An assessment of phase field fracture: crack initiation and growth

TL;DR

This paper reviews phase field fracture methods, demonstrating their ability to predict crack initiation and growth in agreement with classical fracture mechanics, while analyzing their accuracy and modeling choices.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive assessment of phase field fracture models, comparing their predictions with classical theories and exploring their capabilities across different cracking stages.

Findings

Phase field methods predict crack paths consistent with Griffith's theory.

Models with internal length scales capture size effects effectively.

Prediction accuracy depends on modeling choices and constitutive parameters.

Abstract

The phase field paradigm, in combination with a suitable variational structure, has opened a path for using Griffith's energy balance to predict the fracture of solids. These so-called phase field fracture methods have gained significant popularity over the past decade, and are now part of commercial finite element packages and engineering fitness-for-service assessments. Crack paths can be predicted, in arbitrary geometries and dimensions, based on a global energy minimisation - without the need for \textit{ad hoc} criteria. In this work, we review the fundamentals of phase field fracture methods and examine their capabilities in delivering predictions in agreement with the classical fracture mechanics theory pioneered by Griffith. The two most widely used phase field fracture models are implemented in the context of the finite element method, and several paradigmatic boundary value problems are addressed to gain insight into their predictive abilities across all cracking stages; both the initiation of growth and stable crack propagation are investigated. In addition, we examine the effectiveness of phase field models with an internal material length scale in capturing size effects and the transition flaw size concept. Our results show that phase field fracture methods satisfactorily approximate classical fracture mechanics predictions and can also reconcile stress and toughness criteria for fracture. The accuracy of the approximation is however dependent on modelling and constitutive choices; we provide a rationale for these differences and identify suitable approaches for delivering phase field fracture predictions that are in good agreement with well-established fracture mechanics paradigms.