LID Short Course, Prague, 15-19 September 2014

Modeling of Localized
Inelastic Deformation

Milan Jirásek

General outline:
A. Introduction
B. Elastoplasticity
C. Damage mechanics
D. Strain localization
E. Regularized continuum models
F. Strong discontinuity models
LID Short Course, Prague, 15-19 September 2014

F. Strong discontinuity models

F.1 Fundamentals of fracture mechanics

F.2 Finite elements with discontinuities - introduction
F.3 Embedded discontinuities (EED-EAS)
F.4 Extended finite elements (XFEM-PUM)
F.5 Comparative evaluation
F.6 Regularized continua with strong discontinuities
Failure of Liberty (and other) ships during WW II

reason:
brittle fracture

19 ships broke in half without warning

Stress concentration near defects

panel weakened by a spherical hole

ˆ

 max  3ˆ

ˆ ˆ
Stress concentration near defects

panel weakened by an eliptical hole

ˆ  2a  ˆ
 max  1   
 b 
2a
2b

ˆ ˆ
Stress concentration near defects

panel weakened by a crack

 max  
ˆ stress singularity
at the crack tip

2a

ˆ ˆ
Stress concentration near defects

y exact normal stress distribution

(for an infinite panel)
ˆ  x
 y  x,0   for x  a
x2  a2

x
2a

ˆ
 Singular stress field near the crack tip

exact approximation near the tip

ˆ  x ˆ   a  r  ˆ  a
a 1
 y  x,0      ˆ 
x2  a2 a  r   a 2 r
2 2 2ar

y
at distances r a stress is inversely
proportional to the
square root of
distance from the
crack tip
a r x
Singular stress field near the crack tip

Fa F F 1
 y  x,0     
t x x 2  a 2 t 2ar t 2a r
y

at distances r a stress is inversely

F proportional to the
square root of
distance from the
x crack tip
a r
F
 Singular stress field near the crack tip

ˆ
2a  20 mm 2a  30 mm
2a F
ˆ  10 MPa t  5 mm
F F  1.9238 kN
ˆ
near-tip stress a 1 F 1
approximation ˆ  
2 r t 2a r
same value of this factor
same stress concentration near the tip
Singular stress field near the crack tip

general expression for the singular part of stress field

that dominates near the crack tip

KI 1
 y  x,0    K I
… stress intensity factor
2 r
ˆ
2a a 1
 y  x,0   ˆ  … K I  ˆ  a
2 r
ˆ
F 1 F
F  y  x,0    … KI 
F t 2a r t a
 Singular stress field near the crack tip

ˆ
2a  20 mm 2a  30 mm
2a F
ˆ  10 MPa t  5 mm
F F  1.9238 kN
ˆ
K I  ˆ  a  1,772  106 Nm3/ 2
F
KI   1,772  106 Nm 3/ 2
t a
same stress intensity factor
same stress concentration near the tip
 Singular stress field near the crack tip

 y  MPa  a1  10 mm, ˆ  10 MPa

ˆ   a1  r 
1  1

2
a r  a 2

asymptotic
KI stress field
2 r K I  1.772 MNm3/ 2

Fa2
r  mm
t  a2  r   a2  r 
2
 a22

a2  15 mm, F / t  385 kN/m

Singular stress field near the crack tip

KI   3 
 y  r,   cos  1  sin sin 
2 r 2 2 2 
KI   3 
y  x  r,    cos  1  sin sin 
2 r 2 2 2 

y
x x
r 
y
x
a
 Basic fracture modes

mode I
(opening)
mode II
y (sliding)

 yx mode III
(tearing)

 yz

y x
z
 Near-tip asymptotic fields

crack loaded in a mixed mode (combination of modes I and II):

KI   3  K II   3 
 y  r,   cos  1  sin sin   sin  2  cos cos 
2 r 2 2 2  2 r 2  2 2 

KI   3  K II   3
 x  r,   cos  1  sin sin  sin cos cos
2 r 2 2 2  2 r 2 2 2

KI   3 K II   3 
 xy  r,    cos sin cos  cos 1  sin sin 
2 r 2 2 2 2 r 2 2 2 
Crack propagation – Irwin (local) criterion

A crack loaded in mode I propagates

if the stress intensity factor at its tip attains a critical value:

K I  Kc

stress intensity factor fracture toughness

(depends on loading, (material property)

 Nm 3/ 2 
shape and dimensions
of the body
and on the crack size)
Crack propagation – Griffith (global) criterion

A crack loaded in mode I propagates

if its propagation releases a critical amount of energy:

G  Gf

energy release rate fracture energy

(depends on loading, (material property)
shape and dimensions
of the body
 J/m2  N / m 
and on the crack size)
Crack propagation criteria

crack propagates if

K I  Kc G  Gf
local (Irwin) global (Griffith)
criterion criterion
for plane stress and mode I loading it can be shown that
2
K
G  I
E
the above criteria are then equivalent and the fracture tougness
and fracture energy are linked by Kc2
Gf  Kc  EGf
E
 Direction of crack propagation

for mode I loading, the crack can be expected to propagate straight ahead,
but for general mixed-mode loading we need a criterion for the crack direction
maximum circumferential stress criterion
 (maximum hoop stress criterion):
 r  r crack propagates in the direction
r  perpendicular to the
r
 r  maximum circumferential stress

 (evaluated on a circle of a small diameter
centered at the tip)

the direction of propagation    r,c   max    r, 

is given by the anglec for which   
 F.2
Finite elements with discontinuities:
Introduction
Classification of models: kinematic aspects

Strong Weak Regularized

discontinuity discontinuity localization zone
Classification of models: kinematic aspects

Strong Weak Regularized

discontinuity discontinuity localization zone
Classification of models: material laws

Stress-strain law Stress-strain law Stress-strain law

(pre-localization part)

Traction-separation law Stress-strain law Enrichment acting

(post-localization part) as localization limiter:
• nonlocal
• gradient
• Cosserat
• viscosity
Traction-separation laws

1) Formulated directly in the traction-separation space

a) with nonzero elastic compliance (elasto-plastic, …)
b) with zero elastic compliance (rigid-plastic, …)
 

u u
For general applications, we need a link between the separation vector
(displacement jump vector) and the traction vector:

u t
Traction-separation laws

2) “Derived“ from a stress-strain law (softening continuum)

using the strong discontinuity approach

u t  nσ

1

ε  u  n
h
 sym
σ  σ  ε,...;h 
Finite element representation of strong discontinuities

1) Discontinuities at element interfaces:

a) Remeshing
b) Interspersed potential discontinuities
Finite element representation of strong discontinuities

2) Arbitrary discontinuities across elements:

a) Elements with embedded discontinuities using the

enhanced assumed strain formulation (EED-EAS)
aka EFEM, SDA, GSDA, …
b) Extended finite elements based on the
partition-of-unity concept (XFEM-PUM) aka GFEM, …
Embedded discontinuity (enhanced assumed strain)
Embedded discontinuity (enhanced assumed strain)
Approximation on two overlapping meshes (XFEM)
Approximation on two overlapping meshes (XFEM)
Enrichment of interpolation functions in one dimension

EED-EAS
Enrichment of interpolation functions in one dimension

EED-EAS XFEM-PUM
Enrichment of interpolation functions in one dimension

EED-EAS XFEM-PUM XFEM-PUM

 F.3
Elements with Embedded
Discontinuities (EAS)
Elements with embedded discontinuities

d
ε  Bd
ε
~ε,...
σσ
σ
fint   B σ dV
T

fint V
Elements with embedded discontinuities

ε e … new degrees of freedom

characterizing separation (displacement jump)

σ t … traction

fint
Elements with embedded discontinuities

ε e
material

σ t

fint
Elements with embedded discontinuities

d
? kinematics ?

ε e
material

σ t
? equilibrium ?

fint
Elements with embedded discontinuities

d
kinematics

ε e
material

σ t
Three types of formulations:

• KOS … kinematically optimal symmetric

equilibrium
• SOS … statically optimal symmetric
fint
• SKON … kinematically and statically
optimal nonsymmetric
Elements with embedded discontinuities
Elements with embedded discontinuities
Elements with embedded discontinuities
Elements with embedded discontinuities

ε  B d  He 
tP σT
Smeared crack
Smeared crack
Smeared crack
Smeared crack
Smeared crack
Smeared crack
Smeared crack
Smeared crack

• Misalignment between crack and element

• Distorted principal directions
• Stress locking
Embedded crack (EAS approach)
Embedded crack (EAS approach)
Embedded crack (EAS approach)
Embedded crack (EAS approach)
Embedded crack (EAS approach)
EED-EAS approach: discontinuous interpolation
EED- EAS approach: discontinuous interpolation
EED- EAS approach: discontinuous interpolation
EED- EAS approach: discontinuous interpolation
 F.4
Extended Finite Elements (XFEM)
Based on Partition of Unity
Partition of Unity Method

Standard finite element approximation:

Nnod
ux    N x  d
I I
I 1
The shape functions are a partition of unity:
Nnod

 N x   1
I 1
I
Partition of Unity Method

Standard finite element approximation:

Nnod
ux    N x  d
I I
I 1
The shape functions are a partition of unity:
Nnod

 N x   1
I 1
I

Enriched approximation:
Nnod  
ux    N I x d I   Gi x eiI 
I 1  iLI 

selected enrichment functions

Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements

Enrichment by Heaviside function:

1 for x  
H  x    
0 for x  
Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements

Enrichment by Heaviside function:

1 for x  
H  x    
0 for x  
Nnod
ux    N x d
I 1
I I  H  x e I  
Nnod Nnod
  N x d
I 1
I I   N x H x e
I 1
I  I
Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements

If the support of NI is contained in  , then N I H   N I

If the support of NI is contained in  , then N I H   0

Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements

If the support of NI is contained in  , then N I H   N I

If the support of NI is contained in  , then N I H   0

Only if the support of N I is cut by  ,
then the function N I H  really enriches the basis.
Nnod
ux    N x d
I I   N x H x e
I  I
I 1 I S H

set of nodes with Heaviside enrichment

Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements
Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements

nodes with Heaviside enrichment

 Partition of Unity Method – eXtended Finite Elements

XFEM-PUM XFEM-PUM
The enriched
approximation can be
rearranged
to give better physical
meaning to the degrees
of freedom:
XFEM – enrichment by step function
XFEM – enrichment by step function
XFEM – enrichment by step function
XFEM – tip enrichment

Additional enrichment improving the approximation

around the crack tip:

Functions that appear in the analytical near-tip solution:

 
B1 r,    r sin B3 r,    r sin sin 
2 2
 
B2 r,    r cos B4 r,    r cos sin 
2 2
XFEM – tip enrichment

Additional enrichment improving the approximation

around the crack tip:
Nnod
ux    N x d I I   N x H x e
I  0I 
I 1 I S H
4
  N x B r x , x e
I S B i 1
I i iI

Functions that appear in the analytical near-tip solution:

 
B1 r,    r sin B3 r,    r sin sin 
2 2
 
B2 r,    r cos B4 r,    r cos sin 
2 2
XFEM – tip enrichment
XFEM – tip enrichment

nodes with enrichment by near-tip functions

XFEM – tip enrichment

nodes with Heaviside enrichment

nodes with enrichment by near-tip functions
XFEM – tip enrichment

nodes with Heaviside enrichment

nodes with enrichment by near-tip functions
XFEM – tip enrichment

nodes with Heaviside enrichment

nodes with enrichment by near-tip functions
 XFEM – tip enrichment

But if the crack is curved, we cannot define functions Bi

in terms of the standard polar coordinates because B1 would
not be discontinuous across the crack but across the dotted line.
XFEM – level set functions

Remedy:
Construct curvilinear coordinates  and  such that
the crack is characterized by   0 and   0
XFEM – level set functions

Remedy:
Construct curvilinear coordinates  and  such that
the crack is characterized by   0 and   0

and define Bi in terms of the pseudo-polar coordinates

r  ,     2   2

  ,   sgn  arccos
 
2 2
XFEM – level set functions

Functions  and are the so-called level set functions.

They are defined by their values at nodes around the crack

and interpolated using the standard shape functions:

 x    N I x   I ,  x    N I x  I
I I
XFEM – level set functions

For an existing crack, function  can be constructed

as the signed distance function:

 0  0
 0

 x   x  P x  sgnx  P x   nP x 

Criteria for Direction
of Crack Propagation
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack

2
1
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack

Crack direction = normal to the maximum principal stress direction

Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack

Crack direction = normal to the direction of

maximum principal nonlocal stress (or strain)
Tracking of a propagating crack

Stress state around the tip of a cohesive crack

is very close to equibiaxial tension

x y
 Tracking of a propagating crack

Stress distribution at constant distance from the tip of a stress-free crack

Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack
Tracking of a propagating crack

Crack direction = normal to the direction of

maximum circumferential stress
Tracking of a propagating crack

Crack direction = normal to the direction of

maximum circumferential stress
Tracking of a propagating crack

Crack direction = normal to the direction of

maximum circumferential stress
 F.5
Comparison:
EED-EAS versus XFEM-PUM
Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded discontinuity Extended finite elements

Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded Extended
discontinuity finite elements

DOF‘s added locally globally

and related to elements nodes

Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded Extended
discontinuity finite elements

DOF‘s added locally globally

and related to elements nodes

Approximation
of crack opening discontinuous continuous

Enrichment incompatible compatible

Separation test

physical smeared EED-EAS XFEM-PUM

Separation test

physical smeared EED-EAS XFEM-PUM

Separation test

physical smeared EED-EAS XFEM-PUM

EED-EAS approach: partial coupling
EED- EAS approach: partial coupling
EED- EAS approach: partial coupling
XFEM-PUM approach: complete decoupling
XFEM-PUM approach: complete decoupling
XFEM-PUM approach: complete decoupling
XFEM-PUM approach: complete decoupling
Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded discontinuity Extended finite elements

Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded Extended
discontinuity finite elements

DOF‘s added locally globally

and related to elements nodes

Approximation
of crack opening discontinuous continuous

Enrichment incompatible compatible

Separated parts partially coupled fully decoupled

Journal bearing: Physical process
Journal bearing: Physical process
Journal bearing: Mesh respecting material boundaries
Journal bearing: Structured mesh with enrichment
Journal bearing: Structured mesh with enrichment
One element crossed by pre-existing discontinuity
One element: Physical process
One element: Physical process
One element: EED-EAS
One element: EED-EAS
One element: XFEM-PUM
One element: XFEM-PUM
One element crossed by pre-existing discontinuity
Uniqueness of the element response (EED-EAS)
Uniqueness of the element response

For given increments

of nodal displacements …
Uniqueness of the element response

es
… find components
of displacement jump …
en
Uniqueness of the element response

es
… such that tractions are
in equilibrium with stresses.
en
Uniqueness of the element response

The solution is unique for infinitesimal displacement increments

of an arbitrary direction if

min Qsym   H  0
where Q sym is the symmetric part of Q  P De BH
T

and H  0 is the discrete softening modulus.

Physical meaning of Q …
Uniqueness of the element response
Uniqueness of the element response

d  He
εBd
Uniqueness of the element response

e
e

d  He
εBd
σ  De ε
t e  PT σ  P T D e B H e
Uniqueness of the element response

min Qsym    H min

Q  P De B H
T is proportional to the elastic modulus
and inversely proportional to the element size
Uniqueness of the element response

min Qsym    H min

Q  P De B H
T is proportional to the elastic modulus
and inversely proportional to the element size

e Qsym e  e Q e  e t  0
T T T e
can happen
Uniqueness of the element response

n
Uniqueness of the element response

  en / h
  G
tn  0
ts    Gen / h
Uniqueness of the element response

n
Uniqueness of the element response

 ss  es / h
 nn  D12 ss
tn   nn  D12es / h
ts  0
Uniqueness of the element response

en  0
es  0
tn  D12es / h  0
ts  Gen / h  0
eT t e  0
Uniqueness of the element response

discontinuity segments placed at element centers

Uniqueness of the element response

discontinuity segments placed at element centers

maximum deviation  between element side and discontinuity

is limited (e.g., 30 degrees for an equilateral triangle)
Uniqueness of the element response

discontinuity segments form a continuous path

Uniqueness of the element response

discontinuity segments form a continuous path

maximum deviation  between element side and discontinuity

is given by the largest angle of the triangle
(e.g., 60 degrees for an equilateral triangle)
Uniqueness of the element response

Condition under which uniqueness can be guaranteed

if the element is sufficiently small:
1 
plane stress … cos  
3 
true only if   1 / 3 and the element is close to equilateral
Uniqueness of the element response

Condition under which uniqueness can be guaranteed

if the element is sufficiently small:
1 
plane stress … cos  
3 
true only if   1 / 3 and the element is close to equilateral
1
plane strain … cos  
3  4
true only if   1 / 4 and the element is close to equilateral
Uniqueness of the element response

Condition under which uniqueness can be guaranteed

if the element is sufficiently small:
1 
plane stress … cos  
3 
true only if   1 / 3 and the element is close to equilateral
1
plane strain … cos  
3  4
true only if   1 / 4 and the element is close to equilateral
1
three dimensions … cos  
3  4
violated even if the tetrahedral element is regular
Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded discontinuity Extended finite elements

 Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded Extended
discontinuity finite elements

DOF‘s added locally globally

and related to elements nodes

Approximation
of crack opening discontinuous continuous

Enrichment incompatible compatible

Separated parts partially interacting independent

Numerical behavior rather fragile more robust

Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded Extended
discontinuity finite elements

Stiffness matrix always nonsymmetric can be symmetric

Integration scheme remains standard must be modified

for continuous part

Global degrees
of freedom do not change added during simulation

Implementation smaller larger

effort
Comparison of EED-EAS and XFEM-PUM

Embedded Extended
discontinuity finite elements

Stiffness matrix always nonsymmetric can be symmetric

Integration scheme remains standard must be modified

for continuous part

Global degrees
of freedom do not change added during simulation

Implementation smaller larger

effort
... but it pays off
THE END
 F.6
Regularized Continua
with Strong Discontinuities
 F.6.1
Strong Discontinuities
versus
Regularized Continuum Models
Crack propagation in a gravity dam
Crack propagation in a gravity dam
Crack propagation in a gravity dam
Crack propagation in a gravity dam

nonlocal damage model

Crack propagation in a gravity dam

nonlocal damage model

One-dimensional localization test

evolution of
strain profile
One-dimensional localization test

evolution of
damage profile
Problem with definition of fracture energy

traction-separation law
Process zone replaced by cohesive crack
Process zone replaced by cohesive crack
Diffuse damage zone replaced by cohesive cracks
Diffuse damage zone replaced by cohesive cracks
 F.6.2
Nonlocal Model with Transition
to Strong Discontinuities
From diffuse damage to discrete cracking
From diffuse damage to discrete cracking
From diffuse damage to discrete cracking
From diffuse damage to discrete cracking
Transition from diffuse to localized failure pattern
One-dimensional localization test

local stress-strain diagram

with softening

s
s
Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity
Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity

uniform strain distribution

Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity

uniform strain distribution

Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity

localized strain distribution, continuous

Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity

localized strain distribution, discontinuous

Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity

t f i
Continuum damage combined with a discontinuity
 F.6.4
Influence of Crack
on Nonlocal Strain
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

Observation (Simone et al.):

maximum value of nonlocal strain is not attained at the crack tip
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

Observation (Simone et al.): with standard averaging,

maximum value of nonlocal strain is not attained at the crack tip

Possible consequence:
crack propagation in jumps
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

maximum value of nonlocal strain is not attained at the crack tip ??

 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

maximum value of nonlocal strain is not attained at the crack tip !!

Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

line crack thin layer of damaged material

Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

Contribution of crack opening to nonlocal equivalent strain

wn
wn  n 
h
w
ws   ns  s
h
1, 2
1

  n   n2   ns2
2

w

wn
ws
~  1   2
2 2
 1 
1
2h
wn  wn2  ws2 
Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

Contribution of crack opening to nonlocal equivalent strain

wn
wn  n 
h
w
ws   ns  s
h
1, 2
1

  n   n2   ns2
2

w

wn
ws
~  1   2
2 2
 1 
1
2h
wn  wn2  ws2 
  x , ξ ~ ξ dVξ   h x, ξ ~ξ  dξ  

Vd d

 
   x, ξ  wn ξ   wn2 ξ   ws2 ξ  dξ 
1
2 d
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

after correction, maximum value of nonlocal strain is attained at the crack tip

 x     x, ξ  ~ξ  dVξ     x, ξ  w

~ξ  dξ 
V d
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

variation of nonlocal strain at constant distance from the crack tip

 x     x, ξ  ~ξ  dξ
V
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

variation of nonlocal strain at constant distance from the crack tip

 x     x, ξ  ~ξ  dVξ     x, ξ  w

~ξ  dξ 
V d
 Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

variation of nonlocal strain at constant distance from the crack tip

 x     x, ξ  ~ξ  dVξ     x, ξ  w

~ξ  dξ  cos  2
V d
Influence of crack on nonlocal strain

without crack influence with crack influence

and improper energy balance and proper energy balance
Influence of crack on nonlocal strain
 F.6.5
Examples
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Compact tension test
Crack propagation in gravity dam
Crack propagation in gravity dam
Crack propagation in gravity dam
Crack propagation in gravity dam
Crack propagation in gravity dam
Crack propagation in gravity dam
Notched three-point bending test