Comparison of the phase-field approach and cohesive element modeling to analyze the double cleavage drilled compression fracture test of an elastoplastic material: Phase-field approach and cohesive elements for DCDC

Brittle material Mode I fracture may be characterized by the double cleavage drilled compression test. For linear elastic materials, the critical energy release rate, or fracture toughness, can be estimated simply using the linear elastic fracture mechanics. For other types of constitutive behavior, the material parameter has to be determined with numerical fracture modeling. In this paper, we have used two approaches, the phase-field damage model and the cohesive elements, in order to estimate the critical energy release rate of an elastoplastic material. Firstly, we assessed the numerical models and discussed their parameters by comparison of available data from double cleavage drilled compression experimental tests run on a silica glass. Both phase-field damage and cohesive zone models were able to reproduce fracture initiation at the observed macroscopic stress for the linear elastic material. However, the material toughness could not be predicted by the phase-field approach due to the result dependence on the model regularization parameter. Secondly, an elastoplastic methyl methacrylate polymer was submitted to the compression test in our lab. Both models were then extended for elastic-perfectly plastic materials. Crack initiation was obtained at the observed macroscopic strain for similar critical energy release rate ranges for both approaches, providing good confidence in the estimated material toughness.