![]() Despite the higher computational cost, in this case the PF-CZM is much more favored due to its intrinsic capability of modeling complex crack configurations, e.g., nucleation, propagation, merging and branching, etc., with no need of any extra strategy. For complex problems with arbitrary crack propagation, even though some discrepancies are observed, the numerical results given by both methods are also quantitatively similar if the predicted crack trajectories are close to each other. For problems with the crack path known a priori, both methods give almost coincident numerical results though the XFEM is advantageous due to its high coarse mesh resolution. Representative benchmark examples show that both methods are independent of the mesh discretization. A novel implementation of the PF-CZM is proposed similarly to the XFEM, in which the added degrees of freedom characterizing the crack behavior are associated only with those nodes within a small sub-domain. This work addressesnumerical comparison between the extended finite element method (XFEM) and the phase-field regularized cohesive zone model (PF-CZM) (Wu, 2017, 2018a) for the modeling of cohesive fracture induced localized failure in solids.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |