This study evaluates four fracture simulation methods, comparing their computational expenses and implementation complexities within the Finite Element (FE) framework when employed on multiphase materials. Fracture methods considered encompass the Cohesive Zone Model (CZM) using zero-thickness cohesive interface elements (CIEs), the Standard Phase-Field Fracture (SPFM) approach, the Cohesive Phase-Field fracture (CPFM) approach, and an innovative hybrid model. The hybrid approach combines the CPFM fracture method with the CZM, specifically applying the CZM within the interface zone. The finite element model studied is characterized by three specific phases: Inclusions, matrix, and interface zone. The thorough assessment of these modeling techniques indicates that the CPFM approach stands out as the most effective computational model provided that the thickness of the interface zone is not significantly smaller than that of the other phases. In materials like concrete the interface thickness is notably small when compared to other phases. This leads to the hybrid model standing as the most authentic finite element model, utilizing CIEs within the interface to simulate interface debonding. A significant finding from this investigation is that the CPFM method is in agreement with the hybrid model when the interface zone thickness is not excessively small. This implies that the CPFM fracture methodology may serve as a unified fracture approach for multiphase materials, provided the interface zone's thickness is comparable to that of the other phases. In addition, this research provides valuable insights that can advance efforts to fine-tune material microstructures. An investigation of the influence of the interface material properties, morphological features and spatial arrangement of inclusions showes a pronounced effect of these parameters on the fracture toughness of the material.
翻译:暂无翻译