Some issues in the application of cohesive zone models for metal–ceramic interfaces

By Namas Chandra, H. Li, C. Shet, H. Ghonem. 2002

578 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Cohesive zone models (CZMs) are being increasingly used to simulate discrete fracture processes in a number of homogeneous and inhomogeneous material systems. The models are typically expressed as a function of normal and tangential tractions in terms of separation distances. The forms of the functions and parameters vary from model to model. In this work, two different forms of CZMs (exponential and bilinear) are used to evaluate the response of interfaces in titanium matrix composites reinforced by silicon carbide (SCS-6) fibers. The computational results are then compared to thin slice push-out experimental data. It is observed that the bilinear CZM reproduces the macroscopic mechanical response and the failure process while the exponential form fails to do so. From the numerical simulations, the parameters that describe the bilinear CZM are determined. The sensitivity of the various cohesive zone parameters in predicting the overall interfacial mechanical response (as observed in the thin-slice push out test) is carefully examined. Many researchers have suggested that two independent parameters (the cohesive energy, and either of the cohesive strength or the separation displacement) are sufficient to model cohesive zones implying that the form ( shape ) of the traction–separation equations is unimportant. However, it is shown in this work that in addition to the two independent parameters, the form of the traction–separation equations for CZMs plays a very critical role in determining the macroscopic mechanical response of the composite system.

Subfields: Mechanics of Materials

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1b0b2cfd5564b256cfa85d72174e5141333c95c6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Mechanics of Materials

Citations in the corpus

A three-dimensional cohesive-frictional grain-boundary micromechanical model for intergranular degradation and failure in polycrystalline materials (2013, background): “Several cohesive laws have been proposed [54, 55], but most popular are the potential-based laws by Tvergaard [56] and Xu and Needleman [57] and the linear laws by Camacho and Ortiz [58] and Ortiz and Pandolfi [59].”
Comparison between cohesive zone models (2004, methodology): “[10] con rm the CZM shape-sensitivity for an elastic–plastic compliant body.”
Cohesive‐zone models, higher‐order continuum theories and reliability methods for computational failure analysis (2004, background): “when the decohesion law stems from micro-cracking as in concrete or ceramics), the shape of the stress–separation relation plays a much bigger role and is sometimes even more important than the value of the tensile strength ft [9, 10].”
The influence of adhesive constitutive parameters in cohesive zone finite element models of adhesively bonded joints (2009, background): “It has been shown that the shape of the traction law is not important in some cases (Valoroso and Champaney, 2006; Xie and Waas, 2006) and is important in others (Rots, 1986; Chandra et al., 2002; de Borst, 2003; Freed and Banks-Sills, 2008).”
A phase-field method for computational modeling of interfacial damage interacting with crack propagation in realistic microstructures obtained by microtomography (2016, unknown): “An overview of cohesive elements techniques can be found in Chandra et al [10].”
Mesh-independent discrete numerical representations of cohesive-zone models (2006, background): “, when the decohesion law stems from micro-cracking as in concrete or ceramics, the shape of the stress-separation relation plays a larger role and is sometimes more important than the value of the tensile strength ft [8,9].”
An experimental and computational study of laminated paperboard creasing and folding (2009, methodology): “The delamination surfaces are modeled by cohesive zones, which are nowadays commonly used for delamination (Xu and Needleman, 1993; Ortiz and Pandolfi, 1999; Chandra et al., 2002; Van den Bosch et al., 2007).”
Predicting fatigue damage in adhesively bonded joints using a cohesive zone model (2010, background): “[21] investigated two softening branch shapes (bi-linear and exponential) and compared their influences on the mechanical behaviour of a push-out test.”
Modelling adhesive joints with cohesive zone models: effect of the cohesive law shape of the adhesive layer (2013, unknown): “This shape is an approximation of the fullexponential law [20], providing in this case a more abrupt stress drop than the triangular law, after the peak loads are achieved.”
A review on failure theories and simulation models for adhesive joints (2021, methodology): “As mentioned, the method is applied through traction-separation laws which can have various forms such as triangular, [150] linear-parabolic, [151] polynomial, [152] exponential([153]) and trapezoidal .”