Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A consistent interface element formulation for geometrical and material nonlinearities

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Computational Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Decohesion undergoing large displacements takes place in a wide range of applications. In these problems, interface element formulations for large displacements should be used to accurately deal with coupled material and geometrical nonlinearities. The present work proposes a consistent derivation of a new interface element for large deformation analyses. The resulting compact derivation leads to an operational formulation that enables the accommodation of any order of kinematic interpolation and constitutive behavior of the interface. The derived interface element has been implemented into the finite element codes FEAP and ABAQUS by means of user-defined routines. The interplay between geometrical and material nonlinearities is investigated by considering two different constitutive models for the interface (tension cut-off and polynomial cohesive zone models) and small or finite deformation for the continuum. Numerical examples are proposed to assess the mesh independency of the new interface element and to demonstrate the robustness of the formulation. A comparison with experimental results for peeling confirms the predictive capabilities of the formulation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture. Adv Appl Mech 7:55–129

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Elices M, Guinea G, Gómez J, Planas J (2002) The cohesive zone model: advantages, limitations and challenges. Eng Fract Mech 69:137–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carpinteri A, Paggi M (2012) Modelling strain localization by cohesive/overlapping zones in tension/compression: brittleness size effects and scaling in material properties. Z Angew Math Mech 92:829–840

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Paggi M, Carpinteri A, Wriggers P (2012) Special issue on computational methods for interface mechanical problems. Comput Mech 50:269–271

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Ngu D, Park K, Paulino G, Huang Y (2010) On the constitutive relation of materials with microstructure using a potential-based cohesive model for interface traction. Eng Fract Mech 77:1153–1174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hillerborg A (1990) Fracture mechanics concepts applied to moment capacity and rotational capacity of reinforced concrete beams. Eng Fract Mech 35:233–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Carpinteri A (1989) Post-peak and post-bifurcation analysis on cohesive crack propagation. Eng Fract Mech 32:265–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Carpinteri A (1989) Cusp catastrophe interpretation of fracture instability. J Mech Phys Solids 37:567–582

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Carpinteri A (1989) Softening and snap-back instability in cohesive solids. Int J Numer Methods Eng 28:1521–1537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Allix O, Corigliano A (1996) Modeling and simulation of crack propagation in mixed-modes interlaminar fracture specimens. Int J Fract 77:111–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Turon A, Camanho PP, Costa J, Dávila CG (2006) A damage model for the simulation of delamination in advanced composites under variable-mode loading. Mech Mater 38:1072–1089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Reinoso J, Blázquez A, Estefani A, París F, Cañas J, Arévalo E, Cruz F (2012) Experimental and three-dimensional global-local finite element analysis of a composite component including degradation process at the interfaces. Composites B 43:1929–1942

  13. Hattiangadi A, Siegmund T (2004) A thermomechanical cohesive zone model for bridged delamination cracks. J Mech Phys Solids 52:533–566

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Ozdemir I, Brekelmans WAM, Geers MGD (2010) A thermo-mechanical cohesive zone model. Comput Mech 26:735–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sapora A, Paggi M (2013) A coupled cohesive zone model for transient analysis of thermoelastic interface debonding. Comput Mech 53:845–857

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Paggi M, Wriggers P (2011) A nonlocal cohesive zone model for finite thickness interfaces, Part I: mathematical formulation and validation with molecular dynamics. Comput Mater Sci 50:1625–1633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. van den Bosch MJ, Schreurs PJG, Geers MGD (2008) Identification and characterization of delamination in polymer coated metal sheet. J Mech Phys Solids 56:3259–3276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Paggi M, Lehmann E, Weber C, Carpinteri A, Wriggers P, Schaper M (2013) A numerical investigation of the interplay between cohesive cracking and plasticity in polycrystalline materials. Comput Mater Sci 77:81–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Carpinteri A, Paggi M, Zavarise G (2008) The effect of contact on the decohesion of laminated beams with multiple microcracks. Int J Solids Struct 45:129–143

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Alfano G, Sacco E (2006) Combining interface damage and friction in a cohesive-zone model. Int J Num Methods Eng 68:542–582

  21. Parrinello F, Failla B, Borino G (2009) Cohesivefrictional interface constitutive model. Int J Solids Struct 46:2680–2692

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Paggi M, Wriggers P (2012) Stiffness and strength of hierarchical polycrystalline materials with imperfect interfaces. J Mech Phys Solids 60:557–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yao H, Gao H (2007) Multi-scale cohesive laws in hierarchical materials. Int J Solid Struct 44:8177–8193

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Schellekens J, de Borst R (1993) On the numerical integration of interface elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 36:44–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pande GN, Sharma KG (1979) On joint/interface elements and associated problems of numerical ill-conditioning. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 3:293–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Alfano G, Crisfield MA (2001) Finite element interface models for the delamination analysis of laminated composites: mechanical and computational issues. Int J Numer Methods Eng 50:1701–1736

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. de Borst R (2003) Numerical aspects of cohesive-zone models. Eng Fract Mech 70:1743–1757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Remmers JJC, de Borst R, Needleman A (2003) A cohesive segments method for the simulation of crack growth. Comput Mech 31:69–77

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Ortiz M, Pandolfi A (1999) Finite deformation irreversible cohesive elements for three-dimensional crack-propagation analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 44:1267–1282

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Roychowdhury S, Arun Roy Y (2002) Ductile tearing in thin aluminium panels: experiments and analyses using large-displacement 3-D surface cohesive elements. Eng Fract Mech 69:983–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Qiu Y, Crisfield MA, Alfano G (2001) An interface element formulation for the simulation of delamination with buckling. Eng Frac Mech 68:1755–1776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. van den Bosch MJ, Schreurs PJG, Geers MGD (2007) A cohesive zone model with a large displacement formulation accounting for interfacial fibrilation. Eur J Mech A 26:1–19

  33. van den Bosch MJ, Schreurs PJG, Geers MGD (2008) On the development of a 3D cohesive zone element in the presence of large deformations. Comput Mech 42:171–180

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Fleischhauer R, Behnke R, Kaliske M (2013) A thermomechanical interface element formulation for finite deformations. Comput Mech 52:1039–1058

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL (2000) The finite element method, 5th edn, vol I. Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn.

  36. Williams J, Hadavinia H (2002) Analytical solutions for cohesive zone models. J Mech Phys Solids 50:809–825

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Tvergaard V (1990) Effect of fiber debonding in a whisker-reinforced metal. Mater Sci Eng A 107:23–40

    Google Scholar 

  38. Paggi M, Wriggers P (2011) A nonlocal cohesive zone model for finite thickness interfaces—part II: FE implementation and application to polycrystalline materials. Comput Mater Sci 50:1634–1643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rabinovitch O (2008) Debonding analysis of fiber-reinforced-polymer strengthened beams: cohesive zone modeling versus a linear elastic fracture mechanics approach. Eng Fract Mech 75:2842–2859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Jorgensen GJ, Terwilliger KM, DelCueto JA, Glick SH, Kempe MD, Pankow JW, Pern FJ, McMahon TJ (2006) Moisture transport, adhesion, and corrosion protection of PV module packaging materials. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 90:2739–2775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Paggi M, Kajari-Schröder S, Eitner U (2011) Thermomechanical deformations in photovoltaic laminates. J Strain Anal Eng Des 46:772–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007–2013)/ERC Grant Agreement No. 306622 (ERC Starting Grant “Multi-field and multi-scale Computational Approach to Design and Durability of PhotoVoltaic Modules”—CA2PVM; PI: Prof. M. Paggi). JR would like to acknowledge the financial support by the above ERC Starting Grant, supporting his visiting period at IMT Lucca during March–April 2014, and also the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) for supporting the project “Microcracks: Causes and consequences for the long-term stability of PV-modules” (2012–2014).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IMT Institute for Advanced Studies Lucca, Piazza San Francesco 19, 55100, Lucca, Italy

    J. Reinoso & M. Paggi

  2. Institute of Structural Analysis, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Appelstr. 9A, 30167, Hannover, Germany

    J. Reinoso

  3. Group of Elasticity and Strength of Materials, School of Engineering, University of Seville, Camino de los Descubrimientos s/n, 41092, Seville, Spain

    J. Reinoso

Authors
  1. J. Reinoso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Paggi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Paggi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reinoso, J., Paggi, M. A consistent interface element formulation for geometrical and material nonlinearities. Comput Mech 54, 1569–1581 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-014-1077-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-014-1077-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation