Cohesive‐zone models, higher‐order continuum theories and reliability methods for computational failure analysis

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

A review of extended/generalized finite element methods for material modeling (2009, methodology): “Cohesive models in the XFEM/GFEM framework have been discussed by de Borst et al. [29, 30].”
Micromechanics based second gradient continuum theory for shear band modeling in cohesive granular materials following damage elasticity (2012, background): “…computationally the most efficient for many materials which have low viscosity to sufficiently restore well-posedness of the boundary value problem during the strain localization phase, either in a plasticity-based format, a damage-based format, or a combination of the two (de Borst et al., 2004).”
Cohesive fracture model for functionally graded fiber reinforced concrete (2010, background): “These spatially varied microstructures created by nonuniform distributions of reinforcement phase are called functionally graded materials (FGMs) [9].”
Discrete cohesive zone model for mixed-mode fracture using finite element analysis (2006, unknown): “Compared to VCCT, a major advantage of cohesive zone modeling is its capability to predict both onset and propagation of cracking without the need for a pre-existing crack [19–21].”
Crack nucleation in variational phase-field models of brittle fracture (2018, background): “Some propose to stray from Griffith fundamental hypotheses by incorporating cohesive fracture energies [82, 38, 37, 31] or material non-linearities [53].”