Classical variational phase-field models cannot predict fracture nucleation
Authors:
Oscar Lopez-Pamies,
John E. Dolbow,
Gilles A. Francfort,
Christopher J. Larsen
Abstract:
Notwithstanding the evidence against them, classical variational phase-field models continue to be used and pursued in an attempt to describe fracture nucleation in elastic brittle materials. In this context, the main objective of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the existing evidence against such a class of models as descriptors of fracture nucleation. To that end, a review is f…
▽ More
Notwithstanding the evidence against them, classical variational phase-field models continue to be used and pursued in an attempt to describe fracture nucleation in elastic brittle materials. In this context, the main objective of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the existing evidence against such a class of models as descriptors of fracture nucleation. To that end, a review is first given of the plethora of experimental observations of fracture nucleation in nominally elastic brittle materials under quasi-static loading conditions, as well as of classical variational phase-field models, without and with energy splits. These models are then confronted with the experimental observations. The conclusion is that they cannot possibly describe fracture nucleation in general. This because classical variational phase-field models cannot account for material strength as an independent macroscopic material property. The last part of the paper includes a brief summary of a class of phase-field models that can describe fracture nucleation. It also provides a discussion of how pervasively material strength has been overlooked in the analysis of fracture at large, as well as an outlook into the modeling of fracture nucleation beyond the basic setting of elastic brittle materials.
△ Less
Submitted 30 August, 2024;
originally announced September 2024.
A variational formulation of Griffith phase-field fracture with material strength
Authors:
C. J. Larsen,
J. E. Dolbow,
O. Lopez-Pamies
Abstract:
In this expository Note, it is shown that the Griffith phase-field theory of fracture accounting for material strength originally introduced by Kumar, Francfort, and Lopez-Pamies (J Mech Phys Solids 112, 523--551, 2018) in the form of PDEs can be recast as a variational theory. In particular, the solution pair $(\textbf{u},v)$ defined by the PDEs for the displacement field $\textbf{u}$ and the pha…
▽ More
In this expository Note, it is shown that the Griffith phase-field theory of fracture accounting for material strength originally introduced by Kumar, Francfort, and Lopez-Pamies (J Mech Phys Solids 112, 523--551, 2018) in the form of PDEs can be recast as a variational theory. In particular, the solution pair $(\textbf{u},v)$ defined by the PDEs for the displacement field $\textbf{u}$ and the phase field $v$ is shown to correspond to the fields that minimize separately two different functionals, much like the solution pair $(\textbf{u},v)$ defined by the original phase-field theory of fracture without material strength implemented in terms of alternating minimization. The merits of formulating a complete theory of fracture nucleation and propagation via such a variational approach -- in terms of the minimization of two different functionals -- are discussed.
△ Less
Submitted 24 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
