13th International Conference on Fracture June 16–21, 2013, Beijing, China -7- The crack arrest point arises as soon as the solution globally decreases. 6.2. Comparison with a cohesive zone model. Our method has been compared with a cohesive zone model with a sufficiently small cohesive zone, to be close to the Griffith model [7] . Furthermore, this cohesive model is applied to a plane strain behavior while the present method uses a beam model. The comparative results from the present model and the cohesive model for 3 R= are illustrated on the figures 3 and 4. The results (for N=4) are in a good accordance. The crack arrest takes place when the kinetic energy reaches its minimum, before a second bounce, which corresponds to the beam vibration at the end of the crack propagation. Fig. 3. Comparative analysis with a cohesive zone model :Crack kinematics versus time for R=3. Fig. 4. Comparative analysis with a cohesive zone model :Kinetic energy versus time for R=3. Energy ratio R=3 1 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,6 1,7 1,8 1,9 0,00E+00 2,00E-04 4,00E-04 6,00E-04 8,00E-04 1,00E-03 1,20E-03 1,40E-03 1,60E-03 time (s) L/L0 Modal analysis up to fourth mode CZM analysis Kinetic energy R=3, Modal method and CZM 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0,00E+00 2,00E-04 4,00E-04 6,00E-04 8,00E-04 1,00E-03 1,20E-03 1,40E-03 1,60E-03 t(s) K (J) Mode 4 Mode 3 Mode 2 Mode 1 CZM
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjM0NDE=