Dear colleagues, as you known, both Peridynamic model and Cohesive zone model can be used for simulating crack propagation. So, what are the different effects when both models are used for a simulation with the same (or say similar) initial and boundary conditions?
Hi Fei,
I think the major difference is that when you use intrinsic cohesive zone model, you need to put the cohesive zone before the analysis. In other word, you knew it a priori where the damage will potentially occurs and where it will propagate. That is why it is usually used in modeling delamination between composite plies or fiber/matrix debonding.
While in the peridynamic, it can be used to model arbitrary and random cracks? (i think you knew this part better than me).
Hi Ditho,
Thank you for your quick answer. I know little about the cohesive zone model. Probably, the cohesive zone must be a priori knowledge when the model was just proposed. However, I found some recent papers by Prof. Paulino which studied the dynamic and adaptive cohesive zones. I'm not sure if the authors used the given cohesive zones before the first computational step, but it looks these cohesive zones are not set at the beginning? I attached the papers below. What do you think?
Article Adaptive mesh refinement and coarsening for cohesive zone mo...
Article Unstructured polygonal meshes with adaptive refinement for t...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy Of Science
- Reasoning