugget.

Mechanical Model
Force reaction time history result illustrates the
delamination phenomenon:

Crack Growth using
VCCT in WB V15
Test Case : DCB

Double Cantilever Bending
2D Model with Plane Stress

Definition for Fracture Material in Engineering
data

Model Creation
Interface for Delamination
a0
Nodes at interface are matching
a0
Boundary Conditions

Crack Setup
Define Crack using Pre‐Meshed Crack object
Define Interface
Delamination:
• Material Data from Engg.
Data
• Node Matching method
for generating Interface
elements
• Used Initial Crack defined
above

Analysis Settings and Crack Growth settings

Load versus Opening Displacement at load
point
Workbench V15 P1 results on top left
compared to published results on
bottom right
Results are matching well

Crack Growth using
VCCT in WB V15
Test Case : ENF

End Notched Flexure
2D Plane Stress with
Thickness

data

Model Creation
Boundary Conditions
a0 Interface for Delamination
Fixed Y Displacement Fixed X & Y

Y = ‐5.5 mm
Applied Displacement
Nodes at interface are matching

Contact
Frictionless contact is required to prevent
interfaces penetration

Crack Setup
Define Interface
Delamination:
Data
elements
above

Analysis Settings and Crack Growth settings

Case1: Applied Displacement
Applied Displacement

Case 2: Applied Load

Load versus Displacement at load point
Qcrit = 1530.4
Wcrit=1.39
Workbench V15 P1 results on top left
compared to published results on
bottom right
Results are matching well
Crack Growth using
VCCT in WB V15
Test Case : MMB

Mixed Mode Bending
2D Model with Plane Stress

data

Model Creation
Rigid Links (MPC184) defined using Command Snippet
Node to edge no separation
contact (allow sliding)

Crack Setup
Define Interface
Delamination:
Data
elements
above

Contact at the interface
Frictionless contact at the interface to prevent penetration
after delamination

MMB GII/GT = 0.2 Case: Time Step size and
Fracture Criteria over time
c = 92.9 mm

MMB GII/GT = 0.2 Case: Result
ANSYS Result
Wcrit =1.638 mm : Error ~ 0.7% Published Result

Qcrit = 126.55 N : Error ~ 1.6%

• Fracture criteria value
slightly exceeds unity, this
will slightly over predict
the critical load for the
crack onset.
• But if the over shoot is
large then user must
reduce time step size
c = 41.3 mm

ANSYS Result
Wcrit =1.314 mm : Error ~ 1% Published Result

Qcrit = 368.78 N : Error ~ 1.6%

c = 41.3 mm

ANSYS Result
Wcrit =1.576 mm : Error ~ 3% Published Result

Qcrit = 701.56 N : Error ~ 3.5%

Crack Growth using
VCCT in WB V15
Test Case : Solid Composites
using ACP
ACP – Mechanical VCCT crack growth on Solid
composite models
• Contact on Crack face
• Contact on uncrack face
• Automatic crack object from ACP
• Automatic Interface delamination
object from ACP

ACP – Mechanical VCCT crack growth on Solid
composite models
VCCT Crack growth is running fine

Progressive Damage
Model

CDM Progressive Damage Model
• The continuum Damage Mechanics method (CDM) based damage
material model can be used to predict the ultimate strength of fiber
reinforced composites
• Account for different damage modes (fiber rupture and kinking,
matrix cracking and crushing)
• Damage onset is detected with Hashin failure criteria (see TB, DMGI
command)
• Damage evolution based on the amount of dissipated energies (see
TB, DMGE command)
• A nonlinear solution process to simulate the damage propagation.
Suitable for determining the ultimate strength of the composite (last‐
ply failure analysis)

Material Definition
• Progressive damage is implemented via a new
nonlinear material model. Three tables are
required to complete the definition.
#1 FCLI – Defines the material strength limits for failure criteria calculation
TB,FCLI,1,1,,STRS ! material strengths
TBTEMP,0
TBDATA,1,1000 !FAILURE STRESS, FIBER TENSION
TBDATA,2,‐1000 !FAILURE STRESS, FIBER COMPRESSION
TBDATA,3,100 !FAILURE STRESS, MATRIX TENSION
TBDATA,4,‐100 !FAILURE STRESS, MATRIX COMPRESSION
TBDATA,7,50 !FAILURE STRESS, XY SHEAR
TBDATA,8,20 !FAILURE STRESS, YZ SHEAR
TBDATA,9,50 !FAILURE STRESS, XZ SHEAR
#2 DMGI – Defines how failure initiation is detected
TB,DMGI,1,1,,FCRT ! Damage detection using failure criteria
TBTEMP,0
TBDATA,1,4,4,4,4 ! Hashin criteria for all four failure modes
Material Definition (cont.)
• FCLI and DMGE constants can be temperature
dependent.
• Viscous regularization for improving convergence.
#3 DMGE – Defines how damage should be evolved.
TB,DMGE,1,1,,CDM ! damage evolution with CDM method
TBTEMP,0
TBDATA,1,100 ! Fracture toughness, fiber tensile
TBDATA,2,0.01 ! viscosity damping coefficient, fiber tensile
TBDATA,3,100 ! Fracture toughness, fiber compressive
TBDATA,4, 0.01 ! viscosity damping coefficient, fiber compressive
TBDATA,5,10 ! Fracture toughness, matrix tensile
TBDATA,6, 0.01 ! viscosity damping coefficient, matrix tensile
TBDATA,7,10 ! Fracture toughness, matrix compressive
TBDATA,8, 0.01 ! viscosity damping coefficient, matrix compressive

Characteristic Material Behavior
• The following picture shows the correlation between the stress
and displacement of a homogenous plate under uni‐axial load:
Onset of 1. Tensile loading
tensile damage
2. Tensile damage evolution
3. Tensile unloading
4. Compressive loading
5. Compressive damage
Complete
compressive damage evolution
6. Compressive unloading
7. Tensile re‐loading
8. Resumed Tensile damage
evolution
9. Tensile unloading
10. Compressive re‐loading
11. Resumed compressive
Onset of
compressive damage damage evolution

Inviscid vs. Viscous Progression
• The following figure shows the comparison between an
inviscid (unregularized) and viscous (regularized) damage
evolution
Viscous evolution
Inviscid evolution
Solution divergence
Projected ultimate
displacement
• Viscous damping improves convergence performance. However, a viscous damping
factor should be chosen with care. As shown with the figure above, large artificial
damping may lead to exaggerated prediction of material ultimate strength.

Output Quantities
• Two solution items are produced with progressive
damage simulation:
• PFC: Failure criteria corresponding to different
damaged modes based on effective stresses in the
damage material. This output can be utilized to
determine if the material is subject to further
damage evolution
• PDMG: Progressive damage parameters. Available
components:
• Stat ‐ Damage status (0‐ no damage, 1‐ partially
damaged, 2 – completely damaged)
• FT, FC, MT, MC, S – damage variables for
different modes
• SED – damage energy dissipation
• SEDV – viscous energy dissipation

Example: progressive damage of a composite
plate under stretch
Start of damage (layer 1)
Progressed damage (layer 1)
Progressed damage (layer 3)

Current ANSYS Fracture Mechanics Capabilities R160

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Current ANSYS Fracture Mechanics Capabilities R160

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Current ANSYS Fracture

ANSYS Mechanical and Mechanical APDL offer several different

T/σ vs a/W at ϕ=45°

Compact tension specimen Ansys model

Material force - A new way to evaluate driving

Applications and benefits of development

• Introduced in R150, extended to hyperelastic

• integration of physical nodal forces

• integration of material nodal forces

• local spatial momentum balance

• local material momentum balance

• The material force is energy-conjugated to the crack propagation rate

• Material force can be understood as a force to close an equivalent, friction

material force at force to close an

101 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

102 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

104 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

105 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

107 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

108 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

The normal n and shear t work of separation are as follows:

110 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

111 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

112 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

113 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

114 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

115 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

116 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

117 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

118 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

119 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

120 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

121 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

122 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

123 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

Case Input on the TBDATA command as follows:

Mode I Dominated C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 (where C3 = ‐τmax)

125 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

126 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

127 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

128 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

129 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

130 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

The following constraint is automatically  unc   utc 

131 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

132 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

133 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

135 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

136 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

January 11, 2016 138 Release 16.0

Crack Opening Traction, MPa

January 11, 2016 139 Separation, mm Release 16.0

January 11, 2016 140 Release 16.0

LS#1: Bonded Contact LS#2: Debonding

LS#1: Bonded Contact

January 11, 2016 142 Release 16.0

144 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

145 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

147 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

148 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

149 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

150 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016

151 © 2012 ANSYS, Inc. January 11, 2016